DRC-2011-007581 - 0901a0688028c7a3

C- 201
uraniurnone^
Investing in our energy
September 26, 2011
Division of Air Quality
Department of Environmental Quality
P.O. Box 1444820
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820
Attention: Jason Krebs
Re: Annual Radon Flux Testing Results for Shootaring Canyon
Radioactive Materials License UT0900480
Dear Mr. Krebs;
Attached are the results for the radon flux sampling conducted at the Shootaring Canyon Mill
tailings repository on April18-19, 2011. Measurements were done in accordance with 40 CFR
61 Subpart W. The average field background flux rate measured by canisters forthe 2011
sampling campaign was 0.01 pCi/m^s. Large area activated canisters were supplied and read
by Tellco Environmental Services Inc. of Grand Junction Colorado. Canister placement and
retrieval was conducted by Steve Morrill, Ron Haycock, Brock Morrill, Scott Schierman of
Uranium One and Dave Cooper of Tellco Environmental Services. Jason Krebs ofthe
UDEQ/AQD was present to observe canister loading, placement and retrieval.
The minimum temperature observed during the testing period was 41 degrees Fahrenheit,
which is above the minimum sampling temperature of 35 degrees. Measurements were not
initiated within 24 hours of rainfall. Approximately 0.08 inches of rainfall occurred after
placement of the canisters, however no seals around the canisters were compromised nor were
any canisters surrounded by water.
The 2011 calculated average radon flux emission rate from the Shootaring Mill tailings
repository Is 14.2 pCi/m^s which is consistent with historical sampling data. Radon flux
emissions at the Shootaring Mill tailing repository continue to be below the 20 pCi/m^s standard
for radon flux emissions.
Enclosed with this cover letter is the Corporate Officer Declaration. The remainder ofthe radon
flux sampling information is contained within the 2011 NESHAP's Report.
Uranium One Americas, inc.
tei [phone] " fax [phone]
907 N. Poplar Street
Suite 280 * Casper
Wyoming • 82601
www.uranium1.com
uraniumoria'
investing In our energy
Should you have any questions or need additional information please contact me at (307) 840-
1157 or e-mail at scott.schierman@uranium1 .com.
Sincerely;
Scott L. Schierman
Corporate Radiation Safety Officer
Shootaring Canyon Mill
cc: Norman Schwab
John Hultquist (UDRC)
Site file
Uranium One Americas, inc.
tei [phone]'fax [phone]
907 N. Poplar street
Sujte 260 > Casper
Wyoming •82601
www!uranium1 .com
Uranium One Americas, Inc.
Shootaring Canyon Mill
2011 NESHAP's Report
Corporate Officer Declaration and Signature
I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the
information submitted herein based on my inquiries of those individuals immediately responsible
for obtaining the information. I believe that the submitted information is true, accurate and
complete. I am aware that there are significant;penalties for submitting false information
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment. See 18 U.S.C. 1001.
Signature: ./ k^^^^^^Ay^Ory^ti^^ Date:
)onna L. Wichers, President
Uranium One Americas, Inc.
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
2011 Radon Flux Measurement Program
Shootaring Canyon Mill
Ticaboo, Utah 84533
Prepared for: Uranium One Utah, Inc.
Shootaring Canyon Mill
Hwy 276 12 miles north of Bullfrog
P.O. Box 2101
Lake Powell, Utah 84533:
Prepared by: Tellco Environmental
P.O. Box 3987
Grand Junction, Colorado 81502
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1. INTRODUCTION „ 1
2. SITE HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION.. 1
3. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SITE.. 1
4. SAMPLING METHODOLOGY..... 2
5. FIELD OPERATIONS .„ 2
5.1 Equipment Preparation.. 2
5.2 Sample Locations, Identification, and Placement.... 3 ;
5.3 Sample Retrieval....... .....3
5.4 Environmental Conditions ; 3
6. SAMPLE ANALYSIS .^......zL. . .. . ..|......ri...:.:........... 4
6.1 Apparatus.. .T... 4
6.2 Sample Inspection and Documentation 4
6.3 Background and Sample Counting , 4
7. QUALITY CONTROL (QC) AND DATA VALIDATION........... 5
7.1 Sensitivity 5
7.2 Precision ; ;„ 5
7.3 Accuracy . , 5
7.4 Completeness.. 5
8. CALCULATIONS :.: 6
9. RESULTS...... 7
9.1 Mean Radon Flux 7
9.2 Site Results..... 7
References „ g
Figure 1 9
Appendix A. Charcoal Canister Analyses Support Documents
Appendix B. Recount Data Analyses
Appendix C. Radon Flux Sample Laboratory Data, Including Blanks
Appendix D. Aerial Photo; and NESHAPs Placement Map
1. INTRODUCTION
During April 2011, Tellco Environmental, LLC (Tellco) of Grand Junction, Colorado, provided support
to Uranium One regarding the required National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAPs) Radon Flux Measurements. These measurements are required of Uranium One to show
compliance with Federal Regulations. The standard is not an average per facility, but is an average per
radon source.
Tellco was contracted to provide radon canisters, equipment, and canister placement persormel
oversight as well as lab analysis of samples for calendar year 2011. Ura;nium One provided support
personnel for the field operations. This report includes the procedures employed by Uranium One and
Tellco to obtain the results presented in Section 9.0 of this report.
Jason Krebs of the Utah Division of Air Quality (UDAQ) was present during the 2011 radon flux
sampling program. The sampling, conducted on April 18-19, 2011, measured an average radon flux
rate of 14.2 picoCuries per square meter per second (pCiW-s), which is below the regulatory standard
of20pCi/m^-s.
2. SITE DESCRIPTION
The Shootaring Canyon Mill facility is located in Garfield County in southeastern Utah, a few miles
north of Ticaboo, Utah. The mill and tailings disposal cell were constructed between 1978 and 1981
and began operations in 1982 for the purpose of extracting uranium. The Nuclear Regulatory
Commission issued a source materials license on September 21, 1979. Between April and August 1982
the mill produced approximately 25,000 cubic yards of tailings which were deposited in the disposal
cell and covered with soil. The disposal cell has an area of approximately 2,508 m^.
This covered tailings disposal cell is the only region at the site that required sampling under the;
regulations (see Aerial Photo, Appendix D). The area tested for radon emanation is representative ofthe
disposition of tailings for the 2011 reporting period.
3. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS FOR THE SITE
Radon emissions from the Shootaring Canyon Mill are regulated by the State of Utah's Division of
Radiation Control under radioactive materials license number 0900480 and administered by the Utah
Division of Air Quality under generally applicable standards set by the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) for Operating Mills. Applicable regulations ai-e specified in R307-214-1 (Part 61
Sources of the Utah Administrative Code and in 40 CFR Part 61, Subpart W, National Emission
Standards for Radon Emissions from Operating Mill Tailings, with technical procedures in Appendix
B. These regulations are a subset of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAPs). According to subsection 61.252 Standard, (a) radon-222 emissions to ambient air from an
existing uranium mill tailings pile shall not exceed an average of 20 picoCuries per square meter per
second (pCi/m^-s) for each pile or region. Subsection 61.253, Determining Compliance, states that:
"Compliance with the emission standard in this subpart: shall be determined annually through the use of
Method 115 of Appendix B."
4. SAMPLING METHODOLOGY
Radon emissions were measured using Large Area Activated Charcoal Canisters (canisters) in
conformance with 40 CFR, Part 61, Appendix B, Method 115, Restrictions to Radon Flux
Measurements. These are passive gas adsorption sampling devices used to determine the flux rate of
radon-222 gas from a surface. The canisters were constructed using a 10-ihch diameter PVC end cap
containing a bed of 180 grams of activated, granular charcoal. The prepared charcoal was placed in the
canisters on a support grid on top of a Vi inch thick layer of foam and secured with a retaining ring
under 1/4 inches of foam (see Figure 1, page 9).
One hundred canisters were placed throughout the covered tailings disposal cell region. Each charged
canister was placed directly onto the surface (open face down) and exposed to the surface for 24 hours.
Radon gas adsorbed onto the charcoal and the subsequent radioactive decay of the enfrained radon
resulted in radioactive lead-214 and bismuth-214. These radon progeny isotopes emit characteristic
gamma photons that can be detected through gamma spectroscopy. The original total activity of the;
adsorbed radon was calculated from these gamma ray measurements using calibration factors derived
from cross-calibration of standard sources containing known total activities of radium-226 with
geometry identical to the counted samples and from the principles of radioactive decay.
After 24 hours, the exposed charcoal was transferred to a sealed plastic sample container, identified and
labeled, and transported to the Tellco laboratory in Grand Junction, Colorado for analysis. Upon
completion of on-site activities, the field equipment was alpha- and beta-gamma scaimed for possible
contamination resulting from fieldwork activities. All field equipment was surveyed by Uranium One
Radiation Safety persormel and released for unrestricted use. Tellco persormel maintained custody of
the samples from collection through analysis.
5. FIELD OPERATIONS
5.1 Equipment Preparation
All charcoal was dried at 110°C before use in the field. Unused charcoal and recycled charcoal were
treated the same. 180-gram aliquots of dried charcoal were weighed and placed in sample containers.
Proper balance operation; was verified daily by checking a standard weight. The balance readout agreed
with the known standard weight to within ± 0.1 percent.
After acceptable balance check, empty containers were individually placed on the balance and the scale •
was re-zeroed with the container on the balance. Unexposed and dried charcoal was carefiilly added to
the container until the readout registered 180 grams. The lid was immediately placed on the container
and sealed with plastic tape. The balance was checked for readout drift between readings.
Sealed containers with unexposed charcoal were placed individually in the shielded coimting well, with
the bottom ofthe container centered over the detector, and the background coimt rate was documented.
Three five-minute background counts were conducted on ten percent of the containers, selected at
random to represent the "batch". If the backgroiihd counts were too high to achieve an acceptable
lower limit of detection (LLD), the entire charcoal batch was labeled non-conforming and recycled
through the heating/drying process.
5.2 Sample Locations, Identification, and Placement
A grid system with designated sample point locations was established throughout the covered tailings
disposal cell region. A sample identification number (ID) was assigned to every sample point, using a
sequential alphanumeric system indicating the physical location within the region (e.g., Al... JIO). This
ID was written on an adhesive label and affixed tO the top of the canister along with the batch
identification. The sample ID, date, and time of placement were recorded on the radon flux
measurements data sheets for the set of one hundred measurements.
The sampling locations were spread out throughout the region. Prior to placing a canister at each
sample location, the retaining ring, screen, and foam pad of each canister were removed to expose the
charcoal support grid. A pre-measured charcoal charge was selected from a batch, opened and
distributed evenly across the support grid. The canister was then reassembled and placed face down on
the surface at each sampling location. Care was exercised not to push the device into the soil surface.
The canister rim was "sealed" to the surface using a berm of local borrow material.
Five canisters (blanks) for each region were similarly processed and the canisters were kept inside an
airtight plastic bag during the 24-hour testing period.
5.3 Sample Retrieval
At the end ofthe 24-hour testing period, all retrieved canisters were disassembled and each sample was
individually poured through a fiinnel into a container. Identification numbers were transferred to the
appropriate container, which was sealed and placed in a box for fransport. Retrieval date and time were
recorded on the same data sheets as the sample placement information. The blank samples were
similarly processed.
5.4 Environmental Conditions
The meteorological station at the Shootaring Canyon mill site includes a ram gauge and a
minimum/maximum thermometer, which monitored rainfall and air temperatures during the radon flux
sampling in order to ensure compliance with the regulatory measurement criteria.
In accordance with 40 CFR, Part 61, Appendix B, Method 115:
• Measurements were not initiated withm 24 hours of rainfall.
• Approximately 0.08 inches of rainfall occurred after the canisters were emplaced, but none
of the seals around the lips of the canisters were compromised nor were the canisters
surrounded by water.
• None of the radon measurements presented in this report was performed while temperatures
were below 35°F or on frozen ground (the minimum air temperature: recorded at the site
during the collection period was 41°F).
6., SAMPLE ANALYSIS
6.1 Apparatus
Apparatus used for the analysis:
• Single- or multi-channel pulse height analysis system, Ludlum Model 2200 with a Teledyne
3" x 3" sodium iodide, thallium-activated (Nal(Tl)) detector.
• Lead shielded counting well approximately 40 cm deep with 5-cm thick lead walls and a 7-
cm thick base and 5 cm thick top.
• National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) traceable aqueous solution radium-
226 absorbed onto 180 grams of activated charcoal.
• Ohaus Model C501 balance with 0.1-gram sensitivity.
6.2 Sample Inspection and Documentation
Once in the laboratory, the integrity of each charcoal container was verified by visual inspection ofthe
plastic container. Laboratory staff documented damaged or unsealed contamers (if any) and verified
that the data sheet was complete.
All ofthe sample containers received and inspected at the Tellco analytical laboratory were verified as
valid.
6.3 Background and Sample Counting
The gamma ray counting system was checked daily, including background and radium-226 source
measurements prior to and after each counting session. Based on calibration statistics, using two
sources with known radium-226 content, background and source control limits were established for
each Ludluih/Teledyne counting system with an empty shielded well (see Appendix A).
Gamma ray counting of exposed charcoal samples included the following steps:
• The length of count time was determined by the activity of the sample being analyzed,
according to a data quality objective ofa minimum of 1,000 accrued counts for any given
sample.
• The sample container was centered on the Nal detector and the shielded well door was
closed.
• The sample was counted over a determined count length and then the mid-sample count
time, date, and gross counts were documented on the radon flux measurements data sheet
and used in the calculations.
• The above steps were repeated for each exposed charcoal sample.
• Every tenth container CGimted was recounted the next day after the original count.
7. QUALITY CONTROL (QC) AND DATA VALIDATION
Charcoal flux measurement QC samples included the followmg intra-laboratory analytical frequency
objectives:
• Recounts, 10 percent, and
• Blanks, 5 percent
All sample data were subjected to validation protocols that included assessments of sensitivity,
precision, accuracy, and completeness. All method-required data quality objectives (EPA, 2009) were
attained.
7.1 Sensitivity
A total of five blanks were analyzed by measuring the radon progeny activity in samples subjected to
all aspects ofthe measurement process, excepting exposure to the source region. These blank sample
measurements comprised approximately 5 percent of the field measurements. The results of the blank
sample analyses measured radon flux rates ranged from <0.01 to 0.03 pCiW-s, with an average of
approximately 0.01 pCi/m^-s.
7.2 Precision
Ten recount measurements, distributed throughout the sample sets, were performed by replicating
analyses of individual field samples (see Appendix B). These recount measurements comprised
approximately 10 percent ofthe total number of samples analyzed. The precision of all recount
measurements, expressed as relative percent difference (RPD), ranged from < 0.1 percent to 6.2 percent
with an overall average precision of approximately 2.4 percent.
7.3 Accuracy
Accuracy of field measurements was assessed daily by counting two laboratory control samples with
known Ra-226 content. Acciiracy of these lab confrol sample measurements, expressed as percent bias,
ranged from approximately -1.4 percent to +2.5 percent. The arithmetic average bias of the lab control
sample measurements was approximately +0.4 percent (see Appendix A).
7.4 Completeness
Of the 100 field samples placed a total of 97 samples were analyized representing 97% completeness,
which is within EPA's data quality objective of 85% completeness as specified in Method 115. Three
samples (Gl, H7, and H8) were lost because the samples containers were damaged during mobilization
causing seal failure.
8. CALCULATIONS
Radon flux rates; were calculated for charcoal collection samples using calibration factors derived from
cross-calibration to sources with known total activity with identical geometry as the charcoal
containers. A yield efficiency factor was used to calculate the total activity ofthe sample charcoal
containers. Individual field sample result values presented were not reduced by the results of the field
blank analyses.
In practice, radon flux rateis were calculated by a database computer program. The algorithms utilized
by the data base program were as follows:
Equation 8.1:
pCi Rn-222Wsec = [Ts*A*b*0.5<'^'
where: N = net sample count rate, cpm under 220^662 keV peak
Ts = sample duration, seconds
b = instrument calibration factor, cpm per pCi; values used:
0.1729, for M-Ol/D-21 and
0.1725, for M-02/D-20
d = decay time, elapsed hours between sample mid-time and count mid-time
A = area of the canister, m^
Equation 8.2:
Error, 2cr = 2x
Gross Sample, cpiti Background Sample,cpm +
Sample Count,t,min Background Count>t,min
: X Sample Concentration Net,cpm
Equation 8.3:
. 2.71+(4.65)(Sa
ffi^^A*b*a5^^^>]
where: 2.71 = constant
4.65 = confidence interval factor
Sb - standard deviation of the background count rate
Ts = sample duration, seconds
; b = instrument calibration factor, cpm per pCi; values used:
0.1729, for M-Ol/D-21 and
0.1725, for M-02/D-20
d =^ decay time, elapsed hours between sample mid-time and count mid-time
A = area ofthe canister, m^
9. RESULTS
9.1 Mean Radon Flux
Referencing 40 CFR, Part 61, Subpart W, Appendix B, Method 115 - Monitoring for Radon-222
Emissions, Subsection 2.1.7 - Calculations, "the mean radon flux for each region ofthe pile and for the
total pile shall be calculated and reported as follows:
(a) The individual radon flux calculations shall be made as provided in Appendix A EPA 86(1).
The mean radon flux for each region of the pile shall be calculated by summing all
individual flux measurements for the region and dividing by the total number of flux
measurements for the region.
(b) The mean radon flux for the total uranium mill tailings pile shall be calculated as follows:
JiAj + ... J2A21+1... J;A
J, : =
At^ • • •
Where: Js= Mean fliDC forthe total pile (pCi/m^-s)
Ji = Mean flux measured in region i (pCi/m^-s)
Ai = Area of region i (m^)
At = Total area of the pile (m"^)
2.1.8 Reporting. The results of individual flux measurements, the approximate locations on the pile, and
the mean radon flux for each region and the mean radon flux for the total stack [pile] shall be included in the
emission test report. Any condition or unusual event that occurred during the measurements that could
significantly affect the results should be reported."
9.2 SiteResuIts
Site Specific Sample Results (reference Appendix C)
(a) The mean radon flux rate for the covered region was 14.2 pCiW-s, which represents an area that is
approximately 2,508 m^.
Note: Reference Appendix C ofthis report for the entire summary of individual measurement results.
(b) The covered area is the only region within the taifings disposal cell.
As shown above, the arithmetic mean radon flux at Uranium One milling facility is below the NRC
and EPA standard of 20 pCi/m^-s. No condition or unusual event occurred during the measurements
that could significantly affect the reported results. Appendix C is a summary of individual
measurement results, including blank sample analysis. Sample locations are depicted on the NESHAPs
Placement Map, which is included in Appendix D:
References
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Radon Flux Measurements on Gardinier and Royster
Phosphogypsum Piles Near Tampa and Mulberry^ Florida, EVA 520/5-85-029, NTIS #PB86-
161874, January 1986.
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, November 2009.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Radiological Effluent and Environmental Monitoring at
C/rawzwm M7/5, Regulatory Guide 4.14, April 1980.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 40, Appendix A,.
October 2009.
Figure 1
Large Area Activated Charcoal Canisters Diagram
Handle 1/4 in. Vent Hole t -in. Thick
Scrubber Pad
1/2-in. Thick
Scrubber Pad
1/2-in. Thick Charcoal
Support prict
Retainer
Spring
10-in. dia
PVC End Cap
FIGURE 1 Large-Area Radon Collector
Appendix A
Charcoal Canister Analyses Support Documents
URANIUM ONE - SHOOTARING CANYON MILL
TICABOO - LAKE POWELL, UTAH
NESHAPs RADON FLUX MEASUREMENTS
APRIL 18-19,2011
SYSTEM DATE Bkg Counts (1 min. each) Source Counts (1 min. each) AVG NET YIELD FOUND SOURCE KNOWN % BIAS
I.D. #1 #2 #3 #1 #2 #3 cpm cpm/pCi pCi ID pCi
M-01/D-21 4/19/2011 127 149 116 10355 10376 10465 10268 0.1729 59387 GS-04 59300 0.1%
M-Ol/D-21 4/19/2011 121 115 142 10390 10302 10263 10192 0.1729 58949 GS-04 59300 -0.6%
M-01/D-21 4/20/2011 121 135 134 10170 10279 10260 10106 0.1729 58452 GS-04 59300 -1.4%
M-Ol/D-21 4/20/2011 123 131 129 10217 10255 10239 10109 0.1729 58469 GS-04 59300 -1.4%
M-Ol/D-21 4/19/2011 127 149 116 10353 10421 10239 10207 0.1729 59034 GS-05 59300 -0.4%
M-Ol/D-21 4/19/2011 121 115 142 10371 10309 10439 10247 0.1729 59265 GS-05 59300 -0.1%
M-Ol/D-21 4/20/2011 121 135 134 10232 10350 10295 10162 0.1729 58776 GS-05 59300 -0.9%
M-Ol/D-21 4/20/2011 123 131 129 10416 10522 10277 10277 0.1729 59441 GS-05 59300 0.2%
M-02/D-20 4/19/2011 140 139 138 10702 10611 10523 10473 0.1725 60713 GS-04 59300 2.4%
M-02/D-20 4/19/2011 123 127 119 10405 10479 10551 10355 0.1725 60031 GS-04 59300 1.2%
M-02/D-20 4/20/2011 131 138 107 10612 10633 10518 10462 0.1725 60651 GS-04 59300 2.3%
M-02/D-20 4/20/2011 134 130 115 10475 10481 10492 10356 0.1725 60037 GS-04 59300 1.2%
M-02/D-20 4/19/2011 140 139 138 10655 10583 10621 10481 0.1725 60757 GS-05 59300 2.5%
M-02/D-20 4/19/2011 123 127 119 10460 10473 10597 10387 0.1725 60214 GS-05 59300 1.5%
M-02/D-20 4/20/2Q11 131 138 107 10429 10333 10173 10186 0.1725 59051 GS-05 59300 -0.4%
M-02/D-20 4/20/2011 134 130 115 10416 10288 10341 10222 0.1725 59258 GS-05 59300 -0.1%
AVERAGE PERCENT BIAS FOR ALL ANALYTICAL SESSIONS: 0.4%
BALANCE OPERATION DAILY CHECK
Balance Model: OVia^S "Forj-o -^roiy^ ^,f>}, (^307
Standard Weight (g): ^OO^O
Date Pre-check (g) Post-check (g) O K. ± 0.1 % ? By
'Z00_0
^/^/ii "f——
7
CHARCOAL CANISTER ANALYSIS SYSTEM
SITE LOCATION: SKoQ-f <^ (^«^M<0 M t U JT^ C^^^otPi^ yUc \
CUENT: CAV>I^ 'UW> Ot<\£. • ••
Calibration Check Log
CaUbrationDate: Gf/o'~^ Jl^ Due Date: ^f^'^ /
4.42 ThrshJd: 2.20
SvstemID: fA^j / '
Scaler S/N: S'\ 2- M " ^ Q High Voltage: 1 \ '^S Window:
Detector S/N: '^/S'BB (jP'^^ Source ID/SN: G S-^O^/^^^ ^ Source Activity: ^ ^fCl'
in to ^-70 3a= to Blank Canister Bkgd. Range, cpm: 2 a =
Gross Source Range, cpm: 2q== /O/ to /^^3/ 30== l^O^j to /<^7f7
Technician:
Ali counts times are one minute.
Date By Background Counts (1 min. each) Source Counts (1 min. each) ok?
Y/N
Date By
#1 #2 #3 Avg. #1 #2 #3 Average
ok?
Y/N
ion (3/ ioi>s.< 10 t/to<; /
I0 3<^Q r 1U\1C7 y i4/Wil y
?ire-
Y/N: Y = average backgroimd and source cpm falls within the control limits.
N = average background and source cpm does not fall within the control limits.
The acceptable ranges were determined from prior background and source check data.
CHARCOAL CANISTER ANALYSIS SYSTEM
SITE LOCATION: SWQc4f>cr^ G\ W^o M.^ H j "TvC^ Wc?^ ^.T
CLIENT: UytA.A'tv^'^ Ov\^
Calibration Check Log
SvstemID: \A--0 \ / I Calibration Date: ^ /^ V^ ^ Due Date: ^J^^/t^
Scaler S/N: fTI :2.^<^. 0 High Voltage: I ) Window: 4.42 Thrshld: 2.20
Detector S/N: "^j) Source ID/SN: ^^^Ob^/k.^ Source Activity: ^9»3
Blank Canister Bkgd. Range, cpm: 2 a = f H to
Gross Source Range, cpm: 2a= fOf\~l^ to
Technician:
1-70 3<T= to /g5"
All counts times are one minute.
Date By Background Counts (1 min. each) Source Counts (1 min. each) ok?
Y/N
Date By
#1 #2 • #3 Avg. #1 #2 #3 Average
ok?
Y/N
M/B // / • i 04-2.1 ia:23P) /
in ^-71 103CP) y 1 "2- 1 10 ^so
^/Wi) icp^yy
pre.
Y/N: Y = average bacls^oiaid and source cpm falls within the control limits.
N = average backgrOimd and source cpm does not fall within the control limits.
The acceptable ranges were determined from prior background and source check data.
CHARCOAL CANISTER ANALYSIS SYSTEM
SITE LQCATION: Sivc>c4gV/"v GinyoV^ .CA^"
CLIENT: W <\A l/H Q n
Calibration Check Log
System ID; W\ "O / ^ -2^0 CalibraUonDate: O/oiJ W Diie Date: ^ j0~7 j W
ScalerS^: 5~^5'(^3 ^M-t?-Z^ jj^gj^Voltage: ^"^^ Window: 4.42 Thrshld: 2.20
Detector S^: ^ tSd'^C^ Source ID/SN: 0>g-OH/^R^ Source Activity: ^^l^^Cr
Blank Canister Bkgd. Range, cpm: 2 a = j \ 0 to / 3 3 a = 9 ^ to /
Gross Source Range, cpm: 2 cr =.
Technician:
All counts times are one minute.
Date By Background Counts (1 min. each) Source Counts (1 min. each) ok?: :
Y/N
Date By
#1 #2 #3 Avg. #1 #2 #3 Average
ok?: :
Y/N
^ mo [070^ y H/\f>/i\ ^ ' i^^ 1 C7t{7f5 V 1-0.6 if^7 1^5" V i-?»o (1 f C7t^63
i
Y/N: Y = average background and source cpm falls within the control limits.
N = average background arid sovurce cpm does not fall wifliin the control limits.
The acceptable ranges were determined from prior background and source check data.
CHARCOAL CANISTER ANALYSIS SYSTEM
SITE LQCATION: $O^V}
CLIENT: t/ <^viiU«o O t/t ^
Calibration Check Log
Calibration Date: (^/^'^ j\0 Due Date: (^/oj/i^ System ID: p\-9^l
Scaler S/N: S~l'^(^3 C ^ Voltage: ^-^S Window: 4.42 Thrshld: 2.20
Detector S/N: ^ ' ^3 '^0> -^^^ Source ID/SN: GrS'^S/j^^^'^^ Source Activity: jS^^i.^''
Blank Canister Bkgd. Range, cpm: 2 a = < ^ ^ to ^ 3 3 o = 9 ^ to ? 7 ^
Gross Source Range, cpm: 20= i CP f Lj ^ to lO'^^H 3a= I ^^^3 S to ;C76'6'^
Technician:
All coimts times are one minute.
Date By Background Counts (1 min. each) Source Counts (I min. each) ok?
Y/N
Date By
#1 #2 #3 Avg. #1 #2 #3 Average
ok?
Y/N
\Ho
f^3 l':^3 /o^73
13/ 10'^ IP} /0"^33 «C?3l'2-V H/-7J>/i) I30 \^
•
pre
Y/N: Y = average background and source cpm Ms within the control limits.
N = average background and source cpm does not fall within the control limits.
The acceptable ranges were determined fi-om prior background and source check data.
AppendixB
Recount Data Analyses
CLIENT: URANIUM ONE PROJECT: RADON FLUX MEASUREMENTS, SHOOTARING CANYON MILL, TICABOO, UTAH PROJECT NO.: 11006.1
PILE:1 BATCH:! SURFACE: SOIL AIR TEMP MIN: : 4rF WEATHER: RAINED 0.08 in. AFTER PLACEMENT
AREA: COVER DEPLOYED; 4 18 11 RETRIEVED: 4 19 11 CHARCOAL BKG: 147 cpm Wt. Out: 180.0
FIELD TECHNICIANS: DLC, SS, BM, SM, RH COUNTED BY: DLC DATA ENTRY BY: DLC TARE WEIGHT: 29.2
COUNTING SYSTEM I.D.: M01/D21, M02/D2C CAL DUE: 06/07/11
RECOUNT CANISTER ANALYSIS:
GRID : , -SAMPLE PEPLOYRETRIV AN^ CNJ .GROSS ^iGRpSS,
LOCATION I. D. HR MIN, HR MIN^Mp DA; YR^ ; MIN / (MIN) ioUNTSV ; ^pGi/m^s j ipCilt^ -V % RF?D V
BIO
RECOUNT
LB10
LB10
9 25 9 44
9 25 9 44
4 19 11 18
4 20 11 7
37
4
6355
5814
217.9
217.9
9.2
9.2
0.9
0.9
0.03
0.03 0.0%
DIO
RECOUNT
LD10
LD10
9 35
9 35
46
46
4 19 11 18
4 20 11 7
53
6
7156
6613
217.6
217.6
10.4
10.5
1.0
1.1
0.03
0.03 1.0%
FIO
RECOUNT
LF10
LF10
9 43
9 43
48
48
4 19 11 19
4 20 11 7
11
8
1811
1624
217.8
217.8
1.1
1.1
0.1
0.1
0.03
0.03 0.0%:
HID LH10 9 50 9 50 4 19 11 19 29 1 1205 224.6 1.6 0.2 0.03
RECOUNT LH10 9 50 9 50: 4 20 11 7 11 1 1203 224.6 1.7 0.2 0.03 6.1%
JIO LJ10 9 58 9 54 4 19 11 19 49 1 8800 214.2 13.1 1.3 0.03
RECOUNT LJ10 9 58 9 54 4 20 11 7 13 1 7838 214.2 12.7 1.3 0.03 3.1%
AVERAGE PERCENT PRECISION FOR THE COVERED REGION: 2:4%
Page 1 of 1
Appendix C
Radon Flux Sample Laboratory Data (including Blanks)
CUENT: URANIUM ONE PROJECT: RADON FLUX MEASUREMENTS, SHOOTARING CANYON MILL TICABOO, UTAH PROJECT NO.: 11006.00
PILE:1; BATCH: L SURFACE: SOIL AIR TEMP MIN: 4rF
AREA: COVER DEPLOYED: 4 18 11 RETRIEVED: 4 19 11 CHARCOAL BKG:
FIELD TECHNICIANS: DLC, SS, BM, SM, RH COUNTED BY: DLC DATA ENTRY BY: DLC
COUNTING SYSTEM i.D.: M01/D21, M02/D2C CAL DUE: 06/07/11.:
WEATHER: RAINED 0.08 in. AFTER PLACEMENT
147 cpm : WLOut: 180.0. g.
TARE WEIGHT: 29.2 g.
' GRID SAMPLE DEPLOYRETRlVvANALYSIS?. MID-TIME , CNT GROSS GROSS
LOCATION L a/ ;HR, M1N-,HR MIN MdDA'Y^
RADON, ± - ILD .; ^ : . J
pCi/m^s-.- iadfes ' pCi/rn^s f'COMMENTS;
224.9 28.6 2.86 0.03
A4 LA4 _9 22 9 42 4 19 11 18 23 1 17567 219.2 25.7 2.57 0.03
A6 LA6 9 23 . 9 42 4 19 11 18 25 1 4766 217.4 6.8 0.68 0.03
AB LA8 9 24 9 42 4 19 11 18 27 1 2135 221.5 2.9 0.29 0.03
LA10 9 25 9 43 4 19 11 18 29 1 19728 213.7 28.9 0.03
LB2 9 29 9 43 4 19 11 18 31 15371 223.3 22.5 2:25 0.03
B4 LB4 9 28 9 43 4 19 11 18 33 1 14197 223.2 20.8 2.08 0.03
^^ii5l^liBllli^2^»43^iP[P^
LB6 9 43 4 19 B6
88 LB8 9 26 9 44 4
18 34 1 1650 223.9
19 11 18 35 1 21576 223.4 31.6 3.16 0.03
B10 LB10 9 25 9 44 4 19 11 18 37 1 6355 217.9 9.2 0.92 0.03
C2 LC2 9 30 9 44 4. 19 11 18 39 1 14734 220.7 21.6 2.16 0.03
^G4 ^ •LC4 ^ 31 9 44^ 4 19 11 18 4l" 1 1638 221.0 2.2 022^^03
C6
C8 LC8 9 34 9 45 4 19 11 18 44 . 1 11873 224.7 17.4 1.74 0.03
• LC10 9 34 ; 9 45 4- 19 11 18 , 45 ; 1 2959 219.6 4.2 0 42 0.03 ••.
D2 LD2 9 34 9 45 4 19 11 18 46 1 15652 220.8 23.0 2:30 0.03
D4 LD4 : 9 37 9 46 4; 19 11 18 48 1 1687 219.0 ;: 2.3 0.23 0.03
Page 1 of 3
CUENT: URANIUM ONE PROJECT: RADON FLUX MEASUREMENTS, SHOOTARING CANYON MILL, TICABOO, UTAH PROJECT NO.: 11006.00
PILE:1 BATCH: L SURFACE: SOIL AIR TEMP MIN: 4rF
AREA:COVER DEPLOYED: 4 18 11 RETRIEVED:;; 4 19 11 CHARCOALBKG:
FIELD TECHNICIANS: DLC, SS, BM, SM, RH COUNTED BY: DLC DATA ENTRY BY: DLC
COUNTING SYSTEM I.D.: M01/D21, M02/D2C CAL DUE: 06/07/11
WEATHER: RAINED 0.08 in. AFTER PUCEMENT
147 cpm Wt.Out: 180.0 g.
TARE WEIGHT: 29.2 g.
; QRIP '\ ' SAMPLE DEPLOYRETRIV ANALYSIS ,ryiip,TIMEv;: C V:.+ : • LLD ;
LOCATION I: D . ; HR^^M - pCi/rn^l .pGi/rri^^
49 1 8809 222.9 12.9 1.29 0.03 •6 LD6 9 37 9 46 4 19 11 18
•8 LD8 9 36 9 46 4 19 11 18 51 1 10484 226.0 ^ 15.4 1.54 0."Sl""
LDIO 9 35 9 46 4 19 11 18 53 1 7156 217.6 10.4 1.04 0.03
E2 LE2 9 38 9 47 4 19 11 18 55 1 4038 223.6 5.8 0.58 0.03
E4 LE4 , 9 39 9 47 4 19 11 18 56 1 11293 231.3 16?& l.S 0.03
E6 LE6 9 40 9 47 4 19 11 18 58 1 14371 229.3 21.2 2.12 0.03
E8 LE8 9 40 9 47 4 19 11 18 59 1 10589 229.1 15.6 1.56 0.03
E10 LE10 9 41 9 48 4 19 1 12425 215.2 18.3 1.83 0.03
F2 LF2 9 46 9 48 4 19 11 19 3 1 7272 222.5 10.7 1.07 0.03
F4 • LF4 9 45 9 48 4 19 11 19 5 1 2722 233.3 3.9 0.39 0.03
F6 LF6 9 44 9 48 4 19 11 19 7_ 1 14262 224.6 21.1 2.11 0.03
^""^ F8 ' ""^ LFS'^' 43" 9^ 48' 4"""i9'"l1 "i9"""9" ~ ""'4497 "2206 • 6.5 ""'0.65' 0.03 " '
TIO LFIO 9 43 9 48 4 19 11 19 _11 2 _ 1811 217.8 1.1 0.11 0.03
G2 LG2 ; . - _ •
G4 LG4 9 47 9 49 4 19 11 19 15
- • VOID
1 16888 220.3 ; 25.1 : 2.51 0.03
G6 LG6 9 48; 9 49 4 19 11 19 17 1 9873 227.0 14.6 1.46 0.03
G8 LGS 9 49 9 49 4 19 11 19 19 1 3734 219.5 5.4 0.54 0.03
Page 2 of 3
CUENT: URANIUM ONE PROJECT: RADON FLUX MEASUREMENTS, SHOOTARING CANYON MILL TICABOO, UTAF PROJECT NO.: 11006.00
PILE:1 BATCH: L SURFACE: SOIL AIR TEMP MIN: 4rF
AREA:COVER DEPLOYED: 4 18 11 ; RETRIEVED: 4 19 11 CHARCOALBKG:
FIELD TECHNICIANS: DLC, SS, BM, SM, RH COUNTED BY: DLC DATA ENTRY BY: DLC
COUNTING SYSTEM I.D.: M01/D21, M02/D2C CAL. DUE: 06/07/11
WEATHER: RAINED 0,08 in. AFTER PLACEMENT
147 cpm WLOut: 180.0 g.
TARE WEIGHT: 29.2 g.
,. GRID SAMPLE DEPLOYRETRiy ANALYSIS. MID^JIM CNT: Gf^OS^;ACROSS ; "RADON . ^ ; '^'LU^r..•..•:.:..:.^[
LOGATION : I. D., HR l\fllN WR MIN> MO DA Y
GIO LG10 9 49 9 49 4 19 11 19 21 1 2236 220.3 3.1 "^^0.31" 0.03^
H2 LH2 9 53 9 50 4 19 11 19 23 1 15658 216.3 23.3 2.33 0.03
LH4 9 52 9 50 4 19 11 19 25 1 22311 219.8 33.3 3.33 0.03
H6 ; LH6 9 51 9 50 4 19 11 19 27 1 5673 216.9
H8 LH8
8.3 0.83 0.03
VOID
H10 LH10 9 50 9 50 4 19 11 19 29 1205 224.6 1.6 0.16 0.03
13628 217.5 20.3 2.03 0.03
14 LI4 9 55 9 51 4 19 11 19 33 1 6282 217.3 9.2
us _ 9 56 9 52 4 19 11 19 35 1 6854 219.4 10.1 1,
0.92 0.03
18 LI8 9 56 9 52 4 19 11 19 37 1 3957 217.9 5.7
01 0.03
.57 0.03
no Llio 9 57 9 52 4. 19 11 19 39 1 11068 220.1 16.5 1 0.03
LJ2 10 1 9 53 4 19 11 19 41 1 12024 218.1 18.0
:92i
,80 0.03
LJ4 10 0 9 35 4 19.11 19^43 1 4438 213.6 _ 6.6 0.66 0.03 _^
J6 U6 10- 0 9 35 4 ^9 11 19 45 1 7363 215.5 11.1 1.11 0.03
J8 LJ8 9 59 9 54 4 19 11 19 47 1 8125 214.5 12.0 1.20 0.03
JIO U10 9 58 9 54 4 19 11 19 49 1 8800 214.2 13.1 1.31
AVERAGE RADON FLUX FOR THE COVERED AREA: 14.2 pCI/m^s
Page 3 of 3
CUENT: URANIUM ONE PROJECT: RADON FLUX MEASUREMENTS, SHOOTARING CANYON MILL TICABOO, UTAH PROJECT NO.: 11006.00
;PILE:1 BATCH:! SURFACE: SOIL AIR TEMP MIN: 4rF
AREA:COVER DEPLOYED: 4 18 11 RETRIEVED: 4 19 11 CHARCOALBKG:
FIELD TECHNICIANS: DLC, SS, BM, SM, RH COUNTED BY: DLC DATA ENTRY BY: DLC
COUNTING SYSTEM I.D.: M01/D21, M02/D2C CAL DUE: 06/07/11
WEATHER: RAINED 0.08 in. AFTER PLACEMENT
147 cpm WLOut: 180.0
TARE WEIGHT: 29.2
BLANK CANISTER ANALYSIS:
: • -GRID : SAMPLE DEPLQV RETRIV::ANALYSIS MID-TIME ^ CNT GROSS XBROSS V RADON ;;:,±' : LLD : ;' ^-^7- 7 -
LOCAtlON i. D. HR.MIN HR MIN MO DA YR HR MIN (IWIN^COUNTS - WT IN " pCi/rti^s pCi/m^s pCi/mfs COMMENTS:
L«-BLANK
mmm
BLANKS L BLANK 3 9 10 10 4 4 19 11 17 31 10 1693 209.6 0.03 0.02
BLANK 4 L BLANK 4 9 10 10 4 4 19 11 17 31 10 1531 209.8 0.01 0 02
AVERAGE BLANK CANISTER ANALYSIS FOR THE COVERED REGION: 0.01 pCl/m^s
0.03 CONTROL
0.03 CONTROL
Page 1 of 1
Appendix D
Aerial Photo;
and
NESHAPs Placement Map
URANIUM ONE
SHOOTARING CANYON MILL, TICABOO, UTAH
April 18-19,2011 NESHAP'S PLACEMENT MAP
DISTRIBUTION OF RADON FLUX
RESULTS
13.1 26.0 12.0 15.6 11.1 5.6 6.6 7.7 18.0 19.2
16.5 36.4 5.7 5.0 10.1 7.6 9.2 14.2 203 18.8
1.6 9.8 VOID VOID 8.3 18.9 33.3 24.5 23.3 5.3
3.1 5.7 5.4 5.1 14.6 34.4 25.1 20.2 VOID 19.3
1.1 13 6.5 7^2 21.1 18.6 3.9 6.9 107 10.7
18.3 19.2 15.6 14.2 2L2 10,6 16.6 13.1 5.8 9.9
10.4 6.4 15.4 22.5 12.9 3.4 23 12.2 23.0 193
4.2 14.7 17.4 31.2 4.3 1.4 2.2 15.9 21.6 27.7
9.2 16.6 31.6 19.6 2.2 27.0 20.8 23.2 22.S 16.8
28.9 3.8 2.9 1.4 6.8 1L6 25.7 24.2 28.6 20.2
10 9 8 7 6 .: 5 4 3 .: 2 ' 1
RADON FLUX PILE AVERAGE 14.2