DRC-2012-001087 - 0901a068802a7fa9

Wl DRC-2012-001087
DENISO
MINES
Denison Mines (USA) Corp
1050 17th Street Suite 950
Denver CO 80265
USA
Tel [phone]
Fax [phone]
www denisonmines com
January 27 2012
VIA PDF AND FEDERAL EXPRESS
Mr Rusty Lundberg
Executive Secretary
Utah Division of Radiation Control
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
195 North 1950 West
Salt Lake City UT 84116 3097
Re Response to DRC Letter on Failure to Meet Affirmative Defense Requirements
Cell 2 Slimes Dram Recovery Elevation
Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit UGW370004
This letter responds to Utah Division of Radiation Control s { DRC s ) December 20 2011 letter regarding
Denison Mines (USA) Corp s ( Denison s ) White Mesa Mill s (the Mill s) compliance with the Discharge
Minimization Technology ( DMT) provisions in Utah Groundwater Discharge Permit UGW370004 (the
GWDP or the Permit) regarding Tailings Cell 2 Slimes Dram recovery elevation Reference is also
made to
• the DMT Report for the fourth quarter of 2011 submitted by Denison on February 25 2011 which
identified that the monthly slimes dram monitonng requirement seriously interferes with the
pumping needed to reduce the slimes dram level
• a conference call with DRC on May 25 2011
• the Notice pursuant to Part I G 3 of the GWDP submitted by Denison on May 27 2011
• the Plan and Schedule submitted by Denison on June 17 2011 which identified the actions which
Denison considered would be sufficient to return the slimes dram system to compliance with the
GWDP and
• the Status Update Report submitted by Denison on August 1 2011 which confirmed that the
actions proposed in the June 17 2011 Plan and Schedule to be performed by Denison had been
completed
DRC s December 20 2011 letter identifies a number of requirements based on the assumption that the
actions completed in 2011 were not sufficient to reduce the Cell 2 slimes dram level and that the actions
identified in the letter and its accompanying Stipulated Consent Agreement would be necessary to bnng
the Cell 2 slimes dram recovery system into compliance with the provisions of the GWDP
However as discussed with you on January 19 2012 because the Cell 2 slimes dram system is now in
compliance with the DMT provisions of the GWDP as a result of the actions completed during 2011 it is
our understanding that the requirements set out in DRCs December 20 2011 letter are no longer
required
Included with this letter is mformation demonstrating that the Cell 2 slimes dram has achieved compliance
with Part I D 3 of the Permit for 2011 Part I D 3(b)(3) of the Permit requires that annual slimes dram
C\Users\DFRYDENLUND\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet
Files\Content Outlook\M5MKKEM0\01 27 12 Itr to R Lundberg slimes dram Cell 2 compliance docx
Letter to Mr Rusty Lundberg
January 27 2012
Page 2
compliance shall be achieved when the average annual wastewater recovery elevation m the slimes dram
access pipe as determined in the currently approved DMT Plan meets the conditions in the formula (the
Formula ) spelled out in Part I D 3(b)(3) of the Permit
Attachment 1 contains the Cell 2 Head Measurement Test data forms for the months of January through
June 2011 when the measurement requirement was monthly and for the third and fourth quarters of
2011 after the GWDP was changed to require quarterly measurements Attachment 2 contains the Cell
2 slimes dram elevation plot for 2009 2010 and 2011 Attachment 3 contains a spreadsheet with
calculations demonstrating compliance with the formula m Part I D 3(b)(3) of the Permit for 2011
It should be noted that as a result of the additional volume of cut and fill added to the Cell 2 interim cover
dunng the re grading completed in July 2011 to minimize the accumulation of storm water the slimes
dram access pipe was extended 6 97 feet to maintain the monitonng point above the interim cover This
extension is reflected in the entry for the Elevation of the Measunng Point and the Depth to Liquid in
Attachment 2 for the fourth quarter of 2011 (December 19 2011) The axis for Feet Below Top of
Standpipe (the y axis) in the Cell 2 slimes dram elevation time plot in Attachment 2 has also been
adjusted to be consistent with the new elevation of the Measurement Point at the top of the standpipe In
addition the standpipe elevation was resurveyed in 2011 which indicated that the elevation of the
measuring pomt of 5614 83 feet above mean sea level (fmsl) reported to date (pnor to the 6 97 foot
extension) was 3 07 feet higher than the 2011 survey result of 5611 76 fmsl (prior to the 6 97 foot
extension) The y axis has also been corrected to reflect this 2011 survey data These corrections of
axis have no effect on the resulting slimes dram elevation values listed in and used in the calculation in
Attachment 3 or plotted in Attachment 2 since those values are generated from the difference between
the elevation of the measurement point and the depth from the measurement point to the solution level
both of which have increased by the same value of 6 97 feet and both of which reflect the correct survey
results
Since the Cell 2 slimes dram system is now in compliance with Part I D 3(b)(3) of the Permit based on
the actions proposed and installed by Denison during 2011 we understand that future compliance will be
determined using the provisions of the GWDP and that a Stipulated Consent Agreement is not required
Further based on the 2011 results which indicate achievement of compliance through the actions
proposed and completed by Denison to date Denison believes that those measures will be sufficient to
maintain compliance in the future and that it is not necessary at this time to consider any of the further
actions discussed with DRC
As a final point in response to your December 20 2011 letter there appears to be a misunderstanding or
confusion regarding what commitments were made by Denison to DRC in the communications dunng
2011 Dunng the May 25 2011 telephone call DRC and Denison discussed the factors that Denison
believes led to the non compliance situation specifically
• that the frequency of monitonng (monthly) interfered with the pumping time needed to reduce the
slimes dram level and
• that the formula used for determining compliance may be flawed
DRC and Denison also discussed a number of potential actions including reduction of the monitonng
frequency re grading of the interim cover an engineenng evaluation of the current pump installation of
one or more piezometers and other potential engineering changes which DRC identified as optional
actions for Denison s evaluation DRC requested that Denison evaluate these options and submit a
formal notice under Part I G 3 of the Permit on or before May 27 2011 Based on these discussions
Denison submitted the Notice on May 27 2011 identifying the following proposed actions
DENISO
MINES
Letter to Mr Rusty Lundberg
January 27 2012
Page 3
• re grading the intenm fill on Cell 2 in order to reduce the potential for the accumulation of
stormwater on the surface of Cell 2 which can potentially infiltrate into Cell 2
• installing one or more piezometers into Cell 2 for the purposes of monitonng the water level in
Cell 2 in lieu of continued monitonng ofthe Cell 2 slimes dram access pipe and to submit a plan
and schedule to the Executive Secretary on or before June 17 2011 with respect thereto The
Plan and Schedule was to be subject to Executive Secretary approval and piezometer
installation was to occur after Executive Secretary approval
• performing an engineenng evaluation of the current pump in the Cell 2 access pipe to determine if
any changes can be made to improve its efficiency and output and
• amending the Permit to adjust Part I D 3(b)(2) to reflect the changes in the monitoring ofthe Cell
2 water level resulting from the installation of the piezometer(s) and approved monitoring
procedure set out in the amended DMT Plan and to reduce the frequency of monitonng from
monthly to quarterly
Shortly thereafter when prepanng the plan and schedule Denison completed an engineenng evaluation
which determined that the installation of piezometers would not be feasible or effective The engineenng
issues precluding the use of piezometers were discussed in Denison s June 17 2011 Plan and Schedule
Shortly thereafter on June 30 2011 DRC issued a draft revision of the GWDP for Denison s review
which reduced the frequency of monitonng the Cell 2 slimes dram from monthly to quarterly but which did
not contemplate any changes in the monitonng of the Cell 2 slimes dram water level resulting from the
installation of any piezometers DRC published the amended Statement of Basis and GWDP containing
no requirements for additional piezometers on July 14 2011
Based on the foregoing Denison s understanding is that DRC did not require the installation of
piezometers nor did Denison commit to installing additional piezometers dunng the May 25 2011 call
Denison proposed to add one or more piezometers in its May 27 2011 Notice to be detailed in a Plan
and Schedule to be submitted by June 17 2011 In preparing that Plan and Schedule Denison
concluded that the installation of additional piezometers would not be feasible and effective and
explained the reasons for that conclusion in its June 17 2011 submittal and in so doing revised its
proposal to exclude the installation of any additional piezometers The June 17 2011 Plan and Schedule
was subject to Executive Secretary approval On June 30 DRC issued a draft revision to the GWDP that
was consistent with continued monitonng at a reduced frequency in the existing slimes dram and which
did not address the installation of piezometers to be used for monitonng in lieu of the existing slimes
dram On August 1 2011 Denison provided DRC with a letter confirming that Denison had completed
the items set out in the June 17 2011 Plan and Schedule and restating that no piezometers were
proposed to be installed Denison was not aware that DRC disagreed with Denison s revised proposal
until receipt of your December 20 2011 letter In any event given that the Mill is now in compliance with
Part I D 3(b)(3) of the Permit it would appear that no further actions are required at this time
Please contact me if our understanding is incorrect or if you have any questions or require any further
information
Yours very truly
DENIsi IN Ml
Z Fifydenlund
VKe President Regulatory Affairs
DENISO
MINES
Mi
Letter to Mr Rusty Lundberg
January 27 2012
Page 4
cc Ron F Hochstein
Harold R Roberts
Jo Ann Tischler
David E Turk
Kathy A Weinel
DENISO
MINES
Mi
Letter to Mr Rusty Lundberg
January 27 2012
Page 5
ATTACHMENT 1
DENISO
MINES
Mi
MONTHLY HEAD MEASUREMENT TEST
January-11
Location
Shmes Cell # 2
Date
Sampler
1/21/2011
Tanner Holiiday
Garrm Palmer Ryan Schierman
1600
1/17/2011 1/18/2011 1/19/2011 1/20/2011 1/21/2011
600
700 16 15 15 10 14 13 13 74 13 15
800 16 09 15 08 14 13 13 73 13 15
900 16 03 15 06 14 12 13 73 13 15
1000 15 98 15 04 14 05 13 72
1100 15 92 15 00 14 03 13 69
1200 15 86 14 95 14 00 13 67
1300 15 79 14 89 13 96 13 64
1400 15 73 14 84 13 92 13 59
1500 15 69 14 80 13 90 13 55
All measurements are m inches
Comments Report number is 13 15 for the month of January
The tested started with a partialy recovered head because there was an unplanned
power loss to the tailings area over the weekend which allowed the head to recover
for a day and a half to two days before the monthly head recovery test was started
they continue to have some problems with the power supply out on the tailings area
We may continue to see some problems with the slimes dram on CeH 2 until these
issues are resolved
MONTHLY HEAD MEASUREMENT TEST
Location
Siimes Cell # 2
Date
Sampler
2/28/2011
Tanner Holliday
Garrm Palmer
1600
2/21/2011 2/22/2011 2/23/2011 2/24/2011 2/25/2011 2/28/2011
600 10 42
700 14 7 12 73 10 42
800 14 59 12 7 118 11 82 10 42
900 14 47 12 63 11 79 112
1000 14 35 12 6 11 77 1118
1100 14 22 12 56 11 73 1118
1200 141 12 5 11 69 1115
1300 13 96 12 44 11 65 1111
1400 13 87 12 38 11 63 1103
1500 24 85 13 77 12 32 116 10 99
All Measurements are m inches
Comments Test got started late on th 21st and ran overthe weekend The stable
readings were taken the following Monday morning on the 28th The number being
used as stable head for the report is 10 42 feet
MONTHLY HEAD MEASUREMENT TEST
Location
Shmes Cell # 2
Date
Sampler
3/18/2011
Tanner Holliday
Garrm Palmer
1600
3/14/2011 3/15/2011 3/16/2011 3/17/2011 3/18/2011
600
700 14 45 12 61 1176 11 32
800 24 75 14 31 12 56 11 73 1131
900 23 25 14 19 12 53 1171 11 31
1000 22 31 14 05 12 50 1169 1131
1100 21 21 13 92 12 46 11 66
1200 20 68 13 82 12 42 1164
1300 19 78 13 72 12 36 11 62
1400 19 25 13 61 12 30 11 60
1500 18 76 13 53 12 22 11 52
All measurements are in inches
Comments The report number for the month of March is 11 31
MONTHLY HEAD MEASUREMENT TEST
Location
Slimes Cell #2
Date
Sampler
4/25/2011
Tanner Holliday
Garrm Palmer
1600
4/19/2011 4/20/2011 4/21/2011 4/22/2011 4/23/2011 4/24/2011 4/25/2011
600
700 24 48 15 40 13 69 12 94 1157
800 23 02 15 26 13 68 12 91 1157
900 22 23 15 12 13 68 12 88 11 57
1000 21 52 15 03 13 67 12 86
HOC 20 80 14 95 13 61 12 82
1200 20 37 14 82 13 50 12 81
1300 19 73 14 77 13 40 12 78
1400 19 40 14 63 13 35 12 75
1500 19 01 14 61 13 29 12 72 11 65
Comments The report number for the month of April is 11 57
The Head test was started on a Tuesday due to some minor power issues that needed to
be adressed on Monday the 18th
MONTHLY HEAD MEASUREMENT TEST
Location
Shmes Cell # 2
Date
Sampler
5/20/2011
Tanner Holliday
Garrm Palmer
1600
5/16/2011 5/17/2011 5/18/2011 5/19/2011 5/20/2011
600
700 24 89 16 55 14 61 13 69 13 20
800 23 45 16 44 14 55 13 66 1319
900 22 85 16 30 1448 13 63 13 18
1000 2191 16 20 14 41 13 61 13 17
1100 21 53 16 07 14 36 13 58 13 17
1200 2110 15 95 14 32 13 56 13 17
1300 20 52 15 85 14 27 13 54
1400 20 09 15 76 14 22 13 52
1500 1975 15 64 1416 13 50
1317
Comments the report number Is 1317 for the month of May
MONTHLY HEAD MEASUREMENT TEST
Location Date 6/23/2011
Slimes Cell #2
Sampler tanner Holliday
Ryan Shierman
6/13/2011 6/14/2011 6/15/2011 6/16/2011 6/17/2011 6/18/2011 6/20/2011
600
700 24 90 1716 15 28 1414 13 55 13 04 12 18
800 23 90 17 05 15 24 1410 13 49 12 18
900 23 26 1695 15 20 1405 13 47 12 18
1000 22 49 16 84 15 17 1402 13 46
1100 2195 16 71 15 11 13 99 13 46
1200 2153 16 63 15 03 13 95 13 45
1300 2101 16 55 14 95 13 91 13 43
1400 20 51 1640 14 87 13 86 13 40
1500 19 97 16 31 14 79 13 79 13 32
1600
12 18
Comments The report number Is 1218 for the month of June 2011
MONTHLY HEAD MEASUREMENT TEST
Location
Slimes Cell #2
Date
Sampler
7/20/2011
Ryan Sheirman
Ryan Palmer
7/11/2011 7/12/2011 7/13/2011 7/14/2011 7/15/2011 7/19/2011
600
700 23 81 17 50 15 81 14 89 1412 12 59
800 23 24 17 43 15 75 14 85 14 09 12 59
900 22 91 17 27 15 73 14 82 14 07 12 59
1000 22 3 17 21 15 70 14 78 14 05
1100 219 17 16 15 64 14 73 1402
1200 2148 17 06 15 61 14 71 1400
1300 2115 16 95 15 55 14 66 13 97
1400 20 82 16 90 15 49 14 63 13 95
1500 2041 16 84 15 43 14 59
1600
12 59
Comments Additional readings were taken on Saturday the 16th and Sunday the 17th
Saturday at 1800 hrs the level was 13 17 feet On Sunday at 1700 hours the level was 12 70
feet The report number will be 12 59 which was taken on the 19th
The siimes drain pipe and the LDS pipe on Cell 2 wtll have to be raised up to maintain
a reasonable amount of exposed pipe above ground elevation The dirt work Is moving
forward and pipes will be extended with in the next week to ten days
QUARTERLY HEAD MEASUREMENT TEST
Location
Shmes Cell # 2
Date
Sampler
12/19/2011
Gamn Palmer
Tanner Holliday
1600
12/12/11 12/13/11 12/14/11 12/15/11 12/16/11 12/17/11 12/18/11 12/19/11
600
700 35 55 26 24 23 90 22 7 21 94 19 83
800 34 63 26 09 23 81 22 63 21 94 19 83
900 33 69 25 85 22 57 21 93 19 83
1000 32 78 25 61 23 72 22 55 21 91 21 30 20 31
1100 32 13 25 67 23 63 22 51 21 88
1200 31 89 25 43 23 59 22 48 21 84
1300 31 22 25 29 22 47 21 8
1400 30 74 25 12 23 52 22 44 21 77
1500 29 99 24 95 23 48 22 42 21 76
19 83
Comments
Two readings were missed on 12/14 because of monthly GW sampling event
Readings were taken Saturday the 17th and Sunday the 18th
The final number will be 19 83
The slimes drain was extended on Cell 2 when the cell s final cover was placed
The slimes two head measurement is now 45 which is up from 38 previously
Letter to Mr Rusty Lundberg
January 27 2012
Pages
ATTACHMENT 2
DENISO
MINES
Mi
Feet Below Top of Standpipe
n
IL
to
3 rD
O
0}
NJ O o vo
o
o
BO
O
ro
ro
1/30/2009
2/28/2009
3/31/2009
4/30/2009
5/31/2009
6/30/2009
7/31/2009
- 8/31/2009
- 9/30/2009
- 10/31/2009
- 11/30/2009
- 12/31/2009
- 1/31/2010
- 2/28/2010
3/31/2010
4/30/2010
5/31/2010
6/30/2010
- 7/31/2010
- 8/31/2010
- 9/30/2010
- 10/31/2010
- 11/30/2010
- 12/31/2010
- 1/31/2011
- 2/28/2011
- 3/31/2011
- 4/30/2011
- 5/31/2011
- 6/30/2011
7/31/2011
- 8/31/2011
- 9/30/2011
- 10/31/2011
- 11/30/2011
Letter to Mr Rusty Lundberg
January 27 2012
Page 7
ATTACHMENT 3
DENISO
MINES
Mi
CeU 2 Slimes Drain 2011 Compliance Demonstration
2011 Test Closing
Date
Elevation of Measurement
Point (fmsl) i
Reported largest
^ depth to sol n (ft)
SDRE Values
(Reported as fmsl) ,jEy2 Ny..... Ny, Ny2 Ny3
Nyl+Ny2 +
Ny3
SEy-l-XEy Ny -1- Ny 1 +
Ny2
[5:Ey,-h5:Ey2+SEy3]/[Ny
,-|-Ny2+Ny3]
[lEy-|-iEy,-|-EEy2]/
[Ny-|-Ny,-HNy2]
1/21/2011 561176 - J 13 15 5598 61 67 192 97 67 205 03 67 201 96 67 201 96 ' 12 112 12 12 201 608 95 36 201 599 96 36 ^' ' 5 600 25 ^- ' 5 600 00
2/28/2011 561176 .... r ^ 40 42 5601 34
^ 3/18/2011 '561176 ^ 1131 5600 45 r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
^ - 4/25/2011 5611 76 n ~ U 57 5600 19
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
-5/20/2011 . 561176 - :^ - .^^ ^1317 5598 59
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
6/23/2011 5611 76 12 18 5599 58
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
r 7/19/2011 5611 76 V, ^ ^ '12 59 5599 17
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
, -12/19/2011 5618 73 ;;i9 83 5598 9
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
'"^^ ..^ 13 03 67192 97
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
12
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
2010 Test Closing
Date
Elevation of Measurement
Point (fmsl) ^ t
Reported largest
depth to sol n (ft)
SDRE Values
(Reported as fmsl)
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
1/15/2010 5611 76 13 96 5597 8
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
2/21/2010 561176 125 5599 26
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
3/15/2010 , 561176 11 04 5600 72
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
4/12/2010 561176 104 5601 36
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
5/19/2010 5611.76 10 43 . 5601 33
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
6/30/2010 561176 10 13 5601 63
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
8/2/2010 i- 5611 76 10 74 ^ " - - 5601 02
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
9/1/2010 •561176 10 65 5601 11
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
9/24/2010 5611 76 11 5 5600 26
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
10/25/2010 ° 5611 76 12 35 5599 41
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
11/23/2010 ' ^561176 10 81 "' 5600 95
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
12/22/2010 561176 11 58 -> 5600 18
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
11 34 67205 03
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1) 12
r , ^ > - ....
. ^ 1 - . -
^E2011( s asIEy) ' V " ' ^ • ^
XT V.
^^2011 ( asNy) ... i k ? ,^
T
1
1
^E2010( asIEyl)
N2010( seasNy 1)
2009 Test Closing
Date
Elevation of Measurement
Point (fmsl)
Reported largest
depth to sol n (ft)
SDRE Values
(Reported as fmsl)
1/30/2009 , 561176 11 25 5600 51
2/27/2009 561176 9 35 5602 41
3/28/2009 ' 561176 8 84 ^ : 5602 92
4/27/2009 5611 76 11 98 5599 78
5/20/2009 5611 76 10 28 -; 560148
6/22/2009 5611 76 13 5598 76
7/30/2009 ' 561176 13 5598 76
8/31/2009 5611 76 11 04 5600 72
9/28/2009 5611 76 11 46 . 5600 3
10/30/2009 561176 13 35 5598 41
11/23/2009 5611 76 12 49 , 5599 27
12/14/2009 561176 13 12 5598 64
11 60 67201 96
12
IE '2009 ( easZEy2)
2009 ( se as Ny 2)
Cell 2 Shmes Drain 2011 Compliance Demonstration
2008 Test Closing
Date
Elevation of Measurement
Point (fmsl) -r- \
Reported largest
depth to sol n (ft)
SDRE Values
(Reported as fmsl)
1/25/2008 561176 \. > K 10 9 5600 86
11/24/2008 ,. : 5611 76 ^ 115 .5600 26
i I 11201 12 ^'
2 ^
4^
IE 2008 ( se as lEy 3)
2008 ( as Ny 3) ? 1
117. is-
tjL.r