DRC-2012-002320 - 0901a0688032104a

DRC-201P-002320
HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
Environmental Science & Technology
TRANSMITTAL
ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA)
To INC.
255 UNION BOULEVARD, STE 600
LAKEWOOD, CO 80228
Attn JOANN TISCHLER
Cc: RUSTY LUNDBERG, UDEQ
From
Date
D/i/'siono^ 5
STEWART SMITH
HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC
51 WEST WETMORE ROAD, STE 101
TUCSON, AZ 85705
NOVEMBER 8,2012
Project No. 7180000 T2
WE ARE SENDING YOU
[X] ENCLOSED [ ] UNDER SEPARATE COVER VIA
QUANITITY DESCRIPTION
3 copies Second Revision: Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone
In The Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells
White Mesa Uramum Mill Site, Blanding, Utah
(Dated January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision
November 7,2012 )
Cc (1 ORIGINAL 1 COPY WITH 2 CDS OF ABOVE REPORT)
IF MA TERIAL RECEIVED IS NOT AS LISTED, PLEASE NOTIFY US AT ONCE
REMARKS
51 West Wetmore, Suite 101 Tucson, Anzona 85705-1678 If 520 293 1500 520 293 1550-Fax [phone]-ToU Free

HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
Environmental Science & Technology

SECOND REVISION
HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE
PERCHED GROUNDWATER ZONE
IN THE AREA SOUTHWEST OF THE TAILINGS CELLS
WHITE MESA URANIUM MILL SITE

BLANDING, UTAH

January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012;
Second Revision November 7, 2012

Prepared for:

ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC.
225 Union Boulevard, Suite 600
Lakewood, Colorado 80228

[phone]

Prepared by:

HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
51 W. Wetmore, Suite 101
Tucson, Arizona 85705-1678
[phone]

Project Number 7180000.00-02.0

Deleted: REVISED REPORT ON THE¶
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 9
Deleted: DENISON MINES
Deleted: CORP
Deleted: nc
Deleted: Independence Plaza, Suite 950¶
1050 17th Street¶
Denver, Colorado 80265

SECOND REVISION
HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE
PERCHED GROUNDWATER ZONE
IN THE AREA SOUTHWEST OF THE TAILINGS CELLS
WHITE MESA URANIUM MILL SITE

BLANDING, UTAH

Prepared for:

ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC.
225 Union Boulevard, Suite 600
Lakewood, Colorado 80228

[phone]

Prepared by:

________________________________
Stewart J. Smith, R.G.
Utah Registration Number 5336166-2250

January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012
Second Revision November 7, 2012
Deleted: REVISED REPORT ON THE¶
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: DENISON MINES
Deleted: CORP
Deleted: nc
Deleted: Independence Plaza, Suite 950
Deleted: 1050 17th Street¶
Denver
Deleted: 80265
Deleted: ;

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 1
2. SOUTHWEST AREA INVESTIGATION......................................................................... 3
2.1 Rationale for Locating Piezometers........................................................................3
2.2 DR-Series Piezometer Installation and Testing......................................................3
2.2.1 Installation................................................................................................... 4
2.2.2 Drilling and Logging Procedures................................................................ 4
2.2.3 Water Level Monitoring ............................................................................. 4
2.2.4 Piezometer Completion and Abandonment of Non-Completed Borings ... 5
2.3 Hydraulic Testing and Results................................................................................5
2.3.1 October 2011 Testing Procedures............................................................... 6
2.3.2 October 2012 Testing Procedures (DR-8 Retest)....................................... 7
2.3.3 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis..................................................................... 7
2.4 Examination of the Area Near Cottonwood Seep...................................................9
3. HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE AREA SOUTHWEST OF THE TAILINGS CELLS .... 11
3.1 Background and Overview ...................................................................................11
3.1.1 Summary................................................................................................... 11
3.1.2 Seeps and Springs in Relation to Perched Zone Hydrogeology............... 13
3.2 Incorporation of DR-series Data...........................................................................15
3.2.1 Brushy Basin Member Contact Elevations............................................... 15
3.2.2 Perched Water Elevations, Saturated Thicknesses and Depths to Water. 16
3.2.3 Interpretation of Cross-Sections ............................................................... 17
3.2.4 Perched Water Flow Directions................................................................ 18
3.3 Perched Water Travel Times ................................................................................19
3.4 Water Balance Near DR-2 and DR-5....................................................................21
4. IMPLICATIONS FOR SEEPS AND SPRINGS.............................................................. 23
4.1 Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring .........................................................................23
4.2 Cottonwood Seep..................................................................................................23
4.3 Potential Dilution of Perched Water Resulting From Local Recharge of the
Dakota and Burro Canyon Near Seeps and Springs.............................................25
5. CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................... 27
6. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 29
7. LIMITATIONS STATEMENT........................................................................................ 31

Deleted: 133344455677911111113151516171819212323232
Deleted: 2
Deleted: 3 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis 7
Deleted: 6
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 8
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 9
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 9
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 9
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 11
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 13
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 13
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 14
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 15
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 16
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 17
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 19
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 21
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 21
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 21
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 23
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 25
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 27
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: 29
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
... [3]
... [5]
... [4]
... [16]
... [2]
... [8]
... [17]
... [7]
... [9]
... [6]
... [14]
... [10]
... [19]
... [15]
... [18]
... [20]
... [1]
... [12]
... [11]
... [21]
... [13]
... [22]

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

TABLES

1 Surveyed Position Coordinates for DR-series Piezometers
2 Slug Test Parameters
3 Slug Test Results
4 Hydraulic Conductivity Estimates for Travel Time Calculations
5 Estimated Perched Zone Pore Velocities along Path Lines

FIGURES

1 White Mesa Site Plan Showing Southwest Investigation Area and Locations of Perched
Wells, Piezometers, Borings, and Cross Sections
2 Photograph of the Contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin
Member
3 Annotated Photograph Showing East Side of Cottonwood Canyon (looking east toward
White Mesa from west side of Cottonwood Canyon)
4 Kriged Top of Brushy Basin (Ruin Spring and Westwater Seep included in the
contouring)
5 Kriged 2nd Quarter, 2011 Water Levels (DR-series water levels from open boreholes on
May 25; all seeps except Cottonwood included in contouring)
6 Kriged 3rd Quarter, 2011 Water Levels (All seeps/springs except Cottonwood Seep
included in the contouring)
7 Kriged 1st Quarter, 2012 Water Levels (All seeps/springs except Cottonwood Seep
included in the contouring)
8 2nd Quarter, 2011 Saturated Thickness (DR-series water levels measured in open
boreholes on May 25)
9 3rd Quarter, 2011 Saturated Thickness (DR-series water levels measured in completed
piezometers)
10 1st Quarter, 2012 Saturated Thickness (DR-series water levels measured in completed
piezometers)
11 Approximate Axes of Brushy Basin Paleoridges and Paleovalleys in Southwest Area
(with top of Bushy Basin elevation contours and posted 3rd Quarter, 2011 saturated
thicknesses)
12 Interpretive East-West Cross Sections (W-E and W2-E2), Southwest Investigation Area
13 Interpretive North-South Cross Section (S-N), Southwest Investigation Area
14 Kriged 1st Quarter, 2012 Perched Water Levels Showing Inferred Perched Water Flow
Pathlines in Southwest Investigation Area
15 Perched Water Pathlines Used for Perched Water Travel Time Estimates
16 Photograph of the Westwater Seep Sampling Location, July 2010
17 Photograph of the Contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin
Member at Westwater Seep

Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

APPENDICES

A As-Built Piezometer Construction Diagrams
B Lithologic Logs for DR-series Piezometers
C Plots of Raw and Corrected Displacements for Selected Piezometers and Displacement
Data Used in the AQTESOLVE Analysis
D Slug Test Analysis Plots
E Topographic and Geologic Maps
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
iv

Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
1
1. INTRODUCTION
In response to Part 1.H.6 of the amended Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ)
Ground Water Quality Discharge Permit UGW370004 (the Permit), this report discusses the
investigation of the hydrogeology of the perched groundwater zone southwest of the tailings
cells at the White Mesa Uranium Mill, (the Mill or the site) located south of Blanding, Utah. The
investigation of the area southwest of the tailings cells was first presented in Hydro Geo Chem
[HGC] (2012a). A revised version of HGC (2012a) was prepared based on UDEQ comments
[HGC (2012b)]. This report is a revised version of HGC (2012b) and incorporates data collected
during hydraulic retesting of piezometer DR-8 during October, 2012. Installation and testing of
DR-series piezometers will be discussed in Section 2. Figure 1 shows the locations of the
investigation area, perched monitoring wells at the site, and seeps and springs along the margins
of White Mesa.
Specifically, UDEQ requests the following in Part I.H.6 of the Permit:
Detailed Southwest Hydrogeologic Investigation and Report - the purpose of this investigation is
to define, demonstrate, and characterize: 1) hydraulic connection and local groundwater flow
directions between the area near Tailings Ce114B, and the western margin of White Mesa,
including Westwater and Cottonwood Seeps, and Ruin Spring, and 2) the full physical extent of
unsaturated area between former well MW-16, MW-33 and the western margin of White Mesa,
as defined above. In preparation of this report, the Permittee shall:
a) Install multiple borings and/or monitoring wells to completely enclose and define both:
1) the subsurface structural high area of the upper Brushy Basin Shale Member geologic
contact and 2) the horizontal limits of saturation in the Burro Canyon Formation. Said
study shall include, but is not limited to a subsurface area between Tailings Cell 4B, and
the Westwater and Cottonwood Seeps, and Ruin Spring. At a minimum the
characterization/definition of said subsurface area shall be based on:
1) Dry wells or piezometers, completed down to a depth equal to or below the upper
geologic contact of the Brushy Basin Shale Member,
2) Piezometers or wells that intercept the shallow aquifer and encounter a saturation
thickness of 5-feet or more. Said wells and piezometers shall have a minimum inside
diameter of 3 inches. The Permittee shall complete hydraulic testing of all such wells
and piezometers in accordance with Part I.F.6(c) of this Permit.
b) Demonstrate the full geologic and physical extent of the apparent unsaturated structural
high between Tailings Cell 4B and the western margin of White Mesa, including
Westwater and Cottonwood Seeps and Ruin Spring.
Deleted: ,
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
2
c) Demonstrate the location and direction of all groundwater flow paths between Tailings
Cell 4B and nearby Westwater and Cottonwood Seeps and Ruin Spring. Determine
average linear groundwater velocity to said groundwater discharge locations.
d) Perform geologic logging of all borings/wells, and submit geologic logs performed and
certified by a Utah licensed Professional Geologist.
e) Submit the investigation report for Executive Secretary review and approval on or before
January l3, 2012. This report shall be certified by a Utah Licensed Professional Engineer
or Geologist and will include but is not limited to:
1) Geologic logs and well As-built diagrams that comply with the requirements of Part
I.F.6.
2) A revised equipotential map to describe both the physical extent of the dry zone and
all groundwater flow directions near Tailings Cell 4B and Westwater and
Cottonwood Seeps, and Ruin Spring. Said map shal1 demonstrate flowpaths
(streamtubes) to all respective groundwater discharge locations at the western
margin of White Mesa.
3) A revised structural contour map for the upper Brushy Basin Shale for the facility and
physical extent of White Mesa.
4) A revised saturation thickness map based on contemporaneous groundwater head
data for the Burro Canyon aquifer for the facility and physical extent of White Mesa.
5) Appropriate geologic and hydrogeologic maps and cross-sections (to scale).
6) Results and interpretation of aquifer permeability testing as per Part I.F.6(c) of this
Permit.

Section 2 discusses the southwest area investigation as per Part 1.H.6 items (a) and (d). Section 3
provides an overview of site hydrogeology, an update of site hydrogeology based on the results
of the southwest area investigation, and seep and spring hydrogeology in relation to the perched
water system in the southwest area of the site. Section 4 discusses the implications of the results
with regard to seeps and springs in the southwest portion of the site. Sections 3 and 4 satisfy the
elements of Part 1.H.6 items (b) and (c) and item (e).
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
3
2. SOUTHWEST AREA INVESTIGATION
The southwest area investigation included the drilling and logging of 22 borings (referred to as
the DR-series borings) in the southwest portion of the site, completion of 18 of the borings as
piezometers, hydraulic testing of the piezometers having at least 5 feet of water in the casings,
water level monitoring, and additional examination of the area near Cottonwood Seep. Details of
the investigation are provided in Sections 2.1 through 2.4. The results of the investigation show
that permeabilities in the southwest portion of the site are on average lower than previously
estimated, and provide no evidence for a direct hydraulic connection between the perched water
zone and Cottonwood Seep. As discussed in Section 3, the hydraulic test and water level data
also demonstrate that the perched zone southwest of Cell 4B is inadequate as a primary supply to
Cottonwood Seep by several orders of magnitude. As will also be discussed in Section 3, a
hypothetical connection between the perched zone near piezometer DR-8 and Cottonwood Seep
is postulated for the purposes of calculating perched water travel times and to allow for the
possibility that an as yet unidentified connection may exist.
2.1 Rationale for Locating Piezometers
Piezometers were located to satisfy the following goals specified in Part 1.H.6 of the Permit:
a) Investigate the extent of the unsaturated Brushy Basin Member paleoridge between
tailings Cell 4B and the western margin of White Mesa and associated seeps and springs,
and
b) Investigate perched groundwater flow paths and saturated thicknesses between Cell 4B
and the western margin of White Mesa and associated seeps and springs

Twenty two boring locations were sited in the southwest area including five optional borings as
shown in Figure 1. The five optional borings were installed based on data collected during
drilling and subsequent water level monitoring of the remainder of the borings.
2.2 DR-Series Piezometer Installation and Testing
DR-series piezometers were installed, monitored, and tested as described in Sections 2.2.1
through 2.2.4 and Section 2.3. The installation, logging, and testing were conducted in
accordance with Part 1.H.6 items (a) and (d) of the Permit.
Deleted: 1
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
4
2.2.1 Installation
Installation procedures were similar to those used previously at the site for the construction of
perched zone monitoring wells (Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. [HGC], 2005) except that smaller
diameter borings were drilled to accommodate smaller (3-inch rather than 4-inch) diameter
casings. Drilling and construction were performed by Bayles Exploration, Inc., and borings
logged by Mr. Lawrence Casebolt under contract to Denison Mines (USA) Corporation
(Denison). Mr. Stewart Smith of HGC was onsite during a portion of the drilling and well
construction activities. As-built diagrams for the well constructions, based primarily on
information provided by Bayles Exploration, are shown in Appendix A as per Part 1.H.6 (e) item
1 of the Permit. The depths to water shown in the as-built diagrams are based on water level
measurements taken during the third quarter, 2011. Surveyed land surface and top-of-casing
elevations are provided on the diagrams. Table 1 provides surveyed position coordinates and
elevations for piezometers.
2.2.2 Drilling and Logging Procedures
A 6 ¾ inch diameter tricone bit was used to drill a boring of sufficient diameter to install 6-inch-
diameter, Schedule 40 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) surface (or conductor) casing. The surface
casing extended to a depth of approximately five feet below land surface. Once each surface
casing was in place, the boreholes were drilled by air rotary adding water and/or foam only when
needed to maintain circulation. Boreholes were drilled using 5 5/8 to 6 1/8 inch diameter tricone
bits. Each borehole penetrated the Dakota Sandstone and the Burro Canyon Formation and
terminated in the Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison Formation.
Drill cutting samples used for lithologic logging were collected at 2½-foot depth intervals and
placed in labeled, zip-sealed plastic bags and labeled plastic cuttings storage boxes. Copies of the
lithologic logs submitted by Mr. Casebolt are provided in Appendix B (as per Part 1.H.6 (e) item
(1) of the Permit).
2.2.3 Water Level Monitoring
Prior to completion as piezometers, open borings were protected by capping the surface casings
with 6-inch diameter PVC caps, and water levels periodically taken over approximately 1 month.
Based on the data collected, decisions were made whether to complete each boring as a
piezometer or to abandon the boring, as discussed in Section 2.2.4.
Deleted: member
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
5
2.2.4 Piezometer Completion and Abandonment of Non-Completed Borings
Completed piezometers were constructed using 3-inch diameter, Schedule 40, flush-threaded
PVC casing and 0.02-slot, factory-slotted PVC screen. Colorado Silica Sand was used as a filter
pack and installed to a depth approximately three to six feet above the screened interval of each
piezometer. The annular space above the filter pack was then sealed with approximately three to
eight feet of hydrated bentonite chips and grouted to the surface using Portland cement.
DR-2 was abandoned as it was deemed unnecessary to meet the water level monitoring
objectives of this investigation (other than the water level monitoring conducted prior to
abandonment) and DR-5 provided similar information. Water level monitoring established that
the saturated thicknesses at DR-2 and DR-5 were similar, that the area appears to be a
groundwater divide for perched water, and that flow appears to be primarily either north-
northeast to known discharge point Westwater Seep or south toward known discharge point Ruin
Spring.
DR-16 was abandoned as unnecessary due to the proximity of MW-3, MW-20, and DR-15. Only
DR-15 was considered necessary to establish the boundary of the dry zone to the west. Water
level monitoring of DR-16 confirmed that a continuous saturated zone exists between MW-3 and
MW-20 but the boring did not add significant information regarding hydraulic conditions in the
area.
DR-18 was abandoned because it remained dry. DR-18 helped define the southern extension of
the Brushy basin Member paleoridge and dry area intercepted by MW-21.
DR-25 was abandoned as unnecessary because the boring established that significant saturated
thickness exists immediately upgradient of Ruin Spring, but did not add significant information
regarding hydraulic conditions in the area.
2.3 Hydraulic Testing and Results
Hydraulic testing (as per Part 1.H.6 (a) item (2) of the Permit) consisted of slug tests conducted
by HGC personnel using a methodology similar to that described in HGC (2005). This is
substantially the same methodology used for hydraulic testing of all monitoring wells installed
since 2005. All DR-series piezometers with at least 5 feet of water in the casings were tested.
The saturated thickness is defined as the difference between the water level elevation and the
Brushy Basin Member contact elevation which is not necessarily the same as the water column
in the piezometers, because the casings generally extend below the contact. The saturated Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
6
thickness at DR-12 was greater than 5 feet but the water column in the well was not sufficient for
testing because of about 3 feet of sediment in the bottom of the casing.
Testing of all DR-series piezometers was performed during October 2011. The original test at
DR-8 was strongly influenced by barometric pressure changes. UDEQ expressed concern over
the factor of three difference between the hydraulic conductivity estimated from the hand-
collected data (1 x 10-7 cm/s) and the hydraulic conductivity estimated from the automatically
logged data (3.4 x 10-8 cm/s) using the KGS slug test solution (Hyder et al., 1994). UDEQ
considered there to be sufficient uncertainty in the results to warrant a retest. Retesting of
piezometer DR-8 was performed during October 2012. The hydraulic test results reported for
DR-8 in this revision are based on retesting of the well in October 2012.
The results of the testing (Section 2.3.2) indicate that hydraulic conductivities in the southwest
portion of the site are lower than previously estimated indicating perched water moves more
slowly than previous calculations would indicate. The hydraulic conductivity estimates
calculated for piezometer DR-8 (located at the western edge of the mesa east of Cottonwood
Seep as shown in Figure 1) are among the lowest measured on site.
2.3.1 October 2011 Testing Procedures
The slugs used for the October 2011 tests consisted of a sealed, pea-gravel-filled, schedule 80
PVC pipe approximately 4 feet long as described in HGC (2002), and a slug of the same
diameter having a length of 3 feet. The 4-foot slug displaced approximately 0.47 gallons of water
and the 3-foot slug approximately 0.35 gallons.
Three 0-30 pounds per square inch absolute (psia) Level TrollJ data loggers were used for the
tests. One Level Troll was used to measure barometric pressure and was placed in a protected
environment for the duration of the testing. The other Level Trolls were deployed below the
static water columns in the tested wells and used to measure the changes in water levels during
the tests. 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 an electric water level
meter. 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 30 minutes
prior to beginning each test. The purpose of collecting the background data was to allow
correction for any detected water level trends.
Deleted: ,
Deleted: ,
Deleted: ,
Deleted:
Deleted: ,
Deleted: ,
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
7
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. Each test commenced by lowering
the slug to a depth of approximately 1 to 2 feet below the static water level over a period of a few
seconds and taking water level readings by hand as soon as possible afterwards. Hand-collected
data were obtained more frequently in the first few minutes when water levels were changing
rapidly, then less frequently as the rate of water level change diminished. Upon completion of
each test, automatically logged data were checked and backed up on the hard drive of a laptop
computer.
2.3.2 October 2012 Testing Procedures (DR-8 Retest)
The DR-8 retesting procedure included collection and analysis of both automatically logged data
and data collected by hand using an electric water level meter, in substantially the same fashion
as for the October 2011 tests. A 0-30 psia Level TrollTM pressure transducer was used to collect
the automatically logged data and a 0-30 psia BaroTrollTM was used to collect atmospheric
pressure data
The primary differences between the original test and the retest are that 1) a smaller slug was
used (approximately 0.23 gallons rather than approximately 0.47 gallons) to eliminate any
possibility that the slug could interfere with the data logger suspended near the base of the water
column in the well, 2) a 6-second (rather than 3-second) data collection interval was used for
automatically logged water level data, and 3) a 1-minute (rather than 5-minute) interval was used
to collect barometric data. The automatically logged data were corrected for changes in
atmospheric pressure prior to analysis and processed in substantially the same fashion as for the
October 2011 tests.
2.3.3 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis
Data from the tests were analyzed using AQTESOLVETM (HydroSOLVE, 2000), a computer
program developed and marketed by HydroSOLVE, Inc. In each test, the maximum measured
rise in water level was reasonable considering the slug volume, the volume in the 3-inch-
diameter casing, and the volume in the annular space between the casing and the bore.
In preparing the October 2011 automatically logged data for analysis, the total number of records
was reduced. In general, all data collected in the first 30 seconds were retained, then every 2nd,
then 3rd, then 4th, etc. record was retained for analysis. For example, if the first 10 records were
retained (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. A similar process was used for the October 2012 data
collected during retesting of DR-8. The primary difference was that all automatically logged data
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
Deleted: ,
Deleted: ,
Deleted: ,
Deleted: ,
Deleted: In each test, the maximum measured rise in water
level was reasonable considering the slug volume, the volume in
the 3-inch-diameter casing, and the volume in the annular space
between the casing and the bore.
Deleted: ,
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
8
collected during the first 60 seconds (rather than 30 seconds) were retained before reducing the
number of data points as described above.
Data were analyzed using two solution methods: the KGS unconfined method (Hyder et al.,
1994) and the Bouwer-Rice unconfined method (Bouwer and Rice, 1976). When filter pack
porosities were required by the analytical method, a value of 30 percent was used. The saturated
thickness was taken to be the difference between the depth of the static water level measured just
prior to the test and the depth to the Brushy Basin Member contact as defined in the drilling logs
(Appendix B). The static water levels were below the tops of the screened intervals and the
saturated thicknesses were taken to be the effective screen lengths. Short-duration tests generally
did not require correction for changes in barometric pressure. Some of the longer-duration tests,
specifically tests at DR-8, DR-10, DR-13, and DR-14, did require corrections to be applied as
shown in Appendix C. Appendix C also provides displacement data for each test.
The KGS solution allows estimation of both specific storage and hydraulic conductivity, while
the Bouwer-Rice solution allows estimation of only the hydraulic conductivity. The Bouwer-
Rice solution is valid only for any straight-line portions of the data that result when the log of
displacement is plotted against time and is insensitive to both storage and the specified initial
water level rise. Typically, only the later-time data are interpretable using Bouwer-Rice.
The KGS solution generally allows a fit to both early and late time data and is sensitive to
storage and the specified initial water level rise. Both solutions were used for comparison.
Automatically logged and hand-collected data were analyzed separately using both solution
methods. The hand-collected data, therefore, served as an independent data set and a check on
the accuracy of the automatically logged data.
Table 2 summarizes parameters for each test. The results of the analyses are provided in Table 3
and Appendix D (as per Part 1.H.6 (e) item (6) of the Permit). Appendix D contains plots
generated by AQTESOLVEJ that show the quality of fit between measured and simulated
displacements, and reproduce the parameters used in each solution. Estimates of hydraulic
conductivity range from 2.5 x 10-8 centimeters per second (cm/s) to 4.5 x 10-4 cm/s using
automatically logged data, and from 4.5 x 10-8 cm/s to 4.7 x 10-4 cm/s using hand-collected data.
Agreement between analyses using the KGS and Bouwer-Rice solutions, and between
automatically-logged and hand-collected data, was generally good. Except for DR-8 all KGS and
Bouwer-Rice estimates using automatically logged data were within a factor of two, and the
majority were within 30%. KGS and Bouwer-Rice estimates using hand-collected data were
within a factor of three (except at DR-8), and the majority were also within 30%. Agreement
Deleted: 3
Deleted: .4
Deleted: 1.0
Deleted: 7
Deleted:
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
9
between KGS solution estimates using automatically logged and hand-collected data were within
a factor of two except at DR-10 where the estimates were within a factor of three.
At DR-8, the KGS solution estimates obtained from automatically logged and hand collected
data are within a factor of two, a substantial improvement over the original test. The primary
reason for the improvement is that the influence of barometric pressure change was smaller
during the retest than during the original test. However, the KGS and Bouwer-Rice estimates for
the DR-8 retest data differ by approximately an order of magnitude.
Differences between hydraulic conductivity estimates obtained using the KGS and Bouwer-Rice
solutions are common and expected because of the differences between the two solution
methods. The KGS solution accounts for non-steady flow and aquifer storage while the Bouwer-
Rice solution does not. Accounting for non-steady flow and storage allows a fit to the entire data
set using KGS rather than typically only the later-time portion of the data using Bouwer-Rice.
Because the KGS solution accounts for non-steady flow and aquifer storage it is considered a
more accurate solution than Bouwer-Rice. For this reason, hydraulic conductivity estimates
obtained from the KGS solution are used in the groundwater flow and pore velocity calculations
presented in Sections 3.3 and 3.4.
2.4 Examination of the Area Near Cottonwood Seep
HGC investigated the area near Cottonwood Seep in July 2010 as discussed in HGC (2010b).
Additional investigation of the area between Cottonwood Seep and the mesa rim to the east and
northeast (where the perched zone hosted by the Burro Canyon Formation terminates) was
conducted by HGC personnel at the time of the hydraulic testing (in support of Part 1.H.6 item
(c) of the Permit). The purpose of the examination was to determine if any previously
unidentified hydraulic connection between Cottonwood Seep and the Burro Canyon Formation
may exist. In particular, the ground was examined for any previously unidentified seeps
originating from the Burro Canyon Formation near the mesa rim, or any areas of enhanced
vegetation that would indicate surface or near-surface waters (such as cottonwood trees
associated with all other seeps and springs) that may potentially establish a connection between
the perched zone and Cottonwood Seep.
Examination of the area provided no evidence to establish a hydraulic connection. The absence
of any visible seeps or anomalous vegetation in the Brushy Basin Member northeast and east of
Cottonwood Seep is consistent with dry conditions within the upper portion of the Brushy Basin
above Cottonwood Seep. As will be discussed in Section 3, a hypothetical connection between
the perched zone near DR-8 and Cottonwood Seep is postulated for the purposes of calculating
Deleted: for
Deleted: DR-8 and
Deleted: which
Deleted: ,
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
10
perched water travel times and to allow for the possibility that an as yet unidentified connection
may exist.

Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
11
3. HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE AREA SOUTHWEST OF THE
TAILINGS CELLS
The site hydrogeology has been described previously in HGC (2010b), HGC (2009b), HGC
(2007) and TITAN (1994).The results of these previous investigations are summarized in Section
3.1. Section 3.2 updates the site hydrogeology with the results of the present investigation,
Section 3.3 provides calculations of perched water travel times from tailings cells to Westwater
Seep, piezometer DR-8 (located near the mesa rim above Cottonwood Seep), and Ruin Spring,
and Section 3.4 discusses water balance calculations in the southwest portion of the site. The
data show that saturated thicknesses and rates of perched water movement are low in the
southwest portion of the site, and local recharge likely contributes to flow at Westwater Seep and
Ruin Spring.
Perched water travel times from Cell 4B to DR-8 are calculated rather than travel times to
Cottonwood Seep because there is no evidence to establish a hydraulic connection between
Cottonwood Seep and the perched water system. Furthermore, the hydraulic test and water level
data demonstrate that the perched zone southwest of Cell 4B is inadequate as a primary supply to
Cottonwood Seep by several orders of magnitude and that the primary source(s) for Cottonwood
Seep lie(s) elsewhere. However, a hypothetical connection between the perched zone near
piezometer DR-8 and Cottonwood Seep is postulated in Section 3.3 for the purposes of
calculating perched water travel times and to allow for the possibility that an as yet unidentified
connection may exist.
3.1 Background and Overview
Section 3.1.1 provides a brief summary of site hydrogeology taken primarily from HGC (2010b)
and updated with third quarter, 2011 water level data. Section 3.1.2 discusses key findings of
HGC (2010b) regarding the relationship between the perched water zone and seeps and springs
that occur at the margins of White Mesa. Figure 1 shows site features, the locations of perched
monitoring wells, and the locations of seeps and springs.
3.1.1 Summary
Perched groundwater at the site is hosted primarily by the Burro Canyon Formation, which
consists of a relatively hard to hard, fine- to medium-grained sandstone containing siltstone,
shale and conglomeratic materials. The Burro Canyon Formation is separated from the
underlying regional Navajo/Entrada aquifer by approximately 1,000 to 1,100 feet of Morrison
Formation and Summerville Formation materials having a low average vertical permeability. The
Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison Formation is a bentonitic shale that lies immediately
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
12
beneath the Burro Canyon Formation and forms the base of the perched water zone at the site.
Figure 2 is a photograph of the contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the underlying
Brushy Basin Member taken from a location along highway 95 north of the Mill. This
photograph illustrates the transition from the cliff-forming sandstone of the Burro Canyon
Formation to the slope-forming Brushy Basin Member. Based on hydraulic tests at perched zone
monitoring wells (prior to the present investigation), the hydraulic conductivity of the perched
zone ranges from approximately 2 x 10-7 to 0.01 cm/s (HGC, 2009b).
Perched water flow is generally from northeast to southwest across the site. Beneath and south of
the tailings cells, in the west central portion of the site, perched water flow is south-southwest to
southwest. As the results of the present investigation will show, flow on the western margin of
the mesa is also south, approximately parallel to the rim (where the Burro Canyon Formation is
terminated by erosion). On the eastern side of the site perched water flow is also generally
southerly. Because of mounding near wildlife ponds, flow direction ranges locally from westerly
(west of the ponds) to easterly (east of the ponds). Perched water generally has a low quality,
with total dissolved solids ranging from approximately 1,100 to 7,900 mg/L, and is used
primarily for stock watering and irrigation north (upgradient) of the site.
As of the third quarter of 2011, depths to perched water range from approximately 17 to 18 feet
near the wildlife ponds in the northeastern portion of the site to approximately 114 feet at the
southwestern margin of tailings Cell #3. Saturated thicknesses range from approximately 92 feet
near the wildlife ponds to less than 5 feet in the southwest portion of the site, downgradient of
the tailings cells. A saturated thickness of approximately 2 feet occurs in well MW-34 along the
south dike of new tailings Cell 4B, and the perched zone is apparently dry at MW-33 located at
the southwest corner of Cell 4B. Although sustainable yields of as much as 4 gallons per minute
(gpm) have been achieved in wells penetrating higher transmissivity zones, well yields are
typically low (<1/2 gpm) due to the generally low permeability of the perched zone.
Hydraulic testing of perched zone wells prior to the present investigation yielded a hydraulic
conductivity range of approximately 2 x 10-7 to 0.01 cm/s. In general, the highest permeabilities
and well yields are in the area of the site immediately northeast and east (upgradient to cross
gradient) of the tailings cells. A relatively continuous, higher permeability zone associated with a
chloroform plume has been inferred to exist in this portion of the site (HGC, 2007). Analysis of
drawdown data collected from this zone during long-term pumping of MW-4, TW4-19, and
MW-26 (TW4-15) yielded estimates of hydraulic conductivity ranging from 4 x 10-5 to 1 x 10-3
cm/s. Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
13
Permeabilities downgradient of the tailings cells are generally low. Hydraulic tests conducted
prior to the present investigation at wells located at the downgradient edge of the cells, and south
and southwest of the cells, yielded geometric average hydraulic conductivities of 2.3 x 10-5 and
4.3 x 10-5 cm/s depending on the testing and analytical method. The low permeabilities and
shallow hydraulic gradients downgradient of the tailings cells result in average perched
groundwater pore velocity estimates that are among the lowest on site.
3.1.2 Seeps and Springs in Relation to Perched Zone Hydrogeology
Hydro Geo Chem (2010b) discusses the relationships between the perched water zone and seeps
and springs at the margins of White Mesa (shown in Figure 1). Key findings of that report
include the following:
a) Cottonwood Seep is located more than 1,500 feet west of the mesa rim in an area where
the Dakota Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation (which hosts the perched water
system) are absent due to erosion. Cottonwood Seep occurs near a transition from slope-
forming to bench-forming morphology (indicating a change in lithology). Cottonwood
Seep (and 2nd Seep located immediately to the north) are interpreted to originate from
coarser-grained materials within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin Member and are
therefore not (directly) connected to the perched water system at the site.
b) Ruin Spring and Westwater Seep are interpreted to occur at the contact between the
Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin Member. Corral Canyon Seep, Entrance
Spring, and Corral Springs are interpreted to occur at elevations within the Burro Canyon
Formation at their respective locations but above the contact with the Brushy Basin
Member. All seeps and springs (except Cottonwood Seep which is located near the
Brushy Basin Member/Westwater Canyon Member contact) are associated with
conglomeratic portions of the Burro Canyon Formation. The more conglomeratic
portions of the Burro Canyon Formation are likely to have higher permeabilities and the
ability to transmit water more readily than finer-grained portions. This behavior is
consistent with on-site drilling and hydraulic test data that associates higher permeability
with the conglomeratic horizons detected east and northeast of the tailing cells
c) Only Ruin Spring appears to receive a predominant and relatively consistent proportion
of its flow from perched water. Ruin Spring originates from conglomeratic Burro Canyon
Formation sandstone where it contacts the underlying Brushy Basin Member, at an
elevation above the alluvium in the associated drainage. Westwater Seep, which also
originates at the contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin
Member, likely receives a significant contribution from perched water. All seeps and
springs other than Ruin Spring (and 2nd Seep just north of Cottonwood Seep) are located
within alluvium occupying the basal portions of small drainages and canyons. The
relative contribution of flow to these features from bedrock and from alluvium is
indeterminate. Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
14
d) All seeps and springs are reported to have enhanced flow during wet periods. For seeps
and springs associated with alluvium, this behavior is consistent with an alluvial
contribution to flow. Enhanced flow during wet periods at Ruin Spring, which originates
from bedrock above the level of the alluvium, likely results from direct recharge of Burro
Canyon Formation and Dakota Sandstone outcropping near the mesa margin in the
vicinity of Ruin Spring. This recharge would be expected to temporarily increase the flow
at Ruin Spring (as well as other seeps and springs where associated bedrock is directly
recharged) after precipitation events.

As discussed in item a), Cottonwood Seep was interpreted in HGC (2010b) to be associated with
coarser-grained materials within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin Member. The
justification for this interpretation is based primarily on 1) the rate of flow at Cottonwood Seep,
which is estimated to be between 1 and 10 gpm (consistent with Dames and Moore, 1978), 2) the
need for relatively permeable materials to transmit this rate of flow, and 3) the change in
morphology near Cottonwood Seep indicating a change in lithology. The change in morphology
from slope-former to bench-former just east of Cottonwood Seep can be seen in the topographic
map included in Appendix E (Figure E.1) and the annotated photograph provided in Figure 3.
The upper portion of the Brushy Basin Member, which hydraulically isolates the perched zone
from underlying materials, is composed primarily of bentonitic mudstone, claystone, and shale.
The rate of flow at Cottonwood Seep is inconsistent with the materials found within the upper
portion of the Brushy Basin but is consistent with coarser-grained materials expected either
within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin Member or within the upper portion of the
underlying Westwater Canyon (sandstone) Member. The relationship between Cottonwood Seep
and lithology is shown on the geologic map provided in Appendix E (Figure E.2) and Figure 3.
As shown in Figure 3, Cottonwood Seep is located approximately 230 feet below the base of the
perched zone defined by the contact between the cliff-forming Burro Canyon Formation and the
underlying slope-forming Brushy Basin Member. The change in morphology from slope-former
to bench-former occurs within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin Member (or the upper
portion of the Westwater Canyon Member), between the termination of the perched zone at the
mesa rim and Cottonwood Seep. The bench-like area hosting Cottonwood Seep begins at the
change in morphology east of Cottonwood Seep and terminates west of Cottonwood Seep where
a cliff-forming sandstone, interpreted to be within the Westwater Canyon Member, is exposed.
The contact between the Westwater Canyon Member and the Brushy Basin Member is
interpreted to be located between this sandstone outcrop and the change in morphology from
slope-former to bench-former. This places Cottonwood Seep at the transition between the Brushy
Basin Member and the underlying Westwater Canyon Member. This placement is consistent
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
15
with lithologic cross-sections provided in TITAN (1994) which place the contact between the
Brushy Basin Member and the Westwater Canyon Member at elevations between approximately
5,220 and 5,230 feet above mean sea level (ft amsl), within 5 to 15 feet of the elevation of
Cottonwood Seep (5234 ft amsl).
The occurrence of coarser-grained materials within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin
Member is discussed in Shawe (2005). The lower unit of the Brushy Basin Member is described
as “mudstone layers which contain, near their base, lenses lithologically similar to sandstone of
the Salt Wash Member, and near their top, conglomeratic sandstone lenses”. By contrast, the
upper portion of the Brushy Basin Member is described by Shawe (2005) as “principally
mudstone; it contains only minor amounts of sandstone, conglomeratic sandstone, and
conglomerate as discontinuous lenses”.
The expectation of coarser-grained materials at Cottonwood Seep is also consistent with the
transition from the Brushy Basin Member into the underlying Westwater Canyon Member. As
discussed in Craig (1955), and Flesch (1974), The Westwater Canyon Member intertongues with
the Brushy Basin Member. Craig (1955) states “The Westwater Canyon Member forms the lower
portion of the upper part of the Morrison in northeastern Arizona, northwestern New Mexico,
and places in southeastern Utah and southwestern Colorado near the Four Corners, and it
intertongues and intergrades northward into the Brushy Basin Member”.
3.2 Incorporation of DR-series Data
DR-series water level, hydraulic test, and lithologic data were used in conjunction with existing
data to provide a more comprehensive description of the perched zone hydrogeology as
described in Sections 3.2.1 through 3.2.4.
3.2.1 Brushy Basin Member Contact Elevations
Figure 4 (as per Part 1.H.6 (e) item (3) of the Permit) is a contour map of the Burro Canyon
Formation/Brushy Basin Member contact generated from perched well, piezometer, DR-series
boring data and the locations and elevations of Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring. Figure 4 was
generated based on data indicating that only Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring are located at the
contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin Member (HGC, 2010b).
As discussed in Section 2, examination of the area near Cottonwood Seep in July 2010 and re-
examination in October 2011 revealed no evidence for a hydraulic connection with the perched
zone. The absence of any visible seeps or anomalous vegetation in the Brushy Basin Member
Deleted: ,
Deleted: ,
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
16
east and northeast of Cottonwood Seep is consistent with dry conditions in the upper portion of
the Brushy Basin Member.
3.2.2 Perched Water Elevations, Saturated Thicknesses and Depths to Water
In support of Part 1.H.6 (e) item (2) of the Permit, Figures 5, 6, and 7 are contour maps of
perched water elevations generated from second and third quarters, 2011, and first quarter, 2012
water level data. Each contains perched well and piezometer water level data, and the elevations
of all seeps and springs except Cottonwood Seep (for which there is no evidence to establish a
connection to the perched water system and which is located near the Brushy Basin
Member/Westwater Canyon Member contact, indicating that its elevation is not representative of
the perched potentiometric surface). Fill-in contours between the 10-foot elevation contours are
provided in the area immediately west-southwest of the tailings cells to allow detail in an area
having relatively flat hydraulic gradients.
Figure 5 (second quarter, 2011 data) also contains data from DR-2, DR-16, DR-18, and DR-25
that were abandoned after the second quarter, 2011. Figures 5, 6, and 7 were generated assuming
that each seep or spring (except Cottonwood Seep) is a known discharge point for perched water
and that the elevation of the seep or spring is representative of the elevation of perched water at
that location (HGC, 2010b). As per Part 1.H.6 (e) item (4) of the Permit, Figures 8, 9, and 10
show the saturated thicknesses of the perched zone based on second and third quarter, 2011, and
first quarter, 2012 water level data. Differences between the second and third quarters are due
primarily to the slow recovery of water levels in many DR-series borings (in particular DR-6,
DR-8, and DR-12).
The dry areas shown in Figures 5 through 10 occur where the kriged contact between the Burro
Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin Member is higher in elevation than the kriged perched
water elevation. The dry areas shown in these Figures encompass abandoned dry well MW-16,
dry well MW-21, dry well MW-33, and abandoned dry boring DR-18. Dry areas in Figure 5 also
encompass DR-6 and DR-12 which recovered slowly after drilling, but contained measurable
water by the third quarter of 2011. The areas defined by the heavy yellow dashed contour lines
have saturated thicknesses less than 5 feet. As shown in Figures 6, 7, 9 and 10, a large portion of
the perched zone west and southwest (downgradient) of the tailings cells has a saturated
thickness less than 5 feet as of (and subsequent to) the third quarter, 2011. An apparent perched
water divide exists in the vicinity of DR-2 and DR-5 (Figures 5, 6 and 7). Perched water north of
this apparent divide is expected to flow primarily northeast toward Westwater Seep and perched
water south of this apparent divide is expected to flow primarily south toward Ruin Spring. Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
17
As per Part 1.H.6 (b) and (e) items (2), (3), and (4) of the Permit, Figure 11 shows the axes of
paleoridges and paleovalleys in the Brushy Basin Member erosional paleosurface and posted
third quarter, 2011 saturated thicknesses. Also shown is the region estimated to have saturated
thicknesses greater than 10 feet. As indicated, paleoridges in the southwest area of the site are
associated with dry areas and with areas with low saturated thicknesses; paleovalleys are
associated with areas of higher saturated thicknesses. Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring are
located in paleovalleys.
3.2.3 Interpretation of Cross-Sections
As per Part 1.H.6 (e) item (5) of the Permit, Figures 12 and 13 are cross-sections showing the
hydrogeology of the perched zone in the area southwest of the tailings cells. The locations of the
cross-sections are provided on Figure 1. Figure 12 provides east-west cross-sections (E-W and
E2-W2) across the area immediately west and southwest of Cell 4B. Figure 13 is a north-south
cross-section (N-S) from the south dike of Cell 4B to Ruin Spring. Cross-sections E-W and N-S
are oriented approximately parallel to perched water flow and E2-W2 is oriented roughly
perpendicular to perched water flow. Except for abandoned DR-series borings, water levels in
the cross sections are based on third quarter, 2011 data. Water levels for abandoned borings are
from the second quarter, 2011. Water levels did not change significantly between the third
quarter of 2011 and the first quarter of 2012.
As shown in cross-section E-W of Figure 12 (and in Figures 8, 9 and 10) the saturated thickness
of the perched zone in the southwest area of the site varies from negligible to more than 20 feet.
The variable saturated thickness has implications regarding the flow of perched water to known
discharge points Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring. Perched water moving downgradient from the
area of the tailings cells westward toward abandoned boring DR-2 must pass through a region of
low saturated thickness occupied by DR-6 and DR-7 (Figure 12). As will be discussed in more
detail in Section 3.4, this implies (by Darcy’s Law) that some downgradient areas having larger
saturated thicknesses must receive local recharge from precipitation because the water supplied
by lateral perched flow is inadequate to maintain the large saturated thicknesses in areas near
sinks such as Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring.
Two areas of relatively large saturated thickness that are downgradient of areas of small
saturated thickness are of particular interest: the area near DR-2 and DR-5 located west of the
area near DR-6 and DR-7 as shown in Figure 12 (cross-section E-W), and the area near DR-25
located south of the area near MW-20 as shown in Figure 13 (cross-section N-S). Each of the
above areas of larger saturated thickness is downgradient of the corresponding area of small
saturated thickness, and each downgradient area of larger saturated thickness is near a perched
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
18
water sink. The primary known sinks downgradient of DR-2 and DR-5 are Westwater Seep to
the northeast and the paleovalley leading south to Ruin Spring (Figure 11). The primary sink
near DR-25 is Ruin Spring. Lateral flow from areas of larger saturated thickness that may exist
to the east of cross-section N-S may supply the water needed to maintain the relatively large
saturated thickness near DR-25. However, the reported temporary increases in flow from Ruin
Spring (and Westwater Seep) after precipitation events (HGC, 2010b) are difficult to explain
unless flow is temporarily enhanced by local recharge.
As discussed in HGC (2010b), enhanced local recharge is likely near the mesa margins where
weathered Dakota Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation are exposed by erosion (Figure E.2,
Appendix E). Logs at DR-2 and DR-5 show only a few feet of unconsolidated material above the
Dakota Sandstone and visual inspection of the area of the mesa near DR-2 and DR-5 shows that
weathered Dakota is often exposed (consistent with the geology presented in Dames and Moore
(1978). Due to the thin veneer of alluvium overlying the Dakota Sandstone, and thin or absent
Mancos Shale, recharge near DR-2 and DR-5 (cross-section E-W, Figure 12) will be facilitated.
Similarly, in the area near abandoned boring DR-25 and Ruin Spring, recharge will be facilitated
by the thinness or absence of the Mancos Shale and the surface exposure of the Dakota
Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation between DR-25 and Ruin Spring (Figure 13).
3.2.4 Perched Water Flow Directions
As per Part 1.H.6 (e) item (2) of the permit, Figure 14 is a water level contour map showing
estimated pathlines from various locations on the west or south (downgradient) dikes of the
tailings cells toward known discharge points Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring. These pathlines
show the primary expected directions of perched water flow. As indicated, perched water passing
beneath the west dike of Cell 4B has the potential to travel to either of known discharge points
Westwater Seep or to Ruin Spring because of an apparent groundwater divide in the vicinity of
DR-2 and DR-5. Perched water north of this apparent divide is expected to flow primarily
northeast to Westwater Seep and perched water south of this apparent divide is expected to flow
primarily south toward Ruin Spring. The presence of this apparent divide is consistent with
enhanced local recharge.
The path to Ruin Spring from the area south of the apparent divide is sub-parallel to the western
rim of the mesa. The path is generally along a paleovalley between the mesa rim and the dry
portion of the Brushy Basin Member paleoridge defined by MW-21 and abandoned boring DR-
18. Perched water passing beneath the south dike of Cell 4B is expected to travel south-
southwest to Ruin Spring, to the east of the dry paleoridge defined by MW-21 and abandoned
boring DR-18.
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
19
Overall, the data suggest that flow in the southwest portion of the site is influenced by
paleotopography to a greater extent than in other areas of the site due to the prevalence of small
saturated thicknesses.
As discussed in Section 3.1.2, there is no evidence to hydraulically connect Cottonwood Seep to
the perched water system, therefore no primary flow pathway depicted in Figure 14 leads to
Cottonwood Seep. Section 3.3 posits a potential pathway that may hypothetically exist between
the perched zone near DR-8 and Cottonwood Seep for purposes of travel time calculations, and
to allow for the possibility that an as yet unidentified pathway may exist.
3.3 Perched Water Travel Times
As per Part 1.H.6 item (c) of the Permit, perched water pore velocities and travel times along
selected paths between the tailings cells and perched water discharge points were calculated for
the pathlines shown in Figure 15 using Darcy’s Law. The calculated pore velocities and travel
times are representative of the movement of a conservative solute assuming no hydrodynamic
dispersion. Calculated perched water travel times in the area southwest (downgradient) of the
tailings cells are generally longer than previously estimated and pore velocities generally lower
than previously estimated.
The Figure 15 pathlines were selected as the shortest Figure 14 paths from the tailings cells to a)
Westwater Seep (Path 1), b) Ruin Spring via the west side of the Brushy Basin paleoridge (Path
3), and c) Ruin Spring via the east side of the Brushy Basin paleoridge (Path 4). A pathline from
the tailngs cells to the vicinity of DR-8 (Path 2) is also shown in Figure 15. From the vicinity of
DR-8 perched water is expected to flow primarily south (within a paleovalley) toward Ruin
Spring. However, a potential pathline from the vicinity of DR-8 is also shown in Figure 15 that
posits a hypothetical connection between the perched zone and Cottonwood Seep. Path 2
provides the shortest pathline between the tailings cells and the western edge of the perched zone
near DR-8, and the potential path provides the shortest hypothetical connection between the
western edge of Path 2 and Cottonwood Seep.
Hydraulic conductivities used in the calculations are from TITAN (1994), HGC (2002), HGC
(2005), HGC (2009a), HGC (2010a), HGC (2011), and Table 3. Data are summarized in Table 4.
Hydraulic conductivity estimates are based on automatically logged slug test data analyzed using
the KGS solution method, except for MW-12, MW-14, and MW-15. Hydraulic conductivity
estimates at MW-12, MW-14, and MW-15 are based on pumping test analyses reported in
TITAN (1994). Pore velocity calculations for each pathline are summarized in Table 5. Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
20
Path 1 is approximately 2,200 feet long with an average hydraulic gradient of 0.0132 feet per
foot (ft/ft) based on the first quarter, 2012 water level at MW-23 (5,497 ft amsl) and the
elevation of Westwater Seep (5,468 ft amsl). The geometric average hydraulic conductivity of
the perched zone in the vicinity of Path 1 (based on data from DR-5, DR-8, DR-9, DR-10, DR-
11, MW-12, MW-23, MW-24, and MW-36) is 9.8 x 10-6 cm/s (0.027 feet per day [ft/day]).
Assuming an effective porosity of 0.18, the average perched water pore velocity along Path 1 is
0.73 feet per year (ft/yr), yielding a total travel time of approximately 3,010 years.
Path 2 is approximately 4,125 feet long with an average hydraulic gradient of 0.0046 ft/ft based
on the first quarter, 2012 water level at MW-36 (5,493 ft amsl) and the water level at DR-8
(5,474 ft amsl). The geometric average hydraulic conductivity of the perched zone in the vicinity
of Path 2 (based on data from DR-5, DR-8, DR-9, DR-10, DR-11, MW-12, MW-23, MW-24,
and MW-36) is 9.8 x 10-6 cm/s (0.027 ft/day). Assuming an effective porosity of 0.18, the
average perched water pore velocity along Path 2 is 0.26 feet per year (ft/yr), yielding a total
travel time of approximately 15,850 years. The additional time to travel along the hypothetical
pathway to Cottonwood Seep is not calculated because of the hypothetical nature of the pathway.
If such a pathway exists, the combined travel time along Path 2 and the hypothetical pathway
(which adds approximately 2,150 horizontal feet to the total path length), is expected to be
significantly greater than 15,850 years.
Path 3 is approximately 11,800 feet long with an average hydraulic gradient of 0.0096 ft/ft based
on the first quarter, 2012 water level at MW-36 (5,493 ft amsl) and the elevation of Ruin Spring
(5,380 ft amsl). The geometric average hydraulic conductivity of the perched zone in the vicinity
of Path 2 (based on test data from DR-5, DR-8, DR-9, DR-10, DR-11, DR-14, DR-17, DR-19,
DR-20, DR-21, DR-23, DR-24, MW-23, MW-24, and MW-36) is 1.1 x 10-5 cm/s (0.031 ft/day).
Assuming an effective porosity of 0.18, the average perched water pore velocity along Path 3 is
0.60 ft/yr, yielding a total travel time of approximately 19,650 years.
Path 4 is approximately 9,685 feet long with an average hydraulic gradient of 0.0116 ft/ft based
on the first quarter, 2011 water levels at MW-15, MW-34, and MW-37 (5,492 ft amsl) and the
elevation of Ruin Spring (5,380 ft amsl). The geometric average hydraulic conductivity of the
perched zone in the vicinity of Path 4 (based on KGS analysis of automatically test data from
DR-11, DR-13, DR-21, DR-23, DR-24, MW-3, MW-14, MW-15, MW-20 and MW-37) is 1.38 x
10-5 cm/s (0.039 ft/day). Assuming an effective porosity of 0.18, the average perched water pore
velocity along Path 4 is 0.91 ft/yr, yielding a total travel time of approximately 10,650 years.

Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Light Yellow)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Light Yellow)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Tan)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Deleted: 1.15
Deleted: 032
Deleted: 5
Deleted: 86
Deleted: 2,560
Deleted: 1.15
Deleted: 5
Deleted: 032
Deleted: 30
Deleted: 13,750
Deleted: 13
Deleted: 750
Deleted: ,
Deleted: 22
Deleted: 034
Deleted: 66
Deleted: 17,900
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
21
3.4 Water Balance Near DR-2 and DR-5
Enhanced recharge south/southwest of Westwater Seep near DR-2 and DR-5 is likely needed to
maintain the relatively large saturated thicknesses there, considering the slow rate of perched
water flow into that area via the zone of low saturated thickness and the presence of known sinks
to the northeast (Westwater Seep) and to the south (paleovalley leading to Ruin Spring).
Because the water columns in most piezometers penetrating the area of low saturated thicknesses
were inadequate for hydraulic testing, only one estimate of hydraulic conductivity was obtained,
at DR-10. As shown in Table 3, the KGS method hydraulic conductivity estimates at DR-10
(located within the area of low saturated thickness) were one to two orders of magnitude lower
than at DR-5 and DR-9, located west of the area of low saturated thickness. Assuming the
estimate at DR-10 is representative of the area of low saturated thickness, the transmissivity (the
product of hydraulic conductivity and saturated thickness) of the area of low saturated thickness
is two to three orders of magnitude lower than for the area of larger saturated thickness to the
west (near DR-2, DR-5, and DR-9). Figures 6 and 7 show that the hydraulic gradient in this area
is relatively flat, and the gradient does not change significantly across the area of low saturated
thickness.
Water flows westward from the area of the tailings cells through the area of low saturated
thickness between DR-6 and DR-10 (Figure 7). Using Darcy’s Law, and assuming a hydraulic
conductivity of 3 x 10-6 cm/s (0.0084 ft/day, based on the KGS estimate provided for DR-10 in
Table 3), an average hydraulic gradient of 0.0065 ft/ft, an average saturated thickness of 2 1/3 ft,
and a width of approximately 1,600 feet (the approximate distance between DR-6 and DR-10),
the rate of perched water flow westward through the area of low saturated thickness is
approximately 0.2 cubic feet per day (ft3/day) or 0.0011 gpm.
Water flows out of the area of larger saturated thickness (near DR-2 and DR-5) to the northeast
toward known discharge point Westwater Seep and to the south through the paleovalley leading
towards known discharge point Ruin Spring. The rate of flow out of this area northeast to
Westwater Seep is expected to be smaller than the discharge rate at Westwater Seep which also
receives water from the east and northeast. The discharge rate at Westwater Seep is too small for
a reliable estimate. However, the rate of flow south through the paleovalley leading towards Ruin
Spring can be calculated using the geometric average hydraulic conductivity of 0.0089 ft/day
(based on KGS estimates for DR-8, DR-9, and DR-10 in Table 3), an approximate hydraulic
gradient of 0.0088 ft/ft, an average saturated thickness of 12 ft, and a width of approximately
2,250 ft (between DR-8 and DR-10), as 2.1 ft3/day, or 0.011 gpm, an order of magnitude larger
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Deleted: 014
Deleted: 3.3
Deleted: 017
Deleted: more than
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
22
than the calculated flow into the area. The difference between calculated inflow and outflow is
approximately 0.01 gpm.
These calculations indicate that an additional water source is needed to maintain the relatively
large saturated thicknesses west of the area of low saturated thickness between DR-6 and DR-10;
otherwise Westwater Seep and the paleovalley to the south would drain the area of larger
saturated thickness more quickly than water was supplied. The most likely source of additional
water is infiltration of precipitation enhanced by the direct exposure of weathered Dakota
Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation, and the thinness or absence of any overlying low
permeability materials such as the Mancos Shale. Assuming uniform recharge over an area of
approximately 175 acres (the portion of the mesa west of Westwater Seep and north of DR-8 and
DR-9), the calculated difference of 0.01 gpm implies a conservatively low recharge rate of
0.0011 inches per year (in/yr). Most of the recharge likely occurs near the mesa rim where the
Dakota and Burro Canyon are exposed (Figure 12 and Figure E.2, Appendix E). Such recharge is
expected to be enhanced within drainages where they cross weathered Dakota Sandstone and
Burro Canyon Formation.
Furthermore, these calculations indicate that perched water flow in the portion of the site south
of Westwater Seep is inadequate as a primary supply to Cottonwood Seep. Perched water flow
from the area of the tailings cells through the area of low saturated thickness towards
Cottonwood Seep would have to be more than three orders of magnitude higher than calculated
above to provide a supply of between 1 and 10 gpm. The required flow would have to be even
larger considering that some of the incoming flow is diverted to known discharge point
Westwater Seep and to the paleovalley that leads south to known discharge point Ruin Spring.
Even if this calculation were performed using the geometric average of the KGS hydraulic
conductivity estimates for all tested DR-series piezometers (approximately 1 x 10-5 cm/s or 0.028
ft/day) rather than the estimate for DR-10 (3 x 10-6 cm/s or 0.0084 ft/day), the calculated rate of
flow through the area of low saturated thickness would be 0.0035 gpm, which is still
approximately three orders of magnitude lower than the estimated discharge rate of Cottonwood
Seep. The inadequacy of the perched zone as the primary supply to Cottonwood Seep indicates
that the primary source or sources of Cottonwood Seep lie elsewhere.

Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Tan)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Deleted: 6
Deleted: 016
Deleted: 0018
Deleted: .1
Deleted: 031
Deleted: 0038
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
23
4. IMPLICATIONS FOR SEEPS AND SPRINGS
The lithologic and hydraulic data collected from the southwest area investigation allow a more
comprehensive assessment of the hydrogeology of the site and have implications with regard to
seeps and springs southwest of the site. The data indicate that dilution of perched water by local
recharge is expected to occur in the vicinities of Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring, and that
perched zone permeabilities and flow rates in the southwestern portion of the site are too low (by
several orders of magnitude) for the perched zone to serve as the primary source of water for
Cottonwood Seep
4.1 Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring
As discussed in HGC (2010b) the water source for both Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring is
lateral flow from upgradient portions of the perched zone enhanced by local recharge near the
edge of the mesa. Most of this recharge likely occurs near the mesa rim where weathered Dakota
Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation are exposed. Such recharge is likely to be enhanced
within drainages where they cross weathered Dakota Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation.
The results of the present study indicate that the permeability of the perched zone in the
southwest area of the site is on average lower than previously estimated and that the contribution
to flow at Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring by local recharge is more significant than previously
thought.
4.2 Cottonwood Seep
The low perched zone permeabilities and small saturated thicknesses in the southwest area of the
site are consistent with low rates of perched water flow, as shown by the calculated flow through
the area of small saturated thickness southwest of the tailings cells (between DR-6 and DR-10)
provided in Section 3.4. This low rate of perched water flow (approximately 0.001 gpm) is
inadequate (by more than three orders of magnitude) to function as the primary supply to
Cottonwood Seep which has flows estimated to be between 1 and 10 gpm. As discussed in
Section 3.1.2, the estimated flow at Cottonwood Seep is consistent with Dames and Moore
(1978).
In summary, the perched zone cannot be the primary source of water to Cottonwood Seep for the
following reasons:
a) Cottonwood Seep occurs in the lower third of Brushy Basin Member, approximately 230
feet below the contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin
Member, more than 1,500 ft west of the termination of the perched zone, and just west of
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
24
a change in morphology from slope-former to bench-former. The change in morphology
is indicative of a change in lithology. As discussed in HGC (2010b) Cottonwood Seep
likely originates from coarser-grained materials within the lower portion of the Brushy
Basin Member. Alternatively, Cottonwood Seep may originate from coarser-grained
materials of the Westwater Canyon (sandstone) Member intertongueing with the
overlying Brushy Basin Member at the transition between the two Members. The
presence of coarser-grained materials similar to the Salt Wash (sandstone) Member
within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin member is discussed in Shawe (2005). The
intertongueing of the Westwater Canyon and Brushy Basin Members is discussed in
Craig (1955) and Flesch (1974). Based on lithologic cross sections provided in TITAN
(1994), the elevation of Cottonwood Seep (5234 ft amsl) is within 5 to 15 feet of the
elevation of the contact between the Brushy Basin Member and the underlying Westwater
Canyon Member (5220 to 5230 ft amsl).
b) The flow at Cottonwood Seep exceeds the flow in the perched zone in the area southwest
of the tailings cells by several orders of magnitude. Flows at Cottonwood Seep are also
relatively large compared to seeps and springs known to originate from the perched zone,
consistent with a primary source other than perched water.
c) There is no evidence to establish a direct hydraulic connection between the perched zone
and Cottonwood Seep. Cottonwood Seep is located more than 1,500 ft west of the
termination of the Burro Canyon Formation which hosts the perched water zone.
Examination of the area between Cottonwood Seep and mesa rim (the edge of the
perched zone) reveals that the upper portion of the Brushy Basin Member appears dry
and no previously undiscovered seeps originating from the Burro Canyon Formation near
Cottonwood Seep were identified.

Because the results of the southwest area investigation do not provide evidence that Cottonwood
Seep is hydraulically connected to the perched water system at the site, and because the perched
zone near Cottonwood Seep is inadequate as a primary supply, the primary source (or sources) of
water to Cottonwood Seep must lie elsewhere. The primary source(s) must be significant to
supply consistent flows at rates between 1 and 10 gpm. By contrast, flows at Ruin Spring
(estimated at less than about 1/2 gpm, consistent with Dames and Moore, 1978) are lower than at
Cottonwood Seep (between 1 and 10 gpm), and flows at Westwater Seep are too small to
measure. Westwater Seep generally consists of a damp spot that can be sampled only by digging
a hole and waiting for enough water to seep in for sample collection (see Figures 16 and 17 taken
from HGC, 2010b).
Although no evidence of a direct hydraulic connection between the perched zone and
Cottonwood Seep was provided by the investigation, the possibility of a hypothetical, as yet
unknown, connection was postulated for the purpose of calculating a travel time from the tailngs
cells to the western edge of the perched zone (near DR-8), and thence along a potential pathway
Formatted: Paragraph, Indent: Left: 0"
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.25", Hanging: 0.25"
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Light Yellow)
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: Alt
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
25
to Cottonwood Seep. The travel time from the tailings cells to DR-8 was calculated as
approximately 15,850 years. Should a potential pathline such as that shown in Figure 15 exist,
the total time needed to travel from the tailings cells to Cottonwood Seep is expected to be
significantly larger than 15,850 years.
4.3 Potential Dilution of Perched Water Resulting From Local Recharge of
the Dakota and Burro Canyon Near Seeps and Springs
As discussed in Section 3, the rate of flow in the perched water zone in the southwest area of the
site is small and a contribution from local recharge is needed to explain many areas of higher
saturated thickness near sinks such as Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring that are downgradient of
areas of low saturated thickness. The presence of local recharge is expected to affect the water
quality of seeps and springs and has the potential to dilute any dissolved constituents that may
migrate from upgradient areas.
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Tan)
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Deleted: 13
Deleted: 750
Deleted: 13
Deleted: 750
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
26

Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
27
5. CONCLUSIONS
As per Part 1.H.6 (a) through (d) of the Permit, the southwest area investigation included the
drilling and logging of 22 borings in the southwest portion of the site, completion of 18 of the
borings as piezometers, hydraulic testing of the piezometers having at least 5 feet of water in the
casings, water level monitoring, and additional examination of the area near Cottonwood Seep.
Water level data obtained from the borings and piezometers (including dry borings) yielded data
that satisfy Part 1.H.6 (b) and (c) of the Permit.
Interpretation of well survey, lithologic, water level, and hydraulic test data provided in Tables 1
through 4, Figures 2 through 14, and Appendices A through D satisfy Part 1.H.6 (e) items 1
through 6 of the Permit. Specifically, Appendices A and B satisfy item 1; Figures 5, 6, 7, 14, and
15 satisfy item 2; Figures 4 and 11 satisfy item 3; Figures 7 through 11 satisfy item 4; Figures 12
and 13 satisfy item 5; and Tables 2, 3, and 4 satisfy item 6. Figure 15 and Table 5 support
perched water travel time calculations satisfying Part 1.H.6 © of the Permit.
The results of the investigation are substantially consistent with and build upon the results and
conclusions presented in HGC (2010b). The results of the investigation show that permeabilities
in the southwest portion of the site are on average lower than previously estimated, and provide
no evidence for a direct hydraulic connection between the perched water zone and Cottonwood
Seep. The hydraulic test and water level data also demonstrate that the perched zone southwest
of Cell 4B is inadequate as a primary supply to Cottonwood Seep by several orders of magnitude
and that that the primary source of Cottonwood Seep lies elsewhere. However, a hypothetical
connection between the perched zone near piezometer DR-8 and Cottonwood Seep is postulated
for the purposes of calculating perched water travel times and to allow for the possibility that an
as yet unidentified connection may exist
Important results of the southwest area investigation are:
a) The Brushy Basin Member erosional paleosurface in the southwest area of the Mill site is
dominated by a paleoridge extending from beneath Cell 4B to abandoned boring DR-18
(Figures 4 and 11). The paleoridge is flanked to the west by a north-south trending
paleovalley oriented roughly parallel to the western mesa rim (Figure 11).
b) The southwest area of the Mill site is characterized by generally low saturated
thicknesses, low permeabilities, and relatively shallow hydraulic gradients. This is
illustrated in Table 3 and Figures 5 through 13.
c) The paleotopography of the Brushy Basin Member erosional surface has a greater
influence on perched water flow in the southwest portion of the site than other areas
Deleted: (c)
Deleted: l
Deleted: ow permeabili
Deleted:
Deleted: stes
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
28
because of the low saturated thicknesses and dry areas associated with the paleoridge
(Figure 14).
d) The low transmissivities implied by the low permeabilities and low saturated thicknesses
combined with the shallow hydraulic gradients imply low rates of perched water flow in
the southwest portion of the site. Calculated average pore velocities along Pathlines 1, 3,
and 4 (Figure 15) from tailings cells to known discharge points Westwater Seep and Ruin
Spring range from 0.60 ft/yr to 0.91 ft/yr, and travel times from 3,010 to 19,650 years
based on first quarter, 2012 water level data.
e) The estimated travel time from the tailings cells to the vicinity of DR-8 (Path 2) is
approximately 15,850 years based on first quarter, 2012 water level data and a calculated
pore velocity of 0.26 ft/yr. Assuming a hypothetical pathway to Cottonwood Seep, the
time to travel along Path 2 and thence along the potential pathway from the edge of Path
2 to Cottonwood Seep (which adds approximately 2,150 horizontal feet) is expected to be
significantly greater than 15,850 years.
f) Brushy Basin Member paleotopography influences the locations of Westwater Seep and
Ruin Spring; both are located in paleovalleys within the Brushy Basin Member
paleosurface (Figure 11).
g) Local recharge is needed to explain areas of relatively large saturated thickness that
supply Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring, because lateral flow into these areas from
upgradient low saturated thickness portions of the perched zone is inadequate. The
calculated perched zone recharge rate in the approximate 175 acre area southwest of
Westwater Seep (near DR-2 and DR-5) is 0.0011 in/yr.
h) The perched water system in the southwestern portion of the site is inadequate as the
primary supply to Cottonwood Seep by several orders of magnitude. Therefore the
primary source(s) of Cottonwood Seep must lie elsewhere.
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Tan)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Tan)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Formatted: Pattern: Clear (Tan)
Formatted: Pattern: Clear
Deleted: 66
Deleted: 2,560
Deleted: 17
Deleted: 900
Deleted: 13
Deleted: 750
Deleted: 30
Deleted: 13
Deleted: 750
Deleted: 0018
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
29
6. REFERENCES
Dames and Moore. 1978. White Mesa Uranium Project, San Juan County, Utah. For Energy
Fuels Nuclear, Inc. January 30, 1978.
Craig et al. 1955. Stratigraphy of the Morrison and Related Formations, Colorado Plateau
Region. A Preliminary Report. U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1009-E.
Flesch. 1974. Stratigraphy and Sedimentology of the Morrison Formation (Jurassic), Ojito
Spring Quadrangle, Sandoval County, New Mexico: A Preliminary Discussion. New
Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 25th Field Conference, Ghost Ranch (Central-
Northern New Mexico), 1974.
Hydro Geo Chem, Inc (HGC). 2002. Hydraulic Testing at the White Mesa Uranium Mill Near
Blanding, Utah During July, 2002. Submitted to International Uranium (USA)
Corporation, Denver, Colorado.
HGC. 2004. Final Report. Long Term Pumping at MW-4, TW4-10, and TW4-15. White Mesa
Uranium Mill Near Blanding, Utah. May 26, 2004.
HGC. 2005. Perched Monitoring Well Installation and Testing at the White Mesa Uranium Mill,
April through June 2005. Submitted to International Uranium (USA) Corporation,
Denver, Colorado.
HGC. 2007. Preliminary Contamination Investigation Report. White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
Near Blanding, Utah. November 20, 2007.
HGC. 2009a. Letter Report to David Frydenlund, Esq. November 3, 2009.
HGC. 2009b. Site Hydrogeology and Estimation of Groundwater Pore Velocities in the Perched
Zone. White Mesa Uranium Mill Near Blanding, Utah. December 29, 2009.
HGC. 2010a. Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells MW-33, MW-34,
and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill Near Blanding, Utah. October 11, 2010.
HGC. 2010b. Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone and Associated Seeps and
Springs Near the White Mesa Uranium Mill Site, Blanding, Utah. November 12, 2010.
HGC. 2011. Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells MW-38 and
MW-37 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill Near Blanding, Utah. June 28, 2011.
HGC. 2012a. Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the Area Southwest of the
Tailings Cells. White Mesa Uranium Mill Site. Blanding, Utah. January 12, 2012.
HGC. 2012b. Revised Report on the Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells. White Mesa Uranium Mill Site. Blanding, Utah.
August 3, 2012.
HydroSOLVE, Inc. 2000. AQTESOLVE for Windows. User=s Guide.
Kirby. 2008. Geologic and Hydrologic Characterization of the Dakota-Burro Canyon Aquifer
Near Blanding, San Juan County, Utah. Utah Geological Survey Special Study 123.
Knight-Piésold. 1998. Evaluation of Potential for Tailings Cell Discharge – White Mesa Mill.
Attachment 5, Groundwater Information Report, White Mesa Uranium Mill, Blanding,
Utah. Submitted to UDEQ.
Deleted: ¶
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
30
Shawe. 2005. U S Geological Survey Professional Paper 576-F. Geologic Investigations in the
Slick Rock District, San Miguel and Dolores Counties, Colorado.
TITAN. 1994. Hydrogeological Evaluation of White Mesa Uranium Mill. Submitted to Energy
Fuels Nuclear.

Deleted: ¶
Page Break
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
31
7. LIMITATIONS STATEMENT
The opinions and recommendations 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.
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
32
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\sou
thwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
Deleted: H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport\southwest_ar
ea_rev080312.doc

TABLES

FIGURES

APPENDIX A

AS-BUILT PIEZOMETER CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAMS

APPENDIX B

LITHOLOGIC LOGS FOR DR-SERIES PIEZOMETERS

APPENDIX C

PLOTS OF RAW AND CORRECTED DISPLACEMENTS FOR
SELECTED PIEZOMETERS AND DISPLACEMENT DATA
USED IN THE AQTESOLVE ANALYSIS

APPENDIX D

SLUG TEST ANALYSIS PLOTS

APPENDIX E

TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC MAPS

HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
Environmental Science & Technology

SECOND REVISION
HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE
PERCHED GROUNDWATER ZONE
IN THE AREA SOUTHWEST OF THE TAILINGS CELLS
WHITE MESA URANIUM MILL SITE

BLANDING, UTAH

January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012;
Second Revision November 7, 2012

Prepared for:

ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC.
225 Union Boulevard, Suite 600
Lakewood, Colorado 80228

[phone]

Prepared by:

HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
51 W. Wetmore, Suite 101
Tucson, Arizona 85705-1678
[phone]

Project Number 7180000.00-02.0

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 1
2. SOUTHWEST AREA INVESTIGATION......................................................................... 3
2.1 Rationale for Locating Piezometers........................................................................3
2.2 DR-Series Piezometer Installation and Testing......................................................3
2.2.1 Installation................................................................................................... 4
2.2.2 Drilling and Logging Procedures................................................................ 4
2.2.3 Water Level Monitoring ............................................................................. 4
2.2.4 Piezometer Completion and Abandonment of Non-Completed Borings ... 5
2.3 Hydraulic Testing and Results................................................................................5
2.3.1 October 2011 Testing Procedures............................................................... 6
2.3.2 October 2012 Testing Procedures (DR-8 Retest)....................................... 7
2.3.3 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis..................................................................... 7
2.4 Examination of the Area Near Cottonwood Seep...................................................9
3. HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE AREA SOUTHWEST OF THE TAILINGS CELLS .... 11
3.1 Background and Overview ...................................................................................11
3.1.1 Summary................................................................................................... 11
3.1.2 Seeps and Springs in Relation to Perched Zone Hydrogeology............... 13
3.2 Incorporation of DR-series Data...........................................................................15
3.2.1 Brushy Basin Member Contact Elevations............................................... 15
3.2.2 Perched Water Elevations, Saturated Thicknesses and Depths to Water. 16
3.2.3 Interpretation of Cross-Sections ............................................................... 17
3.2.4 Perched Water Flow Directions................................................................ 18
3.3 Perched Water Travel Times ................................................................................19
3.4 Water Balance Near DR-2 and DR-5....................................................................21
4. IMPLICATIONS FOR SEEPS AND SPRINGS.............................................................. 23
4.1 Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring .........................................................................23
4.2 Cottonwood Seep..................................................................................................23
4.3 Potential Dilution of Perched Water Resulting From Local Recharge of the
Dakota and Burro Canyon Near Seeps and Springs.............................................25
5. CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................... 27
6. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 29
7. LIMITATIONS STATEMENT........................................................................................ 31

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

TABLES

1 Surveyed Position Coordinates for DR-series Piezometers
2 Slug Test Parameters
3 Slug Test Results
4 Hydraulic Conductivity Estimates for Travel Time Calculations
5 Estimated Perched Zone Pore Velocities along Path Lines

FIGURES

1 White Mesa Site Plan Showing Southwest Investigation Area and Locations of Perched
Wells, Piezometers, Borings, and Cross Sections
2 Photograph of the Contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin
Member
3 Annotated Photograph Showing East Side of Cottonwood Canyon (looking east toward
White Mesa from west side of Cottonwood Canyon)
4 Kriged Top of Brushy Basin (Ruin Spring and Westwater Seep included in the
contouring)
5 Kriged 2nd Quarter, 2011 Water Levels (DR-series water levels from open boreholes on
May 25; all seeps except Cottonwood included in contouring)
6 Kriged 3rd Quarter, 2011 Water Levels (All seeps/springs except Cottonwood Seep
included in the contouring)
7 Kriged 1st Quarter, 2012 Water Levels (All seeps/springs except Cottonwood Seep
included in the contouring)
8 2nd Quarter, 2011 Saturated Thickness (DR-series water levels measured in open
boreholes on May 25)
9 3rd Quarter, 2011 Saturated Thickness (DR-series water levels measured in completed
piezometers)
10 1st Quarter, 2012 Saturated Thickness (DR-series water levels measured in completed
piezometers)
11 Approximate Axes of Brushy Basin Paleoridges and Paleovalleys in Southwest Area
(with top of Bushy Basin elevation contours and posted 3rd Quarter, 2011 saturated
thicknesses)
12 Interpretive East-West Cross Sections (W-E and W2-E2), Southwest Investigation Area
13 Interpretive North-South Cross Section (S-N), Southwest Investigation Area
14 Kriged 1st Quarter, 2012 Perched Water Levels Showing Inferred Perched Water Flow
Pathlines in Southwest Investigation Area
15 Perched Water Pathlines Used for Perched Water Travel Time Estimates
16 Photograph of the Westwater Seep Sampling Location, July 2010
17 Photograph of the Contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin
Member at Westwater Seep

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

APPENDICES

A As-Built Piezometer Construction Diagrams
B Lithologic Logs for DR-series Piezometers
C Plots of Raw and Corrected Displacements for Selected Piezometers and Displacement
Data Used in the AQTESOLVE Analysis
D Slug Test Analysis Plots
E Topographic and Geologic Maps

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
iv

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
1
1. INTRODUCTION
In response to Part 1.H.6 of the amended Utah Department of Environmental Quality (UDEQ)
Ground Water Quality Discharge Permit UGW370004 (the Permit), this report discusses the
investigation of the hydrogeology of the perched groundwater zone southwest of the tailings
cells at the White Mesa Uranium Mill, (the Mill or the site) located south of Blanding, Utah. The
investigation of the area southwest of the tailings cells was first presented in Hydro Geo Chem
[HGC] (2012a). A revised version of HGC (2012a) was prepared based on UDEQ comments
[HGC (2012b)]. This report is a revised version of HGC (2012b) and incorporates data collected
during hydraulic retesting of piezometer DR-8 during October, 2012. Installation and testing of
DR-series piezometers will be discussed in Section 2. Figure 1 shows the locations of the
investigation area, perched monitoring wells at the site, and seeps and springs along the margins
of White Mesa.
Specifically, UDEQ requests the following in Part I.H.6 of the Permit:
Detailed Southwest Hydrogeologic Investigation and Report - the purpose of this investigation is
to define, demonstrate, and characterize: 1) hydraulic connection and local groundwater flow
directions between the area near Tailings Ce114B, and the western margin of White Mesa,
including Westwater and Cottonwood Seeps, and Ruin Spring, and 2) the full physical extent of
unsaturated area between former well MW-16, MW-33 and the western margin of White Mesa,
as defined above. In preparation of this report, the Permittee shall:
a) Install multiple borings and/or monitoring wells to completely enclose and define both:
1) the subsurface structural high area of the upper Brushy Basin Shale Member geologic
contact and 2) the horizontal limits of saturation in the Burro Canyon Formation. Said
study shall include, but is not limited to a subsurface area between Tailings Cell 4B, and
the Westwater and Cottonwood Seeps, and Ruin Spring. At a minimum the
characterization/definition of said subsurface area shall be based on:
1) Dry wells or piezometers, completed down to a depth equal to or below the upper
geologic contact of the Brushy Basin Shale Member,
2) Piezometers or wells that intercept the shallow aquifer and encounter a saturation
thickness of 5-feet or more. Said wells and piezometers shall have a minimum inside
diameter of 3 inches. The Permittee shall complete hydraulic testing of all such wells
and piezometers in accordance with Part I.F.6(c) of this Permit.
b) Demonstrate the full geologic and physical extent of the apparent unsaturated structural
high between Tailings Cell 4B and the western margin of White Mesa, including
Westwater and Cottonwood Seeps and Ruin Spring.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
2
c) Demonstrate the location and direction of all groundwater flow paths between Tailings
Cell 4B and nearby Westwater and Cottonwood Seeps and Ruin Spring. Determine
average linear groundwater velocity to said groundwater discharge locations.
d) Perform geologic logging of all borings/wells, and submit geologic logs performed and
certified by a Utah licensed Professional Geologist.
e) Submit the investigation report for Executive Secretary review and approval on or before
January l3, 2012. This report shall be certified by a Utah Licensed Professional Engineer
or Geologist and will include but is not limited to:
1) Geologic logs and well As-built diagrams that comply with the requirements of Part
I.F.6.
2) A revised equipotential map to describe both the physical extent of the dry zone and
all groundwater flow directions near Tailings Cell 4B and Westwater and
Cottonwood Seeps, and Ruin Spring. Said map shal1 demonstrate flowpaths
(streamtubes) to all respective groundwater discharge locations at the western
margin of White Mesa.
3) A revised structural contour map for the upper Brushy Basin Shale for the facility and
physical extent of White Mesa.
4) A revised saturation thickness map based on contemporaneous groundwater head
data for the Burro Canyon aquifer for the facility and physical extent of White Mesa.
5) Appropriate geologic and hydrogeologic maps and cross-sections (to scale).
6) Results and interpretation of aquifer permeability testing as per Part I.F.6(c) of this
Permit.

Section 2 discusses the southwest area investigation as per Part 1.H.6 items (a) and (d). Section 3
provides an overview of site hydrogeology, an update of site hydrogeology based on the results
of the southwest area investigation, and seep and spring hydrogeology in relation to the perched
water system in the southwest area of the site. Section 4 discusses the implications of the results
with regard to seeps and springs in the southwest portion of the site. Sections 3 and 4 satisfy the
elements of Part 1.H.6 items (b) and (c) and item (e).

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
3
2. SOUTHWEST AREA INVESTIGATION
The southwest area investigation included the drilling and logging of 22 borings (referred to as
the DR-series borings) in the southwest portion of the site, completion of 18 of the borings as
piezometers, hydraulic testing of the piezometers having at least 5 feet of water in the casings,
water level monitoring, and additional examination of the area near Cottonwood Seep. Details of
the investigation are provided in Sections 2.1 through 2.4. The results of the investigation show
that permeabilities in the southwest portion of the site are on average lower than previously
estimated, and provide no evidence for a direct hydraulic connection between the perched water
zone and Cottonwood Seep. As discussed in Section 3, the hydraulic test and water level data
also demonstrate that the perched zone southwest of Cell 4B is inadequate as a primary supply to
Cottonwood Seep by several orders of magnitude. As will also be discussed in Section 3, a
hypothetical connection between the perched zone near piezometer DR-8 and Cottonwood Seep
is postulated for the purposes of calculating perched water travel times and to allow for the
possibility that an as yet unidentified connection may exist.
2.1 Rationale for Locating Piezometers
Piezometers were located to satisfy the following goals specified in Part 1.H.6 of the Permit:
a) Investigate the extent of the unsaturated Brushy Basin Member paleoridge between
tailings Cell 4B and the western margin of White Mesa and associated seeps and springs,
and
b) Investigate perched groundwater flow paths and saturated thicknesses between Cell 4B
and the western margin of White Mesa and associated seeps and springs

Twenty two boring locations were sited in the southwest area including five optional borings as
shown in Figure 1. The five optional borings were installed based on data collected during
drilling and subsequent water level monitoring of the remainder of the borings.
2.2 DR-Series Piezometer Installation and Testing
DR-series piezometers were installed, monitored, and tested as described in Sections 2.2.1
through 2.2.4 and Section 2.3. The installation, logging, and testing were conducted in
accordance with Part 1.H.6 items (a) and (d) of the Permit.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
4
2.2.1 Installation
Installation procedures were similar to those used previously at the site for the construction of
perched zone monitoring wells (Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. [HGC], 2005) except that smaller
diameter borings were drilled to accommodate smaller (3-inch rather than 4-inch) diameter
casings. Drilling and construction were performed by Bayles Exploration, Inc., and borings
logged by Mr. Lawrence Casebolt under contract to Denison Mines (USA) Corporation
(Denison). Mr. Stewart Smith of HGC was onsite during a portion of the drilling and well
construction activities. As-built diagrams for the well constructions, based primarily on
information provided by Bayles Exploration, are shown in Appendix A as per Part 1.H.6 (e) item
1 of the Permit. The depths to water shown in the as-built diagrams are based on water level
measurements taken during the third quarter, 2011. Surveyed land surface and top-of-casing
elevations are provided on the diagrams. Table 1 provides surveyed position coordinates and
elevations for piezometers.
2.2.2 Drilling and Logging Procedures
A 6 ¾ inch diameter tricone bit was used to drill a boring of sufficient diameter to install 6-inch-
diameter, Schedule 40 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) surface (or conductor) casing. The surface
casing extended to a depth of approximately five feet below land surface. Once each surface
casing was in place, the boreholes were drilled by air rotary adding water and/or foam only when
needed to maintain circulation. Boreholes were drilled using 5 5/8 to 6 1/8 inch diameter tricone
bits. Each borehole penetrated the Dakota Sandstone and the Burro Canyon Formation and
terminated in the Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison Formation.
Drill cutting samples used for lithologic logging were collected at 2½-foot depth intervals and
placed in labeled, zip-sealed plastic bags and labeled plastic cuttings storage boxes. Copies of the
lithologic logs submitted by Mr. Casebolt are provided in Appendix B (as per Part 1.H.6 (e) item
(1) of the Permit).
2.2.3 Water Level Monitoring
Prior to completion as piezometers, open borings were protected by capping the surface casings
with 6-inch diameter PVC caps, and water levels periodically taken over approximately 1 month.
Based on the data collected, decisions were made whether to complete each boring as a
piezometer or to abandon the boring, as discussed in Section 2.2.4.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
5
2.2.4 Piezometer Completion and Abandonment of Non-Completed Borings
Completed piezometers were constructed using 3-inch diameter, Schedule 40, flush-threaded
PVC casing and 0.02-slot, factory-slotted PVC screen. Colorado Silica Sand was used as a filter
pack and installed to a depth approximately three to six feet above the screened interval of each
piezometer. The annular space above the filter pack was then sealed with approximately three to
eight feet of hydrated bentonite chips and grouted to the surface using Portland cement.
DR-2 was abandoned as it was deemed unnecessary to meet the water level monitoring
objectives of this investigation (other than the water level monitoring conducted prior to
abandonment) and DR-5 provided similar information. Water level monitoring established that
the saturated thicknesses at DR-2 and DR-5 were similar, that the area appears to be a
groundwater divide for perched water, and that flow appears to be primarily either north-
northeast to known discharge point Westwater Seep or south toward known discharge point Ruin
Spring.
DR-16 was abandoned as unnecessary due to the proximity of MW-3, MW-20, and DR-15. Only
DR-15 was considered necessary to establish the boundary of the dry zone to the west. Water
level monitoring of DR-16 confirmed that a continuous saturated zone exists between MW-3 and
MW-20 but the boring did not add significant information regarding hydraulic conditions in the
area.
DR-18 was abandoned because it remained dry. DR-18 helped define the southern extension of
the Brushy basin Member paleoridge and dry area intercepted by MW-21.
DR-25 was abandoned as unnecessary because the boring established that significant saturated
thickness exists immediately upgradient of Ruin Spring, but did not add significant information
regarding hydraulic conditions in the area.
2.3 Hydraulic Testing and Results
Hydraulic testing (as per Part 1.H.6 (a) item (2) of the Permit) consisted of slug tests conducted
by HGC personnel using a methodology similar to that described in HGC (2005). This is
substantially the same methodology used for hydraulic testing of all monitoring wells installed
since 2005. All DR-series piezometers with at least 5 feet of water in the casings were tested.
The saturated thickness is defined as the difference between the water level elevation and the
Brushy Basin Member contact elevation which is not necessarily the same as the water column
in the piezometers, because the casings generally extend below the contact. The saturated

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
6
thickness at DR-12 was greater than 5 feet but the water column in the well was not sufficient for
testing because of about 3 feet of sediment in the bottom of the casing.
Testing of all DR-series piezometers was performed during October 2011. The original test at
DR-8 was strongly influenced by barometric pressure changes. UDEQ expressed concern over
the factor of three difference between the hydraulic conductivity estimated from the hand-
collected data (1 x 10-7 cm/s) and the hydraulic conductivity estimated from the automatically
logged data (3.4 x 10-8 cm/s) using the KGS slug test solution (Hyder et al., 1994). UDEQ
considered there to be sufficient uncertainty in the results to warrant a retest. Retesting of
piezometer DR-8 was performed during October 2012. The hydraulic test results reported for
DR-8 in this revision are based on retesting of the well in October 2012.
The results of the testing (Section 2.3.2) indicate that hydraulic conductivities in the southwest
portion of the site are lower than previously estimated indicating perched water moves more
slowly than previous calculations would indicate. The hydraulic conductivity estimates
calculated for piezometer DR-8 (located at the western edge of the mesa east of Cottonwood
Seep as shown in Figure 1) are among the lowest measured on site.
2.3.1 October 2011 Testing Procedures
The slugs used for the October 2011 tests consisted of a sealed, pea-gravel-filled, schedule 80
PVC pipe approximately 4 feet long as described in HGC (2002), and a slug of the same
diameter having a length of 3 feet. The 4-foot slug displaced approximately 0.47 gallons of water
and the 3-foot slug approximately 0.35 gallons.
Three 0-30 pounds per square inch absolute (psia) Level TrollJ data loggers were used for the
tests. One Level Troll was used to measure barometric pressure and was placed in a protected
environment for the duration of the testing. The other Level Trolls were deployed below the
static water columns in the tested wells and used to measure the changes in water levels during
the tests. 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 an electric water level
meter. 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 30 minutes
prior to beginning each test. The purpose of collecting the background data was to allow
correction for any detected water level trends.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
7
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. Each test commenced by lowering
the slug to a depth of approximately 1 to 2 feet below the static water level over a period of a few
seconds and taking water level readings by hand as soon as possible afterwards. Hand-collected
data were obtained more frequently in the first few minutes when water levels were changing
rapidly, then less frequently as the rate of water level change diminished. Upon completion of
each test, automatically logged data were checked and backed up on the hard drive of a laptop
computer.
2.3.2 October 2012 Testing Procedures (DR-8 Retest)
The DR-8 retesting procedure included collection and analysis of both automatically logged data
and data collected by hand using an electric water level meter, in substantially the same fashion
as for the October 2011 tests. A 0-30 psia Level TrollTM pressure transducer was used to collect
the automatically logged data and a 0-30 psia BaroTrollTM was used to collect atmospheric
pressure data
The primary differences between the original test and the retest are that 1) a smaller slug was
used (approximately 0.23 gallons rather than approximately 0.47 gallons) to eliminate any
possibility that the slug could interfere with the data logger suspended near the base of the water
column in the well, 2) a 6-second (rather than 3-second) data collection interval was used for
automatically logged water level data, and 3) a 1-minute (rather than 5-minute) interval was used
to collect barometric data. The automatically logged data were corrected for changes in
atmospheric pressure prior to analysis and processed in substantially the same fashion as for the
October 2011 tests.
2.3.3 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis
Data from the tests were analyzed using AQTESOLVETM (HydroSOLVE, 2000), a computer
program developed and marketed by HydroSOLVE, Inc. In each test, the maximum measured
rise in water level was reasonable considering the slug volume, the volume in the 3-inch-
diameter casing, and the volume in the annular space between the casing and the bore.
In preparing the October 2011 automatically logged data for analysis, the total number of records
was reduced. In general, all data collected in the first 30 seconds were retained, then every 2nd,
then 3rd, then 4th, etc. record was retained for analysis. For example, if the first 10 records were
retained (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. A similar process was used for the October 2012 data
collected during retesting of DR-8. The primary difference was that all automatically logged data

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
8
collected during the first 60 seconds (rather than 30 seconds) were retained before reducing the
number of data points as described above.
Data were analyzed using two solution methods: the KGS unconfined method (Hyder et al.,
1994) and the Bouwer-Rice unconfined method (Bouwer and Rice, 1976). When filter pack
porosities were required by the analytical method, a value of 30 percent was used. The saturated
thickness was taken to be the difference between the depth of the static water level measured just
prior to the test and the depth to the Brushy Basin Member contact as defined in the drilling logs
(Appendix B). The static water levels were below the tops of the screened intervals and the
saturated thicknesses were taken to be the effective screen lengths. Short-duration tests generally
did not require correction for changes in barometric pressure. Some of the longer-duration tests,
specifically tests at DR-8, DR-10, DR-13, and DR-14, did require corrections to be applied as
shown in Appendix C. Appendix C also provides displacement data for each test.
The KGS solution allows estimation of both specific storage and hydraulic conductivity, while
the Bouwer-Rice solution allows estimation of only the hydraulic conductivity. The Bouwer-
Rice solution is valid only for any straight-line portions of the data that result when the log of
displacement is plotted against time and is insensitive to both storage and the specified initial
water level rise. Typically, only the later-time data are interpretable using Bouwer-Rice.
The KGS solution generally allows a fit to both early and late time data and is sensitive to
storage and the specified initial water level rise. Both solutions were used for comparison.
Automatically logged and hand-collected data were analyzed separately using both solution
methods. The hand-collected data, therefore, served as an independent data set and a check on
the accuracy of the automatically logged data.
Table 2 summarizes parameters for each test. The results of the analyses are provided in Table 3
and Appendix D (as per Part 1.H.6 (e) item (6) of the Permit). Appendix D contains plots
generated by AQTESOLVEJ that show the quality of fit between measured and simulated
displacements, and reproduce the parameters used in each solution. Estimates of hydraulic
conductivity range from 2.5 x 10-8 centimeters per second (cm/s) to 4.5 x 10-4 cm/s using
automatically logged data, and from 4.5 x 10-8 cm/s to 4.7 x 10-4 cm/s using hand-collected data.
Agreement between analyses using the KGS and Bouwer-Rice solutions, and between
automatically-logged and hand-collected data, was generally good. Except for DR-8 all KGS and
Bouwer-Rice estimates using automatically logged data were within a factor of two, and the
majority were within 30%. KGS and Bouwer-Rice estimates using hand-collected data were
within a factor of three (except at DR-8), and the majority were also within 30%. Agreement

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
9
between KGS solution estimates using automatically logged and hand-collected data were within
a factor of two except at DR-10 where the estimates were within a factor of three.
At DR-8, the KGS solution estimates obtained from automatically logged and hand collected
data are within a factor of two, a substantial improvement over the original test. The primary
reason for the improvement is that the influence of barometric pressure change was smaller
during the retest than during the original test. However, the KGS and Bouwer-Rice estimates for
the DR-8 retest data differ by approximately an order of magnitude.
Differences between hydraulic conductivity estimates obtained using the KGS and Bouwer-Rice
solutions are common and expected because of the differences between the two solution
methods. The KGS solution accounts for non-steady flow and aquifer storage while the Bouwer-
Rice solution does not. Accounting for non-steady flow and storage allows a fit to the entire data
set using KGS rather than typically only the later-time portion of the data using Bouwer-Rice.
Because the KGS solution accounts for non-steady flow and aquifer storage it is considered a
more accurate solution than Bouwer-Rice. For this reason, hydraulic conductivity estimates
obtained from the KGS solution are used in the groundwater flow and pore velocity calculations
presented in Sections 3.3 and 3.4.
2.4 Examination of the Area Near Cottonwood Seep
HGC investigated the area near Cottonwood Seep in July 2010 as discussed in HGC (2010b).
Additional investigation of the area between Cottonwood Seep and the mesa rim to the east and
northeast (where the perched zone hosted by the Burro Canyon Formation terminates) was
conducted by HGC personnel at the time of the hydraulic testing (in support of Part 1.H.6 item
(c) of the Permit). The purpose of the examination was to determine if any previously
unidentified hydraulic connection between Cottonwood Seep and the Burro Canyon Formation
may exist. In particular, the ground was examined for any previously unidentified seeps
originating from the Burro Canyon Formation near the mesa rim, or any areas of enhanced
vegetation that would indicate surface or near-surface waters (such as cottonwood trees
associated with all other seeps and springs) that may potentially establish a connection between
the perched zone and Cottonwood Seep.
Examination of the area provided no evidence to establish a hydraulic connection. The absence
of any visible seeps or anomalous vegetation in the Brushy Basin Member northeast and east of
Cottonwood Seep is consistent with dry conditions within the upper portion of the Brushy Basin
above Cottonwood Seep. As will be discussed in Section 3, a hypothetical connection between
the perched zone near DR-8 and Cottonwood Seep is postulated for the purposes of calculating

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
10
perched water travel times and to allow for the possibility that an as yet unidentified connection
may exist.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
11
3. HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE AREA SOUTHWEST OF THE
TAILINGS CELLS
The site hydrogeology has been described previously in HGC (2010b), HGC (2009b), HGC
(2007) and TITAN (1994).The results of these previous investigations are summarized in Section
3.1. Section 3.2 updates the site hydrogeology with the results of the present investigation,
Section 3.3 provides calculations of perched water travel times from tailings cells to Westwater
Seep, piezometer DR-8 (located near the mesa rim above Cottonwood Seep), and Ruin Spring,
and Section 3.4 discusses water balance calculations in the southwest portion of the site. The
data show that saturated thicknesses and rates of perched water movement are low in the
southwest portion of the site, and local recharge likely contributes to flow at Westwater Seep and
Ruin Spring.
Perched water travel times from Cell 4B to DR-8 are calculated rather than travel times to
Cottonwood Seep because there is no evidence to establish a hydraulic connection between
Cottonwood Seep and the perched water system. Furthermore, the hydraulic test and water level
data demonstrate that the perched zone southwest of Cell 4B is inadequate as a primary supply to
Cottonwood Seep by several orders of magnitude and that the primary source(s) for Cottonwood
Seep lie(s) elsewhere. However, a hypothetical connection between the perched zone near
piezometer DR-8 and Cottonwood Seep is postulated in Section 3.3 for the purposes of
calculating perched water travel times and to allow for the possibility that an as yet unidentified
connection may exist.
3.1 Background and Overview
Section 3.1.1 provides a brief summary of site hydrogeology taken primarily from HGC (2010b)
and updated with third quarter, 2011 water level data. Section 3.1.2 discusses key findings of
HGC (2010b) regarding the relationship between the perched water zone and seeps and springs
that occur at the margins of White Mesa. Figure 1 shows site features, the locations of perched
monitoring wells, and the locations of seeps and springs.
3.1.1 Summary
Perched groundwater at the site is hosted primarily by the Burro Canyon Formation, which
consists of a relatively hard to hard, fine- to medium-grained sandstone containing siltstone,
shale and conglomeratic materials. The Burro Canyon Formation is separated from the
underlying regional Navajo/Entrada aquifer by approximately 1,000 to 1,100 feet of Morrison
Formation and Summerville Formation materials having a low average vertical permeability. The
Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison Formation is a bentonitic shale that lies immediately

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
12
beneath the Burro Canyon Formation and forms the base of the perched water zone at the site.
Figure 2 is a photograph of the contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the underlying
Brushy Basin Member taken from a location along highway 95 north of the Mill. This
photograph illustrates the transition from the cliff-forming sandstone of the Burro Canyon
Formation to the slope-forming Brushy Basin Member. Based on hydraulic tests at perched zone
monitoring wells (prior to the present investigation), the hydraulic conductivity of the perched
zone ranges from approximately 2 x 10-7 to 0.01 cm/s (HGC, 2009b).
Perched water flow is generally from northeast to southwest across the site. Beneath and south of
the tailings cells, in the west central portion of the site, perched water flow is south-southwest to
southwest. As the results of the present investigation will show, flow on the western margin of
the mesa is also south, approximately parallel to the rim (where the Burro Canyon Formation is
terminated by erosion). On the eastern side of the site perched water flow is also generally
southerly. Because of mounding near wildlife ponds, flow direction ranges locally from westerly
(west of the ponds) to easterly (east of the ponds). Perched water generally has a low quality,
with total dissolved solids ranging from approximately 1,100 to 7,900 mg/L, and is used
primarily for stock watering and irrigation north (upgradient) of the site.
As of the third quarter of 2011, depths to perched water range from approximately 17 to 18 feet
near the wildlife ponds in the northeastern portion of the site to approximately 114 feet at the
southwestern margin of tailings Cell #3. Saturated thicknesses range from approximately 92 feet
near the wildlife ponds to less than 5 feet in the southwest portion of the site, downgradient of
the tailings cells. A saturated thickness of approximately 2 feet occurs in well MW-34 along the
south dike of new tailings Cell 4B, and the perched zone is apparently dry at MW-33 located at
the southwest corner of Cell 4B. Although sustainable yields of as much as 4 gallons per minute
(gpm) have been achieved in wells penetrating higher transmissivity zones, well yields are
typically low (<1/2 gpm) due to the generally low permeability of the perched zone.
Hydraulic testing of perched zone wells prior to the present investigation yielded a hydraulic
conductivity range of approximately 2 x 10-7 to 0.01 cm/s. In general, the highest permeabilities
and well yields are in the area of the site immediately northeast and east (upgradient to cross
gradient) of the tailings cells. A relatively continuous, higher permeability zone associated with a
chloroform plume has been inferred to exist in this portion of the site (HGC, 2007). Analysis of
drawdown data collected from this zone during long-term pumping of MW-4, TW4-19, and
MW-26 (TW4-15) yielded estimates of hydraulic conductivity ranging from 4 x 10-5 to 1 x 10-3
cm/s.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
13
Permeabilities downgradient of the tailings cells are generally low. Hydraulic tests conducted
prior to the present investigation at wells located at the downgradient edge of the cells, and south
and southwest of the cells, yielded geometric average hydraulic conductivities of 2.3 x 10-5 and
4.3 x 10-5 cm/s depending on the testing and analytical method. The low permeabilities and
shallow hydraulic gradients downgradient of the tailings cells result in average perched
groundwater pore velocity estimates that are among the lowest on site.
3.1.2 Seeps and Springs in Relation to Perched Zone Hydrogeology
Hydro Geo Chem (2010b) discusses the relationships between the perched water zone and seeps
and springs at the margins of White Mesa (shown in Figure 1). Key findings of that report
include the following:
a) Cottonwood Seep is located more than 1,500 feet west of the mesa rim in an area where
the Dakota Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation (which hosts the perched water
system) are absent due to erosion. Cottonwood Seep occurs near a transition from slope-
forming to bench-forming morphology (indicating a change in lithology). Cottonwood
Seep (and 2nd Seep located immediately to the north) are interpreted to originate from
coarser-grained materials within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin Member and are
therefore not (directly) connected to the perched water system at the site.
b) Ruin Spring and Westwater Seep are interpreted to occur at the contact between the
Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin Member. Corral Canyon Seep, Entrance
Spring, and Corral Springs are interpreted to occur at elevations within the Burro Canyon
Formation at their respective locations but above the contact with the Brushy Basin
Member. All seeps and springs (except Cottonwood Seep which is located near the
Brushy Basin Member/Westwater Canyon Member contact) are associated with
conglomeratic portions of the Burro Canyon Formation. The more conglomeratic
portions of the Burro Canyon Formation are likely to have higher permeabilities and the
ability to transmit water more readily than finer-grained portions. This behavior is
consistent with on-site drilling and hydraulic test data that associates higher permeability
with the conglomeratic horizons detected east and northeast of the tailing cells
c) Only Ruin Spring appears to receive a predominant and relatively consistent proportion
of its flow from perched water. Ruin Spring originates from conglomeratic Burro Canyon
Formation sandstone where it contacts the underlying Brushy Basin Member, at an
elevation above the alluvium in the associated drainage. Westwater Seep, which also
originates at the contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin
Member, likely receives a significant contribution from perched water. All seeps and
springs other than Ruin Spring (and 2nd Seep just north of Cottonwood Seep) are located
within alluvium occupying the basal portions of small drainages and canyons. The
relative contribution of flow to these features from bedrock and from alluvium is
indeterminate.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
14
d) All seeps and springs are reported to have enhanced flow during wet periods. For seeps
and springs associated with alluvium, this behavior is consistent with an alluvial
contribution to flow. Enhanced flow during wet periods at Ruin Spring, which originates
from bedrock above the level of the alluvium, likely results from direct recharge of Burro
Canyon Formation and Dakota Sandstone outcropping near the mesa margin in the
vicinity of Ruin Spring. This recharge would be expected to temporarily increase the flow
at Ruin Spring (as well as other seeps and springs where associated bedrock is directly
recharged) after precipitation events.

As discussed in item a), Cottonwood Seep was interpreted in HGC (2010b) to be associated with
coarser-grained materials within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin Member. The
justification for this interpretation is based primarily on 1) the rate of flow at Cottonwood Seep,
which is estimated to be between 1 and 10 gpm (consistent with Dames and Moore, 1978), 2) the
need for relatively permeable materials to transmit this rate of flow, and 3) the change in
morphology near Cottonwood Seep indicating a change in lithology. The change in morphology
from slope-former to bench-former just east of Cottonwood Seep can be seen in the topographic
map included in Appendix E (Figure E.1) and the annotated photograph provided in Figure 3.
The upper portion of the Brushy Basin Member, which hydraulically isolates the perched zone
from underlying materials, is composed primarily of bentonitic mudstone, claystone, and shale.
The rate of flow at Cottonwood Seep is inconsistent with the materials found within the upper
portion of the Brushy Basin but is consistent with coarser-grained materials expected either
within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin Member or within the upper portion of the
underlying Westwater Canyon (sandstone) Member. The relationship between Cottonwood Seep
and lithology is shown on the geologic map provided in Appendix E (Figure E.2) and Figure 3.
As shown in Figure 3, Cottonwood Seep is located approximately 230 feet below the base of the
perched zone defined by the contact between the cliff-forming Burro Canyon Formation and the
underlying slope-forming Brushy Basin Member. The change in morphology from slope-former
to bench-former occurs within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin Member (or the upper
portion of the Westwater Canyon Member), between the termination of the perched zone at the
mesa rim and Cottonwood Seep. The bench-like area hosting Cottonwood Seep begins at the
change in morphology east of Cottonwood Seep and terminates west of Cottonwood Seep where
a cliff-forming sandstone, interpreted to be within the Westwater Canyon Member, is exposed.
The contact between the Westwater Canyon Member and the Brushy Basin Member is
interpreted to be located between this sandstone outcrop and the change in morphology from
slope-former to bench-former. This places Cottonwood Seep at the transition between the Brushy
Basin Member and the underlying Westwater Canyon Member. This placement is consistent

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
15
with lithologic cross-sections provided in TITAN (1994) which place the contact between the
Brushy Basin Member and the Westwater Canyon Member at elevations between approximately
5,220 and 5,230 feet above mean sea level (ft amsl), within 5 to 15 feet of the elevation of
Cottonwood Seep (5234 ft amsl).
The occurrence of coarser-grained materials within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin
Member is discussed in Shawe (2005). The lower unit of the Brushy Basin Member is described
as “mudstone layers which contain, near their base, lenses lithologically similar to sandstone of
the Salt Wash Member, and near their top, conglomeratic sandstone lenses”. By contrast, the
upper portion of the Brushy Basin Member is described by Shawe (2005) as “principally
mudstone; it contains only minor amounts of sandstone, conglomeratic sandstone, and
conglomerate as discontinuous lenses”.
The expectation of coarser-grained materials at Cottonwood Seep is also consistent with the
transition from the Brushy Basin Member into the underlying Westwater Canyon Member. As
discussed in Craig (1955), and Flesch (1974), The Westwater Canyon Member intertongues with
the Brushy Basin Member. Craig (1955) states “The Westwater Canyon Member forms the lower
portion of the upper part of the Morrison in northeastern Arizona, northwestern New Mexico,
and places in southeastern Utah and southwestern Colorado near the Four Corners, and it
intertongues and intergrades northward into the Brushy Basin Member”.
3.2 Incorporation of DR-series Data
DR-series water level, hydraulic test, and lithologic data were used in conjunction with existing
data to provide a more comprehensive description of the perched zone hydrogeology as
described in Sections 3.2.1 through 3.2.4.
3.2.1 Brushy Basin Member Contact Elevations
Figure 4 (as per Part 1.H.6 (e) item (3) of the Permit) is a contour map of the Burro Canyon
Formation/Brushy Basin Member contact generated from perched well, piezometer, DR-series
boring data and the locations and elevations of Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring. Figure 4 was
generated based on data indicating that only Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring are located at the
contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin Member (HGC, 2010b).
As discussed in Section 2, examination of the area near Cottonwood Seep in July 2010 and re-
examination in October 2011 revealed no evidence for a hydraulic connection with the perched
zone. The absence of any visible seeps or anomalous vegetation in the Brushy Basin Member

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
16
east and northeast of Cottonwood Seep is consistent with dry conditions in the upper portion of
the Brushy Basin Member.
3.2.2 Perched Water Elevations, Saturated Thicknesses and Depths to Water
In support of Part 1.H.6 (e) item (2) of the Permit, Figures 5, 6, and 7 are contour maps of
perched water elevations generated from second and third quarters, 2011, and first quarter, 2012
water level data. Each contains perched well and piezometer water level data, and the elevations
of all seeps and springs except Cottonwood Seep (for which there is no evidence to establish a
connection to the perched water system and which is located near the Brushy Basin
Member/Westwater Canyon Member contact, indicating that its elevation is not representative of
the perched potentiometric surface). Fill-in contours between the 10-foot elevation contours are
provided in the area immediately west-southwest of the tailings cells to allow detail in an area
having relatively flat hydraulic gradients.
Figure 5 (second quarter, 2011 data) also contains data from DR-2, DR-16, DR-18, and DR-25
that were abandoned after the second quarter, 2011. Figures 5, 6, and 7 were generated assuming
that each seep or spring (except Cottonwood Seep) is a known discharge point for perched water
and that the elevation of the seep or spring is representative of the elevation of perched water at
that location (HGC, 2010b). As per Part 1.H.6 (e) item (4) of the Permit, Figures 8, 9, and 10
show the saturated thicknesses of the perched zone based on second and third quarter, 2011, and
first quarter, 2012 water level data. Differences between the second and third quarters are due
primarily to the slow recovery of water levels in many DR-series borings (in particular DR-6,
DR-8, and DR-12).
The dry areas shown in Figures 5 through 10 occur where the kriged contact between the Burro
Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin Member is higher in elevation than the kriged perched
water elevation. The dry areas shown in these Figures encompass abandoned dry well MW-16,
dry well MW-21, dry well MW-33, and abandoned dry boring DR-18. Dry areas in Figure 5 also
encompass DR-6 and DR-12 which recovered slowly after drilling, but contained measurable
water by the third quarter of 2011. The areas defined by the heavy yellow dashed contour lines
have saturated thicknesses less than 5 feet. As shown in Figures 6, 7, 9 and 10, a large portion of
the perched zone west and southwest (downgradient) of the tailings cells has a saturated
thickness less than 5 feet as of (and subsequent to) the third quarter, 2011. An apparent perched
water divide exists in the vicinity of DR-2 and DR-5 (Figures 5, 6 and 7). Perched water north of
this apparent divide is expected to flow primarily northeast toward Westwater Seep and perched
water south of this apparent divide is expected to flow primarily south toward Ruin Spring.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
17
As per Part 1.H.6 (b) and (e) items (2), (3), and (4) of the Permit, Figure 11 shows the axes of
paleoridges and paleovalleys in the Brushy Basin Member erosional paleosurface and posted
third quarter, 2011 saturated thicknesses. Also shown is the region estimated to have saturated
thicknesses greater than 10 feet. As indicated, paleoridges in the southwest area of the site are
associated with dry areas and with areas with low saturated thicknesses; paleovalleys are
associated with areas of higher saturated thicknesses. Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring are
located in paleovalleys.
3.2.3 Interpretation of Cross-Sections
As per Part 1.H.6 (e) item (5) of the Permit, Figures 12 and 13 are cross-sections showing the
hydrogeology of the perched zone in the area southwest of the tailings cells. The locations of the
cross-sections are provided on Figure 1. Figure 12 provides east-west cross-sections (E-W and
E2-W2) across the area immediately west and southwest of Cell 4B. Figure 13 is a north-south
cross-section (N-S) from the south dike of Cell 4B to Ruin Spring. Cross-sections E-W and N-S
are oriented approximately parallel to perched water flow and E2-W2 is oriented roughly
perpendicular to perched water flow. Except for abandoned DR-series borings, water levels in
the cross sections are based on third quarter, 2011 data. Water levels for abandoned borings are
from the second quarter, 2011. Water levels did not change significantly between the third
quarter of 2011 and the first quarter of 2012.
As shown in cross-section E-W of Figure 12 (and in Figures 8, 9 and 10) the saturated thickness
of the perched zone in the southwest area of the site varies from negligible to more than 20 feet.
The variable saturated thickness has implications regarding the flow of perched water to known
discharge points Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring. Perched water moving downgradient from the
area of the tailings cells westward toward abandoned boring DR-2 must pass through a region of
low saturated thickness occupied by DR-6 and DR-7 (Figure 12). As will be discussed in more
detail in Section 3.4, this implies (by Darcy’s Law) that some downgradient areas having larger
saturated thicknesses must receive local recharge from precipitation because the water supplied
by lateral perched flow is inadequate to maintain the large saturated thicknesses in areas near
sinks such as Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring.
Two areas of relatively large saturated thickness that are downgradient of areas of small
saturated thickness are of particular interest: the area near DR-2 and DR-5 located west of the
area near DR-6 and DR-7 as shown in Figure 12 (cross-section E-W), and the area near DR-25
located south of the area near MW-20 as shown in Figure 13 (cross-section N-S). Each of the
above areas of larger saturated thickness is downgradient of the corresponding area of small
saturated thickness, and each downgradient area of larger saturated thickness is near a perched

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
18
water sink. The primary known sinks downgradient of DR-2 and DR-5 are Westwater Seep to
the northeast and the paleovalley leading south to Ruin Spring (Figure 11). The primary sink
near DR-25 is Ruin Spring. Lateral flow from areas of larger saturated thickness that may exist
to the east of cross-section N-S may supply the water needed to maintain the relatively large
saturated thickness near DR-25. However, the reported temporary increases in flow from Ruin
Spring (and Westwater Seep) after precipitation events (HGC, 2010b) are difficult to explain
unless flow is temporarily enhanced by local recharge.
As discussed in HGC (2010b), enhanced local recharge is likely near the mesa margins where
weathered Dakota Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation are exposed by erosion (Figure E.2,
Appendix E). Logs at DR-2 and DR-5 show only a few feet of unconsolidated material above the
Dakota Sandstone and visual inspection of the area of the mesa near DR-2 and DR-5 shows that
weathered Dakota is often exposed (consistent with the geology presented in Dames and Moore
(1978). Due to the thin veneer of alluvium overlying the Dakota Sandstone, and thin or absent
Mancos Shale, recharge near DR-2 and DR-5 (cross-section E-W, Figure 12) will be facilitated.
Similarly, in the area near abandoned boring DR-25 and Ruin Spring, recharge will be facilitated
by the thinness or absence of the Mancos Shale and the surface exposure of the Dakota
Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation between DR-25 and Ruin Spring (Figure 13).
3.2.4 Perched Water Flow Directions
As per Part 1.H.6 (e) item (2) of the permit, Figure 14 is a water level contour map showing
estimated pathlines from various locations on the west or south (downgradient) dikes of the
tailings cells toward known discharge points Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring. These pathlines
show the primary expected directions of perched water flow. As indicated, perched water passing
beneath the west dike of Cell 4B has the potential to travel to either of known discharge points
Westwater Seep or to Ruin Spring because of an apparent groundwater divide in the vicinity of
DR-2 and DR-5. Perched water north of this apparent divide is expected to flow primarily
northeast to Westwater Seep and perched water south of this apparent divide is expected to flow
primarily south toward Ruin Spring. The presence of this apparent divide is consistent with
enhanced local recharge.
The path to Ruin Spring from the area south of the apparent divide is sub-parallel to the western
rim of the mesa. The path is generally along a paleovalley between the mesa rim and the dry
portion of the Brushy Basin Member paleoridge defined by MW-21 and abandoned boring DR-
18. Perched water passing beneath the south dike of Cell 4B is expected to travel south-
southwest to Ruin Spring, to the east of the dry paleoridge defined by MW-21 and abandoned
boring DR-18.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
19
Overall, the data suggest that flow in the southwest portion of the site is influenced by
paleotopography to a greater extent than in other areas of the site due to the prevalence of small
saturated thicknesses.
As discussed in Section 3.1.2, there is no evidence to hydraulically connect Cottonwood Seep to
the perched water system, therefore no primary flow pathway depicted in Figure 14 leads to
Cottonwood Seep. Section 3.3 posits a potential pathway that may hypothetically exist between
the perched zone near DR-8 and Cottonwood Seep for purposes of travel time calculations, and
to allow for the possibility that an as yet unidentified pathway may exist.
3.3 Perched Water Travel Times
As per Part 1.H.6 item (c) of the Permit, perched water pore velocities and travel times along
selected paths between the tailings cells and perched water discharge points were calculated for
the pathlines shown in Figure 15 using Darcy’s Law. The calculated pore velocities and travel
times are representative of the movement of a conservative solute assuming no hydrodynamic
dispersion. Calculated perched water travel times in the area southwest (downgradient) of the
tailings cells are generally longer than previously estimated and pore velocities generally lower
than previously estimated.
The Figure 15 pathlines were selected as the shortest Figure 14 paths from the tailings cells to a)
Westwater Seep (Path 1), b) Ruin Spring via the west side of the Brushy Basin paleoridge (Path
3), and c) Ruin Spring via the east side of the Brushy Basin paleoridge (Path 4). A pathline from
the tailngs cells to the vicinity of DR-8 (Path 2) is also shown in Figure 15. From the vicinity of
DR-8 perched water is expected to flow primarily south (within a paleovalley) toward Ruin
Spring. However, a potential pathline from the vicinity of DR-8 is also shown in Figure 15 that
posits a hypothetical connection between the perched zone and Cottonwood Seep. Path 2
provides the shortest pathline between the tailings cells and the western edge of the perched zone
near DR-8, and the potential path provides the shortest hypothetical connection between the
western edge of Path 2 and Cottonwood Seep.
Hydraulic conductivities used in the calculations are from TITAN (1994), HGC (2002), HGC
(2005), HGC (2009a), HGC (2010a), HGC (2011), and Table 3. Data are summarized in Table 4.
Hydraulic conductivity estimates are based on automatically logged slug test data analyzed using
the KGS solution method, except for MW-12, MW-14, and MW-15. Hydraulic conductivity
estimates at MW-12, MW-14, and MW-15 are based on pumping test analyses reported in
TITAN (1994). Pore velocity calculations for each pathline are summarized in Table 5.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
20
Path 1 is approximately 2,200 feet long with an average hydraulic gradient of 0.0132 feet per
foot (ft/ft) based on the first quarter, 2012 water level at MW-23 (5,497 ft amsl) and the
elevation of Westwater Seep (5,468 ft amsl). The geometric average hydraulic conductivity of
the perched zone in the vicinity of Path 1 (based on data from DR-5, DR-8, DR-9, DR-10, DR-
11, MW-12, MW-23, MW-24, and MW-36) is 9.8 x 10-6 cm/s (0.027 feet per day [ft/day]).
Assuming an effective porosity of 0.18, the average perched water pore velocity along Path 1 is
0.73 feet per year (ft/yr), yielding a total travel time of approximately 3,010 years.
Path 2 is approximately 4,125 feet long with an average hydraulic gradient of 0.0046 ft/ft based
on the first quarter, 2012 water level at MW-36 (5,493 ft amsl) and the water level at DR-8
(5,474 ft amsl). The geometric average hydraulic conductivity of the perched zone in the vicinity
of Path 2 (based on data from DR-5, DR-8, DR-9, DR-10, DR-11, MW-12, MW-23, MW-24,
and MW-36) is 9.8 x 10-6 cm/s (0.027 ft/day). Assuming an effective porosity of 0.18, the
average perched water pore velocity along Path 2 is 0.26 feet per year (ft/yr), yielding a total
travel time of approximately 15,850 years. The additional time to travel along the hypothetical
pathway to Cottonwood Seep is not calculated because of the hypothetical nature of the pathway.
If such a pathway exists, the combined travel time along Path 2 and the hypothetical pathway
(which adds approximately 2,150 horizontal feet to the total path length), is expected to be
significantly greater than 15,850 years.
Path 3 is approximately 11,800 feet long with an average hydraulic gradient of 0.0096 ft/ft based
on the first quarter, 2012 water level at MW-36 (5,493 ft amsl) and the elevation of Ruin Spring
(5,380 ft amsl). The geometric average hydraulic conductivity of the perched zone in the vicinity
of Path 2 (based on test data from DR-5, DR-8, DR-9, DR-10, DR-11, DR-14, DR-17, DR-19,
DR-20, DR-21, DR-23, DR-24, MW-23, MW-24, and MW-36) is 1.1 x 10-5 cm/s (0.031 ft/day).
Assuming an effective porosity of 0.18, the average perched water pore velocity along Path 3 is
0.60 ft/yr, yielding a total travel time of approximately 19,650 years.
Path 4 is approximately 9,685 feet long with an average hydraulic gradient of 0.0116 ft/ft based
on the first quarter, 2011 water levels at MW-15, MW-34, and MW-37 (5,492 ft amsl) and the
elevation of Ruin Spring (5,380 ft amsl). The geometric average hydraulic conductivity of the
perched zone in the vicinity of Path 4 (based on KGS analysis of automatically test data from
DR-11, DR-13, DR-21, DR-23, DR-24, MW-3, MW-14, MW-15, MW-20 and MW-37) is 1.38 x
10-5 cm/s (0.039 ft/day). Assuming an effective porosity of 0.18, the average perched water pore
velocity along Path 4 is 0.91 ft/yr, yielding a total travel time of approximately 10,650 years.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
21
3.4 Water Balance Near DR-2 and DR-5
Enhanced recharge south/southwest of Westwater Seep near DR-2 and DR-5 is likely needed to
maintain the relatively large saturated thicknesses there, considering the slow rate of perched
water flow into that area via the zone of low saturated thickness and the presence of known sinks
to the northeast (Westwater Seep) and to the south (paleovalley leading to Ruin Spring).
Because the water columns in most piezometers penetrating the area of low saturated thicknesses
were inadequate for hydraulic testing, only one estimate of hydraulic conductivity was obtained,
at DR-10. As shown in Table 3, the KGS method hydraulic conductivity estimates at DR-10
(located within the area of low saturated thickness) were one to two orders of magnitude lower
than at DR-5 and DR-9, located west of the area of low saturated thickness. Assuming the
estimate at DR-10 is representative of the area of low saturated thickness, the transmissivity (the
product of hydraulic conductivity and saturated thickness) of the area of low saturated thickness
is two to three orders of magnitude lower than for the area of larger saturated thickness to the
west (near DR-2, DR-5, and DR-9). Figures 6 and 7 show that the hydraulic gradient in this area
is relatively flat, and the gradient does not change significantly across the area of low saturated
thickness.
Water flows westward from the area of the tailings cells through the area of low saturated
thickness between DR-6 and DR-10 (Figure 7). Using Darcy’s Law, and assuming a hydraulic
conductivity of 3 x 10-6 cm/s (0.0084 ft/day, based on the KGS estimate provided for DR-10 in
Table 3), an average hydraulic gradient of 0.0065 ft/ft, an average saturated thickness of 2 1/3 ft,
and a width of approximately 1,600 feet (the approximate distance between DR-6 and DR-10),
the rate of perched water flow westward through the area of low saturated thickness is
approximately 0.2 cubic feet per day (ft3/day) or 0.0011 gpm.
Water flows out of the area of larger saturated thickness (near DR-2 and DR-5) to the northeast
toward known discharge point Westwater Seep and to the south through the paleovalley leading
towards known discharge point Ruin Spring. The rate of flow out of this area northeast to
Westwater Seep is expected to be smaller than the discharge rate at Westwater Seep which also
receives water from the east and northeast. The discharge rate at Westwater Seep is too small for
a reliable estimate. However, the rate of flow south through the paleovalley leading towards Ruin
Spring can be calculated using the geometric average hydraulic conductivity of 0.0089 ft/day
(based on KGS estimates for DR-8, DR-9, and DR-10 in Table 3), an approximate hydraulic
gradient of 0.0088 ft/ft, an average saturated thickness of 12 ft, and a width of approximately
2,250 ft (between DR-8 and DR-10), as 2.1 ft3/day, or 0.011 gpm, an order of magnitude larger

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
22
than the calculated flow into the area. The difference between calculated inflow and outflow is
approximately 0.01 gpm.
These calculations indicate that an additional water source is needed to maintain the relatively
large saturated thicknesses west of the area of low saturated thickness between DR-6 and DR-10;
otherwise Westwater Seep and the paleovalley to the south would drain the area of larger
saturated thickness more quickly than water was supplied. The most likely source of additional
water is infiltration of precipitation enhanced by the direct exposure of weathered Dakota
Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation, and the thinness or absence of any overlying low
permeability materials such as the Mancos Shale. Assuming uniform recharge over an area of
approximately 175 acres (the portion of the mesa west of Westwater Seep and north of DR-8 and
DR-9), the calculated difference of 0.01 gpm implies a conservatively low recharge rate of
0.0011 inches per year (in/yr). Most of the recharge likely occurs near the mesa rim where the
Dakota and Burro Canyon are exposed (Figure 12 and Figure E.2, Appendix E). Such recharge is
expected to be enhanced within drainages where they cross weathered Dakota Sandstone and
Burro Canyon Formation.
Furthermore, these calculations indicate that perched water flow in the portion of the site south
of Westwater Seep is inadequate as a primary supply to Cottonwood Seep. Perched water flow
from the area of the tailings cells through the area of low saturated thickness towards
Cottonwood Seep would have to be more than three orders of magnitude higher than calculated
above to provide a supply of between 1 and 10 gpm. The required flow would have to be even
larger considering that some of the incoming flow is diverted to known discharge point
Westwater Seep and to the paleovalley that leads south to known discharge point Ruin Spring.
Even if this calculation were performed using the geometric average of the KGS hydraulic
conductivity estimates for all tested DR-series piezometers (approximately 1 x 10-5 cm/s or 0.028
ft/day) rather than the estimate for DR-10 (3 x 10-6 cm/s or 0.0084 ft/day), the calculated rate of
flow through the area of low saturated thickness would be 0.0035 gpm, which is still
approximately three orders of magnitude lower than the estimated discharge rate of Cottonwood
Seep. The inadequacy of the perched zone as the primary supply to Cottonwood Seep indicates
that the primary source or sources of Cottonwood Seep lie elsewhere.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
23
4. IMPLICATIONS FOR SEEPS AND SPRINGS
The lithologic and hydraulic data collected from the southwest area investigation allow a more
comprehensive assessment of the hydrogeology of the site and have implications with regard to
seeps and springs southwest of the site. The data indicate that dilution of perched water by local
recharge is expected to occur in the vicinities of Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring, and that
perched zone permeabilities and flow rates in the southwestern portion of the site are too low (by
several orders of magnitude) for the perched zone to serve as the primary source of water for
Cottonwood Seep
4.1 Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring
As discussed in HGC (2010b) the water source for both Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring is
lateral flow from upgradient portions of the perched zone enhanced by local recharge near the
edge of the mesa. Most of this recharge likely occurs near the mesa rim where weathered Dakota
Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation are exposed. Such recharge is likely to be enhanced
within drainages where they cross weathered Dakota Sandstone and Burro Canyon Formation.
The results of the present study indicate that the permeability of the perched zone in the
southwest area of the site is on average lower than previously estimated and that the contribution
to flow at Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring by local recharge is more significant than previously
thought.
4.2 Cottonwood Seep
The low perched zone permeabilities and small saturated thicknesses in the southwest area of the
site are consistent with low rates of perched water flow, as shown by the calculated flow through
the area of small saturated thickness southwest of the tailings cells (between DR-6 and DR-10)
provided in Section 3.4. This low rate of perched water flow (approximately 0.001 gpm) is
inadequate (by more than three orders of magnitude) to function as the primary supply to
Cottonwood Seep which has flows estimated to be between 1 and 10 gpm. As discussed in
Section 3.1.2, the estimated flow at Cottonwood Seep is consistent with Dames and Moore
(1978).
In summary, the perched zone cannot be the primary source of water to Cottonwood Seep for the
following reasons:
a) Cottonwood Seep occurs in the lower third of Brushy Basin Member, approximately 230
feet below the contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and the Brushy Basin
Member, more than 1,500 ft west of the termination of the perched zone, and just west of

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
24
a change in morphology from slope-former to bench-former. The change in morphology
is indicative of a change in lithology. As discussed in HGC (2010b) Cottonwood Seep
likely originates from coarser-grained materials within the lower portion of the Brushy
Basin Member. Alternatively, Cottonwood Seep may originate from coarser-grained
materials of the Westwater Canyon (sandstone) Member intertongueing with the
overlying Brushy Basin Member at the transition between the two Members. The
presence of coarser-grained materials similar to the Salt Wash (sandstone) Member
within the lower portion of the Brushy Basin member is discussed in Shawe (2005). The
intertongueing of the Westwater Canyon and Brushy Basin Members is discussed in
Craig (1955) and Flesch (1974). Based on lithologic cross sections provided in TITAN
(1994), the elevation of Cottonwood Seep (5234 ft amsl) is within 5 to 15 feet of the
elevation of the contact between the Brushy Basin Member and the underlying Westwater
Canyon Member (5220 to 5230 ft amsl).
b) The flow at Cottonwood Seep exceeds the flow in the perched zone in the area southwest
of the tailings cells by several orders of magnitude. Flows at Cottonwood Seep are also
relatively large compared to seeps and springs known to originate from the perched zone,
consistent with a primary source other than perched water.
c) There is no evidence to establish a direct hydraulic connection between the perched zone
and Cottonwood Seep. Cottonwood Seep is located more than 1,500 ft west of the
termination of the Burro Canyon Formation which hosts the perched water zone.
Examination of the area between Cottonwood Seep and mesa rim (the edge of the
perched zone) reveals that the upper portion of the Brushy Basin Member appears dry
and no previously undiscovered seeps originating from the Burro Canyon Formation near
Cottonwood Seep were identified.

Because the results of the southwest area investigation do not provide evidence that Cottonwood
Seep is hydraulically connected to the perched water system at the site, and because the perched
zone near Cottonwood Seep is inadequate as a primary supply, the primary source (or sources) of
water to Cottonwood Seep must lie elsewhere. The primary source(s) must be significant to
supply consistent flows at rates between 1 and 10 gpm. By contrast, flows at Ruin Spring
(estimated at less than about 1/2 gpm, consistent with Dames and Moore, 1978) are lower than at
Cottonwood Seep (between 1 and 10 gpm), and flows at Westwater Seep are too small to
measure. Westwater Seep generally consists of a damp spot that can be sampled only by digging
a hole and waiting for enough water to seep in for sample collection (see Figures 16 and 17 taken
from HGC, 2010b).
Although no evidence of a direct hydraulic connection between the perched zone and
Cottonwood Seep was provided by the investigation, the possibility of a hypothetical, as yet
unknown, connection was postulated for the purpose of calculating a travel time from the tailngs
cells to the western edge of the perched zone (near DR-8), and thence along a potential pathway

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
25
to Cottonwood Seep. The travel time from the tailings cells to DR-8 was calculated as
approximately 15,850 years. Should a potential pathline such as that shown in Figure 15 exist,
the total time needed to travel from the tailings cells to Cottonwood Seep is expected to be
significantly larger than 15,850 years.
4.3 Potential Dilution of Perched Water Resulting From Local Recharge of
the Dakota and Burro Canyon Near Seeps and Springs
As discussed in Section 3, the rate of flow in the perched water zone in the southwest area of the
site is small and a contribution from local recharge is needed to explain many areas of higher
saturated thickness near sinks such as Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring that are downgradient of
areas of low saturated thickness. The presence of local recharge is expected to affect the water
quality of seeps and springs and has the potential to dilute any dissolved constituents that may
migrate from upgradient areas.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
26

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
27
5. CONCLUSIONS
As per Part 1.H.6 (a) through (d) of the Permit, the southwest area investigation included the
drilling and logging of 22 borings in the southwest portion of the site, completion of 18 of the
borings as piezometers, hydraulic testing of the piezometers having at least 5 feet of water in the
casings, water level monitoring, and additional examination of the area near Cottonwood Seep.
Water level data obtained from the borings and piezometers (including dry borings) yielded data
that satisfy Part 1.H.6 (b) and (c) of the Permit.
Interpretation of well survey, lithologic, water level, and hydraulic test data provided in Tables 1
through 4, Figures 2 through 14, and Appendices A through D satisfy Part 1.H.6 (e) items 1
through 6 of the Permit. Specifically, Appendices A and B satisfy item 1; Figures 5, 6, 7, 14, and
15 satisfy item 2; Figures 4 and 11 satisfy item 3; Figures 7 through 11 satisfy item 4; Figures 12
and 13 satisfy item 5; and Tables 2, 3, and 4 satisfy item 6. Figure 15 and Table 5 support
perched water travel time calculations satisfying Part 1.H.6 © of the Permit.
The results of the investigation are substantially consistent with and build upon the results and
conclusions presented in HGC (2010b). The results of the investigation show that permeabilities
in the southwest portion of the site are on average lower than previously estimated, and provide
no evidence for a direct hydraulic connection between the perched water zone and Cottonwood
Seep. The hydraulic test and water level data also demonstrate that the perched zone southwest
of Cell 4B is inadequate as a primary supply to Cottonwood Seep by several orders of magnitude
and that that the primary source of Cottonwood Seep lies elsewhere. However, a hypothetical
connection between the perched zone near piezometer DR-8 and Cottonwood Seep is postulated
for the purposes of calculating perched water travel times and to allow for the possibility that an
as yet unidentified connection may exist
Important results of the southwest area investigation are:
a) The Brushy Basin Member erosional paleosurface in the southwest area of the Mill site is
dominated by a paleoridge extending from beneath Cell 4B to abandoned boring DR-18
(Figures 4 and 11). The paleoridge is flanked to the west by a north-south trending
paleovalley oriented roughly parallel to the western mesa rim (Figure 11).
b) The southwest area of the Mill site is characterized by generally low saturated
thicknesses, low permeabilities, and relatively shallow hydraulic gradients. This is
illustrated in Table 3 and Figures 5 through 13.
c) The paleotopography of the Brushy Basin Member erosional surface has a greater
influence on perched water flow in the southwest portion of the site than other areas

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
28
because of the low saturated thicknesses and dry areas associated with the paleoridge
(Figure 14).
d) The low transmissivities implied by the low permeabilities and low saturated thicknesses
combined with the shallow hydraulic gradients imply low rates of perched water flow in
the southwest portion of the site. Calculated average pore velocities along Pathlines 1, 3,
and 4 (Figure 15) from tailings cells to known discharge points Westwater Seep and Ruin
Spring range from 0.60 ft/yr to 0.91 ft/yr, and travel times from 3,010 to 19,650 years
based on first quarter, 2012 water level data.
e) The estimated travel time from the tailings cells to the vicinity of DR-8 (Path 2) is
approximately 15,850 years based on first quarter, 2012 water level data and a calculated
pore velocity of 0.26 ft/yr. Assuming a hypothetical pathway to Cottonwood Seep, the
time to travel along Path 2 and thence along the potential pathway from the edge of Path
2 to Cottonwood Seep (which adds approximately 2,150 horizontal feet) is expected to be
significantly greater than 15,850 years.
f) Brushy Basin Member paleotopography influences the locations of Westwater Seep and
Ruin Spring; both are located in paleovalleys within the Brushy Basin Member
paleosurface (Figure 11).
g) Local recharge is needed to explain areas of relatively large saturated thickness that
supply Westwater Seep and Ruin Spring, because lateral flow into these areas from
upgradient low saturated thickness portions of the perched zone is inadequate. The
calculated perched zone recharge rate in the approximate 175 acre area southwest of
Westwater Seep (near DR-2 and DR-5) is 0.0011 in/yr.
h) The perched water system in the southwestern portion of the site is inadequate as the
primary supply to Cottonwood Seep by several orders of magnitude. Therefore the
primary source(s) of Cottonwood Seep must lie elsewhere.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
29
6. REFERENCES
Dames and Moore. 1978. White Mesa Uranium Project, San Juan County, Utah. For Energy
Fuels Nuclear, Inc. January 30, 1978.
Craig et al. 1955. Stratigraphy of the Morrison and Related Formations, Colorado Plateau
Region. A Preliminary Report. U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1009-E.
Flesch. 1974. Stratigraphy and Sedimentology of the Morrison Formation (Jurassic), Ojito
Spring Quadrangle, Sandoval County, New Mexico: A Preliminary Discussion. New
Mexico Geological Society Guidebook, 25th Field Conference, Ghost Ranch (Central-
Northern New Mexico), 1974.
Hydro Geo Chem, Inc (HGC). 2002. Hydraulic Testing at the White Mesa Uranium Mill Near
Blanding, Utah During July, 2002. Submitted to International Uranium (USA)
Corporation, Denver, Colorado.
HGC. 2004. Final Report. Long Term Pumping at MW-4, TW4-10, and TW4-15. White Mesa
Uranium Mill Near Blanding, Utah. May 26, 2004.
HGC. 2005. Perched Monitoring Well Installation and Testing at the White Mesa Uranium Mill,
April through June 2005. Submitted to International Uranium (USA) Corporation,
Denver, Colorado.
HGC. 2007. Preliminary Contamination Investigation Report. White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
Near Blanding, Utah. November 20, 2007.
HGC. 2009a. Letter Report to David Frydenlund, Esq. November 3, 2009.
HGC. 2009b. Site Hydrogeology and Estimation of Groundwater Pore Velocities in the Perched
Zone. White Mesa Uranium Mill Near Blanding, Utah. December 29, 2009.
HGC. 2010a. Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells MW-33, MW-34,
and MW-35 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill Near Blanding, Utah. October 11, 2010.
HGC. 2010b. Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone and Associated Seeps and
Springs Near the White Mesa Uranium Mill Site, Blanding, Utah. November 12, 2010.
HGC. 2011. Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells MW-38 and
MW-37 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill Near Blanding, Utah. June 28, 2011.
HGC. 2012a. Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the Area Southwest of the
Tailings Cells. White Mesa Uranium Mill Site. Blanding, Utah. January 12, 2012.
HGC. 2012b. Revised Report on the Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells. White Mesa Uranium Mill Site. Blanding, Utah.
August 3, 2012.
HydroSOLVE, Inc. 2000. AQTESOLVE for Windows. User=s Guide.
Kirby. 2008. Geologic and Hydrologic Characterization of the Dakota-Burro Canyon Aquifer
Near Blanding, San Juan County, Utah. Utah Geological Survey Special Study 123.
Knight-Piésold. 1998. Evaluation of Potential for Tailings Cell Discharge – White Mesa Mill.
Attachment 5, Groundwater Information Report, White Mesa Uranium Mill, Blanding,
Utah. Submitted to UDEQ.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
30
Shawe. 2005. U S Geological Survey Professional Paper 576-F. Geologic Investigations in the
Slick Rock District, San Miguel and Dolores Counties, Colorado.
TITAN. 1994. Hydrogeological Evaluation of White Mesa Uranium Mill. Submitted to Energy
Fuels Nuclear.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
31
7. LIMITATIONS STATEMENT
The opinions and recommendations 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.

Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the
Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells White Mesa Uranium Mill Site
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\southwest_area_rev_nov2012_rev1.doc
January 12, 2012 | Revised August 3, 2012 | Second Revision November 7, 2012
32

TABLES
TABLE 1
Surveyed Position Coordinates for DR-series Piezometers
Location Latitude N Longitude W
Top of Casing
Elevation (ft amsl)
Ground
Elevation (ft amsl)
DR-2 37°31'43.2384" 109°31'48.9843" abandoned 5551.34
DR-5 37°31'42.8093" 109°31'36.6427" 5565.56 5564.05
DR-6 37°31'42.7892" 109°31'20.4809" 5578.87 5577.91
DR-7 37°31'42.7607" 109°31'09.9342" 5583.86 5582.39
DR-8 37°31'27.1416" 109°31'48.7868" 5525.01 5523.69
DR-9 37.31'24.9239" 109°31'37.8796" 5566.25 5565.09
DR-10 37°31'26.9443" 109°31'20.6076" 5560.49 5559.49
DR-11 37°31'26.7357" 109°31'09.9599" 5585.64 5584.42
DR-12 37°31'26.6924" 109°30'58.2466" 5579.94 5578.70
DR-13 37°31'26.4497" 109°30'48.8041" 5556.44 5555.11
DR-14 37°31'08.3875" 109°31'37.0783" 5542.58 5541.31
DR-15 37°31'07.6211" 109°31'08.2651" 5558.24 5557.16
DR-16 37°31'08.1536" 109°30'58.3915" abandoned 5550.76
DR-17 37°30'55.3156" 109°31'37.0518" 5518.55 5517.16
DR-18 37°30'55.1352" 109°31'20.5340" abandoned 5524.48
DR-19 37°30'43.3468" 109°31'49.5061" 5517.94 5517.16
DR-20 37°30'43.4778" 109°31'38.4324" 5498.67 5497.88
DR-21 37°30'42.6634" 109°31'14.0727" 5521.75 5520.58
DR-22 37°30'30.0936" 109°31'50.0818" 5484.42 5482.97
DR-23 37°30'37.0276" 109°31'25.8592" 5495.94 5494.65
DR-24 37°30'23.5938" 109°31'41.7780" 5461.44 5460.19
DR-25 37°30'19.3288" 109°31'16.5987" abandoned 5461.78
Note:
ft amsl = feet above mean sea level
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\SWTables_rev1012.xls: Table 1 11/7/2012
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)
DR-5 94 81.7 76.1 96.1 12.3
DR-8 58 49.7 40.0 60.0 7.8
DR-9 110 85.5 82.1 112.1 24.5
DR-10 80 77.0 63.0 83.0 3.0
DR-11 106 97.1 89.0 109.0 8.9
DR-13 80 68.8 65.0 85.0 11.2
DR-14 94 75.2 67.2 97.2 18.8
DR-17 70 63.5 53.1 73.1 6.5
DR-19 66 62.5 49.0 69.0 3.5
DR-20 73 55.1 56.0 76.0 17.9
DR-21 114 100.5 96.9 116.9 13.5
DR-23 77 69.5 59.1 79.1 7.5
DR-24 60 42.6 43.0 63.0 17.4
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\SWTables_rev1012.xls: Table 2 11/7/2012
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)
DR-5 12.3 2.95E-05 4.21E-05 3.80E-05 2.86E-05 2.65E-03 3.76E-05
1DR-8 7.8 2.46E-08 1.00E-02 3.56E-07 4.46E-08 1.00E-02 4.45E-07
DR-9 24.5 4.49E-04 4.30E-06 3.41E-04 4.73E-04 1.21E-05 4.73E-04
DR-10 3 2.92E-06 6.54E-03 5.56E-06 9.71E-06 8.41E-04 9.71E-06
DR-11 8.9 8.88E-06 8.88E-04 1.54E-05 5.83E-06 2.22E-03 1.11E-05
DR-13 11.2 5.90E-06 7.33E-05 5.38E-06 4.93E-06 1.57E-04 1.49E-06
DR-13(et) 11.2 NA NA NA NA NA 6.81E-06
DR-14 18.8 1.26E-05 7.34E-05 1.66E-05 7.78E-06 4.84E-04 6.18E-06
DR-14(et) 18.8 NA NA NA NA NA 1.23E-05
DR-17 6.5 1.24E-05 1.53E-04 1.43E-05 3.17E-06 5.00E-03 2.19E-06
DR-17(et) 6.5 NA NA NA NA NA 8.35E-06
DR-19 3.5 3.29E-05 2.54E-03 3.78E-05 3.39E-05 1.86E-03 4.08E-05
DR-20 17.9 2.14E-06 1.91E-05 2.69E-06 1.43E-06 1.90E-05 1.89E-06
DR-21 13.5 3.29E-05 7.17E-06 3.60E-05 2.21E-05 1.87E-04 3.49E-05
DR-23 7.5 1.96E-05 3.85E-04 2.35E-05 7.49E-06 5.00E-03 4.51E-06
DR-23(et) 7.5 NA NA NA NA NA 2.16E-05
DR-24 17.4 1.64E-05 7.49E-05 1.43E-05 1.64E-05 7.49E-05 8.23E-06
DR-24(et) 17.4 NA NA NA NA NA 1.97E-05
Notes:
1 DR-8 results from retesting during October, 2012
Bouwer-Rice = Unconfined Bouwer-Rice solution method in Aqtesolve™
cm/s = centimeters per second
et = early time data
ft = feet
K = hydraulic conductivity
KGS = Unconfined KGS solution method in Aqtesolve™
Ss= specific storage
Automatically Logged Data Hand Collected Data
KGS KGS
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\SWTables_rev1012.xls: Table 3 11/7/2012
TABLE 4
Hydraulic Conductivity Estimates for Travel Time Calculations
location k (cm/s) location k (cm/s) location k (cm/s)
DR-5 2.95E-05 DR-5 2.95E-05 DR-11 8.88E-06
DR-8 2.46E-08 DR-8 2.46E-08 DR-13 5.89E-06
DR-9 4.49E-04 DR-9 4.49E-04 DR-21 3.29E-05
DR-10 2.92E-06 DR-10 2.92E-06 DR-23 1.54E-05
DR-11 8.88E-06 DR-11 8.88E-06 MW-3 4.00E-07
MW-12 2.20E-05 DR-14 1.26E-05 MW-14 7.50E-04
MW-23 2.30E-07 DR-17 1.24E-05 MW-15 1.90E-05
MW-24 4.16E-05 DR19 3.29E-05 MW-20 9.30E-06
MW-36 4.51E-04 DR-20 2.14E-06 MW-37 1.28E-05
DR-21 3.29E-05
DR-23 1.96E-05
DR-24 1.64E-05
MW-23 2.30E-07
MW-24 4.16E-05
MW-36 4.51E-04
geomean:9.76E-06 geomean:1.10E-05 geomean:1.38E-05
Notes:
k = hydraulic conductivity
cm/s = centimeters per second
PATHS 1 and 2 PATH 3 PATH 4
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\SWTables_rev1012.xls: Table 4 11/7/2012
TABLE 5
Estimated Perched Zone Pore Velocities Along Path Lines
Path Length Head Change Hydraulic Gradient Pore Velocity
(cm/s) (ft/yr) (ft) (ft) ft/ft ft/yr
1 9.76E-06 10.0 2,200 29 0.0132 0.73
2 9.76E-06 10.0 4,125 19 0.0046 0.26
3 1.10E-05 11.3 11,800 113 0.0096 0.60
4 1.38E-05 14.1 9,685 112 0.0116 0.91
Notes:
aGeometric average (from Table 4)
Assumes effective porosity of 0.18
cm/s = centimeters per second
ft/ft = feet per foot
ft/yr = feet per year
Path
Hydraulic Conductivitya
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\SWTables_rev1012.xls: Table 5 11/7/2012

FIGURES
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
Co
t
t
o
n
w
o
o
d

C
a
n
y
o
n
W E
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
W2 E2
S
N
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
(optional)
(optional)
(optional)
(optional)
DR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
abnd
abnd
(opt/abnd)
abnd
MW-16
(dry/abnd)
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well
perched piezometer
perched piezometer installed
May/June, 2011
abandoned perched well or boring
seep or spring
WHITE MESA SITE PLAN
SHOWING SOUTHWEST INVESTIGATION AREA
AND LOCATIONS OF PERCHED WELLS, PIEZOMETERS,
BORINGS AND CROSS SECTIONS
H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTMbase/UTMwelloc11e.srf
MW-5
PIEZ-1
DR-5
RUIN SPRING
southwest investigation area
1SJS7/20/12
B ur ro Canyon Fo rma t ion
Brushy Basin Member
Highway 95
Reference Outcrop Just North
of White Mesa Uranium Mill
APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.
2
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE CONTACT BETWEEN THE
BURRO CANYON FORMATION AND THE
BRUSHY BASIN MEMBER
H:/718000/
cell4bjuly2010/springsQ2/contact.srfSJS7/20/12
APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.
"Dry Seep""2nd Seep" (5240 ft amsl)Cottonwood Seep (5234 ft amsl)
Kdbc Kdbc
Jmbb
ss (within Jmw)
sh (Jmr)
(contact approx. 5465 ft amsl)
Approximate Location
of DR-8
EXPLANATION
Dakota Sandstone/
Burro Canyon Formation
Brushy Basin (Shale) Member
Approximate Location of
Geologic Contact
Kdbc
Jmbb
sandstone (within Westwater
Canyon Member)
ss
(within Jmw)
shale (Recapture Member)sh (Jmr)
H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/cottonwood.srf
ANNOTATED PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING
EAST SIDE OF COTTONWOOD CANYON
(looking east toward White Mesa
from west side of Cottonwood Canyon)
NOTES: adapted from HGC (2010b); "2nd Seep" and "Dry Seep" are described in HGC (2010b)
3
Approximate Change From
Slope-Former to Bench-Former
Jmbb Jmbb
WHITE MESA
(slope-former)
(cliff-former)
(cliff-former)(cliff-former)
(slope-former)(slope-former)
COTTONWOOD CANYON
lower Jmbb/upper Jmw
(bench former)
lower Jmbb/upper Jmw
(bench former)
(slope-former)
SJS 7/20/12
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
DR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
5536
5492
5466
5491
5479
5494
54775473
5495
5470
5518
5511
5449
5470
5396
5483
5502
5499
5537
5515
5491
5508
5489
5494 5491
5482
5481
55265506
5497
55165513
5511
5552
5536
5558
5501
5477
5544
5534
5542
5519
5507
5536
5545
5507
5552
5562
5543 5560
5518
5528
5525
5561
5536
5502
5555
5464 5470 5483 5489
5466
5455
5479 5478 5487 5473
5447 5461 5451
5447 5467
5451 5425 5407
5425
5418
5400
5386
5534
5522
5512
5517
5521
5517
5520
5525
5521
5517
5515
5518
5536
5532
55365481
55025509
5494
5487
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
5624
5383
5234
5560
5380
5468
(not included)
(not included)
(not included)
(not included)
TW4-27
5515
EXPLANATION
perched piezometer showing
elevation in feet amsl
abandoned perched well or boring
showing elevation in feet amsl
seep or spring showing elevation in
feet amsl
MW-5
DR-5
DR-16
RUIN SPRING
APPROXIMATE ELEVATION OF TOP OF BRUSHY BASIN
(Ruin Spring and Westwater Seep
included in the contouring)
perched monitoring well showing
elevation in feet amsl
5380
5470
5491
5451
SJS 4 H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTMbase_revisedmaps/Ubb0312_v2.srf7/20/12
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
DR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
5583
5503
5472
5503
5522
5501
54945493
dry
5499
5587
5604
5451
dry
5450
5498
5507
5538
5577
5543
5512
5538
5548
dry
5492
5494
5484
55785538
5549
55755570
5598
5594
5610
5597
5542
5541
5598
5610
5603
5603
5585
5590
5560
5590
5584
5586
5615 5636
5588
5587
5584
5605
5607
5588
5609
5476 5482 dry 5491
5466
5479
5482 5487 dry 5486
5466 5465 5467
5453 dry
5454 5440 5420
dry
5425
5417
5408
5590
5544
5538
5555
5585
5574
5525
5576
5584
5538
5555
5558
5585
5584
55665560
55855570
5542
5493
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
5624
5383
5560
5380
5468
(not included)
5234
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well showing
elevation in feet amsl
perched piezometer installed May, 2011
showing elevation in feet amsl
abandoned perched well; or DR-boring
abandoned after May 25 measurement
seep or spring showing elevation in
feet amsl
H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTMbase_revisedmaps/UTMwlq211_rev0712.srf
MW-5
PIEZ-1
DR-5
DR-16
RUIN SPRING
KRIGED 2nd QUARTER, 2011 WATER LEVELS
(DR-series water levels from open boreholes on May 25)
(All seeps except Cottonwood included in contouring)
estimated dry area (kriged Brushy Basin
surface > kriged perched water surface)
estimated areas of saturated
thickness < 5 feet
perched piezometer showing
elevation in feet amsl
5380
5482
5594
5503
5SJS 7/20/12
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
DR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
5583
5503
5472
5503
5522
5501
54945494
dry
5500
5587
5603
5453
dry
5450
5498
5507
5538
5576
5543
5513
5538
5548
dry
5492
5494
5490
55785552
5549
55755570
5598
5594
5611
5597
5543
5541
5597
5610
5602
5603
5586
5590
5560
5590
5584
5586
5615 5636
5588
5587
5584
5605
5607
5588
5609
(abnd)5482 5484 5492
5474
5480
5482 5487 5493 5486
5466 5465 (abnd)
5454 (dry/abnd)
5455 5443 5420
dry
5425
5418
(abnd)
5583
5540
5538
5555
5584
5574
5525
5548
5585
5538
5554
5557
5585
5584
55665562
55855568
5542
5493
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
5624
5383
5560
5380
5468
5234
(not included)
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well showing
elevation in feet amsl
perched piezometer installed May, 2011
showing elevation in feet amsl
abandoned perched well or boring
seep or spring showing elevation in
feet amsl
H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTMbase_revisedmaps/UTMwlq311_rev0712.srf
MW-5
PIEZ-1
DR-5
DR-16
RUIN SPRING
estimated dry area (kriged Brushy Basin
surface > kriged perched water surface)
estimated areas of saturated
thickness < 5 feet
perched piezometer showing
elevation in feet amsl
5380
5482
5594
5503
KRIGED 3rd QUARTER, 2011 WATER LEVELS
(All seeps/springs except Cottonwood Seep
included in the contouring)
6SJS7/20/12
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18
TW4-27
TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
5583
5503
5472
5503
5523
5501
54955494
5500
5587
5603
5456
dry
5451
5497
5507
5539
5577
5544
5513
5539
5548
dry
5492
5494
5493
5489
55785557
5550
55765571
5597
5594
5608
5598
5544
5541
5597
5606
5602
5601
5586
5590
5561
5590
5585
5586
5615 5640
5588
5587
5584
5605
5608
5587
5609
5582
5543
5539
5555
5577
5573
5526
5568
5585
5538
5525
5554
5558
5584
5583
55665564
55855572
5543548254855492
5474
5480
5482 5487 5492 5487
5466 5465
5454
5455 5443 5414
dry
5425
5418
(abnd)
(abnd)
(opt/abnd)
(abnd)
DR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
5624
5383
5234
5560
5380
5468
(not included)
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well showing
elevation in feet amsl
perched piezometer showing
elevation in feet amsl
seep or spring showing
elevation in feet amsl
KRIGED 1st QUARTER, 2012 WATER LEVELS
WHITE MESA SITE
DR-5
RUIN SPRING
abandoned perched well or boring
DR-16
MW-5
PIEZ-1
5503
5594
5482
5380 7
estimated areas of saturated
thickness < 5 feet
SJS
H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTbase_revisedmaps/Uwl0312v2.srf
perched piezometer installed May, 2011
showing elevation in feet amsl
abnd
estimated dry area (kriged Brushy Basin
surface > kriged perched water surface)
7/20/12
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
DR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
47
11
6
12
44
7
1721
dry
30
70
93
2
dry
54
15
5
40
39
28
22
30
59
dry 1
12
3
5231
52
5957
88
42
75
40
42
64
53
76
61
85
79
54
16
83
32
24
72 76
70
59
59
43
71
86
54
12 12 dry 2
0
24
2 9 dry 13
18 4 16
6 dry
3 15 14
dry
7
17
22
56
21
26
37
63
57
5
52
63
21
40
40
48
52
3079
8362
48
6
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well showing
saturated thickness in feet
perched piezometer installed May/June,
2011 showing saturated thickness in feet
abandoned perched well; or DR-boring
abandoned after May 25 measurement
seep or spring
MW-5
PIEZ-1
DR-5
DR-16
RUIN SPRING
2nd QUARTER, 2011 SATURATED THICKNESSES
(DR-series water levels measured in
open boreholes on May 25)
estimated dry area (kriged Brushy Basin
surface > kriged perched water surface)
estimated areas of saturated
thickness < 5 feet
perched piezometer showing
saturated thickness in feet
12
42
12
8 H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTMbase_revisedmaps/UTMstq211_rev0712.srfSJS 7/20/12
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
DR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
47
11
6
12
44
7
1721
dry
30
70
92
4
dry
54
15
5
40
39
28
22
30
58
dry 2
12
9
5245
52
5957
87
42
75
39
42
64
53
76
61
84
79
54
16
83
32
24
72 77
70
59
59
44
72
86
54
abnd 12 2 2
8
25
3 9 6 13
19 4 abnd
7 (dry/abnd)
3 18 14
dry
8
17
abnd
49
18
26
37
63
57
6
24
64
21
40
40
48
51
3080
8359
48
6
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well showing
saturated thickness in feet
perched piezometer installed May/June,
2011showing saturated thickness in feet
abandoned perched well or boring
seep or spring
MW-5
PIEZ-1
DR-5
DR-16
RUIN SPRING
3rd QUARTER, 2011 SATURATED THICKNESSES
(DR-series water levels measured in
completed piezometers)
estimated dry area (kriged Brushy Basin
surface > kriged perched water surface)
estimated areas of saturated
thickness < 5 feet
perched piezometer showing
saturated thickness in feet
12
42
12
abnd
9 H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTMbase_revisedmaps/UTMstq311_rev0712.srfSJS 7/20/12
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4BDR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18
TW4-27
TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
47
11
6
12
44
7
1721
30
70
92
7
dry
54
15
5
40
39
29
22
30
59
dry 1
12
6
8
5251
53
5957
86
42
72
40
43
64
52
72
60
82
79
54
16
83
33
24
72 80
70
59
59
44
72
85
54
48
21
26
37
56
56
6
43
64
21
10
39
40
48
51
3083
8364
48
12 2 2
8
25
3 9 5 13
19 4
7
3 19 8
dry
8
17
abnd
abnd
(opt/abnd)
abnd
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well showing
saturated thickness in feet
perched piezometer showing
saturated thickness in feet
seep or spring (saturated
thickness not defined)
1st QUARTER, 2012
PERCHED WATER SATURATED THICKNESSES
WHITE MESA SITE
PIEZ-1
DR-2
RUIN SPRING
12
NOTE: MW-4, MW-26, TW4-4, TW4-19, and TW4-20 are pumping wells
MW-5
abandoned perched well or boring
estimated areas of saturated
thickness < 5 feet
SJS 10 H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTbase_revisedmaps/Usat0312v2.srf
perched piezometer installed May/June,
2011showing saturated thickness in feet
DR-5
12
42
estimated dry area (kriged Brushy Basin
surface > kriged perched water surface)
abnd
7/20/12
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
DR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
47
11
6
12
44
7
1721
dry
30
70
92
4
dry
54
15
5
40
39
28
22
30
58
dry 2
12
9
5245
52
5957
87
42
75
39
42
64
53
76
61
84
79
54
16
83
32
24
72 77
70
59
59
44
72
86
54
12 12 2 2
8
25
3 9 6 13
19 4 16
7 (dry/abnd)
3 18 14
dry
8
17
22
49
18
26
37
63
57
6
24
64
21
40
40
48
51
3080
8359
48
6
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
?????
?
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well showing 3rd
quarter, 2011 saturated thickness in feet
perched piezometer installed May/June,
2011 showing 3rd quarter, 2011
saturated thickness in feet
abandoned perched well or boring showing
2nd quarter, 2011 saturated thickness in feet
seep or spring
MW-5
PIEZ-1
DR-5
DR-2
RUIN SPRING
APPROXIMATE AXES OF BRUSHY BASIN
PALEORIDGES AND PALEOVALLEYS IN SOUTHWEST AREA
(with top of Brushy Basin elevation contours and
posted 3rd quarter, 2011 saturated thicknesses)
perched piezometer showing 3rd
quarter, 2011 saturated thickness in feet
12
42
12
5 3 6 0 kriged top of Brushy Basin
contour line labeled in feet amsl
approximate axis of Brushy Basin
paleoridge in southwest portion of site
approximate axis of Brushy Basin
paleovalley in southwest portion of site
12
approximate area (within contoured area)
having saturated thickness >10 feet
estimated dry area (kriged Brushy Basin
surface > kriged perched water surface)
11 H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTbase_revisedmaps/UTMbbst11v2_rev0712.srfSJS7/20/12
APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.
EXPLANATION
Qal
Km
Kdbc Jmbb
Alluvium/Fill
Mancos Shale
Dakota Sandstone/
Burro Canyon Formation
Brushy Basin Member
of Morrison Formation
Piezometric surface INTERPRETIVE EAST-WEST
CROSS SECTIONS (W-E and W2-E2)
SOUTHWEST INVESTIGATION AREA
H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTMbase_revisedmaps/ewxsectb_rev0712.srf
vertical exaggeration = 5:1
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
distance along cross section (feet)
5450
5475
5500
5525
5550
5575
5600
5625
el
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t

a
m
s
l
)
DR
-
8
DR
-
9
DR
-
1
0
DR
-
1
1
DR
-
1
2
DR
-
1
3
Qal
Km Km
Kdbc Kdbc
Jmbb Jmbb
W2 E2
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
distance along cross section (feet)
5450
5475
5500
5525
5550
5575
5600
5625
5650
el
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t

a
m
s
l
)
DR
-
0
2
DR
-
0
5
DR
-
0
6
DR
-
0
7
MW
-
3
5
Qal
Km
Kdbc
Kdbc
Jmbb Jmbb
W E
12
(NOTE: abandoned DR-2 water level from 2nd quarter, 2011)
SJS 7/20/12
APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000
distance along cross section (feet)
5375
5400
5425
5450
5475
5500
5525
5550
5575
5600
5625
el
e
v
a
t
i
o
n

(
f
e
e
t
)
Ru
i
n

S
p
r
i
n
g
DR
-
2
5

(
a
b
n
d
)
DR
-
2
1
MW
-
2
0
DR
-
1
6

(
a
b
n
d
)
MW
-
3
DR
-
1
3
MW
-
3
7
Qal
Km
Km
Km
Kdbc
Kdbc
Jmbb
Jmbb
S N
EXPLANATION
Qal
Km
Kdbc Jmbb
Alluvium/Fill
Mancos Shale
Dakota Sandstone/
Burro Canyon Formation
Brushy Basin Member
of Morrison Formation
Piezometric surface
INTERPRETIVE NORTH-SOUTH
CROSS SECTION (S-N)
SOUTHWEST INVESTIGATION AREA
H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTMbase_revisedmaps/nsxsectb_rev0712.srf
vertical exaggeration = 20:1
13
(NOTES: abandoned DR-16 and DR-25 water levels are
from the 2nd quarter, 2011)
SJS 7/20/12
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18
TW4-27
TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
5583
5503
5472
5503
5523
5501
54955494
5500
5587
5603
5456
dry
5451
5497
5507
5539
5577
5544
5513
5539
5548
dry
5492
5494
5493
5489
55785557
5550
55765571
5597
5594
5608
5598
5544
5541
5597
5606
5602
5601
5586
5590
5561
5590
5585
5586
5615 5640
5588
5587
5584
5605
5608
5587
5609
5582
5543
5539
5555
5577
5573
5526
5568
5585
5538
5525
5554
5558
5584
5583
55665564
55855572
5543548254855492
5474
5480
5482 5487 5492 5487
5466 5465
5454
5455 5443 5414
dry
5425
5418
(abnd)
(abnd)
(opt/abnd)
(abnd)
DR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
5624
5383
5234
5560
5380
5468
(not included)
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well showing
elevation in feet amsl
perched piezometer showing
elevation in feet amsl
seep or spring showing
elevation in feet amsl
KRIGED 1st QUARTER, 2012 WATER LEVELS
SHOWING INFERRED PERCHED WATER FLOW
PATHLINES SOUTHWEST (DOWNGRADIENT) OF CELLS
DR-5
RUIN SPRING
abandoned perched well or boring
DR-16
MW-5
PIEZ-1
5503
5594
5482
5380
estimated dry area
14
estimated areas of saturated
thickness < 5 feet
SJS H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTbase_revisedmaps/Uflow0312v2.srf
perched piezometer installed May, 2011
showing elevation in feet amsl
estimated perched flow path line
7/20/12
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1 mile
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
MW-01
MW-02
MW-03
MW-05
MW-11
MW-12
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-26
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34
MW-35
MW-36
MW-37
TW4-01
TW4-10
TW4-20TW4-22
TW4-23
TWN-01
TWN-02
TWN-03
TWN-04
TWN-05
TWN-06
TWN-07
TWN-08
TWN-09
TWN-10
TWN-11 TWN-12
TWN-13
TWN-14
TWN-15
TWN-16
TWN-17
TWN-18
TWN-19
PIEZ-01
PIEZ-02
PIEZ-03
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-02
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
TW4-16
TW4-18
TW4-27
TW4-19
TW4-26
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-03
TW4-08
MW-04
DR-05 DR-06 DR-07
DR-08
DR-09
DR-10 DR-11 DR-12 DR-13
DR-14 DR-15
DR-17
DR-19 DR-20 DR-21
DR-22
DR-23
DR-24
5583
5503
5472
5503
5523
5501
54955494
5500
5587
5603
5456
dry
5451
5497
5507
5539
5577
5544
5513
5539
5548
dry
5492
5494
5493
5489
55785557
5550
55765571
5597
5594
5608
5598
5544
5541
5597
5606
5602
5601
5586
5590
5561
5590
5585
5586
5615 5640
5588
5587
5584
5605
5608
5587
5609
5582
5543
5539
5555
5577
5573
5526
5568
5585
5538
5525
5554
5558
5584
5583
55665564
55855572
5543548254855492
5474
5480
5482 5487 5492 5487
5466 5465
5454
5455 5443 5414
dry
5425
5418
(abnd)
(abnd)
(opt/abnd)
(abnd)
DR-02
DR-16
DR-18
DR-25
5624
5383
5234
5560
5380
5468
(not included)
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well showing
elevation in feet amsl
perched piezometer showing
elevation in feet amsl
seep or spring showing
elevation in feet amsl
DR-5
RUIN SPRING
abandoned perched well or boring
DR-16
MW-5
PIEZ-1
5503
5594
5482
5380
estimated dry area
15
estimated areas of saturated
thickness < 5 feet
SJS
H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTbase_revisedmaps/Upath0312v2.srf
perched piezometer installed May, 2011
showing elevation in feet amsl
PERCHED WATER ELEVATIONS AND PATHLINES
USED FOR PERCHED WATER
TRAVEL TIME ESTIMATES
7/20/12
perched water flow pathline
potential flow pathline (assuming
hypothetical connection
to Cottonwood Seep)
B ur ro Canyon Fo rma t ion
Brushy Basin Member
APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.
16
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE WESTWATER SEEP
SAMPLING LOCATION
JULY 2010
SJS
Westwater Seep
(sampling location)
H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTbase_revisedmaps/westsampl_v2.srf7/20/12
B ur ro Canyon Fo rma t ion
Brushy Basin Member
APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.
17
PHOTOGRAPH OF THE CONTACT BETWEEN THE
BURRO CANYON FORMATION AND THE
BRUSHY BASIN MEMBER
AT WESTWATER SEEP
SJS
Westwater Seep
(immediately downgradient from
sampling location)
Burro Canyon Formation
Brushy Basin Member
H:/718000/cell4bdryarea/
UTbase_revisedmaps/westcontact_v2.srf7/20/12

APPENDIX A

AS-BUILT PIEZOMETER CONSTRUCTION DIAGRAMS

APPENDIX B

LITHOLOGIC LOGS FOR DR-SERIES PIEZOMETERS

APPENDIX C

PLOTS OF RAW AND CORRECTED DISPLACEMENTS FOR
SELECTED PIEZOMETERS AND DISPLACEMENT DATA
USED IN THE AQTESOLVE ANALYSIS
H:\718000\cell4bdryarea\revisedreport_nov2012\DR-8 retest C.1.xls: F2 DR-8 plot
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
elapsed time (minutes)
di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
e
e
t
)
uncorrected
corrected
DR-8 CORRECTED AND
UNCORRECTED DISPLACEMENTS
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.Approved FigureDateAuthorDateFile Name
SJS 10/30/12 C.1F2 DR-8 Plot10/30/12SJS
H:\718000\hydtst11b\data\WhiteMesa_DRtestdata_2.xls: FC.2 DR10 plot
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
time (minutes)
di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
e
e
t
)
uncorrected
corrected
CORRECTED AND UNCORRECTED
DISPLACEMENTS AT DR-10
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.Approved FigureDateAuthorDateFile Name
SJS 12/5/11 C.2FC.2 DR10 PLOT12/5/11SJS
H:\718000\hydtst11b\data\WhiteMesa_DRtestdata_3.xls: FC.3 DR13 plot
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
time (minutes)
di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
e
e
t
)
uncorrected
corrected
CORRECTED AND UNCORRECTED
DISPLACEMENTS AT DR-13
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.Approved FigureDateAuthorDateFile Name
SJS 12/5/11 C.3FC.3 DR13 PLOT12/5/11SJS
H:\718000\hydtst11b\data\WhiteMesa_DRtestdata_1.xls: FC.4 DR14 plot
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
time (minutes)
di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
e
e
t
)
uncorrected
corrected
CORRECTED AND UNCORRECTED
DISPLACEMENTS AT DR-14
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.Approved FigureDateAuthorDateFile Name
SJS 12/5/11 C.4FC.4 DR14 PLOT12/5/11SJS
DR5.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-5 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.668
0.1 0.662
0.15 0.654
0.2 0.662
0.25 0.65
0.3 0.655
0.35 0.656
0.4 0.652
0.45 0.65
0.5 0.651
0.6 0.644
0.75 0.65
0.95 0.643
1.2 0.636
1.5 0.634
1.85 0.621
2.25 0.613
2.7 0.599
3.2 0.59
3.75 0.577
4.35 0.559
5 0.546
5.7 0.531
6.45 0.518
7.25 0.506
8.1 0.497
9 0.48
9.95 0.472
10.95 0.455
12 0.443
13.1 0.43
14.25 0.431
15.45 0.412
16.7 0.399
18 0.389
19.35 0.374
20.75 0.362
22.2 0.353
23.7 0.341
25.25 0.327
26.85 0.32
28.5 0.309
30.2 0.29
31.95 0.283
33.75 0.277
35.6 0.268
37.5 0.258
39.45 0.248
41.45 0.235
43.5 0.229
45.6 0.217
47.75 0.209
49.95 0.192
52.2 0.179
54.5 0.173
56.85 0.167
59.25 0.16
61.7 0.151
64.2 0.145
66.75 0.137
69.35 0.132
Page 1
DR5.DSP
72 0.126
74.7 0.124
77.45 0.111
80.25 0.103
83.1 0.096
86 0.099
Page 2
dr5h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-5 displacement (ft)
0.10 0.67
0.27 0.67
0.50 0.66
1.00 0.65
1.50 0.64
2.00 0.62
2.50 0.61
3.00 0.60
3.50 0.59
4.00 0.58
4.50 0.57
5.00 0.56
6.00 0.54
7.00 0.52
8.00 0.51
9.00 0.50
10.00 0.48
15.00 0.44
20.00 0.39
25.00 0.35
30.00 0.31
35.00 0.28
45.00 0.24
55.00 0.20
65.00 0.16
75.00 0.13
85.00 0.10
Page 1
DR8RTST.DSP
time (min) displacement (ft)
0 0.38316
0.1 0.30135
0.2 0.32554
0.3 0.321825
0.4 0.320015
0.5 0.319205
0.6 0.323395
0.7 0.32468
0.8 0.31887
0.9 0.32306
1.1 0.323535
1.4 0.3242
1.8 0.31915
2.3 0.32429
2.9 0.327145
3.6 0.320625
4.4 0.31615
5.3 0.31815
6.3 0.32015
7.4 0.31615
8.6 0.31686
9.9 0.316145
11.3 0.315335
12.8 0.31752
14.4 0.31847
16.1 0.3188
17.9 0.31699
19.8 0.316985
21.8 0.3168
23.9 0.310995
26.1 0.31965
28.4 0.311665
30.8 0.32045
33.3 0.308475
35.9 0.316795
38.6 0.31414
41.4 0.317985
44.3 0.319125
47.3 0.31066
50.4 0.30285
53.6 0.311985
56.9 0.305175
60.3 0.301125
63.8 0.31117
67.4 0.30646
71.1 0.306515
74.9 0.306465
78.8 0.309635
82.8 0.30417
86.9 0.304115
91.1 0.309155
95.4 0.304305
99.8 0.30282
104.3 0.30824
108.9 0.304475
113.6 0.30442
118.4 0.30375
123.3 0.307215
128.3 0.30626
133.4 0.3024
138.6 0.304245
143.9 0.30224
Page 1
DR8RTST.DSP
149.3 0.30756
154.8 0.294235
160.4 0.30142
166.1 0.301215
171.9 0.29736
177.8 0.29272
183.8 0.292535
189.9 0.29681
196.1 0.297375
202.4 0.29332
208.8 0.29365
215.3 0.29765
221.9 0.297495
228.6 0.295545
235.4 0.30462
242.3 0.297485
249.3 0.30081
256.4 0.301465
263.6 0.295485
270.9 0.29786
278.3 0.29381
285.8 0.287135
293.4 0.295135
301.1 0.290615
308.9 0.299495
316.8 0.295135
324.8 0.284135
332.9 0.286335
341.1 0.29412
349.4 0.293795
357.8 0.295785
366.3 0.293785
374.9 0.29426
383.6 0.296115
392.4 0.2866
401.3 0.28246
410.3 0.282415
419.4 0.28593
428.6 0.28593
437.9 0.287945
447.3 0.28674
456.8 0.29132
466.4 0.29466
476.1 0.28962
485.9 0.293475
495.8 0.2883
505.8 0.294485
515.9 0.29301
526.1 0.292355
536.4 0.28498
546.8 0.29037
557.3 0.282465
567.9 0.288
578.6 0.296185
589.4 0.28868
600.3 0.27921
611.3 0.28921
622.4 0.2887
633.6 0.287235
644.9 0.27796
656.3 0.27791
667.8 0.27777
679.4 0.28573
Page 2
DR8RTST.DSP
691.1 0.28607
702.9 0.28512
714.8 0.28275
726.8 0.284935
738.9 0.284415
751.1 0.282135
763.4 0.2831
775.8 0.280285
788.3 0.270565
800.9 0.2771
813.6 0.275575
826.4 0.276955
839.3 0.279285
852.3 0.27382
865.4 0.276625
878.6 0.27178
891.9 0.272645
905.3 0.26694
918.8 0.267985
932.4 0.27319
946.1 0.27548
959.9 0.27733
973.8 0.279335
987.8 0.26952
1001.9 0.26361
1016.1 0.268805
1030.4 0.2652
1044.8 0.26587
1059.3 0.26201
1073.9 0.265145
1088.6 0.2678
1103.4 0.26687
1118.3 0.255035
1133.3 0.25836
1148.4 0.26052
1163.6 0.252385
1178.9 0.262675
1194.3 0.26306
1209.8 0.2642
1225.4 0.262405
1241.1 0.251885
1256.9 0.25881
1272.8 0.25262
1288.8 0.25225
1304.9 0.25561
1321.1 0.257285
1337.4 0.253485
1353.8 0.2463
1370.3 0.243115
1386.9 0.253485
1403.6 0.250425
1420.4 0.25961
1437.3 0.25195
1454.3 0.254785
1471.4 0.255775
1488.6 0.2363
1505.9 0.25436
1523.3 0.24827
1540.8 0.25092
1558.4 0.25185
Page 3
DR8RTSTH.DSP
time (min) displacement (ft, hand collected)
0.42 0.33
0.75 0.32
1.00 0.32
1.50 0.32
2 0.32
3 0.32
4 0.32
5 0.32
6 0.32
7 0.32
8 0.31
9 0.32
10 0.31
12 0.32
14 0.31
16 0.31
18 0.31
20 0.31
23 0.31
26 0.31
29 0.31
33 0.31
37 0.31
41 0.31
45 0.31
50 0.30
55 0.30
60 0.30
75 0.30
90 0.30
150 0.30
180 0.29
210 0.29
240 0.29
300 0.29
360 0.29
420 0.28
1260 0.24
1320 0.24
1380 0.24
1440 0.23
1500 0.23
1560 0.23
Page 1
DR9.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-9 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.5
0.1 0.511
0.15 0.478
0.2 0.449
0.25 0.432
0.3 0.41
0.35 0.401
0.4 0.384
0.45 0.368
0.5 0.356
0.6 0.328
0.75 0.301
0.95 0.262
1.2 0.223
1.5 0.186
1.85 0.157
2.25 0.126
2.7 0.105
3.2 0.076
3.75 0.066
4.35 0.051
5 0.043
5.7 0.035
6.45 0.027
7.25 0.022
8.1 0.022
9 0.017
9.95 0.017
10.95 0.015
12 0.015
13.1 0.011
14.25 0.01
15.45 0.009
16.7 0.006
18 0.012
19.35 0.006
20.75 0.01
22.2 0.012
23.7 0.007
25.25 0.007
26.85 0.005
28.5 0.006
30.2 0.01
31.95 0.007
33.75 0.006
35.6 0.005
37.5 0.005
39.45 0.006
41.45 0.006
43.5 -0.001
45.6 0.007
Page 1
dr9h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-9 displacement (ft)
0.22 0.41
0.50 0.35
0.67 0.28
0.83 0.25
1.00 0.23
1.25 0.20
1.50 0.18
2.00 0.13
2.50 0.10
3.00 0.08
3.50 0.06
4.00 0.05
4.50 0.05
5.00 0.03
5.50 0.03
6.00 0.02
6.50 0.02
7.00 0.02
8.00 0.01
9.00 0.01
15.00 0.00
20.00 0.00
Page 1
DR10.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-10 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.303
0.1 0.297
0.15 0.303
0.2 0.299
0.25 0.296
0.3 0.292
0.35 0.296
0.4 0.292
0.45 0.294
0.5 0.294
0.6 0.299
0.75 0.291
0.95 0.294
1.2 0.299
1.5 0.293
1.85 0.297
2.25 0.290
2.7 0.290
3.2 0.289
3.75 0.28
4.35 0.284
5 0.283
5.7 0.28
6.45 0.282
7.25 0.27
8.1 0.277
9 0.278
9.95 0.274
10.95 0.276
12 0.271
13.1 0.275
14.25 0.265
15.45 0.270
16.7 0.26
18 0.26
19.35 0.264
20.75 0.260
22.2 0.259
23.7 0.26
25.25 0.25
26.85 0.262
28.5 0.253
30.2 0.256
31.95 0.253
33.75 0.255
35.6 0.255
37.5 0.254
39.45 0.251
41.45 0.244
43.5 0.24
45.6 0.249
47.75 0.246
49.95 0.247
52.2 0.245
54.5 0.242
56.85 0.242
59.25 0.239
61.7 0.243
64.2 0.232
66.75 0.237
69.35 0.230
Page 1
DR10.DSP
72 0.227
74.7 0.226
77.45 0.226
80.25 0.222
83.1 0.223
86 0.223
88.95 0.22
91.95 0.221
95 0.219
98.1 0.214
101.25 0.21
104.45 0.214
107.7 0.214
111 0.218
114.35 0.216
117.75 0.210
121.2 0.20
124.7 0.211
128.25 0.212
131.85 0.213
135.5 0.210
139.2 0.21
142.95 0.19
146.75 0.206
150.6 0.205
154.5 0.208
158.45 0.206
162.45 0.204
166.5 0.200
170.6 0.206
174.75 0.202
178.95 0.2
183.2 0.202
187.5 0.203
191.85 0.202
196.25 0.203
200.7 0.19
205.2 0.201
209.75 0.192
214.35 0.198
219 0.197
223.7 0.190
228.45 0.189
233.25 0.190
238.1 0.189
243 0.191
247.95 0.188
252.95 0.194
258 0.187
263.1 0.184
268.25 0.187
273.45 0.191
278.7 0.184
284 0.182
289.35 0.181
294.75 0.183
300.2 0.188
305.7 0.181
311.25 0.179
316.85 0.17
322.5 0.180
328.2 0.177
333.95 0.178
Page 2
DR10.DSP
339.75 0.175
345.6 0.169
351.5 0.179
357.45 0.174
363.45 0.175
369.5 0.174
375.6 0.173
381.75 0.174
387.95 0.172
394.2 0.172
400.5 0.167
406.85 0.165
413.25 0.167
419.7 0.167
426.2 0.168
432.75 0.165
439.35 0.160
446 0.159
452.7 0.159
459.45 0.159
466.25 0.153
473.1 0.154
480 0.15
486.95 0.155
493.95 0.151
501 0.151
508.1 0.148
515.25 0.148
522.45 0.147
529.7 0.143
537 0.143
544.35 0.14
551.75 0.139
559.2 0.135
566.7 0.132
574.25 0.136
581.85 0.129
589.5 0.129
597.2 0.132
604.95 0.13
612.75 0.127
620.6 0.126
628.5 0.122
636.45 0.121
644.45 0.121
652.5 0.118
660.6 0.118
668.75 0.111
676.95 0.117
685.2 0.116
693.5 0.115
701.85 0.113
710.25 0.109
718.7 0.109
727.2 0.103
735.75 0.105
744.35 0.101
753 0.098
761.7 0.096
770.45 0.096
779.25 0.090
788.1 0.091
797 0.098
Page 3
DR10.DSP
805.95 0.088
814.95 0.091
824 0.090
833.1 0.09
842.25 0.085
851.45 0.083
860.7 0.084
870 0.08
879.35 0.079
888.75 0.081
898.2 0.079
907.7 0.076
917.25 0.072
926.85 0.074
936.5 0.072
946.2 0.068
955.95 0.070
965.75 0.070
975.6 0.068
985.5 0.06
995.45 0.071
1005.45 0.068
Page 4
dr10h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-10 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.31
0.25 0.30
0.50 0.30
0.83 0.30
1.00 0.30
3.00 0.29
4.00 0.29
5.00 0.29
10.00 0.28
22.00 0.27
30.00 0.26
44.00 0.25
1012.00 0.03
Page 1
DR11.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-11 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.653
0.1 0.656
0.15 0.644
0.2 0.654
0.25 0.648
0.3 0.642
0.35 0.649
0.4 0.638
0.45 0.647
0.5 0.643
0.6 0.639
0.75 0.64
0.95 0.638
1.2 0.636
1.5 0.625
1.85 0.618
2.25 0.617
2.7 0.607
3.2 0.601
3.75 0.59
4.35 0.586
5 0.576
5.7 0.564
6.45 0.536
7.25 0.553
8.1 0.55
9 0.542
9.95 0.533
10.95 0.522
12 0.515
13.1 0.51
14.25 0.5
15.45 0.501
16.7 0.485
18 0.48
19.35 0.472
20.75 0.469
22.2 0.463
23.7 0.458
25.25 0.447
26.85 0.444
28.5 0.438
30.2 0.432
31.95 0.425
33.75 0.418
35.6 0.414
37.5 0.402
39.45 0.402
41.45 0.384
43.5 0.381
45.6 0.372
47.75 0.369
49.95 0.361
52.2 0.358
54.5 0.353
56.85 0.344
59.25 0.339
61.7 0.336
64.2 0.33
66.75 0.321
69.35 0.316
Page 1
DR11.DSP
72 0.311
74.7 0.303
77.45 0.297
80.25 0.291
83.1 0.284
86 0.282
88.95 0.275
91.95 0.272
95 0.264
98.1 0.264
101.25 0.257
104.45 0.255
107.7 0.248
111 0.24
114.35 0.227
117.75 0.23
121.2 0.228
124.7 0.219
128.25 0.215
131.85 0.21
135.5 0.208
139.2 0.199
142.95 0.196
146.75 0.192
150.6 0.187
154.5 0.178
158.45 0.18
162.45 0.175
166.5 0.168
170.6 0.165
174.75 0.151
178.95 0.148
183.2 0.143
187.5 0.139
191.85 0.138
196.25 0.137
200.7 0.13
205.2 0.129
209.75 0.121
Page 2
dr11h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-11 displacement (ft)
0.10 0.65
0.33 0.64
0.50 0.64
0.67 0.64
0.83 0.63
1.00 0.63
1.50 0.62
2.00 0.62
2.50 0.61
3.00 0.60
3.50 0.59
4.00 0.59
4.50 0.58
5.00 0.57
6.00 0.56
7.00 0.55
8.00 0.54
9.00 0.53
10.00 0.53
15.00 0.50
20.00 0.47
25.00 0.45
30.00 0.43
75.00 0.32
150.00 0.22
190.00 0.18
210.00 0.17
Page 1
DR13.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-13c displacement (ft)
0.05 7.08E-01
0.1 7.03E-01
0.15 6.99E-01
0.2 7.04E-01
0.25 7.01E-01
0.3 7.00E-01
0.35 6.98E-01
0.4 7.09E-01
0.45 6.94E-01
0.55 6.98E-01
0.7 7.00E-01
0.9 6.96E-01
1.15 6.93E-01
1.45 6.93E-01
1.8 6.91E-01
2.2 6.92E-01
2.65 6.91E-01
3.15 6.87E-01
3.7 6.88E-01
4.3 6.81E-01
4.95 6.67E-01
5.65 6.66E-01
6.4 6.61E-01
7.2 6.58E-01
8.05 6.59E-01
8.95 6.47E-01
9.9 6.52E-01
10.9 6.47E-01
11.95 6.36E-01
13.05 6.35E-01
14.2 6.25E-01
15.4 6.27E-01
16.65 6.19E-01
17.95 6.13E-01
19.3 6.11E-01
20.7 6.11E-01
22.15 6.00E-01
23.65 5.93E-01
25.2 5.92E-01
26.8 5.85E-01
28.45 5.78E-01
30.15 5.71E-01
31.9 5.62E-01
33.7 5.61E-01
35.55 5.58E-01
37.45 5.49E-01
39.4 5.45E-01
41.4 5.38E-01
43.45 5.31E-01
45.55 5.33E-01
47.7 5.27E-01
49.9 5.12E-01
52.15 5.15E-01
54.45 5.03E-01
56.8 5.02E-01
59.2 4.93E-01
61.65 4.92E-01
64.15 4.77E-01
66.7 4.73E-01
69.3 4.63E-01
71.95 4.65E-01
Page 1
DR13.DSP
74.65 4.56E-01
77.4 4.44E-01
80.2 4.51E-01
83.05 4.38E-01
85.95 4.33E-01
88.9 4.23E-01
91.9 4.18E-01
94.95 4.18E-01
98.05 4.13E-01
101.2 3.96E-01
104.4 3.88E-01
107.65 3.94E-01
110.95 3.79E-01
114.3 3.76E-01
117.7 3.69E-01
121.15 3.71E-01
124.65 3.57E-01
128.2 3.51E-01
131.8 3.46E-01
135.45 3.47E-01
139.15 3.35E-01
142.9 3.27E-01
146.7 3.21E-01
150.55 3.21E-01
154.45 3.11E-01
158.4 3.02E-01
162.4 2.94E-01
166.45 2.95E-01
170.55 2.85E-01
174.7 2.80E-01
178.9 2.74E-01
183.15 2.78E-01
187.45 2.67E-01
191.8 2.63E-01
196.2 2.55E-01
200.65 2.49E-01
205.15 2.47E-01
209.7 2.42E-01
214.3 2.40E-01
218.95 2.31E-01
223.65 2.28E-01
228.4 2.32E-01
233.2 2.21E-01
238.05 2.14E-01
242.95 2.15E-01
247.9 2.14E-01
252.9 2.12E-01
257.95 2.00E-01
263.05 1.96E-01
268.2 1.95E-01
273.4 1.94E-01
278.65 1.88E-01
283.95 1.82E-01
289.3 1.79E-01
294.7 1.77E-01
300.15 1.70E-01
305.65 1.68E-01
311.2 1.68E-01
316.8 1.62E-01
322.45 1.67E-01
328.15 1.62E-01
333.9 1.57E-01
339.7 1.52E-01
Page 2
DR13.DSP
345.55 1.46E-01
351.45 1.54E-01
357.4 1.43E-01
363.4 1.44E-01
369.45 1.39E-01
375.55 1.46E-01
381.7 1.36E-01
387.9 1.35E-01
394.15 1.30E-01
400.45 1.27E-01
406.8 1.26E-01
413.2 1.30E-01
419.65 1.20E-01
426.15 1.20E-01
432.7 1.20E-01
439.3 1.15E-01
445.95 1.20E-01
452.65 1.12E-01
459.4 1.15E-01
466.2 1.11E-01
473.05 1.08E-01
479.95 1.05E-01
486.9 1.00E-01
493.9 1.01E-01
500.95 9.73E-02
508.05 9.63E-02
515.2 1.01E-01
522.4 9.14E-02
529.65 9.31E-02
536.95 8.66E-02
544.3 9.08E-02
551.7 8.73E-02
559.15 8.56E-02
566.65 8.60E-02
574.2 8.71E-02
581.8 8.46E-02
589.45 8.13E-02
597.15 7.94E-02
604.9 7.71E-02
612.7 7.79E-02
620.55 7.88E-02
628.45 7.73E-02
636.4 7.67E-02
644.4 7.11E-02
652.45 7.35E-02
660.55 7.12E-02
668.7 6.77E-02
676.9 6.57E-02
685.15 6.60E-02
693.45 6.90E-02
701.8 6.12E-02
710.2 6.10E-02
718.65 6.00E-02
727.15 5.95E-02
735.7 5.44E-02
744.3 5.28E-02
752.95 5.10E-02
761.65 4.80E-02
770.4 5.07E-02
779.2 4.61E-02
788.05 4.40E-02
796.95 4.40E-02
805.9 4.48E-02
Page 3
DR13.DSP
814.9 4.00E-02
823.95 4.32E-02
833.05 4.10E-02
842.2 4.05E-02
851.4 5.01E-02
860.65 3.91E-02
869.95 4.39E-02
879.3 3.91E-02
888.7 4.32E-02
898.15 4.00E-02
907.65 3.71E-02
917.2 3.43E-02
926.8 3.43E-02
936.45 3.01E-02
946.15 2.70E-02
955.9 3.26E-02
965.7 2.98E-02
975.55 2.47E-02
985.45 2.80E-02
995.4 2.70E-02
1005.4 2.49E-02
1015.45 3.10E-02
1025.55 2.68E-02
1035.7 2.75E-02
1045.9 2.51E-02
1056.15 2.77E-02
1066.45 2.32E-02
1076.8 2.47E-02
1087.2 2.14E-02
1097.65 2.05E-02
1108.15 2.33E-02
1118.7 3.10E-02
1129.3 2.42E-02
1139.95 2.89E-02
1150.65 2.28E-02
1161.4 2.30E-02
1172.2 2.95E-02
1183.05 2.23E-02
1193.95 2.55E-02
1204.9 2.70E-02
1215.9 2.32E-02
1226.95 2.56E-02
Page 4
dr13h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-13 displacement (ft)
0.17 0.71
0.42 0.70
0.67 0.70
1.00 0.70
1.50 0.70
2.00 0.69
3.00 0.69
4.00 0.68
5.00 0.67
6.00 0.67
7.00 0.66
8.00 0.65
9.00 0.65
10.00 0.64
15.00 0.62
20.00 0.61
25.00 0.59
30.00 0.57
115.00 0.38
130.00 0.35
140.00 0.34
345.00 0.16
1226.00 0.08
Page 1
DR14.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-14 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.752
0.1 0.736
0.15 0.739
0.2 0.733
0.25 0.730
0.3 0.732
0.35 0.728
0.4 0.717
0.45 0.719
0.5 0.722
0.6 0.710
0.75 0.70
0.95 0.702
1.2 0.694
1.5 0.68
1.85 0.674
2.25 0.66
2.7 0.658
3.2 0.644
3.75 0.6
4.35 0.625
5 0.611
5.7 0.601
6.45 0.592
7.25 0.584
8.1 0.573
9 0.56
9.95 0.56
10.95 0.542
12 0.53
13.1 0.519
14.25 0.51
15.45 0.503
16.7 0.49
18 0.477
19.35 0.471
20.75 0.457
22.2 0.450
23.7 0.438
25.25 0.429
26.85 0.415
28.5 0.414
30.2 0.40
31.95 0.386
33.75 0.378
35.6 0.377
37.5 0.368
39.45 0.349
41.45 0.335
43.5 0.327
45.6 0.31
47.75 0.309
49.95 0.295
52.2 0.293
54.5 0.283
56.85 0.27
59.25 0.265
61.7 0.258
64.2 0.249
66.75 0.239
69.35 0.232
Page 1
DR14.DSP
72 0.222
74.7 0.216
77.45 0.210
80.25 0.203
83.1 0.194
86 0.191
88.95 0.178
91.95 0.171
95 0.170
98.1 0.164
101.25 0.156
104.45 0.154
107.7 0.14
111 0.139
114.35 0.131
117.75 0.124
121.2 0.12
124.7 0.114
128.25 0.110
131.85 0.104
135.5 0.102
139.2 0.094
142.95 0.086
146.75 0.084
150.6 0.077
154.5 0.075
158.45 0.068
162.45 0.066
166.5 0.059
170.6 0.064
174.75 0.059
178.95 0.056
183.2 0.051
187.5 0.056
191.85 0.050
196.25 0.04
200.7 0.043
205.2 0.041
209.75 0.04
214.35 0.034
219 0.025
223.7 0.027
228.45 0.025
233.25 0.026
238.1 0.023
243 0.018
247.95 0.020
252.95 0.016
258 0.015
263.1 0.015
268.25 0.012
273.45 0.010
278.7 0.009
284 0.009
Page 2
dr14h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-14 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.73
0.32 0.67
0.60 0.71
1.03 0.69
1.50 0.69
2.00 0.67
3.00 0.65
4.00 0.63
5.00 0.62
10.00 0.56
15.00 0.51
20.00 0.47
30.00 0.41
40.00 0.35
50.00 0.30
70.00 0.24
90.00 0.18
188.00 0.08
285.00 0.07
Page 1
DR17.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-17 displacement (ft)
0.001 0.814
0.05 0.736
0.1 0.723
0.15 0.721
0.2 0.714
0.25 0.71
0.3 0.706
0.35 0.711
0.4 0.707
0.5 0.711
0.65 0.702
0.85 0.7
1.1 0.701
1.4 0.695
1.75 0.693
2.15 0.69
2.6 0.68
3.1 0.677
3.65 0.673
4.25 0.665
4.9 0.665
5.6 0.659
6.35 0.651
7.15 0.647
8 0.641
8.9 0.636
9.85 0.635
10.85 0.622
11.9 0.615
13 0.608
14.15 0.607
15.35 0.595
16.6 0.592
17.9 0.593
19.25 0.58
20.65 0.573
22.1 0.566
23.6 0.561
25.15 0.557
26.75 0.555
28.4 0.548
30.1 0.541
31.85 0.536
33.65 0.528
35.5 0.526
37.4 0.515
39.35 0.511
41.35 0.505
43.4 0.499
45.5 0.496
47.65 0.49
49.85 0.479
52.1 0.478
54.4 0.474
56.75 0.467
59.15 0.459
61.6 0.456
64.1 0.446
66.65 0.439
69.25 0.43
71.9 0.425
Page 1
DR17.DSP
74.6 0.417
77.35 0.41
80.15 0.402
83 0.396
85.9 0.391
88.85 0.386
91.85 0.379
94.9 0.374
98 0.368
101.15 0.362
104.35 0.358
107.6 0.352
110.9 0.343
114.25 0.333
117.65 0.332
121.1 0.322
124.6 0.319
128.15 0.316
131.75 0.305
135.4 0.299
139.1 0.294
142.85 0.289
146.65 0.287
150.5 0.283
154.4 0.27
158.35 0.265
162.35 0.261
166.4 0.254
170.5 0.25
174.65 0.242
178.85 0.238
183.1 0.232
187.4 0.227
191.75 0.221
196.15 0.222
200.6 0.211
205.1 0.21
209.65 0.206
214.25 0.198
218.9 0.195
223.6 0.187
228.35 0.187
233.15 0.18
238 0.176
242.9 0.172
247.85 0.167
252.85 0.165
257.9 0.163
263 0.155
268.15 0.15
273.35 0.145
278.6 0.137
283.9 0.135
289.25 0.131
294.65 0.127
300.1 0.127
305.6 0.119
311.15 0.114
316.75 0.111
322.4 0.106
328.1 0.113
333.85 0.102
339.65 0.1
Page 2
DR17.DSP
345.5 0.098
351.4 0.095
357.35 0.094
363.35 0.091
369.4 0.089
375.5 0.087
381.65 0.089
387.85 0.088
394.1 0.086
400.4 0.087
406.75 0.085
413.15 0.078
419.6 0.076
426.1 0.071
432.65 0.071
439.25 0.074
445.9 0.073
452.6 0.076
459.35 0.071
466.15 0.071
473 0.073
479.9 0.069
486.85 0.067
493.85 0.067
500.9 0.068
508 0.065
515.15 0.062
522.35 0.058
529.6 0.06
536.9 0.058
544.25 0.06
551.65 0.062
559.1 0.064
566.6 0.063
574.15 0.058
581.75 0.056
589.4 0.055
597.1 0.05
604.85 0.05
612.65 0.05
620.5 0.046
628.4 0.046
636.35 0.042
644.35 0.041
652.4 0.039
660.5 0.036
668.65 0.035
676.85 0.037
685.1 0.039
693.4 0.039
701.75 0.04
710.15 0.035
718.6 0.026
727.1 0.031
735.65 0.025
744.25 0.033
752.9 0.035
761.6 0.028
770.35 0.022
779.15 0.019
788 0.024
796.9 0.019
805.85 0.017
Page 3
DR17.DSP
814.85 0.015
823.9 0.015
833 0.015
842.15 0.01
851.35 0.011
860.6 0.013
869.9 0.017
879.25 0.015
888.65 0.011
898.1 0.013
907.6 0.012
917.15 0.013
926.75 0.012
936.4 0.01
946.1 0.013
955.85 0.012
965.65 0.01
975.5 0.01
985.4 0.006
995.35 0.008
1005.35 0.007
1015.4 0.008
1025.5 0.008
1035.65 0.005
1045.85 0.015
1056.1 0.008
1066.4 0.012
1076.75 0.009
1087.15 0.011
1097.6 0.011
1108.1 0.01
1118.65 0.007
1129.25 0.004
1139.9 0.001
1150.6 0.004
1161.35 0.001
1172.15 0.009
Page 4
dr17h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-17 displacement (ft)
0.08 0.75
0.33 0.74
0.67 0.74
1.00 0.73
1.50 0.73
2.00 0.72
3.00 0.71
4.00 0.70
5.00 0.69
10.00 0.66
15.00 0.63
25.00 0.60
35.00 0.57
125.00 0.39
250.00 0.28
278.00 0.28
1203.00 0.13
Page 1
DR19.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-19 displacement (ft)
0.001 0.842
0.05 0.652
0.1 0.631
0.15 0.635
0.2 0.626
0.25 0.624
0.3 0.627
0.35 0.624
0.4 0.621
0.5 0.616
0.65 0.617
0.85 0.607
1.1 0.602
1.4 0.594
1.75 0.591
2.15 0.585
2.6 0.572
3.1 0.563
3.65 0.555
4.25 0.543
4.9 0.541
5.6 0.532
6.35 0.52
7.15 0.513
8 0.504
8.9 0.498
9.85 0.496
10.85 0.482
11.9 0.477
13 0.473
14.15 0.464
15.35 0.454
16.6 0.439
17.9 0.44
19.25 0.431
20.65 0.427
22.1 0.413
23.6 0.412
25.15 0.404
26.75 0.397
28.4 0.383
30.1 0.372
31.85 0.366
33.65 0.366
35.5 0.351
37.4 0.345
39.35 0.338
41.35 0.331
43.4 0.329
45.5 0.324
47.65 0.312
49.85 0.309
52.1 0.303
54.4 0.295
56.75 0.287
59.15 0.281
61.6 0.273
64.1 0.259
66.65 0.259
69.25 0.251
71.9 0.243
Page 1
DR19.DSP
74.6 0.238
77.35 0.235
80.15 0.226
83 0.219
85.9 0.214
88.85 0.209
91.85 0.197
94.9 0.197
98 0.193
101.15 0.184
104.35 0.186
107.6 0.178
110.9 0.17
114.25 0.165
117.65 0.161
121.1 0.154
124.6 0.151
128.15 0.146
131.75 0.138
135.4 0.136
139.1 0.131
142.85 0.125
146.65 0.119
150.5 0.116
154.4 0.111
158.35 0.11
162.35 0.1
166.4 0.102
170.5 0.099
174.65 0.091
178.85 0.089
183.1 0.088
187.4 0.083
191.75 0.083
196.15 0.074
200.6 0.072
205.1 0.066
209.65 0.063
214.25 0.059
218.9 0.057
223.6 0.1
Page 2
dr19h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-19 displacement (ft)
0.33 0.63
0.55 0.62
0.93 0.60
1.18 0.60
1.50 0.59
2.00 0.59
3.00 0.58
4.00 0.56
5.00 0.55
10.00 0.50
15.00 0.47
20.00 0.45
25.00 0.42
30.00 0.39
35.00 0.36
40.00 0.34
45.00 0.33
50.00 0.30
55.00 0.29
60.00 0.28
139.00 0.13
221.00 0.05
Page 1
DR20.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-20 displacement (ft)
0.001 1.305
0.05 1.135
0.1 1.213
0.15 1.214
0.2 1.22
0.25 1.202
0.3 1.206
0.35 1.215
0.4 1.21
0.5 1.194
0.65 1.195
0.85 1.199
1.1 1.189
1.4 1.195
1.75 1.175
2.15 1.19
2.6 1.182
3.1 1.181
3.65 1.176
4.25 1.175
4.9 1.18
5.6 1.164
6.35 1.166
7.15 1.163
8 1.161
8.9 1.15
9.85 1.153
10.85 1.139
11.9 1.145
13 1.148
14.15 1.141
15.35 1.125
16.6 1.12
17.9 1.115
19.25 1.118
20.65 1.117
22.1 1.105
23.6 1.095
25.15 1.09
26.75 1.089
28.4 1.083
30.1 1.084
31.85 1.07
33.65 1.072
35.5 1.068
37.4 1.064
39.35 1.058
41.35 1.053
43.4 1.036
45.5 1.025
47.65 1.024
49.85 1.019
52.1 1.008
54.4 1.012
56.75 1.005
59.15 0.99
61.6 0.991
64.1 0.974
66.65 0.97
69.25 0.968
71.9 0.956
Page 1
DR20.DSP
74.6 0.949
77.35 0.947
80.15 0.93
83 0.923
85.9 0.916
88.85 0.913
91.85 0.912
94.9 0.895
98 0.9
101.15 0.876
104.35 0.872
107.6 0.874
110.9 0.857
114.25 0.859
117.65 0.842
121.1 0.83
124.6 0.827
128.15 0.82
131.75 0.816
135.4 0.806
139.1 0.798
142.85 0.786
146.65 0.778
150.5 0.773
154.4 0.772
158.35 0.755
162.35 0.747
166.4 0.739
170.5 0.729
174.65 0.736
178.85 0.722
183.1 0.715
187.4 0.709
191.75 0.701
196.15 0.697
200.6 0.691
205.1 0.686
209.65 0.674
214.25 0.664
218.9 0.657
223.6 0.653
228.35 0.651
233.15 0.635
238 0.629
242.9 0.626
247.85 0.621
252.85 0.624
257.9 0.608
263 0.609
268.15 0.593
273.35 0.589
278.6 0.575
283.9 0.571
289.25 0.57
294.65 0.563
300.1 0.557
305.6 0.548
311.15 0.543
316.75 0.536
322.4 0.53
328.1 0.523
333.85 0.514
339.65 0.512
Page 2
DR20.DSP
345.5 0.513
351.4 0.503
357.35 0.497
363.35 0.493
369.4 0.488
375.5 0.482
381.65 0.471
387.85 0.467
394.1 0.466
400.4 0.452
406.75 0.445
413.15 0.44
419.6 0.432
426.1 0.425
432.65 0.418
439.25 0.411
445.9 0.407
452.6 0.4
459.35 0.389
466.15 0.393
473 0.382
479.9 0.378
486.85 0.377
493.85 0.37
500.9 0.368
508 0.361
515.15 0.345
522.35 0.342
529.6 0.342
536.9 0.336
544.25 0.337
551.65 0.331
559.1 0.325
566.6 0.316
574.15 0.309
581.75 0.302
589.4 0.298
597.1 0.292
604.85 0.289
612.65 0.281
620.5 0.283
628.4 0.275
636.35 0.271
644.35 0.261
652.4 0.26
660.5 0.263
668.65 0.257
676.85 0.259
685.1 0.253
693.4 0.25
701.75 0.241
710.15 0.237
718.6 0.238
727.1 0.233
735.65 0.229
744.25 0.228
752.9 0.224
761.6 0.22
770.35 0.22
779.15 0.21
788 0.213
796.9 0.205
805.85 0.208
Page 3
DR20.DSP
814.85 0.205
823.9 0.199
833 0.199
842.15 0.199
851.35 0.197
860.6 0.194
869.9 0.192
879.25 0.188
888.65 0.187
898.1 0.182
907.6 0.18
917.15 0.176
926.75 0.173
936.4 0.167
946.1 0.168
955.85 0.172
965.65 0.165
975.5 0.166
985.4 0.169
995.35 0.166
1005.35 0.167
Page 4
dr20h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-20 displacement (ft)
0.08 1.26
0.42 1.26
1.00 1.25
2.00 1.24
3.00 1.24
4.00 1.23
5.00 1.23
15.00 1.20
20.00 1.18
26.00 1.16
35.00 1.15
85.00 1.03
1042.00 0.26
Page 1
DR21.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-21 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.747
0.1 0.821
0.15 0.811
0.2 0.81
0.25 0.806
0.3 0.807
0.35 0.804
0.4 0.801
0.45 0.806
0.5 0.806
0.6 0.792
0.75 0.781
0.95 0.783
1.2 0.759
1.5 0.757
1.85 0.742
2.25 0.733
2.7 0.727
3.2 0.71
3.75 0.698
4.35 0.681
5 0.661
5.7 0.658
6.45 0.645
7.25 0.623
8.1 0.614
9 0.599
9.95 0.588
10.95 0.575
12 0.561
13.1 0.547
14.25 0.536
15.45 0.517
16.7 0.507
18 0.491
19.35 0.471
20.75 0.467
22.2 0.448
23.7 0.434
25.25 0.41
26.85 0.395
28.5 0.384
30.2 0.363
31.95 0.353
33.75 0.346
35.6 0.333
37.5 0.315
39.45 0.294
41.45 0.283
43.5 0.273
45.6 0.258
47.75 0.246
49.95 0.232
52.2 0.225
54.5 0.21
56.85 0.199
59.25 0.19
61.7 0.184
64.2 0.168
66.75 0.16
69.35 0.147
Page 1
DR21.DSP
72 0.14
74.7 0.142
77.45 0.123
80.25 0.115
83.1 0.112
86 0.106
88.95 0.094
91.95 0.093
95 0.083
98.1 0.075
101.25 0.074
104.45 0.068
107.7 0.064
111 0.064
114.35 0.051
117.75 0.048
121.2 0.045
124.7 0.042
128.25 0.042
131.85 0.041
135.5 0.03
139.2 0.036
142.95 0.035
146.75 0.026
150.6 0.023
154.5 0.031
158.45 0.031
162.45 0.031
166.5 0.016
170.6 0.017
174.75 0.028
178.95 0.013
183.2 0.012
187.5 0.013
191.85 0.018
196.25 0.012
200.7 0.009
205.2 0.007
209.75 0.004
214.35 0.003
219 0.005
223.7 0.003
228.45 0
233.25 0.01
238.1 0.001
243 0.001
247.95 -0.002
252.95 0.001
258 -0.002
263.1 -0.004
268.25 -0.003
273.45 -0.005
278.7 -0.003
284 -0.007
289.35 -0.005
294.75 -0.002
300.2 -0.01
305.7 -0.011
311.25 -0.007
316.85 -0.005
322.5 -0.004
328.2 -0.006
333.95 -0.004
Page 2
DR21.DSP
339.75 -0.003
345.6 0
351.5 0.007
357.45 -0.006
363.45 0
Page 3
dr21h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-21 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.81
0.33 0.79
0.48 0.78
0.75 0.77
0.83 0.76
1.25 0.75
1.50 0.74
2.00 0.72
2.50 0.71
3.00 0.70
3.50 0.68
4.00 0.67
4.50 0.66
5.00 0.65
7.00 0.62
8.00 0.60
9.00 0.59
10.00 0.57
15.00 0.52
20.00 0.46
25.00 0.41
30.00 0.37
35.00 0.33
40.00 0.29
45.00 0.25
50.00 0.23
55.00 0.21
60.00 0.18
65.00 0.16
115.00 0.05
195.00 0.03
300.00 0.07
365.00 0.11
Page 1
DR23.DSP
time automatically logged
(minutes) DR-23 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.649
0.1 0.649
0.15 0.65
0.2 0.644
0.25 0.638
0.3 0.635
0.35 0.635
0.4 0.635
0.45 0.631
0.5 0.631
0.6 0.625
0.75 0.619
0.95 0.617
1.2 0.611
1.5 0.61
1.85 0.596
2.25 0.594
2.7 0.581
3.2 0.573
3.75 0.576
4.35 0.559
5 0.543
5.7 0.546
6.45 0.54
7.25 0.52
8.1 0.509
9 0.507
9.95 0.505
10.95 0.498
12 0.486
13.1 0.482
14.25 0.472
15.45 0.463
16.7 0.449
18 0.441
19.35 0.443
20.75 0.434
22.2 0.424
23.7 0.417
25.25 0.409
26.85 0.391
28.5 0.389
30.2 0.377
31.95 0.37
33.75 0.365
35.6 0.354
37.5 0.347
39.45 0.339
41.45 0.332
43.5 0.323
45.6 0.317
47.75 0.312
49.95 0.303
52.2 0.297
54.5 0.29
56.85 0.284
59.25 0.278
61.7 0.272
64.2 0.263
66.75 0.257
69.35 0.254
Page 1
DR23.DSP
72 0.243
74.7 0.238
77.45 0.23
80.25 0.228
83.1 0.224
86 0.214
88.95 0.21
91.95 0.205
95 0.196
98.1 0.195
101.25 0.189
104.45 0.184
107.7 0.178
111 0.175
114.35 0.168
117.75 0.161
121.2 0.158
124.7 0.154
128.25 0.153
131.85 0.141
135.5 0.14
139.2 0.132
142.95 0.128
146.75 0.125
150.6 0.119
154.5 0.116
158.45 0.109
162.45 0.108
166.5 0.102
170.6 0.1
174.75 0.095
178.95 0.09
183.2 0.085
187.5 0.083
191.85 0.077
196.25 0.08
200.7 0.072
205.2 0.07
209.75 0.065
214.35 0.063
219 0.06
223.7 0.056
228.45 0.056
233.25 0.051
238.1 0.051
243 0.051
247.95 0.045
252.95 0.045
258 0.045
263.1 0.044
268.25 0.039
273.45 0.039
278.7 0.039
284 0.036
289.35 0.035
294.75 0.034
300.2 0.037
305.7 0.033
311.25 0.031
316.85 0.028
322.5 0.026
Page 2
dr23h.dsp
time hand collected
(minutes) DR-23 displacement (ft)
0.05 0.63
0.25 0.62
0.58 0.61
0.83 0.60
1.08 0.60
1.50 0.59
2.00 0.58
2.50 0.57
3.00 0.56
3.50 0.55
4.00 0.55
4.50 0.54
5.00 0.54
6.00 0.53
7.00 0.52
8.00 0.51
9.00 0.50
10.00 0.48
15.00 0.46
20.00 0.43
25.00 0.40
32.00 0.37
35.00 0.36
125.00 0.17
255.00 0.13
320.00 0.13
Page 1
DR24.DSP
-0.001 0
0.001 1.211
0.05 1.159
0.1 1.094
0.15 1.084
0.2 1.069
0.25 1.073
0.3 1.071
0.35 1.067
0.4 1.065
0.45 1.062
0.55 1.057
0.7 1.053
0.9 1.045
1.15 1.027
1.45 1.02
1.8 1.007
2.2 0.996
2.65 0.976
3.15 0.958
3.7 0.945
4.3 0.931
4.95 0.916
5.65 0.9
6.4 0.882
7.2 0.863
8.05 0.844
8.95 0.817
9.9 0.798
10.9 0.778
11.95 0.766
13.05 0.736
14.2 0.717
15.4 0.702
16.65 0.682
17.95 0.653
19.3 0.644
20.7 0.62
22.15 0.603
23.65 0.577
25.2 0.567
26.8 0.549
28.45 0.526
30.15 0.507
31.9 0.495
33.7 0.482
35.55 0.458
37.45 0.443
39.4 0.427
41.4 0.417
43.45 0.396
45.55 0.382
47.7 0.37
49.9 0.357
52.15 0.346
54.45 0.333
56.8 0.319
59.2 0.306
61.65 0.296
64.15 0.284
66.7 0.273
69.3 0.264
71.95 0.252
Page 1
DR24.DSP
74.65 0.243
77.4 0.234
80.2 0.226
83.05 0.217
85.95 0.206
88.9 0.2
91.9 0.195
94.95 0.188
98.05 0.185
101.2 0.174
104.4 0.158
107.65 0.159
110.95 0.158
114.3 0.15
117.7 0.137
121.15 0.142
124.65 0.126
128.2 0.131
131.8 0.12
135.45 0.119
139.15 0.118
142.9 0.115
146.7 0.104
150.55 0.099
154.45 0.106
158.4 0.091
162.4 0.089
166.45 0.085
170.55 0.093
174.7 0.078
178.9 0.072
183.15 0.081
187.45 0.069
191.8 0.068
196.2 0.066
200.65 0.061
205.15 0.061
209.7 0.058
214.3 0.056
218.95 0.055
223.65 0.051

Page 2
DR24H.DSP
0.05 1.08
0.30 1.05
0.58 1.04
0.83 1.03
1.00 1.02
1.50 1.01
2.00 1.00
3.00 0.96
4.00 0.93
5.00 0.91
6.00 0.88
7.00 0.86
8.00 0.83
9.00 0.81
10.00 0.79
15.00 0.71
20.00 0.63
25.00 0.56
30.00 0.51
35.00 0.45
40.00 0.41
45.00 0.38
50.00 0.35
55.00 0.32
60.00 0.29
121.00 0.13
226.00 0.07

Page 1

APPENDIX D

SLUG TEST ANALYSIS PLOTS

0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100.
0.
0.14
0.28
0.42
0.56
0.7
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr5.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:54:31
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 12.3 ft
WELL DATA (DR-5)
Initial Displacement: 0.67 ft Static Water Column Height: 12.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 12.3 ft Screen Length: 12.3 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 2.949E-5 cm/sec Ss = 4.212E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 18. 36. 54. 72. 90.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr5br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:57:29
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 12.3 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-5)
Initial Displacement: 0.67 ft Static Water Column Height: 12.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 12.3 ft Screen Length: 12.3 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 3.8E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.5537 ft
0.1 1. 10. 100.
0.
0.14
0.28
0.42
0.56
0.7
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr5h.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:57:59
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 12.3 ft
WELL DATA (DR-5)
Initial Displacement: 0.67 ft Static Water Column Height: 12.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 12.3 ft Screen Length: 12.3 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 2.855E-5 cm/sec Ss = 2.651E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 18. 36. 54. 72. 90.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr5hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:55:07
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 12.3 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-5)
Initial Displacement: 0.67 ft Static Water Column Height: 12.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 12.3 ft Screen Length: 12.3 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 3.764E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.5798 ft
0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
0.
0.08
0.16
0.24
0.32
0.4
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst12\aqtesolve\dr8r2.aqt
Date: 10/31/12 Time: 10:13:27
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: DR-8
Test Date: 10-9-12
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 7.8 ft
WELL DATA (DR-8)
Initial Displacement: 0.33 ft Static Water Column Height: 7.8 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 7.8 ft Screen Length: 7.8 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 2.463E-8 cm/sec Ss = 0.01 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 400. 800. 1.2E+3 1.6E+3 2.0E+3
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\hydtst12\aqtesolve\dr8rbr.aqt
Date: 10/31/12 Time: 10:14:24
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: DR-8
Test Date: 10-9-12
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 7.8 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-8)
Initial Displacement: 0.33 ft Static Water Column Height: 7.8 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 7.8 ft Screen Length: 7.8 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 3.568E-7 cm/sec y0 = 0.3043 ft
0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
0.
0.08
0.16
0.24
0.32
0.4
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst12\aqtesolve\dr8rh.aqt
Date: 10/31/12 Time: 10:14:00
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: DR-8
Test Date: 10-9-12
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 7.8 ft
WELL DATA (DR-8)
Initial Displacement: 0.33 ft Static Water Column Height: 7.8 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 7.8 ft Screen Length: 7.8 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 4.462E-8 cm/sec Ss = 0.01 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 400. 800. 1.2E+3 1.6E+3 2.0E+3
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\hydtst12\aqtesolve\dr8rhbr.aqt
Date: 10/31/12 Time: 10:14:44
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Energy Fuels
Location: White Mesa
Test Well: DR-8
Test Date: 10-9-12
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 7.8 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-8)
Initial Displacement: 0.33 ft Static Water Column Height: 7.8 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 7.8 ft Screen Length: 7.8 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 4.451E-7 cm/sec y0 = 0.299 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100.
-0.001
0.119
0.239
0.36
0.48
0.6
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr9.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 11:00:51
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 24.5 ft
WELL DATA (DR-9)
Initial Displacement: 0.52 ft Static Water Column Height: 24.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 24.5 ft Screen Length: 24.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.0004493 cm/sec Ss = 4.292E-6 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 4. 8. 12. 16. 20.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr9br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 11:01:19
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 24.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-9)
Initial Displacement: 0.52 ft Static Water Column Height: 24.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 24.5 ft Screen Length: 24.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.0003408 cm/sec y0 = 0.201 ft
0.1 1. 10. 100.
0.
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr9h.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 11:01:47
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 24.5 ft
WELL DATA (DR-9)
Initial Displacement: 0.52 ft Static Water Column Height: 24.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 24.5 ft Screen Length: 24.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.000473 cm/sec Ss = 1.21E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 2. 4. 6. 8. 10.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr9hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 11:02:17
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 24.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-9)
Initial Displacement: 0.52 ft Static Water Column Height: 24.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 24.5 ft Screen Length: 24.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.000473 cm/sec y0 = 0.3336 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
0.
0.08
0.16
0.24
0.32
0.4
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr10c2.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 09:58:35
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3. ft
WELL DATA (DR-10)
Initial Displacement: 0.305 ft Static Water Column Height: 3. ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3. ft Screen Length: 3. ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 2.918E-6 cm/sec Ss = 0.006538 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 200. 400. 600. 800. 1000.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr10c2br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 09:59:24
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3. ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-10)
Initial Displacement: 0.305 ft Static Water Column Height: 3. ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3. ft Screen Length: 3. ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 5.56E-6 cm/sec y0 = 0.2531 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
0.
0.08
0.16
0.24
0.32
0.4
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr10h.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 09:59:55
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3. ft
WELL DATA (DR-10)
Initial Displacement: 0.305 ft Static Water Column Height: 3. ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3. ft Screen Length: 3. ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 9.713E-6 cm/sec Ss = 0.0008413 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 220. 440. 660. 880. 1.1E+3
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr10hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:00:34
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3. ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-10)
Initial Displacement: 0.305 ft Static Water Column Height: 3. ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3. ft Screen Length: 3. ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 9.713E-6 cm/sec y0 = 0.265 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
0.
0.14
0.28
0.42
0.56
0.7
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr11.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:01:02
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 8.9 ft
WELL DATA (DR-11)
Initial Displacement: 0.66 ft Static Water Column Height: 8.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 8.9 ft Screen Length: 8.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 8.877E-6 cm/sec Ss = 0.0008882 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 50. 100. 150. 200. 250.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr11br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:01:26
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 8.9 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-11)
Initial Displacement: 0.66 ft Static Water Column Height: 8.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 8.9 ft Screen Length: 8.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.543E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.5049 ft
0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
0.
0.14
0.28
0.42
0.56
0.7
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr11h.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:01:58
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 8.9 ft
WELL DATA (DR-11)
Initial Displacement: 0.66 ft Static Water Column Height: 8.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 8.9 ft Screen Length: 8.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 5.833E-6 cm/sec Ss = 0.002217 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 50. 100. 150. 200. 250.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr11hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:02:36
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 8.9 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-11)
Initial Displacement: 0.66 ft Static Water Column Height: 8.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 8.9 ft Screen Length: 8.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.255 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.111E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.4605 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
0.
0.16
0.32
0.48
0.64
0.8
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr13.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:03:10
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 11.2 ft
WELL DATA (DR-13)
Initial Displacement: 0.71 ft Static Water Column Height: 11.2 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 11.2 ft Screen Length: 11.2 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 5.896E-6 cm/sec Ss = 7.327E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 200. 400. 600. 800. 1000.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr13br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:03:39
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 11.2 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-13)
Initial Displacement: 0.71 ft Static Water Column Height: 11.2 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 11.2 ft Screen Length: 11.2 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 5.377E-6 cm/sec y0 = 0.4398 ft
0. 300. 600. 900. 1.2E+3 1.5E+3
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr13hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:13:59
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 11.2 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-13)
Initial Displacement: 0.71 ft Static Water Column Height: 11.2 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 11.2 ft Screen Length: 11.2 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.49E-6 cm/sec y0 = 0.2105 ft
0. 300. 600. 900. 1.2E+3 1.5E+3
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr13hbret.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:14:35
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 11.2 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-13)
Initial Displacement: 0.71 ft Static Water Column Height: 11.2 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 11.2 ft Screen Length: 11.2 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 6.811E-6 cm/sec y0 = 0.5798 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
0.
0.16
0.32
0.48
0.64
0.8
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr14c.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:35:48
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 18.8 ft
WELL DATA (DR-14)
Initial Displacement: 0.75 ft Static Water Column Height: 18.8 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 18.8 ft Screen Length: 18.8 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 1.261E-5 cm/sec Ss = 7.337E-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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr14cbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:36:15
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 18.8 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-14)
Initial Displacement: 0.75 ft Static Water Column Height: 18.8 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 18.8 ft Screen Length: 18.8 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.663E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.5798 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
0.
0.16
0.32
0.48
0.64
0.8
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr14h.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:36:42
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 18.8 ft
WELL DATA (DR-14)
Initial Displacement: 0.75 ft Static Water Column Height: 18.8 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 18.8 ft Screen Length: 18.8 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 7.776E-6 cm/sec Ss = 0.0004841 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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr14hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:37:06
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 18.8 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-14)
Initial Displacement: 0.75 ft Static Water Column Height: 18.8 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 18.8 ft Screen Length: 18.8 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 6.177E-6 cm/sec y0 = 0.2417 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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr14hbret.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:37:34
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 18.8 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-14)
Initial Displacement: 0.75 ft Static Water Column Height: 18.8 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 18.8 ft Screen Length: 18.8 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.232E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.4822 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
0.
0.16
0.32
0.48
0.64
0.8
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr17.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:38:17
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 6.5 ft
WELL DATA (DR-17)
Initial Displacement: 0.721 ft Static Water Column Height: 6.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 6.5 ft Screen Length: 6.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 1.243E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.0001533 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 200. 400. 600. 800. 1000.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr17br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:38:43
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 6.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-17)
Initial Displacement: 0.721 ft Static Water Column Height: 6.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 6.5 ft Screen Length: 6.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.427E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.6357 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
0.
0.16
0.32
0.48
0.64
0.8
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr17h.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:39:10
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 6.5 ft
WELL DATA (DR-17)
Initial Displacement: 0.76 ft Static Water Column Height: 6.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 6.5 ft Screen Length: 6.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 3.174E-6 cm/sec Ss = 0.005 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 300. 600. 900. 1.2E+3 1.5E+3
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr17hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:39:35
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 6.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-17)
Initial Displacement: 0.76 ft Static Water Column Height: 6.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 6.5 ft Screen Length: 6.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 2.196E-6 cm/sec y0 = 0.3493 ft
0. 300. 600. 900. 1.2E+3 1.5E+3
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr17hbret.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:40:01
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 6.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-17)
Initial Displacement: 0.76 ft Static Water Column Height: 6.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 6.5 ft Screen Length: 6.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 8.349E-6 cm/sec y0 = 0.6357 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
0.
0.14
0.28
0.42
0.56
0.7
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr19.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:40:33
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3.5 ft
WELL DATA (DR-19)
Initial Displacement: 0.65 ft Static Water Column Height: 3.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3.5 ft Screen Length: 3.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 3.293E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.002542 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 50. 100. 150. 200. 250.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr19br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:41:14
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-19)
Initial Displacement: 0.65 ft Static Water Column Height: 3.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3.5 ft Screen Length: 3.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 3.781E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.5049 ft
0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
0.
0.14
0.28
0.42
0.56
0.7
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr19h.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:41:46
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3.5 ft
WELL DATA (DR-19)
Initial Displacement: 0.65 ft Static Water Column Height: 3.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3.5 ft Screen Length: 3.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 3.398E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.00186 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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr19hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:42:16
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-19)
Initial Displacement: 0.65 ft Static Water Column Height: 3.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3.5 ft Screen Length: 3.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 4.086E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.5049 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
0.
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr20.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:42:49
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.9 ft
WELL DATA (DR-20)
Initial Displacement: 1.22 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.9 ft Screen Length: 17.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 2.14E-6 cm/sec Ss = 1.905E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 200. 400. 600. 800. 1000.
0.1
1.
10.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr20br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:43:21
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.9 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-20)
Initial Displacement: 1.22 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.9 ft Screen Length: 17.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 2.694E-6 cm/sec y0 = 1.055 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000. 1.0E+4
0.
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr20h.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:44:11
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.9 ft
WELL DATA (DR-20)
Initial Displacement: 1.26 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.9 ft Screen Length: 17.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 1.435E-6 cm/sec Ss = 1.904E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 240. 480. 720. 960. 1.2E+3
0.1
1.
10.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr20hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:44:41
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.9 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-20)
Initial Displacement: 1.26 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.9 ft Screen Length: 17.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.892E-6 cm/sec y0 = 1.157 ft
0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
-0.02
0.164
0.348
0.532
0.716
0.9
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr21.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:45:11
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 13.5 ft
WELL DATA (DR-21)
Initial Displacement: 0.82 ft Static Water Column Height: 13.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 13.5 ft Screen Length: 13.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 3.286E-5 cm/sec Ss = 7.173E-6 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 50. 100. 150. 200. 250.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr21br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:45:34
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 13.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-21)
Initial Displacement: 0.82 ft Static Water Column Height: 13.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 13.5 ft Screen Length: 13.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 3.603E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.7299 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
0.
0.18
0.36
0.54
0.72
0.9
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr21h.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:46:01
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 13.5 ft
WELL DATA (DR-21)
Initial Displacement: 0.82 ft Static Water Column Height: 13.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 13.5 ft Screen Length: 13.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 2.206E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.0001869 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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr21hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:48:37
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 13.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-21)
Initial Displacement: 0.82 ft Static Water Column Height: 13.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 13.5 ft Screen Length: 13.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.234 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 3.496E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.6656 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
0.
0.14
0.28
0.42
0.56
0.7
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr23.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:49:17
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 7.5 ft
WELL DATA (DR-23)
Initial Displacement: 0.65 ft Static Water Column Height: 7.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 7.5 ft Screen Length: 7.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 1.96E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.0003854 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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr23br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:49:46
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 7.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-23)
Initial Displacement: 0.65 ft Static Water Column Height: 7.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 7.5 ft Screen Length: 7.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 2.357E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.4822 ft
0. 80. 160. 240. 320. 400.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr23hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:50:23
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 7.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-23)
Initial Displacement: 0.65 ft Static Water Column Height: 7.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 7.5 ft Screen Length: 7.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 4.512E-6 cm/sec y0 = 0.2204 ft
0. 80. 160. 240. 320. 400.
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\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr23hbret.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:50:58
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 7.5 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-23)
Initial Displacement: 0.65 ft Static Water Column Height: 7.5 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 7.5 ft Screen Length: 7.5 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 2.16E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.4822 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
0.
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr24.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:51:41
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.4 ft
WELL DATA (DR-24)
Initial Displacement: 1.1 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.4 ft Screen Length: 17.4 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 1.642E-5 cm/sec Ss = 7.489E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 60. 120. 180. 240. 300.
0.01
0.1
1.
10.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr24br.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:52:09
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.4 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-24)
Initial Displacement: 1.1 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.4 ft Screen Length: 17.4 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.43E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.4822 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
0.
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr24h.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:52:39
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.4 ft
WELL DATA (DR-24)
Initial Displacement: 1.1 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.4 ft Screen Length: 17.4 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 1.642E-5 cm/sec Ss = 7.489E-5 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 60. 120. 180. 240. 300.
0.01
0.1
1.
10.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr24hbr.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:53:08
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.4 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-24)
Initial Displacement: 1.1 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.4 ft Screen Length: 17.4 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 8.228E-6 cm/sec y0 = 0.265 ft
0. 60. 120. 180. 240. 300.
0.01
0.1
1.
10.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\hydtst11b\aqtesolv\results\dr24hbret.aqt
Date: 12/14/11 Time: 10:53:42
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: Denison
Location: White Mesa
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.4 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (DR-24)
Initial Displacement: 1.1 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.4 ft Screen Length: 17.4 ft
Casing Radius: 0.125 ft Well Radius: 0.25 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 1.974E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.697 ft

APPENDIX E

TOPOGRAPHIC AND GEOLOGIC MAPS
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
CORRAL CANYON
5624
CORRAL SPRINGS
5383
COTTONWOOD
5234
ENTRANCE SPRING
5560
FROG POND
5590
RUIN SPRING
5380
WESTWATER
5468
Approved Date Author Date File Name Figure
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.
SEEPS AND SPRINGS
ON USGS TOPOGRAPHIC BASE
WHITE MESA
7180002G09/17/10SJS 707/16/10DRS
0.5 0 0.5 10.25
Mile
Cell No. 1
Cell No. 3
Cell No. 2
Cell No. 4A
NK:\718000\GIS\7180002G.mxd: Friday, September 17, 2010 1:02:59 PM
Cell No. 4B
WESTWATER
5468
Seep or Spring
Elevation (feet) above mean sea level
0.5 10
Mile
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
Cell No. 1
Cell No. 2
Cell No. 3
Cell No. 4A
Qh
Qlbb
Qlbb
Qlbb
Kdb
Kdb
Kdb
Kdb
Kdb
Kdb
Jmb
Jmb
Jmb
Jmb
Jmb
Jmb
Qea
Qea
Qea
Qea
Qa
Qa
Qa
Qa
Qa
Kdb
Kdb
Jmb
Qa
Cell No. 4B
Jmw
Jmr
Qh
Qea
Jmr
Jmw
Kdb
Jmb
Kdb
Kdb
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
FROG POND
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
GEOLOGIC MAP
WHITE MESA, UTAH
SJSÒApproved Date File Figure
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.12/28/11
Geological Map of the Blanding Area, San Juan County, Utah (modified from Haynes et al., 1962; Dames & Moore, 1978 and Kirby, 2008)
Base Map Prepared from Portions of the Blanding South, Black Mesa Butte, Big Bench and No Mans Land U.S.G.S. 7.5' Quadrangles.
K:\718000\GIS\Geology E.2
Contact - dashed where uncertain
E Seep or Spring
EXPLANATION
Tailing Cell
Artificial cut and fill
Stream alluvium
Slumps and landslides, Brushy Basin
Mixed eolian and alluvial deposits
Dakota and Burro Canyon Formations (undivided)
Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison Formation
Westwater Canyon Member of the Morrison Formation
Recapture Member of the Morrison Formation
QhQhQhQh
QaQaQaQa
QlbbQlbbQlbbQlbb
QeaQeaQeaQea
KdbKdbKdbKdb
JmbJmbJmbJmb
JmwJmwJmwJmw
JmrJmrJmrJmr