DRC-2018-003725 - 0901a068807f6bff

Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. 225 Union Blvd. Suite 600 Lakewood, CO, US, 80228 303 974 2140
www.energyfuels.com
ENERGY FUELS
April 10, 2018
VIA E-MAIL AND EXPRESS DELIVERY
Mr. Scott Anderson
Director
Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
195 North 1950 West
P.O. Box 144880
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820
Dear Mr. Anderson;
Div of Waste Management
and Radiation Control
APR 1 1 2018
572 -2010 -0037z5
Re: State of Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit ("the Permit") No. UGW370004 White Mesa
Uranium Mill — As-Built Report Pursuant to Part I.F.6 of the Permit
This letter transmits the As-Built Report for Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.' s ("EFRI' s") perched
groundwater monitoring wells TW4-40 and TW4-41.
TW4-40 and TW4-41 were installed during the period of February 12, 2018 through February 21, 2018. TW4-
40 was installed to attempt to bound chloroform exceeding 70 jig/I. at TW4-26. TW4-41 is a pumping
well and was installed to enhance the rate of extraction of chloroform-bearing perched water.
The enclosed As-Built Report includes the items required for As-Built Reports in the Permit Part I.F.6, and is
being submitted for TW4-40 and TW4-41.
Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions or require any further information.
Yours very truly,
itE ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC.
Kathy Weinel
Quality Assurance Manager
cc: David Frydenlund Paul Goranson David Turk Scott Bakken Logan Shumway

HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
Environmental Science & Technology

INSTALLATION AND HYDRAULIC TESTING OF
PERCHED MONITORING WELLS TW4-40 AND TW4-41
WHITE MESA URANIUM MILL
NEAR BLANDING, UTAH
(AS-BUILT REPORT)

April 10, 2018

Prepared for:

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

Prepared by:

HYDRO GEO CHEM, INC.
51 West Wetmore Road, Suite 101
Tucson, Arizona 85705
[phone]

Project Number 7180000.00-01.0

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1
2. DRILLING AND CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................ 3
2.1 Drilling and Logging Procedures ............................................................................ 3
2.2 Construction ............................................................................................................ 4
2.3 Development ........................................................................................................... 4
3. HYDRAULIC TESTING ................................................................................................... 5
3.1 Testing Procedures .................................................................................................. 5
3.2 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis ................................................................................. 5
4. CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................. 9
5. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 11
6. LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................. 13

TABLES

1 Well Survey Data
2 Slug Test Parameters
3 Slug Test Results

FIGURES

1 Detail Map: Locations of New Perched Monitoring Wells TW4-40 and TW4-41
(showing kriged Q4 2017 perched water elevations and chloroform plume boundary)
2 TW4-40 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
3 TW4-41 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
4 Detail Map: Approximate Locations of Pilot Borings (showing kriged Q4 2017 perched
water elevations and chloroform plume boundary)

APPENDICES

A Lithologic Logs
B Well Development Field Sheets
C Slug Test Plots
D Slug Test Data

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
ii

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
1
1. INTRODUCTION
This report describes the installation, development, and hydraulic testing of perched monitoring
wells TW4-40 and TW4-41 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill (the “Mill” or the “site”) near
Blanding, Utah. TW4-40 was installed south of TW4-26 and TW4-41 was installed immediately
northeast of TW4-4, as shown on Figure 1. TW4-40 and TW4-41 were installed because, as
described in the Exceedance Notice dated November 27, 2017, beginning with the second
quarter of 2017, chloroform in TW4-26 exceeded the State of Utah Groundwater Quality
Standard (GWQS) of 70 µg/L.
Both TW4-40 and TW4-41 were installed with the approval of the State of Utah Division of
Waste Management and Radiation Control (DWMRC). TW4-40 was installed to attempt to
bound chloroform exceeding 70 µg/L at TW4-26 (approximately 608 µg/L in the fourth quarter
of 2017) immediately to the south. TW4-41 was installed as a pumping well to enhance the rate
of extraction of chloroform-bearing perched water and reduce or halt southerly expansion of the
plume near TW4-26. TW4-41 was completed using 6-inch diameter casing within an 8 ¾ inch
diameter bore. Both the bore and casing diameters of TW4-41 are larger than the typical 6 ¾ and
4-inch diameters, respectively, of other chloroform program wells at the site, including TW4-40.
TW4-41 is located near TW4-4, within the southernmost portion of the chloroform plume hosted
by materials having permeabilities large enough to make pumping practical. Test (or pilot)
borings in the vicinity of TW4-4 were first installed and the most productive during drilling was
reamed and completed as TW4-41. In the fourth quarter of 2017, chloroform at nearby pumping
well TW4-4 was detected at a concentration of 1,120 µg/L.
Pumping at TW4-4 is known to have had a beneficial impact on the southernmost extremity of
the plume. However, the productivity of TW4-4 has diminished since the third quarter of 2016.
In addition, the decay of the perched groundwater mound associated with the southern wildlife
pond (located to the south-southeast of the southern extremity of the plume) has caused hydraulic
gradients to become more southerly, and has enhanced southerly migration of the plume.
Continued pumping of TW4-4, augmented by pumping at TW4-41, is expected to slow or halt
further plume expansion to the south.
Both TW4-40 and TW4-41 were installed during February 2018. TW4-41 was the last well
installed and was completed on February 21, 2018. Development of TW4-40 consisted of
surging and bailing on February 27, 2018 followed by overpumping on March 6, 2018. Due to
the larger casing diameter, TW4-41 was not surged and bailed; development consisted of

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
2
overpumping on April 3, 2018 using the permanent pump installed in the well. Hydraulic testing
of both wells consisted of slug tests conducted during the week of March 19, 2018. The
hydraulic testing of TW4-41 occurred prior to the installation of the permanent pump in the well.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
3
2. DRILLING AND CONSTRUCTION
Well installation procedures were similar to those used previously at the site for the construction
of other perched zone wells (Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. [HGC], 2005). Drilling and construction
were performed by UCOLO Drilling, LLC, and borings logged by Mr. Lawrence Casebolt under
contract to Energy Fuels (USA) Corporation (EFRI). As-built diagrams for the well construction,
based primarily on information provided by Mr. Casebolt, are shown in Figures 2 and 3. The
depths to water (below land surface) shown in the as-built diagrams were based on water level
measurements taken either just prior to development (TW4-40) or just prior to testing (TW4-41).
New wells were surveyed by a State of Utah licensed surveyor and the location and elevation
data are provided in Table 1.
Because TW4-41 was intended to be a chloroform production well, small-diameter (4 ¾ to 5 ¼
inch) pilot borings were drilled within an area of the plume considered 1) to be productive based
on the results of testing TW4-4 as described in HGC (2010), and 2) to have relatively high
chloroform concentrations. Based on data available prior to drilling, the area tested by the pilot
borings was within the southernmost portion of the plume hosted by materials having
permeabilities large enough to make pumping practical. The approximate locations of pilot
borings are shown in Figure 4. Pilot boring #4 was originally to be located immediately west of
TW4-4; however, it was moved immediately south of TW4-4 to avoid a powerline that was too
close to the planned original location.
Based on water produced during drilling, pilot boring 5 was determined in the field to have the
largest productivity. Pilot boring 5 was overdrilled and completed as pumping well TW4-41.
Pilot borings 1 through 4 were abandoned to the surface with bentonite by UCOLO Drilling,
LLC.
2.1 Drilling and Logging Procedures
All borings were drilled by air rotary using tricone bits. Drill cuttings samples for all borings
were collected at 2½-foot depth intervals and placed in labeled, zip-sealed plastic bags and
labeled plastic cuttings storage boxes. Lithologic logs were prepared for TW4-40 and pilot holes
#1 - #5 (Figure 4). The log for TW4-41 corresponds to pilot hole #5 (overdrilled and completed
as well TW4-41). Copies of the lithologic logs submitted by Mr. Casebolt are provided in
Appendix A.
When installing TW4-40, an 11-inch diameter tricone bit was used to construct a boring of
sufficient diameter to install an 8-inch-diameter, Schedule 80 poly vinyl chloride (PVC) surface

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
4
(conductor) casing. When overdrilling pilot boring #5 to install TW4-41, a 12¼ -inch diameter
tricone bit was used to construct a boring of sufficient diameter to install a 10-inch-diameter,
Schedule 80 poly vinyl chloride (PVC) surface (conductor) casing. Both surface casings
extended to depths of approximately 9 feet below land surface. Once the surface casings were in
place, the boreholes were drilled (or overdrilled) by air rotary (and foam as needed) using either
a 6¾-inch (TW4-40) or 8¾-inch (TW4-41) diameter tricone bit. Both boreholes penetrated the
Dakota Sandstone and the Burro Canyon Formation and terminated in the Brushy Basin Member
of the Morrison Formation.
2.2 Construction
TW4-40 was constructed using 4-inch diameter, Schedule 40, flush-threaded PVC casing and
0.02-slot, factory-slotted PVC screen. TW4-41 was constructed using 6-inch diameter, Schedule
40, flush-threaded PVC casing and 0.02-slot, factory-slotted PVC screen. Colorado Silica Sand
was used as a filter pack and installed to depths of approximately 5 to 6 feet above the screened
intervals. The annular spaces above each filter pack were sealed with hydrated bentonite chips.
Well casings were fitted with 4- or 6-inch PVC caps to keep foreign objects out of the wells and
lockable steel security casings were installed to protect the wells.
2.3 Development
As discussed in Section 1, well TW4-40 was developed by surging and bailing followed by
overpumping. Well TW4-41 was developed by overpumping using the permanent pump installed
in the well. Development records are provided in Appendix B.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
5
3. HYDRAULIC TESTING
Hydraulic testing consisted of slug tests conducted by HGC personnel using a methodology
similar to that described in HGC (2005).
3.1 Testing Procedures
The slug used for the tests (described in HGC, 2002) consisted of a sealed, pea-gravel-filled,
schedule 80 PVC pipe. The slug was approximately three feet long and displaced approximately
3/4 gallons of water. A Level TrollJ 0-30 pounds per square inch absolute (psia) data logger was
used for the tests. The Level Troll was deployed below the static water column of the tested
wells and used to measure changes in water level during the tests. A 0-30 psia Baro-TrollJ was
used to measure barometric pressure and was placed in a protected environment near the wells
for the duration of the testing. Automatically logged water level data were collected at 1-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
and recorded in the field notebook. The data loggers were then lowered to a depth of
approximately nine feet below the static water level in each well and background pressure
readings were collected for approximately 30 minutes to 1 hour prior to beginning each test. The
purpose of collecting the background data was to allow correction for any detected water level
trends.
Once background data were collected, the slug and electric water level meter sensor were
suspended in the tested well just above the static water level. Each test commenced by lowering
the slug to a depth of approximately two feet below the static water level over a period of a few
seconds and taking water level readings by hand as soon as possible afterwards. Hand-collected
data recorded in the field notebook were obtained more frequently near the start of the tests when
water levels were changing more rapidly, then less frequently as the rate of water level change
diminished. Upon completion of each test, automatically logged data were checked and backed
up on the hard drive of a laptop computer.
3.2 Hydraulic Test Data Analysis
Data from each test was analyzed using AQTESOLVETM (HydroSOLVE, 2000), a computer
program developed and marketed by HydroSOLVE, Inc. In preparing the automatically logged
data for analysis, the raw data were converted to displacements and the total number of records
was reduced. All data collected in the first 10 seconds were retained, then every 2nd, then 3rd,

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
6
then 4th, etc. record was retained for analysis. For example, if the first 10 records were retained
(10 seconds of data at 1-second intervals), the next records to be retained would be the 12th, the
15th, the 19th, the 24th, etc.
Pre-test water level data in TW4-41 were affected by pumping at nearby chloroform pumping
well TW4-4. The pump at TW4-4 cycles on and off because TW4-4 (like other pumping wells at
the site) is not productive enough to make continuous pumping practical. The test was conducted
at a time when monitoring indicated that water levels at TW4-41 were relatively stable (flat).
Due to the brevity of both tests, resulting from quick recovery of water levels, there was no need
to correct displacements at either well for changes in barometric pressure or water level trends.
Data were analyzed using two solution methods: the KGS unconfined method (Hyder et al.,
1994) and the Bouwer-Rice unconfined method (Bouwer and Rice, 1976). When filter pack
porosities were required by the analytical method, a value of 30 percent was used. The saturated
thicknesses were taken to be the difference between the depth of the static water level measured
just prior to each test and the depth to the Brushy Basin Member contact as defined in the drilling
logs (Table 2; Appendix A). The static water levels were below the tops of the screened intervals
in both wells and the saturated thicknesses were taken to be the effective screen lengths.
The KGS solution allows estimation of both specific storage and hydraulic conductivity, while
the Bouwer-Rice solution allows estimation of only the hydraulic conductivity. The Bouwer-
Rice solution is valid only when a straight line is identifiable on a plot of the log of displacement
versus time (indicating that flow is nearly steady), and is insensitive to both storage and the
specified initial water level rise. Generally, only the later time data are interpretable using
Bouwer-Rice. Data from TW4-41 showed two analyzable near-straight line portions that were
both analyzed. The later-time portion is referred to in the analysis as ‘late-time’.
The KGS solution accounts for non-steady flow and storage, is sensitive to the specified initial
water level rise, and generally allows a fit to both early- and late-time data. Both KGS and
Bouwer-Rice solutions were used for comparison. Automatically logged and hand-collected data
were analyzed separately using both solution methods. The hand-collected data therefore served
as an independent data set and a check on the accuracy of the automatically logged data.
Table 2 summarizes test parameters and Table 3 and Appendix C provide the results of the
analyses. Appendix C contains plots generated by AQTESOLVEJ that show the quality of fit
between measured and simulated displacements, and reproduce the parameters used in each
analysis. Appendix D provides both raw and corrected displacement data. Estimates of hydraulic
conductivity range from approximately 1.1 x 10-3 centimeters per second (cm/s) to 9.8 x 10-3

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
7
cm/s using automatically logged data, and from approximately 8.1 x 10-4 cm/s to 9.8 x 10-3 cm/s
using hand-collected data. Estimates are within the high end of the range previously measured at
the site (approximately 2 x 10-8 cm/s to 0.014 cm/s).
In general, there is good agreement between estimates obtained from the two solution methods
and between estimates obtained from automatically logged and hand-collected data. All
estimates for TW4-40 are within a factor of two; all estimates for TW4-41 are within a factor of
two except for late-time estimates using Bouwer-Rice. The late-time estimates are lower than
corresponding earlier-time estimates by factors of 3 to 7. Although there was generally good
agreement between the KGS and Bouwer-Rice results, because the KGS solution accounts for
non-steady flow and aquifer storage, the results obtained using KGS are considered more
representative than those obtained using Bouwer-Rice.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
8

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
9
4. CONCLUSIONS
Procedures for the installation, hydraulic testing, and development at new perched monitoring
wells TW4-40 and TW4-41 (Figure 1) are generally similar to those used previously at the site
for the construction, testing, and development of other perched zone wells. The primary
difference was that TW4-41, intended to be a pumping well, was completed using 6-inch (rather
than 4-inch) diameter casing within an 8 ¾ - inch diameter (rather than 6 ¾ - inch diameter)
borehole.
Because TW4-41 was intended to be a production well, five small-diameter pilot borings were
installed, and the most productive based on water produced during drilling was overdrilled and
completed as TW4-41. The most productive pilot boring was boring # 5 (Figure 4).
Automatically logged and hand-collected slug test data from new wells were analyzed using
KGS and Bouwer-Rice analytical solutions. Estimates of hydraulic conductivity range from
approximately 1.1 x 10-3 cm/s to 9.8 x 10-3 cm/s using automatically logged data, and from
approximately 8.1 x 10-4 cm/s to 9.8 x 10-3 cm/s using hand-collected data. Estimates are within
the high end of the range previously measured at the site (approximately 2 x 10-8 cm/s to 0.014
cm/s).
In general, there is good agreement between estimates obtained from the two solution methods
and between estimates obtained from automatically logged and hand-collected data. All
estimates for TW4-40 are within a factor of two; all estimates for TW4-41 are within a factor of
two except for late-time estimates using Bouwer-Rice. The late-time estimates are lower than
corresponding earlier-time estimates by factors of 3 to 7. Although there was generally good
agreement between the KGS and Bouwer-Rice results, because the KGS solution accounts for
non-steady flow and aquifer storage, the results obtained using KGS are considered more
representative than those obtained using Bouwer-Rice.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
10

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
11
5. REFERENCES
Bouwer, H. and R.C. Rice. 1976. A Slug-Test method for Determining Hydraulic Conductivity
of Unconfined Aquifers with Completely or Partially Penetrating Wells. Water Resources
Research, Vol. 12, No. 3, Pp. 423-428.
Hyder, Z, J.J. Butler, Jr. C.D. McElwee, and W. Liu. 1994. Slug Tests in Partially Penetrating
Wells. Water Resources Research, Vol. 30, No. 11, Pp. 2945-2957.
Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. (HGC). 2002. Hydraulic Testing at the White Mesa Uranium Mill Near
Blanding, Utah During July 2002. Submitted to International Uranium Corporation.
August 22, 2002.
HGC. 2005. Perched Monitoring Well Installation and Testing at the White Mesa Uranium Mill,
April through June 2005. Submitted to International Uranium Corporation.
August 3, 2005.
HGC. 2010. Hydraulic Testing of TW4-4, TW4-6 and TW4-26. White Mesa Uranium
Mill. July 2010.
HydroSOLVE, Inc. 2000. AQTESOLV for Windows. User=s Guide.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
12

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
13
6. LIMITATIONS
The information and conclusions presented in this report are based upon the scope of services
and information obtained through the performance of the services, as agreed upon by HGC and
the party for whom this report was originally prepared. Results of any investigations, tests, or
findings presented in this report apply solely to conditions existing at the time HGC’s
investigative work was performed and are inherently based on and limited to the available data
and the extent of the investigation activities. No representation, warranty, or guarantee, express
or implied, is intended or given. HGC makes no representation as to the accuracy or
completeness of any information provided by other parties not under contract to HGC to the
extent that HGC relied upon that information. This report is expressly for the sole and exclusive
use of the party for whom this report was originally prepared and for the particular purpose that
it was intended. Reuse of this report, or any portion thereof, for other than its intended purpose,
or if modified, or if used by third parties, shall be at the sole risk of the user.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
TW4-40 and TW4-41, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\TW40\report\TW40_41_instal_final.doc
April 10, 2018
14

TABLES
TABLE 1
Well Survey Data
Northing * Easting * Top of Casing Ground
(feet) (feet) (feet amsl) (feet amsl)
TW4-40 10162248.92 2220266.25 5597.58 5595.66
TW4-41 10163066.14 2220394.89 5614.96 5613.31
Notes:
amsl = above mean sea level
* = state plane coordinates
Well
H:\718000\TW40\report\T1_T2_T3_0318.xls: T 1
TABLE 2
Slug Test Parameters
Depth to Depth to Depth to Top Depth to Base Saturated Thickness
Well Brushy Basin Water of Screen of Screen Above Brushy Basin
(feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet)
TW4-40 84.0 64.7 46.0 86.0 19.3
TW4-41 92.0 74.1 57.8 97.8 17.9
Note: All depths are in feet below land surface
H:\718000\TW40\report\T1_T2_T3_0318.xls: T 2
TABLE 3
Slug Test Results
Bouwer-Rice Bouwer-Rice
Test Saturated
Thickness (ft)
K
(cm/s)
Ss
(1/ft)
K
(cm/s)
K
(cm/s)
Ss
(1/ft)
K
(cm/s)
TW4-40 19.3 9.81E-03 3.96E-04 8.54E-03 9.81E-03 3.96E-04 6.48E-03
TW4-41 2.69E-03 2.22E-03 3.03E-03 2.69E-03 2.22E-03 5.40E-03
TW4-41 late time NA NA 1.10E-03 NA NA 8.11E-04
Notes:
NA = not analyzed
Bouwer-Rice = Unconfined Bouwer-Rice solution method in Aqtesolve™
cm/s = centimeters per second
ft = feet
K = hydraulic conductivity
KGS = Unconfined KGS solution method in Aqtesolve™
Ss= specific storage
17.9
Automatically Logged Data Hand Collected Data
KGS KGS
H:\718000\TW40\report\T1_T2_T3_0318.xls: T 3

FIGURES
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1000 feet
MW-25
MW-31
TW4-01
TW4-02
TW4-03
TW4-04
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-10
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
MW-26
TW4-16
MW-32
TW4-18TW4-19
TW4-20
TW4-21
TW4-22
TW4-23
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-26
PIEZ-3A
PIEZ-04
TWN-01
TW4-07 TW4-08
TW4-35
TW4-36
TW4-38
TW4-39
MW-04
TW4-27
TW4-29
TW4-32
TW4-33
TW4-34
TW4-28
TW4-30
TW4-31
TW4-37
TW4-40
TW4-41
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well
temporary perched monitoring well
perched piezometer
MW-25
TW4-7
PIEZ-2
DETAIL MAP: LOCATIONS OF NEW PERCHED
MONITORING WELLS TW4-40 AND TW4-41
(showing kriged Q4 2017 perched water elevations
and chloroform plume boundary)
H:/718000/tw40/tw40and41.srf
PIEZ-3A May, 2016 replacement of perched
piezometer Piez-03
temporary perched monitoring well
installed October, 2016
TW4-38 NOTES: MW-4, MW-26, TW4-1, TW4-2, TW4-4, TW4-11, TW4-19, TW4-20, TW4-21, TW4-37 and TW4-39 are chloroform pumping wells;
TW4-22, TW4-24, TW4-25 and TWN-2 are nitrate pumping wells; TW4-11 water level is below the base of the Burro Canyon Formation
temporary perched monitoing
well installed February 2018
Q4 2017 kriged chloroform
plume boundary
5525 Q4 2017 kriged perched water elevation
1
TW4-40
SJS 4/5/2018
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
1000 feet
MW-25
MW-31
TW4-01
TW4-02
TW4-03
TW4-04
TW4-05
TW4-06
TW4-09
TW4-10
TW4-11
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-14
MW-26
TW4-16
MW-32
TW4-18TW4-19
TW4-20
TW4-21
TW4-22
TW4-23
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-26
PIEZ-3A
PIEZ-04
TWN-01
TW4-07 TW4-08
TW4-35
TW4-36
TW4-38
TW4-39
MW-04
TW4-27
TW4-29
TW4-32
TW4-33
TW4-34
TW4-28
TW4-30
TW4-31
TW4-37
1
2
34
5
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well
temporary perched monitoring well
perched piezometer
MW-25
TW4-7
PIEZ-2
DETAIL MAP: APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS OF
PILOT BORINGS
(showing kriged Q4 2017 perched water elevations and
chloroform plume boundary)
H:/718000/tw40/PilotBoring.srf
PIEZ-3A May, 2016 replacement of perched
piezometer Piez-03
temporary perched monitoring well
installed October, 2016
TW4-38 NOTES: MW-4, MW-26, TW4-1, TW4-2, TW4-4, TW4-11, TW4-19, TW4-20, TW4-21, TW4-37 and TW4-39 are chloroform pumping wells;
TW4-22, TW4-24, TW4-25 and TWN-2 are nitrate pumping wells; TW4-11 water level is below the base of the Burro Canyon Formation
approximate pilot boring location
and sequence
Q4 2017 kriged chloroform
plume boundary
1
5525 Q4 2017 kriged water elevation
4SJS 4/5/2018

APPENDIX A

LITHOLOGIC LOGS

APPENDIX B

WELL DEVELOPMENT FIELD SHEETS

APPENIDX C

SLUG TEST PLOTS
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100.
0.
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\TW40\SlugTests\tw40.aqt
Date: 04/03/18 Time: 15:24:11
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: TW4-40
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 19.3 ft
WELL DATA (tw4-40)
Initial Displacement: 0.9 ft Static Water Column Height: 19.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 19.3 ft Screen Length: 19.3 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.00981 cm/sec Ss = 0.0003955 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.
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\TW40\SlugTests\tw40br.aqt
Date: 04/03/18 Time: 15:25:54
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: TW4-40
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 19.3 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (tw4-40)
Initial Displacement: 0.9 ft Static Water Column Height: 19.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 19.3 ft Screen Length: 19.3 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.008544 cm/sec y0 = 0.4741 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100.
0.
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\TW40\SlugTests\tw40h.aqt
Date: 04/03/18 Time: 15:26:57
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: TW4-40
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 19.3 ft
WELL DATA (tw4-40)
Initial Displacement: 0.9 ft Static Water Column Height: 19.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 19.3 ft Screen Length: 19.3 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.00981 cm/sec Ss = 0.0003955 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.
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\TW40\SlugTests\tw40hbr.aqt
Date: 04/03/18 Time: 15:27:40
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: TW4-40
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 19.3 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (tw4-40)
Initial Displacement: 0.9 ft Static Water Column Height: 19.3 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 19.3 ft Screen Length: 19.3 ft
Casing Radius: 0.167 ft Well Radius: 0.28 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.006481 cm/sec y0 = 0.207 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100.
0.
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\TW40\SlugTests\tw41.aqt
Date: 04/03/18 Time: 15:31:00
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: TW4-41
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.9 ft
WELL DATA (tw4-41)
Initial Displacement: 0.45 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.9 ft Screen Length: 17.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.25 ft Well Radius: 0.36 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.002686 cm/sec Ss = 0.002215 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
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\TW40\SlugTests\tw41br.aqt
Date: 04/03/18 Time: 15:31:33
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: TW4-41
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.9 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (tw4-41)
Initial Displacement: 0.45 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.9 ft Screen Length: 17.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.25 ft Well Radius: 0.36 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.003025 cm/sec y0 = 0.2605 ft
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\TW40\SlugTests\tw41brlt.aqt
Date: 04/03/18 Time: 15:32:09
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: TW4-41
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.9 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (tw4-41)
Initial Displacement: 0.45 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.9 ft Screen Length: 17.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.25 ft Well Radius: 0.36 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.001098 cm/sec y0 = 0.1306 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100.
0.
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.
Time (min)
Di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
t
)
WELL TEST ANALYSIS
Data Set: H:\718000\TW40\SlugTests\tw41h.aqt
Date: 04/03/18 Time: 15:33:54
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: TW4-41
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.9 ft
WELL DATA (tw4-41)
Initial Displacement: 0.45 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.9 ft Screen Length: 17.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.25 ft Well Radius: 0.36 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: KGS Model
Kr = 0.002686 cm/sec Ss = 0.002215 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
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\TW40\SlugTests\tw41hbr.aqt
Date: 04/03/18 Time: 15:34:33
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: TW4-41
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.9 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (tw4-41)
Initial Displacement: 0.45 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.9 ft Screen Length: 17.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.25 ft Well Radius: 0.36 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.005359 cm/sec y0 = 0.3435 ft
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\TW40\SlugTests\tw41hbrlt.aqt
Date: 04/03/18 Time: 15:35:04
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: TW4-41
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 17.9 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (tw4-41)
Initial Displacement: 0.45 ft Static Water Column Height: 17.9 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 17.9 ft Screen Length: 17.9 ft
Casing Radius: 0.25 ft Well Radius: 0.36 ft
Gravel Pack Porosity: 0.3
SOLUTION
Aquifer Model: Unconfined Solution Method: Bouwer-Rice
K = 0.0008111 cm/sec y0 = 0.08628 ft

APPENDIX D

SLUG TEST DATA
tw40.dsp
TW4-40
min displ (ft)

1.67E-05 0.746

0.016683 0.812

0.03335 0.443

0.050017 0.399

0.066683 0.431

0.08335 0.302

0.100017 0.29

0.116683 0.271

0.13335 0.258

0.150017 0.23

0.166683 0.208

0.200017 0.176

0.250017 0.135

0.316683 0.098

0.400017 0.069

0.500017 0.048

0.616683 0.033

0.750017 0.027

0.900017 0.018

1.066683 0.013

1.250017 0.017

1.450017 0.012

1.666683 0.013

1.900017 0.012

2.150017 0.011

2.416683 0.008

2.700017 0.007

3.000017 0.007

3.316683 0.007

3.650017 0.008

4.000017 0.005

4.366683 0.01

4.750017 0.009

5.150017 0.007

5.566683 0.008

Page 1
tw40.dsp
6.000017 0.007

6.450017 0.007

6.916683 0.008

7.400017 0.008

7.900017 0.002

8.416683 0.009

8.950017 0.002

9.500017 0.009

10.06668 -0.004

10.65002 0.006

11.25002 0.006

11.86668 0.006

12.50002 0.003

13.15002 0.004

13.81668 0.007

14.50002 0.006

15.20002 0.007

15.91668 0.002

16.65002 0.005

17.40002 0.006

18.16668 0.006

18.95002 -0.001

19.75002 0.004

20.56668 0.006

21.40002 0.004

22.25002 0.005

23.11668 0.007

24.00002 0.005

24.90002 -0.003

25.81668 -0.002

26.75002 0.003

27.70002 0.004

28.66668 0.006

29.65002 0.002

30.65002 -0.078

31.66668 0.001

32.70002 0.001
Page 2
tw40h.dsp
TW4-40 hand collected
min displ (ft)
0.166667 0.24
0.25 0.08
0.416667 0.05
0.666667 0.02
0.916667 0.02
1.166667 0.02
2 0.02
5 0.02
15 0.02
20 0.02
30 0.02
Page 1
tw41.dsp
TW4-41
min displ (ft)

1.67E-05 0.368

0.016683 0.37

0.03335 0.403

0.050017 0.303

0.066683 0.234

0.08335 0.331

0.100017 0.312

0.116683 0.293

0.13335 0.279

0.150017 0.269

0.166683 0.259

0.200017 0.25

0.250017 0.232

0.316683 0.21

0.400017 0.187

0.500017 0.169

0.616683 0.15

0.750017 0.132

0.900017 0.117

1.066683 0.104

1.250017 0.086

1.450017 0.086

1.666683 0.077

1.900017 0.071

2.150017 0.061

2.416683 0.059

2.700017 0.054

3.000017 0.05

3.316683 0.045

3.650017 0.044

4.000017 0.031

4.366683 0.038

4.750017 0.034

5.150017 0.032

5.566683 0.03

Page 1
tw41.dsp
6.000017 0.028

6.450017 0.029

6.916683 0.03

7.400017 0.018

7.900017 0.025

8.416683 0.026

8.950017 0.024

9.500017 0.023

10.06668 0.022

10.65002 0.022

11.25002 0.018

11.86668 0.018

12.50002 0.018

13.15002 0.018

13.81668 0.018

14.50002 0.016

15.20002 0.015

15.91668 0.014

16.65002 0.015

17.40002 0.015

18.16668 0.016

18.95002 0.014

19.75002 0.016

20.56668 0.014

21.40002 0.018

22.25002 0.015

23.11668 0.013

Page 2
tw41h.dsp
TW4-41 hand collected
min displ (ft)
0.283333 0.21
0.55 0.17
0.883333 0.08
1.05 0.06
1.633333 0.06
2.016667 0.05
2.5 0.05
3 0.04
3.5 0.04
4 0.04
5 0.03
6 0.03
7 0.03
10 0.02
15 0.02
20 0.02
25 0.02
30 0.01
40 0.01
50 0.01
60 0.01
Page 1