DRC-2018-005866 - 0901a068808496c4

JUN 1 4 2018
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
225 Union Blvd. Suite 600
Lakewood, CO, US, 80228 303 974 2140
www.enetzy fuels cool
ENERGY FUELS
Div of Waste Management
and Radiation Control
June 12, 2018 Dí C-2,010-oose26(0
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:
Re: State of Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit ("the Permin 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 MW-38, MW-39, and MW-40.
MW-38, MW-39, and MW-40 were installed during the period of February 12, 2018 through February 21,
2018. MW-38, MW-39, and MW-40 were installed as required by the January 19, 2018 Ground Water
Discharge Permit, Part I.H.2.
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 MW-38, MW-39, and MW-40.
Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions or require any further information.
Yours very truly,
Joii-t-e
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 MW-38, MW-39 AND MW-40
WHITE MESA URANIUM MILL
NEAR BLANDING, UTAH
(AS-BUILT REPORT)

June 12, 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
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 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 ................................................................................. 6
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 Showing Locations of New Perched Wells MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40 and
Kriged 4th Quarter, 2018 Water Levels (ft amsl)
2 MW-38 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
3 MW-39 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
4 MW-40 As-Built Well Construction Schematic
5 MW-39 Corrected and Uncorrected Displacements (automatically logged data), White
Mesa, Utah

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
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
ii

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
1
1. INTRODUCTION
This report describes the installation, development, and hydraulic testing of perched monitoring
wells MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40 at the White Mesa Uranium Mill (the “Mill” or the “site”)
near Blanding, Utah. The three wells were installed far to the southeast of the tailings
management system as shown on Figure 1. All three wells were installed as required by the
January 19, 2018 Groundwater Discharge Permit. These wells are located far to the southeast
(cross-gradient) of the tailings management system.
All three wells were installed during the week of February 12, 2018. Development consisted of
surging and bailing (during February and March, 2018) followed by overpumping (during
March, 2018). Hydraulic testing consisted of slug tests conducted during the week of March 19,
2018.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
2

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 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 through 4. The
depths to water shown in the as-built diagrams were based on water level measurements taken
just prior to development (in feet below land surface). New wells were surveyed by a State of
Utah licensed surveyor and the location and elevation data are provided in Table 1.
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 Copies of the lithologic logs submitted by Mr. Casebolt are
provided in Appendix A.
For each well an 11-inch diameter tricone bit was used to construct borings of sufficient diameter
to install 8-inch-diameter, Schedule 80 poly vinyl chloride (PVC) surface (conductor) casings.
The surface casings extended to depths of approximately 9 feet below land surface. Once the
surface casings were in place, the boreholes were drilled by air rotary (and foam as needed)
using a 6¾ inch diameter tricone bit. The boreholes penetrated the Dakota Sandstone and the
Burro Canyon Formation and terminated in the Brushy Basin Member of the Morrison
Formation.
Although not specifically noted in the lithologic log, drilling fluid return from the lowermost
portion of the MW-39 borehole (near the contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and
underlying Brushy Basin Member) had a reddish color and sheen. This color change may be due
to the change in color from the light-colored sandstone of the Burro Canyon Formation to the
purplish-brown to red shale within the uppermost portion of the Brushy Basin Member; however,
both the color and sheen may also indicate the presence of iron bacteria. If present in the
formation, iron bacteria are expected to influence the chemistry of the perched groundwater
collected from this well.
Pyrite in the MW-39 borehole was also noted at the contact between the Burro Canyon
Formation and underlying Brushy Basin Member (as noted in the lithologic log) and is also

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
4
expected to impact the chemistry of the perched groundwater collected from this well. The
influence of pyrite in the perched groundwater zone is discussed in HGC (2012).
2.2 Construction
The wells were constructed using 4-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 4 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-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
Wells were developed by surging and bailing followed by overpumping. Development records
are provided in Appendix B.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 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 3-foot long slug used for the tests in MW-39 and MW-40, which displaced approximately 3/4
gallons of water, is described in HGC (2002). Due to the small saturated thickness at MW-38, a
shorter (approximately 1 ½ foot long) slug displacing approximately 0.36 gallons, was used for
the test at that well. Both slugs consisted of sealed, pea-gravel-filled PVC pipe; the 3-foot long
slug used schedule 80 PVC and the 1 ½ foot long slug used schedule 40 PVC.
Level TrollTM 0-30 pounds per square inch absolute (psia) data loggers were used for the tests.
The Level Trolls were deployed below the static water column of the tested wells and used to
measure the change in water level during the test. 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 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
and recorded in the field notebook. The data loggers were then lowered to a depth of
approximately ten feet below the static water level in each well except MW-38. Because the
water column height in MW-38 was only approximately 6 feet, the logger was lowered to the
base of the well casing. Background pressure readings were then collected for approximately 1 to
3 hours 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 in the first few minutes 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.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
6
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 30 seconds (except for a negative displacement caused
by initial water level oscillation) 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.
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 (Appendix A). The static water levels were below the tops of the screened intervals in all
three wells and the saturated thicknesses were taken to be the effective screen lengths.
An increase in barometric pressure during the test at MW-39 appeared to influence the
automatically-logged data, and the displacements calculated from that data were corrected
accordingly. Figure 5 compares corrected and uncorrected water level displacements for
automatically logged data at MW-39. Corrections did not need to be applied to displacements at
MW-38 and MW-40.
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. In analyzing data from MW-40, near-straight line portions of middle and late-time
data were both analyzed.
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.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
7
Table 2 summarizes test parameters and Table 3 and Appendix C provide the results of the
analyses. Appendix C contains plots generated by AQTESOLVETM 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 1.8 x 10-5 centimeters per second (cm/s) to 1.3 x 10-4
cm/s using automatically logged data, and from approximately 1.4 x 10-5 cm/s to 2.1 x 10-4 cm/s
using hand-collected data. Estimates are within the middle portion of the range previously
measured at the site (approximately 2 x 10-8 cm/s to 0.01 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 are within a factor of two, except for the late-time Bouwer-Rice estimate for MW-40,
which was a factor of 3 lower than the highest estimate for that well (using automatically logged
data). 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
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
8

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
9
4. CONCLUSIONS
Procedures for the installation, hydraulic testing, and development at new perched monitoring
wells MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40 are generally similar to those used previously at the site for
the construction, testing, and development of other perched zone wells.
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 1.8 x 10-5 centimeters per second (cm/s) to 1.3 x 10-4 cm/s using automatically
logged data, and from approximately 1.4 x 10-5 cm/s to 2.1 x 10-4 cm/s using hand-collected data.
Estimates are within the middle portion of the range previously measured at the site
(approximately 2 x 10-8 cm/s to 0.01 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 are within a factor of two, except for the late-time Bouwer-Rice estimate for MW-40,
which was a factor of 3 lower than the highest estimate for that well (using automatically logged
data). 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.
Although not specifically noted in the lithologic log, drilling fluid return from the lowermost
portion of the MW-39 borehole (near the contact between the Burro Canyon Formation and
underlying Brushy Basin Member) had a reddish color and sheen. This color change may be due
to the change in color from the light-colored sandstone of the Burro Canyon Formation to the
purplish-brown to red shale within the uppermost portion of the Brushy Basin Member; however,
both the color and sheen may also indicate the presence of iron bacteria. If present in the
formation, iron bacteria are expected to influence the chemistry of the perched groundwater
collected from this well.
Pyrite in the MW-39 borehole was also noted at the contact between the Burro Canyon
Formation and underlying Brushy Basin Member (as noted in the lithologic log) and is also
expected to impact the chemistry of the perched groundwater collected from this well. The
influence of pyrite in the perched groundwater zone is discussed in HGC (2012).
.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
10

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 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. 2012, Investigation of Pyrite in the Perched Zone. White Mesa Uranium Mill Site.
Blanding, Utah. December 7, 2012.
HydroSOLVE, Inc. 2000. AQTESOLV for Windows. User=s Guide.

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
12

Installation and Hydraulic Testing of Perched Monitoring Wells
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 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
MW-38, MW-39 and MW-40, White Mesa Uranium Mill (As-Built Report)
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\MW38_39_40_instal_final.doc
June 12, 2018
14

TABLES
TABLE 1
Well Survey Data
Northing * Easting * Latitude Longitude Top of Casing Ground
(feet) (feet) (degrees) (degrees) (feet amsl) (feet amsl)
MW-38 10157837.44 2218130.82 37.515807 -109.507996 5533.03 5531.21
MW-39 10158682.32 2219325.06 37.518057 -109.503818 5546.46 5544.68
MW-40 10159485.17 2220452.69 37.520195 -109.499871 5568.19 5566.45
Notes:
amsl = above mean sea level
* = state plane coordinates
Well
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\T1_T2_T3_0518.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)
MW-38 72 69.0 44.3 74.3 3.04
MW-39 97 64.4 62.5 102.5 32.6
MW-40 117 78.6 70.0 120.0 38.4
Note: All depths are in feet below land surface
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\T1_T2_T3_0518.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)
MW-38 3.04 6.84E-05 0.0221 5.90E-05 5.13E-05 0.0149 6.86E-05
MW-39 32.6 1.76E-05 8.07E-04 2.43E-05 1.43E-05 3.80E-03 2.48E-05
MW-40 1.26E-04 3.36E-04 1.23E-04 1.26E-04 3.36E-04 2.08E-04
MW-40 late time NA NA 4.18E-05 NA NA NA
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
38.4
Automatically Logged Data Hand Collected Data
KGS KGS
H:\718000\MW38_39_40\report\T1_T2_T3_0518.xls: T 3

FIGURES
HYDRO
GEO
CHEM, INC.
1 mile
WHITE MESA
Mill Site
CORRAL CANYON
CORRAL SPRINGS
COTTONWOOD
ENTRANCE SPRING
RUIN SPRING
WESTWATER
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell 4A
Cell 4B
MW-01
MW-02
MW-3A
MW-11
MW-14MW-15
MW-17
MW-18
MW-19
MW-20
MW-21
MW-22
MW-23
MW-24
MW-25
MW-27
MW-28
MW-29
MW-30
MW-31
MW-32
MW-33
MW-34MW-37
TW4-01
TW4-03
TW4-34
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-3A
PIEZ-04
PIEZ-05
TW4-05
TW4-12
TW4-13
TW4-31
TW4-32
MW-12
TW4-11TW4-16
TW4-18
TW4-27
MW-26
MW-35
MW-36
TW4-04
TW4-07
TW4-09
TW4-19
TW4-21
TW4-24
TW4-25
TW4-26
TW4-40
TW4-06
TW4-02
TW4-08
MW-04
MW-05
TW4-22
TW4-23
TW4-20
TW4-28
TW4-29
TW4-30
TW4-10
TW4-33
TW4-35
TW4-36
TW4-41TW4-14
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
TW4-37 TW4-38
TW4-39
abandoned abandoned
abandoned
abandoned
abandoned abandoned
abandoned
abandoned abandoned
wildlife pond
wildlife pond
wildlife pond
MW-38
MW-39
MW-40
EXPLANATION
perched monitoring well
perched piezometer
seep or spring
WHITE MESA SITE PLAN SHOWING LOCATIONS OF
PERCHED WELLS AND PIEZOMETERS
H:/718000/
MW38_39_40/report/Uwelloc0318rev.srf
MW-5
PIEZ-1
RUIN SPRING
temporary perched monitoring well
temporary perched nitrate monitoring
well
TW4-12
TWN-7
TW4-19 perched chloroform or
nitrate pumping well
May, 2016 replacement of
perched piezometer Piez-03
PIEZ-3A
TW4-40 temporary perched monitoring well
installed February, 2018
1
perched monitoring well installed
February, 2018
TW4-41 perched chloroform pumping well
installed February, 2018
MW-38
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 125
di
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

(
f
e
e
t
)
time (minutes)
MW-39 corrected MW-39 uncorrected CORRECTED AND UNCORRECTED DISPLACEMENTS
(automatically logged data)HYDRO
GEO Approved FigureDateAuthorDateFile Name
SJS 5MW39.xlsxSJS

APPENDIX A

LITHOLOGIC LOGS

APPENDIX B

WELL DEVELOPMENT FIELD SHEETS

APPENIDX C

SLUG TEST PLOTS

0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw38.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:46:03
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-38
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3.04 ft
WELL DATA (MW-38)
Initial Displacement: 0.43 ft Static Water Column Height: 3.04 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3.04 ft Screen Length: 3.04 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 = 6.839E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.0221 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 40. 80. 120. 160. 200.
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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw38br.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:46:53
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-38
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3.04 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (MW-38)
Initial Displacement: 0.41 ft Static Water Column Height: 3.04 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3.04 ft Screen Length: 3.04 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 = 5.9E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.207 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw38h.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:47:16
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-38
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3.04 ft
WELL DATA (MW-38h)
Initial Displacement: 0.43 ft Static Water Column Height: 3.04 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3.04 ft Screen Length: 3.04 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 = 5.125E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.01486 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 12. 24. 36. 48. 60.
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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw38hbr.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:47:50
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-38
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 3.04 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (MW-38h)
Initial Displacement: 0.4 ft Static Water Column Height: 3.04 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 3.04 ft Screen Length: 3.04 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 = 6.863E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.3132 ft
0.01 0.1 1. 10. 100. 1000.
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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw39.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:48:21
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-39
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 32.6 ft
WELL DATA (MW-39)
Initial Displacement: 0.74 ft Static Water Column Height: 32.6 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 32.6 ft Screen Length: 32.6 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 = 1.759E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.0008073 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 40. 80. 120. 160. 200.
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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw39br.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:48:56
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-39
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 32.6 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (MW-39)
Initial Displacement: 0.74 ft Static Water Column Height: 32.6 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 32.6 ft Screen Length: 32.6 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 = 2.428E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.3944 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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw39h.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:49:53
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-39
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 32.6 ft
WELL DATA (MW-39h)
Initial Displacement: 0.74 ft Static Water Column Height: 32.6 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 32.6 ft Screen Length: 32.6 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 = 1.429E-5 cm/sec Ss = 0.003774 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 40. 80. 120. 160. 200.
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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw39hbr.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:50:15
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-39
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 32.6 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (MW-39h)
Initial Displacement: 0.71 ft Static Water Column Height: 32.6 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 32.6 ft Screen Length: 32.6 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 = 2.483E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.2857 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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw40.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:50:37
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-40
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 38.4 ft
WELL DATA (MW-40)
Initial Displacement: 0.66 ft Static Water Column Height: 38.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 38.4 ft Screen Length: 38.4 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 = 0.0001263 cm/sec Ss = 0.0003357 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 12. 24. 36. 48. 60.
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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw40br.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:51:04
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-40
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 38.4 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (MW-40)
Initial Displacement: 0.66 ft Static Water Column Height: 38.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 38.4 ft Screen Length: 38.4 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 = 0.0001323 cm/sec y0 = 0.2857 ft
0. 12. 24. 36. 48. 60.
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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw40brlt.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:51:26
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-40
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 38.4 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (MW-40)
Initial Displacement: 0.66 ft Static Water Column Height: 38.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 38.4 ft Screen Length: 38.4 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 = 4.183E-5 cm/sec y0 = 0.05969 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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw40h.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:51:45
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-40
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 38.4 ft
WELL DATA (MW-40h)
Initial Displacement: 0.66 ft Static Water Column Height: 38.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 38.4 ft Screen Length: 38.4 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 = 0.0001263 cm/sec Ss = 0.0003357 ft-1
Kz/Kr = 0.1
0. 6. 12. 18. 24. 30.
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\MW38_39_40\SlugTests\mw40hbr.aqt
Date: 06/05/18 Time: 13:52:21
PROJECT INFORMATION
Company: HGC
Client: EFRI
Test Well: MW-40
AQUIFER DATA
Saturated Thickness: 38.4 ft Anisotropy Ratio (Kz/Kr): 0.1
WELL DATA (MW-40h)
Initial Displacement: 0.66 ft Static Water Column Height: 38.4 ft
Total Well Penetration Depth: 38.4 ft Screen Length: 38.4 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 = 0.0002077 cm/sec y0 = 0.4324 ft

APPENDIX D

SLUG TEST DATA

MW-38
minutes displ (ft)
1.67E-05 0.071
0.050017 0.349
0.100017 0.41
0.150017 0.39
0.200017 0.396
0.250017 0.383
0.300017 0.385
0.350017 0.386
0.400017 0.383
0.450017 0.387
0.500017 0.382
0.600017 0.383
0.750017 0.379
0.950017 0.369
1.200017 0.372
1.500017 0.366
1.850017 0.35
2.250017 0.346
2.700017 0.336
3.200017 0.339
3.750017 0.334
4.350017 0.321
5.000017 0.32
5.700017 0.311
6.450017 0.306
7.250017 0.297
8.100017 0.285
9.000017 0.28
9.950017 0.275
10.95002 0.26
12.00002 0.254
13.10002 0.251
14.25002 0.244
15.45002 0.246
16.70002 0.233
18.00002 0.238
19.35002 0.23
20.75002 0.221
22.20002 0.217
23.70002 0.213
25.25002 0.202
26.85002 0.2
28.50002 0.191
30.20002 0.193
31.95002 0.179
33.75002 0.182
35.60002 0.172
37.50002 0.165
39.45002 0.155
41.45002 0.152
43.50002 0.155
45.60002 0.148
47.75002 0.143
49.95002 0.133
52.20002 0.128
54.50002 0.131
56.85002 0.119
59.25002 0.114
61.70002 0.121
64.20002 0.112
66.75002 0.11
69.35002 0.108
72.00002 0.1
74.70002 0.111
77.45002 0.102
80.25002 0.097
83.10002 0.095
86.00002 0.095
88.95002 0.085
91.95002 0.082
95.00002 0.08
98.10002 0.08
101.25 0.08
104.45 0.075
107.7 0.078
111 0.072
114.35 0.071
117.75 0.07
121.2 0.066
124.7 0.063
128.25 0.061
131.85 0.06
135.5 0.059
139.2 0.057
142.95 0.054
146.75 0.063
150.6 0.054
154.5 0.047
158.45 0.046
162.45 0.045
166.5 0.043
170.6 0.047
174.75 0.046
178.95 0.05
183.2 0.044
187.5 0.043
191.85 0.046
196.25 0.043
200.7 0.042
205.2 0.043
209.75 0.041
214.35 0.045
219 0.042
223.7 0.041
228.45 0.041
233.25 0.042
238.1 0.039
243 0.039
247.95 0.036
252.95 0.038
258 0.034
263.1 0.033
268.25 0.032
273.45 0.032
278.7 0.033
284 0.037
289.35 0.035
294.75 0.036
300.2 0.034
305.7 0.036
311.25 0.034
316.85 0.033
322.5 0.035
328.2 0.034
333.95 0.036
339.75 0.035
345.6 0.034
351.5 0.032
357.45 0.031
363.45 0.029
369.5 0.029
375.6 0.026
381.75 0.028
387.95 0.029
394.2 0.023
400.5 0.024
406.85 0.024
413.25 0.017
419.7 0.019
426.2 0.02
432.75 0.016
439.35 0.015
446 0.013
452.7 0.014
459.45 0.009
466.25 0.009
473.1 0.009
480 0.009
486.95 0.01
493.95 0.012
501 0.016
508.1 0.016
515.25 0.015
522.45 0.018
529.7 0.01
537 0.009
544.35 0.008
551.75 0.004
559.2 0.004
566.7 0.005
574.25 0.008
581.85 0.01
589.5 0.007
597.2 0.007
604.95 0.003
612.75 0.003
620.6 0.001
628.5 0.001
636.45 0.003
644.45 0.002
652.5 0.002
660.6 0
668.75 -0.001
676.95 -0.003
685.2 -0.005
693.5 -0.002
701.85 -0.001
710.25 0
718.7 0
727.2 -0.006
735.75 0.005
744.35 0
753 0
761.7 0.004
770.45 0
779.25 -0.002
788.1 0.001
797 -0.003
805.95 0.002
814.95 0.007
824 0.003
833.1 0.004
842.25 0.014
851.45 0.001
860.7 0.002
870 0.004
879.35 0.002
888.75 0.005
898.2 -0.004
907.7 -0.003
917.25 0.001
926.85 0.004
936.5 0.001
946.2 -0.008
955.95 0.001
MW-38 hand-collected
minutes displ (ft)
0.216667 0.43
0.683333 0.42
1.05 0.37
1.5 0.37
2.083333 0.37
2.916667 0.37
3.633333 0.36
4.45 0.36
5 0.35
6 0.34
7 0.33
8 0.32
9 0.31
10 0.3
11 0.29
12 0.29
13 0.29
15 0.28
17 0.27
20 0.26
23 0.24
26 0.22
32 0.21
36 0.21
40 0.2
45 0.19
50 0.18
55 0.17
60 0.17
MW-39
minutes displ displ(corrected) (feet)
0 0.799 0.834
0.05 0.765 0.8
0.1 0.694 0.729
0.15 0.699 0.734
0.2 0.693 0.728
0.25 0.687 0.722
0.3 0.682 0.717
0.35 0.681 0.716
0.4 0.668 0.703
0.45 0.667 0.702
0.5 0.663 0.698
0.6 0.654 0.689
0.75 0.647 0.682
0.95 0.639 0.674
1.2 0.601 0.636
1.5 0.594 0.629
1.85 0.581 0.616
2.25 0.566 0.601
2.7 0.546 0.581
3.2 0.533 0.568
3.75 0.52 0.555
4.35 0.503 0.538
5 0.486 0.521
5.7 0.469 0.504
6.45 0.456 0.491
7.25 0.44 0.475
8.1 0.423 0.458
9 0.41 0.445
9.95 0.394 0.429
10.95 0.382 0.417
12 0.369 0.404
13.1 0.35 0.385
14.25 0.336 0.371
15.45 0.326 0.361
16.7 0.314 0.349
18 0.299 0.334
19.35 0.285 0.32
20.75 0.27 0.305
22.2 0.256 0.291
23.7 0.249 0.284
25.25 0.244 0.279
26.85 0.233 0.268
28.5 0.222 0.257
30.2 0.202 0.237
31.95 0.203 0.238
33.75 0.193 0.228
35.6 0.184 0.219
37.5 0.174 0.209
39.45 0.166 0.201
41.45 0.157 0.192
43.5 0.154 0.189
45.6 0.148 0.183
47.75 0.134 0.169
49.95 0.126 0.161
52.2 0.115 0.15
54.5 0.114 0.149
56.85 0.104 0.139
59.25 0.09 0.125
61.7 0.088 0.123
64.2 0.092 0.127
66.75 0.084 0.119
69.35 0.069 0.104
72 0.074 0.109
74.7 0.061 0.096
77.45 0.055 0.09
80.25 0.055 0.09
83.1 0.053 0.088
86 0.052 0.087
88.95 0.045 0.08
91.95 0.044 0.079
95 0.039 0.074
98.1 0.035 0.07
101.25 0.019 0.054
104.45 0.018 0.053
107.7 0.023 0.058
111 0.02 0.055
114.35 0.004 0.039
117.75 0.01 0.045
121.2 0.005 0.04
MW-39 hand-collected
minutes displ (ft)
0.17 0.7
0.25 0.69
0.35 0.64
0.68 0.54
0.97 0.51
1.45 0.5
1.82 0.49
2.30 0.48
2.67 0.48
3.42 0.46
4.00 0.44
4.73 0.42
5.50 0.4
6.00 0.39
7.00 0.38
8.00 0.36
9.00 0.35
10.00 0.34
11.00 0.33
12.00 0.31
13.00 0.3
14.00 0.29
15.00 0.29
20.00 0.24
25.00 0.2
30.00 0.17
35.00 0.14
40.00 0.12
45.00 0.11
50.00 0.1
55.00 0.09
60.00 0.08
70.00 0.07
90.00 0.04
105.00 0.04
120.00 0.03
MW-40
minutes displ (ft)
1.67E-05 0.094
0.050017 0.682
0.100017 0.629
0.150017 0.567
0.200017 0.556
0.250017 0.541
0.300017 0.524
0.350017 0.514
0.400017 0.502
0.450017 0.49
0.500017 0.481
0.600017 0.463
0.750017 0.44
0.950017 0.411
1.200017 0.38
1.500017 0.353
1.850017 0.325
2.250017 0.29
2.700017 0.267
3.200017 0.239
3.750017 0.218
4.350017 0.194
5.000017 0.171
5.700017 0.157
6.450017 0.134
7.250017 0.12
8.100017 0.11
9.000017 0.091
9.950017 0.083
10.95002 0.072
12.00002 0.065
13.10002 0.056
14.25002 0.054
15.45002 0.045
16.70002 0.038
18.00002 0.04
19.35002 0.031
20.75002 0.029
22.20002 0.031
23.70002 0.019
25.25002 0.022
26.85002 0.02
28.50002 0.017
30.20002 0.021
31.95002 0.017
33.75002 0.019
35.60002 0.013
37.50002 0.013
39.45002 0.011
41.45002 0.012
43.50002 0.01
45.60002 0.012
47.75002 0.01
49.95002 0.009
52.20002 0.008
54.50002 0.009
56.85002 0.007
59.25002 0.006
MW-40 hand-collected
minutes displ (ft)
0.333333 0.63
0.683333 0.43
1.166667 0.37
1.366667 0.35
1.866667 0.31
2.416667 0.28
2.883333 0.25
3.366667 0.23
3.766667 0.21
4.3 0.19
4.75 0.18
5.3 0.16
5.883333 0.14
6.366667 0.13
7 0.11
8 0.09
9 0.08
10 0.08
12 0.06
15 0.05
16 0.04
18 0.04
20 0.02
22 0.02
24 0.02
26 0.02
30 0.01
35 0.01
40 0.01
45 0.01
50 0.01
60 0