DRC-2013-003918 - 0901a068803f6d4d

Department of
Environmental Quality
Amanda Smith
Executive Director
State of Utah
GARY R HERBERT
Governor
DIVISION OF RADIATION CONTROL
Rusty Lundberg
Director
DRC-2013-003918 GREG BELL
Lieutenant Governor
October 8, 2013
Jo Ann S. Tischler, Director, Compliance
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
225 Union Boulevard, Suite 600
Lakewood, CO 80228
Subject: Compliance—Radioactive Material License No. UT1900479
2013 Radiation Protection Inspection, Module RADMOD-IEM-01
Dear Ms. Tischler:
This letter refers to the inspection conducted at the Energy Fuels Resources (USA) facility in Blanding, UT
on September 26 and September 27,2013 by a representative of the Division of Radiation Control (DRC),
Utah Department of Environmental Quality.
The inspection was an examination of your facilities as they relate to compliance with the Utah Radiation
Control Rules and the conditions of the Radioactive Materials License Number UT 1900479. The
inspection consisted of personnel interviews, document reviews and direct observations by the inspector.
The activities and practices reviewed during the inspection with respect to work area air monitoring and
internal and external personnel monitoring were found to be in compliance with relevant requirements.
The Inspection Report is enclosed.
As usual, your staff at the mill was cordial, cooperative, and accommodating in facilitating the inspection.
If you have any question, please contact Boyd Imai at [phone].
Sincerely,
RL/BMI:bi
Enclosure
cc/enc: David Turk, Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Blanding, UT
195 North 1950 West • Salt Lake City, UT
Mailing Address P O Box 144850 • Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4850
Telephone [phone] • Fax (801) 533^097 • T D D. [phone]
www deq utah gov
Printed on 100% recycled paper
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection Module: RADMOD-IEM-01: Internal/External Monitoring
Radioactive Material License No. UT 1900479
Inspection Location: Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Blanding, UT
Inspection Date(s): September 26,2013 to September 27,2013
Inspector: Boyd Imai, Utah Division of Radiation Control (DRC)
Personnel Contacted: Dan Hillsten, Ronnie Nieves, David Turk
Inspection Summary
The inspection was opened on September 26,2013 with a meeting with R. Nieves and D. Turk of
Energy Fuels. Kevin Carney from the DRC was also in attendance.
Areas inspected included:
• Work Area Air Monitoring
• Bioassay Program
• External Dosimetery
The inspector held a closeout meeting on September 27,2013 with D. Hillsten, R. Nieves, and
Dave Turk of Energy Fuels Resources with K. Carney of DRC to review the inspection activities,
observations, and conclusions.
No citable violations or deficiencies were observed during the inspection.
Inspection Items
Work Area A ir Monitoring
At the outset, the Licensee indicated that no production work activities were being conducted at
the time of the inspection; therefore no air sampling was being performed.
R. Nieves conducted a tour of the facility and pointed out the locations where routine high
volume air samples are drawn as specified in Table 2.1.2-1 of the Radiation Protection Manual.
The monthly sampling for September 2013 had been completed and was documented in the
monthly report.
Breathing Zone (BZ) sampling was reviewed. BZ sampling is required whenever it is specified in
the Radiation Work Permit or when air concentrations are >25% of the DAC (derived air
concentration).
Page 1 of3
U \MON_WAST\Bimai\wp\Inspections\Energy Fuel, Blanding, UT\2013VRadmod-IEM-01\InspectionReportRevO doc
Findings
The worker's identification and sampling location are indicated on the calibration sheet. BZ
filters are counted on detection equipment, e.g. Ludlum 2929 or 3030 and the results are entered
into a Breathing Zone Sampling Field Sheet along with start and stop times and flow rates. The
spread sheet compiles the data and calculates the values with respect to the applicable DAC.
R. Nieves demonstrated how the BZ pumps are calibrated. The pumps are attached to a DryCal
instrument that measures the flow rate of the pump. Three measurements are taken and an
average is computed. The Breathing Zone Pump Calibration Form is filled out which indicates
who will be wearing the sampler and the activities involved. It was later noted that the DryCal
instrument was last calibrated on 3/12/12.
The high volume air pumps were stored in the respirator maintenance shop where flow meters
are adjusted prior to use. The pumps are calibrated annually. The Licensee provided calibration
records for the four pumps inspected at the maintenance shop. All had been calibrated within the
last 12 months.
Filters with 0.8 micron pore diameter are utilized for BZ sampling and for the work area samples
filters with 1.0 micron pore diameter are used.
Bioassay Program
Urine samples are collected as prescribed by Regulatory Guide 8.22. Sampling is tracked
monthly on the Monthly Urinalysis Report. Blank, duplicate, and spike samples are analyzed for
quality control purposes.
Sample preparation area is monitored for a contamination to prevent cross contarnination of
samples.
Radiation Safety personnel submit urine samples every two weeks during production periods.
External Dosimetry
All personnel encountered during the inspection were observed wearing their Optically
Stimulated Luminescence (OSL) dosimetery. This included adrninistrative, laboratory, and
operations staff. All OSLs were being worn at chest level.
The "badge boards" located at the locker room area and in the admimstration building were
inspected. Badges not in use were clipped to the board at positions designated by employee's
name. A control dosimeter was clipped to each board.
Little can be done to ensure that dosimeters are "in the possession of each individual, in a locker
or other secure area" as required; however, the Radiation Safety staff does inventory the badge
board to ensure badges are returned to the board when not in use.. The number of total staff is
relatively small so it is known whether a dosimeter is missing. An investigation is conducted by
Radiation Safety to locate a missing dosimeter. Typically, in these instances the employee failed
to return the dosimeter tO the badge board when departing the site and it was found with the work
clothes in the locker room. This is a positive effort to confirm compliance.
Page 2 of3
U.\MON_WAST\Bimai\wp\Inspections\Energy Fuel, Blanding, UT\2013\Radmod-IEM-01\InspectionReportRevO doc f
There are currently no declared pregnant workers at the mill nor have there been any for the past
several years.
Closeout Meeting
The inspector held a closeout meeting with D. Hillsten, R. Nieves, and D. Turk of Energy Fuels
Resources (USA) on September 27,2013. Also in attendance was K. Carney of the DRC. The
observations described above were summarized during the meeting.
R. Nieves indicated that the BZ pumps are sent out for an annual calibration in addition to having
the flow rate checked before each use.
Recommendations for the Licensee
• Have the DryCal instrument calibrated and ensure that breathing zone samples obtained
during the period one year beyond the last calibration date (3/12/13 to present) are
accurately evaluated.
• Periodically verify that the Breathing Zone Sampling Field Sheet spreadsheet has not
been altered or corrupted by validating the accuracy of the formulae within the
spreadsheet.
• Update/revise the Radiation Protection Manual, Section 3.2.3 to reflect the current
method the breathing zone sampling pumps are calibrated.
Recommendations for future Inspections
• Verify that the DryCal iristrument used for calibrating the breathing zone sampling pumps
had been calibrated. Assess the "as found" status of the instrument. If the mstrument
was out of calibration in the "as found" condition assess the actions taken by the Licensee
regarding the sampling performed between calibrations. This matter was discussed with
the Licensee during the Closeout Meeting.
• Evaluate Licensee's approach to Regulatory Guide 8.25. Air Sampling in the Workplace,
Section 6.5, Annual Review of Air Sampling Measurements.
Recommendation for the DRC Director
Regarding the findings of this inspection, it is recommended that no enforcement action be taken
at this time.
Prepared By: Boyd M. Imai Q^^^^October 3,2013
(Name) ' Signature) (Date)
Page 3 of3
U \MON_WAST\Bimai\wp\Inspections\Energy Fuel, Blanding, UTA2013\Radmod-ffiM-01\InspectionReportRevO doc
Inspection Report
entt
RADMOD-IEM-01 Checklist
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection Module: RADMOD-IEM-01: Internal/External Monitoring
Radioactive Material License No. UT 1900479
Inspection Location: Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Blanding, UT
Inspection Date(s): September 26, 2013 to September 27,2013
Inspector: Boyd Imai, Utah Division of Radiation Control (DRC)
Personnel Contacted: Dan Hillsten, Ronnie Nieves, David Turk
Inspection Summary
The inspection was opened on September 26, 2013 with a meeting with R. Nieves and D. Turk of
Energy Fuels. Kevin Carney from the DRC was also in attendance.
Areas inspected included:
• Work Area Air Monitoring
• Bioassay Program
• External Dosimetery
The inspector held a closeout meeting on September 27, 2013 with D. Hillsten, R. Nieves, and
Dave Turk of Energy Fuels Resources with K. Carney of DRC to review the inspection activities,
observations, and conclusions.
Findings
No citable violations or deficiencies were observed during the inspection.
Inspection Items
Work Area Air Monitoring
At the outset, the Licensee indicated that no production work activities were being conducted at
the time of the inspection; therefore no air sampling was being performed.
R. Nieves conducted a tour of the facility and pointed out the locations where routine high
volume air samples are drawn as specified in Table 2.1.2-1 of the Radiation Protection Manual.
The monthly sampling for September 2013 had been completed and was documented in the
monthly report.
Breathing Zone (BZ) sampling was reviewed. BZ sampling is required whenever it is specified in
the Radiation Work Permit or when air concentrations are >25% of the DAC (derived air
concentration).
1 Page 1 of3
U \MON_WAST\Bimai\wp\Inspections\Energy Fuel, Blanding, UT\2013\Radmod-lEM-01\InspectionReportRev0 doc
The worker's identification and sampling location are indicated on the calibration sheet. BZ
filters are counted on detection equipment, e.g. Ludlum 2929 or 3030 and the results are entered
into a Breathing Zone Sampling Field Sheet along with start and stop times and flow rates. The
spread sheet compiles the data and calculates the values with respect to the applicable DAC.
R. Nieves demonstrated how the BZ pumps are calibrated. The pumps are attached to a DryCal
instrument that measures the flow rate of the pump. Three measurements are taken and an
average is computed. The Breathing Zone Pump Calibration Form is filled out which indicates
who will be wearing the sampler and the activities involved. It was laternoted that the DryCal
instrument was last calibrated on 3/12/12.
The high volume air pumps were stored in the respirator maintenance shop where flow meters
are adjusted prior to use. The pumps are calibrated annually. The Licensee provided calibration
records for the four pumps inspected at the maintenance shop. All had been calibrated within the
last 12 months.
Filters with 0.8 micron pore diameter are utilized for BZ sampling and for the work area samples
filters with 1.0 micron pore diameter are used.
Bioassay Program
Urine samples are collected as prescribed by Regulatory Guide 8.22. Sampling is tracked
monthly on the Monthly Urinalysis Report. Blank, duplicate, and spike samples are analyzed for
quality control purposes.
Sample preparation area is monitored for a contamination to prevent cross contamination of
samples.
Radiation Safety personnel submit urine samples every two weeks during production periods.
External Dosimetry
All personnel encountered during the inspection were observed wearing their Optically
Stimulated Luminescence (OSL) dosimetery. This included administrative, laboratory, and
operations staff. All OSLs were being worn at chest level.
The "badge boards" located at the locker room area and in the administration building were
inspected. Badges not in use were clipped to the board at positions designated by employee's
name. A control dosimeter was clipped to each board.
Little can be done to ensure that dosimeters are "in the possession of each individual, in a locker
or other secure area" as required; however, the Radiation Safety staff does inventory the badge
board to ensure badges are returned to the board when not in use. The number of total staff is
relatively small so it is known whether a dosimeter is missing. An investigation is conducted by
Radiation Safety to locate a missing dosimeter. Typically, in these instances the employee failed
to return the dosimeter to the badge board when departing the site and it was found with the work
, clothes in the locker room. This is a positive effort to confirm compliance.
Page 2 of3
U \MON_WAST\Bimai\wp\Inspections\Energy Fuel, Blanding, UT\2013\Radmod-IEM-01\InspectionReportRevO doc
There are currently no declared pregnant workers at the mill nor have there been any for the past
several years.
Closeout Meeting
The inspector held a closeout meeting with D. Hillsten, R. Nieves, and D. Turk of Energy Fuels
Resources (USA) on September 27, 2013. Also in attendance was K. Carney of the DRC. The
observations described above were summarized during the meeting.
R. Nieves indicated that the BZ pumps are sent out for an annual calibration in addition to having
the flow rate checked before each use.
Recommendations for the Licensee
• Have the DryCal instrument calibrated and ensure that breathing zone samples obtained
during the period one year beyond the last calibration date (3/12/13 to present) are
accurately evaluated.
• Periodically verify that the Breathing Zone Sampling Field Sheet spreadsheet has not
been altered or corrupted by validating the accuracy of the formulae within the
spreadsheet.
• Update/revise the Radiation Protection Manual, Section 3.2.3 to reflect the current
method the breathing zone sampling pumps are calibrated.
Recommendations for future Inspections 7
• Verify that the DryCal instrument used for calibrating the breathing zone sampling pumps
had been calibrated. Assess the "as found" status of the instrument. If the instrument
was out of calibration in the "as found" condition assess the actions taken by the Licensee
regarding the sampling performed between calibrations. This matter was discussed with
the Licensee during the Closeout Meeting.
• Evaluate Licensee's approach to Regulatory Guide 8.25. Air Sampling in the Workplace,
Section 6.5, Annual Review of Air Sampling Measurements.
Recommendation for the DRC Director
Regarding the findings of this inspection, it is recommended that no enforcement action be taken
at this time.
Prepared By: Boyd M. Imai />H#^<^f \MJ^ October 3, 2013
(Name) C(Signature) (Date)
Page 3 of3
U \MON_WAST\Bimai\vvp\Inspections\Energy Fuel, Blanding, UT\2013\Radmod-IEM-01\InspectionReportRevO doc
UTAH DIVISION OF RADIATION CONTROL
RADIATION PROTECTION INSPECTION MODULE
RADMOD-IEM-01
INTERNAL/EXTERNAL MONITORING
DENISON MINES - WHITE MESA URANIUM MILL
RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL LICENSE UT1900479
Inspector(s): J&Jj^3^ Date(s): - ?A//A3
References:
• Radioactive Material License UT 1900479
• License Renewal Application dated February 28, 2007
• Radiation Protection Manual, Section 5
• 10CFR20
• NRC Regulatory Guide 8.13
• NRC Regulatory Guide 8.22
• Utah Administrative Code R313-12-3
• Utah Administrative Code R313 -15.
AIR SAMPLING
Radiation Protection Manual, Section 1.1.2, Breathing Zone Sampling, Section 1.1.2.2, Applicability:
Breathing zone samples are required:
for all calciner maintenance activities,
at least quarterly during routine operating and maintenance tasks on
representative individuals performing these tasks,
when radiation work permits are issued in which airborne
concentrations may exceed 25% of 10CFR20 limits,
weekly for yellow cake operations, or
at the discretion of the RSO.
1) Are BZ air samples being taken:
for all calciner maintenance activities?
at least quarterly during routine operating and maintenance tasks
on representative individuals performing these tasks?
when radiation work permits are issued in which airborne
concentrations may exceed 25% of 10CFR20 limits?
weekly for yellowcake operation?,
at the discretion ofthe RSO?
Yes IS NoQ
YesH NoD
YesCS NoQ
Yesgl NoD
Yes[S NoD
Comments:
Page 1 of 11
2) Section 1.1.2.3 is the procedure for BZ sampling. Is this procedure being followed?
YesD NoD
Comments: r5?- sa>*^£*wo^ JL«v»a- AJU^C>«^ i^^Lgc^"t»w
3) Section 1.1.2.6 lists the Data Records that are to be kept. Are they being kept?
YesD NoQ
Comments: J, M^. — ru^-l,t^^
1 t^tftldw^L* ^*&H^_ XC>4 -
t)>k / Settle. 4 - fSf-c^U^ 5**>-ft^~^ f y«^J.
5»*up/<. £<VCLW\ - ^ j ^ '
4) Section 1.1.2.7 shows the calculations to be used. Are these calculations being used?
Yes]Z] NoD
Are they being used correctly?
Yes [3 NoD
Comments: ^ syr*-»* sv*«j^
Radiation Protection Manual, Section 1.1.2.4, Calibration
3.2 PERSONNEL AIR SAMPLERS
The calibration procedure for personnel air samplers involves primary and secondary calibration procedures
Samplers will be calibrated prior to each use by either of two methodologies bubble tube or mass flow
determinations Air samplers may be calibrated to standard air conditions.
3.2.1 Bubble Tube Calibration Method — U^h^
3.2.3 Electronic Calibration Method
5) Are calibrations for BZ air samplers being performed and documented prior to each use?
YesNoD
Comments:
Page 2 of 11
6) For BZ air samples being taken, are calibrations for BZ air samplers being performed and documented in
accordance with Section 3.2.1 or 3.2.3 of the Radiation Protection Manual?
YesQ NoQ
Comments: /Waf |*A.~fo
7) Observe a BZ being calibrated. Which procedure was used and was it done correctly?
Procedure: 3. ^. 3 Yes • NoD
Comments: ?<scxu>^ £ ^W-/" ordo ^XMS* 4U u^fe«.u.a
1 ^ j-^fle^
5 v>*°
8) Is the RSO reviewing results that exceed 2j0% of 10FR20 limits? (Section 1.1.2.8)
Yesjg] NoD
Comments:
Radiation Protection Manual, Section 1.1.3.1, Frequency and Locations
The following principles usedfor the collection of area grab samples must be considered when collecting a
sample in order to obtain a representative concentration that workers may be exposed to during their
assigned work tasks.
1. The locations selected for sampling should be representative of exposures to employees working in the
area.
2. For special air sampling, the sampling period should represent the conditions during the entire period of
exposure. This may involve sampling during the entire exposure period.
3. For routine sampling, the sampling period must be sufficient to ensure a minimum flow rate of 40 liters per
minute for at least 60 minutes.
4. Sample filters will be analyzed for gross alpha using a sensitive alpha detector.
5. Grab sampling procedures may be supplemented by use of Breathing Zone Samples for special jobs or
non-routine situations.
Page 3 of 11
9) Are area grab samples obtained in areas representative of workers exposure? (During the Mill tour Have
the HP Staff show where the air samples are being taken.)
YesJS NoQ
Comments: *R-> Mlg-0*S j*rJl*JC^4*-^ t^fc-wn^ cM^w^
10) For routine sampling, did the licensee sample at a minimum flow rate of 40 liters per minute for at least
60 minutes?
Yes [ST No •
Comments:
11) Were air sample filters analyzed for gross alpha using a sensitive alpha detector? *
Yes(S NoD
Comments: 2-?Z-7 -C^5<a^^ t z
Table 1.1.1-1 for areas where the ALI <.01 and the DAC is <0.01 it state, "Air sampling is generally not
necessary. However monthly or quarterly grab samples or some other measurement may be appropriate
to confirm that airborne levels are indeed low. "
12) Are periodical grab samples taken on a Monthly or Quarterly frequency to confirm that airborne
radioactivity remain below ALI <.01 and the DAC is <0.01 values?
YesgJ NoD
Comments: , '
Page 4 of 11
RML License Condition 11.4
Annually, the licensee shall collect, during mill operations, a set of air samples covering eight hours of
sampling, at a high collection flow rate (i.e., greater than or equal to 40 liters per minute), in routinely or
frequently occupied areas of the mill. These samples shall be analyzed for gross alpha. In addition, with
each change in mill feed material or at least annually, the licensee shall analyze the mill feed or
production product for U-nat, Th-230, Ra-226, and Pb-210 and use the analysis results to assess the
fundamental constituent composition of air sample particulates.
13) Did the licensee perform high volume alpha air sampling in routinely or frequently occupied areas of the
mill in accordance with L.C. 11.4?
Yesg| NoD
Comments: P^^K^-A fl*^ Z*)3 " fXx»v<fcjLt cXjreq AtrWhj QA(Q0_
14) Did the air samples cover eight hours of sampling, at a high collection flow rate (i.e., greater than or equal
to 40 liters per minute)?
YesH NoD
Comments: 4gC> Kcu^. °fc> j_
15) With each change in mill feed material or at least annually, did the licensee analyze the mill feed or
production product for U-nat, Th-230, Ra-226, and Pb-210 and use the analysis results to assess the
fundamental constituent composition of air sample particulates?
Yes^Sl NoD
Comments: pyw^M^fr ,00 <jL^2J2vAr~cW<je- ^/uucO^t* <u^^tSe^NLi gteKayJ?
Page 5 of 11
Radiation Protection Manual, Section 1.1.3.2 Sampling Equipment
Monitoring equipment will be capable of obtaining an air sample flow rate of at least 40 liters per minute for
one hour or longer. Equipment utilized will be an Eberline RAS-1, or a Scientific Industries Model H25004,
or equivalent. Filter media will have a maximum of 0.8 micron pore diameter. Equipment is calibrated prior
to each usage as per Section 6, [3] (typo), of this manual.
16) Are calibrations for area air samplers being performed and documented prior to usage?
YesQ NoQ
Comments:
17) Is the licensee using air sample filters that have a maximum c^QrS'micron pore diameter?
YesQ NoD
Comments:
/MAS;
18) Are calibrations for area samplers being performed and documented in accordance with Section 3.3 of this
Manual?
YesQ NoD
Comments: A-b^u^r J^ij^jr- y^jjjfcsuy' - r a.li^^fc^j) *3***Ui»Q-&*/f
19) Has the licensee provided proper documentation of the results of calibration for the following air sampling
equipment?
Air Sampler ^S/N /Q?</5 g/W* Yes g] NoD
Air Sampler ^S/N Ttt S r/'f//3 Yes H No •
Air Sampler ^ S/N ^ * rt-({£Jd ?//r/Yes § NoD
Air Sampler • S/N 11 0H\ tftrfq Yes H No •
Comments:
Page 6 of 11
20) Section 2.1.2 Frequency/Locations
Has the Licensee performed monthly uranium dust monitoring in the following areas? (Table 2.1.2-1)
Airborne Radiation Sample Locations S^V* 2^o>
BA1 Ore Scalehouse Yes E No D BA17 Change Room Yes E No •
BA2 Ore Storage Yes g] No • BA18 Administrative Building Yes a Nop
BA7 SAG Mill Area Yes E No • BA19 Warehouse Yes 3 NoD
BA8 Leach Tank Area / Yes B No D BA20 Maintenance Shop • Yes [El NoD
BA9 Wash Circ CCD Thickness / Yes E No D BA21 Boiler Yes E No D
BA10 Sol Ex Bldg/Stripping tf&s' Yes S No D BA22 Vanadium Panel Y Yes
Sol Ex Bldg/Stripping Ro'orm/ Yes B No D Vanadium Dryer ^<
Kj NoD
BA11 BA22A Yes a Nop
BA12 YC Precip/W Storage Area / Yes M No D BA23 Filter Belt/Rotary Dryer Yes ENOD
BA12A No. YC Dryer Enclosure • Yes E No D BA24 Tails Yes HNOD
BA12B So. YC Dryer Enclosure f' Yes [X] No D BA25 Central Control Room ^ Yes HNOD
BA13 YC Drying/Packaging Arear"^ Yes E No D BA26 Shifter's Office Yes E No D
BA13A YC, Packaging Enclosure s' Yes E No D BA27 Operator's Lunch Room Yes S] NoD
BAH Packaged YC Storage Roomvx Yes E No D BA28 Dump Station Yes K|NoD
BA15 Met Lab Sample Room Yes gl NoD BA29 Fitter Press Yesjcl No r~|
BA16 Lunch Room Area Yes E No D BA30 Truck Shop Yes g| No D
Comments: t> AZ^- e^Jr — ft & ^ S-
3»
3^
Yes 'yes
1X9 A torf AU^Ufia<f ^
U retention class Y: 2E-lluCi/ml Footnote 3 (for 10CFR20 Table 1 of Appendix B DAC values for
Z3*U):
If a mixture of radionuclides consists of uranium and its daughters in ore dust (10 tim AMAD particle
distribution assumed) prior to chemical separation of the uranium from the ore, the following values may be
used for the DAC of the mixture: 6E-lljuCi of gross alpha activity from uranium-238, uranium-234, thorium-
230, and radium-226 per milliliter of air; 3E-lljuCi of natural uranium per milliliter of air. or 45 micrograms
of natural uranium per cubic meter of air.
21) Where any of the air sample results from the above areas found to be in excess of the DAC values listed in
10CFR20 Table 1 of Appendix B?
YesD Nog
Areas Identified S*f^W *
Area DAC Value Area DAC Value Area DAC Value
Comments:
Page 7 of 11
Utah Rules R313-12-3. Definitions
"Airborne radioactivity area" means: a room, enclosure, or area in which airborne radioactive material
exists in concentrations:
(a) In excess ofthe derived air concentrations (DACs), specified in Rule R313-I5, or
(b) To such a degree that an individual present in the area without respiratory protective equipment could
exceed, during the hours an individual is present in a week, an intake of 0.6 percent of the annual limit on
intake (ALI), or 12 DAC hours. ^
Utah Rules R313-15-902. Posting Requirements
(4) Posting of Airborne Radioactivity Areas. The licensee or registrant shall post each airborne radioactivity
area with a conspicuous sign or signs bearing the radiation symbol and the words "CA UTION, AIRBORNE
RADIOACTIVITY AREA" or "DANGER, AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVITY AREA."
IK
22) If yes to yf, were the areas found to be in excess of the DAC values listed in 10CFR20 Table 1 of
Appendix B properly posted?
BIO ASSAY PROGRAM
Radiation Protection Manual, Section 1.4:1 Frequency
Urinalysis will be performed on those employees that are a) exposed to airborne yellowcake or involved in
maintenance tasks during which yellowcake dust may be produced, or b) routinely exposed to airborne
uranium ore dust. Baseline urinalysis will be performed prior to initial work assignments
Urine samples are collected on a routine basis from mill employees as required in Regulatory Guide 8.22.
Urine samples will be collected from employees who have worked in yellowcake packaging, yellowcake
precipitation, grind area (SAG Mill), ore feed, sample plant, scale house, and the sample preparation
room every two weeks during production periods. Samples will be collected from all other employees
monthly during production periods. During non-production periods, bi-weekly samples will be collected if
individual exposures are expected to exceed 25% of the DAC value otherwise samples will be collected
from all employees quarterly. Non-routine urinalysis will usually be performed on employees who have
been working on assignments that require a Radiation Work Permit, and always on any individual that
may have been exposed to airborne uranium or ore dust concentrations that exceed 25% of the DAC level.
23) Are urine samples being collected from workers who are working under an RWP?
^re- < {NAT *fl^o^
Yes
Comments:
Page 8 of 11
24) Are bi-weekly urine samples being collected from workers in the following areas during production?
^Yellowcake Packaging Yes No O
</Yeliowcake Precipitation Yes 0 NoQ
Grind Area (SAG Mill)\_ ' Yes • No • tf* \ s^^\
Ore Feed- ^ , Yes • No • fit*
Sample Plant ^ — ?=^K w Yes-H-Ne-B" N A
/Scale House Yes Q NoD
Sample Prep Room ^ W*,U>"--\ r^^^ Yes 0 No Q
Comments:
25) During production periods, are monthly urine samples being collected from all employees working in
areas other than those listed above?
Yes0 NoD
Comments:
26) Are urine samples being collected from Radiation Safety Personnel every two weeks during production
periods? (Radiation Safety Personnel routinely work in areas listed in #21 above).
Comments: "T^VAS ^(^WtU - >r^ - 3 < Sy/ U
Section 1.4.3 Sample Preparation
Sample preparation will be done in an area decontaminated to less than 25 dpm alpha (removable) per 100
cm2 prior to preparation of samples. All of the equipment that is used in sample preparation will be clean and
maintained in such condition. **/' f /' *-
27) Are the sample preparation area contamination levels maintained below 25dpm/100cm2 a (removable)?
Yes [gf NoD
Comments: \jOr\^^ 5^n^ ^y^-S
Page 9 of 11
EXTERNAL MONITORING
28) Section 1.3 Beta-Gamma Surveys
Were all observed personnel wearing a personal monitoring badge while in the Restricted Area?
Yesjg] NoD
Comments: Z-^Wr 2- 4°^^ ^rf^ p^ftA^Avinf \
Section 1.3.1 Monitoring Procedures
77ze monitoring procedures consist of:
1. Personnel issued personal monitoring devices will wear the device on the trunk (torso) of the body or
visibly on the exterior of their hard hat. The personal monitoring device records beta/gamma radiation as
well as other forms ofpenetrating radiation such as x-rays. A personal monitoring device is an exposure
record of an individual's personal exposure to radiation while on the job. Therefore, personal monitoring
devices are to remain at the Mill in the personal possession of each individual, in a locker or other secure
area. All exposure records obtained by a personal monitoring device which are not consistent with the
exposure rates of work tasks or work location measurements made throughout the Mill will be evaluated by
the RSO. This evaluation will result in an investigation by the RSO and a written explanation of the findings.
These written records will be maintained at the Mill.
2. Personal monitoring devices will be issued at a minimum quarterly and will be exchanged by the
Radiation Safety Department. Missing or lost badges will be reported to management.
3. Female employees that become pregnant and continue to work during the course of their pregnancy will be
placed on a monthly personal monitoring device exchange during this period. NRC Regulatory Guide 8.13
provides guidelines to be followed during pregnancy and is made part of this procedure.
29) Under routine conditions, were observed employees wearing monitoring badges properly on the torso?
Yes^l NoD
Comments: ^) ^b^ylj
Page 10 of 1!
30) Has the licensee assured that personal monitoring devices are being kept at the Mill in the possession of
the individual, in a locker or in another secure area?
Yesjgl NoD
Comments:
31) Check the dosimeter boards in the locker rooms^vmaintcnancc building and administration building. Are
the badges properly stored?
YesB NoD
Comments: &vlv^ Ji&s^^J^cs ^res^J
32) Have any female workers declared their pregnancy in the past 2 years?
YesD Noja
Comments:
33) If yes to 31 above, has the declared pregnant worker been placed on a monthly personal monitoring device
exchange during this period?
Yes • No • N/A g
Comments:
Follow-up
34) AltematelbedLfJheck to see where all of the alternate feed material is b$
pad area then wherelsTt-andhow is it being stored?
Eofed If it is not in the ore
Comments:
Supporting Documentation
BREATHING ZONE PUMP CAUBRAT10N FORM
DATE -Hit
CALIBRATE AT 4 LITERS PER MINUTE
READING lA^61
READING 2. Mt>W5
READING 3.JDVM_
AVERAGE MO^M
TEMPERATURE
PURPOSE OF BREATHING ZONE "fo CfrltWftT^^/$fA**^^l^
RAQIATIQN/SAFETY TECHNICIAN RoA^-a .
NAME OF EMPLOYEE WEARING SAMPLE r\g<Ak. LA\-W
COMMENTS Ac
AattfialEiaSBoaSnulBU
Wee*, lit877-477-0711 • Billings, MT BQ0-739-44B9 • Casper, WY 888-235-1515
KBrthtWf KM88-71T5* Rapid CH&SDMB-B7M225 • College Station, TX88M8M211
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT
Prepared by Casper, WY Branch
Client: Denison Mines USA Corp
Project: AF Composite
Lab ID: C12030336-001
Client Sample ID: KF Material
Report Date: 04/16/12
Collection Date: 03/06/1213:30
DateReceived: 03/08/12
Matrix: Solid
Analyses Result Units Qualifier RL
MCU
QCL Method Analysis Date / By
METALS-TOTAL
•'Uranium 7010 mg/kg-dry 1.0 SW6020 03/13/12 15:29/smm
RADIONUCLIDES
Lead 210
Lead 210 precision (±)
Lead 210 MDC
t/Radium 226
Radium 226 precision (±)
Radium 226 MDC
•Thorium 230
Thorium 230 precision (±)
Thorium 230 MDC
Thorium 232
Thorium 232 precision (±)
Thorium 232 MDC
0.6
0.1
0.2
0.6
0.05
0 02
53
29
3.0
0.9
1.6
2.8
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
pCi/g-dry
E909.0
E909.0
E909.0
E903.0
E903.0
E903.0
E908.0
E908.0
E908.0
E908.0
E908.0
E908 0
03/26/12
03/26/12
03/26/12
03/27/12
03/27/12
03/27/12
03/22/12
03/22/12
03/22/12
03/22/12
03/22/12
03/22/12
02:24 / eh-cs
02.24 / eli-cs
02:24/eh-cs
01:34/lbb
01:34 / Ibb
01 -34 / Ibb
08:41 /dmf
08:41 / dmf
08:41 / dmf
08:41 / dmf
08:41 / dmf
08.41 / dmf
Report
Definitions:
RL - Analyte reporting limit.
QCL - Quality control limit.
MDC - Minimum detectable concentration
MCL - Maximum contaminant level.
ND - Not detected at the reporting limit.
U - Not detected at minimum detectable concentration
Page 3 of 9
Sample #
2233
2234
2235
2236
2237
2238
2239
2240
2241
2242
2243
2244
2245
2246
2247
2248
2249
2250
2251
2252
2253
2254
2255
2256
2257
2258
2259
2260
2261
2262
Employee Name
Chad Haycock
Wade Hancock
Cortney Montella
Thayne Holt
Jeremy Jones
Chad Perkins
Albert Bylilly
Kenneth Jones
Nick Whitehorse
Christine Jones
Spike
Blank
Duplicate of 2233
Abel Jr.
Wayne Palmer
David Lyman
Spike
Travis Plott
Darin Laws
Milton Pipkin
Tyrone Little
Chad Little
Noah Imel
Arden Nielson
Milfred Maryboy
Mathew Benally
Ken Brown
Spike
Blank
Duplicate of 2258
Location
MONTHLY URINALYSIS REPORT
MONTH: September 2013
Date To Lab From Lab Spike Comments
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Spike
Blank
DUP
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Spike
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
Spike
Blank
DUP
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/4/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
11
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
10
<5
11
<5
<5
<5
21
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
30
<5
<5
10
20
30
100%
105%
100%
Sample # Employee Name Location
MONTHLY URINALYSIS REPORT
MONTH: September 2013
Date To Lab From Lab Spike Comments
2263 Clarence Yellow Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2264 Shawn Begaye Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2265 Tremayne Cowboy Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2266 David Beaver Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2267 Ramone Hatalie Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2268 David Lacy Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2269 Scot Christensen Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2270 Karson Lacy Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2271 Dustin Reed Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2272 Sterling Jones Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2273 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 10 10 100%
2274 Blank Blank 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2275 Duplicate of 2271 DUP 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2276 Marvin Charley Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2277 Ryan Young Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2278 Stephone Benally Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2279 Ted Black Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 10
2280 Henry Neal Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2281 Terry Slade Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2282 Jerome Benally Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2283 Deanna Walker Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2284 Ronnie Nieves Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2285 Roy Atcitty Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2286 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 18 20 90%
2287 Blank Blank 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2288 Duplicate of 2276 DUP 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2289 Bobby Deny Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2290
2291
2292
Herbert Stanley
David Turk
Casey Singer
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
9/5/2013
<5
<5
<5
Sample # Employee Name Location
MONTHLY URINALYSIS REPORT
MONTH: September 2013
Date To Lab From Lab Spike Comments
2293 Heath Latham Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2294 David Carr Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2295 Hersheal Bennett Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2296 Reeves Sandoval Monthly 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2297 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 28 30 93%
2298 Blank Blank 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2299 Duplicate of 2289 DUP 9/3/2013 9/5/2013 <5
2300 Blake Burtenshaw Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2301 Philbert Simpson Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2302 Wilson Zohonnie Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2303 Frank Warren Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2304 Clifford Kaye Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2305 Nathan Frisbie Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2306 Verdale Boy Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2307 Truitt Oshely Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2308 Roy Romero Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2309 Sheridan Jones Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2310 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 10 80%
2311 Blank Blank 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2312 Duplicate of 2301 DUP 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2313 Derick Palmer Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2314 Tayton Arthur Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2315 Tranner Sharpe Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2316 Chad Haycock Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2317 Collin Warner Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2318 Justin Perkins Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2319 Chuck Dayish Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2320 Tully Lameman Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2321 Theo Holiday Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2322 Johnson Benally Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
Sample # Employee Name Location
MONTHLY URINALYSIS REPORT
MONTH: September 2013
Date To Lab From Lab Spike Comments
2323 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 18 20 90%
2324 Blank Blank 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2325 Duplicate of 2319 DUP 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2326 Garrin Palmer Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2327 Stan Jones Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2328 Tanner Holiday Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2329 Deswood West Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2330 Steven Helquist Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2331 Steve Snyder Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2332 Kyle Holiday Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2333 Jaymes Benally Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2334 Josh Taylor Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2335 Travis Oneil Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2336 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 28 30 93%
2337 Blank Blank 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2338 Duplicate of 2332 DUP 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2339 Tad Kreth Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 11
2340 Terry John Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2341 Ben dinger Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2342 Ty Bitsinnie Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2343 Shawn Keith Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2344 Gerald Joe Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2345 Billy Mendoza Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2346 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 10 90%
2347 Blank Blank 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2348 Duplicate of 2342 DUP 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2349 Tyler Bunting Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2350
2351
2352
Logan Shumway
Leron Atcitty
Lyman Cosby
Monthly
Monthly
Monthly
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/6/2013
9/6/2013
9/6/2013
<5
<5
<5
Sample # Employee Name Location
MONTHLY URINALYSIS REPORT
MONTH: September 2013
Date To Lab From Lab Spike Comments
2353 Tyrone Blackhorse Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2354 Michelle Graf Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2355 Launa Armstrong Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2356 Abel Mendoza Sr. Monthly 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2357 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 16 20 80%
2358 Blank Blank 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2359 Duplicate of 2352 DUP 9/3/2013 9/6/2013 <5
2360 Tenaya Begaye Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2361 Zack Lameman Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2362 Salvador Cerros Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2363 Rachele Burtenshaw Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2364 Michael James Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2365 Jamie Laws Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2366 Kevin Nez Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2367 Paul Kemner Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2368 Randy Hatalie Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2369 Wesley Simpson Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2370 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 29 30 96%
2371 Blank Blank 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2372 Duplicate of 2366 DUP 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2373 Dan Hillsten Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2374 Kenneth Roberts Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2375 Amanda Bailey Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2376 Jeremy D Jones Monthly 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 <5
2377 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/9/2013 19 20 95%
2378 Phillip Rentz Monthly 9/3/2013 9/10/2013 <5
2379 Pernell Tsosie Monthly 9/3/2013 9/10/2013 <5
2380 Aaron Taylor Monthly 9/3/2013 9/10/2013 <5
2381
2382
Matt Atwood
Spike
Monthly
Spike
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/10/2013
9/10/2013
<5
10 90%
Sample # Employee Name Location
MONTHLY URINALYSIS REPORT
MONTH: September 2013
Date To Lab From Lab Spike Comments
2383 Jolly Bayles Monthly 9/3/2013 9/10/2013 <5
2384 Thomas Morris Monthly 9/3/2013 9/10/2013 <5
2385 Spike Spike 9/3/2013 9/10/2013 30 30 100%
2386
2387
2388
Tisdale Oshley
Roydale Paul
Spike
Monthly
Monthly
Spike
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/3/2013
9/11/2013
9/11/2013
9/11/2013
<5
<5
22 20 110%
Sample # Employee Name Location
MONTHLY URINALYSIS REPORT
MONTH: September 2013
Date To Lab From Lab Spike Comments
2389 Ted Black EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2390 Jolly Bayles EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2391 Philbert Simpson EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2392 Timothy Morris EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2393 Pernell Tsosie EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2394 Tranner Sharpe EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 16
2395 Chad Haycock EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2396 Kyle Holiday EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2397 Tisdale Osheley EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2398 Wesley Simpson EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2399 Spike Spike 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 10 80%
2400 Blank Blank 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2401 Duplicate of 2394 DUP 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 15
2402 Paul Kemner Bi-Monthly 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2403 Clifford Kaye Bi-Monthly 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2404 Kenneth Roberts EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2405 Salvador Cerros EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2406 Ty Bitsinnie EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2407 Tayton Arthur EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2408 Roydale Paul EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2409 Derick Palmer EXIT 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2410 Gerald Joe Bi-Monthly 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2411 Arden Nielson Bi-Monthly 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2412 Spike Spike 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 17 20 85%
2413 Blank Blank 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2414 Duplicate of 2407 DUP 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2415 Nathan Frisbie Bi-Monthly 9/16/2013 9/18/2013 <5
2416 Chad Little EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2417
2418
Milton Pipkin
Roy Romero
EXIT
EXIT
9/16/2013
9/16/2013
9/20/2013
9/20/2013
<5
<5
Sample # Employee Name Location
MONTHLY URINALYSIS REPORT
MONTH: September 2013
Date To Lab From Lab Spike Comments
2419 Tremayne Cowboy EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2420 Mathew Benally EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2421 Zack Lameman EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2422 Kenneth Roberts EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2423 Theo Holiday EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2424 Sheridan Jones EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2425 Reeves Sandoval EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2426 Spike Spike 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 27 30 90%
2427 Blank Blank 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2428 Duplicate of 2421 DUP 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2429 Albert By I illy EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2430 Ramone Hatalie EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2431 Sterling Jones EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2432 Herbert Stanley EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2433 Ty Bitsinnie EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2434 Cortney Montella Bi-Monthly 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2435 Jeremy D Jones EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2436 Shawn Keith EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2437 Tommy Morris EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2438 Deswood West EXIT 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2439 Spike Spike 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 10 10 100%
2440 Blank Blank 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2441 Duplicate of 2435 DUP 9/16/2013 9/20/2013 <5
2442
2443
2444
2445
2446
2447
2448
Stephone Benally
Kyle Holiday
Spike
David Lacy
Casey Singer
Chuck Dayish
Kevin Nez
EXIT
EXIT
Spike
Bi-Monthly
Bi-Monthly
Bi-Monthly
Bi-Monthly
9/16/2013
9/16/2013
9/16/2013
9/16/2013
9/16/2013
9/16/2013
9/16/2013
9/20/2013
9/20/2013
9/20/2013
9/23/2013
9/23/2013
9/23/2013
9/23/2013
<5
<5
18
<5
<5
<5
<5
20 90%
Sample # Employee Name Location
MONTHLY URINALYSIS REPORT
MONTH: September 2013
Date To Lab From Lab Spike Comments
2449 Milfred Mayrboy Bi-monthly 9/16/2013 9/23/2013 <5
2450 Bobby Deny Bi-monthly 9/16/2013 9/23/2013 <5
2451 Travis O'neil Bi-monthly 9/16/2013 9/23/2013 <5
2452 Spike Spike 9/16/2013 9/23/2013 32 30 106%
2453 Blank Blank 9/16/2013 9/23/2013 <5
2454 Duplicate of 2450 DUP 9/16/2013 9/23/2013 <5