DRC-2010-002642 - 0901a06880176acc

^^c-.^m-^^^^'^l^
DENISON^i
MINES
Denison Mhws (USA) Corp.
109017th Stfset, Suite 950
Oenvvr, CO 80265
USA
Tel: [phone]
Fax:[phone]
www.denisonminas.com
March 26, 2010
VIA PDF AND FEDERAL EXPRESS
Mr. Dane L. Finerfrock
Executive Secretary
Utah Radiation Control Board
State ofUtah Department of Environmental Quality
168 North 1950 West
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4850
Re: White Mesa Uranium MiU; Radioactive Materials License No. UT1900479 - Safety
and Environmental Review Panel ("SERP**) 2009 Annual Report
Dear Mr. Finerfrock:
Enclosed please fmd the 2009 Annual SERP Report for the White Mesa Mill, which is being
submitted in compliance with condition 9.4 C of State of Utah Radioactive Materials License
No. UT 1900479 (the "License").
Ifyou have any questions or require any further information, please contact the undersigned.
Yours truly,
Jo Ann Tischler
Director, Compliance and Permitting
cc: David C. Frydenlund
Ron F. Hochstein
Harold R. Roberts
David E. Turk
WHITE MESA MILL
SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PANEL (SERP)
2009 ANNUAL REPORT
March 26, 2010
Submitted to the Utah Department of Environmental Quality
Division of Radiation Control
Submitted by:
White Mesa Uranium Mill
LicenseNo. UTI 900479
1. INTRODUCTION
This report is being submitted by Denison Mines (USA) Corp. ("DUSA"), licensee of the White
Mesa Uranium Mill (the "Mill") to the Utah Division of Radiation Control ("DRC") in
compliance with condition 9.4 C of State of Utah Radioactive Materials License No. UT
1900479 (the "License").
There were four Safety and Environmental Review Panel ("SERP") evaluations conducted for
the period of January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009. Each SERP evaluation and review
was conducted in accordance with SERP procedures set forth in the Mill's Standard Operating
Procedure PBL-1, Rev. No. R-4 (the "SERP SOP"). The evaluations are summarized below in
Section 2.
2. SUMMARY OF EVALUATIONS
This section describes the changes, tests or experiments evaluated by the SERP pursuant to
License condition 9.4, and summarizes the evaluations performed and actions taken by the SERP
relative to each.
In each case, the SERP consisted of those individuals specified in License condition 9.4 C, with
additional members included as appropriate, to address technical aspects.
The SERP followed the SERP SOP as it performed its evaluations, to ensure that the actions
taken satisfy the following 3 conditions specified in License condition 9.4 B:
a) The change, test or experiment does not conflict with any requirement specifically stated
in the License, or impair the licensee's ability to meet all applicable regulations.
b) There is no degradation in the essential safety or environmental commitments in the
License application or provided by the approved reclamation plan.
c) The change, test or experiment is consistent with the conclusions of actions analyzed and
selected in the Environmental Assessment dated February 1997 (the "1997
Environmental Assessment).
2.1. SERP Report No. 2009-01 June 12, 2009 Construction and Use of New Alternate
Feed Circuit
2.1.1. Proposed Action
Review and approve the changes in the facility or process resulting from the
construction and use ofthe new altemate feed circuit at the Mill.
2.1.2. Description of Change. Tests or Experiments
Historically, the Mill has processed altemate feed materials utilizing existing Mill equipment and
facilities. However:
• In most cases, the portions of the existing Mill circuit used for altemate feed processing
could not simultaneously be used for conventional ore processing, thereby resulting in
altemate feed processing displacing conventional ore processing; and
• Cleaning up the process circuits between different altemate feed processing mns and
prior to subsequent conventional ore processing runs can be costly and time-consuming.
In order to eliminate these two issues, the Mill constructed a new altemate feed circuit (the
"Circuit"), that could be run simultaneously and independently from a number of the
conventional ore processing circuits. The solvent exfraction, precipitation, drying and packaging
stages, however, would continue to be performed with existing facilities.
2.1.3. Safetv and Environmental Evaluation ofthis SERP Action
In making their determination, the SERP reviewed the following information and considered the
following issues.
The SERP reviewed the UF4 Circuit General Arrangement Plan, other engineering plans and
drawings describing the circuit layout and operation, and a summary of the design feattires
prepared for the SERP by the Mill engineer.
The SERP evaluated:
• the implications of new emission points for air emissions, the maimer of protection
against spills to soil and groundwater;
• whether new chemical storage tanks or facilities meet industry and EPA standards for
spill containment;
• The marmer in which process streams are connected to existing process facilities.
• instrumentation and process controls;
• fire protection systems;
• safety systems and equipment; and
• radiation safety features.
The SERP concluded that:
a) The Change involves the construction and operation of a new altemate feed circuit that
is parallel to the existing Mill process circuit. With the exception of the new dmm
dumping station, all of the operations performed in the Circuit have been, and could
continue to be, performed in existing Mill process circuits. With respect to the new
drum dumping station, similar, although somewhat different, specialized dram dumping
operations have historically been performed in the Mill's existing drum dumping station.
The Circuit therefore does not conflict with any requirements specifically stated in the
License. In addition, the Circuit has been designed and constmcted to comply with all
applicable regulations and license and permit conditions. Accordingly, the SERP
concluded that the Change will not conflict with any requirement specifically stated in
the license, or impair DUSA's ability to meet all applicable regulations. As a result, this
criterion is satisfied.
b) The Circuit does not add any new process steps or features not already in existence at the
Mill and contemplated by the License. The Circuit has been designed and constracted to
comply with all applicable safety and other regulations and with the Mill's permits and
licenses. Occupational safety and radiation protection matters have been addressed to
the same standards as for existing Mill facilities. Potential spill containment has been
designed in accordance with the Mill's Groundwater Discharge Pennit, and well within
applicable EPA requirements. No air emissions of any significance are expected, and in
any event, any potential air emissions from the Circuit will be handled in the same
fashion as for the existing process circuits. No changes to the Mill's Reclamation Plan
are required, other than a relatively small increase in the reclamation cost estimate and
surety to take into account a small increase in demolition costs at the time of Mill
reclamation. Therefore, the SERP determined that approval of the Change would
produce no degradation in the essential safety or envirormiental corrmiitments in the
license application, or provided by the approved reclamation plan, and therefore this
criterion is met.
c) The Circuit has been designed and constracted to minimize or eliminate any potential
spill to soils and groundwater. There will also be no air emissions from the Circuit of
any significance, and, in any event, no air emissions over and above the emissions that
would result from performing the same process steps using existing Mill facilities. In
addition, the Circuit does not involve precipitation, drying or packaging of yellowcake,
which will be performed using existing Mill facilities. The License limits total
yellowcake production at the facility to 4,380 tons of yellowcake per year. This limit
will not be changed. Therefore, total emissions from the facility will not be increased.
If the Circuit is operating in parallel with the existing Mill circuits, the existing limit on
yellowcake production will ensure that the total production from the Mill at any one time
will not exceed the levels of production contemplated by the License and supporting
environmental assessments. As a result, the SERP concluded that the Change is
expected to produce no environmental impacts beyond those assessed in the EA dated
Febmary 1997, and is consistent with the conclusions regarding actions analyzed in the
EA. As a result, this criterion is also satisfied.
c) The Procedure is not expected to produce any environmental impacts beyond those
assessed in the EA dated Febraary 1997, and is consistent with the conclusions
regarding actions analyzed in the EA. As a result, this criterion is also satisfied.
Inherent in its approval of the License amendment authorizing processing of the
Materials, NRC concluded that the receipt and processing of the Materials will not
result in any significant incremental impacts to public health, safety or the
environment.
2.2.4 SERP Action
The SERP concluded that:
• the Procedure meets the criteria set forth in the SERP SOP for approval, and the
Procedure was approved for immediate implementation; and
• future modifications to the Procedure will be brought to the SERP for approval.
This SERP action resulted in no changes to any pages of the 2007 License Renewal Application
or the Mill's Reclamation Plan.
2.3. SERP Report No. 2009-03 July 1, 2009 Updates to SOP for UF4 Processing
2.3.1. Proposed Action
Review and approve the following proposed changes to the Mill's Standard
Operating Procedures for UF4 Processing, PBL-21, Rev. No. R-0, Book No. 10
(the "Procedure" or "SOP"):
• Change Node 1 to include the addition of hydrogen peroxide solution
to the dram dumping station;
• Change Node 3 to include the addition of filter aid (diatomaceous
earth) to the slurry in the digestion/precipitation tank;
• Change Node 5 to include the addition of sodium chlorate solution to
the contents ofthe filter cake acid re-dissolution tank; and
• Make several other adminisfrative changes to accommodate the
foregoing changes and to add some flexibility to the Procedure.
The proposed changes to the Procedure referred to above are referred to in this section as the
"Change" because they involve considering a change to an existing Mill Standard Operating
Procedure.
2.3.2. Description of Change Tests or Experiments
The purpose ofthis SERP action was to review the following proposed changes to update
the UF4 SOP:
The Procedure was recently adopted on June 12, 2009 prior to the first operation ofthe Mill's
new altemate feed circuit (the ("Circuit") (see SERPs 2009-01 and 2009-02). The Change
involves some minor changes to the Procedure in an attempt to optimize process conditions,
based on the Mill's initial experience in processing UF4 materials (the "Materials") through the
Circuit. DUSA determined that it would be appropriate to amend the Procedure to incorporate
the Change.
No new chemicals are utilized under the Change to the SOP, that are not already contemplated
by the Procedure or otherwise in common use at the Mill. The hydrogen peroxide added in Node
1 is already utilized in Node 2, the diatomaceous earth filter aid added to Node 3 is already
utilized in Nodes 4 and 6 and sodium chlorate is a common reagent used at the Mill for
conventional ore and other altemate feed processing.
There are no new emissions or emission sources that could potentially impact the environment,
over and above those initially contemplated by the existing SOP.
No new radiation or occupational safety issues arise in connection with the Change. No new
PPE is required, other than as originally contemplated by the Procedure.
2.1.4. SERP Action
The SERP concluded that the constmction and operation ofthe new altemate feed circuit
meets the criteria set forth in the SERP SOP for approval, and it was approved for
immediate implementation.
The SERP action resulted in:
• Amendments to the Mill's Radiation Protection Manual to address the number
and locations of air particulate monitoring stations and radon monitoring stations
for the Circuit.
• Incorporation into the Mill's Radiation Protection Manual of the location of
additional gamma balls for the Circuit.
Changed pages from the Mill's Radiation Protection Manual, which has been submitted to the
Executive Secretary as part ofthe Mill's 2007 License renewal Application, have been included
in Attachment 1 to this report.
2.2. SERP Report No. 2009-02 June 12, 2009 SOPs for UF4 Processing
2.2.1. Proposed Action
Review and approval of the Standard Operating Procedures for UF4 Processing, PBL-
21, Rev. No. R-0, Book No. 10 (the "Procedure").
2.2.2. Descriptions of Change. Tests or Experiments
The Procedure sets out the standard operating procedures to be employed for processing UF4
altemate feed material (the "Materials") from the Cameco Corporation facility in Port Hope,
Ontario, pursuant to condition 10.11 ofthe Mill's License, which was authorized by the United
States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") prior to the State of Utah becoming an
Agreement State for uranium mills. In authorizing the Mill to receive and process the Materials,
NRC concluded that the receipt and processing of the Materials would not result in any
significant incremental impacts to public health, safety or the environment.
Because there are sufficient differences between the process operating conditions and procedures
to be used in connection with processing the Materials and existing Mill standard operating
procedures. Mill personnel developed the Procedure as a new Standard Operating Procedure
(SOP) for the Materials. The Procedure is based on the metallurgical flow sheet and a hazard
analysis of each of seven units of operation referred to as nodes in this evaluation. Processing
will include the use ofthe Altemate Feed Circuit which was reviewed and approved by the SERP
in SERP No. 2009-1, also on June 12, 2009.
2.2.3 Safetv and Environmental Evaluation ofthis SERP Action
The SERP reviewed the Procedure described above in detail and concluded that:
The Procedure does not conflict with any requirements specifically stated in the license, or
impair Denison's ability to meet all applicable regulations.
a) The Procedure satisfies the requirement set out in License condition 9.6 that standard
operating procedures shall be established and followed for all operational process
activities involving radioactive materials that are handled, processed, or stored.
b) The Procedure will not produce any degradation in the essential safety or
environmental commitments in the license application, or provided by the approved
reclamation plan, and therefore this criterion is met. All chemicals being used in the
Process are chemicals that are currently, or have been, used for Mill operations.
Appropriate storage facilities for all such chemicals are currently in place at the Mill.
There will be no new chemical reactions or off-gases associated with processing the
Materials that haven't been experienced and handled safely by the Mill in cormection
with processing conventional ores or other altemate feed materials.
As a result, the safety and environmental analysis initially performed for the Procedure, as set
out in SERP 2009-02, is equally applicable to and encompasses the Change.
2.3.3. Safetv and Environmental Evaluation ofthis SERP Action
The SERP reviewed the proposed changes to the UF4 SOP and made the following conclusions:
a) The Procedure, as amended by the Change, does not conflict with any requirements
specifically stated in the License, or impair Denison's ability to meet all applicable
regulations. The Procedure, as amended, satisfies the requirement set out in License
condition 9.6 that standard operating procedures shall be established and followed for all
operational process activities involving radioactive materials that are handled, processed,
or stored.
b) The Change will not produce any degradation in the essential safety or environmental
commitments in the license application, or provided by the approved reclamation plan,
and therefore this criterion is met. All chemicals being used in the Procedure, as
amended by the Change, are chemicals that are currently used for Mill operations or
have been used in the past for Mill operations. Appropriate storage facilities for all such
chemicals are currentiy in place at the Mill. There will be no new chemical reactions or
off-gasses associated with processing the Materials under the Procedure, as amended by
the Change, that haven't been experienced and handled safely by the Mill in connection
with processing conventional ores or other altemate feed materials.
c) The Procedure, as amended by the Change, is not expected to produce any
environmental impacts beyond those assessed in the EA dated Febraary 1997, and is
consistent with the conclusions regarding actions analyzed in the EA. As a result, this
criterion is also satisfied. Inherent in its approval of the License amendment authorizing
processing of the Materials, NRC concluded that the receipt and processing of the
Materials will not result in any significant incremental impacts to public health, safety or
the environment.
2.3.4. SERP Action
The SERP concluded that the changes to the UF4 SOP meet the criteria set forth in the SERP
SOP for approval, and approved the changes.
This SERP action resulted in no changes to any pages of the 2007 License Renewal Application
or the Mill's Reclamation Plan.
2.4.1 SERP Report No. 2009-04 July 10, 2009 Review and Approval of New
Decontamination Pad
2.4.2 Proposed Action
Review and approve the changes in the facility or process resulting from the
constmction and use ofthe new decontamination pad at the Mill.
The changes referred to above are referred to in this section as the "Change" because they
involve considering a change to the facility or process, as presented in the Mill's license
application.
2.4.3 Description of Change Tests or Experiments
The Mill has historically decontaminated tracks, intermodal containers ("IMCs") and other
equipment utilizing a decontamination pad (the "Existing Decontamination Pad") that was
constracted approximately 10 years ago. The Existing Decontamination Pad is a concrete slab
stracture with platforms on either side from which high pressure water is sprayed from hoses
using water from Recapture Reservoir to fill three below grade settlement tanks. Sprayed water
is collected by sumps and directed back to the settiement tanks, and re-used in the system.
The Existing Decontamination Pad is located at the westem edge ofthe Mill's ore pad, deep
within the Mill's restricted area. In order to prevent re-contamination of equipment as it is
transported between the Existing Decontamination Pad and the restricted area exit gate, it is
necessary to maintain a clean gravel roadway between the Pad and the exit gate. In order to
prevent this roadway from re-contaminating equipment as it leaves the site, the Mill restricts use
ofthe roadway to decontaminated equipment only, and the roadway was not available for use on
a daily basis by other Mill operating equipment and vehicles.
To address the foregoing concems, the Mill has constracted a new decontamination pad (the
"New Decontamination Pad"), in the southeast comer of the ore pad, close to the existing Scale
House and main entry to the Mill' s ore pad, with the following improvements:
• The concrete slab has an additional trench, which directs sprayed water more readily to
the sumps;
• The three settlement tanks have steel liners;
• The side platforms are wider;
• An electric heat exchange is used to keep the water from freezing in the winter, compared
to the mere addition of steam for the Existing Decontamination Pad; and
• Various other minor modifications and improvements.
2.4.3 Safetv and Environmental Evaluation ofthis SERP action
In making their determination, the SERP reviewed the following information from the
engineering plans and drawings. The SERP evaluated:
• the implications of new emission points for air emissions, the manner of protection
against spills to soil and groundwater;
• whether new chemical storage tanks or facilities meet industry and EPA standards for
spill containment;
• the marmer in which process streams are cormected to existing process facilities;
• instramentation and process controls;
• fire protection systems;
• safety systems and equipment; and
• radiation safety features.
The SERP concluded that:
a) The New Decontamination Pad advances and improves upon the design of the Mill's
Existing Decontamination Pad, which has a proven record of operations without any
adverse health, safety or environmental impacts, and has been designed and constracted
to comply with all applicable regulations and license and permit conditions. The New
Decontamination Pad and the Existing Decontamination Pad are both designed to
facilitate decontamination of equipment prior to release from the Mill's restricted area,
as required by the License. Accordingly, the SERP concluded that the Change will not
conflict with any requirement specifically stated in the License, or impair DUSA's
ability to meet all applicable regulations, and will enhance the Mill's ability to meet all
applicable regulations. As a result, this criterion is satisfied.
b) The New Decontamination Pad does not add any new process steps or features not
already in existence at the Mill and contemplated by the License. The New
Decontamination Pad has been designed and constracted to comply with all applicable
safety and other regulations and with the Mill's permits and licenses. Occupational
safety and radiation protection matters have been addressed to the same standards as for
existing Mill facilities. Secondary containment and a leak detection system have been
incorporated into the design to prevent potential releases of waters from the settlement
tanks to groundwater. The New Decontamination Pad has been designed to minimize
any excursions of sprayed water to the ore pad. No air emissions of any significance are
expected, and in any event, any potential air emissions from the New Decontamination
Pad will be handled in the same fashion as for the Existing Decontamination Pad, and
will not exceed any air emissions otherwise emanating from normal ore pad activities.
No changes to the Mill's Reclamation Plan are required, other than a relatively small
increase in the reclamation cost estimate and surety to take into account a small increase
in demolition costs at the time of Mill reclamation. Therefore, the SERP determined that
approval of the Change would produce no degradation in the essential safety or
environmental commitments in the License application, or provided by the approved
reclamation plan, and therefore this criterion is met.
c) As discussed above, the New Decontamination Pad has been designed and constracted to
minimize or eliminate any potential release to soil and groundwater and is an
improvement over the Existing Decontamination Pad, which has operated for the last ten
years without any adverse impact to health, safety or the environment. There will also
11
be no air emissions from the New Decontamination Pad of any significance. As a result,
the SERP concluded that the Change is expected to produce no environmental impacts
beyond those assessed in the EA dated Febraary 1997, and is consistent with the
conclusions regarding actions analyzed in the EA. As a result, this criterion is also
satisfied.
2.4.4 SERP Action
The SERP concluded that the Change meets the criteria set forth in the SERP SOP for approval,
and approved the Change, subject to receipt of regulatory approvals.
This SERP action resulted in no changes to any pages of the 2007 License Renewal Application
or the Mill's Reclamation Plan.
12
ATTACHMENT 1
13
White Mesa Mill - Standard Operating Procedures Date: 08/09 Revision: DUSA-2
SOP PBL-RP-2
Book: Radiation Safety Manual, Section 2 Page 1 of 20
2.0 RADIATION MONITORING - AREA
2.1 HIGH VOLUME AIRBORNE AREA AIR SAMPLING
Area air sampling involves passing a representative sample of air through a filter paper
disc via an air pump for the ptirpose of determining the concentration of uranium in
breathing air at that location. Although the process is only measuring airbome
concentrations at a specific place and at a specific time, the results can often be used to
represent average concentration in a general area. A high volume sampler or similar high
volume pump will be used for this purpose. Samples wall be analyzed as per standard
gross alpha analysis procedures using a sensitive alpha detector.
2.1.1 Equipment
Monitoring equipment will be capable of obtaining an air sample flow rate of 40 1pm or
greater for one hour or longer. A variety of equipment may be used for area air sampling,
however normally the equipment used is an Eberline RAS-1, 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 3.6 ofthis manual.
2.1.2 Frequency/Locations
Area dust monitoring frequency is monthly for the locations shown in Table 2.1.2-1.
Table 2.1.2-1
Airborne Radiation Sample Locations
Code Location/Description
BAI Ore Scalehouse
BA2 Ore Storage
BA6 Sample Plant
BA7 SAG Mill Area
BA7A SAG Mill Control Room (radon only)
BAS Leach Tank Area
BA9 Washing Circuit CCD Thickness
BAIO Solvent Extiraction Building/Stripping Section
BAI 1 Solvent Extraction Building/Control Room
B A12 Yellowcake Precipitation 8c West Storage Area
BA12A North Yellowcake Dryer Enclosure
BAI 2B South Yellowcake Dryer Enclosure
BA 13 Yellowcake Drying 8c Packaging Area
BAI3A Yellowcake Packaging Enclosure
BAH Packaged Yellowcake Storage Room
This page was revised as of the June 12, 2009 SERP.
White Mesa Mill - Standard Operating Procedures Date; 08/09 Revision: DUSA-2
SOP PBL-RP-2
Book: Radiation Safety Manual, Section 2 Page 2 of 20
Code
BAI 5
BAI 6
BAI 7
BA18
BAI 9
BA20
BA21
BA22
BA22A
BA23
BA24
BA25
BA26
BA27
BA28
BA29
BA30
BA31
BA32
BA33A
BA33B
Location/Description
Metallurgical Laboratory Sample Preparation Room
Lunch Room Area (New Training Room)
Change Room
Administrative Building
Warehouse
Maintenance Shop
Boiler
Vanadium Panel
Vanadium Dryer
Filter Belt/Rotary Dryer
Tails
Central Control Room
Shifter's Office
Operator's Limch Room
Dimip Station
Filter Press
Tmck Shop
Women's Locker Room
Oxidation
AF South Pad
AF North Pad
Areas BA-10 and BA-12 are soluble uraniimi exposure areas. These areas are areas
where the uranium compounds that are produced are soluble in lung fluids and are
comparatively quickly eliminated from the body. All the other areas are insoluble
exposure areas. Insoluble uranium areas are areas where the uranium compounds are not
readily soluble in lung fluids and are retained by the body to a higher degree.
Temperature of drying operations has a significant impact on solubility of uranium
compounds. High drying temperatures produce insoluble uranium compounds. Area
uranium dust monitoring, during production periods, is weekly in the designated
yellowcake production areas. Monitoring increases to weekly in other monitored areas
with the observance of levels exceeding 25% of 10 CFR 20 limits and reverts to monthly
upon a continued observance of levels below 25% of 10 CFR 20 limits as determined by
the RSO. The RSC may also perform any additional samplings at his or her discretion.
The RSO will designate those areas involved in area monitoring during non-production
periods. Non-production period monitoring becomes effective one month following the
cessation of production.
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
hKpLVinU-anel.deniiionniine.'i.coni/whIlcmesainill/Oavcs Kolder/Oave's Special Folder/Boole 09 Radiatron I'roL Mamial/07 [.icensc
Reno\val/Scct2 AnnD RPM WMMSOP li-2.docGABeeuHKiBt!>.a)Hl-Se{t«ig5^d6AMvJ3eeamwrt$\SBps4He^fan-Ai>pti€^RPm^e6t3
AppB-RPM WMMSOP 0115 04-(a)T<tee
This page was revised as a result of the June 12, 2009 SERP
Location of Spherical Environmental Monitors 3rd Quarter 2009
Badge
Number Location of Monitors
0 Administration Building - Vault (Control)
1 Vanadium Control Room - Located on South Wall
2 BHV-6
3 Ore Storage - Cameco Barrel Storage Area
4 Vanadium Precipitation - Located on Agitator Start Stop Button
5 Yellowcake Drying Area - Located on North Yellowcake Dryer Alarm
6 Leach Area - Located at #2 Leach Tank Eyewash Station
7 Derrick Screens - northeast corner
8 Yellowcake Precip. - Located on S. Wall by Yellowcake Acid Redissolve Tank
9 Central Control Room - Located on Shifter's Bulletin Board
10 Ore Pad - Decontamination Pad
11 Barrel Dump Station - Located at Operator's Panel
12 Metallurgical Laboratory - Hanging From Ceiling
13 Filter Press Room - Located on North Wall
14 BHV-I
15 BHV-2
16 BHV-3
17 BHV-4
18 BHV-5
19 SAG Mill - Located Outside SAG Mill Control Room Door (North Side)
20 Tails - Located on Cell 2 at die Power Distribution Center
21 CCD - Located Outside MCC On North Wall on Breaker Box
22 North SX - Located on Rcgen. Pump Start/Stop Switch
23 Administration Building - Located on Main Bulletin Board
24 In Tree By Picnic Bench Outside Administration Building
25 Yellowcake Packaging - Hung on Wall outside Door
26 North Yellowcake Dryer Area 2nd Level on N. Dryer Temp. Ctrl. Box
27 Bucking Room - Located on East Wall Behind Crusher
28 Mill Lunch Room - Located on Projection Screen on West Wall
29 South SX - Located on Column # 10
30 Electrical Foreman's Office - Located on North Wall
31 Ore Feed Grizzly - Located on North Wall at Power Distribution Boxes
32 Scalehouse - Located in Office at Northeast Comer
33 OBS (Sample Plant) - Located on South Side of Southwest Entrance Door
34 Front Gate
45 Alternate Feed circuit - Barrel Dump Station
46 Altemate Feed Circuit - Start/Stop Switch Sump Pump Southwest
47 Altemate Feed Circuit - Start/Stop Switch Sump Pump Impurity Removal Tanks
This page was revised as a result of the June 12, 2009 SERP