The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDRC-2011-001189 - 0901a068801f58fdDENISOhlOi MINES January 14, 2011 VIA E-MAIL AND OVERNIGHT DELIVERY Rusty Lundberg Utah Department of Environmental Quality 195 North 1950 West P.O. Box 144810 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820 Denver, CO 80265 USA Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 303 389-4125 www.donisonmlnes.com 2011-00 11 Re: State of Utah Division of Radiation Control ("DRC") Request for Information Letter of January 12, 2011 Regarding Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2A, Utah Radioactive Materials License UT1900479 Dear Mr. Lundberg: This letter transmits Denison Mines (USA) Corp's proposed addendum, entitled Revision 3,2 Edition B to the approved Reclamation Plan Revision 3.0 and submittals referred to as Revision 3.1 for White Mesa Mill ("Revision 3.0/3.1"). This letter also responds to DRC's Request for information ("RFI") letter of January 12, 2011 requesting additional changes to previously submitted versions of this document. As requested in the DRC letter, the addendum has been entitled Reclamation Plan Revision 3,2.Edition B ("Revision 3.2.B"). and all changes have been linked to the previously approved version. Revision 3.0/3.1, Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2.B consists of; i • the contents of approved Revision 3.0 and submittals referred to as Revision 3.1, • additional changes as requested in DRC's RFI letter of November 30, 2010, and • additional changes as requested in DRC's RFI letter of January 12, 2011. For ease of comparison, the Addendum Revision 3.2..B has been developed from, and all redlined changed linked to, the approved Revision 3.0/3.1. For ease of review, the text sections included in the Addendum have been provided in both redline/strikeout and black-line ("clean") form, which are provided, respectively, as Attachments 1 and 2 to this letter. These revisions incorporate all the changes requested in DRC's above- named letters. Denison requests that UDEQ review and approve the attachments to this letter. Denison has provided, below, specific responses to each request in DRC's RFI letter. The sections and numbering of the remainder of this letter follow that of the RFI. Each DRC request is shown in italics, below, followed by Denison's response. N:\R8clamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\01:14,10 Transmittal to DRC Rec Plan 3,2.B.doc I>ENISOJ)~~ MINES January 14, 2011 VIA E-MAIL AND OVERNIGHT DELIVERY Rusty Lundberg Utah Department of Environmental Quality 195 North 1950 West P.O. Box 144810 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-4820 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO 80265 USA Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 3033894125 www.denisonmines.com Re: State of Utah Division of Radiation Control ("DRC") Request for Information Letter of January 12, 2011 Regarding Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2A, Utah Radioactive Materials License UT1900479 Dear Mr. Lundberg: This letter transmits Denison Mines (USA) Corp's proposed addendum, entitled Revision 3.2 Edition B to the approved Reclamation Plan Revision 3.0 and submittals referred to as Revision 3.1 for White Mesa Mill ("Revision 3.0/3.1"). This letter also responds to DRC's Request for Information ("RFI") letter of January 12, 2011 requesting additional changes to previously submitted versions of this document. As requested in the DRC letter, the addendum has been entitled Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2.Edition B ("Revision 3.2.B"). and all changes have been linked to the previously approved version, Revision 3.0/3 .1. Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2.B consists of: • the contents of approved Revision 3.0 and submittals referred to as Revision 3.1, • additional changes as requested in DRC's RFI letter of November 30, 2010, and • additional changes as requested in DRC's RFI letter of January 12, 2011 . For ease of comparison, the Addendum Revision 3.2 .. B has been developed from, and all redlined changed linked to, the approved Revision 3.0/3.1. For ease of review, the text sections included in the Addendum have been provided in both red line/strikeout and black-line ("clean") form, which are provided, respectively, as Attachments 1 and 2 to this letter. These revisions incorporate all the changes requested in DRC 's above- named letters. Denison requests that UDEQ review and approve the attachments to this letter. Denison has provided, below, specific responses to each request in DRC's RFI letter. The sections and numbering of the remainder of this letter follow that of the RFI. Each DRC request is shown in italics, below, followed by Denison's response. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\01.14.1 0 Transmittal to DRe Rec Plan 3.2.B.doc Letter to Mr. Rusty Lundberg January 14, 2010 Page 2 DEQ Comments and Responses 1. Our letter of November 30, 2010, paragraph 3, stated that, "Existing Figure A-S. 1-2 in approved Revision 3. 1 appears to contain cross Sections and details which are essential to be retained in the Reclamation Plan. " a. Therefore, existing Figure A-S.1-2 must somehow be retained 'and not replaced by the Addendum ... " Recap: The referenced Figure-A-S.1-2 in Reclamation Plan Rev. 3.1 (labeled on the figure to include drawings through Rev. No.4 dated July 9, 2008), provides Section A-A' and Details 1 through 3. The figure is titled, " ... Reclamation Cover Details. and Cross Section. " In contrast, Reclamation Plan Rev. 3.2 provided a Figure A-S1-2 titled, "Reclamation Cover and Cross Sections ... "This figure provided Sections 8-8', C-C', and 0-0'. Not the same sections or details as Rev. 3.1. As stated in DUSA's letter of June 29, 2010, it appeared that this figure was provided as a "replacements for" the figure of the. same figure number. However, the latter Figure A-S. 1-2 (Rev. 3.2) does not contain any of the drawings provided in the earlier Rev. 3.1 figure of the same name. Therefore, to keep the original drawing concepts provided on Figure A-S.1-2 (Rev. 3.1), DRC requested that the, "existing Figure A-S .1-2 must somehow be retained and not replaced by the Addendum ... " Comment: After receipt of the subject letter of December 20-2010, we have compared the submitted figures in Rev. 3.2A with the corresponding previous figures in Rev. 3.1. It appears that proposed Figures A-S.1-2 and A-S.1-3 are not the same as the Rev. 3.1 figures of the same number. Also, some correction to the drawings is needed. In as much as these figures are to replace the corresponding figures of the same number as part of a formal addendum, we request you please correct the following: a. Correct a transposition of figure numbers by changing the figure numbers proposed as Figures A-S. 1-2 and A-S. 1-3 in Rev. 3.2A to correspond to the figures of the same number from Rev. 3.1. Denison Response: The transposition of figure numbers has been corrected. b. Section 0-0' needs to be revised to include the addition of Cell 48. Denison Response: Section 0-0' has been revised to include Cell 4B. 2. In Rev. 3.2A, Appendix G, a technical memorandum from MWH dated January 29, 2010 is provided. This gives the deSign justification for the 6-inch thick filter blanket on cell outside slopes of the cells. This memo was not provided in the subject Emailssent.This item must be provided in electronic format as well as the paper copy of the Reclamation Plan. Denison Response: The MWH memo has been included in paper and digital formats .. 3. In our letter of November 30, 2010, we requested that, "the cover and the text of Reclamation Plan be revised to state that Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2 is in the form of an Addendum to Reclamation Plan 3.0 and 3.1." However, the subject DUSA December 20,2010 letter OENISOJ)J~ MINES 2 Letter to Mr. Rusty Lundberg January 14, 2010 Page 3 describes Rev. 3.2A is an addendum to proposed Rev. 3.2. This designation will lead to confusion, which must be avoided. Please revise the plan's cover, text and transmittal letter to show that the next version, e.g. Rev. 3.2B, is an addendum to Rev. 3.0 and Rev. 3.1 (which have already been approved by the ORC). Rev. 3.2B needs to be complete, and not rely on the previous Rev. 3.2 or 3.2A a ddendums. a. In response to our letter mentioned above, the OUSA letter of December 20, 2010 provides replacement cover, which states, "Addendum/Changed Pages for the White Mesa Mill and Tailings Management System. " However, the Reclamation Plan addendum cover needs to be edited to be explicit and accurate as to what the addendum applies to in accordance with the above paragraph. Denison Response: The cover has been changed .. b. Also, the text of the Reclamation Plan addendum (Rev. 3.2A) does not address this point, as requested in the mentioned ORC letter. A separate preface page in the addendum may be an appropriate method to address our request. Denison Response: A Preface page has been added. c. Please assure that Rev. 3.2.B is complete, and does not rely on the previous Rev. 3.2 or 3.2A addendums. Denison Response: Revision 3.2. B is complete and has been linked to the approved Revision 3.0/3.1. 4. The upcoming revised edition of the Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2 (i.e. a revision of the Addendum) will need to be identified by a unique edition name, but still retain the Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2 label, e.g. "Edition B, " or other method for identifying the unique edition. Denison Response: As requested, the Plan has been identified as Revision 3.2 Edition B or "Revision 3.2.B." 5. We recognize that in the process of ORC review and OUSA response that identification needs will require designation of editions or versions such as B, C, etc. However, we request that when the final revision is ready for approval that OUSA submit a final document labeled as Rev.3.2-final. Denison Response: Comment Noted. Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions or require any further information. Yours very truly, DENISON MINES (USA) CORP. ~~ Jo Ann Tischler Director, Compliance and Permitting cc: David C. Frydenlund OENISOJ)~~ MINES 3 Letter to Mr. Rusty Lundberg January 14, 2010 Page 4 Harold R. Roberts David E. Turk K. Weinel Central files OENISONI)~~ MINES 4 f)ENISOJ)~~ Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO 80265 USA MINES Tel: 303 628·7798 Fax: 303 389-4125 www.denisonmines.com White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2 Edition B ("Revision 3.2.B") Addendum/Changed Pages for the White Mesa Mill and Tailings Management System January 2011 State of Utah11e.(2) Byproduct Material License # UT1900479 Revision 3.2. B constitutes an Addendum to Approved Revision 3.0 and 3.1 of the White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Denison Mines (USA) Corp. www.denisonmines.com 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO, USA 80265 Tel: 303 628·7798 Fax: 303389-4125 PREFACE This document contains Revision 3.2 Edition B (Revision 3.2.B), an Addendum to the White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Rev. 3.0 and 3.1. The White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2.B does the following: • Completely replaces the content of Rev. 3.1, by replacing Figures A-S.1-1, A-S.1-2 and A-S.I-3 of Rev. 3.1, which was the entire content of Rev. 3.1. • For Rev. 3.0, replaces with revised documents the text, figures, tables, appendices, and attachments included under this cover that correspond to the same items in existing Revision 3.0. • Adds the new documents under this cover to the Reclamation Plan. • Maintains the remaining balance of the contents of Approved Revision 3.0, The contents of this Addendum, when combined with the existing approved Revision 3.0/3.1 as described above, constitute the complete current version of the White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan. TABLEOFCONTENT$ LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES Pagei Revision 3.2.8 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Page No. lISTOFATIACHMENTS LIST OF APPENDICES REFERENCES INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 1.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS 1.1 CLIMATE ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 1-5 1.1.1 GenerallnAuences ................................................................................................................................................ 1-5 1.1.2 Preci pitation ........................................................................................................................................................... 1-6 1.1.3 Winds ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1-6 1.1 .4 Swrms ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1-6 1.2 TOPOGRAPHy ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1-10 1.3 ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................ 1-10 1.3.1 Archeological Sites .............................................................................................................................................. 1-10 1.3.2 Current Srarus of Excavation ............................................................................................................................ 1-13 N:\Redamarion Plan\Rcclamarion Plan Rev J.2B\TABlCONTR£v32.B clcan.doo<~IlVI.d"lTIftrio" Pln~.ht"""!a,, Pin" Re. 3.29\1'A8lCa~llRe.3:2:8 ,.dfine:dctot I ( • __ _ __ _____________ _ _ __ _ ___ ___ ______________ _ __ ~ __ J I , , I Page ii Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines,(USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Page No. 1.4 SURFACE WATER ................................................. , ................................................................................................................. 1-14 1.4.1 Surface Water Description .............................................................. , ...................................... " ...................... ".1-14 1.4.2. Surface Water Qua-lity ....................................................................................................................................... 1-19 1.5 GROUNDWATER ............. , ............. , ....................................................................................................................................... 1-23 1.5.1 Site Description ............................... , ................................................................................................................... 1-2.6 1.5.2: Geologie Setting ..................................................... , ..... , ................... , ................................................................... 1-26 1.5.2.1 Strarigraphy ............................................................................... , ....................................................... 1-28 1,5.2.2 Local Geologic Srrucru re ................................................................................................................ 1-28 1.5.3 Hyd rogcologic Serri ng ................................ , ................ , ............................................................................. , ....... 1-30 1.5.3.1 Hydrostral'igraphy ............................................................................................................................ 1-36 1.5.3.2 Data Collected in 1994 ................................................................................................................... 1-47 1.5.4 Oimarological Setting ........................................................................................................................................ 1-54 1.5.5 Perched Ground Water Characteristics .................................................................................................. , ...... 1-54 1.5.5.1 Perched Water Quality ................................................................................................................... 1·60 1.6 GEOLOGy ................. , .............................................................................................................................................................. 1-62 1.6.1 Regional Geology., ... ,., ..... , ... , ....................................................................................... , .. , .................................... 1-63 N:\Rcclil1Tlation Plan\Rcdamarion Plan Rev 3.2B\TABLCONTRl!VJ.2.B clc.iln.dDa~amildo" Phth\Reclntnfttion Flail He. J.2B\TABlEQUTReCl3 .. 2.B redJmerJ~ ) I .& ___ __ _ __ __ __ __ ____ __ _ _______________________________________________ J , , , , , Forma pt, Do Page iii Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. Whire Mesa Mill Reclamation plan 1.6.1.1 Physiography ...................................... " ............................................................................................. 1-63 1.6.1.2 Rock Units .......................................................................................................................................... 1·64 1.6.1.3 Srructure and Tecronics .................................................................................................................. 1·73 1.6.2 Blanding Site Geology ........................................................................................................................................ 1-78 1.6.2.1 PhYSiography and Topography ..................................................................................................... 1-78 1.6.2.2 Rock Units ............................................................................. _ ............................................................ 1-81 1.6.2.3 Structure ............................................................................................................................................. 1-86 1.6.2.4 Relationship of Earthquakes ro Tectonic Structures ............................................................... 1-90 1.6.2.5 Poremial Earrhquake Hazards to Pro jeer ................................................................................... 1-96 1.6.3 Seismic RiskAssessment ................................................................................................................................... 1-98 1.6.3.1 Static Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 1·99 1.6.3.2 Pseudosraric Analysis (Seismicil)') ............................................................................................... 1-99 1.7 BIOTA ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 1-100 1.7.1 Terrestrial ........................................................................................................................................................... 1-100 '1.7.1.1 Flora ....................................................................................................................................................... 1-100 1.7.1 .2 Fauna ..................................................................................................................................................... 1-105 1.7.2 Aquarlc Biora ..................................................................................................................................................... 1·107 1.8 NATURAL RADIATION ..................................................................................................................................................... 1·112 1.8.1 Background ........................................................................................................................................................ 1-112 1.8.2 Current Moniroring Da[a .............................................................................................................................. 1-113 1.8.2.1 Environmental Radon ....................................................................................................................... 1-113 N:\Reclamatlon Plan\Redamadon PI.l" Rev 3,2B\TABLCONTRev3~2.B clcan.dOC:X~l1i"ft"OI' Plalt\Reclsmftdon-Pw", Rt. J:2B\TA8lCOtlTRc ",3.2,8 icdlilte.doex /' • _ _ _______________________________________ ~ ___________________________ J I I , I I Forma pt, Do Pageiv Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan 1.8.2.2 Environmental Gamma .................................................................................................................... 1-114 1.8.2.3 Vegetation Samples ...................................................................................................................... 1-114 1.8.2.4 Environmental Air Moniroring and Stack Sampling ............................................................ 1-114 1.8.2.5 Groundwater .................................................................................................................................. 1-115 1.8.2.6 Surface Water ................................................................................................................................. 1-116 1.8.2.7 Meteorological Monitoring ........................................................................................................ 1-116 2.0 EXISTJNG FACILITY 2.1 FACILITY CONSTRUCTION HISTORy ............................................................................................................................... 2-1 2.1.1 Mill and Tailings Management Facility ........................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 FACILITY OPERATIONS ......................................................................................................................................................... 2-2 2.2.1 Operating Periods ................................................................................................................................................. 2-3 2.2.2 Mill CircuiL .............................................................................................................................................................. 2-4 2.2.3 Tailings Management Facilities ......................................................................................................................... 2-5 2.2.3.1 Tailings Managemenr ....................................................................................................................... 2-7 2.2.3.2 LiqUid Management .......................................................................................................................... 2-8 2.3 MONITORING PROGRAMS ................................................................................................................................................. 2-9 2.3.1 Monitoring and Reporting Under the Mill's GWDP .................................................................................... 2-9 2.3.1.1 2.3:1.2 2.3.1.3 2.3.1.4 2.3.1.5 Groundwater Monitoring ...................................................................................................... 2-9 Deep Aquifer ........................................................................................................................... 2-13 Seeps and Springs .................................................................................................................. 2-13 Discharge Minimization Technology and BestAvailable Technology Standards and Moniroring ................................................................................................... 2-15 2.3.1 .4.1 General ..................................................................................................... 2-15 BAT Pe rformance Standards for Cell 4A .......................................................................... 2-19 N:\Rcclamarlon Plan\Rcdamauon Plan Re.v 3.28\TABLCO TRev3.2.1l cleiln.docxN:\Reelall'l8lion Ple,,~edllmalio" Pia" Reo 3:2B\l'ASlEOtfl'Re>3.2.B .. <lI~Ml< " -______ _ _ ____ ___ _ ____________________________________________________ J Forma I " pt, Do I 2.3 .1.6 2.3.1.7 Page v Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Stormwater Management and Spill Control Requiremenrs ....................................... 2-22 Taili ngs and Slimes Drain Sampling ................................................................................. 2-23 2.3.2 Monitoring and Inspections Required Under rhe License ....................................................................... 2-24 2.3.2.1 2.3.2.2 3.0 RECLAMATION PLAN Enviro nmental Monito ring .................................................................................................. 2-24 Additional Monitoring and Inspections Required Under rhe License ..................... 2-32 3.1 LOCATION AND PROPERlY DESCRiPTION ................................................................................................................... 3-1 3.2 FACILITIES TO BE RECLAIMED ............................................................................................................................................ 3-4 3.2.1 Summary of Facilities to be Reclaimed ........................................................................................................... 3-4 3.2.2 Tail ings and Evaporative Cells ........................................................................................................................... 3-7 3.2.2.1 Soi l Cover DeSign ............................................................................................................................... 3-7 3.2.2.2 Cell 1-1.. .................................................................................................................................................. 3-9 3.2.2.3 Cell Z. .................................................................................................................................................... 3-10 3.2.2.4 Cell 3 .................................................................................................................................................... 3-11 3.2.2.5 Cell4A ................................................................................................................................................. 3-1 ·1 3.2.2.6 CeI14B ................................................................................................................................................. 3-11 3.2.3 Mill Decommissioning ...................................................................................................................................... 3-11 3.2.3.1 Mill Buil di ng and Equipment, and Olher 11 e.(2) Byproduct Material .............................. 3-11 3.2.3.2 Mill Site ............................................................................................................................................... 3-14 3.3 DESIGN CRITERIA .................................................................................................................................................................. 3-14 3.3.1 Regulatory Criteria .............................................................................................................................................. 3-15 3.3.2 Radon Flux Attenuation .................................................................................................................................... 3-16 N:\Rcclamrulon f>lan\Rcdamatlon 1'100 RI!V 3.28\TABLCONTRcvJ.2.G dean.doOtN:ltRecl~ell"R .• dsi IIalion-Pls" lle. 3:lB\:r;~Sl:COlfFRC43:2:B i edlili •. doClO " • ____ ~____ _ _ _ _ _ _________________________________________ J , , ,. , , Forma pt, Do 3.3.3 3.3.4 3.3.2.1 3.3.2.2 Predictive Analysis ............................. . Page vi Revision 3.2,B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan ............ 3-16 Empirical Data ................................................................................................................................. 3-18 Infiltration Analysis ................. " .... , ... ,.,.,.,.,., ........... ,., ....................................................................................... 3·19 Freeze/Thaw Evaluation ....................... ,. ,., ........................................................................................... 3-21 3.3.5 Soil Cover Erosion Protection .................................................. ,.,., ................................................. ,.. """", .. ,3-22 3.3.6 Slope Stability Analysis .................................................................. ,.,.,.,." ................................ , ......................... 3-24 3.3.7 3.3.8 Static Analysis ................................................................... . . ...... , .. ", ............................ 3-25 3.3.6.1 3.3.6.2 Pseudostatic Analysis (Seismicity) ............................................................................................. 3-25 50il Cover -Anirnal lntrusion ...................................................................... . .................................. 3-26 Cover Material/Cover Material Volumes ................................. . ............... 3-26 N:\R~d~m.lIon l'Iiln\Rcd.m~fon Mill Rev 3.Z8\TA8lCONTRevJ.2.8 dun.doatl.\acclaroo,,. c •• PI .. hRut'h'lric .. 1'110. Reo 3.2Bl,TA8lEetl'FRc.).2:8 • e~I;"c:dCCA " & ________________________________________________________________________________ J , , i Fonna :' pt, Do Pagei 'Revision ~3.2.AB lmernarional-l:ltanittmDcnl50n Mlnc5 (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Page No. LlSTOFTABl£Sr.. ••• W'. "",,,,,,~,,,_,,,,_,,,",,,,,,,"",,,",,,,,,",,,,","",,,=,,,=,,,"' .... "" .•. "" ••. ,",, .• ,,,, ... = ... = ... ", .... "" ... "" ... ~ ... "" ... "' ... "' .... "' ... "" ... "" .... "" .. "" ... "' ... ::: .... ::: ... := ... :::: .... = .. :::: ... ", ... = ... :::: .... = ... "" ... :::: ... "" ... = ... ...,,,.= .... "" ... "" ... :::: ... :::: ... = ... ::: ... ", .. ,."" ... :::: ... :::: ... = ... = ... ""'; ... LlSTDF FIGURES ......... _ ................................. _ ......... ,., ..................... , ...... , ........... , ..... , ..... _ .. _ ...................... , ........... , ... , ...... , ............... , ........... iij LIST OF A TTACHMENTS_ ................. , ...... , .......................................... , .......... ,".,....................................................................... .. .... . ... lei UST OF ApPENDICES .. , ........ , ............................................................... ,.... .. .... ,.. ......... .... . ................. , ................................................... :lti I REFERENCES.......... ... .................................. , ........................ .. . .. leii INTRODUCTION ...................... ., ........ , ........... , ............. , .......... , .. , ................................ , .... , ... ,.,,, ................................................ , .............. , ....... , .. 1·1 1.0 SITE CHARAO'ERISTICS 1.1 CliMATE .......................................................................................................................................................................... 1·5 1.1.1 Gencral lnrluenccs .... , ........................................... , ................................................ , ...................................... 1-5 1.1.2 I'rccipilation .................. " ................................................................. " .................................................. " ...... , 1·6 1.1.3 Winds ................................................................................................................................................ , ............ 1·6 1.1.4 Slomls .... , ........ ,." ...................... , .................................. ,., ......... , .................................................................... , 1·6 1.2 TOI'OGRAI'HV ............................................................ , ................................................................................................ 1·10 1.3 ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................ , ....... 1-10 1.3.1 Archeological SItC$, ................................................................................................................ , ............. , ..... 1-10 1.3.2 Current Stalus off)ccavalion ................... , .................. " .......... , ................................... , ..................... , .... , .. 1·13 I Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,~/, I.,f:..;o:.;r.:.;m;;;a:,:tt=ed=:..: :..:Fon=t:~9:.!p:::t _______ ......J N-.\Rrc!."",,!>n Pi.1n\tIKi.1m .. ion Pion Rev ),2B\TABlCONTRoVJ.2.Q "dn~~fR9,WMAEPb'lN'dA8lee"r,:raE\l'1<> 1m ;' & _____________________________________________________________ J P~geii RevisiOn ~3.2AB tme.nano",,1 U'i111;UIIIOru'lls.on Mli'ICS (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Re.clamation Plan 1.4 SURFACE WATER ........................................................................................................................ : .................................... 1-'14 1.4.1 SII,facc Waler Descriplion .. _ ...... _ .. _ ............................................................................... _ ...................... 1-14 1.4.2 5L.rface Waler QUdlit)' ............................................................................................................................... 1-19 TABLE or cmofFENTS (c:onnnuelij Puge ...... 15 GROUNDWATE'R ................................... _ ................................................................................................................... 1-23 1.5.1 Site Dcs.criptio., ........................................................................................ ,' ... , ................... ,' ............ _ ............ 1-26 1.5.2 G~olog1c Setting .......................................................................................................................................... 1-25 1.5.2.1 Slfa!Igr.,phy .......................................................................... .. 1.5.2~ local Geologic S!IUC!ure ......................................................................................................... 1-28 1.5.3 H)'drogeologlcSculng .................................................. _ ............................ _ .......................... _ .............. 1-30 15.3.1 Hydros!ratigraphy .. __ ...... __ ........... _ ....... _ ................................. _ .................... _ ........................ 1-36 1.S.3.2 Data Collec!ed In 1994 ............................................................................................................ 1-47 1.S.4 Cllmalological Sc!11n&0 .............................................................................................................................. 1-54 1.5.5 Perched Ground Water dlaraclOrj~rics .. __ .......... __ ..................................................................... __ ........... 1-54 1.5.5.1 Perched Water Qliiliity ............................................................................................................ 1-60 I {}-f..;o;..r..;m..;a..;tted,;';';'';': ;.;FOIl~t:..;9..:p;.;t _______ ~ ,', { formatted: Font: 9. pt " " 4N~R~~~'~~ ~nY':.~~.~n!!n!,~ 12~\:',,!L:'Q~TRe:).:.~ I~~n...s~"j '1~t..II&\'.! ~RE!~':,":AII..!'Ea~A'_lIi!E?::'~ ~~ n __ n n n n .. f Page ill Revi5ion~.2."8 1o'lc,,,,,;o,,.1 U'8hib",Denison M'nes (USA) Co'p. Wi1ilc Mesa Mill Rcddmalion PI,ln GEOLOGY ...... H .......•... HH .... . . ..... _ .....• 1-62 1.6.1 1.6.2 1.6.3 Regional Gcology._ .• __ •.... _ ........ H •... HH_ .•....•• _ ......... _ ..•.• _ .... _._ ..... _ ..•.•...•. _ •......•... _ ..•..•.. 1·63 1.6.1.1 1.6.1.2 Physiography ..... . RO<:.k Unils._ ... _._ ................ ___ ... _. . ...•.• 1.6) . ....•. , '.6<1 1.6.1.3 SUUClU'C inc!'l"cc!onjcS .... H_H ._H ____ .H.H.H._._._.H._ ....... __ . ___ .•.. H __ H ___ .... , -73 Blanding SilcGcology •... 1.6.2.1 Physiograph)' and T o!KIgraph)' .... _______ . 1.6.2.2 RockUnit~ 1.6.2.3 Structure T,\f!lE OF CONTENTS (o:ooai$Obcd) ... _ ......... 1.78 . .............. ____ .. _____ .... _ .......... 1-78 ......... '-81 .... __ '-86 1.6.2.4 RelaTionship of E~nhquakC!; !O Tectonic $'ruClu'cs_ ..... __ .... H ••• _ ••• _ ••••• OH •••••••••• 1·90 1.6.25 Potcmi~1 hllhquakc Haurds TO ProJecT •. _._ .•. ___ ._._ ... ____ .. _ .. _____ .H.H._ ...... H __ .• 1-96 Si:ismk Risk Ass=mcnr .... . ........ _ .. __ ... H._ •...• _._ •...• H_ .......... __ ..... ___ ..... H. 1·98 1.6.3.1 STatkAnafysls .... H_H_.H.H ... _._._H. __ . ____ . __ ,. __ ._ .. _._ .. '.H.H ......... __ .. ___ •.• '·99 1.6.3.2 PscudOSlati( Analysis (Scismkily)_ ...... __ .. H .. _ •.. H_ ... H ___ .... _ ........ __ ..... ____ 1-99 BIOTA .................................................................................................................................... _ ............... . 1.7.1 Tc"CSl"ial .............................................. . . ................................................. _ ... _ ..................... 1-100 1.7.1.1 Flo'~ _ ... ___ .. _ ..• _ .... _ ...... H ••• _.HOH._ •••• H ••••••••••••••• _ •••••• H 1·100 j formatted: Font: 9 PI ,'; Formatted: Font: 9 PI " " 4't~~!!'~i"'!"l"!:'~~!" .. ~!<.rU!'~"!'£'O~·'-~':l~'g!~~':.~I~l .. !'~~~c..a~T:,,'!~I-'9!' .. _ .... _ ...... _ .... _ .. ..f Pageiv Revision ~~ ""C, ii8!iCliiftl u, a, ,lttmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 1.7.1.2 Fauna ............................................................................................................................................. 1-1 OS 1.7.2 Aquatic Biota ............................................................................................................ _ .............................. 1-107 1 .8 NATURAL RADIATION ...................................................................................... , ...................................................... 1-112 1.9.1 Background ............................................................................................................................................... 1-112 1.8.2 Currenl MonilOring Dara ............................ .-.... .-..... .-. .-.· .......................................................... .-.................... 1-113 1.8.2..1 Environmental Radon ............................................................... _ ................................................ 1-113 1.B.2.2 Environn'enral Garnma .............................................................................................................. 1-114 1.8.2.3 Vegetation Sarnplcs ........................................................................ _ ..................................... 1-114 1.8.2.4 Environmental Air Monlloring and Slack Sampling .......... _ .... _ .. _ .... _ ......... _ ............. 1.114 1.8.2.5 Groundwater ....................... _ .................. _ ........................ _ .. _ .... _ .. _ ................................ 1-115 1.8.2.6 Surfnce W~ter .......................................................................................................................... 1-116 1.6.2.7 Meleorological Monlloring ........................................................................... '''' ................. 1-11 G 2.0 eUSTING FACILITY 2.'1 FI\ClLllY CONSTRUCllON HISTORY ... _ .................................................................................................................. 2-'1 TABLE OF CONTENl5 (COMb ,ued1 Peg' ~Io. 2.1.1 Mill and Tililings Mana.g\!menr Fa.cility ................................................ _ ..................... _ .......................... 2-'1 2..2 FACILIlY OPERA nONS ...................................... _ ................................. _ ................................. _ ............................... 2-2 2.2.1 Operating Periods .................................. __ ................................................................................................. 2-l1 2.2..2 Mill Orcl,il ............................................................................... _ ............................................. _ ................. 2-~ 2.U Tailings Management' acililles ............................................................................................................... 2"~ j Formatted: Font: 9 pt Page v Revision t.ID.2.AB Intemlltio, ,al Ural1itlmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan 2.2.3.1 Tailings Management ................................................................................................................. 2-Z5 2.2.3.2 Liquid Management ................................................................................................................. 2-.!!6 2.3 MONITORING PROGRAMS ......... " ........................ " ..... _ .. " ............................. " .. , ................................................... 2-l16 2.3.1 Operational Monitoring and Reporting Under the Mill'5 GWDP .................................... _ ............... 2-l16 2.3.1.1 Groundwater Monitoring .. " ............................................................................... _ .......... 2·9 2.3.1.2 Deep Aq u ifer .................................................................................................................... 2-13 2.3.1.3 Seeps and Sprlnw ... ··...... .. ... " .. " ... , ............................................................... , ........ 2·143 2.3.1.4 Discharge MinimizatIon TechnoloID' Olnd Best AvaIlable Technology +-- -.( Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5", First line: 0" Standards and Monitoring .... _ ................. __ ........ _ .......... _ .................................. _ ........ 2 .. 15+----I Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5", First line: 0", Tab stops: 2", Left + 2.25", Left 2.3.1.4.1 General. .............................................................................................. 2·15·--~ "l Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5", First line: 0" 2.3.1.5 BAT Performance Standards for Cell4A ................................................................ 2~19 2.3.1.6 Slormwatcr Management and Spill Control Regulrcmcnl.S .... _ .. _ .. _......... "'" 2-22 2.3.1.7 Tailings and SlImes Drain Sampling. .. .................................................................... 2-23+-- -i Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5", Hanging: 5" .-- --{ Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5", First line: 0" 2.3.2 £ ... 1'0' ,"'elilal Monitoring and InspeCllons Required Under ,he Llcense ..................................... 2-241' 2.3.2.1 fn\ilronmecnral Monitoring ................................ , ... _ ........... _ .................... , .......... , .......... 2·24 2.3.2.2 Additional Monitoring and Inspecti90ns rRequired Under the License ............. 2·332 3.0 RECLAMATION PLAN 3.1 LOCATION AND PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ............ "' .......................................... , .. ~ ........ "0> ................ " .... _ •• " ....... 3-1 3.2 FACILITIES TO BE RECLAIMED ........... " ............. " ..... , ................ " ...................... " ............................ _ .......................... 3-4 3.2.1 Summary of Facilities to be Reciaimed ....... " ............................................................................................ 3-4 3.2.2 Tailings and Evaporative Cells ........ _ ........... "" .. " ............. " ........ " .. " ........ " .. " ...... " ... _ ............. " ........... 3"Z6 3.2.2.1 Soil Cover Design ..................................................................................................................... 3-Z6 Cell 1-1, ................................... , ............................................................... , ...... " ............................ 3-28 Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,>-----------=-~----------------< , Formatted: Font: 9 pt I~/~~~~~~~~ ______________ --J 3.2.2.2 1/ N:\Recl.m.''''n PI.~\lI<cbm"ionP .. nI!cvH[J\'rAQI.CONTII<.l.2.B ,..JIJ" .. d~5\WIoI!l~ 1/ & _~_~ ________ _ _________ _~ ________________________________ J Page vi Revision *3.2AB I"Ierllati.,,,aHnen!nmDc.nlson Min (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 3.2.2.3 <:ell 2 .............................................................................................. _ ..................................... 3·1409 3.2.2.4 Cell 3 .............................................. _._ ....................... _ .. _ ..... _ ............ _ .... _ .... _ .... _ .. _ ...... _ .... 3·119 3.2.2.5 CelI4A ...................................................................................................................................... 3·119 3.2.2.6 CclI4B .................................. __ ................................................................................................. 3·11 3.2.3 Mill Decommlssioning ....................................................... _ ............................................................... 3·1~1a TAelE or Eo"nEN"FS (eontln~ Page t • .,. 3.2.3.1 Mill Building and Equipment, and Other 11c.(2) ByproduCt Malllllal ....................... 3·H19 3.2.3.2 Mill Site ..................................... _ .............. _ ...... _._ ................................... _ ...................... )·15<a 3.3 DESIGN CRITERIA ........................................................................................... _ ..................................................... 3·1543 3.3.1 Regulatory Crlteria ....................................................... _ ...................... _ ............................................... )·1653 3.3.2 Radon Flux Anenuation ................................................................................................................... _ 3·1:;164 3.3.2.1 Prcdi~tive Anal)'sis .............................. .-........... .-............................................... _ ........ _ ........ 3·'1'/64 3.3.2.2 Empirlc;)1 Data ....................................................... _ ......................................................... _ 3·1986 3.3.3 Infilrr.uion Analysis ............................................................................................. _ .......................... .3~194? 3.3.4 Fre&e/Thaw Evaluation .......... , ......................................................................................................... 3·2~1'19 3.3.S 5011 Cover Erosion PrOlc"ion ............................ _ ............................................................................. 3·232'19 3.3.6 Slope Stability Anal)'sis ......................................................... _ .. _ .. _ .................................................. 3·2544 3.3.6.1 Sr.l.llc Analysis.. .. _ ... _ ....................................... _ ................................................................... 3-2§2r 3.3.6.2 PsclidOslilllcAn~lysl5 (Sclsmldty) ..................................................................... _ ............. 3·26~ j Formatted: Font: 9 pt Page vii Revisio n -e63.2.AB InlernarioMI Url!nil1mDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan 3.3.7 Soil Cover-Animal Intrusion .............................................................................................................. 3-2~ 3.3.8 Cover Material/Cover Material Volumes .......................................................................................... 3-2!:@ Formatted: Font: 9 pt l \..:...Fo:..r~m~a~tt=ed=: ;,..Fo:..n.;.:t;,..: :..9.::p:..t ________ ~ " 4N>J!:c~~I~n!~n!~I~~I:gn!I'"!lev ~2!!\~aL~N~Re~J.:.2!'~~n • .d~!~~.~~.:"-O~f.!'?~· ~_~ _____________ j TABLE 1.1-1 TA8LE 1.1-2 TABLE 1.3-1 TABLE 1.4-1 TABLE 1.5-1 LIST OF TABLES Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Page No. Temperature Means and Extremes at Blanding, Utah ........................................ o> .............. m ..................... 1-8 (Table 2.1.1 Dames & Moore-Final ES) Preci pitation Means and Extremes at Blanding, Utah ................................................................................. 1-9 (Table 2.1-2 Dames & Moore -Final ES) Distriburion of Recorded Sites According .................................................................................................... 1-12 to Temporal Position (Table 2.3-2 Dames & Moore -Final ES) Drainage Areas of Pro jeer Vicinity and Region ........................................................................................... 1-18 (Table 2.6-3 Dames & Moore -Final ES) Wells Located Within a 5-Mile Radius of the White Mesa Uranium Mill ....................................................................................................................... 1-33 (Table 1.1 Ti ran) TABLE 1.5.3.1-1 Properties of the Dakota/Burro Canyon Formations, White Mesa Uranium Mill ....................................................................................................................... 1-39 (Table 2.1 Titan) TABLE 1.5.3.1-2 Summary of Hydraulic Properties, White Mesa Uranium Mill ............................................................................................................................................... 1-40 (Table 2.2 Titan) TABLE 15 .3.2-1 Summary of Borehol e Tesrs, 1994 Drill ing Program, White Mesa Project, San Juan County, Utah ...................................................................................... 1-52 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan TABLE 1.5.3.2-2 Results of Laboratory Tests .............................. _._ ... _ ............................................................................................................ 1-53 TABLE 1.5.5-1 Monitoring Well and Ground Water Elevation Data, White Mesa Uranium Mill ................................................................ _ ... _.............................................. 1-59 (Table 2.3 Titan) LIST OF TABLES (continued) Page No. TABLE 1.6-1 Generalized Stratigraphie Seclion of Subsurface Rocks Based on Oil-Well Logs ......................................................................................................................... 1-69 (Table 2.6-1 UMETCO) TABLE 1.6-2 Generalized Stratigraph ic Section of Exposed Rocks in the Project Vicinity ................................................................................................................ ,............ 1-70 (Table 2.6-2 UMETCO) TABLE 1.6-3 Modified Mercalli Scale. 1956 Version ...................................................................................................... 1-89 (Table 26-3 UMETCO) TABLE 1.7-1 CommuniI)' Types and Expanse Within the Project Site Boundary ............................................................................................................................ 1-104 (Table 2.7-1 UMETCO) TABLE 1.7-2 Ground Cover for Each CommuniI)' Within the Project Site BOl,Jndary ......................................................................................................................... 1-104 TABLE 1.7-3 Birds Observed in the Vicinity of the White Mesa Project ..................................................................................................................................................... 1-107 (Table 2.7-3 UMETCO) TABLE 1.7·4 TABLE 2.)., TABLE 2.3·2 Table 3.3·' TABLE 5.3.2.1-1 TABLE B-1 Threatened and Endangered Aquatic Species Revision 3.2.B Oenison Mines (USA) Corp. Whit e Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Occurring in Utah .............................................................................................................................. 1-"1 (Table 2.7·4 UMETCO) Groundwater Monitoring Constituems listed in Table 2 or the GWOP ........ . . .......... 2·11 Operational phase Surface Water Monilortng Program ..... . . ................................................. 2·33 Avcrage Radon Flux from Tailings Cells 2004-2008. ........................................................................ 3·19 Placemem and Compaction Criteria Reclamation Covcr Materials ............................................................................................................................ [)age A·24 Required Reports ............. _ ..................................................................................................................................... Page 8·14 _'-___ UI\I. .... ' __ lU01.IJ ... __. TABLE 1.1-1 TABLE 1.1-2 TABLE 1.3-1 TABLE 1.4-1 TABLE 1.5-1 Revision %:93.2.AB mtet<,ultional UranitlmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan LIST OF TABLES Page No. Temperature Means and Extremes at Blanding, U[ah ................................................................................. 1-8 (Table 2.1:1 Dames & Moore -Final ES) Precipitation Means and Extremes at Blanding. Utah ...... _ .. _ ..................................................................... 1-9 (Table 2.1-2 Dames & Moore -Fina l ES) Distribution of Recorded Sites According .................................................................................................... 1-12 to Temporal Position (Table 2.3-2 Dames & Moore -Final ES) Drainage Areas of Project Vicinity and Region ........................................................................................... 1-18 (Table 2.6-3 Dames & Moore -Final ES) Wells Located Within a S-Mile Radius of rhe White Mesa Uranium Mill ....................................................................................................................... 1-33 (Table 1.1 Titan) TABLE 1.5.3.1-1 Propenies of the Dakora/Burro Canyon Formations, White Mesa Uranium Mill .................................. _ ................................................................................... 1-39 (Table 2.1 Titan) TABLE 1.5.3.1 -2 Summary of HydrauliC Properties, White Mesa Uranium Mill ............................................................................................................................................... 1-40 (Table 2.2 Titan) TABLE 1.5.3.2-1 Summary of Borehole Tesrs. 1994 Drilling Program. White Mesa Project. San Juan County. Utah ...................................................................................... 1-52 Revision r.e3.2.AB h,ternational UranitlmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan TABLE 1.5.3.2-2 Results of Laboratory Tesrs ................................................................................................................................................. 1-53 TABLE 1.5.5-1 Monitoring Well and Ground Warer Elevarion Data, White Mesa Uranium Mill .................................................................................................................... 1-59 (Table 2.3 Titan) LIST OF TABLES (continued) Page No. TABLE 1.6-1 Generalized Srratigraphic Section of Subsurface Rocks Based on Oil-Well Logs ......................................................................................................................... 1-69 (Table 2.6-1 UMETCO) TABLE 1.6-2 Generalized Stratigraphic Section of Exposed Rocks in the Project Vicinity ............................................................................................................................. 1-70 (Table 2.6-2 UMETCO) TABLE1 .6-J Modified Mercalli Scale, 1956 Version ...................................................................................................... 1-89 (Table 2.6-3 UMETCO) TABLE 1.7-1 Community Types and Expanse Within the Project Site Boundary ............................................................................................................................ 1-104 (Table 2.7-1 UMETCO) TABLE 1.7-2 Ground Cover for Each Community Within the Project Site Boundary ......................................................................................................................... 1-104 TABLE 1.7-3 Birds Observed in the Vicinity ohhe White Mesa Project..................................................................................................................................................... 1-107 (Table 2.7-3 UMETCO) TABLE 1.7-4 Threatened and Endangered Aquaric Species Revision r.G3.2.AB Illtelllft'l'iollm UranitlmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Occurring in Urah ................................................................................................................................ 1-111 (Table 2.7-4 UMETCO) I TABLE1.3-1 GroundwatcrMoniroring Constiwenrs Listed in Table 2 of the GWDP .......................................... 2-11 TABLE 2.3-2 Operational Phase Surface Water Monitoring Program ..................................................................... 2-33 Table 3.3-1 Average Radon Flux from Tailings Cells 2004-200B ........................................................................... 3-19 TABLE 5.3.2.1-1 Placement and Compaction Criteria Reclamation Cover Materials ............................................................................................................................... Page A-24 TABLE B-1 ReqUired Reports ........................................................................................................................................................ Page B-14 FIGURE 1-1 FIGURE 1-2 FIGURE 1.4-1 FIGURE 1.4-2 FIGURE 1.4-3 RGURE 1.5.1 FIGURE 1.5-2 FIGURE 1.5-3 LIST OF FIGURES Page viii Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mi.1I Reclamation plan Page No. White Mesa Mill Regional Location Map .......................................................................................................................... 1-3 White Mesa Mill location Map ........................................................................................................................................... 1-4 Drainage Map of the Vicinlry of rhe White Mesa Project ........................................................................................... 1-17 (Adapted from Dames & Moore (1978b), Plate 2.6-5) Streamflow Summary in the Blanding, Utah Vicinity .................................................................................................. 1-21 (Adapted from Dames & Moore (1978b), Plate 2.6-6) Preoperational Water Qualiry Sampling Stations in rhe White Mesa Project Vic.iniry ........................................................................................ , ..... 1-21 (Adapted from Dames & Moore (1978b), Plale 2.6-10) Colorado Plateau Geologic Map ........................................................................................................................................ 1-27 (Titan Figure 1.1) Approximate Elevation of Top of Brushy Basin ............................................................................................................. 1-29 (Titan Figure 1.2) Ground Water Appropriation Applications Within a 5-Mile Radius .................................................................................................................................... 1-32 (Titan Figure 1.3) FIGURE 1.5.3.1 -1 Site Plan Map (Showing Cross 5eClion5) ......................................................................................................................... 1·45 (Titan Figure 2.1) ·\Rocl.mnllbn PI.n\R.cIGUl~lion Plu Rev J.2SlLiSi orFlgllres r<. 3.2 Il 01.13.11 cltan.doex Page ix Revision 3.2.8 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan FIGURE 1.5.3.1-2 Cross Section A-A' West to East Through White Mesa Westwater Creek to Corral Canyon ...........•...•............................................................................. 1-48 (Titan Figure 2.2) FIGURE 1.5.3.1-3 Cross Section B-B' North to South Through White Mesa North of Facility to Cottonwood Wash ................................•..................................................... 1·49 FIGURE 1.5.5-1 Perched Ground Water Levels ............................................................................................................................................ 1-56 (Tiran Figure 2.4) FIGURE 1.5.5-2 Saturated Thickness of Perched Water ......................................................................................................................... 1-57 (Titan Figure 2.5) FIGURE 1.5.5-3 Topography of Brushy Basin ............................................................................................................................................... 1-58 (Titan Figure 2.6) FIGURE 1.6-1 Tectonic Index Map .......................................................... _ ................................................................................................ 1-68 FIGURE 1.6-2 White M esa Millsite-Geology of Surrounding Area ............................................................ _ ....................................... 1-80 FIGURE 1.6-3 Seismicity 320km Around Blanding, Utah ................................................................................................................... 1-91 FIGURE 1.6-4 Seismicity 200km Around Blanding. Utah ........................•.•........................................................................................... 1-92 FIGURE 1.6-5 Seismicity of the Western United States, 1950 to 1979 .............................................................................................. 1-93 FIGURE 1.6-6 Colorado Lineament .......................................................................................................................................................... 1·97 FIGURE 1.7-1 Community Types on [he Whim Mesa Projeer Site ................................................................................................... 1-103 FIGURE 2.3-1 ·\Recl.mOlian PI.n\ReclamAlion PI.n Rev 3.2lIU-isl orFi8l'r~ "w 3.2.11 01 13.) I clO1ln.docx FIGURE 3.1-1 FIGURE 3.2-1 FIGURE 3.2.3-1 Page x Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan White Mesa Mill Regional Map Showing Land Position ............................................................ , ................................. 3-3 White Mesa Mill General Layout Showing Access and Restricted Area Boundary ...... _ ........................................................................................................ 3-5 Site Map Locations of Buildings and Tankage ............................................................................................................... 3-12 FIGUREA-2.2.4-1 Sedimentation Basin Detail .................................................................................................................................................. A-? FIGUREA-3.2-1 Mill Site and Ore P;ld Final Grading plan ....................................................................................................................... A-12 FIGURE A-3.3-1 Typical Scanning Path Scoping Survey ........................................................................................................................... A-18 FIGURE A-3.3-2 Standard S;lmpling Pattern for Systematic Grid Survey of Soil ................................................................................ A-1 9 FIGURE A-S.1-1 Reclamation Cover Grading Plan ..................................................................................................................................... A-24 FIGURE A-S.1-2 Reclamation Cover Details and Cross Section ............................................................ """ ...... ,, .................................... A-2S FIGURE A-S.1-3 Reclamation Cover and Cross Sections .......................................................................................................................... A-26 FIGURE A-S.1-4 RockApron at Base oft oe of Cell Outslopes ................................................................................................................ A-2? FIGURE B-1 Typical Flow Charr for Construcrion Project .................................................................................................................. 8-22 ·\Re.:lom.lion PI •• IReelamolion Pion Ri:v 3.2II1Lisl ofl'igu ..... rev l.l l} 01.1 3.1 I clean do<:. FIGURE 1-1 FIGURE 1-2 FIGURE 1.4-1 FIGURE 1.4-2 FIGURE 1.4-3 FIGURE 1.5.1 I FIGURE 1.5-2 FIGURE 1.5-3 LIST OF FIGURES Page viii Revision r:93.2.AB International UranitlmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Page No. ---White Mesa Mill Regional Location Map ....................................................................................................... 1-3 ---White Mesa Mill Location Map ......................................................................................................................... 1-4 Drainage Map of the Vicinity of the White Mesa Project ........................................................................................... 1-17 (Adapted from Dames & Moore (1 978b), plate 2.6-5) Streamflow Summary in the Blanding, Utah Vicinity .................................................................................................. 1-21 (Adapted from Dames & Moore (1 978b), Plate 2.6-6) Preoperational Water Quality Sampling Stations in the White Mesa Project Vicinity .............................................................................................. 1-21 (Adapted from Dames & Moore (1 978b), Plate 2.6-10) Colorado plateau Geologic Map ........................................................................................................................................ 1-27 (Titan Figure 1.1) Generalired Srrtrtigraphy of White Me!aApproximate Elevation of Top of Brushy Basi n ................................. 1-29 (Titan Figure 1.2) Ground Water Appropriation Applications Within a 5-Mile Radius .................................................................................................................................... 1-32 (Titan Figure 1.3) FIGURE 1.5.3.1-1 Site plan Map (Showing Cross Sections) ......................................................................................................................... 1-45 (Titan Figure 2.1) Page ix Revision -t.e3.2.AB International UranitlrnDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan FIGURE 1.5.3.1-2 Cross Section A-A' West to East Through White Mesa Westwater Creek to Corral Canyon ............................................................................................. 1-48 (ntan Figure 2.2) FIGURE 1.53.1-3 Cross Section B-B' North to South Through White Mesa North of Facility to Cottonwood Wash ....... __ ........................................................................... 1-49 Lis:.-OF FIGURES (eontintled~ Page No. FIGURE 1.5.5-1 Perched Ground Water Levels ............................................................................................................................................ 1-56 (Titan Figure 2.4) FIGURE 1.5.5-2 Saturated Thickness of Perched Water ......................................................................................................................... 1-57 (Titan Figure 2.5) FIGURE 1.5.5-3 Topography of Brushy Basin .... _ .......................................................................................................................................... 1-58 (Titan Figure 2.6) FIGURE 1.6-1 Tectonic Index Map ............................................................................................................................................................ 1-68 FIGURE 1,6-2 White Mesa Millsite-Geology of SurroundIng Area ..................................................................................................... 1-80 FIGURE 1.6-3 Seismicity 320km Around Blanding, Utah ................................................................................................................... 1-91 FIGURE 1.6-4 Seismicity 200km Around Blanding, Utah ...................................................................................................................... 1-92 FIGURE 1.6-5 Seismicity of the Western United States, 1950 to 1979 .............................................................................................. 1-93 FIGURE 1.6-6 Colorado Lineament .......................................................................................................................................................... 1-97 N utccJIW.tign Plnp\RWlmatjoo Plan Rev ] 'lB\LIs of figura' my 3 l,B OJ 13 II redljnc.docxNAAnipmoltfm-i1!Jn\Rq:Jonwiort-Pltn+it-ifHKogC;n 12 17 JW.iM:offl8um:rm4M 1k2O;l9;~~RGI'/,AN\FlGIlRQS'P.M.)'4999 FIGURE 1.7-1 FIGURE 2.3-1 FIGURE3.1-1 FIGURE 3.2-1 FIGURE 3.2.3-1 Pagex Revision r.t33.2.AB Intel nlltionlll UrllnitlmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Community Types on the White Mesa Project Site ................................................................................................... 1-103 White Mesa Mill Regional Map Showing Land Position .............................................................................................. 3-3 White Mesa Mill General Layout Showing Access and Restricted Area Boundary ................................................................................................................ 3-S Site Map Showing Locations of Buildings and Tank!~ ........................................................................................... 3-12 I FIGURE A-2.2.4-1 Sedimentation Basin Detail ............................................................................................................................................... A-Z4 LIST OF FIGURES (contintled) Pllge No. FIGUREA-3.2-1 Mill Site and Ore Pad Final Grading plan ..................................................................................................................... A-128 FIGURE A-3.3-1 Typical Scanning Path Scoping Survey ......................................................................................................................... A-1,!!4 FIGURE A-3.3-2 Standard Sampling Pattern for Systematic Grid Survey of Soil .............................................................................. A-125 FIGURE A-S.1-1 Reclamation Cover Grading plan for Cell! 21lnd 3 ................................................................................................. A-2449 I FIGURE A-S.1-2 Reclamation Cover Details and Cross Sections .......................................................................................................... A-22,e FIGURE A-S.1-3 Reclamation Cover and Cross Sections Ilnd Detllil., .................................................................................................. A-264 ---- FIGUREA-S.1 -4 I FIGURE B-" Page xi Revision r.93.2.A8 Ii It!!1 national UraniumDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Rock Apron at Base ofT oe of Cell Outslopes ................................................................................................................ A-27 ----Typical Flow Chart for Construction Project ................................................................................................ B-22 N lRotll mOlion Pbn\&cIQml!lon 1'100 Rey J 28\1 is! or FlgUllls rev 3 2 U 01 )) 11 rcdrra .. d~m.*"-Ph"AAccltmtjlk" ... Ph"t-H til ... "m!!"... 1117 19\biM of.£lw~ WOdO:Llifl:l;\H&EM\WMRGI'b;\ I6YR6,l,S'PMay-llJ99 Page i Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan REFERENCES Abt, S. R., 1987. Engineering and Design of Waste Disposal Systems, Mini-course No.7: Riprap Design for Reclamation. Abt, S.R., J.F., and Wittler., 199. Estimating Flow Through Riprap, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, v. 117, no 5, pp. 670-675, May. Advanced Terra Testing, 1996. (Cited in 3.3.2.1) Agenbroad, l. D. et. aI., 1981. 1980 Excavations in White Mesa, San Juan (ouney. Utah. (Cited in 1.3.2) Aitken and Berg. 1968. (Cited in 3.3.4) Aki. K" 1979. Characterization of Barriers on an Earthquake Fault, Journal of Geophysical 6140-6148. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Research, v. 84, pp. Algermissen, S. T. and Perkins, D. M., 1976. A Probabilistic Estimate of Maximum Acceleration on Rock in the Contiguous United States, U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Repo.rt, No. 76A16. (Cited in 1.6.3.4) Anderson, L. W. and Miller, D. G., 1979. Quarternary Fault Map of Utah, FURGO, Inc. Arabasz, W. J., Smith,R B., and Richins, W. D., eds., 1979. Earthquake Studies in Utah 1850 to 1978, Special Publication of the University of Utah Seismograph Stations, Department of Geology and Geophysics. Bonilla, M. G., Mark, R. K., and Lien kaerri per, J. J., 1984. StatistiCal Relations Among Earthquake Magnitude, Surface Rupture Length, and Surface Fault Displacement, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 74, No.6, pp. 2379-2411. Brill, K. G. and Nuttli, O. W., 1983. Seismicity ofthe Colorado Lineament, Geology, v. 11, pp. 20-24. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) N:\R.d.m.uion PI.n\Rcci,malion I~.n Rev 3.28\RfFE RENCES 3.2.B d •• n.uocx Page ii Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Case, J. E. and Joesting, H. R., 1972. Regional Geophysical Investigations in the Central Plateau, U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 736. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Casjens, L. A. et. aI., 1980. Archeological Excavations on White Mesa, San Juan County, Utah, 1979; Volumes I through IV; June, 1980. (Cited in 1.3.2) Cater, F. W., 1970. Geology of the Salt Anticline Region in Southwestern Colorado, U. S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 637. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Chen and Associates, Inc., 1978. Soil Property Study, Earth Lined Tailings Retention Cells, White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah. Chen and Associates, Inc., 1979. Soil Property Study, Proposed Tailings Retention Cells, White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah. Chen and Associates, Inc., 1987. (Cited in 3.3.2.1,3.3.6) Cook, K. L. and Smith, R. B., 1967. Seismicity in Utah, 1850 Through June 1965, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., v. 57, pp. 689-718. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Coulter, H. W., Waldron, H. H., and Devine, J. F., 1973. Seismic and Geologic Siting Considerations for Nuclear Facilities, Proceedings, Fifth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Rome, Paper 302. (Cited in 1.6.3.4) Craig, L. c., et. aI., 1955. Stratigraphy ofthe Morrison and Related Formations, Colorado plateau Region, a Preliminary Report, U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1009-E, pp. 125-168. (Cited in 1.6.2.2) Dames and Moore, 1978, "Environmental Report, White Mesa Uranium Project, San Juan County, Utah." Prepared for Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc., January. (Cited in 1.5, 1.5.3.1, 1.5.5, 1.7.1.1) Dames and Moore, 1978a. Site Selection and Design Study -Tailing Retention and Mill Facilities, White Mesa Uranium Project, January 17, 1978. Dames and Moore, 1978b. Environmental Report, White Mesa Uranium Project, San Juan County, Utah, January 20, N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\REFERENCES 3.2.B clean.doD< Page iii Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan 1978, revised May 15, 1978. (Cited in Section 1.0, 1.4.1, 1.4.2, 1.6.3.4, 1.7.1.1, 1.7.1.2, 1.7.2, Attachment A) D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., 1979. Engineer's Report, Tailings Management System, White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah. D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., 1981, Letter Report, "Assessment of the Water Supply System, White Mesa Project, Blanding, Utah." Prepared for Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc., February. (Cited in 1.5, 1.5.3.1) D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., 1981 a. Engineer's Report, Second phase Design -Cell 3 Tailings Management System, White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah. D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., 1981 b. letter Report, leak Detection System Evaluation, White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah. D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., 1982, "Construction Report, Initial Phase -Tailings Management System, White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah." Prepared for Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc., February. (Cited in 1.5, 1.5.3.1) D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., 1982a. Construction Report, Initial Phase -Tailings Management System, White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah. D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., 1982b. Monitoring Plan -Initial phase -Tailings Management System -White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah. D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., 1982c. letter Report -Groundwater Monitoring Program White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah. D'Appolonia Consulting, Engineers, Inc., 1982d. Letter Report -Additional Analysis Tailings Cover Design Revisions - White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah. D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc., 1984, "Engineer's Report, Geotechnical Site Evaluation, Farley Project, Garfield County, Utah." Prepared for Atlas Minerals, Moab, Utah, June. (Cited in 1.5) N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\REFERENCES 3.2.B clean.docx Pageiv Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Eardly. A. J .• 195B. Physiography of Southeastern Utah in Intermountain Association Petroleum Geologists Guidebook. 9th Annual Field Conference. Geology of the Paradox Basin. pp. 10-15. (Cited in 1.6.1.1) Energy Fuels Nuclear. Inc.. 1983. Construction Report -Second phase Tailings Management System. White Mesa Uranium Project. Energy Fuels Nuclear. Inc. Semi-annual Effluent Report. White Mesa Mill. SUA-1358. Docket No. 40-8681. (July - December 1995) and (January through June 1996). (Cited in 1.0. 1.5. 1.5.5.1. 3.3.2.2) Environmental Protection Agency. 1994. (Cited in 3.3.1.3.3.3) Feltis. R. D .• 1966. Water from Bedrock in the Colorado plateau of Utah. Utah State Engineer Technical Publication No. 15. Grose. L. T .• 1972. Tectonics. in Geologic Atlas ofthe Rocky Mountain Region Rocky Mountain Association Geologists. Denver. Colorado. pp. 35-44. (Cited in 1.6.1.3) Hadsell. F. A.. 1968. History of Earthquakes in Colorado. in Hollister. J. S. and Weimer. R. J .• eds .• Geophysical and Geological Studies of the Relationships Between the Denver Earthquakes and the Rocky Mountain Arsenal Well. Colorado School Mines Quarterly. v. 63. No.1. pp. 57-72. (Cited in 1.6.2.3. 1.6.3.3) Haynes. D.D .• Vogel. J.D .• and Wyant. D.G .• 1972. "Geology. Structure and Uranium Deposits of the Cortez. Quadrangle. Colorado and Utah." u.s. Geological Survey. Miscellaneous Investigation Series. Map. 1-629. May. (Cited in 1.5.2. 1.5.3.1,1.6.2.2) Hermann, R. B., Dewey, J. W .• and Park, S. F., 1980. The Dulce, New Mexico, Earthquake of January 23, 1966. Seismological Society of America Bulletin. v. 70, No.6, pp. 2171-2183. (Cited in 1.6) Hite, R. J., 1975. An Unusual Northeast-trending Fracture Zone and its Relation to Basement Wrench Faulting in Northern Paradox Basin. Utah and Colorado, Four Corners Geological Society 8th Field Conference Guidebook, Durango. Colorado. pp. 217-223. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Huff, L. D .• and Lesure. F. G .• 1965. Geology and Uranium DepOSits of Montez.uma Canyon Area, San Juan County. N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\REFERENCES 3.2.B clean do(x Page v Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Utah, U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1190, 102 p. (Cited in 1.6.2.2) Hunt, C. B., 1956. Cenozoic Geology of the Colorado plateau: U. S. G. S. Professional Paper, 279. Hydro-Engineering, 1991, "Ground Water Hydrology at the White Mesa Tailings Facility.:' Minerals Corporation, Blanding, Utah, July. Prepared for Umetco Johnson, H. 5., Jr. , and Thordarson, W., 1966. Uranium Deposits of the Moab, Monticello, White Canyon, and Monument Valley Districts, Utah and Arizona, U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1222-H, 53 p. (Cited in 1.6.1.3, 1.6.2.2) Keend, W. E., 1969. Quaternary Geology of the Grand and Battlement Mesa Area, Colorado: U.S.G.S. Professional Paper, 617. Kelley, V. c., 1955. Regional Tectonics of the Colorado Plateau and Relationship to the Origin and Distribution of Uranium, New Mexico University Publication Geology No.5, 120 p. (Cited in 1.6.1.3) Kelley, V. c.. 1956. (Cited in 1.6.1.3) Kelley, V.c., 1958, ''Tectonics of the Region of the Paradox Basin." In Intermountain Association Petroleum Geologists Guidebook, 9th Annual Field Conference, Geology of the Paradox Basin, p. 31-38. Kirkham, R. M. and Rogers, W. P., 1981. Earthquake Potential in Colorado, A Preliminary Evaluation, Colorado Geological Survey, Bulletin 43. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Krinitzsky, E. l. and Chang, F. K., 1975. State-of-the-Art for Assessing Earthquake Hazards in the United States, Earthquake Intensity and the Selection of Ground Motions for Seismic Design, Miscellaneous Paper 5-73-1, Report 4, September 1975, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, CE, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Larson, E. E., et. ai., 1975. Late Cenozoic Basic Volcanism in Northwestern Colorado and its Implications Concerning Tectonics and the Colorado River System in Cenozoic History of Southern Rocky Mountains: Geological Society of America, Memoir 144. N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\REFERENCES 3 2.B clean.docx Pagevi Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1994. Seismic Hazard Analysis of Title II Reclamation plans; U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Lindsay, L. M. W., 1978. Archeological Test Excavations on White Mesa, San Juan County, Southeastern Utah. (Cited in 1.3.2) MITRE Software Corporation, GSLOPE Computer Software Package. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 1977. Probable Maximum Precipitation Estimates, Colorado River and Great Basin Drainages. Hydrometerological Report (HMR) No. 49. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 1988. Computer Printout of Earthquake File Record for 320 km Radius of Blanding, Utah. U. S. Department of Commerce, National GeophYSical Data Center, Boulder, Colorado. (Cited in 1.6.3.4, 1.7) Nielson, A. S., 1979. Additional Archeological Test Excavations and Inventory on White Mesa, San Juan County, Southeastern Utah. (Cited in 1.3.2) NUREG 1623, 2002. Design of erosion Protection for Long-Term stabilization, Final Report, September. NUREG/CR-1081, March 1980. Characterization of Uranium Tailings Cover Materials for Radon Flux Reduction. NUREG/CR-2642, June 1982. Long-term Survivability of Riprap for Armoring Uranium Mill Tailings and Covers: A Literature Review. NUREG/CR-2684, August 1982. Rock Riprap Design Methods and Their Applicability to Long-term Protection of Uranium Mill Tailings Impoundments. NUREG/CR-3027, March 1983. Overland Erosion of Uranium Mill Tailings Impoundments Physical Processes and Computational Methods. NUREG/CR-3061, November 1983. Survivability of Ancient Man-made Mounds: Implications for Uranium Mill N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation plan Rev 3,2B\REFERENCES 3,2,B clean.docx Page vii Revision 3.2.8 Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Tailings Impoundment. NUREG/CR-3199, October 1983. Guidance for Disposal of Uranium Mill Tailings: Long-term Stabilization of Earthen Cover Materials. NUREG/CR-3397, October 1983. Design Considerations for Long-term Stabilization of Uranium Mill Tailings Impoundments. NUREG/CR-3533, February 1984. Radon Attenuation Handbook for Uranium Mill Tailings Cover Design. NUREG/CR-3674, March 1984. Designing Vegetation Covers for Long-term Stabilization of Uranium Mill Tailings. NUREG/CR-3747, May 1985. The Selection and Testing of Rock for Armoring Uranium Tailings Impoundments. NUREG/CR-3972, December 1984. Settlement of Uranium Mill Tailings Piles. NUREG/CR-4075, May 1985. Designing Protective Covers for Uranium Mill Tailings Piles: A Review. NUREG/CR-4087, February, 1985. Measurements of Uranium Mill Tailings Consolidation Characteristics. NUREG/CR-4323, January 1986. The Protection of Uranium Tailings Impoundments against Overland Erosion. NUREG/CR-4403, November 1985. Summary of the Waste Management Programs at Uranium Recovery Facilities as They Relate to the 40 CFR Part 192 Standards. NUREG/CR-4480, September 1986. Erosion Protection of Uranium Tailings Impoundment. NUREG/CR-4504, March 1986. Long-term Surveillance and Monitoring of Decommissioned Uranium Processing Sites and Tailings Piles. NUREG/CR-4520, April 1986. Predictive Geochemical Modeling of Contaminant Concentrations in Laboratory Columns and in Plumes Migrating from Uranium Mill Tailings Waste Impoundments. N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\REFERENCES 3.2.B clean.dacx Page viii Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan NUREG!CR-4620, June, 1986. Methodologies for Evaluating Long-Term Stabilization Designs of Uranium Mill Tailings Impoundments, J. D. Nelson, S. R. Abt., et. al. (Cited in 3.3.1, 3.5.5, Attachment A) NUREG!CR-4651, May 1987. Development of Riprap Design Criteria by Riprap Testing in Flumes: Phase I. (Cited in 3.3.1,3.3.5, Attachment A) Nuttli, O. W., 1979. State-of-the-Art for Assessing Earthquake Hazards in the United States, Part 16: The Relation of Sustained Maximum Ground Acceleration and Velocity to Earthquake Intensity and Magnitude, with Errata Sheet of January 11, 1982; U. S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, P. O. No. DACW39-78-C-0072, 67 p. with Two Appendices and 2 p. Errata. Roger and Associates Engineering Company, 1988. Radiological Properties Letters to C. O. Sealy from R. Y. Bowser dated March 4 and May 9, 1988. (Cited in 3.3.2.1) Rogers and Associates, 1996. (Cited in 3.3.2.1) Schroeder, P. R., J. M. Morgan, T. M. Walski, and A. C. Gibson, 1989, "Technical Resource Document, The Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) Model, Version II," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Seed, H. B. And Idriss, I. M., 1982. Ground Motions and Soils Liquefaction During Earthquakes, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, Berkeley, California. Shoemaker, E. M., 1954. Structural Features of Southeastern Utah and Adjacent Parts of Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona. Utah Geological Society Guidebook to the Geology of Utah, No.9, pp. 48-69. (Cited in 1.6.1.3) Shoemaker, E.M., 1956, "Structural Features of the Colorado plateau and Their Relation to Uranium DepOSits." U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 300, p. 155-168. (Cited in 1.6.1.3) Simon, R. B., 1972. Seismicity, in Mallory, W. W., and Others, eds. Geologic Atlas of the Rocky Mountain Region, Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists, pp. 48-51. N:\Rcclamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\REFERENCES 3.2.B clean.docx Pageix Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines {USA} Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Slemmons, D. B., 1977. State-of-the-Art for Assessing Earthquake Haz.ards in the United States, Part 6, Faults and Earthquake Magnitude, with an Appendix on Geomorphic Features of Active Fault Zones, U. S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Contract No. DACW39-76-C-0009, 129 p. plus 37 p. Appendix. Smith, R. B., 1978. Seismicity, Crustal Structure, and Intraplate Tectonics of the Western Cordillera, in Cenoz.oic Tectonics and Regional Geophysics of the Western Cordillera. Smith, R. B. and Eaton, G. P., eds, Memoir 152, Geological Society of America, pp. 111-144. {Cited in 1.6.3.3} Smith, S., 1981. Long-Term Stability at Union Carbide's Tailings Piles in Uravan, Colorado. Stephenson, D., 1979. Rockfill in Hydraulic Engineering, Developments in Geotechnical Engineering, 27, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, pp. 50-60. See NUREG 4620. Stokes, W. L., 1954. Stratigraphy of the Southeastern Utah Uranium Region, Utah Geological Society Guidebook to the Geology of Utah, No.9, pp. 16-47. Stokes, W. L., 1967. A Survey of Southeastern Utah Uranium Districts, Utah Geological Society Guidebook to the Geology of Utah, No. 21, pp. 1-11 . {Cited in 1.6.2.2} Tellco Environmental, 1995. Neshaps Radon Flux Measurement Program, White Mesa Mill, October 1995. {Cited in Introduction} Thompson, K. c., 1967. Structural Features of Southeastern Utah and Their Relations to Uranium Deposits, Utah Geological Society Guidebook to the Geology of Utah, No. 21, pp. 23-31. {Cited in 1.6.1.3} Thordarson, 1966. {Cited in 1.6.1.3, 1.6.2.2} Titan Environmental Corporation, 1994. {Cited in 1.0} Titan Environmental Corporation, 1994a. Hydrogeologic Evaluation of White Mesa Uranium Mill, July 1994. {Cited in Introduction, 1.5} N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\REFERENCES 3.2.B c1ean.docx Page x Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Titan Environmental Corporation, 1994b. Points of Compliance, White Mesa Uranium Mill, September 1994. (Cited in Introduction, 1.5) Titan Environmental Corporation, 1996. Tailings Cover Design, White Mesa Mill, October 1996 (Cited in Introduction, 1.6.3) Trifunac, M. D. and Brady, A. G. On the Correlation of Seismic Intensity Scales with the Peaks of Recorded Strong Ground Motion, Seismological Society of America Bulletin, V. 65, Feb. 1975, pp. 139-162. (Cited in 1.6.3.4) Umetco, 1987. Umetco Minerals Corporation SUA-1358: Docket No. 40-8681, license Condition 48, White Mesa Mill, Utah, Letter From R. K. Jones to U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated November 30,1987. Umetco Minerals Corporation, 1992, "Ground Water Study, White Mesa Mill, Blanding, Utah," license SUA 1358, Docket No. 40-8681. (Cited in 1.5.3.1,1.5.5) United States Geological Survey, 1970. (Cited in 1.6) U.S. Department of Energy, 1988. (Cited in 3.3.1,3.3.4) U.s. Department of Energy, 1993, "Environmental Assessment of Remedial Action at the Slick Rock Uranium Mill Tailings Sites, Slick Rock, Colorado." UMTRA Project Office, Albuquerque, New Mexico, February. (Cited in 1.5.3) U. S. Geological Survey. (Cited in 1.5) U. S. Geological Survey, 1970. (Cited in 1.6.2.3) U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1977. Regulatory Guide 3.11, Design, Construction, and Inspection of Embankment Retention Systems for Uranium Mills, Revision 2, 1977. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Regulatory Guide 3.64, Task WM 503-4, Calculation of Radon Flux Attenuation by Earthen Uranium Mill Tailings Covers. (Cited in 3.3.2.1) N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation rlan Rev 3.2B\REFERENCES 3.2.B clean.docx Page xi Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1979. Final Environmental Statement -White Mesa Uranium Project, NUREG-0556. (Cited in Section 1.0,1.3.1,1.4,1.4.2) U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1980. (Cited in 3.3.1) U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1984. Guidelines for Decontamination of Facilities and Equipment Prior to Release for Unrestricted Use or Termination of Licenses for Byproduct or Source Materials. (Cited in Introduction) U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1985. Standard Review plan for UMTRA Title I Mill Tailings -Remedial Action Plans, Division of Waste Management. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1987a. URFO:TIO, Docket No. 40-8681, 040086817405, Letter to Umetco Minerals Corporation O. S. Hamrick) from F. F. Hawkins dated January 26, 1987. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1987b. 10 CFR 40, Appendix A U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1987c. URFO:GRK, Docket No. 40-8681, Letterto Umetco Minerals Corporation from E. F. Hawkins dated October 21, 1987. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1988. Docket No. 40-8681 SUA-1358, Amendment No. 10. Letter to Umetco Minerals Corporation dated January 8, 1988, from R. Dale Smith. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1989. (Cited in 3.3.1,3.3.2) U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1990. (Cited in 3.3.5, Attachment A) University of Utah Seismograph Stations, 1988. Computer List of Earthquakes within 320 km of Blanding, Utah, Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City. von Hake, C. A, 1977. Earthquake History of Utah, Earthquake Information Bulletin 9, pp. 48-51. (Cited in 1.6.2.3) Warner, L. A, 1978. The Colorado Lineament, A Middle Precambrian Wrench Fault System, Geological Society of N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\REFERENCES 3.2.B clean.doex America Bulletin, v. 89, pp. 161-171. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Williams, P. L.,1964. Geology, Structure, and Uranium Deposits of the Moab Quadrangle. Geologie Survey Map, 1-360. Witkind, I. J .• 1964. Geology oftheAbajo Mountains Area, San Juan County. Utah, U. S. Professional Paper 453. (Cited in 1.6.1.3, 1.6.2, 1.6.2.2) Page xii Revis.ion 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Colorado and Utah. U. S. Geological Survey. Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 19B2. Geologie Characterization Repon of the Paradox Basin Study Region, Utah Study Areas, ONWI-290, v. 1, Prepared for Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation, Battelle Memorial Institute. Wong; I. G., 1981. Seismological Evaluation of the Colorado Lineament in the Intermountain Region {abs.}. Earthquake Notes. v. 53, pp. 33-34. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Wong, I. G., 1984. Seismicity of the Paradox Basin and the Colorado Plateau Interior, ONWI-492. Office of Nuclear Waste Isolation. Barrelle Memorial Institute. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Zoback. M. D. and Zoback. M. L., 1980. State of Stress in the Conterminous United States, Journal Research, v. 85, pp. 6113-6156. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) N;\Rcciamalion 1'I.n\Reciomollon I'I.n Itev ~2B\I{EFER CES 3.2.6 dcandou Prepared for the of Geophysical Page xii Revision 4:e3.2.AB [lie, 1!)1 Ftlels ~~tldear, IlieDenison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan REFERENCES Abt, S. R., 1987. Engineering and Design of Waste Disposal Systems, Mini-course No.7: Riprap Design for Reclamation. Abt, S.R., I.F., and Winler., 199. Estimating Flow Through Riprap, lournal of HydrauliC Engineering, v. 117, no 51 pp. 670-675,.---1 Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", Hanging: 0.5" ~ Advanced Terra Testing. 1996. (Cited in 3.3.2.1) Agenbroad, L. D. et. aI., 1981. 1980 Excavations in White Mesa, San Juan County, Utah. (Cited in 1.3.2) Aitken and Berg, 1968. (Cited in 3.3.4) Aki, K., 1979. Characterization of Barriers on an Earthquake Fault, Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 84, pp. 6140-6148. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Algermissen, S. T. and Perkins, D. M., 1976. A Probabilistic Estimate of Maximum Acceleration on Rock in the Contiguous United States, U. S. Geological Survey Open-File Report, No. 76-416. (Cited in 1.6.3.4) Anderson, L. W. and Miller, D. G., 1979. Quarternary Fault Map of Utah, FURGO, Inc. Arabasz, W. j., Smith, R. 8., and Richins, W. D., eds., 1979. Earthquake Studies in Utah 1850 to 1978, Special Publication of the University of Utah Seismograph Stations, Department of Geology and Geophysics. Bonilla, M. G., Mark, R. K., and Lienkaemper, J. J., 1984. Statistical Relations Among Earthquake Magnitude, Surface Rupture Length, and Surface Fault Displacement, Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 74, No.6, pp. 2379-2411. Brill, K. G. and Nuttli, O. W., 1983. Seismicity of the Colorado Lineament, Geology, v. 11, pp. 20-24. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) N'\AtdWU!9!1 llLin\ltrsl:!:r!'!.HJDIl ~ Rt .... 'l.1IAAIHRENtts 3.1.9 r!drl~,d\?S.:1!4M"t.~m\ars~ .. )'1: [ ,,0"'9 Hj±M!!\RltfAf-N@-71A ~~M\WI"M~ft\I<l __ ~,."J'uLt<1'lO Pagexiii Revision +.93.2.AB [lie. ID' F~el, ~'~dea., IneDenison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Case, J. E. and Joesting, H. R., 1972. Regional Geophysical Investigations in the Central Plateau, U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 736. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Casjens, L. A. et. aI., 1980. Archeological Excavations on White Mesa, San Juan County, Utah, 1979; Volumes I through IV; June, 1980. (Cited in 1.3.2L Cater, F. W., 1970. Geology of the Salt Anticline Region in Southwestern Colorado, U. S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 637. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Chen and Associates, Inc., 1978. Soil Property Study, Earth lined Tailings Retention Cells, White Project, Blanding, Utah. Mesa Uranium Chen and Associates, Inc., 1979. Soil Property Study, Proposed Tailings Retention Cells, White Mesa Uranium Project, Blanding, Utah. Chen and Associates, Inc., 1987. (Cited in 3.3.2.1,3.3.6) Cook. K. L. and Smith, R. 8., 1967. Seismicity in Utah, 1850 Through June 1965, Bull. Seism. Soc. Am., v. 57, pp. 689-718. (Cited in 1.6.3.3) Coulter, H. W., Waldron, H. H., and Devine, J. F., 1973. Seismic and GeologicSiting Considerations for Nuclear Facilities,"---I Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", Hanging: OS' Proceedings, Fifth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Rome, Paper 302. (Cited in 1.6.3.4) Craig, L. C, et. al" 1955. Stratigraphy of the Morrison and Related Formations, Colorado plateau Preliminary Report, U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1 009-E, pp. 125-168. (Cited in 1.6.2.2) Dames and Moore, 1978, "Environmental Report, White Mesa Uranium Project, San Juan County, for Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc., January. (Cited in 1.5, 1.5.3.1, 1.5.5, 1.7.1.1) Region, a Utah." Prepared N;\R«lJtNilnn PI.an\R«I.imldcM Phlt. ~ lW,R.£FERlNCU :l.2.B IrdUrw,d9t~.!n!riorl.n\:tsst.'.'''''h pf!ft=jl.t-li ., P,CtUd' ~J;;t~ ..d.. *_""",,-~ Page xiv Revision +.e3.2.AB Erte.!P' Ftocl3 ~~II.:1eer;-!ncDeflison Mines (USA) Corp .. White MesaMillReclamation plan Dames and Moore, 1978a. Slle Selection and Oesign SliJdy -Tailing Retention and Mill Fadillics. White Mesa Uranium Proiecr. )anuMY 17.1978. Dames and Moore. 1978b. Environmental Repon. White Mesa Ur.lnium Projec!, San juan County. Utah. January 20. 1978. revised May1S. 1978. (Oted in Section 1.0. 1.4.1. 1.4.2, 1.6.3.4, 1.7.1.1,1.7.1.2,1.7.2. Attachment A) D'Appolonia Consulting Engineers, Inc. 1979. Engineer's Repan. Tailings Maflagemem System/ Ur,lOium l'roleC1, Blanding. Utah. White Mesa D'Appolonia Consulling Enginecrs.lnc.1981. Leiter Report. "Assessment of the Water Supply Syslem. White Mesa Project. Blanding. Utah." Prepared for Ener!l)l Fuels Nuclear. Inc.. February. (Cited in 1.5. 15.3.1) O'Appolonia Consul ling Engineers. Inc., 1981a. Engineer's Repon, Second Phase Design -Cell 3 Management System. White Me~a Uranium l'rojcc1. Blanding. Urnh. D'Appolonia ConH.lting Engineers.,lne./1981 b. Lencr Repon, Leak Detection SYSlem Evaluation, Uraniuo" Projec~ Blanding. Utah. Tailings White Mesa D'Appolonia Con~ulting Engineers. Inc .• 1982, ·ConStHl'tian Report. Initial I'hase -Tailings Managemem System, Whlre Mesa Uranium Projce!. Blanding. Utah," Prepared for Eneigy Fuels Nuclear. Inc.. Fcbrtr.lry. (Cited in 1.5.1.5.3.1) O'Appolonia ConSulting Engineers,lnc. 1982a. Construction Rilpon, Initial Phase ."aillngs Mesa Uranium I'roject. Blanding. Utah, Management System. White O'Appolonla Consulting Engineers. Inc" 1982b. Monlroring pran -Initial Phase -TailIngs Mesa Uranium ProjeCt. Blanding, Utah, Management System -White O'Appolonia Consulting Engineers. Inc.. 1982c. letler Repon -Gro~",d\VaterMonitoring Program Uranium Project. 8landing. Utah. White Mesa Page xv Revision +.B3.2.AB E"ergy Fllels ~~lIdear, l"eDenison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan D'Appolonla Consulting, Engineers, Inc., 19B2d. LClIcr Report ·Additional Analysis Tailings Cover Design Revisions . Whire Mesa Uranium Projeel, Blanding. Utah. O'Appolonia Consulting Ellgineers, Inc., 1984. "Engineds Repon. Georecnnkal Sire Evaluation. Farley I'ro)co. G.rlIdd County. urah." Prepared for Atlas Mincrals. Moab. Ulan. June. (Ched in 1.5) Eardly.A. f" 1958. PhYSiography 01 SOUlheastern Ul1Ih in Intermountain Association Perroleum Geologi515 GUidebook, 9th Annllal Reid Conference, Geology of Ihe PJradox Basin. pp. 10·15. (Cited in 1.6.1.1) E.nergy Fucls Nuclear, Inc. 1 983. Construction Report· Second phase Tailings Management System. While Mesa lJ~anium ProleeL Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc. Seml·annual effluent Report. White Mc.s., Mill, SUA-USB. Docket No. 40·8681, (luly - December 1995) and (jafluary through June 1996). (Cited in 1.0, 1.5. 1.5.5.1.3.3.2.2) Erwironmemal Protection Agency. 1994. (Cited in 3.3.1. 3.3.3) Fell.s. R. D., 1965. Water from Bedrock in thc Colorado Plateau of Utah, Utah SI~IC Engineer Technical Publication No.1 5. Grose, L. T .. 1972. le(tonics.in GcologicAtias ofrhl' ROcky Mouniain Region Rocky Mountain Association GeologistS, Oenver. Colorado. pp. 3S-44. (Cited In 1.6,1.3) Hadsell, F. A" 1968. History 01 Earthquakes in Colorado. in Hollis!er, J. S. and Weimer, R.I., cds., Geophysical and Geological Studies of the Relationships Belween the Denver Earthquakes and the Rocky Moumain Arsenal Well, Colorado School Mines Quarterly, v. 63, No.1. pp. 57-72. (Cited in 1.6.2.3,1.6.3.3) Haynes, O.D., Vogel, ).0 .• and Wynnr. O.G., 1972, "Geology, Srruaure and Uranium Deposits of (he Cortez QUlJdranglc, Color,ldo and Utah.' U.S. Geological Survey. M15cellancou~ Investigation Series. Map. 1·62.9, May. (Cited in 1.5.2, 1.5.3.1 ,1.6.2.2) Hermann. R. B .. Dcwe)'.J. W .. ,lnd I'ark, S. F., 1980. The Dub:. New Mexico. E.mhqu ke of lanuary 23, 1966, N:\Rtd .. mJdon P!lmRrdinlJ,»n pt .. " Rey 3.211\R[rERf~'((S 3,2.9 ,~dlil'1f'~rs!:T!!JO ~";t~ •.• kd,.n l~tMtrfU"ff! 31A ~ .......... ~ __ « h, 1.4'!96 Pagel<Vi Re\li~i(m 4:93.2""'B Ene'!)' Fael. ~iddeftrrlm:Ocni50n Mines (USA) Corp .. White MesaMili Reclamation plan Scismologkal Society of America Bulletin, v. 70, No.6. pp. 2171·21B3. (Cited In 1.6) Hire. R.I., 1975. An Unusual Northeast-trending FraClUre7.onc and its Relation 10 Basement Wrench Faulting in Nonhern Paradox Basin, Urah and Colorado. Four Corners Geological Sod!!!)' Bth Reid (onference Guidebook, Durango, Colorado. pp. 217-223. (Ciled in 1.6.3.3) Huff, L D .. and Lesure. F. G .. 1965. Geology and Uranium Deposits 01 Montauma Canyon Area. San Junn County. Utah, U. S. GcologiCilI Survey Bulletin 1190,102 p. (Ciled in 1.6.2.2) HUn!, C. B., 1956. CenOloic Gcology of the Colorado Plateau: U. S. G. S.l'rofessional Paper. 279. Hydro-Engineering; 1991. "Ground Waler Hydrology ilt the WhlIe Mesa T~ilings Fadll!)'." Prepared for UrnelCo Minerals Corporaflon.Blanding. Utah, July. Johnson. H. 5 .• Jr., and Thordarson, W~ 1966. Uranium Deposits of Ihe Moab. Monticello, White Canyon. ilnd Monument vaJley Districts, Utilh a.,d Arizona, U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1222·H. 53 p. (Cited In 1.6.1,3, 1.6.2.2) Kcend. W. E.. 1969. Quatelnary Geology of lhe Gmnd and Battlement Mesa Area, Colorado: U.S.G.S. Professional Paper, 617. Kelley. V. C.,1955. Regional Tecto nics of the Colorado Platc.au and Relationship [0 (he Origin and Distribulion of Uranium, New Mexico UniversilY Publication Geology No.5. 120 p. COtcd in 1.6.1.3) Kell y, v. 4 1956. (Cited In 1.6.1.3) Kelley. v.c., 1958, ICGI"OnlCS of the Region of the l'aJadox Basin." In Intermountain Association I)cuoleum Geologists Guidebook. 9th Annual Field Conferencc, Gcology of the Par.l.dox Basin, p. 31-38. Kirkham, R, M. and Rogers. W.P., 1981. Eaflhquakc Potential In Colotado.A Preliminary Evaluation. Colorado Geologica l Survey. Bullerin 43. (Ciled in 1.6.3.3) Page xvii Revision +.e3.2AB ["eo£:), Fbel5 t4uclear, IneOtnison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Krininsky. E.l. a~d Chang. F. K.,197S. State-o(-the·An for Assessing Earthquake Hazards in the Unired St3ICS, Eaflhquake InrenSi!)' ,lnd the Selecllon 0/ Ground Malians for Seismic Design. Miscellaneous Paper 5-]3-1, Report 4, September 1975, U. S. Arm)' Engincer Waterwa),s Experiment SI3tlcn, CE, Vicksburg, MisSiSSippI. Larson, E. E .. el. aI., 1975. late Cenozaic Basic Volcanism in Northwestern Calorado and its Implications Concerning Tecranics and the Colorado River System In Cenoloic Hlsto.), of Southern Rocky Mounr.-.ins: Geological Sociery of Amerlca, MentO'ir 144. lawrence Livermore NationallilboralOr)', 1994. Seismic. Hazard Analysis of Title II ReciamatiDn Regulatary Commission. Plans; U. S. Nudear Lindsay, L. M. w., 1978. Alchroologlcal Test Excavations on White Mesa. San Juan County. in 1.3.2) Southeastern Utah. (Cited MITRE Soflware CorporatiDn, GSLOI'E Computer Software I'ackag Narronal Oceanic and Atmospheric Admlnistralian (NOAA), 1977. Probable Maximum Precipitalion Estimates. Colarado River and Grc.·u Basin Drainages. Hydromctcrologkal RepDrt (HMR) No. 49. National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdminislraliDII (NOM), 19~a. Compuler Primal/! of fanhquakc file Record far 320 k", Radius of llIanding, Umh. U. S. Department of Commerce, Nalional Gcophysic.,1 O,1Ia Ccn!er. Boulder, Colotada. (Cilcd in 1.6.3.4,1.7) NielsDn,A. 5., 1979. Adclilional Ard,ealogical Test Excavations and Invemory on White Mesa, San luan COl/my, SDutheasterp Ulah. (Cited in 1.3.2) NUREG 1623, 2002. Design of erasian Proll1tlian lar long-Term stabillzatlDn. Rnal Repon, September. NUREG/C~-1 081, Mar~h 1980. Characterizatian of Uranium Tailings Cover Materials fDr Radon FJux Reduction. Pilgexviii Revision +.e3.2AB ~e1I1';"IMDenjson Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan NUREG/CR-2642. Junc 1982. Long-term Survivabilil)' of Rlprap for Armllring Uranium Mill Tailings aJ1d Covers: A iJlcraLurc Rcview. NUREG/CR-2684. Augus11982. Rock Riprap Design MClhods and Their Applicabilir,y 10 Long-Icrm Prolcction of Uranium Mill Tailings Impoundments. NUREG/CR.30Z7. Mardl '1983. Ovcdand Erosion of Uranium Mill Tailings Imlioundmems Physical Processes and Compullitlonal MClhods. NUREG/CR-3061. November 1983. Survivability of Ancien! Man-made Mounds: Implltlllions for Uranium Mill Tailings ImpoundmcoL NUREG/CR-3199. October 1983. GuldanccJor Disposal of Ura.nium Mill Tailings: long-Ierm 5tabilltaliol) of Earlhen Cover Malcrials. NUREG/CR-3397. Onober 19B3. Design Considerations or Long-term StabiliZluion of Uranium Mill ImpoLlOdmcn! NUREG/CR-3S33. February 1984. (ladon Anenui\tion Handbook for Uranium Mill T.,i11ngs Cover Design. NUREG/m-3674, Mard11984. Designing Vegetation Covcrs for Long-term Srabilizdtion of Uranium Mill Tailings. NUREG/CR-3747. May 1985. The Solcclion ;tnd Testing of Rock for Armoring Uranium Tailings ImpoundmcllIs. NUREG/CR-3972. December 1984. SCILlemcnt of U",nium Mill Tailinss Piles. NUREG/CR-407S. May 1985. Designing I'rolective Covers (or Urallium Mill Tailings Piles: A Review. NUREG/CR-4087. Febtuary. 1985. Me.uureJTlerus of Uranium Mill Tailings Consolidation Characlcr;sllcs. NUREG/CR-4323. January 1986. Th Proll:et;on of Uranium Tailings Impoundments against Overland Erosion. I'agexix Revision +.93.2.A8 [ .. tillY F~eb rjude~I.1; "Denison Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill R.eclamation Plan NUREG/CR-4403. November 1985. Summary of the WaslcManagcmcnt Programs al Uranium Recovery Faciliries as They Relme 10 the 40 CFR Part 192 Siandnrds. NUREG/CR-4480. Seplember 1986. Erosion PrOICClion of Uranium Tailings Impoundment. NUREG/CR-4S04, March 1986. long-term Surveillance and Moniloring of Decommissionccf Uranium Processing Silcs and T-ailings Piles. NUREG/CR-4S20. April 1996, I'rediclive Geochemic.ll Modeling of Contaminant' COnccmfalions Columns and In Plumes Migrating from Uranium Mill Tailings Wasle Impoundments. NUREG/CR-4620. June. 1986. Methodologies for EvaJualing Long-Term Srabiliz:al;on Designs of Tailings Impoundments, J. D. Nelson, S. R. Ab" ct. al. (Ciled in ),3.1. 3.5.5, Anaroment A) NUREG/CR-4651. May 1997. Development of Riprap Design Criteria by Riprap Tcsling In Flumes: 3.3.1, 3,3.5, Atmchment A) Nllttll, o. W,,1979.. Stale·of-the·Art for Assessing Earthquake Hazards In Ihe United Sllltes, ran in laboralOry Uranium Mill Phase I. (Gled in 16: The Relation of Sustained MilJlimum Ground Acceleration and Velocily 10 Earthquake Intensity arId Magnitude. with Errata Sheeror January 11, 1991; U. S, Army Enginccrs Waterways ExperimeOl Station, Vicksburg, P. O. No. DACW39-78·C·OOn. 67 p. with Two Appendiccs and 2 p, Etram. Rogcrand Associ~!cs Engineering Company, 1989. Radlologicall)roperJles lellers to C. O. Scaly from R. Y. Bowser dared March 4 and May 9, 1988. (Cited in 3.3.2.1) Rogers and Associates. 1996. (Cited In 3.3.2.1) Schroeder, P. It. J. M. Morgan. T. M, Walski. and A. C. Gibson. 1989, ·Technical Resource Documcnt, i he Hydrologic E'vailliltion oflandlill Performance (HELP) Model, Version II: U.S. Environmenral PrOlec~ion Agem)'. Seed. H. B. And Idriss.l, M" 1992. Ground MOIlons and Soils Liquefuction During Earl.hquakes. Earthquake Page XX Revision +.e3.2A8 &~, ID' File" tJdd~Denison Mines (USA) Corp •. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan Engineering Research Inslilule. Berkeley. California. Shoemaker, E. M., 1954. SltllclUral FealUres of Soulheaslcrn Utllh and Adjacent Pam of Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona. Utah Geological So del)' GUidebook 10 the Geology of Ulilh. No.9. pp. 48·69. (Ched In 1.6.1.3) Shoemaker. E.M .• 1956, ·Slruclural Fealures of Ihe Colorado rlalcau and Their Rclalion 10 Uranium DeposTts," u.s. Geological S"rvey Professional Paper 300, p.1SS·1 G8. (Cited in 1.6.1.3) Simon, R. B .. 1972. Scismieil)'. in Mallory. W. W .. and Olhers, eds. Geologic Atlas of Ihe Rocky Moumain Region. Rocky Mounl,lln Associallon of GeologiSts. pp. 48-51 . SJcl1Imons. D. B .• 1977. Stale.of·lhe·Altfor Assessing Eanhquake Hazards in Ihe United Slates, 1'<1" 6, Fauhs and Earthquake Magnitude, with an APpendix on Geomorphic FealLlres of Active Fauh Zones, U. S. Army Engineer WaierwaY5 ExpcrimcnrSlatlon, Vicksburg. Comraa No. DACWJ9·76-(·OOO9, 129 p. plus 37 p. Appendix. Smilh, R. B .. 1978. Seismicil)" Crustal Sirucrurc, and Intraplale TeClor)icsof Ihe W lern Cordillera, in Cenozoic Tectonics and Regional Geophysics of the Wesrern Cordillera.. Smith, R. B. and EalOn, G. P., cds. Memoir 152. Geological Society of Amerita, pp. 111·144. (Oled in 1.6.3.3) Smith, S., 1981. Long.Term Stabllll)' al Union Carbide's Tailings Piles in Uravan, Colorado, Stephenson. D., 1979. Rockflilin Hydraulic Enghlccrlng. Developmonts In Geotechnical Scicmific Publishing Company, pp. SO·GO. Sec NLiREG 4620. Engineering, 27, ,Iscvler Slokes. W. L 1954. Slraligtaphy or Ihe SOLI the;! lern Ulah Uranium Region, Utah G olagical Sociely Guidebook 10 Ihe Geology orUrah, No.9, pp. 16-4-7. Stokes. W. L., 1967. A Survey of SO!Jlheastem Utah Uranium Disaricrs, Utah Geological SOciety Guidebook 10 Ihe Geology of Ulah, No. 21, pp.1.". (Ciacd In1.6~2) Tcllc() Enl1ironmcmaJ. 1995. Neshaps Radon Flux Mcnsuremcml',ogram, White Mesa Mill, OClober 1995. (Cited in Page xxi Revision 4:9~ Ene. g) r"cb ~1"cI_, liKDeni50n Minrs (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation plan IntroduCtion) Thompson. K. C.1957. Slructural Fcatur~s ofSoutheastcrn Utah and Their Relations 1'0 Ur.1nlum Geological Socicty Guidebook to the Geology of Utah, No. 21. pp. 23·31. (Cited in 1.6.1.3) Deposhs" Urah ThordarsoJl.1966. (Cited iii 1.6.1.3.1.6.2.2) Tlran Enviroilmcnral Corporation. 1994. (Ciled in '1.0) 11t;an Environmental Co rporation, 1994a. Hydrogeologic Evaluation of White Mesa Uranium Mill. July 1994. (Cited I., IntrodUC!lon, 1.5) Tl",,, E.nvironmental Corporation. 1994b. f'oims of Compliance. WhilC Mesa Uranium Mill. Introdutlion. 1.5) lltan Environmental Corporation. 1996. Tailings Cover Design. White Mesa Mill. October 1996 Introduction. 1.6.3) Trifunac. M. D. and Brad)'. A. G. On thc Corrda.llon of Seismic IntenSity Scales with the Peaks of September 1994. (Cited in (Cited in Recorded Slrong Ground Motion. Seismological SocielY of America Bulletin. V. 65. Feb. 1975. pp. 139·1G2. (Cited in 1.6.3.4) UnlCLco.19B7. UmelcoMlncrais Corporation SUA·13SB: Docket No.40·BGB1. License Condition 4B. White Mesa Mill. Urah. Leller From R. K.jones to U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission dated November 30.1987. UmClCO Mil1crals Corporalioi\ 1992. "Ground WalcrStudy. White Mesa Mill. Blanding. U.ah: License SUA 13SB. Docket No.40·8G81. (Cited in 1.S.3.1. 1.S5) Unhcd StJICS Gcological Survcy. 1970. (Cited In1.6) u.s. Department of Energy. 19BB. (Cited In 3.3.1. 3.3.4) • Pagexxjj, Revision 4:93.2."'B ("cog)' Fuell tluclem.lneDenb"on Mines (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan U.S. Department of Energy. 1993. "Environmental Assessment of Remedial Action at the Slick Rock Uranium Mill Tailings Siles, Slick Rock. Colorado; UMTRA Project Offic~. Albuquerque. New Mexico, February. (Cited In 15.3) U. S. Geologic.ll Survey. (Cited In 1.5) U.S, Geo logical Survey, 1970, (Cited in 1.6.2.3) U, 5, Nuclear Regul.ltQl), Commission. 1977. Regulatory Guide3,11. Design. Construction. and Inspection of mbilnkment Retcntion Systems for Urnnium Mills. Revision 2.1977. U. S. Nloclear Reg\ilatory Commission. Earthen UiOlnium Mill Tailings Covers. Regulatory Guide 3.64. Task WM S03·4. Calculation or Radon Flux Auenui!tloll by (Cited in 3.3.2.1) U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1979, Final Environmental Statemcnt -White Mesa Uranium Project, NUREG·OSSG. (Cited in Section 1.0.1.3.1,1.4.1.4,2) U, S. Nuclear Regulatory COmmission. 1980. (Citcd in 3.3.1) U, S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1984. Guidelines (or Dcmmamination of Facilities iI.nd Equipment I'rior to Release (or Unrestricted Usc or Termination of Licenses for ByproduClor Soure Matcrials. (Ched in Introduction) U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1985. Standard Review Plan for UMTRA TItle I Mill Plans, Division of Waste Management. Tailings -Rcmcdial Action U. S. Nuclear Rcgulatory Commission. 1987a. URFO:TTO, Docket No. 40-8681. 040086817405. leiter to Umetco Mincl'iIls Corporation O. S. Hamrick) (rom F. F. Hawkins dated January 26.1987. U .. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 1987b. 10 CFR '10. Appendix A U, S, Nuclear Rcgulatory CommIssion. 1987c. URFO:GRK. Docket No. 40·8681,lcltcr to UOl1ctco Minerals PageJCXiii Revisio~ +:93.2.AB me, g) Fud, ~~ocIeamncDenison Min~s (USA) Corp .. White Mesa Mill Re~laination Plan Corporation from E. F. Hawkins dated' October 21.19B7. U. S. Nuclear Regula\ory Commission, 1988. Docket No. 40·8681 SUA·13S8. Amendment No. 10. Letter to Umctco Minerals Corporation dated January 8, 19B8, from R. Dale Smith. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1989. (Cited In3.3.1, 3.3.2) U. S. Nuclear Reg,llator), Commission, 1990. (Cited In 3.35. AuachmemA) University of Utah Seismograpl1 Stations. 19BB. Computer Lis! of Earthqu kcswithln 320 km of Blanding. lItah. Department of Geolog)' and Geoph)'sics, Unlvcrsll)l of Utah, Salt Lake Cil)'. von Hake. C. A.. 19n, Earthquake H,stol}' of Utah. Earthquake Information Bulletin 9. pp. 48·51. (Cited in 1.6.2.3) Warner. L.A. 197B. The Colorado Lineament A Middle Precambrian Wrench Fault Systcm. Geological Soclet), of America Bulletin. \/.89. pp.1G1-171. (Cited in 1.6.),3) Williams. P. L., 1964. Geology. Structure. and Uranium Deposits of the Moab Quadrangle, Geologic Survey Map. 1·360. Colorado and Utah. U. s. Witkind. 1.1 .. 1964. Geology ofthe Abajo MOt,ntaln, Ar~a. San Juan Coum)'. Utah. U. S. Geologic.1 Survey. Professional Paper 453. (Cited in 1.6.1.3,1.6.2.1.6.2.2) woodward.Clyde Consultants. 1982. Geologic Characlerll.<l.tlon Report of the Paradox Basin Study Region. Utah Study Areas. ONWI-290, v.1. Prepared for Offlce of Nuclear Wastc Isolation. Banelle McmOl'iallnstituIC. Wong. I. G .. 1981 . Scismologlcal EVall'alion of .he Colorado Lineament in the Intermountain ~egion (abs.), Earthquake NOles, v. 53. pp. 33·34. (CilCd in 1 ,6.3.3) Wong, I. G .. 1984. Sl!ism dl)' of tlte Paradox Basin and .he Color'ldo Plateau Interior, ONWI-492. Prepared for lhe Office of Nt,clear Waste Isolalion, Battelle Memoriallnslhute. (Cited in 1.63.3) N:\!ttclanudOI1o Pltn\Jtnlmurkw ,1." ~t.V :PS\R!fUUN'@ 3.2." tl'dlluc·..dqp;Hftll~w,..,.~. 32_ I deiLa 12.11.HMEffRMf§ tE" ~~M\_all\R~_a>.Il«,"h .. cl9'JI Page xxiv Revision +.e~ ["colD F~eb ~.dcleal.llleDetllson Mines (USA) Corp .. While Mesa Mill Reclamalion plan Zoback, M. D. and Zoback, M. L, 1980. Slale ofSlress in Ihe Conlerminous Uniled Slales, Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 85, pp. 6113-61 S6. (Ciled in 1.6.3.3) Introduction Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO 80265 USA Tel: 303 628·7798 Fax: 303 3894125 www.denlsonmines.com White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2.8 for Reclamation of the White Mesa Mill and Tailings Management System January 2011 State ofUtahlle.(2) Byproduct Material License # UT1900479 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. www.denisonmines.com 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO, USA 80265 Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 303389-4125 Page I-I Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan INTRODUCTION This reclamation Plan (the "Plan") prepared by Denison Mines(USA) Corp. ("Denison"), for Denison's White Mesa Uranium Mill (the "Mill"), located approximately 6.0 miles south of Blanding Utah. The Plan presents Denison's plans and estimated costs for the reclamation of the Mill's tailings Cells 1,2,3, 4A and 4B, and for decommissioning of the Mill and Mill site. Summary of Plan The uranium and vanadium processing areas of the mill, including all equipment, structures and support facilities will be decommissioned and disposed of in tailings or buried on site as appropriate. All equipment, including tankage and piping; agitation; process control instrumentation and switchgears; and contaminated structures; will be cut up, removed, and buried in tailings prior to final cover placement. Concrete structures and foundations will be demolished and removed or covered with soil as appropriate. These decommissioned areas would include, but not be limited to, the following: Coarse ore bin and associated equipment, conveyors and structures. Grind circuit including semi-autogenous grind (SAG) mill, screens, pumps and cyclones. Three pre-leach tanks to the east of the mill building, including all associated tankage, agitation equipment, pumps, and piping. Seven leach tanks inside the main mill building, including all associated agitation equipment, pumps and piping. Counter-current decantation (CCD) circuit including all thickeners and equipment, pumps and piping. Uranium precipitation circuit, including all thickeners, pumps and piping. Two yellowcake dryers and all mechanical and electrical support equipment, including uranium packaging equipment. Clarifiers to the west of the mill building including the preleach thickener and claricone. Boiler and all ancillary equipment and buildings. N:\Redamation Plan\Redamation Plan Rev 3.2B\Sect01 rev 3,2B 01.13.11 dean,docx Page 1-2 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Entire vanadium precipitation, drying, and fusion circuit. All external tankage not included in the above list including: reagent tanks for the storage of acid, ammonia, kerosene, water, or dry chemicals; and the vanadium oxidation circuit. Uranium and vanadium solvent extraction (SX) circuit including all SX and reagent tankage, mixers and settlers, pumps, and piping. SX building. Mill building. Office building. Shop and warehouse building. Sample plant building. Alternate feed Circuit Truck Shop. Temporary Storage Building The sequence of demolition would proceed so as to allow the maximum use of support areas of the facility, such as the office and shop areas. Any uncontaminated or decontaminated equipment to be considered for salvage will be released in accordance with the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC") document,guidance and in compliance with the conditions of the Mill's State of Utah Radioactive materials License No. UT1900479 (the "License"). As with the equipment for disposal, any contaminated soils from the Mill and surrounding areas and any ore or feed materials on the Mill site will be disposed of in the tailings facilities in accordance with Section 4.0 of Attachment A, Plans and Specifications. H;\U5ERS\WMRCPlN\INTRO RPl\May 1999 Page 1-3 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The estimated reclamation costs for surety are set out in Attachment C. Attachment C will be reviewed and updated on a yearly basis. Plan Organization General site characteristics pertinent to this Plan are contained in Section 1.0. Descriptions of the facility construction, operations and monitoring are given in Section 2.0. The current environmental monitoring program is described in Section 2.3. Seismic risk was assessed in Section1.6.3. The Plan itself, including descriptions of facilities to be reclaimed and design criteria, is presented in Section 3.0. Section 3.0 Attachments A through H are the Plans and Specifications, Quality Plan for Construction Activities, Cost Estimates, and supplemental testing and design details. Supporting documents which have been reproduced as appendices for ease of review, include: • Semi-Annual Effluent Reports, (January through June 2008), (June through December 2008) and (January through June 2009) for the Mill, Which have been submitted previously on November 24,2009; • Site hydrogeology and Estimation of Groundwater Travel Times in the Perched Zone White Mesa Uranium Mill Site Near Blanding, Utah, August 27, 2009, prepared by Hydro Geo Chern, Inc. (the "2009 HGC Report), submitted previously on November 24,2009; • The Mill's Stormwater Best Management Practices Plan, Revision 1.3: June 12, 2008, submitted previously on November 24,2009; H:\USERS\WMRCPLN\lNTRO RPT\MiI.), 1999 Page 1-4 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan • Tailings Cover Design, White Mesa Mill, October 1996. submitted previously on November 24, 2009; • National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Radon Flux Measurement Program, White Mesa Mill Site,200S. Tellco Environmental, submitted previously on November 24, 2009; and • Semi-Annual Monitoring Report July 1 -December 31, 2008 and Annual Monitoring Summary for 2008, White Mesa Mill Meteorological Station, January 20, 2009 McVehil-Monnett Associates, Inc., submitted previously on November 24,2009. As required by Part I.H.11 ofthe Mill's State of Utah Ground Water Discharge Permit No. UGW370004 (the "GWDP"), Denison is in the process of completing an infiltration and contamination transport model of the final tailings cover system to demonstrate the long-term ability of the cover to protect nearby groundwater quality. Upon review of such modeling, the executive Secretary of the State of Utah radiation Control Board (the "Executive Secretary") will determine if changes to the cover system as set out in the Plan are needed to ensure compliance with the performance criteria contained in Part I.D.S of the GWDP. Although the modeling has not been completed, modeling results to date suggest that some changes to the final cover design as set out in the Plan will be needed. However, as the details of such re-design have not been finalized at this time, the approved 2000 cover design and basis will continue to be used for this version of the Plan. This Plan will be amended in the future to incorporate any changes to the design of the tailings cover system that result from the current modeling effort. H:\USERS\WMRCPlN\INTRO RPT\MilY 1999 Page 1-1 Revision 3.2.all Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan ------------------------------.!IIiN~!~R~9_'::P~_,..,I_!:'!(::-T-:!:-_~!O'":!_~N _~ _ -.( Formatted: Font: (Default) TImes New Roman J~~e!fl_a!i~I!I!.I _I;:1~l!'iY!'!":D'1Di~on _~ ~ ~ -( Formatted: Font: (Default) TImes New Roman Mines(U A) Corpemtiea, (' H:lSADenison"), for Dcnjson's White Mesa _Uranium Mill Cthj! ~ _--I Formatted: Font: (Default) TImes New Roman "Mill"), located approximately 6,0 mil south of Blanding Utah. The Plan presents I1:JS.A.!t;Denison's plans and estimated costs for the reclamation of the Mill's tailings Cells 14 ,2, 3,4A and 4ft, and for decommissioning of the ~Mill and Mill site. The l!Fanil!m tlFeElessing seelieRs sf the mi II will se eeeemmissisneeas feIl9'1¥5: ~ummarv of Plan ~ _ -' Formatted: Font: (Default) TImes New Roman, ------------.. , , Underline The uranium and vanadium processing areas of the mill, including all equipment, structures and support facilities will be decommissioned and disposed of in tailings or buried on site as appropriate. All equipment, including tankage and piping; agitation; process control instrumentation and switchgears; and contaminated structures; will be cut up, removed, and buried in tailings prior to final cover placement. Concrete structures and foundations will be demolished and removed or covered with soil as appropriate. These decommissioned areas would include. but not be limited to. the following: Coarse ore bin and associated equipment. conveyors and structures. Grind circuit including semi-autogenous grind C AG) mill. screens. pumps and cyclones. Three pre-leach tanks to the easL of the mill building, including all associated tankage, agitation equipment, pumps. and piping. Seven leach tanks inside the main mill bwliling. incluiling all associated agitation equipment. pumps and piping. Counter-current decantation ( D) circllit including all thickeners and eguipment, pumps and piping. Uranium preeipitalion circuit, including all thickeners, pump. and piping. Two yellowcake dryers and all mechanical and electrical support gulpmenl. including uranium packaging equipment. h~mo~j\fltodi!J1UElonP .. n\l!td!!l!fllorlptll\.tvl.2.8\5¢pO'jrYH801 'l.l1rrdf!,."doe. ~ &______ _ _ _ _ _ _ ______ ~ ____________________ J >---------------------~ Formatted: Font: (Default) TImes New Roman , .( Formatted: Font: 8 pt , Page I·2 Revision 3.2.aJ! Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Clarifiers to the west of the mill building including the preleach thickener and claricone. Boiler and all ancillary equipment and buildinlzs. 1t.~tIN;\R!d~hpnf',,*"\lltd'tII.u!9!1PboP'.{V12fNmQ!(,..,l1n 01 1J 11 ttd!!'trdp " --- ---------------------------------~ , , , ~ Formatted: Font: B pt Page I-I Revision 3.2.a!! Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Entire vanadium precipitation. drying. and fusion circuit. All external tankage not included in the above list including: reagent tanks for the storage oEacid. ammonia, kerosene. walcr. or dry chemicals: and the vanadium oxidation circuit. Uranium and vanadium solvent extracLion (SX) circuit including all SX and reagent tankage. mLxers and settlers. pumps. and piping. SX building. Mill building. Office building. Shop and warehouse building. Sample plant building. Alternate feed Circuit Truck Shop. Temporary Storage Building, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ________ ~ _ ~ 1 Formatted: Font: (Default) limes New Roman ~~e_E!e~~J!l:~l~~~~~_ '2'~~I~ i,!el~Et~ ~~t_R9~ ~~ Lif!l~l~t!. ~a ~~ Jel!E!."yi!!g: ________ u u __ -1 Formatted: Font: (Default) limes New Roman CeQrse ere Bin anEi assaeiatee eEjl-lipmeRl, eeAve)'ars aREI slr~ GriREI eireuit iflell:lEliAg sem.j...al:ltegeAEltiS gfieEi (S{\G) mi ll, sereeliS, pumps MEl e),elene5. Teree pre leaeh !aRIa te lhe east af !:he mill i:ll:IilEling ineillaing all assaeiateEi lBHlE8ge, agftatiaR eEjtlipffiellt, Pl:lFAflS. aRE! pipiRg. SeveR leaee tanks ffisiae tI~e main mill Bl-lilEling; iAell-laing all asseeialed agil:elien eqtltpmenl; pumps aBEl piping;. CaliRler etlrrefll EleeoRlfttian (CCD) eirettil iReh.ldiflg all tflielEeRer5-ftRS et'jliipmel'l-l:;-J*tmps MEl piping. UrafliuFA preeipitatiaft eiFEltiil; iRelllaing alilhielleAers "'IIR~"'S aBEl pipiAg. Twa }'elleweake dl)'efS and aJ.J FfleekaRiea:l alld eleee-ieal sliJ3f>ert eqtti-pment, ineltlEHRg HRlllil:lm J3aekegffig eEitlipA'leRl. Clarifiers ta the west artAe mill etlilaing inelusiRg the J3Feleaeh \hiekeRer Me elatieEllle. Boiler 6f1G &II aaeiLiary eEll:lipment and el:l~ Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0", Tab stops: Not at -1" • ____ ~!i:te_ ... -"'~t!i~'!l:P!~el~i~!i~~,_€!.f)'i!lg,-'!!'1~J~!!!~'!. ~i~e~!1:. h ___________________ :..:--::. -' Formatted: Font: (Default) limes New Roman All 6)(teFflBll:efll(age Bel iReh.lEleEi iR lhe aaave list inelitEiing: reagent tBflI(s feF tAe sklr-age '. Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0", Tab stops: Not at -1" Page 1-2 Revision 3.2.aJ.! Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan ---lHJraRil::lm ElfIEI 'f£iflEldil::lm seiveRt elilfBel:iea (SX) eifetlil iReh:leliRg all SX BRei reagent l&fllwge fAiKers aael settlers j'llfR'lflS, aRd j'li"iflg. SX Bl::lilElieg. Mill Bl::lilElieg. Offi!!e Bl::lilElieg. Shel" aRd wareheHse Bl::lilElieg. SBffI!"le !"laRtel::lilElieg. The sequence of demolition would proceed so as to aJlow the maximum use of support areas of the facility, such as the office and shop areas. Il is tlftlieipated !:Aat all m&jer slrl::letl:tFeS aREI large eEjtlij'lmeet ... l'ill Be demelisheel witH !:AI! !:Ise ef Ryoratllie sRears. These will s!"eed the f}feeess flftwide j:Jfflfler St2:iRg efthe materials Ie ee fllaeeEl ift tailiegs, MEl red!!ee ~SHre te meliatien &REI eH~er safely flll-ZQrds 6t1riRg the ElemelilieR. Any uncontaminated or decontaminated equipment to be considered for salvage will be released in accordance with the United States Nuclear Regulatory Comm ission C"NR ~ document Gl::liEleliRes fer DeeentamiA8tieR ef Faeilities MEl EgHlameftl Prier ia Release fur UAFestrieteEl Use SF TermiRaHee of Lieeflses feF Bwreelyet eF 8el:tr-ee Material!!, dated 8ef:lteJt1beF;-:l-984.-aml-ifl-oomflliaflee with the eellditiens af SSI:IFee Material LieeAse SUA 13S8guidance and in compliance with th cond itions of the Mill s Slate of tah Radioactive materials License No. un 900479 (the "License"). _ ~~ ~it!J _th~ t:.<lulR.~~nJ f~ ___ --{ Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman 1 disposal, any contam i aated soi Is from the mMill .. and sUIT.£lundinlllU:.e!l _ and an~ ore or ftz,ed _," :: -Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman materials on the Mill site. ~U'-~e_disJl.s>~e_d_of i'! th~ !al~,!g.:> f!!.cl~t!e~ in_~c~£lrda'2.~e _~i!h.. ~e_c!i£l~ ~ . .9 ___ ~ of Attachment A, Plans and Specifications. H:\USfRS\WMllCPl.N\NTRO.R~lggg Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman Formatted ~ ',}oF;.;o;.;.r;.;.m;,;;a,;;,;tt;,;;ed;;... ________ .. -c::l2f .. ~. &:2:L.{ , Formatted Table eN "'>--;.......;.---------...... 0:..1.:::~ 1/ Formatted r-:;r ".~;.;.;.;.;.=.;;....------...I~..;.: .... ~ .. l ~'ll " Formatted Cf5f Page [-3 :/~F-o-rm-atted----------E16I,j".;;.~61.o( Revision 3.2.aJ.! ".:--;....;,;.;.=;.;....-------.I..:.;.; ... ~ Denison Mines (USA) Corp. i: :I>-Fo_r_m_a_tt_ed ________ ..Ir::17f"" .. :.:...m~ White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan : "Ih: I Formatted r:18f ',lj!I~F,;;,;or;.;.m;,;;a;,;;tt,;;,;ed~--------~~.~ .. ~9~ .1JlE _e§~l!I!!t~c! .!~cl~1'l!~tL0!l_c.s>~t§ f~r_ S_u.!t:t~ !I~e_ ~E!.ri~~ ~ l~I~~sFt QuI in u~ttaEhmcllt C. J,' ::',,'/. >-F_o_r_m_a_tt_ed ________ ..Ir:::TIOf..:.:.:. .. ""'1:::0~ A'taCh~~'_~ :~l~ ~ '~~:: ~"d """-,:_0:_'_ ~':v b,,;~ _______________________ j i~).:;.;:;;.~:;;.;.;;.::;.;.:;;;;..-------..I£:]ii'f ~""::~: 1.:~':'2fL-< L ~l~~_' C:~:m~-~-,~~ ::~:::: ~ ~ ~~~~;~ :.:: :-~-~~ ~ ~ -~~~~~ -~ ~------~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -~~ ~:~ -~~~~~/~-:::;;.:-::a,;;.:-:;;:::::::::::::::::..I~~r.::-mr;,;;::~: .. I.:;:.~.::.7~ ~:X;.,=.f = == ==.= ------------------_u_ --uu --nufGgiSKf --1f~ Formatted r;:mr: t:~iiYReel~-'=--------u u ------_u_ -----1365 44{ ---':~_' _-->-:-:-~:-:-:-:--------.... -r:::Tl9f r-=-':':""" ... 191~ ~ _______________ I~ .... ~ •• f~Z200~1 ""_11 -., .----_n U ---n - -- --- n 12Q 128 -rFormatted ~ --L.:,,;;,;.;.;.;,;;;;,;;,;;,;; ______ J:Jlif ........... .t.:2~1 ~A': " rD.;:':" 71\"---------------------------I.9i9.4fQh----....~Formatted i, ~.~ ~ ~'-.:'-1;...... ---- - --,,-..---_",.-- - -- --; .. "j ,,,-;:;.~-.., _ _ _ , . 'i>--Fo-r-m-att-ed--------..I~..:·:.:. .. ...:22=-< 'OU , ~23L :~fi~~~~~=========~=~=====~~-==-===-=======~~ ---~,,\\, ::~:::: ~ t~~~~~~ = = ---- --------------~ ------f 071-§fg----\\ ,;:Fo~r:m:a_tt~ _ed~ _-_-_-_:-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_...Ir.:126f~.:":2:~ ~ ~:: :.=;: = =;;-=~== --------------~i%. ----------------~----,\\\>-F ... o_rm_a .. tt ... ed .... ________ .. ~,,_. 1o.:i2;:.7L-< t =i:=~-;';-I:'-;---------------------------~---~\\ Formatted _r.128f £'g~~~;:;~:_:=n ------.y;. --,,-;---n--~~ ---i n;'o,,!. ~£..,~-\ \}-Fo_r_m_a_tt_ed ________ .. r:::T29f .... ,;:, .. ""29::;::.I-( , I Formatted ~ 1~~~~~-------------i~,.~~ .. ~VUL ------------------ ---- --- - --- -------------------- - ------- -----~, \;\~\\}--Fo-r-m-a-tt-ed--------.. r:::13If .... ,;:,,,~If~ RePORT QRGAN)ZA11()NPlan Organi7.ation, ________________________________ ,"" ,'\\I>""Fo~r~m~att~ed;.;.... _______ ,\,,;Cillf.~ .. ,j,;3;:;21.{ II I ' Formatted ~33 ,I ,,>-__________ ..... L ..... :;,; ... -.-.IJJ"'<J II , Formatted ~ General site characteristics pertinent to the Feelftlfl fttiofl ~Plan are contained in Section 1.0. \\" \'\\~-Fo"r-m-a-tt-ed---------r.::13sfI..;;'; .. .Io:.:.I..( Descriptions ofthe facility construction, operations and monitoring are given in Section 2.0. The , Formatted r.::T36f Formatted crJ7f current environmental monitoring program is described in Section 2.3. Seismic risk was assessed Formatted ~ in SeCti0[1...;!""''-=.6:..:;.3::;.'--____________________________ ---,.~:1 .. Formatted C739f '~ I Formatted _CJ<jO[ The Reelamatiofl Plan itselt inclu_di'!.gAe~~riP.ti.s>!?~ ~f}!!~iD~~s_t21'~ ~e~lail1]~d_ ,!n.9 _d~~i8t:! ~rlt~Ij!!,_, \'\I",,!'\I'} _F_or_m_a_tt_ed _________ ,I.;;r:::14Ifr:::r42f:::~41~ Formatted 42 is presented in Section 3.0. Section 3.0 Attachments A through H are the Plans and \ ~',",\~ -F .. or-m-a ... tt-ed--------.l.:.::.----:-:::;-.. ·:..Io.::~ \ 1I 1~------------IoOL ... :.:.: ....... lq4"'J3""<L Specifications, Quality Plan for Construction Activities, Cost Estimates, and supplemental testing " \",I\l'~:-.F_o-rm-att-ed~"""'~~---_=-"044f==,,;;.. ~44~ , I Formatted ,.....-;;p-, \1\~ .... ,;.;;.; .... --------~~-·"-···;.J.;:;-l·I!>;:.!,,(.L and design details. H:\USEAS\WMll.CPlN\INTROAPl\Mayl999 I " Formatted ~ I ,,>-__________ ..1-1 ... "';';'''''' I'IO"'~I I ,I Formatted ~ \ '}""""-""-______________ -...II"" ..... ~.~I'l'I~ \ I Formatted ~ \,~~=~-----------..I-L_ ... ,,~.I~ ~L , Formatted r--:-:="49 \~-----------------~1 ... ~ ... ~1491~ '. Formatted _C:JSOf Formatted Page 1-4 Revision 3.2.aj! Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan .. S~PQ~t!i~g ~~c_u~n_e!1~ J~~:::i.!l!,!!I>: ~,,!e,,!itl~c!)~ ~~Lcb h~':.e_ b_e~11 !:ep!:od..!'c~d ~ _ap ~nstle~ fa! ~!!s~ __ --{ Formatted: Font: (Default) nmes New Roman of review, include: ~~. emi-Annual Effluent Repol , V/ltite Mesa Mill, 8UA 1358, Doel~et No. 40 8e81, (january through June 2008), (June through 0 cember 2008) and (~ tflfotlgfi Deeembef 1995January through June 2009) aRa Semi ARRlia:l Sffil:leHt ReBaF5 '.lIlIile Mese Mill. SUA 1358. Daellel ~IA. 40 8681, (Jamllll)' (firetlgR Jl:lfl8 1996) baerg}' Ftlels Nl:leleeF, IRa. for the Mill. Whieh have been submitted previously on Formatted: List Paragraph, Indent: Left: 0.25", First line: 0", Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: OS' November 24, 2009; __________________________________________________ --( Formatted: Font: (Default) nmes New Roman ~---Site hydrogeology and Estimation of Groundwater Trovel Times in the Perched ZOn White Mesa Uranium Mill ite Near landing. Utah. August 27, • Report), submitted previously on Novemher 24. 2009J;yElregeologic S't'alloletian of White Mesa Urenil:lfA Mill, "tlly 1994. TitBl'l bflvironmeRtel Corporation (Tilafl). PeiA(S ofCsfllf3li&flee \Vflite Mestt-YmAitim-Mill , Sef)lemeer 1994. Tih'm, The Mill s lorn/waler Best Management Practices Plan, Revision 1.3: June 12, • ---Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5" Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5" 2008. submilled previou lyon November 24, 2009~ _________________________ , _ -.( Formatted: Font: (Default) nmes New Roman ~ ~ Tailings Cover Design. White Mesa Mill, October 1996. ~submitted previously on November 24. 2009; • Nes!:tars:-National Emissions Standards {or lIa::ardous Air Pollutants -_. Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5" • Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5" .Ra~on f:.lux _ Meas~re.!l!.e.!1t _Pro~~'!1 ___ White Mesa Mills Sits. 1995, _ 9~~.!I~ ______ ~: --Formatted: Font: (Default)nmes New Roman Formatted: Font: (Default) nmes New Roman H:\USEAS\WMRCPl.N\lNTRORPl\Moy 19Q!1 Page 1-5 Revision 3.2.a!! Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan +9%2008 •. _ )~ell~2 ~!l~ir2nJl!~n!aJ~ §'lh_milted PLevio~ll' on ovember 24. 2002; ________ --{ Formatted: Font: (Default) limes New Roman and -------~-...... ,-• Semi-Annual Monitoring Report July 1 -December 31. 2008 and Annual MOlliJoring 'llmmary for 2008. While Mesa Mill Meteorological. lation. January 20. 2009 McYehil-Monnett Associates. Inc .. submitted previously on November 24,2009. 4-\ \ \ \ , 4 _____________________________________________________ ~~ As required by Part 1.1 Lli ofLh Mill s State ofUtab Ground Water Discharge Permil No. '" \ UGW370004 (the contamiJlatiQn transport model of the final tailings cover svstem to demonstrate the long-lerm ability of the cover (0 protect nearby groUlldwater quality. Upon review of such ecretarv of the late of Utah radialion COnlrol Board (the are nceded to ensure compliance with the performance criteria contained in Part I.D.8 of the ownP. Although the modeling has not been completed. modeling results to date suggest that some changes (0 the final cover design as set out in the Plan will be needed. However. as the details of such re~esign have not been finalized allhis lime. the aQproved 2000 cover design and basis will continue to be used for this version of the Plan. This Plan will be amended in the future to incomoratc any changes to th design of the tailings \ \ Formatted: Font: (Default) limes New Roman Formatted: Left, Indent: Left: 0.5", Right: 0", Line spacing: Single, No bullets or numbering, No widow/orphan control, Tab stops: Not at -1" Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5" Formatted: Font: (Default) limes New Roman Formatted: Left, Indent: Left: 0.5", Right: 0", Line spacing: single, No bullets or numbering, No widow/orphan control, Tab stops: Not at ·1" ,}-------------------------~ Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", First line: 0" cover ystem that result from the current modeling eCfQrt~ _____________________________ -1 Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman H:\USERS\W,o,,\ACPl.N\WfRORf'l\M.oyl9!19 I Page 3: [1] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [1] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [2] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [3] Change Katherine Weinel 1/13/20111:03:00 PM Formatted Table I Page 3: [4] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [4] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [5] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [5] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [6] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [7] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [7] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [8] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [9] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [9] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [10] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I Page 3: [10] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: {Default} Times New Roman I n .... __ .,. rot .. , I: __ .... ~_ ... .,-~ .. --I--, •. _: ___ " , .. ., ,"I" ...... '''h~a.''" nu Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [12] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [13] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [13] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [14] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt I P~ge 3: [15] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [15] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [16] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [16] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [17] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [18] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [18] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [19] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [19] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [20] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [21] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [21] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM I~ r 1\ .......... I Page 3: [22] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [23] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM I Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [24] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [24] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [25] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [25] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [26] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [27] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [27] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [28] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [28] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [291 Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [30] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [31] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [31] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [32] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [33] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [33) Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [34] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt 1 Page 3: [35] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [3S} Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [36] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [36] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [37] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: (37) Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [38] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [39] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [39] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [40] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [40] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [41] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [41} Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I n ........... .,. rJl"" 1:' __ ............. 11 .............. 1_ .... ,., .... :_ ..... .. '4., ,..,n4 .... .,.~a."" nu Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [43] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [44] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [44] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [45] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 11 pt I Page 3: [46] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [46] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [47] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [47] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [48] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [49] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [50] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [50] Formatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [50] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman I Page 3: [51] Fonnatted Katherine Weinel 1/13/201112:58:00 PM Font: (Default) Times New Roman OENISOJ)~~ Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO 80265 USA MINES Tel : 303 628-7798 Fax: 303 389-4125 www.denisonmines.com Section 2.0 Existing Facility White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2.B for Reclamation of the White Mesa Mill and Tailings Management System January 2011 State ofUtahlle.(2) Byproduct Material License # UT1900479 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. www.denisonmines.com 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO, USA 80265 Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 303389-4125 Page 2-1 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 2.0 EXISTING FACILITY The following sections describe the construction history of the Mill; the Mill and Mill tailings management facilities; Mill operations including the Mill circuit and tailings management; and both operational and environmental monitoring. 2.1 Facility Construction History The Mill is a uranium/vanadium mill that was developed in the late 1970's by Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc. (EFN) as an outlet for the many small mines that are located in the Colorado Plateau and for the possibility of milling Arizona Strip ores. At the time of its construction, it was anticipated that high uranium prices would stimulate ore production. However, prices started to decline about the same time as Mill operations commenced. As uranium prices fell, producers in the region were affected and mine output declined. After about two and one-half years, the Mill ceased ore processing operations altogether, began solution recycle, and entered a total shutdown phase. In 1984, a majority ownership interest was acquired by Union Carbide Corporation's ("UCC") Metals Division which later became Umetco Minerals Corporation ("Umetco"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of UCC. This partnership continued until May 26, 1994 when EFN reassumed complete ownership. In May of 1997, Denison (then named International Uranium (USA) Corporation) and its affiliates purchased the assets ofEFN and is the current owner of the facility. Throughout this Plan, the names Denison and IUSA are used interchangeably. 2.1.1 Mill and Tailings Management Facility N:\Rec1amation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 c1ean.docx Page 2-2 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The Source Materials License Application for the White Mesa Mill was submitted to NRC on February 8, 1978. Between that date and the date the first ore was fed to the mill grizzly on May 6, 1980, several actions were taken including: increasing mill design capacity, permit issuance from the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") and the State of Utah, archeological clearance for the Mill and tailings areas, and an NRC pre-operational inspection on May 5, 1980. Construction on the tailings area began on August 1, 1978 with the movement of earth from the area of Cell 2. Cell 2 was completed on May 4, 1980, Cell 1 on June 29, 1981, and Cell 3 on September 2, 1982. In January of 1990 an additional cell, designated CeIl4A, was completed and initially used solely for solution storage and evaporation. Cell 4A was only used for a short period of time and then taken out of service because of concerns about the synthetic lining system. IN 2007, Cell 4A was retrofitted with a new State of Utah approved lining system and was put back into service in October of 2008. Cell 4B construction was authorized by License Amendment No.4, issued on June 17,2010, and the cell is currently under construction. The Cell4A and 4B design and operational details are more specifically described in the following documents, hereby incorporated by reference: 1) Cell4A Construction Quality Assurance Report, July 2008 2) Cell4B Construction Quality Assurance Report, November 2010 3) Discharge Minimization technology Monitoring Plan, Revision 11, and Best Available Technology Operations and Maintenance Plan revision 2, November 12, 2010 (under review). N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx 2.2 Facility Operations Page 2-3 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan In the following subsections, an overview of mill operations and operating periods are followed by descriptions of the operations of the mill circuit and tailings management facilities. 2.2.1 Operating Periods The Mill was operated by EFN from the initial start-up date of May 6, 1980 until the cessation of operations in 1983. Umetco, as per agreement between the parties, became the operator of record on January 1, 1984. The Mill was shut down during all of 1984. The Mill operated at least part of each year from 1985 through 1990. Mill operations again ceased during the years of 1991 through 1994. EFN reacquired sole ownership on May 26, 1994 and the mill operated again during 1995 and 1996. After acquisition of the Mill by Denison and its affiliates several local mines were restarted and the Mill processed conventional ores during 1999 and early 2000. With the resurgence in uranium and vanadium process in 2003, Denison reopened several area mines and again began processing uranium and vanadium ores in April of 2008. Mill operations were suspended in 2009, and resumed in March of201O. Typical employment figures for the Mill are 110 during uranium-only operations and 140 during uranium/vanadium operations. Commencing in the early 1990's through today, the Mill has processed alternate feed materials from time to time when the Mill has been processing conventional ores. Alternate feed materials are uranium-bearing materials other than conventionally-mined uranium ores. The Mill installed an alternate feed circuit in 2009 that allows the Mill to process certain alternate feed materials simultaneously with conventional ores. N :\Reclamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx 2.2.2 Mill Circuit Page 2-4 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan While originally designed for a capacity of 1,500 dry tons per day (dtpd.), the Mill capacity was boosted to the present rated design of 1980 dtpd. prior to commissioning. The mill uses an atmospheric hot acid leach followed by counter current decantation ("CCD"). This in turn is followed by a clarification stage which precedes the solvent extraction ("SX") circuit. Kerosene containing iso-decanol and tertiary amines extract the uranium and vanadium from the aqueous solution in the SX circuit. Salt and soda ash are then used to strip the uranium and vanadium from the organic phase. After extraction of the uranium values from the aqueous solution in SX, uranium is precipitated with anhydrous ammonia, dissolved, and re-precipitated to improve product quality. The resulting precipitate is then washed and dewatered using centrifuges to produce a final product called "yellowcake." The yellowcake is dried in a multiple hearth dryer and packaged in drums weighing approximately 800 to 1,000 lbs. for shipping to converters. After the uranium values are stripped from the pregnant solution in SX, the vanadium values are transferred to tertiary amines contained in kerosene and concentrated into an intermediate product called vanadium product liquor ("VPL"). An intermediate product, ammonium metavanadate ("AMY"), is precipitated from the VPL using ammonium sulfate in batch precipitators. The AMV is then filtered on a belt filter and, if necessary, dried. Normally, the AMV cake is fed to fusion furnaces when it is converted to the mill's primary vanadium product, V 205 tech flake, commonly called "black flake." N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 0\.\3.11 clean.docx Page 2-5 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The same basic process steps used for the recovery of uranium from conventional ores are used for the recovery of uranium from alternate feed materials, with some variations depending on the particular alternate feed material. The mill processed 1,511,544 tons of ore and other materials from May 6, 1980 to February 4, 1983. During the second operational period from October 1, 1985 through December 7, 1987, 1,023,393 tons of conventional ore were processed. During the third operational period from July 1988 through November 1990, 1,015,032 tons of conventional ore were processed. During the fourth operational period from August 1995 through January 1996,203,317 tons of conventional ore were processed. In the fifth operational period from May 1996 through September 1996, the Mill processed 3,868 tons of calcium fluoride alternate feed material. From 1997 to early 1999" the Mill processed 58,403 tons from several additional feed stocks. With rising uranium prices in the late 1990's, company mines were reopened in 1997, and 87,250 tons of conventional ore were processed in 1999 and early 2000. In 2002 and 2003, the Mill processed 266,690 tons of alternate feed material from government cleanup projects. An additional 40,866 tons of alternate feed materials were processed in 2007. From April 2008 through May 2009 the Mill processed an additional 184,795 tons of conventional ore. Inception to date material processed through May 2009 totals 4,128,468 tons. This total is for all processing periods combined. 2.2.3 Tailings Management Facilities Tailings produced by the mill typically contain 30 percent moisture by weight, have an in-place dry density of 86.3 pounds per cubic foot (Cell 2), have a size distribution with a predominant -325 mesh size fraction, and have a high acid and flocculent content. Tailings from alternate feed N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 c1ean.docx Page 2-6 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan materials that are similar physically to conventional ores, which comprise most of the tons of alternate feed materials processed to date at the Mill, are similar to the tailings for conventional ores. Tailings from some of the higher grade, lower volume alternate feed materials may vary somewhat from the tailings from conventional ores, primarily in moisture and density content. The tailings facilities at White Mesa currently consist of four cells as follows: • CellI, constructed with a 30-millimeter (ml) PVC earthen-covered liner, is used for the evaporation of process solution (Cell I was previously referred to as Cell I-I, but is now referred to as Cell 1); • Cell 2, constructed with a 30-millimeter (ml) PVC earthen-covered liner, is used for the storage of barren tailings sands. This Cell is full and has been partially reclaimed; • Cell 3, constructed with a 30-millimeter (ml) PVC earthen-covered liner, is used for the storage of barren tailings sands and solutions. This cell is partially filled and has been partially reclaimed; and • CeIl4A, constructed with a geosynthetic clay liner, a 60 Millimeter (mil) HDPE liner, a 300 mil HDPE geonet drainage layer, a second 60 mil HDPE liner, and a slimes drain network over the entire cell bottom. This cell was placed into service in October of 2008. • CeIl4B, will be constructed with a geosynthetic clay liner, a 60 Millimeter (mil) HDPE liner, a 300 mil HDPE geonet drainage layer, a second 60 mil HDPE liner, and a slimes drain network over the entire cell bottom. This cell will be constructed during the 2010 construction season. Total estimated design capacity of Cells 2, 3, and 4A is approximately six million (mm) tons. Figures 1.5-4 and 1.5-5 show the locations of the tailings cells. N:\RecIamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.28\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01 .13.11 cIean.docx Page 2-7 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Denison has submitted an application to the Executive Secretary to amend the License and GWDP to authorize the construction oftailings Cell4B, which will be located adjacent to Cell4A and will provide approximately two million additional tons of tailings capacity. That application was approved by the Executive Secretary on June 17,2010. 2.2.3.1 Tailings Management Constructed in shallow valleys or swale areas, the lined tailings facilities provide storage below the existing grade and reduce potential exposure. Because the cells are separate and distinct, individual tailings cells may be reclaimed as they are filled to capacity. This phased reclamation approach minimizes the amount of tailings exposed at any given time and reduces potential exposure to a minimum. Slurry disposal has taken place in Cells 2, 3 and 4A. Tailings placement in Cell 2 and Cell 3 was accomplished by means of the final grade method, described below. The final grade method used in Cell 2 and Cell 3 calls for the slurry to be discharged until the tailings surface comes up to final grade. The discharge points are set up in the east end of the cell and the final grade surface is advanced to the slimes pool area. Coarse tailings sand from the discharge points are graded into low areas to reach the final disposal elevation. When the slimes pool is reached, the discharge points are then moved to the west end of the cell and worked back to the middle. An advantage to using the final grade method is that maximum beach stability is achieved by (1) allowing water to drain from the sands to the maximum extent, and (2) allowing coarse sand deposition to help provide stable beaches. Another advantage is that radon release and dust prevention measures (through the placement of the initial layer of the final cover) are applied as expeditiously as possible. N :\Reclamation Plan \Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 0 J.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-8 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Slurry disposal in Cell 4A is from several pre-determined discharge points located around the north and east sides of the cell. Slurry discharge is only allowed on skid pads, or protective HDPE sheets, to prevent damage to the synthetic lining system. Once tailings solids have reach the maximum elevation around the perimeter of the cell, discharge points can be moved toward the interior of the cell. Slurry disposal in Cell4B will be conducted in the same manner as Ce114A. 2.2.3.2 Liquid Management As a zero-discharge facility, the White Mesa Mill must evaporate all ofthe liquids utilized during processing. This evaporation takes place in three (3) areas: • Cell 1, which is used for solutions only; • Cell 3, in which tailings and solutions exist; • Cell 4A, in which tailings and solutions exist, and • Cell 4B after construction is complete. The original engineering design indicated a net water gain into the cells would occur during Mill operations. As anticipated, this has been proven to be the case. In addition to natural evaporation, spray systems have been used at various times to enhance evaporative rates and for dust control. To minimize the net water gain, solutions are recycled from the active tailings cells to the maximum extent possible. Solutions from Cells 1,3, and 4A are brought back to the CCD circuit where metallurgical benefit can be realized. Cell4B will be operated in the same manner as Ce1l4A. Recycle to other parts of the mill circuit are not feasible due to the acid content ofthe solution. N :\Reclarnation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx 2.3 Monitoring Programs Page 2-9 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Operational monitoring is defined as those monitoring activities that take place only during operations. This is contrasted with environmental monitoring, which is performed whether or not the mill is in operation. 2.3.1 Monitoring and Reporting Under the Mill's GWDP 2.3.1.1 Groundwater Monitoring a) Plugged and Excluded Wells Wells MW-6, MW-7, and MW-8 were plugged because they were in the area of Cell 3, as was MW-13, in the Ce1l4A area. Wells MW-9 and MW-10 are dry and have been excluded from the monitoring program. MW-16 is dry and has been plugged as part of the tailings Cell 4B construction. b) Groundwater Monitoring at the Mill Prior to Issuance of the GWDP At the time of renewal of the License by NRC in March, 1997 and up until issuance ofthe GWDP in March 2005, the Mill implemented a groundwater detection monitoring program to ensure compliance to 10 CFR Part 40, Appendix A, in accordance with the provisions of the License. The detection monitoring program was in accordance with the report entitled, Points of Compliance, White Mesa Uranium Mill, prepared by Titan Environmental Corporation, submitted N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-10 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan by letter to the NRC dated October 5,1994 (Titan, 1994b). Under that program, the Mill sampled monitoring wells MW-5, MW-ll, MW-12, MW-14, MW-15 and MW-17, on a quarterly basis. Samples were analyzed for chloride, potassium, nickel and uranium, and the results of such sampling were included in the Mill's Semi-Annual Effluent Monitoring Reports that were filed with the NRC up until August 2004 and with the DRC subsequent thereto. Between 1979 and 1997, the Mill monitored up to 20 constituents in up to 13 wells. That program was changed to the Points of Compliance Program in 1997 because NRC had concluded that: • The Mill and tailings system had produced no impacts to the perched zone or deep aquifer; and • The most dependable indicators of water quality and potential cell failure were considered to be chloride, nickel, potassium and natural uranium. c) Issuance ofthe GWDP On March 8, 2005, the Executive Secretary issued the GWDP, which includes a groundwater monitoring program that supersedes and replaces the groundwater monitoring requirements set out in the License. Groundwater monitoring under the GWDP commenced in March 2005, the results of which are included in the Mill's Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring Reports that are filed with the Executive Secretary. d) Current Ground Water Monitoring Program at the Mill Under the GWDP The current groundwater monitoring program at the Mill under the GWDP consists of monitoring at 22 point of compliance monitoring wells: MW-1, MW-2, MW-3, MW-3A, MW-5, MW-11, MW-12, MW-14, MW-15, MW-17, MW-18, MW-19, MW-23 , MW-24, MW-25, MW-26, N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-11 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan MW-27, MW-28, MW-29, MW-30, MW-31 and MW-32. The locations of these wells are indicated on Figure 1.5-2. Part I.E.l.(c) of the GWDP requires that each point of compliance well must be sampled for the following constituents: Table 2.3-1 Groundwater Monitoring Constituents Listed in Table 2 of the GWDP Nutrients: Ammonia (as N) Nitrate & Nitrite (as N) Heavy Metals: Arsenic Beryllium Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Selenium Silver Thallium Tin Uranium Vanadium Zinc Radiologies: Gross Alpha N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 0l.13.11 clean.docx Volatile Organic Compounds: Acetone Benzene 2-Butanone (MEK) Carbon Tetrachloride Chloroform Chloromethane Dichloromethane Naphthalene Tetrahydrofuran Toluene Xylenes (total) Others: Field pH (S.U.) Fluoride Chloride Sulfate TD Page 2-12 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Further, Part I.E.I.( c) of the GWDP, requires that, in addition to pH, the following field parameters must also be monitored: • Depth to groundwater • Temperature • Tubidity • Specific conductance, and that, in addition to chloride and sulfate, the following general organics must also be monitored: • Carbonate, bicarbonate, sodium, potassium, magnesium, calcium, and total anions and cations. , :\Reclamalion Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.28 'E '1'02 rev 3.2.0 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-13 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Sample frequency depends on the speed of ground water flow in the vicinity of each well. Parts I.E. 1 (a) and (b) of the GWDP provide that quarterly monitoring is required for all wells where local groundwater average linear velocity has been found by the Executive Secretary to be equal to or greater than 10 feet/year, and semi-annual monitoring is required where the local groundwater average linear velocity has been found by the Executive Secretary to be less than 10 feet/year. Based on these criteria, quarterly monitoring is required at MW-ll, MW-14, MW-25, MW-26, MW-30 and MW-31, and semi-annual monitoring is required at MW-l, MW-2, MW-3, MW-3A, MW-5, MW-12, MW-15, MW-17, MW-18, MW-19, MW-23, MW-24,MW-27,MW -28, MW-29 and MW-32. 2.3.1.2 Deep Aquifer The culinary well (one of the supply wells) is completed in the Navajo aquifer, at a depth of approximately 1,800 feet below the ground surface. Due to the fact that the deep confined aquifer at the site is hydraulically isolated from the shallow perched aquifer, no monitoring of the deep aquifer is required under the GWDP. 2.3.1.3 Seeps and Springs Pursuant to Part I.H.8 of the GWDP, Denison has a Sampling Plan/or Seeps and Springs in the Vicinity a/the White Mesa Uranium Mill, Revision: 0, March 17, 2009 (the "SSSP") that requires the Mill to perform groundwater sampling and analysis of all seeps and springs found downgradient or lateral gradient from the tailings cells. Under the SSSP, seeps and springs sampling is conducted on an annual basis between May 1 and N:\Reciamation PIan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.\3.11 clean.docx Page 2-14 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan July 15 of each year, to the extent sufficient water is available for sampling, at five identified seeps and springs near the Mill. The sampling locations were selected to correspond with those seeps and springs sampled for the initial Mill site characterization performed in the 1978 ER, plus additional sites located by Denison, the BLM and Ute Mountain Ute Indian Tribe representatives. Samples are analyzed for all ground water monitoring parameters found in Table 2.3-1 above. The laboratory procedures utilized to conduct the analyses of the sampled parameters are those utilized for groundwater sampling. In addition to these laboratory parameters, the pH, temperature and conductivity of each sample will be measured and recorded in the field. Laboratories selected by Denison to perform analyses of seeps and springs samples will be required to be certified by the State of Utah in accordance with UAC R317 -6-6.12.A. The seeps and springs sampling events will be subject to the Mill's QAP, unless otherwise specifically modified by the SSSP to meet the specific needs of this type of sampling. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-15 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 2.3.1.4 Discharge Minimization Technology and Best Available Technology Standards and Monitoring 2.3.1.4.1 General Part I.D. of the GWDP sets out a number of Discharge Minimization Technology ("DMT") and Best Available Technology ("BAT") standards that must be followed. Part I.E. ofthe GWDP sets out the Ground Water Compliance and Technology Performance Monitoring requirements, to ensure thatthe DMT and BAT standards are met. These provisions of the GWDP, along with the White Mesa Mill Tailings Management System and Discharge Minimization (DMT) Monitoring Plan, 9/08 Revision: Denison-6 (the "DMT Plan"), the Cell 4Aand 4B BAT Monitoring, Operations and Maintenance Plan R.evision 2.0 (under review) and other plans and programs developed pursuant to such Parts of the GWDP, set out the methods and procedures for inspections of the facility operations and for detecting failure of the system. In addition to the programs discussed above, the following additional DMT and BAT performance standards and associated monitoring are required under Parts I.D and I.E. of the GWDP b) Tailings Cell Operation Part I.D.2 of the GWDP provides that authorized operation and maximum disposal capacity in each of the existing tailings Cells, 1, 2 and 3 shall not exceed the levels authorized by the License and that under no circumstances shall the freeboard be less than three feet, as measured from the top of the flexible membrane liner ("FML"). Part LE.7(a) of the GWDP requires that the wastewater pool elevations in Cells 1 and 3 must be monitored weekly to ensure compliance with the maximum wastewater elevation criteria mandated by Condition 10.3 of the License. N :\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-16 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Part LD.2 further provides that any modifications by Denison to any approved engineering design parameter at these existing tailings cells requires prior Executive Secretary approval, modification of the GWDP and issuance of a construction permit. c) Slimes Drain Monitoring Part LD.3(b)(1) of the GWDP requires that Denison must at all times maintain the average wastewater head in the slimes drain access pipe to be as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) in each tailings disposal cell, in accordance with the approved DMT Plan. Compliance will be achieved when the average annual wastewater recovery elevation in the slimes drain access pipe, determined pursuant to the currently approved DMT Plan meets the conditions in Equation 1 specified in Part LD.3(b)(1) of the GWDP. Part LE.7(b) of the GWDP requires that Denison must monitor and record monthly the depth to wastewater in the slimes drain access pipes as described in the currently approved DMT Plan at Cell 2, and upon commencement of de-watering activities, at Cell 3, in order to ensure compliance with Part LD.3(b)(1) of the GWDP. d) Maximum Tailings Waste Solids Elevation Part LD.3( c) of the GWDP requires that upon closure of any tailings cell, Denison must ensure that the maximum elevation of the tailings waste solids does not exceed the top of the FML. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx e) Wastewater Elevation in Roberts Pond Page 2-17 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Part LD.3(e) of the GWDP requires that Roberts Pond be operated so as to provide a minimum 2-foot freeboard at all times, and that under no circumstances will the water level in the pond exceed an elevation of 5,624 feet above mean sea level. Part LD.3(e) also provides that in the event the wastewater elevation exceeds this maximum level, Denison must remove the excess wastewater and place it into containment in Cell 1 within 72 hours of discovery. Part LE.7(c) of the GWDP requires that the wastewater level in Roberts Pond must be monitored and recorded weekly, in accordance with the currently approved DMT Plan, to determine compliance with the DMT operations standard in Part LD.3(e) of the GWDP; f) Inspection of Feedstock Storage Area Part LD.3(f) of the GWDP requires that open-air or bulk storage of all feedstock materials at the Mill facility awaiting Mill processing must be limited to the eastern portion of the Mill site (the "ore pad") described by the coordinates set out in that Part of the GWDP, and that storage of feedstock materials at the facility outside of this defined area, must meet the requirements of Part LD.11 of the GWDP. Part LD.ll requires that Denison must store and manage feedstock materials outside the defined ore storage pad in accordance with the following minimum performance requirements: (i) Feedstock materials will be stored at all times in water-tight containers, and (ii) Aisle ways will be provided at all times to allow visual inspection of each and every feedstock container, or N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.\3.1\ clean.docx Page 2-18 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan (iii) Each and every feedstock container will be placed inside a water-tight overpack prior to storage, or (iv) Feedstock containers shall be stored on a hardened surface to prevent spillage onto subsurface soils, and that conforms with the following minimum physical requirements: A. A storage area composed of a hardened engineered surface of asphalt or concrete, and B. A storage area designed, constructed, and operated in accordance with engineering plans and specifications approved in advance by the Executive Secretary. All such engineering plans or specifications submitted shall demonstrate compliance with Part I.DA ofthe GWDP, and C. A storage area that provides containment berms to control stormwater run-on and run-off, and D. Stormwater drainage works approved in advance by the Executive Secretary, or (v) Other storage facilities and means approved in advance by the Executive Secretary. Part 1.E.7(d) of the GWDP requires that Denison conduct weekly inspections of all feedstock storage areas to: (i) Confirm that the bulk feedstock materials are maintained within the approved feedstock storage area specified by Part I.D.3(f) of the GWDP; and (ii) Verify that all alternate feedstock materials located outside the approved feedstock storage area are stored in accordance with the requirements found in Part I.D.11 of the GWDP. Part I.E.7(f) further provides that Denison must conduct weekly inspections to verify that each feed material container complies with the requirements of Part I.D.11 of the GWDP. N :\RecIamation Plan\RecIamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-19 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The Mill's Standard Operating Procedure under the License for inspection of the Mill's ore pad is contained in Section 3.3 of the DMT Plan. g) Monitor and Maintain Inventory of Chemicals Part I.D.3(g) of the GWDP requires that for all chemical reagents stored at existing storage facilities and held for use in the milling process, Denison must provide secondary containment to capture and contain all volumes of reagent( s) that might be released at any individual storage area. Response to spills, cleanup thereof, and required reporting must comply with the provisions of the Mill's Emergency Response Plan, which is found in the Mill's Stormwater Best Management Practices Plan, Revision 1.3; June 12, 2008 (a copy of which is included as Appendix C), as stipulated by Parts I.D.I0 and I.H.16 of the GWDP. Part I.D.3(g) further provides that for any new construction of reagent storage facilities, such secondary containment and control must prevent any contact of the spilled or otherwise released reagent or product with the ground surface. Part I.E. 9 of the G WDP requires that Denison must monitor and maintain a current inventory of all chemicals used at the facility at rates equal to or greater than 100 kg/yr. This inventory must be maintained on-site, and must include: (iii) Identification of chemicals used in the milling process and the on-site laboratory; and (iv) Determination of volume and mass of each raw chemical currently held in storage at the facility. 2.3.1.5 BAT Performance Standardsfor Cell4A and 4B N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-20 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan a) BAT Operations and Maintenance Plan Part LD.6 and Part LD.13 of the GWDP provide that Denison must operate and maintain Cell4A and Cell 4B, respectively, so as to prevent release of wastewater to groundwater and the environment in accordance with the Mill's Cell 4A and 4B BAT Monitoring, Operations and Maintenance Plan, pursuant to Part LH.8 of the GWDP. The Mill's Cell 4A and Cell 4B BAT Monitoring, Operations and Maintenance Plan, 11/2010 Revision: Denison 2.0 (under review) includes the following performance standards: (i) The fluid head in the leak detection system shall not exceed 1 foot above the lowest point in the lower membrane liner; (ii) The leak detection system maximum allowable daily leak rate shall not exceed 24,160 gallons/day for Cell4A or 26,145 gallons/day for CeIl4B; (iii) After Denison initiates pumping conditions in the slimes drain layer in Cell 4A or CeIl4B, Denison will provide continuous declining fluid heads in the slimes drain layer, in a manner equivalent to the requirements found in Part LD.3(b) for Cells 2 and 3; and (iv) Under no circumstances shall the freeboard be less than 3 feet in Cell 4A or Cell 4B, as measured from the top of the FML. b) Implementation of Monitoring Requirements Under the BAT Operations and Maintenance Plan The Ce1l4A and 4B BAT Monitoring, Operations and Maintenance Plan also requires Denison to perform the following monitoring and recordkeeping requirements. (i) Weekly Leak Detection System (LDS) Monitoring -including: N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-21 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan A. Denison must provide continuous operation of the leak detection system pumping and monitoring equipment, including, but not limited to, the submersible pump, pump controller, head monitoring, and flow meter equipment approved by the Executive Secretary. Failure of any pumping or monitoring equipment not repaired and made fully operational within 24-hours of discovery shall constitute failure of BAT and a violation of the GWDP; B. Denison must measure the fluid head above the lowest point on the secondary FML by the use of procedures and equipment approved by the Executive Secretary. Under no circumstance shall fluid head in the leak detection system sump exceed a I-foot level above the lowest point in the lower FML on the cell floor. For purposes of compliance monitoring this I-foot distance shall equate to 2.28 feet above the leak detection system transducer; C. Denison must measure the volume of all fluids pumped from the leak detection system. Under no circumstances shall the average daily leak detection system flow volume exceed 24,160 gallons/day for Cell 4A or 26,145 gallons/day for Ce1l4B; and D. Denison must operate and maintain wastewater levels to provide a 3-foot Minimum of vertical freeboard in tailings Cell 4A and Cell 4B. Such measurements must be made to the nearest 0.1 foot. N:\Reclamation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 c1ean.docx Page 2-22 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan (ii) Slimes Drain Recovery Head Monitoring Immediately after the Mill initiates pumping conditions in the Cell 4A or Cell 4B slimes drain system, monthly recovery head tests and fluid level measurements will be made in accordance with the requirements of Parts LD.3 and LE.7(b) of the GWDP and any plan approved by the Executive Secretary. 2.3.1. 6 Stormwater Management and Spill Control Requirements Part LD.10 of the GWDP reqUIres that Denison will manage all contact and non-contact stormwater and control contaminant spills at the facility in accordance with the Mill's stormwater best management practices plan. The Mill's Stormwater Best Management Practices Plan, Revision 1.3: June 12,2008 (a copy of which is included as Appendix C) includes the following prOVISiOns: a) Protect groundwater quality or other waters of the state by design, construction, and/or active operational measures that meet the requirements of the Ground Water Quality Protection Regulations found in UAC R317 -6-6.3(G) and R317 -6-6.4(C); b) Prevent, control and contain spills of stored reagents or other chemicals at the Mill site; c) Cleanup spills of stored reagents or other chemicals at the Mill site immediately upon discovery; and d) Report reagent spills or other releases at the Mill site to the Executive Secretary in accordance with UAC 19-5-114. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-23 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 2.3.1.7 Tailings and Slimes Drain Sampling Part I.E.8 ofthe GWDP requires that, on an annual basis, Denison must collect wastewater quality samples from each wastewater source at each tailings cell at the facility, including surface impounded wastewaters, and slimes drain wastewaters, pursuant to the Mill's Tailings and Slimes Drain Sampling Program, Revision 0, November 20, 2008 (the "WQSP"). All such sampling must be conducted in August of each calendar year. The purpose of the WQSP is to characterize the source term quality of all tailings cell wastewaters, including impounded wastewaters or process waters in the tailings cells, and wastewater or leachates collected by internal slimes drains. The WQSP requires: • Collection of samples from the pond area of each active cell and the slimes drain of each cell that has commenced de-watering activities; • Samples of tailings and slimes drain material will be analyzed at an offsite contract laboratory and subjected to the analytical parameters included in Table 2 of the GWDP (see Table 2.3-1 above) and general inorganics listed in Part I.E. 1 (d)(2)(ii) of the GWDP, as well as semi-volatile organic compounds; • A detailed description of all sampling methods and sample preservation techniques to be employed; • The procedures utilized to conduct these analyses will be standard analytical methods utilized for groundwater sampling and as shown in Section 8.2 of the Mill's QAP; • The contracted laboratory will be certified by the State of Utah in accordance with UAC R317-6-6.12A; and • 30-day advance notice of each annual sampling event must be gIven, to allow the Executive Secretary to collect split samples of all tailings cell wastewater sources. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B Ol.l3.ll clean.docx Page 2-24 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The tailings and slimes drain sampling events are subject to the Mill's QAP, unless otherwise specifically modified by the WQSP to meet the specific needs of this type of sampling. 2.3.2 Monitoring and Inspections Required Under the License 2.3. 2.1 Environmental Monitoring The environmental monitoring program is designed to assess the effect of Mill process and disposal operations on the unrestricted environment. Delineation of specific equipment and procedures is presented in the Mill's Environmental Protection Manual, included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal Application. c) Ambient Air Monitoring (i) Ambient Particulate Airborne radionuclide particulate sampling is performed at five locations, termed BHV-l, BHV-2, BHV-4, BHV-5 and BHV-6. With the approval of the NRC and effective November, 1995, BHV-3 was removed from the active air particulate monitoring program. At that time, the Mill proposed (and NRC determined) that a sufficient air monitoring data base had been compiled at station BHV-3 to establish a representative airborne particulate radionuclide background for the Mill. BHV-6 was installed by the Mill at the request of the White Mesa Ute Community. This station began operation in July of 1999 and provides airborne particulate information in the southerly direction between the Mill and the White Mesa Ute Community. Figure 2.3-1 shows the locations of these air particulate monitoring stations. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx ----, ~9-i I ~ _________ '-I I ------, I ~-.. ;;>-+---..... ---un-t----0------i I -'~ I BHV-2 \ N : -, .. ....-,. ~I -~ I ; ( I I A : I ...... !/ .. I VA l .. ,,~.. i )V l I ~1 ;~~ ,-fr' .. ~ I : I i .". , ...... I I I I " /----I , ,I I l I / , ...... I l 2 L ________ + ~ ii i t /' ~-----------, -------------/-:; -----1 --I ... --------i-·---w -c'i -I ---, I I ", ----1---------'i i I 2000 I a 2000 "" : I :.: \ I ( ~ I I ~~f I I " \ -:. \ I \ 'I SCALE IN FEET I j'" I ''*\ \ '\ "It I i I I I I -, • I I I -, I -, , I \ jil t! ; (I l I ______ ~j-v~ _ --J -----------~-__________ II' ' - --I , , I --t--+I--------------rl:,~.1 -I -! A I ~! ~ ... I , I 1 , ", ~ 1 ,) _ 1 '. : ~ I : I ~ j 'I ~.,.#\ \ 'I \ I " .t _ I \ I I '" I -' • ' ill. I ..,._~ 1 " -, r-_ \... .. 1 \ ~'I : ~ ,_. I ~. ,: ...... ,,--: j • 1-------1 -; I. , ...... -c<~_A' ---f;;,-:t --------I !t.': \ I ________ 7--"~O;____ 0 • \ "'", \ \ I -'-----r ---,.-,' ~-.. BHV-5 :, \. 4 _ ~ "" I ... :::/ l 1, .. \ i c. 1 i' '\ 1 '--~ '''\,.,J • " I) ! -:. ''-.,....:0 J "---~r \ 4... '0. '., I ~ 4t ' ... "', \ J .. I.>' ... ,f / ", \"C.\,-1-'-! '----• 0 l "'" ! ~ _ : \ \ BHV-6 "..:~t ----l---O----j----------i ,': __________________ ~, <. 1 : I _\ __ . -.---":~~ .. i~ ~ '", -l -, -..., I .A " i ( f : .,J '" .. ~... \ I \ , I 7_. (, ~, .. 1 / !"! ! t", >t,", " 1 '. .. 7" '1 '--. \ -:. I " .,. ,'_ , ~ : ,< : I I I 'S,~~,,-~_~ __ I \ & I ! I __ ---------------~--r.~ I -I" ~ I I a ______ __ _ l I ' ~. " • ',,-_ ',' " 8 . '...... , -------t ":-; ----: I i ~'" \. ~'I : / 'l-,. :.. , (" c.-', ' , .~ I ~ , , '--_, i '~-\ -""'r-'j,~ ~ I \ 1 / _ ~. ~ -.~ .. ._,'-.. \ ~--'\ . ~ f ,; I '\ \ " I , .. .-I \ .. ~... \ i:l ----'-------=-'i. : \ I \._ ------~ --------------------S.. .1 I ____ \_____ ... ----o:.----! -----'l I ' tit. " I '.: : I : I ,/ I \: I..~I .. ~-- J I. " -' \, 'i ~--: ( '\ "', (-----'--': I \ " ..... I " "---\ ::: I -\_J .~ ? 1\ -~ 0" ! I ----------f~/~-------'I-----~~-O -J--. I -~ --------I\-~~~~~--~-~-------1 'Jl-I ~~" I-----~ ~ 4t ,. --------" I "" I ~ --1 ____ J~ __ --.JIl.=__ __ __"__"_ I ( ~ b. ,~ _II_II Property Boundary Reservation Boundary Canyon Rim o Air Monitor Stations Denison Mines (USA) Corp. Project REVISIONS Dale I By 11-09 dis 01113111 BM WHITE MESA MILL County: I State: lIT Location; Figure 2.3-1 High Volume Air Monitoring Stations Scale: as shawn Author: HRR Page 2-26 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The present sampling system consists of high volume particulate samplers utilizing mass flow controllers to maintain an air flow rate of approximately 32 standard cubic feet per minute. Samplers are operated continuously with a goal for on-stream operating period at ninety percent. Filter rotation is weekly with quarterly site compo siting for particulate radionuclide analysis. Analysis is done for U-natural, Th-230, Ra-226, and Pb-210. See Section 3. 13.1.7(a) of the 2007 ER for a summary of historic monitoring results for airborne particulate. (ii) Ambient Radon With the approval of the NRC, Radon-222 monitoring at the BHV stations was discontinued in 1995, due to the unreliability of monitoring equipment available at that time to detect the new 10 CFR standard of 0.1 pCi/l. From that time until the present, the Mill demonstrated compliance with the requirements ofR313-15-301 by calculation authorized by the NRC in September 1995 and as contemplated by R313-15-302 (2) (a). This calculation was performed by use of the MILDOS code for estimating environmental radiation doses for uranium recovery operations (Strenge and Bender 1981) in 1991 in support of the Mill's 1997 license renewal and more recently in 2007 in support of the 2007 License Renewal Application, by use of the updated MILDOS AREA code (Argonne 1998). The analysis under both the MILDOS and MILDOS AREA codes assumed the Mill to be processing high grade Arizona Strip ores at full capacity, and calculated the concentrations of radioactive dust and radon at individual receptor locations around the Mill. Specifically, the modeling under these codes assumed the following conditions: N :\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 c1ean.docx • 730,000 tons of ore per year • Average grade of 0.53% U30g Page 2-27 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan • Yellowcake production of 4,380 tons ofU30s per year (8.8 million pounds U30g per year). Based on these conditions, the MILDOS and MILDOS AREA codes calculated the combined total effective dose equivalent from both air particulate and radon at the current nearest residence (approximately 1.2 miles north of the Mill), i.e., the individual member of the public likely to receive the highest dose from Mill operations, as well as at all other receptor locations, to be below the ALARA goal of 10 mremlyr for air particulate alone as set out in R313-15-101(4). Mill operations are constantly monitored to ensure that operating conditions do not exceed the conditions assumed in the above calculations. If conditions are within those assumed above, radon has been calculated to be within regulatory limits. If conditions exceed those assumed above, then further evaluation will be performed in order to ensure that doses to the public continue to be within regulatory limits. Mill operations to date have never exceeded the License conditions assumed above. In order to determine if detection equipment has improved since 1995, the Mill has, commencing with the first quarter of2007, re-instituted direct measurements of radon at the five air particulate monitoring locations currently utilized for air particulate sampling. The reliability of this data is currently under review by Denison. d) External Radiation TLD badges, as supplied by Landauer, Inc., or equivalent, are utilized at BHV-1, BHV-2, BHV-3, BHV-4, BHV-5 and BHV-6 to determine ambient external gamma exposures (see Figure 2.3-1). System quality assurances are determined by placing a duplicate monitor at one site continuously. Exchanges of TLD badges are on a quarterly basis. Badges consist of a minimum of five TLD N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 c1ean.docx Page 2-28 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan chips. Measurements obtained from location BHV -3 have been designated as background due to BHV-3's remoteness from the Mill site (BHV-3 is located approximately 3.5 miles west of the Mill site). For further procedural information see Section 4.3 of the Mill's Environmental Protection Manual, included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal Application. See Section 3.13.1.7(c) of the 2007 ER for a summary of historic monitoring results for external radiation. e) Soil and Vegetation (i) Soil Monitoring Soil samples from the top one centimeter of surface soils are collected annually at each of BHV -1, BHV-2, BHV-3, BHV-4 and BHV-5 (see Figure 2.3-1). A minimum of two kilograms of soil is collected per site and analyzed for U-natural and Ra-226. For further procedural information see Section 4.1 of the Mill's Environmental Protection Manual included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal Application. See Section 3.13.1.7.1 of the 2007 ER for a summary of the historic results for soil monitoring. The 2007 ER concludes that the results of sampling are low, less than the unrestricted release limits. (i) Vegetation Monitoring Forage vegetation samples are collected three times per year from animal grazing locations to the northeast (near BHV-I (the meteorological station)), northwest (to the immediate west of the site) and southwest (by BHV-4) of the Mill site. Samples are obtained during the grazing season, in the late fall, early spring, and in late spring. A minimum of three kilograms of vegetation are submitted from each site for analysis of Ra-226 and Pb-210. For further procedure information see Section 4.2 of the Mill's Environmental Protection Manual included as Appendix A to the N :\Reclarnation Plan\Reclarnation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13. I 1 c1ean.docx Page 2-29 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 2007 License Renewal Application. See Section 3. 13.7(d) of the 2007 ER for a summary of the historic results for vegetation monitoring. The 2007 ER concludes that the most recent results indicate no increase in uptake of Ra-226 and Pb-21 0 in vegetation. d) Meteorological Meteorological monitoring is done at a site near BHV -1. The sensor and recording equipment are capable of monitoring wind velocity and direction, from which the stability classification is calculated. Data integration duration is one-hour with hourly recording of mean speed, mean wind direction, and mean wind stability (as degrees sigma theta). The data from the meteorological station is retrieved monthly by down loading onto a Campbell Scientific data module, or the equivalent. The data module is sent to an independent meteorological contractor where the module is downloaded to a computer record, and the data is correlated and presented in a Semi-Annual Meteorological Report. Monitoring for precipitation consists of a daily log of precipitation using a standard NOAA rain gauge, or the equivalent, installed near the administrative office, consistent with NOAA specifications. Windrose data is summarized in a format compatible with MILDOS and UDAD specifications for 40 CFR 190 compliance. For further procedural information see Section 1.3 of the Mill's Environmental Protection Manual included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal Application. A windrose for the site is set out in Figure 1.1-1. e) Point Emissions N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-30 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Stack emission monitoring from yellowcake facilities follows EPA Method 5 procedures and occurs on a quarterly basis, during operation of the facility. Particulate sampling is analyzed for Unat on a quarterly basis and for Th-230, Ra-226, and Pb-21O on a semi-annual basis. Demister and ore stack emission monitoring follows EPA Method 5 procedure on a semi-annual basis, during operation ofthe facility. Particulate samples are analyzed for Unat, Th-230, Ra-226, and Pb-2W. Monitored data includes scrubber system operation levels, process feed levels, particulate emission concentrations, isokinetic conditions, and radionuclide emission concentrations. For further procedure information see Section 1.4 of the Mill's Environmental Protection Manual included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal Application. Historic stack emission data are summarized in Section 3.13.1.7(e) of the 2007 ER. f) Surface Water Monitoring Surface water monitoring is conducted at two locations adjacent to the Mill facility known as Westwater Canyon and Cottonwood Creek. Samples are obtained annually from Westwater and quarterly from Cottonwood using grab sampling. For Westwater Creek, samples will be of sediments if a water sample is not available. Field monitored parameters and laboratory monitored parameters are listed in Table 2.3-2. For further procedural information see Section 2.1 of the Mill's Environmental Protection Manual included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal Application. See Section 3.7.4 of the 2007 ER for a summary of the historic results for surface water monitoring. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Table 2.3-2 Page 2-31 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Operational Phase Surface Water Monitoring Program Monitoring Sites Westwater Creek and Cottonwood Creek Field Requirements 1. Temperature C; 2. Specific Conductivity umhos at 25 C; 3. pH at 25 C; 4. Sample date; 5. Sample ID Code; Vendor Laboratory Requirements Semiannual * Ouarterly One gallon Unfiltered and Raw One gallon Unfiltered and Raw One gallon Unfiltered, Raw and preserved to One gallon Unfiltered, Raw and Preserved to pH <2 with HN03 J~H <2 with HN03 Total Dissolved Solids Total Dissolved Solids Total Suspended Solids Total Suspended Solids Gross Alpha Suspended Unat Dissolved Unat Suspended Ra-226 Dissolved Ra-226 Suspended Th-230 Dissolved Th-230 .. *Semlannual sample must be taken a millimum of four months apart. ** Annual Westwater Creek sample is analyzed for semi-annual parameters. Radionuclides and LLDs reported in /lCi/ml N :\Reclamation PIan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01 .13.11 c1ean.docx Page 2-32 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 2.3.2.2 Additional Monitoring and Inspections Required Under the License Under the License daily, weekly, and monthly inspection reporting and monitoring are required by NRC Regulatory Guide 8.31, Information Relevant to Ensuring that Occupational Radiation Exposures at Uranium Recovery Facilities will be As Low As is Reasonable Achievable, Revision 1, May 2002 ("Reg Guide 8.31 "), by Section 2.3 of the Mill 's ALARA Program and by the DMT Plan, over and above the inspections described above that are required under the GWDP. A copy of the Mill's ALARA Program is included as Appendix I to the 2007 License Renewal Application. a) Daily Inspections Three types of daily inspections are performed at the Mill under the License: (i) Radiation Staff Inspections Paragraph 2.3.1 of Reg. Guide 8.31 provides that the Mill's Radiation Safety Officer ("RSO") or designated health physics technician should conduct a daily walk-through (visual) inspection of all work and storage areas of the Mill to ensure proper implementation of good radiation safety procedures, including good housekeeping that would minimize unnecessary contamination. These inspections are required by Section 2.3.1 of the Mill's ALARA Program, and are documented and on file in the Mill's Radiation Protection Office. (ii) Operating Foreman Inspections 30 CFR Section 56.18002 of the Mine Safety and Health Administration regulations requires that a N:\Reclarnation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-33 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan competent person designated by the operator must examine each working place at least once each shift for conditions which may adversely affect safety or health. These daily inspections are documented and on file in the Mill's Radiation Protection Office. (iii) Daily Tailings Inspection Paragraph 2.2 of the DMT Plan requires that during Mill operation, the Shift Foreman, or other person with the training specified in paragraph 2.4 of the DMT Plan, designated by the RSO, will perform an inspection of the tailings line and tailings area at least once per shift, paying close attention for potential leaks and to the discharges from the pipelines. Observations by the Inspector are recorded on the appropriate line on the Mill's Daily Inspection Data form. b) Weekly Inspections Three types of weekly inspections are performed at the Mill under the License: (i) Weekly Inspection of the Mill Forms Paragraph 2.3.1 of Reg. Guide 8.31 provides that the RSO and the Mill foreman should, and Section 2.3.2 of the Mill's ALARA Program provides that the RSO and Mill foreman, or their respective designees, shall conduct a weekly inspection of all Mill areas to observe general radiation control practices and review required changes in procedures and equipment. Particular attention is to be focused on areas where potential exposures to personnel might exist and in areas of operation or locations where contamination is evident. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx (ii) Weekly Ore Storage Pad Inspection Forms Page 2-34 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Paragraph 3.3 of the DMT Plan requires that weekly feedstock storage area inspections will be performed by the Radiation Safety Department, to confirm that the bulk feedstock materials are stored and maintained within the defined area of the ore pad and that all alternate feed materials located outside the defined ore pad area are maintained within water tight containers. The results of these inspections are recorded on the Mill's Ore Storage/Sample Plant Weekly Inspection Report. (iii) Weekly Tailings and DMT Inspection Paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2 of the DMT Plan require that weekly inspections of the tailings area and DMT requirements be performed by the radiation safety department. c) Monthly Reports Two types of monthly reports are prepared by Mill staff: (i) Monthly Radiation Safety Reports At least monthly, the RSO reviews the results of daily and weekly inspections, including a review of all monitoring and exposure data for the month and provides to the Mill Manager a monthly report containing a written summary of the month's significant worker protection activities (Section 2.3.4 ofthe Mill's ALARA Program). N :\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 c1ean.docx (ii) Monthly Tailings Inspection Reports Page 2-35 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Paragraph 4 of the DMT Plan requires that a Monthly Inspection Data fonn be completed for the monthly tailings inspection. This inspection is typically performed in the fourth week of each month and is in lieu of the weekly tailings inspection for that week. Mill staff also prepares a monthly summary of all daily, weekly, monthly and quarterly tailings inspections. d) Quarterly Tailings Inspections Paragraph 5 of the DMT Plan requires that the RSO or his designee perfonn a quarterly tailings inspection. e) Annual Evaluations The following annual evaluations are performed under the License, as set out in Section 6 of the DMTPlan. (i) Annual Technical Evaluation An annual technical evaluation of the tailings management system must be performed by a registered professional engineer (PE), who has experience and training in the area of geotechnical aspects of retention structures. The technical evaluation includes an on-site inspection of the tailings management system and a thorough review of all tailings records for the past year. The Technical Evaluation also includes a review and summary of the annual movement monitor survey (see paragraph (ii) below). N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 c1ean.docx Page 2-36 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan All tailings cells and corresponding dikes are inspected for signs of erosion, subsidence, shrinkage, and seepage. The drainage ditches are inspected to evaluate surface water control structures. In the event tailings capacity evaluations were performed for the receipt of alternate feed material during the year, the capacity evaluation forms and associated calculation sheets will be reviewed to ensure that the maximum tailings capacity estimate is accurate. The amount of tailings added to the system since the last evaluation will also be calculated to determine the estimated capacity at the time of the evaluation. As discussed above, tailings inspection records consist of daily, weekly, monthly, and quarterly tailings inspections. These inspection records are evaluated to determine if any freeboard limits are being approached. Records will also be reviewed to summarize observations of potential concern. The evaluation also involves discussion with the Environmental and/or Radiation Technician and the RSO regarding activities around the tailings area for the past year. During the annual inspection, photographs of the tailings area are taken. The training of individuals is also reviewed as a part of the Annual Technical Evaluation. The registered engineer obtains copies of selected tailings inspections, along with the monthly and quarterly summaries of observations of concern and the corrective actions taken. These copies are then included in the Annual Technical Evaluation Report. The Annual Technical Evaluation Report must be submitted by November 15th of every year to the Directing Dam Safety Engineer, State of Utah, Natural Resources. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx (ii) Annual Movement Monitor Survey Page 2-37 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan A movement monitor survey is conducted by a licensed surveyor annually in accordance with Condition 11.3 of the License, approved on June 17, 2010. The movement monitor survey consists of surveying monitors along dikes 4A-S and 4B-S to detect any possible settlement or movement of the dikes. The data generated from this survey is reviewed and incorporated into the Annual Technical Evaluation Report of the tailings management system. (iii) Annual Leak Detection Fluid Samples In the event solution has been detected in a leak detection system in Cells 1, 2 or 3, a sample will be collected on an annual basis. This sample will be analyzed according to the conditions set forth in License Condition 11.3.C. The results of the analysis will be reviewed to determine the origiu of the solution. N:\Rec1amation PI!lll\Rec1am~tion Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT02 rev 3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 2-1 Revision ~3 .2.AB ~Dcnison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 2 0 EX ISIrNG FA CII.!TY The following sections describe the construction history of the ~Mill; the Mmill and Mmill tailings management facilities; Mmill operations including the Mmill circuit and tailings management; and both operational and environmental monitoring. 2.1 Facility Construction History The Wllite MesaMill is a uranium/vanadium mill that was developed in the late 1970's by Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc. (EFN) as an outlet for the many small mines that are located in the Colorado Plateau and for the possibility of milling Arizona Strip ores. At the time of its construction, it was anticipated that high uranium prices would stimulate ore production. However, prices started to decline about the same time as Mmill operations commenced. As uranium prices fell, producers in the region were affected and mine output declined. After+---.[ Formatted: No Widow/orphan control about two and one-half years, the White Mesa Mill ceased ore processing operations altogether, began solution recycle, and entered a total shutdown phase. In 1984, a majority ownership interest was acquired by Union Carbide Corporation's e UCC:) Metals Division which later became Umetco Minerals Corporation e Umetco:), a wholly-owned subsidiary of UCC. This partnership continued until May 26, 1994 when EFN reassumed complete ownership. In May of 1997 Denison (then named International Uranium illfu1lCorporation) and its affiliates purchased the assets of EFN and is the current owner of the facility. Throughout this Plan, the names Formatted: Font: 9 pt I ~----------~------------~ /, Formatted: Font: 9 pt " NAAt<lkllnallon--------P=lruAAeekIma!t&t! Pia" 32 A ill==-11fQCR!S5 12 J7.IQ\S1iG!ll2 r8. 3,2." 12.20.10 /,' redliMd!!!H!TI-'I!!~F;!I-!,!:I~.9~"'-A!'1Sffi~.~~9JN:\Rcclamalion Plan\Rcf'amation Plan Rev 3·l.~Ernl J9.L',' 32 B 01.13 11 rc!!linc.docllo... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ________________ -I Page 2-2 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtematioRal UFaRil:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan .----{ Formatted: No widow/orphan control 2.1.1 Mill and Tailings Management Facility The Source Materials License Application for the White Mesa Mill was submitted to the U. S. NtieleaF ReglilatoFY CommissioR (NR 1 on February 8 1.978. Between th~is date and the date the first ore was fed to the mill grizzly on May 6, 1980, several actions were taken including: increasing mill design capacity, permit issuance from the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") and the State of Utah, archeological clearance for the Mmill and tailings areas, and an NRC pre-operational inspection on May 5, 1980. Construction on the tailings area began on August 1, 1978 with the movement of earth from the area of Cell 2. Cell 2 was completed on May 4, 1980, Celll-I on June 29,1981, and Cell 3 on September 2, 1982. In January of 1990 an additional cell, designated Cell 4A, was completed and plaeea iRto I:Iseinitially used solely for solution storage and evaporation. Cell 4A was only used for a short period of time and then taken out of service because of concerns about the ynthetic lining sy (ern. IN 2007, e1l4A was retrofitted with a new State of Utah approved lining system and was put back into service in October of 2008. Cell 4B construction was 8uthoriz d by License Amendment 0.4. issued on June 17,2010, and the cell is currcntl und r conslruction. The Cell4A and 4B design and operational details are more specifically de cribed in the following documents. h reby incorporated b reference: J) Ccll4A Construction Qua\jty Assurance Report. July 2008 2) Cell 4B Construction Quality Assurance Report, November 2010 " Formatted: List Paragraph, Numbered + Level: 1 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: OS' Formatted: Font: 9 pt / I I..F:.;:o:;,:rm:.:.:,a=.:tt::;ed:=..: F:.;:o:.:.:,nt:;.,: :..9 ::.:pt~ _____ ---J .N;\Iffil!amalie~tm\R~!lm!lI!oo:-----fYan 32 A irt-------pmgres5 1217,IGiSEiCTl!2 my 32 A 1222,10 // ff!!Ili~~~~61_'29J~'YW<lamAlion Plpn\RcqlsmatioQ Plnn Rev 3,2B\SECIP~ r;v ~I/ 32,B 01 13_11 redlinc.doCl\; _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ ____ ____ __ ___________ _ _ _________ -1 Page 2-3 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtematioRa\ UffiflitiffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 3) Discharge Minimization technologv Monitoring Plan, Rcvision 11. and Best Available Technology Operalions an d Maintenance Plan revision 2, November 12, 2010 (under review). 2.2 Facility Operations In the following subsections, an overview of mill operations and operating periods are followed by descriptions of the operations of the mill circuit and tailings management facilities. 2.2.1 Operating Periods The White Mesa Mill was operated by EFN from the initial start-up date of May 6, 1980 until the cessation of operations in 1983. Umetco, as per agreement between the parties, became the operator of record on January 1, 1984. The lNhite Mesa Mill was shut down during all of 1984. The Mmill operated at least part of each year from 1985 through 1990. Mill operations wefe again ceased during the years of 1991 through 1994. EFN reacquired sole ownership on May 26, 1994 and the mill operated again during 1995 and 1996. Alter acquisition of the Mill by Denison and its affiliates several local mines were restarted and lhe Mill proc.essed convenLional ores during 1999 and early 2000. With the resurgence in uranium and anadium proce s in 2003, Denison reopened several area mines and again began proces ing uranium and vanadium ores in April 0[2008. Mill operations were suspended in 2009, and resumed in March of201 O. Typical employment figures for the Mmill are llQ& during uranium-only operations and 14ffi& during uranium/vanadium operations. Formatted: Font: 9 pt I ~------------------------< / I Formatted: Font: 9 pt " NAAe9!a1!lll1jen--------p!RI!\Re\!kuH8!jOR Plen l .2 ft i~ss 12.17 JQIJi6CT22 Fe¥ J.2.A 12.20r19. /,' ~~Jt9~4.1\t'!S1'9I91.BJ[I~.YJ2~1;:j~~arl1j\li!m Plan\Be£lamalion Plan Rev 3.2Bl$ECT02 rev~/,' 3280113 II rOOline.docx. n n n ______ nnn n n u _ u __ n _ n _ n n _ n _ n ___ j Page 2-4 Revision ~3.2.AB ~~~enison Mines (tjSA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Commencing in lhe early 1290's thrQugh today. the Mill has groce sed alternate feed material ----{ I'onnatted: Space After: 6 pt from time to time when thc Mill has been proces ing conventional or s. Alternate feed materials are uranium-bearing materials other than conventionally-mined uranium ores. The Mill installed an alternate feed circuit in 2009 that allows the Mil l to process certain alternate feed matcrials simultaneously with conventional ore. Formatted: Font: 9 pt /?F";o-rm-a-tted--: F-on-t-: 9;..P;..t-------< ,,~ ________ ~~ __________ --J , , NAAeo!~1i&!t---P1ftfl 3 :h in--------t!fflg8S9 12.17 I Ql,SEVI'Ok:-=rev J 2A 12.20.11l ,'/ redlinltd~I;.!~~I~tR.9~W~RIl~.B-~~t1;lBs:clnmali9n PlllO\ReSlnmatiQll Plan R~v 3.2B\SE£[02 rev~',' 3.2 B 01.13."11 rcdJinc.doc1C. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____________ J 2.2.2 Mill Circuit Page 2-5 Revision ~3.2.AB Ietematiaeai UFllRillmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan While originally designed for a capacity of 1,500 dry tons per day (dtpd.), the Mmill capacity was boosted to the present rated design of 1980 dtpd. prior to commissioning. The mill uses an atmospheric hot acid leach followed by counter current decantation ~CCD:). This in tum is followed by a clarification stage which precedes the solvent extraction ~SX:) circuit. Kerosene containing iso-decanol and tertiary amines extract the uranium and vanadium from the aqueous solution in the SX circuit. Salt and soda ash are then used to strip the uranium and vanadium from the organic phase. After extraction of the uranium values from the aqueous solution in SX, uranium is precipitated with anhydrous ammonia, dissolved, and re-precipitated to improve product quality. The resulting precipitate is then washed and dewatered using centrifuges to produce a final product called "yellowcake." The yellowcake is dried in a multiple hearth dryer and packaged in drums weighing approximately 800 to 1,000 Ibs. for shipping to converters. After the uranium values are stripped from the pregnant solution in SX, the vanadium values are transferred to tertiary amines contained in kerosene and concentrated into an intermediate product caJled vanadium product liquor c..'VPL:). An intermcdiale product, ammonium metavanadate e AMY:), is precipitated from the YPL using ammonium sulfate in batch precipitators. The AMY is then filtered on a belt filter and, if necessary, dried. Normally, the AMY cake is fed to Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,'?F-o-rm--att-ed--:-Fo-n-t:-g~p-t ------------~ II ~~~~~~~ ____________ -J II NAAeoIftffilltfwt----=P!~tan 3 iI,A jll==1}!j!!y:eS5 12,17.H$EGf9jl Fe... 32... 12,2!l,1~ /,' f!!I!il!$doolj/ !1.J::I~R§'!!~9~~"'!~.FQ1G1.~~l!Y )29JN'~cl'!VJatioD PlaD~I!m!!J.i1M' PlnD Rev 3,2BI&ECT02 rev ~ '/ 3 2 B 01 13,! I rcdline dQCX, __________________________ u ______________________ I Page 2-6 Revision ~3.2.AB IFltematisFlai UraFIil:lfHDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan fusion furnaces when it is converted to the mill's primary vanadium product, V20 S tech flake, commonly called "black flake." The same basic process steps used for the recovery of uranium from conventional ores are used for the recovery of uranium from alternate feed materials, with orne variation depending on the particular alternate feed material. The mill processed 1,511,544 tons of ore and other materials from May 6, 1980 to February 4, 1983. During the second operational period from October 1, 1985 through December 7, 1987, 1,023,393 tons of conventional ore were processed. During the third operational period from July 1988 through November 1990, -1,015,032 tons of conventional ore were processed. During the fourth operational period from August 1995 through January 1996, -203,317 tons of conventional ore were processed. !nJ+he fifth operational period rrom May 1996 through eptember 1996 the Mill processed 3,868 tons of calcium fluoride alternate feed material. SiFlee eaFiyFrom 1997JQ early 1999., the Mmill ftfts.-processed 58,403 tons from several additional feed stocks. With rising uranium prices in the late 1990's, company mines were reopened in 1997, and 87,250 tons of conventional ore were processed in 1999 and early 2000. In 2002 and 2003, the Mill processed 266,690 tons of alternate teed material from governmen't cleanup projects. An additional 40,866 tons of allemal feed materials wer processed In 2007. From April 2008 through May 2009 the Mill processed an additional 184,795 ton of conventi onal ore. Inception to date material processed through AflFil1999May 2009 totals 3,815,5774,128.468 tons. This total is for all processing periods combined. 2.2.3 Tailings Management Facilities I r F_o_rm_a_tt_oo __ :F_o_nt_:9~p~t ____________ ~ /, -..,;F:...::o.;,,;rm,;,,:,a:.:tt:::.:oo==-: F:...::o.;,,;nt::..,: 9=-'p:.:t ______ ~ " NAAe6!!lmaOOIl-==:fllaIt\Rulnmn1ien---Plon 3.2.0 in-=-ft(9(!fBSS 12 17 Hl\SSCIQ2 RW l.2.A 12,20d9 /,' fe!iliRtHIOOlII !-£\!!~S~i!!I:M!\.gel:!'~§'!:QE,~Ilf::I£9JtI;\Rcclam..!lliQn Plan\R~lamaliQn P!an Rev 3.2B.w:.C1'06 rev ~',' ),2,BOI13.11red1ine.docl\, _______________________________________________ ...1 Page 2-7 Revision ~3.2.AB iflEeFft9:tieAal Ur9:ArumOenisoD Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Tailings produced by the mill typically contain 30 percent moisture by weight, have an in-place dry density of 86.3 pounds per cubic foot (Cell 2), have a size distribution with a predominant -325 mesh size fraction, and have a high acid and flocculent content. Tailings from alternate feed materials that are similar physically to conventional ores. which comprise m sl of the tons of alternate fc.ed materials processed to date at the Mill. are imilar to the tailings for conventional ores. Tailings from orne of the higher grade. lower volume alternate feed materials may arv somewhat from the tai lings from conventional ores, primarily in moisture and density contont. The tailings facilities at White Mesa currently consist of four cells as follows: ~~Cell 1, constructed with a 30-millimeter (ml) PVC earthen-covered liner, is used+--_. Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.5" + Indent at: 0.75" for the evaporation of process solution (Cell I was previously referred to as Cell I-\' but is now referred to as Cell 1);. _e _ ~-Cell 2, constructed with a 30-millimeter (ml) PVC earthen-covered liner, is used for the storage of barren tailings sands. This Cell is full and has been partially reclaimed: ~ -ell 3, constructed with a 30-millimeter (ml) PVC earthen-covered liner, is used for the storage of barren tailings sands and solutions. This cell is partially filled and bas been partially reclaimed; and ~ ~Cell 4A, constructed with a geosynthetic clay liner, a 60 Millimeter (mil) HOPE liner. a 300 mil HDPE geonel drainage layer, a, econd 6Q mil HOPE liner, and a slimcs drain network over thc enlire cell bottom. This cell was placed into service in October of2008. e CeIl4B, will be constructed with a geosynthetic clay liner, a 60 Millimeter (mm HOPE liner. a 300 mil HOPE geonel drainage layer, a second 60 mi l HOPE liner, and a slimes Formatted: Font: 9 pt Page 2-8 Revision ~3.2.AB Ifltematieflal UFllfIiliffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan drain network over Lhe enlire cell bottom. This cell will be constructed during the 2010 construction season. 4Q milliffieteF (ffll) IIDPE liHeF, is etlFFeHtly Het tlsea. Total estimated design capacity of Cells 2, 3, and 4A is approximately six million (mm) etJ&ie yaFlistons. Figures 1.5-4 and 1.5-5 show the locations of the tailings cells. Denison has submitled an application to the Executive ecretary to amend the Lic(:l1 e and GWDP to authorize the construction of tailings CeIl4B, which will be located adjacent La CeU4A and will capacity. That application was approved b the Executive ecrelary on June 17,2010. Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulieted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.5" + Indent at: 0.75" I l.?:.~'! J'giJi.!lg~lY!..a!!qgel,~e!!L _____________________________________________ --1-.:F:..:o::,:rm::.:a:::tted=::..:.:.:Fo:::n::.:t:..::Ita:::l:..:iC ______ --' Constructed in shallow valleys or swale areas, the lined tailings facilities provide storage below the existing grade and reduce potential exposure. Because the cells are separate and distinct, individual tailings cells may be reclaimed as they are filled to capacity. This phased reclamation approach minimizes the amount of tailings exposed at any given time and reduces potential exposure to a minimum. Slurry di posal has taken place in Cell 2.3 and 4A. Tailings placement in Cell 2 and Cell 3 was accomplisbed by means ofthe final grade mcthod. described below. " Formatted: Font: 9 pt /, L:...:Fo::.r:::m=att::ed=:.:...Fo::.n:.::t::..:9~p::..t ______ ~ Nt\Bel!lpf!mlien--------Plan\Rj!e\!lmatiGR==P!at!==-:::2&n jB ftf6!!fess 1217.1Q\$IOCIW r<l, J 2..... 1229 IQ /,' redJifl\l;dlmJ ,}y~E]t§\}\~~'!!§lGE.~~~'!1~N·\R~lama!iol1 PlanlRcclamalion Plan Rsv ~i.§ISECT02 r!O.v _',' 3.2 B 0 I !3 11 rcdlinc doc;~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ ______________ n __ n ______ .J Page 2-9 Revision ~3.2.AB IAtematioAal UFaAiHffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The f3erir"e~f eiseharge ffielftoe iftyelves seltiftg tip Elisel\arge peiAt;s EifeliAd Ole east, AOt1lr.-t:me west eal:lRElaries of the eell. This results ift lew eost disposal at first, followed tty AigAer dispose) eosls lowen! l:Ile eftd of Ole aell's life. TAe Eli-sad¥amage Ie th-ia--me1:AeEl is ~hat r=eelfH'ftatioft aeti't'i*ies eliflfl6t lftIte.t*aae ltfIUI fleaHJ:!e-eIHI eHRe eell's life. TIHs dised'fentage ','{a9 reoOf;fllzeEi &fie led to t4ie Ele','eloflffieRI of lite HAS I grade ffiel:heEl: SIUffY El:ispesal has takeR plaee iA eol:h Cells 2 and 3. Tails plaeement aeeemplislieEi iA Cell 2 WQ5 by meat1!1 ef the aBove eeseriBee periffieter Elisellarge melheEl while iA Cell 3 IRe fiAal greee FRethoa, eesel'iaed aelew k£I5 8eeA eFRflleyed: The final grade method used in Cell 2 and Cell 3 calls for the slurry to be discharged until the tailings surface comes up to final grade. The discharge points are set up in the east end ofthe cell and the final grade surface is advanced to the slimes pool area. Coarse tailings sand from the di charge points are graded int low areas to reach the final disposal elevation. When the slimes pool is reached, the discharge points are then moved to the west end ofthe cell and worked back to the middle. An advantage to using the final grade method is that maximum beach stability is achieved by (I) allowing water to drain from the sands to the maximum extent, and (2) allowing coarse sand deposition to help provide stable beaches. Another advantage is that radon release and dust prevention measures (through the placement of the initial layer of the final cover) are applied as expeditiously as possible. lurry disposal in Cell 41\ is from severnl pre-determined discharge points located around the north and east sidcs of the cell. lurr,y discharge is only allowcd on skid !lads. or protective HDPE sheets, to pr venl damage to the synthetic lining system. Once tailings solid have reach the maximum elevation around the perimeter or the cell. discharge POints can be moved toward Lbe intcrior of the cell. Sima disptl &1 in Ccll4B will be conducted in the same manner as CeIl 4!\. Formatted: Font: 9 pt I>-________ ~~------------< ,I, ",F;..:o.;;.;rm.;.;.a.;.;.tt.;;.;ed;.;..;...: F"",o-,nt-,: 9:...;p:....t ______ .-J I I ,N;\ReeIoma!je!J----:lllamR:ee!affillli9ft:==:=Pktn 328 io-------megress 12 17 10000GT@ ~ Iii! 20 10 /,' red!inej!Wl!HM~\~~.9f*::~g.~·~)' )29JN:\R$!l,lamalion Plan\RcclamntiQ.," Plan Rev ~~Q,\Sr.CT02 rev _',' ).2 SQ!.!).II redhnc,docx: _________________________________________________ , Page 2-10 Revision 2-.G3.2.AB IRtematiefull UFsaitlmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan l ..2A..·?' M.rl!llq¥.f1!..'qge.!,~el.1£ _____________________________________________ ~' -1 .... F....:o_rm_a....:tt:..:.ed'--:_Fo....:n_t:_It_al_iC ______ ---J As a zero-discharge facility, the White Mesa Mill must evaporate all ofthe liquids utilized during processing. This evaporation takes place in RYe-threc () areas: !...-~Cell 1, which is used for solutions only; !...-~Cell 3, in which tailings and solutions exist; +---Formatted: Ust Paragraph, Bulieted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.5" + Indent at: 0.75" • Cell 4A. in which tailings and solutions exist, and • Cell 4B aller construction is complete. The original engineering design indicated a net water gain into the cells would occur during Mmill operations. As anticipated, this has been proven to be the case. In addition to natural evaporation, spray systems have been used at various times to enhance evaporative rates and for dust control. To minimize the net water gain, solutions are recycled from the active tailings cells to the maximum extent possible. Solutions from Cells 1,J ... and 4A~ are brought back to the CCD circuit where metallurgical benefit can be realized. Cell 4B will be operated in the same manner as Ce1l4A. Recycle to other parts ofthe mill circuit are not feasible due to the acid content ofthe solution. Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,'1 .... F....:o....:rmc.;.:.,att:..:.ed:..:...;.,: ....:Fo:..:.n....:t:....:9..:..p_t ______ ---J II ~ien______JllarAAwt!!!1lieJt==ll.!I!!I H fl in IIF9g!eSS 12 17 IQISSCfOO RJ" 32... IUQ JQ ,',' Rl!IIifl~ t"Y~F;,R§Wi~NlS_~lyD~~JN:\ReolHm8tion rlanlRe£!~m8!jop Plan Rev 3.2QJSE~~ r'iv _I,' 3.2.801.13.11 redlinc.docx. _________________________________________________ -' 2.3 Monitoring Programs Page 2-11 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtematieRal UFltRi\:lffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Operational monitoring is defined as those monitoring activities that take place only during operations. This is contrasted with environmental monitoring, which is performed whether or not the mill is in operation. 2.3.1 Operational Monitoring and Reporting Under the Mill's GWDP l.3..U 9.!f!'ll!fillloler MoniLori[IU __________________________________________ ---1'-..F_o_rm_a_tt_ed_:_F_on_t_: I_ta_liC ______ -' a) Plugged and Excluded Wells Wclls MW-6, MW-7, and MW-8 were plugged because they were in the area of Cell 3, as was MW-13. in the Ce1l4A area, Wells MW-9 andMW-IO are drY and have bee.n excluded from the monitoring program. MW-16 js dry and bas been plugged a part of the tailings ell 48 construction, b) roundwaLer Monitoring at the Mill Prior to Issuance of the GWDP Allh lime ofrcnewaJ of the Licen e b NRC in March. 1997 and up until issuance or the GWDP in Maroh 2005, the Mill implemented a groundwater detection monitoring program to ensure compl iance to 10 FR Part 40, Appcndix A, in accordance with the provisions of the License. Tbe detection monitoring program wa in accordance with the report entitled Points of Compliance. White Mesa Uranium Mill, prepared by Titan Environmental Corporation, submitted by letter to the NRC dated October 5. 1994 (Titan. 1994bl. Under that program, th Mill sampled monitoring wel ls MW-5. MW-I I, MW-12, MW-14. MW-15 and MW-1.7, on a quarterly basis. Formatted: Font: 9 pt /, ~F:...:o:.:..:rm:.:.:.a:..:tt=ed::..:....: F:...:o~nt=-: 9:....p::..;t ______ ---J " NAAAAI!I!!!!Ilioo=4?f;l!!\Reek!l1ll!ti0J~i!@[ess 12.17 IQlQEGTQ2 rev a.itA 12 ~G.lO ,',' Milne deelJi!:\!:!~6_R§\~VoM.Rg~I:.A_~~9tO~.~~N;IReclanlnli9n f lanlReclanlalion Plan Rev 3.2BI§ECJ:OZ rev _',' 3.2,)3 01 13 II nxllinc doc>S. __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ ____________________ ...I Page 2-12 Revision ~3.2.AB IBtematisBal UFllBiliHlDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan amplcs were analyzed for chi ride. potassium. nickel and uranium. and the results of such sampling were included in the Mill semi-Annual Ellluent Monitoring Reports that were filed with the RC up until August 2004 and with the ORC subsequent thereto. Between 1979 and 1997, the Mill monitored up to 20 constituents in up to 13 wells. That program was changed to the Points of Compliance Pr gram in 1997 because NRC had concluded that: • Thc Mill and tailings system had produced no impact to the perched zone or deep aquifer; and • The most dependable indicators of water quaJiLy and pOlential cell failure were considered to be chloride. nickcl. potassium and natural uranium. c) Issuance ofthe GWDP On March 8. 2005. the Excculiv Secretary issued lhe GWDP. which includes a groundwater monitoring program that supcrscdes and replaces the gr undwatcr monitoring requirements set out in the License. Groundwater monitoring under the GWD? commenced in March 2005, the results of which are Included in the Mill s Quarterlv Groundwater MoniLol'ing R£pol'ts that are filed with the Executive Secretary. d) Current Ground Water Monitoring Program at the Mill Under the GWDP The current groundwater monitoring program at the Mill under the GWDP consists of monitoring at 22 point of compliance monitoring well : MW-I, MW-2. MW-3, MW-3A, MW-5, MW-ll, MW-12. MW-J4. MW-15. MW-17. MW·IS. MW-19. MW-23. MW-24. MW-25. MW-26, MW-27. MW-28, MW-29, MW-30, MW-31 and MW-32. The locations of these wells are Formatted: Font: 9 pt I~--------~~----------~ ,', Formatted: Font: 9 pt " N;\&!9kIme!iAA------=f>!wJ\Roo!afllOJieA==Pkltl==Hjl-==:in------=prggTess lilol;t,lQ\S5Cf02 rev loU !P O 10 /,' r:ee1i~1>~§I.yI~~!'~o~a~~tlil!!g:lnmaljon P!.an~~I!lnJotjon Plan Rev 302B~f&T02 rev~l/ J2BQI13!1[edlincdQc~ _____________________ UUU _____ h ___________ ..1 indicated On Figure 1.5-2. Page 2-13 Revision ~3.2.AB -WeMalieRal UmRiumDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Part 1. '.I.(c) of the GWDP requires that each pOint of compliance well must be sampled for the following constituents: Table 2.3-1 Groundwater Monitoring Constituents Listed in Table 2 ofth GWDP Nutrients: Ammonia (a N) Nitrate & Nitrite (as N) Heavy Metals: Arsenic Beryllium Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel elenium Silver Thallium Tin Uranium Vanadium Zin Radiologies: Gross Alpha " formatted: foot: 9 pt ,~~~~~~------------~ /, ..... f_o_rm_a_tted __ : f_O_"t_': 9_Pc..;l ______ -J NAAw!amatiell===l>!a!AAe$!!lalitm:---=Plw~!!-------jlf9gfe5S 12.11.IO\Bg<;FQ2 f8" U A 122Qd9 ,',' R!!f!~~l!1t~~~b_Al'~.!'g[Il.H~~~Il'y _129Jt!:\R~amalion Plrm\Rcclam!ljiQn PJiILl Rsv ~ 2IDSEC;r01 r~v J',' 3,2,BO l 13 1lo;dlinc,docl\, ___________ ._. ________________________________ J Volatile Organic Compounds: Acetone Benzene 2-Butanone (MEK) Carbon Tetrachloride Chloroform Chloromethane Dichloromethane Naphthalene Tetrahydrofuran Toluene Xylenes (total) Others: Field pH (S.U.) Fluoride Chloride Sulfate TDS Page 2-14 Revision ~3.2.AB IB~8lieRllI UJ'aRium.Dcnison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Further, Part I.E.I.(c) of the GWDP, requires that. in addition to pH. the following field parameters must also be monitored: • Depth to groundwater • Temperature • Tubiditvf' • Specific conductance, and thaI. in addition to chloride and sulfate. the following general organics must also be m nitored: I ~F~o~rm~a~tt~oo~:F~o~nt~:9~p~t ____________ ~ ,', Formattoo: Font: 9 pt " ~~18IAAeoIftma.iafl==p.k!D a 2 H in BFB!!f!!SS '2 '1, I9\8BCfW fe" 3 2.,', 1220 II! ,'/ re!lli~~J::.~ffi§II!.?,!Y.!:r:~Il)' )29JN'\Reclamation Plan~ct~mft1.lSID Pion Rev ),2B\SECl02 r~v ~I/ 3,2 HOI. 13.11 rec!ljnc,docl( _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, Page 2-15 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtemstisRsl UrsRittmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan • Carbonate, bicarbonate, sodium. potassium, magnesium, calcium, and total anions and cations. Sample jI'cquoncy depends on the speed of ground water flow in the vicinity of each well. Parts J.E.Hal and (b) of the GWDP provide that quarterly monitoring is required for all wells where local groundwater average linear velocity has been found by the Executive Secretary to be equallo or greater than 10 feet/year, and semi-annual monitoring is required where the loca l groundwater average linear velocity has been found by the Executive ecretary to be less than 10 feet/year. Based on these criteria, quarterly monitoring is required at MW-l l. MW-14. MW-2S. MW-26, MW-30 and MW-3 1. and semi-annual monitoring is required at MW-l . MW-2. MW-3. MW-3A, MW-5. MW-12, MW-lS. MW-17. MW-18, MW-19, MW-23. MW-24, MW-27, MW-28, MW-29 and MW-32. 2.3.1.2Qeep AfJuifor _________________________________________________ :-',->-Fo;..;,.;.rm;..a;..tt~ed;.;...: F..;o_nt;..: l_ta_lic ______ -< The culinary well (one of the supply wells) i completed in the Navajo aquifer, at a depth of approximately 1.800 feeL below Lhe ground surface. Due to the facllhallhe deep confined aquifer at the site is hydraulically isolated from the shallow perched aquifer. no monitoring or lh deep aquifer is requ.ired under the GWDP, Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 4 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 2 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.5", Tab stops: Not at OS' Page 2-16 Revision ~3.2.AB IHtematisHai UFRHiHffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 2.3.1. 3 §.eeps and Springs -----------------------------------------------, Pursuant 10 Part I.H.8 oHhe GWDP. Denison has a amp/int: Plan (or Seeps and Springs in 'he Vicinity oflhe While Mesa Uranium Mill. Revision: O. March L 7.2009 Obe SSSP) that rcguires lhe Mill to perform groundwater sampling and analysis of aU seeps and springs found downgradient or lateral gradient from the tailings cells. Under the P. seeps and springs sampling is conducted on an annual basis between May I and July 15 of each year. to the extent sufficient water is available for sampling, at five identified seeps and spring. near the Mill. The sampling locations were selected to correspond with those seeps and springs s.ampled for the initial Mill site characterization performed in lhe 1918 ER. plus additional sites lOcated by Denison. the BLM and Ute Mountain Ute Indian Tribe representatives. amples are anarY-ad for all ground water monitoring parameters found in Table 2.3-1 above. The laboratory procedures utilized to conduct the analvse of th ampled parameters are those utilized for groundwater sampling. In addition to these laboT'<l.tory parameters, the pH. temperature and conductivity of each sample will be measured and recorded in the Ii Id . . Laboratories selected by Denison to perfom1 analyses of seeps and springs samples will be reguired 10 be certified by the State of Ulah in accordance with UA R3l7-6-6.12.A. The seep. and springs sampling events will be subject to lhe Mill' QAP. unless otherwise speei tical ly modified by the SSSP 10 meet the specific needs of Ihis type of sampling. ", , , , , Formatted: Normal, Left, Line spacing: single, Tab stops: Not at '0.75" + -0.5" + 0" + 0.75" Formatted: Font: Italic Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 4 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ". + Start at: 3 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.5", Tab stops: Not at 0.5" Formatted: Font: 9 pt " I .... F_o_rm_att_ed_:_Fo_n_t:_9...;.p_t ______ ---' " N±lReol!lffl!!lH}(t----£lI!!AAe$mn!i8R Plan He. h!::=:=lffllgf8SS 12.I7IQISECTIli! reol 321\ 122010 ,'/ w!liuffloo'il'I;\y~BM~~~~.~'!!1!Y _~~Jtl;lRecli!!nation PJan~e£lamaliQJI Plan R£v 3.2B\sE~2 rev ~I/ 3 2 B Q! 13 11 redlinc.dOClS, __________________________________________________ , Page 2-17 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtemRtisRal UraRilu~Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 2.3.1.4 PJ.tCP91YJ_ Mjnimization Jeclmolqgy and Best Available Technolqg;y Sfandarris aJ1F.>-:..: Monitoring 2.3,1.4,1 General Part I.D. of the GWDP sets out a number of Discharge Minimization Technology ("DMT") and Best Available Technology C"BA T") standards that must be followed. Part I.E. ofthe GWDP sets out the Ground Water Compliance and Technology Performance Monitoring requirements. to ensure that the DMT and BAT standards are met. These provision oCthe GWDP. along with the While Mesa Mill Tailings Managemen( Svstem and Discharge Minimi:aliofl (DMV Monitoring Plan. 9/08 Revision: Delli on-6 {the "nMT Plan'l. the Cell 4Aand 4B BAT Monitoring. Operafions and Maintenance Plwl R.evision 2.0 {under review} and other plans and programs de eloped pursuant to such Part oflhe GWOP. set out the methods and procedures for inspections oflhe facility operation and for detecting failure of lhe ystem. In addition to the programs discussed above. the following additional OMT and SA performance standards and associated monitoring are required under Parts 1.0 and I.E. ofthe GWDP b) Tailings Cell Operation Part I.D.2 of the GWO? provides that authorized oDeration and max.imum disposal capacity in each or the existing tailings ells. 1.2 and 3 shall not exceed the levels authorized by the License and that under no circumstances shall the freeboard be less than three feel as measured from lhe top of the tlexibl membrane liner ("FMLn). Part I.E.7(a) of tile GWDP require that Lbe Formatted: Font: Italic Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 4 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 4 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.5", Tab stops: Not at 0.5" Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 5 + Numbering Style: 1, 2,3, ... + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.75" Formatted: Font: 9 pt wastewater pool elevations in Cells I and 3 must be monitored weekly to ensure comoliance with /1 Formatted: Font: 9 pt II NAAoo!lIffl9!jeJt==JlIall\Rem!!!!!Ij&t~~ in omgrjlSS 12111011lEQIQ2 F8'1 32.A 122212 // R4!~~~~t,.A1'!.!S.¥ftClE.~'!IYo1!!Y J~9JtI:\Rc~!!!nOli9n rlan\Rc~lam"tion Pla~ Rev 3.2BI.~ECT02 rev ~I/ 3 2.BOl131lrcdljncdoolS. _________ u _______ n __ u ___ nn _____ u ________ -' Page 2-18 Revision ~3.2.AB IHiematisHRl UfRHiHmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan til ma~imum wastewater elevation criteria mandated by Condition 10.3 of the License. Part !. .2 further provides that any modifications by Denison to any appro ed engineering design parameter at these exi~ling tailings cells requires prior Executive ecretarv approval. modification orthe GWDP and issuance ora construction permit. c) Slimes Drain Monitoring Part ID.3(b)Ct) of the awop requires thai Denison must at aJ I times maintain the average wastewater head in the slimes drain access pipe to be a low as reasonably achievable CALARAl in each tailings disposal cell. in accordance wi th the aoproved DMT P lan. Compliance will be achieved when the average annual wastevl'Ilter recoverv elevation in the slimes drain access pipe. determined pursuant to the currently approved DMT Plan meets the conditions in Equation specified in Part I.D.3(b)(l) ofthe aWDP. Part l.E.7(b) of the aWDP require that Denison must monitor and record monthly th d Rlh to wastewater in the slimes drain access pipes as described in the currently approved DMT Plan at Cell 2, and upon commencemcOL of de-watering activities, at Cell 3. in order to ensure compliance with Part I.D.3(b)(I) orthe GWDP. d) Maximum Tailings Waste Solids Elcvation Part I.D.3(c) of lhe GWDP requires lhat upon closure of any tai li ngs cell. Denison must ensure that the maximum elevation ofthe tailings waste solid does not exceed the lop oflhe FML. " Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,~~~~~~~----------~ ,', Formatted: Font: 9 pt NAAtiI!!mRlio~Gll!liott=PIQl! 328 i/t==!ffl!gA!S5 12.1710186GTQ2 Rl" 3 2 • 12,,2~ // fed~ !;\!il~6_RjWI1"-R~~"'!-':!S.f.9!:9.E~~~Jtl:l8.!XiI1W'alioL\ PlanlRcclamaliQ,n Plan RSv 3.2BISEC"l1l2 r~v _'/ 32BOll3l1redlincdocx. _______________________________________________ .' Page 2-19 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtematisRai UFaRiHfRDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan e) Wastewater Ele at ion in Roberts Pond Part 1.D.3(e) of the aWDP requires that Roberts Pond be operated so as to provide a minimum 2-foot freeboard at all limes. and that under 00 circumstances will the water level in the pond exceed an elevation of 5,624 feet above mean sea level. Part I.D.3(e) also provides thai in the event the wastewater elevation exceeds this maximum level. Denison mu. t remove the excess wastewater and place it into containment in ell I within 72 hours of discovery. Part I.E.7(c) of the aWDP requires that the wastewater level in Roberts Pond must be monitored and recorded weekJy, in accordance with the currently approved DMT Plan. to d termine compliance with the DMT operations standard in Part I.D.3(e) of the aWOPi o Inspection of Feedstock Storage Area Part 1.0,3<0 ofthe GWOP requires that open-air or bulk storage of all feedstock materials at the Mill facility awaiting Mill processing must be limited to the eastern portion of the Mill site (the 'ore pad") described by the coordinates set out in that Part of the GWDP, and that storage of feedstock malerial at the facility outside ofthis defined area. must meet th requirements of Pert 1.0, I I of the GWDP, Part J.D.ll requires that Denison must store and manag feedstock materials outside the defined ore storage pad in accordance with the following minimum performance requirements: (il eed tock materials will be stored at all times in water-light containers, and (iil Aisle way will be provided al all times to allow visual inspection of each and every feedstock container, or Formatted: Font: 9 pt /?-------------------------------------~ ,', Formatted: Font: 9 pt , , NAAee!Offlolirut------=Plan\Reo!omft1jOH PIW) J ~ 8 jll--!!f§gless )~ 17 !Q~ ow J.~.A 12.~Q.!9 // FeiI!i~LI)y~8~§~~!'91~~'U~"j~Bj' J~9JtI:iR£clam,il!lon rl!I!J.\Rtcl~!J,!ation Plan Rev 3 2B\~EP02 r~v _'/ 3.2.B 0 L 13 II rcdl!!Ic.dQC~ __ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ J Page 2-20 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtematioRal UraRiHffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan (iii) Each and every feedstock container will be placed inside a water-tight ovomack prior to storage, or (iv) hall be slored on a hardened surface Lo prevent pillage onto subsurface soils, and that conforms with the following minimum physical requirements: A. A storage area composed of a hardened engineered surface of asphall or concrete, and B. A lorage area designed. constructed. and operated in accordance with engineering plans and specifications approved in advance by the Executive ecrerary. All su.ch engineering plans or specifications submitted shall demonstrate compliance with Part LO.4 ofthe GWDP, and C. A storage area that provides containm nL berms to control tormw8ter run-on and run-off. and O. Stann water drainage works approved in advance by the Executive ecretary. or (v) Other storage faciliLies and means ngproved in advance by Lhe Executi e Secretary. Part I.E.7(d) of the GWDP requires that Denison conduct weekly inspections of all feedstock storage areas to: en Confirm thal the bulk feedstock materials are maintained within the approved leedstock storage area specified bv Part 1.0 .3(0 oflhe GWDP; and (ij) Verify that all alternate feedstock material located outside the approved feedstock storage area nrc stored in accordance with the requirements tound in Part 1.0.11 oftheGWDP. Part I.E.7(1) further provides thaI Denison must conduct weekly inspections to verifv that each Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,', LF_o_rm_a_tt_ed_: F_o_nt_: 9---'p'---t ______ --' " NAAffinma!iw-------fl@ffiSe!iHUD!lliwt:=f1!ftn 3.2.& i!l===&ril!!f!!S5 12 17 HllSBCT02 "'" 3.2.A t2.29d2 ,',' [ed'ifle,@e!!1tl,!!~E..R§~£>~~~lSE§19~.~~1!Y _129.Jt1:.\.aeclamalioo P!aJl\R!;£lamBlion Plan R$Y 3,2B~EC'm rl(.Y ~/,' 32!3 01 13 II rs;4line.docl\, _________________________________________________ -' Page 2-21 Revision ~3.2.AB IHtemlltisHll1 UFIlHiUffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan feed material container compBes with tho requirements of Part 1.0.11 or tile GWDP. The Mill's Standard Operating Procedure under the License for inspection of the Mill's ore pad is contained in Section 3.3 ofthe DMT Plan. gl Monitor and Maintain Inventory of Chemicals Part 1.0.3(g) of the OWDP requires that for all chemical reagents tared at existing stomge faeililie. and held for use in the milling process. Denison must provide secondary containment to capture and contain aU volumes ofrcagent(sl that might be released at any individual storage area. Resoon e La spill ,cleanup thereof. and required reporting must comply with the provi ion of the Mill's Emergency Response Plan. which is found in th Mill s Siormwater Best Managemenl Practices Plan. Revision 1.3: June 12, 2008 (a copy of which is included as Appendix q, as stipulated by Parts 1.0.10 and 1.H.16 of the awop. Part1.D.3Cg) further provides that tOr any new construction of reagent storage fncilities. uch secondary containment and control must prevent any contact oftlle spilled or otherwise released reagent or oroduct with the ground surface. Part I.E.9 ofilia aWD? requires that Denison must monitor and maintain a current inventory orall eh mioals used at the faciJily at mtes egualto or greater than 100 kelyr. Thi inventory must be maintained on-site, and must include: (iii) Identification of chemicals used in the milli",! process and the on-site laboratory: and (ivl Determination of volume and mass of each raw chemical currently held in stomge at the facility. Formatted, Font: 9 pt " ?F-o-rm-a-tt-ed-' F-o-nt-: 9...;P:..t------~ '/~~~~~~~ __________ --J I I ~~m!!Iien---:=Pf!!D 32 e ill------1lFogress 1l.171!MEGTQ2 ''''' 3 2 A 12.29.19 ,'/ re<I!inMee~t,,!:!§.lOjt§'~R~~!oR9,g.~V}o·~1!)' )29J~'\R££Iamalion Plan\Rcplnmalion Plan Rev 3.2BISEcro2 rev~l/ 3.2BQI 13.llrodline,docx. ______________________________________________ ..1 Page 2-22 Revision ~3.2.AB Hfl:erfletiefl91 UfflAil:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 2.3.1.511AT p'erWrpa'lce§rqn.,dacds/gr Ce/14Ji and ~B4-__________________________ ~"'". _-Formatted: Font: Italic a) BAT Operations and Maintenance Plan Pan I.D.6 and Part 1.0.13 of the aWn? provide that Denison must operate and maintain Cell 4A and Cell 48. respectively. so as to prevent rei ase or waste\ £ller to groundwamr and the environment in accordance with the Mill's Cell 4A and 48 BAT Monitoring. Operations and Maintenance Plan. pursuant to Part UL8 of the GWDP. The Mill's Cell 4A and Cell 4B BAT Monitoring. Operations and Maintenallce Plan. 1112010 Revision: Denison 2.0 (under review) includes the following perfonnance-standards: (i) The fluid head in the leak detection system shall not exceed I foot above the lowest point in the lower membrane liner; (ij) The leak detection system maximum allowable dai ly leak. rate shall nol exceed 24,160 gallons/day for Cell4A or 26,]45 gallons/day for CeIl4B: (iii) After Denison in itiates pumping conditions in the slimes drain layer in Cell 4A or e1l4B, Denison will provide continuous declining fluid heads in the slimes drain layer, in a manner equivalenlto the reguiremenL'i found in Part I.D.3(b) for CeLLs 2 and 3; and (j) Under no circumstance shalllhe freeboard be less than 3 feet in Cell 4A or ell 413, as mea ured [rom the top of the FML, b) Implementation of Monitoring Requirements lJndcr the BAT Operations and Maintenance Plan The Cell4A and 4B BAT Monitoring, Onera/ions and Mainlen{JJ!Ce Plan also require Denison to ,,-, Formatted: Font: Italic Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 4 + Numbering Style: 1, 2,3, ... + Start at: 5 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.5", Tab stops: Not at 0.5" Formatted: Font: 9 pt , Formatted: Font: 9 pt // '--------'-----------' N!lReelamaliAA------Plil!J\RtIllnmMieB::-:dln1l 3,2.a ill OfOl!feSS 12.1'l,-1.Q\l}6crQ;! mt==::::¥! • Rag,IQ // redliee !lQW!J"!.!\US6..R§\Wl!.R§PL.!.~J2.gBQ1":'Q,?:~~t':\R~18m.at on Pllln\ReciamatiQ.!! PJan R,!iv 3 ~!iru~ JlI.v ~'/ 32801 !3 I I rcdlincdoc~ n n n _nn __ n _______ n ______________ n __________ ' Page 2-23 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtematioRal UraRiHmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan perform the following monitoring and n::cordkccping requirements. Weekly Leak Detection ) Monitoring -including: A. Denison must provide continuous operation of the leak detection system pumping and monitoring equipment including. but not limited to. the subm rsible pump. pump controller. head monitoring, and flow meter equipment approved by the Executive ecretary. Failure of any pumping or monitoring equipment not repaired and made fully operational within 24-hours ofdi~covery shall constitute failure of BAT and Ii violation of the GWDP; B. Denison must measure the fluid head abo e the lowest point on the secondary FML by the usc of procedures and equipment approved by the Executive ecretarv. Under no circumstance shall fluid head in the leak detection system sump exceed a I-foot level above the lowest point in the lower FML on the cel! floor. For purposes of compliance monitoring this I-foot distance shall equate to 2.28 feet above the leak detection system transducer; C. Denison must measure the volume of all nuids pumped from the leak detection system. Under no circumstances shall the average daily leak detection system flow volume exceed 24.160 gallons/day for Cell 4A or 26,145 gallons/day for CeIl4B; and D. Denison must operate and maintain wastewater levels to provide a 3-foot Minimum of vertical freeboard in tailings Cell 4A and Cell 4B. uch measurements must be made to the nearest 0.1 foot. Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,', ,-F_o_rm_a_tt_ed_: F_o_nt_: 9.....:p'-t ______ --J " Nt\Rtilama!ieI!-=-P!oojP.eekml!!i*"'=Pla~~Rl5S 12. 17.1 Q\S6CI'Q2 Fe, 32" 122thlQ ,'/ ~~~~'1IJ)'-:J.~lj·lRecIQmalion Plan\Rccllllun1iqn Plan RJrv 3.2B1SIiP02 n;y ~'/ 302on 01.13.11 rOOlincodoclS. __________________________________________________ , Page 2·24 Revision -2-:C}3.2,AB ~RtemaHonal UF6fliwftDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan " " " , ••• _____ • _._ -____ -__ ----____ -- -- --- -- - - -__ - -----____ ...I f~~, .. ~ttod~t'~~~"~·~==========~ ::1 Formatted: Font: 9 pi , , Page 2-25 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtematisRal UraRitiffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan (in Slimes Drain Recovery Head Monitoring Immediatelv after the Mill initiates pumoin!! conditions in the ell 4A or Cell 4B slimes drain ystem, monthly recovery head tests and fluid level measurements will be made in accordance willi the requirements of Parts LD.3 and I.E.7(b) of the GWDP and any plan approved bv the Executive Secretary. .. ,_ -Formatted: Font: Italic ----------------------., :-;..;....;;.;=~...;...;...-------.....: Part I.D.IO of the owor requircs lhat Denison will manage al l contact and non-contact storm water and control contaminant spills at the facility in accordance with the Mill s stormwater best management practices plan. The Mill's Storm water Best Management Practices Plan, Revision 1.3: June 12, 2008 (a copy of which is included as Appendix C) includes the following provi ions: a) Protect groundwater guul ily or other water. of the slate by design. construction, and/or active operational measures lhat meet the requirements of the Ground Watcr Quality Protection Regulations found in UAC R3 17-6-6.3(G) and R3 L 7-6-6.4(C): b) Prevent. control and contain pills of stored reagents or olhcr chemical!> al lhe Mill site; c) Cleanup spills of slored reagents or other chemicals at the Mill site immediately upon discovery; and d) Report reagent spills or other releases at the Mill site to the Executive ccrctary in accordance with UAC 19-5-114. Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 4 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 6 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.5", Tab stops: Not at 0.5" ,~F~o~rm~att~ed~:~~~n~t:~9~p~t ____________ ~ I Formatted: Font: 9 pt 'I ~ __________ ~ ____________ -J I, N:~e8IoAl8!W!I==plruAAjlekm!ll!iIID==4l!ftA 32.ft j!1--=--fJf:egFeSS 12.17 HlISgcjJ02 "1'1 3.2 A Ii!.i!~,',' ~Ii . __ }l:I:\Rcclam,,!ltiQ!l il!tn\B.ccl~'!l'l!ion .Plan Rsv 3.26 ECI06 r~v _',' 3.2.BO!'!3.llredifni:dPcls.--==_== _====== ________ u _____________ u ________ u _-' Page 2-26 Revision ~3.2.AB ffilemaaessl URiflkfmDcni. on Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan .... ,_ -., Formatted: Font: Italic ------------------------------------ raTtl.E.8 of the awnp requires !.haL on an ann ual basis. Denison must collect wastewater quality samples from each wastewater source at each tailings cell at the facility. including surface impounded wastewaters. and slimes drain wastewaters. pursuant to the Mill s Tailings and limes Drain amnling Program. Revision O. November 20. 2008 (the "WQSP"). All. ueh sampling must be conducted in August of each calendar ear. The purno e of the wasp i to characterize the source Lerm quality or all tailings cell wastewaters. including imoounded wastewaters or process waters in the taiJings cells. and wastewater or ICBchates collected by intemal slimes drains. The WQ P reguires: • Col lection of samples from the pond area of each active cell and the slimes drain of each cell that has commenced de-watering activities; • Samples or tailings and slimes drain material will be analyzed at an offsite contract laboratory and subjected to the analytical parameters included in able 2 of the GWDP ( ee Table 2.3-1 above) and general inorganics listed in Part I. .l(d)(2)(ii) of the aWDP, as well as semi-olaLile organic compounds; • A detailed description of all sampling methods and sample preservation tcchniques to be employed; • The procedures utilized to conduct these analvses will be tandard analytical method<; uti lized for groundwater sampling and as shown in eclion 8.2 of the Mill sOAP; • The contracted laboratory w ill be certi lied by the tatc of Utah in accordance with U AC R317-6-6.12A; and " Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 4 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, '" + Start at: 7 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.5", Tab stops: Not at 0.5" Formatted: Font: 9 pt /, -.;F;..:o.;.;rm.:.;.a;..:tt.;.;ed,,--: F..;.o....;nt_: 9-'p....;t ______ .-J N;\Re&Iamati~8:fien PieR ],2 R jR prQ!!!6§S 12 11.1 CAA~\ 3 2 t. 122!HQ /,' R!dli~Klt\y~e:_R~!!j,!!A,!,I.!S:¥9!Q~:So!!~ _"29Jt!:\Reelnmalioll Ptan\Rcclnmn,tiQP Pin,!) R£v 3 "ijISE~Ol rc;.v ~/,' 3 2,B 01.13,\\ rtdlinc,doc,," _________________________________________________ ..I Page 2-27 Revision 2-,()3.2.AB blteFflstisRsl UFsRil:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan • 3D-day advance notice of each annual . ampling event must be given, to allow the • ecutivc Secretary to collect split samplcs of all tail ings cell wastewater sources. The tailings and slime. drain sampling events are subject to the Mill's OAP. unless otherwise speCificall y modified by the WO. P to meet the specific needs oflhis type of sampling. 2.3.2 Monitoring and Inspections Required Under the License 2.3.2. I j}l1rirQ'!!'lenlal Nonjloring _________________________________________ ~_~,_ The environmental monitoring program is designed to assess the effect of Mill process and disposaJ operations on the unrestricted environment Delineation of specific equipment and procedures Is presented in the MilJ's Environmental Protection Manllal. included as Appendix A to the 2007 Lic nse Renewal Application. c) Ambient Air Monitoring (i) Ambient Particulate ~ Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 3 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 2 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.5", Tab stops: Not at 0.5" Formatted: Font: Italic Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 4 + Numbering Style: 1, 2, 3, ... + Start at: 1 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.5", Tab stops: Not at 0.5" Formatted: Font: 9 pt Airborne radionuclide particulate sampling is performed at tivc locations, termed BIIV-l. BHV-2. BHV-4, BUV·5 and BIIV-6. With the approval of the NRC and effective November, 1995, BI IV-3 was removed from the active air particulat monitoring program. At that lime, the Mill proposed (and NRC determ ined) that a sufficient air monitoring data base had been ompiled at station Bl lV-3 to establ ish a representative airborne parliculate radionuclide background for the Mill. BHV-6 was installed by the Mill at the request of the Whi le Mesa Ute ommunity. This station began operation in July of 1999 and provides airborne partioulate information in the I ~----------~------------~ /, Formatted: Font: 9 pt I I ~!lB PIM\R@!!IR!lIi!lIt=Piuo 3.a.0 il!=-p@gres5 1217 1000liGIQa HI'>' 32.A la.>!9:±!) /,' ffiIIi!l&;doo~!!IiBJl;'§~R9E~'\!'I~'!!:gG~.~'1B'y _'2~tf;,lRcela.maliQD I'lanl.B~£lamo!ion Plan RoSv 3·~CT02 ~C',' 3.2.B O! J 3 II re4lioe.doc1l... __ __ __ _ __ __ __ __ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ _ ____________________ -' Page 2-28 Revision ~3.2.AB hUemalienal UfeflillmDcnison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mitl Reclamation Plan SQutherly direction between the Mill and the Wbitt Mega Ute Community. Figure 2.3-1 shoW we locations o[these ajr particulate monitoring stations. Page 2·29 Revision 2:GJ .2.AU IAlemftliQmd UNlltumPcnison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Inse rt Fig 2,3·1 locations Qrair particulate stations Page 2-30 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtematisRal UfaRiHmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The grescnt samgiing system con ists of high volume particylate samplers ulilizing mass flow conlToliers to maintain an air Oow rate of approximately 32 sta ndard cubic feet per minute. Samplers are operated continuously with a goal for on-stream operating geriod at ninety percent. filter rolalion is weekly with quarterly site compositing for particulate radionuelide analysis. AnalYsis is done for U-natural, Th-230, Ra-226, and Pb-21 O. See. cetion 3.13.1.7(8) orthe 2007 ER for a summary of h.istoric monitoring result for airborne particulate. (m Ambient Radon With the approval of the NRC, Radon-222 monitoTing at the BHY stations was discontinued in 1995, due to the unreliability of monitoring equipment available at that time to detcct thc new 10 crR standard of 0.1 pCi/1. From that lime UTIli! Ule pre cnL the Mill demonstrated compliance with the requirements fR313-l5-30 l by calculation authorized by thc NRC in September 1995 and as contemplated by R3 (3-(5-302 (2) (a). This calculation was performed by use of the MILDO code for estimating environmental radialion doses ror uranium recovery ogerations ( lrcnge and Bender 198 1) in 1991 in supp rlof the Mill's 1997 license renewal and more recently in 2007 in support ofthe 2007 License Renewal Application, by use of the updated MILDO AR. ~A code (Argonne 1998), The analy i under Arizona Strip ores at full capacily, and calculated the concentrations of radioactive dust and radon at individual receptor locations around the Mi ll. Specifically, the modeling under these codes assumed the following conditions: Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,', \...F:....;o:....;rm:....;a;;.;tt:....;ed=-: F:....;o:....;nt;,...: 9:....;D:..;t ______ ---.J , , ~malie!l----PlatAA.ee!oll!eliGn plaR H R in BF0gte55 I~ 17 IQ\8EC!92 Fl}' 32 • 1222.1:2 /,' F!l!llift!t4ooJ~ tl,!l~H$~~Ij_~Rffl:!'1'llS!i§'£G~.!L~~Jti:\R~lam8Ijon Plan\Reclama,!jon PII,IIJ n~v 3.2B\SECJ02 rev _III 3.2.901.\3.11 rtdlino.doo'St._______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ ___________________________ , • 730,000 tons of ore per year • Average grade of 0.53% Ulna Page 2-31 Revision ~3.2.AB lHtematieRal UFaRiHHlDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan • Yellowcake production of 4.380 tons of U10,A per year (8.8 million pounds Ulna per year). Based on these conditions. the MILDO and MrLDOS AREA codes calculated the combined LOtal effective dose equivalent (rom both air particulate and radon at the current nearest residence (approximately 1.2 miles north of the Mill), i.e .. the individual member of the public likely to receive the highest dose from Mill operations. as well as at all other receptor locations. to be below the ALARA goal of 10 mrem/yr for air particulate alone as set out in RJI3-J5-10t(4l. Mill operations are constantly monitored to ensure thal operaling conditions do not exceed the conditions assumed in the above calculations. If conditions are within those assumed above. radon has been calculated to be within regulatory limits. If conditions exceed those assumed above, then further evaluation will be performed in order to ensure that doses to the public continue to be within regulatory limits. Mill operation to date. have never exceeded the Licepse conditions assumed above. In order to determine ifdcteclion equipment has improved since 1995. the Mill has. commencing with the first quarter or2007, re-instituted direct meac;uremenls of radon at the five air particulate monitoring locations currently uti lized for air particulate sampling. The reliability oflhis data is currently under review by Denison. d) External Radiation TLD badges. as supplied by Landauer. Inc .. or equivalent. are utilized atBIIV-l, BHV-2. BHV-3, BHV-4. BHV-5 and BI IV -6 to determine ambient external gamma exposures (see Figure 2 .3-1). Formatted: Font: 9 pt I Formatted: Font: 9 pt // '-------'----------' NAAeo!n!!lflfj&ll===:flIaA\Rmmatioo-----Pll!~ ill "fogFess 12 17,IQ~!WIW Fe" J V. lil.ilQ 10 // ~~~~~~t::!;\R~lamalion Plan\Re£!ama.!ion Plan Bey ~.2BISEg:02 rev~l/ 3.2 B 01.13 II n;dlinc doclS. h h h h ______ h h ____ h h _________________ u ___ .! Page 2-32 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtematisRal UraRitlmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan System quality assurances are determined by placing a duplicate monitor at one itc conlinuous1v. Exchanges of TLD badges are on a quarterly ba.;is. Badges consist of a minimum of five TLD chips. Measurements obtained [rom location SHV-) have been designated as background duc to BHV-3 's remoleness from the Mill site (SI-IV-3 is located approximately 3.5 miles west uflhe Mill sire). 'or further procedural infonnation see Section 4.3 of the Mill's Environmental Protection Manual. included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal Application. ee Section 3.13.1.7(c) of the 2007 ER for a ummarv of hi Lorie monitoring results for external radiation. e) Soil and Vegetation en Soil Monitoring oil Bmples from the top one centimeter of surface soils arc collected annually at each orBHV-1 , BHV·2, BHV-3, BHV-4 and BIIV-5 (see Figure 2.3-1), A minimum of two kilogram ofsoi! is coli cted per site and analyzed for U-nalural and Ra-226. For further procedural in formation see Section 4.1 of the Mill's Environmental Protection Manual included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal Application. See Section 3.13.1.7.1 of the 2007 ER for a summary of the historic results for soil monitoring. Tile 2007 ER concludes that the re ults of ampling arc low, less than the unrestricted release limits. en Vegetalion MonHoring 'orage vegetation samples are collectcd three limes ocr year from animal grazing localions 10 the northeast (near BHV-I (the meteorological station)), northwest (to the immediate wcst ofthe ite) and southwest (by BHV-4) orthe Mill site. Samples are obtained during the grazing season, in Formatted: Font: 9 pt I ~------------------------< ,'1 Formatted: Font: 9 pt II N::-\R~mafiGft=--ll!&tAAeeffl!l!iatt:=Pffl~Fegf!!lj5 12.1710l.SSCTQi! Fe" 3.2 A 12.2Q,fQ // ~oo1j t~ll~H_R~~!'RgEl[l)'!Iny }~9JN'\Redamation J>lawaecla!llaJ.j~n PlOD Rev J 2B\sECI02 r£v ~I/ 3.2.B 01.13.11 rtdlinedocx. ___ ___ __ __ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ _I Page 2-33 Revision ~3.2.AB IRteffiatieRll1 UfllRiliHiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan the late fall, early spring. and in late spring. A minimum of three kilograms oj' vegetation arc submitted from each sit for analysis of Ra-226 and (>1>0210. For further procedure information see Section 4.2 of the Mill s Environmental Protection Mamlal included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal Application. ee Section 3. 13.7(d) of the 2007 ER for a summary of the historic results for vegetation monitoring. The 2007 ER concludes that the most recent results indica! no increase in uptake of Ra-226 and Pb-2ID in vegetation. d) Meteorological Meteorological monitoring is done al a site ncar BHY -I . The en or and recording equipment are capable of monitoring wind velocity and direction, from which tile stabi.iity classification is calculated. Data integration duration is one-hour with hourly recording of mean speed. mean wind direction. and mean wind stability (as del!Tees sigma theta). The data from Lhe meteorological slation is retriev.ed monthly by down loading onlO a Campbell cientific data module, or the cgui alenL The data module is sent La an independent meteorolollical c{)ntractor where the module is downloaded to a computer rccord. and the data is correlated and presented in a Semi-Annual Meteorological Report. Monitoring for precipitation consists of a daily log of precipitation using a standard NQA rain gauge, or the equivalenL in tailed near the administrative office, consistent with NOAA specifications. Windrose data is summarized in a format compatible with MTI.DO and UDAD specifications for 40 erR 190 compliance. Por further procedural information see Section 1.3 of the Mill's Environmental Protection Manllal included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal " Formatted: Font: 9 pt I ~~~~~~~----------~ /, Formatted: Font: 9 pt ~!lli&n==pjjl!Meelalllatien-----P!eA 3:!R in IlEegres!i 1:!.I;t,IOl.SGCT22 re'! l-2.A 12,29;19 /,' fe!l.!iIlO;dee!Vt\!!§.~\..?1~~W~!'~~1!Y )29JN:\Reclamation Plan\1l1CC1amntjon Plan Rsv 3,2B\SECT02 rev ~/,' 3.2.8 0 I 13 II rcdlinc doc'S.. " _" u n __ _ _ __ _ _ __ " _ " _ " _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ " " ___________ -' Page 2-34 Revision 1.G3.2.AB IRtematieRai UraRiliffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Application. A wi odro. e for the sito is set out in Figure 1.1-1. e) Point Emissions Stack emission monitoring from yellowcake facilities follows EPA Method 5 procedures and occurs on a quarterly basis, during operation of the facility. Particulate sampling is analvzed for Unat an 11 quarterly ha is and for Th-23Q, Ra-226, and Pb-2 lOon a . emi-annual basis. Demister and ore stack emission monitoring follows EPA Method 5 procedure on a semi-annual basis. during operation of the facility. Particulate samples are analyzed for UnaL Th-230. Ra-226, and Pb-21O. Monitored data includes scrubber sy tern operation levels. process feed Ie cis, particulate emission concentrations. isokinetic conditions. and radionuclide emission concentrations. For further procedure infonnation see ecLion 1.4 of the Mill s Environmental Protection Manual included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Renewal Application. Historic slack emission data aro summari7.ed in Sectioll 3. t 3.1.7(0) of the 2007 ER t) Surface Water Monitoring ater moniloring is c()nducted at two localions adjacent to the MHI facility known as Westwater Canyon and Cottonwood Creek. Samples are obtained annually from Westwater and quarterly from Cottonwood using grab sampling. r r Westwater Creek, samples will be of sediments if a water sample is not available. Pield monitored parameters and laboratory monitored oarametcrs arc Iistcd in Table 2.3·2. For further procedural information see Section 2.1 of the Mill's EnviJ'onmenral Protection MQJmal included as Appendix A to the 2007 License Ren 'wa1 Application. ce Section 3.7.4 of the 2007 ER for a summary of the historic results for surface water monitoring. Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,~----------------------~ " I Formatted: Font: 9 pt " Nt\Beelema!jen-----!e!!\SeeIamaEian Plan 3.2.0 ill=9R!gFllS5 1217 19I$BG!f(!2 fe. 3'-b. 122{)"u),',' ~A!'I;!S!oqro£.~)')29JtI;j,R~am8tion Plan\RcclamationFPlnn Rev ~213\SECT02 r£v~/,' 3.2.B 01.13 II rcdHnc.doclS" _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __________________________ I Page 2-35 Revision ~3.2.AB Ifltematisflai UF!lfIiliffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Table 2.3-2 Operational Phase Surface Water Monitoring Program Monitoring Sites Westwater Creek and Cottonwood Creck Field Reguirements 1. Temperature C; 2. Soecifie Conductivil:t umhos at 25 C; 3. pH at 25 C; 4. Sample date; 5. Sample ID Code; Vendor LaboratoQ: Reguirements Semiannual* Ouarterly One gallon Unfiltered and Raw One gallon Unfiltered and Raw One gallon Un.fi lt~rcg. Raw and I2reseryed to One galion !,lnfillcreg, Raw and Prelicrved to oH <2 with HNO, oH <2 with HNO, Total Dissolved Solids Total Dissolved Solids Total Susoended Solids Total Susoended Solids Gross Alpha Susoended Unat Dissolved Unat Suspended Ra-226 Dissolved Ra-226 Susoended Th-230 Dissolved Th-230 ·S!:misnnl.!l!1 ~!!!m!le must be taken !I ooinimyoo of fQur months all!!!l. ··A!lIlIH!1 W~lwat!:J:.~rellk Sl!!!lllle i~ l!!llllvzcd rQr ~!<ooi-an!ll!al ll!!ramclc[s, RadiQny&lidc~ and L!"Ds renQrtcd in ~Cilml " Formatted: Font: 9 pt '?-~~~~~~------------~ " I Formatted: Font: 9 pt NAAeeJam~affi8eefamatjofl--l1kln-------H:o iA pr-egress 12.11 JQ\sECTQ2 fey 3.2.A 12.2Q.IQ ,' I f~MJ-I)!:!~~S:E~!,~a1 _129JN:\R$ctamolion Pl9ma.~lalll0tjQn Pjon Rl,lv 3.2B\sE~2 ttv '/ 32 BOI.DII nxlllnc.docl\, __ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ ___ __ ________ n uu_ n __________ -I Page 2-36 Revision M3.2.AB IHtematiOl-lal UFafliHmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 2. 3.2.2 tJ.ddilio~UJI Monitoring and h~sJ!ections Real/ired Under the License.. ______________ :.>"'.: )-F_o_rm_att_ed_: _Fo_n_t:_It_al_iC ______ -< Under the License daily. weekly. and monthly jnspection reporting and monitoring arc required by NRC Regu.tatory Guide 8.31, Informalioll Relevant /0 Ensuring thal OcclIpalional Radialioll Expo /Ires at Uranjum Recovery Facilities will be As Low As is Reasonable AchilNable. Revi ion I. May 2002 ("Reg Guide 8.31'), by eotion 2.3 of the Mill's ALAltA Program and by the DMT Plan, over and above the inspections described above that are required under the WDP, A COPy of the Mill s ALARA Program is included as Appendix I to the 2007 License Renewal Application. a) Daily Inspections Three types of daily inspections arc ncrformed at the Mill under the License: en Radiation StaffInspections Paragraoh 2.3.1 of Reg. Guide 8.31 provides that tho Mill s Radiation Safety Officer ('<R 0 ) or designated health physics technician sh uJd conduct a daily walk-through (visual) inspection of all work and storage Breas of the Mill to ensure proper implementation of good radiation safety procedures. including good housekeeping that would minimize unnecessarY contamination. These inspections are required by eation 2.3.1 of the MiU's ALARA Program, and are documented and on file in the Mill's Radiation Protection Office. (ij) Operating Foreman Immections Formatted: Outline numbered + Level: 4 + Numbering Style: 1, 2,3, ... + Start at: 2 + Alignment: Left + Aligned at: 0" + Indent at: 0.5", Tab stops: Not at 0.5" Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,~~~~----~------------~ ,'1 Formatted: Font: 9 pt II NAAeeIRmatie!r----p!&RlRjWlB!ft!l~~S 12./7 10000GTOO reo 3 V. 1229;:19 // FelI\i00;900I!H<\y~EM'~!l-iJ~s:~I:.A..!~.!>9lG2.~~II)' )29J~:~am!llipn Planlli,cclamation Plan Rev 3.2B1SECT02 rev ~'/ 32 130\.13 11 redlinc.d2!i~ __________________________ un ____________ u __ -' Page 2-37 Revision ~3.2.AB hNematiaaal UfliHiHffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 30 crR Section 56.18002 of the Mine afelY and Health Administration regulations requires that a comQCtent person designated by the operator must examine each working place alleast once each shift for conditions which may adversely affect safely or health. These dally insp ctions arc documonled and on file in the Mill's Radiation Protection Office. (iii) Daily Tailings Inspection Paragraph 2.2 of the DMT P lan requires that during Mill operation, the hill oreman. or other person with the training specified in paragraph 2.4 of the DMT Plan, designated by the RSO. will perrorm an inspeclicm of the tailings line and tailings area at least once per shift. paving close attention for pOLential leaks and to the discharges from the pipelines. Observations by the Inspector are recorded on the appropriate line on the Mill s Daily fnspeclion Data fonn. b) Weekly Inspections Three types of weekly in peclions are performed at the Mi ll under the License: (i) Weekly Inspection of the Mill Forms Paragraph 2.3.1 of Reg. Guide 8.31 provides that th R 0 and the Mill foreman hould, and Section 2.3.2 of the Mill s ALARA ProgrclItl provides that the RSO and Mill foreman. or their respective designees. shall conduct a weekly inspection of all Mill areas to obs rYe general radiaLion conlrol practices and review rcquired changes in procedures and equipment. Particular attcntion is to be focused on areas where potential expo ures (0 per onnel might exist and in areas of operation or locations where Qntamination is evident. Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,~--------~~----------~ ,', Formatted: Font: 9 pt " NAAeo!lIfflIIli~Il!O!ie~1l Bf8gfess 1217 IQlSRc:roo rev 32 A 12.iW;!Q // FedIi~~~§\lV_~~1.~1!Y_129J~:\Rcclam.J1i9nPIau\R~lijm8!iQn Clan Rev 3.2BlSECT02 rcv~l/ 3.2,13 01.13.11 [cell inc doox. __________________________________________________ , Page 2-38 Revision ~3.2.AB Ifl1eRlatiaAal Uraflil>lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan (in Weekly Ore Storage Pad Inspection Forms Paragraph 3.3 of the DMT Plan requires that weekly feedstock storage area inspections will be performed by the Radiation afety Department. to confirm that the bulk feedstock materials arc stored and maintained within the defined area of the ore pad and that all alternate feed materials I cated outside the defined ore pad area arc maintained within water tight containers. The results of these inspections arc recorded on the Mill's Ore ample Plant Weekly lnspecli n Report. (iii) Weekly Tailings and DMT Inspection Paragraphs 3. I and 3.2 of the DMT Plan require that weekly inspections of the tailings area and DMT requirements be performed by the radialion safety department. c) Monthly Reports Two types of monthly reports are prepared by Mill staff: (i) Monthly Radiation aftty Reports At least monthly .. the J 0 reviews the results of daily and weekly inspections. including a review of all monitoring and exposure dala for the month and provides to the Mill Manager a monthly report containing a written summary of the month's significant worker protection aclivities (Section 2.3.4 of the Mill s "LARA Program). Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,?---------~------------~ /, Formatted: Font: 9 pt " ~km:----='Y!l!!\BeeIamalieR--P!an a.:;!,R ifl-----1}f0!!f8SS 1217 IGlSHGro2 re, :1.2 p, 12.22dO ,'/ Fed~~!:!~E]t§'z'&!!t~¥'o .. N!S!!~n~,~1!Y J29JI:!;l~~8m..i'lioD Plnn\RecIWlI8!.i0n Plan Rl'Y 3.2Jt\sF,~1 rey_',' 3,2 BOI 13 II redlinc,doc.'&... _________________ nnn ___ u _____________________ -' Page 2-39 Revision ~3.2.AB IRtematieRll1 UFllfI:itlRlDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan (Ii) Monthly Tailings Inspection Renorts Paragraph 4 of the OM" Plan requires that a Monthlv Inspection Data ronn be completed for the monthly lailings inspection. This inspection is typically performcd in thc fourth weck of cach month and is in lieu of the weekly tailings inspection for that week. Mill staff also prepares a month ly summary or all daily, weekly, monthly and quarterly taiJings inspections. d) Quarterly Tailings Inspections Paragraph 5 of the DM" Plan requires that the RSO or his designee perfonn a quarterly tailings inspection. e) Annual Evaluations The following annyal evaluations afC perfonned under the License. as set out in eclion 6 of thc DMTPlan. (i) Annual Technical Evaluation An annual techni .al evaluation of the tailings manollemeni system must be performed by a registered professional engineer (PEl. who has experience and training in the area of geotechnical aspects of retention structures. 111e technical evaluation includes an on-site inspection of lhe tailings management system and a thorough review of all tailing records for the pa I year. The Formatted: Font: 9 pt Technical . valuation also includes a review and summary afthe annual movement monitor survey " Formatted: Font: 9 pt I,~~~~ __ ~~ __________ --J " NAAeo!ematWn PlanlAeeI8!l1!l!ien--------P1an 32 a ill PEeRless 12 17 IQ!$!&fll2 Ah 32.A 1220AG ,',' £;!(JlifW!ool!t!..:'.kI~~.!t~~.9~~!?I1S.!'igro.E·~J' _1£9Jt!;lR~~alion Plan'8eclnmalion]lan Re~ 2.m1SECf02 fl£.V ~ 'I' 3.2.13 01.13 II r¢dline.doox,. _________________________________________________ .J (see paragraph (in below). Page 2-40 Revision ~3.2.AB IftteFflatieRll1 UrllRiumDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan All tailings cells and COrre ponding dikes are inspected for signs of erosion, subsidence, hrinkage. and seepage. The drainage ditches are inspected \0 evaluate surface watcr control structures. In the vent tailings capacity evaluations were performed for the receipt of alternate feed material during the year. the capacity evaluation forms and associated calculation heels will be reviewcd to ensure that the maximum tailings capacity estimate is accurate. The amount of tailings added to the ystem since the last evaluation will also be calculated to determine thc estimated capacity at the time ofthe evaluation. As discussed above. tailings inspection records consist of daily, weekly, monthly. and quarterly tailings inspections. These inspection records are evaluated to determine ifany freeboard limits are being approached. Records will also be reviewed to summarize observations of potential concern. The evaluation also involves discussion with the Environmental and/or Radiation Technician and the RSQ regarding activities around the tailings area for the past ye=ar. During th annual inspection. photographs of the tailings area are taken. The training of indi iduals is also reviewed as a part oflhe Annual Technical Evaluation. The registered engineer obtains copies of selected lai I ing inspections, along with the monthly and quarterly summaries of observations of concem and the correclive actions taken. These copies are then included in the Anllual Technical Evaluation Report. The Annual Technical Evaluation Reporl must b submitted by November 1 5~h of everYY£l!r lq !ch,S! __ --{ Formatted: Superscript Direcling Dam Safcty Engineer. tate of Utall. Natural R ources. I ~F~o~rm~a~tt~ed~:F~o~nt~:9~p~t ____________ ~ / I Formatted: Font: 9 pt " I%RoolllmaHen-----FlIllAA~llliIlfoo----::i!IlIO 32 R in ofagress 1$17.19:\86(;"02 fev n A 12.2{),.l.(J /,' ~~~~'?:VM.R9~~1''1S!,9T~~~l!YJ~JN:\Reclam8tion PIDI'!)&<~IJ!'lIatjon Pjan Rev 3.2B)SEcrqz rq"~,/ 32 BOLl3II r¢lincdoc~ ________________________________________________ ...1 Page 2-41 Revision M3.2.AB IRteFflatioRal Urasil:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan (m Annual Movement Monitor Survey A movement monitor survey is conducted by a licensed surveyor annuallv in accordance with Condition 11.3 of the License, approved on June 17, 2010. The movement monitor survey con ists of surveying mon itors along dikes 41\-S and 48-to detect any possible scLUement or movement of the dike,. The data generated from lhis survey is reviewed and incorporated into lheA/mua' Technical EvalllaJion Report of the tailings management system. (iii) Annual Leak Detection Fluid Samples In the event solution has been detected in a leak detection ySlem in Cells 1. 2 or 3. a sample will be collecled on an annual be is. This sample wi \I be analyzed according to thc conditions set forth in License Condition 1l.3.C. The results ofthe analysis will be reviewed to determine the origin of the solution. IA the mill meilities IlFeli: the speral.ios&l IflsHiteriAg flFegtamS eel'l5ist ef effil:lel'lt ga5 sl:eelc ~ltng; Elaily iB5peeties of flFOeess t8Hlts, IiRes Itfld eq\iipFA6Rt; &IlEkiaily iAspeeliofl of ta+Hftg iFAflO1:Hl8FAe£iffi IHld leal( deteelioA systems. Ql:IsFterly emt:leRt gas staelE samples ere eelleeleEi eA all mill prosess stael<ti wAen tAesa -praeess systems era epereting. These iAeli:lae tile yeijeweekiHlryers ~le. I MEl Ne. 2, the YIlRed+tmHiryer 5l-ftek; tkeiF Fe5flee~'1e seR:lBBBr steeles, H:!e eemisteF staek, lHle the grizzly steele Formatted: Font: 9 pt I~~~~~~~----------~ ,'1 Formatted: Font: 9 pt I I NAAft/ametifIR---pkl~!I,lIIIH!Il==pla!!~ 9R1gres5 1217 19\5r;CTQi! Fe" ;J,2,,', 122M9 /,' r~in~~E~§-\FM.R~~grGJ~a'y )29,}'l::I:\R£S,1l!D1Dlion P.lall~lamal,i"tn PJan R~Y 3,2B\SEq02 rev ~I/ ),2.B 01.13,11 n:dHncdQc:s. __________________________________________________ J Page 2-42 Revision 2-.()3.2.AB Jf!ternalional UfllRiumDcnison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan A , .. isl:lal if!speelioR is maae aai ly by sltpef'o'isoF)' peFSoRflel crall preeess taRIES MEl aisehElrge lines ifHhe mill aHa of tAe lftili~f+6gemet'1t 81'ea: Ifl the event of a fai ltJFe if! eRe of the ROl'fRal process skeB:fFIS; eorroettve-aat-iefts--tlfe-4a:keIt4e-eftSllFo lAal:-4here--aro no disohElrges ttl lhe efwifoRmefit. :beak deteelioR systems ("LDS") unaer allah laili-flgs eall are FRORiteree fur the flresenee efsohtl:ioR weelfl)'. If 901tll:iof! is fl~e LOS or Gells 2.3, Sf 4 a flregrftFR eesoriaeEi tlflaO:F bieense GeneliliOB 11 .3, pF&,,'iEies foF aetioRs to ee talEOR. 2.3.2 Eft'liroamefttftl Moaiteriag 6R't'if6RRle~sist5 oftlle foHewit1g-;-gf6ttaGwaI:eF ana stlFfilee 't't'ftler sElffiples· air ~afl:ietJlale SaFRflles. gamma roeliatien FReasurell'lenls, sail, aRd Yegelatoion samples. Refer ttl tile Semi-aRfltJal EmueRt Reports contained in Aflpef!di!< A fer samflliBg leeatief!, tfequanB)' &fie Mltiytieal restlits. Formatted: Font: 9 pt " >-F-o-rm-a-tted--: F-o-nt-: g'''''p-t-------< '/~~~~~~ ____________ __J " ~11!1l~wAAea!qn)jJfiqa=PI~tt----=iIt===1'fjl!:Fess liI.17,IQlS6CTW "'" 1.2.A 12.21).10 ,',' redl~~.!~~.¥qI..:IlE.~9}'1a.Y -'.2~~:IRc:clam8Iion PlanlR~£I!lLUllllon PIHD lID: 3.2B\SE!(!92 rtv ~',' 32.901,13 11 rcdline.docx. ___________________ n ______ un ________________ -' Gr9('lfuiwater Page 2-43 Revision ~3.2.AB -kltem&tioflal Uranil:llflDeni on Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan WeUs-MW-6;-MW 7, aRft-MW 8 ',vere pll:lggeel BeellHse lftey ..... era I:Il\eler C6113, as ..... ~ l:Ifleer Cell 4,.... Wells MW 9 a.flel MW IQ are elf)' Me IUlYe BeeR exell:laeEl fr-elfl LAe manitefiflg ~r9grlHl'l. The leR lBaRilaFiRg ..... ells iA er ReaF the I:Iflpermasl sEfl:lifer are MW J MW 2 MW 3, MW 4. MW 5, MW 11, MW 12. MW 14, MW 15 aReI MW 17. TRese wells 'iaf)' if! eleplh rrem 94 la 189 feet: FJe'N ffites--tfHhese ·.vells vary ffflm 15 geIlOA!! per mOf!tfl 1.9 I Q gallens pep kal:lf. Tke el:lliRtlFy · .... ell (ORe of the SI:l~~ly 'Neils) is eomplet-ed in the t>~a·,'e.ja 8Ejl:lifer. at a eleplft.-ef awreximately 1,80Q feel belo· .... ilie gretmd 9l:1rfaee: TAe groURelwater m~m eef!SiSlS of !'leMmaters mell5l:1Feel qllilrtarly aAG semi-amtttally. QuarleFI), fJaraffleteFS iReluEle: pH, SfJeeiH9 eeflettet&Ree, lempereh:lre, eefllh Ie water eklarieles, 51:1116les, tatal elissal¥eel seliss (TDS), Aiel.el, petassitlm, anel U ft8ll:H'fll:---The paFllFfleteFS measuFes aR a semi QRRI:la! Basis, iR aeelilieA (0 tke ql:lsrterly flaralfle,en; are: IlFSMie, seleRiuFA, sooium:, rasil:lFA 226, thorium 230, flRe leae 210. Semi aRRl:lal parameters I .... hieR &II meBSUfe4-efe;.-a1i ph)'5ieal ehemieal et'iteria eH!tt~ampl iflg as well (:!~eR&HlflMyte f>&I'itfReteFS-05:-Se ~Ia ane Rtltli9Ruolides Ra 226 TIl 23Q Elfld JlW(r. Surfuee Water Sl:Irlaee water sBFAl'lles are talt-eB Ham the ~we Rearby streams \Vestw~ Creek SAd Cettenweee Creel.. CeUeRweoel Creelc-l:I5I:Ialiy eeRwiRs rl:lRRifig waler. Bl:Il fill!! nJ50 eeee ery an eseasian . .westwater Creel, rerely eORtains FURRiRg waleF~d · .... ken it dees, it is from-pt'eeifJilftlieR FliReff. Water saml3ies-tlre eelleeti!-El-ql:larterly from CeltaR' .... eed Creek aReI ana-IY2:ed feF TDS and tetal SI:ISf)eReleEl solids (TSS). Aelditioflal semi Bflfltl8t ..... ater s(:!fflples are eelleelea at a minimum of " Formatted: Font: 9 pt I ~~~~~~~----------~ ,', Formatted: Font: 9 pt NAAeelaml!!j!!!b=P!!lIl\&ee!amn~!C-----tlFegress 1217 IQ\Sr;GT!);! re~' 32A 1220d9 ,',' B!fm~EJt§\~Jt~L.A.~.!'~~t:l"\Recl~tion P!9n\~cI8m'J.tiO!J Plan Rev 32BISECJ1)2 rev ~/,' 3.2,801 13 1 ! rcdljnc doc1!\. _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _______ u __________________ -' Page 2-44 Revision u)3.2.AB IRtematioRal UraRilimDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan .ffitH:-{~lll:hs apart. These samples are aR81)~a fur TOS, T88 eisseh'ea &fId-9liSfleRded U Rat, Ra 226, aRd Th 230. GtlFFeRily the flfflgrllfB iReltleles SWflJ'lliRg water from Wes~at-erGreek-eRee a year jfthe ereel, is newiRg. Ilewe¥eF, if wa~eF is Ral rWlAiRg, aR aiteFflate sail sample is eelleeteEl [fam ~e ereak bed. Waler sllRlJ'lles trem West .... <ater Creek are aRely~eEl fur IDS TSS, Disselved &fId SliSfl61:laed lJ flat; R:a 226, BftEJ.:Fh 230. lIa soi l sample is eelleeled, it is lHlal~ed fur U Rat aREI Ra 226 (per LieeRse CSRditisR 24C). RadiatisR Nftw.Fa.1 faEtialioa---meJ'l-i.t.effng iReh:leles air J'lEH'tiel:llatMllmflliRg, ga~remeflt5; ailEI ¥egetatiaR lHlei sail sllffil*iRg. Air J'lartietllat.e meRiteriRg is eeRdl:letea eeRltel:lOllsly al rellr mORileriag statioAs loeateel 9fOtlAa the periphery ef the mill. Gamma reaiatioR meBSllr6meAts ... egeta~oR sampling, aRd soil sampling are eORdl:letes at five loeations. See SeelioR 1.8 feF details eOReemieg tHe moeitsrieg program. ~llEi.iElliOA 16' .. eI5 are deteFFRinea til the fj~'e 8lWiroA:flleBtal mOAitoring statiefls ftfI& are reported Ejl:larlerly, ¥liU~ dUJ'llieale sBmJ'lles eelleoled at ~e Aearesl fesiaeABe: Aflflrt»dmalely five POl:l1l9S of "sew gro, .. Ah" ','egetaliotl samflles are eelleeled from area5 ~east of t-he mill, AoAAwest of the mill. 8Rd501:l~'I(es~ft-he mi ll" dtiriRg early spriAg, late sJ'lFiflg, &fIalate fall. Sample eolleetioR aFeQS vary de!)eRaing OR ~e growth yeB:F (i.e. ie 10· .... ' or AO moisture years it may lali:B aA area se¥eml aeres iR size Ie eolleel "','e J'l01:Hids ofvegelfttieR ..... hile if! "wel" years a FRtleR smaUer area is neetiecl). Vegelatiofl is asalYi!eti fer fBijiuFfI 226 000 lead 210. Formatted: Font: 9 pt /, \,,;F;.;;o.;...:rm.;...:a:..:tt=ed=:...c: F....:.o;.;;nt.;...:: 9;..:p;.;.t ______ ---.J " ~tiell==Pl8fl\B.ffial]l!!ljo»=Plnn 32_0 il~ss lal? tQISB~.. l .2.A 12.2QdG /,' @O~~lO~~};GTO.?~fj)' -'-~9J~:\R~!!D1atiQn J'181l\RC£lum8tioll Plan Rev 3.~n~nrn2 Jev ~',' 3,2.13 Q 1.13.11 rcdljnc doclS. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ u u _______________________ J Page 2-45 Revi.sion ;b()3.2.AB JAtemalioAal UraAiullillcnisnn Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Sails ere sampled al eeak onile flYe eBvirOllmOftlfl1 mOFliteRAg stations alUlUally in Augtl5L Tko setls are aeal}'zea fer U Raktfak!ftEHaEi~ Formatted: Font: 9 pt ,~----------~------------~ ,', ... F;..:o;.:..rm;.:...:catt:.:.ed::.::..:.:.:...Fon::.:::l:.;.9.:;.p.;..t ______ ~ , I WBee!tmJffi.jall===:.f'laffiB.etlam!ltj~IQ!~ft===i>F!!WSs 12.11.19\8EGFl2 Fe. a,iI,A 12,2GdQ ,'/ rHline,dee~-,\U~I¥t~~E~_'O~"'~~~ )29JN:IReclnmation Ptan\Rcciomalion PlanR,Sv ~2~~<B rev _',' 3,2 B 01 13-11 redHne.docx, _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _____________________________________ .I OENISOJ)~~ Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO 80265 USA MINES Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 303 389-4125 www.denisonmines.com Section 3.0 Reclamation Plan White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2.8 for Reclamation of the White Mesa Mill and Tailings Management System January 2011 State of Utahlle.(2) Byproduct Material License # UT1900479 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. www.denisonmines.com 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO, USA 80265 Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 303389-4125 Page 3-1 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 3.0 RECLAMATION PLAN This section provides an overview of the Mill location and property; details the facilities to be reclaimed; and describes the design criteria applied in this Plan. Reclamation plans and specifications are presented in Attachment A. Attachment B presents the quality plan for construction activities. Attachment C presents cost estimates for reclamation. Attachments D through H present additional material test results and design calculations to support the reclamation plan. 3.1 Location and Property Description The White Mesa Mill is located six miles south of Blanding, Utah on US Highway 191 on a parcel of land encompassing all or part of Sections 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 32, and 33 of T37S, R22E, and Sections 4,5,6,8,9, and 16 ofT38S, R22E, Salt Lake Base and Meridian described as follows (Figure 3.1-1): The south half of Section 21; the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 22; the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter and lots 1 and 4 of Section 27 all that part of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter and the northwest quarter southwest quarter of Section 27 lying west of Utah State Highway 163; the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter, the south half of the northwest quarter, the northeast quarter and the south half of Section 28; the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 29; the east half of Section 32 and all of Section 33, Township 37 South, Range 22 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian. Lots 1 through 4, inclusive, the south half of the north half, the southwest quarter, the west half of the southeast quarter, the west half of the east half of the southeast quarter and the west half of the east half of the east half of the N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 3-2 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan southeast quarter of Section 4; Lots 1 through 4, inclusive, the south half of the north half and the south half of Section 5 (all); Lots 1 and 2, the south half of the northeast quarter and the south half of Section 6 (EII2); the northeast quarter of Section 8; all of Section 9 and all of Section 16, Township 38 South, Range 22 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian. Additonalland is controlled by 46 Mill site claims. Total land holdings are approximately 5,415 acres .. N:\Rec1amation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 c1ean.docx '0 al ~ ~ ~ ";' ;:j !! ~ ~ ! " g '" " .:I ~ .. " ro 0:: ~ 0 I I i 5 ~ ;:a ;.. \ ! .~. \! : ( \ • .1: ~ ~ ... ,.1 '. , I," ~~ ":~.~ . ! ; t __ • · ~ · !.., i • . ".; 36 31 32 33 • ',' ~ 32 •• ~ 36 ~ ~' 31 33 ~? !BLAND~ UI~ !! ! ; ~. f35 / 1+ " ~; : : ~ .. , , ~ , , l\ \. I I ~ _~\ .. / ') ~j I ! i \1 ~.,,)t . I : ~ I'~ : 'I I 6 5 ~.. 3 2 1 ,.. 6 ~ i ! c,:,,#; Ii:" '':l , \ I" 'i ! 5 _ .... I t ' ,', I, : ~ I .,---(': ;; ~\,_!_v:' I l" t----~~~~~~---T--I ~-------4J~~:---r--+---~~~------~--------+-~<~~'·c+~=.~-----r-------1 ~] V. ) \~ ! ., ~ f 10 ' :11 ': 1,,'1 7 t ·, ,! , i :'-t I '" 8 :!il 1 11 12 7\' \~e 9 ", " ! ".9 '.-t ',' ~ II I ! "r ~~.i , .... p. t----.i i (, /j 22 _.....1-..._/ '\,. .. , j \ \. I " .. J,r I , ~ ... :~~ .' ':20 21 • 22 23 .~ -" " "'\ \.. "1' (, :~l .. ~~ '"., i f j (' 23 24 i i .). '. • ....•... r.,.. • .. ..; i .,' ,; I ~ I : ... i. ! 19 21 28 ;-\ -" .. -.. J._ .... : ~--. -", \ I ~j! ~ .. ," / ./ -\. ~ t; ,t"" \.,., i ,I!! j \,0;;.. ! ~ ~ ~....-,. Ii! '.~ 35 I ' '. ill ~ I!J ; "'''1 ..... d ~ ,/ S'1 "I'; 32 ~ 33 3+ ~; \ '}36 • 31 '. i!::i 3 31 33 "l ').1J ,I 36 r I .. ' _, ..... ' ..... I ,Il • ~ "" _<:i t" ~ I!' 4 " :> l NO. .. \~ i I¥ ; • I I . .-'. .! I ... ~ \ '$. : ,. 0 ,,: t" ..... \.. t ,. 3 ~ II f ~ Jf I ; ',.\ .. ~ .,. ~ .' J ~f' \' I ''t) _ 2 r(, ... _.1 L ~), 5 i 4 i:\ .~ t:;. 0_ 2") I· .;: f6 -' , .. \ '5 .,J-.'''<'' .J .....:! I : i (,. " '1-• i I "~ i.,' t'" m i •• '" ! I' 1 DENlSON MINES (JJSA) CORP ~ ".... .... '. "' J ," t .. I! I'· I" .. 1 \ j f __ I--_-I-_\!------+--'.,.:..': ...... ~ •• -C 'I i \ .. !I::.........~·' ! 1 ", I /' ... , ...... 1-.. ,,. 1 1 .. ( • ...t, r /' 10 11 • .12 7 f ~ ••• ,~ .I....! 1 ' 11 '. 12 I ~. 7 ."., 8 '. ! i , l I ' .... \.. \ l ~/ ; 't-.\i:'-'-t 1, I : .40." "" \. ~.:" 9 \ ... ' • .1 ,. i IJ " '\ .-", ~ ,. \ i , " ~ ~ ~ ", ~, L. I ' .. p 18 : 17 "'~ i "'j 16 II 1~'" (-. 14 f.. }J... • .:., ,--·-;~--·-i _:'.'\ '-~ I = ',' ~ .... ' '.~ '1:" 1'-"( ~ I ~'-. ..... I • '. ,r.... I' , .. <"of '" ,-• i ~.,.;;.. I '" __ .--I-______ t--"-, ______ -+--_____ -+--= .. ,;,.L~---..... ':j .... : . ....... • ... ) ! ~ . -'I " ... co' I ! ...... . ... : .,,' ; / '. ~: ,,~... .i'" : ,,~ ... -~ E /,I <9.. U IN "I N l-'i i {1~ :{ L .. 24 19 ( ~ .,w-' kl -. /"-' 22 ~.~ ~.r, "".' __ ","l&-,.'}. ' '\. -',' . 1~ '1, I -.' .... J !I 4 ... ". l ,,~[ \. _.~. -f..... '-" • .1 .. \, :~!. ,.. y (,[ !' I, • I N D I " N'~ El'S E R V" ION '\ 25 '. 30 29 :ta.. . __ . ___ ,.fB_~,L 8 ... ~ .. ~.---. 30 i .. 1-.. , .. I ",,' • I~ "" ,. 16 17 14 15 21 20 22 2J 28 29 27 26 " '\, ,,-'" .~. I . (, ;' ~~-----4-------~~-----~------_~ ___ .--~--------~---~--~----~~--I.~~~-~-!r----4----~ l /'''''1 1'", 1,/ i. .,.: I ! .:, _I' ... 10--" ..... I' 14' ! ,/ 31 32 ~:,~ .......... I 3:>1',':J' -h6 i '... 131 r..... 32 33 _--_4-------~~/-·----~-----+------+--------~~·~--·'-'-~--u .... -.~-~~-~~~~~I~! DM~OOMin~(~~~~\ENISO~~ \" . ( I' MINES ..... ,.. ,_ RE\IISIONS "'Ojed: White Mesa Mill -"'I'''' 6 5 4 J K\2-" 001. Illy County SwoJuan 1'".0: u"'" 2 ,., Lacotoon: (","10-" I ..... FIGURE 3,1-1 ~4-~,4---4----4----~---4--/-A_--~~H i t--1--h~~~w.--u=~_,~lm~----I~~~-~I·~~~~----~ ,Autl1o,. I""""''''' RAH 35 3+ J REGIONAL MAP SHOWING LAND POSITION Page 3-4 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 3.2 Facilities to be Reclaimed See Figure 3.2-1 for a general layout of the mill yard and related facilities and the restricted area boundary. 3.2.1 Summary of Facilities to be Reclaimed The facilities to be reclaimed include the following: • CellI (evaporation). CellI was previously referred to as Cell I-I. It is now referred to as CellI; • Cells 2 and 3, 4A and 4B (tailings); • Mill buildings and equipment; • On-site contaminated areas; and • Off-site contaminated areas (i.e., potential areas affected by windblown tailings). The reclamation of the above facilities will include the following: • Placement of contaminated soils, crystals, and synthetic liner material and any contaminated underlying soils from CellI into tailings Cells 4A or 4B. • Placement of a compacted clay liner on a portion of the Cell 1 impoundment area to be used for disposal of contaminated materials and debris from the Mill site decommissioning. (the Cell 1 Tailings Area) • Placement of materials and debris from Mill Decommissioning into tailings Cells 4A or 4B or in the CellI Tailings Area; N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B OU3.11 clean.docx Page 3·5 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mi ll Reclamation Plan • Placement of an engineered multi-layer cover over the entire area of Cells 2, 3, 4A and 4B and the Cell 1 Tailings Area. • Construction of runoff control and diversion channels as necessary; • Reconditioning of Mi ll and ancill ary areas; and • Reclamation of borrow sources. N:\Rcclamlition J>lan\Rcclarnation Plan Rev 3.2H\SECT03 Rcv3.2.B 01.13.1 1 c1can.docx Page 3-6 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan INSERT FIGURE 3.2-1 N :\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx 3.2.2 Tailings and Evaporative Cells Page 3-7 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The following subsections describe the cover design and reclamation procedures for Cellsl-I, 2, 3, 4A and 4B. Complete engineering details and text are presented in the Tailings Cover Design report, Appendix D, previously submitted. Additional information is provided in Attachments D, E and F to this submittal. 3.2.2.1 Soil Cover Design A six-foot thick soil cover to be placed over the uranium tailings and mill decommissioning materials in the Cell I-I Tailings Area, Cell 2, Cell 2, Cell 4A and Cell 4B was designed using on-site materials that will contain tailings and radon emissions in compliance with regulations of the NRC, the State of Utah, and by reference, the EPA. The cover consists of a one-foot thick layer of clay, available from within the site boundaries (Section 16 or stockpiles on site), below two feet of random fill (frost barrier), available from stockpiles on site. The clay is underlain by three feet (minimum) random fill soil (platform fill), also available on site. In addition to the soil cover, a minimum three-inch (on the cover top) to 8-inch (on the cover slopes) layer of riprap material will be placed over the compacted random fill to stabilize slopes and provide long-term erosion resistance (see Attachments D and H for characterization of cover materials). Uranium tailings soil cover design requirements for regulatory compliance include: Attenuate radon flux to an acceptable level (20 picoCuries-per meter squared-per second [pCilm2/sec]) (NRC, 1989) and 40 CFR 61.250-61.256; Minimize infiltration into the reclaimed tailings cells; Maintain a design life of up to 1,000 years or to the extent reasonably achievable, and in N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx any case for at least 200 years; and Page 3-8 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Provide long-term slope stability and geomorphic durability to withstand erosional forces of wind, the probable maximum flood event, and a horizontal ground acceleration ofO.1g due to seismic events. Several models/analyses were utilized in simulating the soil cover effectiveness: radon flux attenuation, hydrologic evaluation of infiltration, freeze/thaw effects, soil cover erosion protection, and static and pseudo static slope stability analyses. These analyses and results are discussed in detail in Sections 3.3.1 through 3.3.5, and calculations are also shown in the Tailings Cover Design report, (Appendix D, Attachment E and Attachment F). The soil cover (from top to the bottom) will consist of: (1) minimum of three inches of riprap material; (2) two feet of compacted random fill; (3) one foot of compacted clay; and (4) minimum three feet of compacted random fill soil. The final grading plan is presented in Section 5, Figure 5.1-1. As indicated on the figures, the top slope of the soil cover will be constructed at 0.2 percent and the side slopes, as well as transitional areas between cells, will be graded to five horizontal to one vertical (5H: 1 V). A minimum of three feet random fill is located beneath the compacted fill and clay layers (see cross-sections on Figures 5.1-2 and 5.1-3). The purpose ofthe fill is to raise the base ofthe cover to the desired subgrade elevation. In many areas, the required fill thickness will be much greater. However, the models and analyses presented in the Tailings Cover Design report (Appendix D) were performed conservatively, assuming only a three-foot layer. For modeling purposes, this lower, random fill layer was considered as part of the soil cover for performing the radon flux attenuation calculation, as it effectively contributes to the reduction of radon emissions (see Section 3.3.2). The fill was also evaluated in the slope stability analysis (see Section 3.3.6). However, it is not defined as part of the soil cover for other design calculations (infiltration, N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx freeze/thaw, and cover erosion). 3.2.2.2 Cell 1-1 Page 3-9 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Cell 1, used during mill operations solely for evaporation of process liquids, is the northernmost existing cell and is located immediately west of the mill. It is also the highest cell in elevation, as the natural topography slopes to the south. The drainage area above and including the cell is 216 acres. This includes drainage from the Mill site. Cell 1 will be evaporated to dryness. The synthetic liner and raffinate crystals will then be removed and placed in tailings Cells 4A or 4B. Any contaminated soils below the liner will be removed and also placed in the tailings cells. Based on current regulatory criteria, the current plan calls for excavation of the residual radioactive materials to be designed to ensure that the concentration of radium-226 in land averaged over any area of 100 square meters does not exceed the background level by more than: • 5 pCi/g, averaged over the first 15 cm of soil below the surface, and • 15 pCi/g, averaged over a 15 cm thick layer of soil more than 15 cm below the surface. A portion of Cell 1 (i.e., the Cell 1 Tailings Area), adjacent to and running parallel to the downstream cell dike, will be used for permanent disposal of contaminated materials and debris from the mill site decommissioning and windblown cleanup. The actual area of Cell I-I Tailings Area needed for storage of additional material will depend on the status of Cell 4A and 4B at the time of final mill decommissioning. A portion of the Mill area decommissioning material may be placed in Cell4A or 4B if space is available, but for purposes of the reclamation design the entire quantity of contaminated materials from the Mill site decommissioning is assumed to be placed in the Cell 1 Tailings Area. This results in approximately 10 acres of the Cell 1 Tailings Area and N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B OLl3.ll clean.docx Page 3-10 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan being utilized for permanent tailings storage. The remaining area of Cell 1 will then be breached and converted to a sedimentation basin. All runoff from the Cell I-I Tailings Area, the Mill area and the area immediately north of Cell 1 will be routed into the sedimentation basin and will discharge onto the natural ground via the channel located at the southwest comer ofthe basin. The channel is designed to accommodate the PMF flood. The HEC-1 model was used to determine the PMF and route the flood through the sedimentation basin (Attachment G). The peak flow was determined to be 1,344 cubic feet per second (cfs). A 20-foot wide channel will discharge the flow to the natural drainage. During the local storm PMF event, the maximum discharge through the channel will be 1,344 cfs. The entire flood volume will pass through the discharge channel in approximately four hours. At peak flow, the velocity in the discharge channel will be 7.45 feet per second (fps). The maximum flow depth will be 1.45 feet. This will be a bedrock channel and the allowable velocity for a channel of this type is 8-10 fps, therefore no riprap is required. A free board depth of O. 5 feet will be maintained for the PMP event. 3.2.2.3 Cell 2 Cell 2 will be filled with tailings and covered with a multi-layered engineered cover to a minimum cover thickness of six feet. The final cover will drain to the south at a 0.2 percent gradient. The cover will be as described in Section 3.2.2.1 above, and will consist of a mini mum of three feet of random fill (platform fill), followed by a clay radon barrier of one foot in thickness, and two feet of upper random fill (frost barrier) for protection of the radon barrier. A minimum of three inches of rock will be utilized as armor against erosion. Side slopes will be graded to a 5: 1 slope and will have 0.67 feet (8 inches) of rock armor protection. N :\Rec1amation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx 3.2.2.4 Cell 3 Page 3-11 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Cell 3 will be filled with tailings, debris and contaminated soils and covered with the same multi-layered engineered cover as Cell 2. 3.2.2.5 Cell4A Cell 4A will be filled with tailings, debris and contaminated soils and covered with the same multi-layered engineered cover as Cell 2 and Cell 3. 3.2.2.6 Ce1l4B Cell 4B will be filled with tailings, debris and contaminated soils and covered with the same multi-layered engineered cover as Cell 2, Cell 3 and Ce1l4A. 3.2.3 Mill Decommissioning A general layout of the mill area is shown in Figure 3.2.3-1. 3.2.3.1 Mill Building, Equipment, and Other 11 e. (2) Byproduct Material The uranium and vanadium sections, including ore reclaim, grinding, pre-leach, leach, CCD, SX, and precipitation and drying circuits as well as the alternate feed circuit, decontamination pads, scale house, sample plant, truck shop and all other structures on site will be decommissioned as follows: All equipment including instrumentation, process piping, electrical control and switchgear, and contaminated structures will be removed. Contaminated concrete foundations will be demolished N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 3-12 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan and removed or covered with soil as required. Uncontaminated equipment, structures and waste materials from Mill decommissioning may be disposed of by sale, transferred to other company-owned facilities, transferred to an appropriate off-site solid waste site, or disposed of in one of the tailings cells. Contaminated equipment, structures and dry waste materials from Mill decommissioning, contaminated soils underlying the Mill areas, and ancillary contaminated materials will be disposed of in tailings Ce1l4A, Cell 4B, or the Cell 1 Tailings Area. All other 11e.(2) byproduct material on site will be disposed of in Cell4A or CeIl4B. Debris and scrap will have a maximum dimension of 20 feet and a maximum volume of 30 cubic feet. Material exceeding these limits will be reduced to within the acceptable limits by breaking, cutting or other approved methods. Empty drums, tanks or other objects having a hollow volume greater than five cubic feet will be reduced in volume by at least 70 percent. If volume reduction is not feasible, openings shall be made in the object to allow soils or other approved material to enter the object. Debris and scrap will be spread across the designated areas to avoid nesting and to reduce the volume of voids present in the placed mass. Stockpiled soils, and/or other approved material shall be placed over and into the scrap in sufficient amounts to fill the voids between the large pieces and the volume within the hollow pieces to form a coherent mass. See also Section 3.1 of Attachment A. The estimated reclamation costs for surety are set out in Attachment C. Attachment C will be reviewed and updated on a yearly basis. N:\Rec1amation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 c1ean.docx 3.2.3.2 Mill Site Page 3-14 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Contaminated areas on the Mill site will be primarily superficial and includes the ore storage area and surface contamination of some roads. All ore will have been previously removed from the ore stockpile area or will be transported and disposed of as contaminated material. All contaminated materials will be excavated and be disposed in one of the tailings cells. The depth of excavation will vary depending on the extent of contamination and will be governed by the criteria in Attachment A, Section 3.2. Windblown material is defined as Mill-derived contaminants dispersed by wind to surrounding areas. Windblown contaminated material detected by a gamma survey using the criteria in Attachment A, Section 3.2, will be excavated and disposed in one of the tailings cells. Disturbed areas will be covered, graded and vegetated as required. The proposed grading plan for the Mill site and ancillary areas is shown on Figure A-3.2-l in Attachment A. 3.3 Design Criteria As required by Part I.H.l of the G WDP, Denison is in the process of completing an infiltration and contamination transport model of the final tailings cover system to demonstrate the long-term ability of the cover to protect nearby groundwater quality. Upon review of such modeling, the executive Secretary will determine if changes to the cover systems as set outin the iPlan are needed to ensure compliance with the performance criteria contained in part I.D.8 of the GWDP. Although the modeling has not been completed, modeling results to date suggest that some changes to the final cover design as set out in this Plan will be needed. However, as the details of such re-design have not been finalized at this time, the approved 2000 cover deiagn and basis will continue to be used for this version of the Plan. This Plan will be amended in the future to incorporate any changes to the design of the tailings cover system that result from the current N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 3-15 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan modeling effort. The design criteria summaries in this section are adapted from Tailings Cover Design, Mill (Titan, 1996). A copy of the Tailings Cover Design report is included in Appendix D, previously submitted. It contains all ofthe calculations used in design discussed in this section. Additional design information is included in Attachments D through H to this submittal. 3.3.1 Regulatory Criteria Information contained in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix A, 10 CFR Part 40, and Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 40 (which are incorporated by reference into UAC R313-24-4), and 40 CFR Part 192 was used as criteria in final designs under this Plan. In addition, the following documents also provided guidance: • EPA, 1994, The Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) Model, Version 3, EPA/6001R-94/168b, September; • NRC, 1989, "Regulatory Guide 3.64 (Task WM-503-4) Calculation of Radon Flux Attenuation by Earthen Uranium Mill Tailings Covers, March; • NRC, 1980, Final Staff Technical Position Design of Erosion Protection Covers for Stabilization of Uranium Mill Tailings Sites, August; • NUREG/CR-4620, Nelson, J. D., Abt, S. R., et. al., 1986, Methodologies for Evaluating Long-Term Stabilization Designs of Uranium Mill Tailings Impoundments, June; • NUREG/CR-4651 , 1987, Development of Riprap Design Criteria by Riprap Testing in Flumes: Phase 1, May; • U. S. Department of Energy, 1988, Effect of Freezing and Thawing on UMTRA Covers, Albuquerque, New Mexico, October; and. • NUREG 1620,2003, Standard Review Planfor the review of a reclamation Planfor Mill Tailings Sites Under Title II of the uranium Mill Tailings radiation Control Act of 1978. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 3-16 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan As mentioned above, the requirements set out in Part I.D.8 of the GWDP require that the cover system for each tailings cell will be designed and constructed to meet the following minimum requirements for a period of not less than 200 years: • Minimize the infiltration of precipitation or other surface water into the tailings, including, but not limited to the radon barrier; • Prevent the accumulation of leachate head within the tailings waste layer that could rise above or over-top the maximum FML elevation internal to any disposal cell, i.e. create a "bathtub" effect; and • Ensure that groundwater quality at the compliance monitoring wells deosn ot exceed the GWQSs or GWCLs specified in Part I.C.l and table 2 of the GWDP. Upon completion of the Infiltration Analysis, this Plan will be revised as necessary to ensure compliance with these requirements. 3.3.2 Radon Flux Attenuation The EPA rules in 40 CFR Part 192 require that a "uranium tailings cover be designed to produce reasonable assurance that the radon-222 release rate would not exceed 20 pCi/m2/sec for a period of 1,000 years to the extent reasonably achievable and in any case for at least 200 years when averaged over the disposal area over at least a one year period" (NRC, 1989). NRC regulations presented in 10 CFR Part 40 (incorporate by reference into UAC R313-24-4) also restrict radon flux to less than 20 pCi/m2/sec. The following sections present the analyses and design for a soil cover which meets this requirement. 3.3.2.1 Predictive Analysis N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 3-17 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The soil cover for the tailings cells at White Mesa Mill was evaluated for attenuation of radon gas using the digital computer program, RADON, presented in the NRC's Regulatory Guide 3.64 (Task WM 503-4) entitled Calculation of Radon Flux Attenuation by Earthen Uranium Mill Tailings Covers. The RADON model calculates radon-222 flux attenuation by multi-layered earthen uranium mill tailings covers, and determines the minimum cover thickness required to meet NRC and EPA standards. The RADON model uses the following soil properties in the calculation process: • Soil layer thickness [centimeters (cm)]; • Soil porosity (percent); • Density [grams-per-cubic centimeter (gm/cm3)]; • Weight percent moisture (percent); • Radium activity (PiC/g); • Radon emanation coefficient (unitless); and • Diffusion coefficient [square centimeters-per-second (cm2/sec)]. Physical and radiological properties for tailings and random fill were analyzed by Chen and Associates (1987) and Rogers and Associates (1988). Clay physical data from Section 16 was analyzed by Advanced Terra Testing (1996) and Rogers and Associates (1996). Additional testing of cover materials was performed in April 1999. The test results are included III Attachment D. See Appendix D, previously submitted, for additional laboratory test results. The RADON model was performed for the following cover section (from top to bottom): • two feet compacted random fill (frost barrier); • one foot compacted clay; and • a minimum of three feet random fill occupying the freeboard space between the tailings and clay layer (platform fill). N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 3-18 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The top one foot of the lower random fill, clay layer and two foot upper random fill are compacted to 95 percent maximum dry density. The top riprap layer was not included as part of the soil cover for the radon attenuation calculation. The most current RADON modeling is included in Attachment F. The results of the RADON modeling exercise, based on two different compaction scenarios, show that the uranium tailings cover configuration will attenuate radon flux emanating from the tailings to a level of 18.2 to 19.8 pCi/m2/sec. This number was conservatively calculated as it takes into account the freeze/thaw effect on the uppermost part (6.8 inches) of the cover (Section 3.3.4). The soil cover and tailing parameters used to run the RADON model, in addition to the RADON input and output data files, are presented in Appendix D as part of the Radon Calculation brief (See Appendix B in the Tailings Cover Design report, previously submitted in its entirety as Appendix D) and the most current model included as Attachment F to this submittal. Based on the model results, the soil cover design of six-foot thickness will meet the requirements of 40 CFR Part 192 and 10 CFR Part 40. 3.3.2.2 Empirical Data Radon gas flux measurements have been made at the White Mesa Mill tailings piles over Cells 2 and 3 (see Appendix D). Currently Cell 2 is fully covered and Cell 3 is partially covered with three to four feet of random fill. During the period 2004 through 2007, cell 2 was only partially covered with such random fill. Radon flux measurements, averaged over the covered areas, were as follows (Denison 2004-2008): N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Cell 2 Cell 3 Table 3.3-1 Page 3-19 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Average Radon Flux from Tailings Cells 2004-2008 (pCi/m2/sec) 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 13.9 7.1 7.9 13.5 3.9 10.8 6.2 10.0 8.9 3.1 Empirical data suggest that the random fill cover, alone, is currently providing an effective barrier to radon flux. Thus, the proposed tailings cover configuration, which is thicker, moisture adjusted, contains a clay layer, and is compacted, is expected to attenuate the radon flux to a level below that predicted by the RADON model. The field radon flux measurements confirm the conservatism of the cover design. This conservatism is useful, however, to guarantee compliance with applicable regulations under long term climatic conditions over the required design life of 200 to 1,000 years. 3.3.3 Infiltration Analysis The tailings ponds at White Mesa Mill are lined with synthetic geomembrane liners which under certain climatic conditions, could potentially lead to the long-term accumulation of water from infiltration of precipitation. Therefore, the soil cover was evaluated to estimate the potential magnitude of infiltration into the capped tailings ponds. The Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) model, Version 3.0 (EPA, 1994) was used for the analysis. HELP is a quasi two-dimensional hydrologic model of water movement across, into, through, and out of capped and lined impoundments. The model utilizes weather, soil, and engineering design data as input to the model, to account for the effects of surface storage, snowmelt, run-off, infiltration, evapotranspiration, vegetative growth, soil moisture storage, lateral subsurface drainage, and N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 3-20 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan unsaturated vertical drainage on the specific design, at the specified location. The soil cover was evaluated based on a two-foot compacted random fill layer over a one-foot thick, compacted clay layer. The soil cover layers were modeled based on material placement at a minimum of 95 percent of the maximum dry density, and within two percent of the optimum moisture content per American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) requirements. The top riprap layer and the bottom random fill layer were not included as part of the soil cover for infiltration calculations. These two layers are not playing any role in controlling the infiltration through the cover material. The random fill will consist of clayey sands and silts with random amounts of gravel and rock-size materials. The average hydraulic conductivity of several samples of random fill was calculated, based on laboratory tests, to be 8.87 x 10-7 em/sec. The hydraulic conductivity ofthe clay source from Section 16 was measured in the laboratory to be 3.7 x 10-8 em/sec. Geotechnical soil properties and laboratory data are presented in Appendix D. Key HELP model input parameters include: Blanding, Utah, monthly temperature and precipitation data, and HELP model default solar radiation, and evapotranspiration data from Grand Junction, Colorado. Grand Junction is located northeast of Blanding in similar climate and elevation; Soil cover configuration identifying the number of layers, layer types, layer thickness, and the total covered surface area; Individual layer material characteristics identifying saturated hydraulic conductivity, porosity, wilting point, field capacity, and percent moisture; and N :\Reclamation Plan \Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 3-21 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Soil Conservation Service runoff curve numbers, evaporative zone depth, maximum leaf area index, and anticipated vegetation quality. Water balance results, as calculated by the HELP model, indicate that precipitation would either run off the soil cover or be evaporated. Thus, model simulations predict zero infiltration of surface water through the soil cover, as designed. These model results are conservative and take into account the freeze/thaw effects on the uppermost part (6.8 inches) of the cover (See Section 1.3 of the Tailings Cover Design report, Appendix D). The HELP model input and output for the tailings soil cover are presented in the HELP Model calculation brief included in previously submitted Appendix D. As mentioned above, potential infiltration into the tailings cap is currently ebing remodelined in the Infiltration Analysis. Any changes to this Plan that are required as a result of such remodeling will be incorporated into a subsequent revision to this Plan. 3.3.4 Freeze/Thaw Evaluation The tailings soil cover of one foot of compacted clay covered by two feet of random fill was evaluated for freeze/thaw impacts. Repeated freeze/thaw cycles have been shown to increase the bulk soil permeability by breaking down the compacted soil structure. The soil cover was evaluated for freeze/thaw effects using the modified Berggren equation as presented in Aitken and Berg (1968) and recommended by the NRC (U.S. Department of Energy, 1988). This evaluation was based on the properties of the random fill and clay soil, and meteorological data from both Banding, Utah and Grand Junction, Colorado. The results of the freeze/thaw evaluation indicate that the anticipated maximum depth of frost penetration on the soil cover would be less than 6.8 inches. Since the random fill layer is two feet N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 0l.l3.11 clean.docx Page 3-22 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan thick, the frost depth would be confined to this layer and would not penetrate into the underlying clay layer. The performance of the soil cover to attenuate radon gas flux below the prescribed standards, and to prevent surface water infiltration, would not be compromised. The input data and results of the freezelthaw evaluation are presented in the Effects of Freezing on Tailings Covers Calculation brief included as Appendix E in the Tailings Cover Design report, which was previously submitted as Appendix D. 3.3.5 Soil Cover Erosion Protection A riprap layer was designed for erosion protection of the tailings soil cover. According to NRC guidance, the design must be adequate to protect the soil/tailings against exposure and erosion for 200 to 1,000 years (NRC, 1990). Currently, there is no standard industry practice for stabilizing tailings for 1,000 years. However, by treating the embankment slopes as wide channels, the hydraulic design principles and practices associated with channel design were used to design stable slopes that will not erode. Thus, a conservative design based on NRC guidelines was developed. Engineering details and calculations are summarized in the Erosion Protection Calculation brief provided in Appendix F in the Tailings Cover Design report, which was previously submitted as Appendix D. Riprap cover specifications for the top and side slopes were determined separately as the side slopes are much steeper than the slope of the top of the cover. The size and thickness ofthe riprap on the top of the cover was calculated using the Safety Factor Method (NUREG/CR-4651, 1987), while the Stephenson Method (NUREG/CR-4651, 1987) was used for the side slopes. These methodologies were chosen based on NRC recommendations (1990). By the Safety Factor Method, riprap dimensions for the top slope were calculated in order to achieve a slope "safety factor" of 1.1. For the top of the soil cover, with a slope of 0.2 percent, the Safety Factor Method indicated a median diameter (Dso) riprap of 0.28 inches is required to N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 c1ean.docx Page 3-23 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan stabilize the top slope. However, this dimension must be modified based on the long-term durability ofthe specific rock type to be used in construction. The suitability of rock to be used as a protective cover has been assessed by laboratory tests to determine the physical characteristics of the rocks (See Attachment H). The North pit source has an over sizing factor of 9.85%. The riprap sourced from this pit should have a D50 size of at least 0.31 inches and should have an overall layer thickness of at least three inches on the top of the cover. Riprap dimensions for the side slopes were calculated using Stephenson Method equations. The side slopes of the cover are designed at 5H:l V. At this slope, Stephenson's Method indicated the unmodified riprap Dso of3.24 inches is required. Again, assuming that the North pit material will be used, the modified Dso size of the riprap should be at least 3.54 inches with an overall layer thickness of at least 8 inches. The potential of erosion damage due to overland flow, sheetflow, and channel scouring on the top and side slopes of the cover, including the riprap layer, has been evaluated. Overland flow calculations were performed using site meteorological data, cap design specifications, and guidelines set by the NRC (NUREG/CR-4620, 1986). These calculations are included in Appendix F ofthe Tailings Cover Design report (Appendix D previously submitted). According to the guidelines, overland flow velocity estimates are to be compared to "permissible velocities," which have been suggested by the NRC, to determine the potential for erosion damage. When calculated, overland flow velocity estimates exceed permissible velocities, additional cover protection should be considered. The permissible velocity for the tailings cover (including the riprap layer) is 5.0 to 6.0 feet-per-second (ft.lsec.) (NUREG/CR-4620). The overland flow velocity calculated for the top of the cover is less than 2.0 ft.lsec., and the calculated velocity on the side slopes is 4.9 ft.lsec. The need for a filter or bedding material beneath the riprap was evaluated using methods presented in NUREG/CR-4620. The function of the filter is to prevent stone penetration into the cover, and N:\Rec1amation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 0\.\3.11 c1ean.docx Page 3-24 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan to prevent soil erosion of the cover at the riprap/soil cover interface. The likelihood of soil erosion at the interface is evaluated by calculating the interstitial flow velocity through the riprap. Interstitial velocities were calculated using procedures presented by Abt et al. (1991), which updates the Leps relationship that is presented in NUREG/CR-4620. Details ofthese calculations are presented in Attachment G. The interstitial velocities on the top slope and the toe apron are sufficiently low that a bedding layer is not necessary. However, the interstitial velocity within the riprap on the side slopes is within the range of values where bedding is conditionally recommended. Because of the wide difference in grain size distributions between the rip rap and the random fill, it is recommended that a 6-inch layer of bedding material be placed between these two materials. A rock apron will be constructed at the toe of high slopes and in areas where runoff might be concentrated (See Figure A-S.1-4). The design of the rock aprons is detailed in Attachment G. 3.3.6 Slope Stability Analysis Static and pseudostatic analyses were performed to establish the stability of the side slopes of the tailings soil cover. The side slopes are designed at an angle of SH: 1 V. Because the side slope along the southern section of Cell 4A is the longest and the ground elevation drops rapidly at its base, this slope was determined to be critical and is thus the focus of the stability analyses. The computer software package GSLOPE, developed by MITRE Software Corporation, has been used for these analyses to determine the potential for slope failure. GSLOPE applies Bishop's Method of slices to identify the critical failure surface and calculate a factor of safety (FOS). The slope geometry and properties of the construction materials and bedrock are input into the model. These data and drawings are included in the Stability Analysis of Side Slopes Calculation brief included in Appendix G of the Tailings Cover Design report. For this analysis, competent N:\Reclamation Plan\RecJamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 c\ean.docx Page 3-25 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan bedrock is designated at 10 feet below the lowest point of the foundation [i.e., at a 5,540-foot elevation above mean sea level (msl)]. This is a conservative estimate, based on the borehole logs supplied by Chen and Associates (1979), which indicate bedrock near the surface. 3.3.6.1 Static Analysis For the static analysis, a Factor of Safety ("FOS") of 1.5 or more was used to indicate an acceptable level of stability. The calculated FOS is 2.91, which indicates that the slope should be stable under static conditions. Results of the computer model simulations are included in Appendix G of the Tailings Cover Design report. 3.3.6.2 Pseudostatic Analysis (Seismicity) The slope stability analysis described above was repeated under pseudostatic conditions in order to estimate a FOS for the slope when a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.1 Og is applied. The slope geometry and material properties used in this analysis are identical to those used in the stability analysis. A FOS of 1.0 or more was used to indicate an acceptable level of stability under pseudo static conditions. The calculated FOS is 1.903, which indicates that the slope should be stable under dynamic conditions. Details of the analysis and the simulation results are included in Appendix G of the Tailings Cover Design report. In June of 1994, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory ("LLNL") published a report entitled Seismic Hazard Analysis of Title II Reclamation Plans, (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1994) which included a section on seismic activity in southern Utah. In the LLNL report, a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.12g was proposed for the White Mesa site. The evaluations made by LLNL were conservative to account for tectonically active regions that exist, for example, near Moab, Utah. Although, the LLNL report states that It ••• [Blanding] is located in a region known for its scarcity of recorded seismic events," the stability of the cap design slopes N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 3-26 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan using the LLNL factor was evaluated. The results of a sensitivity analysis reveal that when considering a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.12g, the calculated FOS is 1.778 which is still above the required value of 1.0, indicating adequate safety under pseudo static conditions. This analysis is also included in Appendix G of the Tailings Cover Design report. A probabilistic seismic risk analysis (See Attachment E) was performed in April 1999 during an evaluation of cover stability. 3.3.7 Soil Cover-Animal Intrusion To date, the White Mesa site has experienced only minor problems with burrowing animals. In the long term, no measures short of continual annihilation of target animals can prevent burrowing. However, reasonable measures will discourage burrowing including: Total cover thickness of at least six-feet; Compaction of the upper three feet of soil cover materials to a minimum of 95 percent, and the lower three feet to 80-90 percent, based on a standard Proctor (ASTM D-698); and Riprap placed over the compacted random fill material. 3.3.8 Cover Material/Cover Material Volumes Construction materials for reclamation will be obtained from on-site locations. Fill material will be available from the stockpiles that were generated from excavation of the cells for the tailings facility. If required, additional materials are available locally to the west of the site. A clay material source, identified in Section 16 at the southern end of the White Mesa Mill site, will be used to construct the one-foot compacted clay layer. Riprap material will be produced from off-site sources. Detailed material quantities calculations are provided in Attachment C, Cost Estimates for N:\Rec1amation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 clean.docx Page 3-27 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Reclamation of White Mesa Mill Facilities, as part of the volume and costing exercise. N:\Reclamalion Plao\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.213 'CT03 Rcv3.2.il 01.13.11 c1ean.docK Page 3-1 Revision 3.2.ABO IHtematieHallJfaHil:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp<-~ White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 30 RECLAMATION Pl.AN This section provides an overview of the Mmilliocation and property; details the facilities to be reclaimed; and describes the design criteria applied in this reelamatieH fllllHPlan. Reclamation QPlans and §Specifications are presented in Attachment A. Attachment B presents the quality plan for construction activities. Attachment C presents cost estimates for reclamation. Attachments D through H present additional material test results and design calculations to support the rReclamation QPlan. 3.1 Location and Property Description The White Mesa Mill is located six miles south of Blanding, Utah on US Highway 191 on a parcel of land encompassing all or part of Sections 21, 22, 27, 28, 29, 32, and 33 of T37S, R22E, and Sections 4,5,6,8,9, and 16 ofT38S, R22E, Salt Lake Base and Meridian described as follows (Figure 3.1-1): The south half of Section 21; the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 22; the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter and lots 1 and 4 of Section 27 all that part of the southwest quarter of the northwest quarter and the northwest quarter southwest quarter of Section 27 lying west of Utah State Highway 163; the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter, the south half of the northwest quarter, the northeast quarter and the south half of Section 28; the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 29; the east half of Section 32 and all of Section 33, Township 37 South, Range 22 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian. Lots 1 through 4, inclusive, the south half of the north half, the southwest quarter, the west half of the southeast quarter, the west half of the east N'\ReclnmOlIQo Phm\ReolflmnlioD Plan Rey;} 2B\$ECT03 Rcy:l.2.B 01 13 11 redlinc.dQc~I:lReelaHllllieR PIWllReelBHIlllieR Plaa I,' ~8ns!i 12 I1dGlSt;qQ3 Rty3 2 ... 12 17 19 doo$ .J I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt I Page 3-2 Revision 3.2.A09 IAteFfllltiemti UF6ntumDenison Mines (USA) Corp~eFat1eR White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan half of the southeast quarter and the west half of the cast half of the east half of the SQutheast quarter of Section 4; LOis 1 through 4, inclusive, the south half of Ihe north half and the south halfofScclion 5 (ali); Lots I and 2, Ihe south halfoflhe northeast quarter and the soulh half of Section 6 (£1/2); the northeast quarter of Section 8; 1111 of Section 9 and all of Section 16, Township 38 South, Range 22 East, Salt Lake Base and Meridian. GefttatAiRg a~~A»fimately 4,871 aeresAdditonal land is controlled by 46 Mi ll site claims. Total land hold ings arc approximately 5.415 acres .. _________________________________ J , , , , Page 3-3 Revision 3.2.AB{) IRtematieRaI llillRil:lfflDenison Mines (USA) Corp~emtien White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan INSERT FIGURE 3.1-1 N:\Re~IBJn8lron Plan\RcclamnuQn Plan Rey? 2IDSECTOJ Rky) 2 B 0 I,! 3.! I rcd!j!lC.dO!ix>HR;o!smm~tjen.p!1lIl I: ~1fI Dffi~ess 1i!.1710\SEGI93 8e,3 2 Pi 1j!.F7.IQ.doo!!; .J , ~ Formatted: Font: 9 pt , 3.2 Facilities to be Reclaimed Page 3-4 Revision 3.2.ABQ :IffiefoaMflW--Yf:GRf.HmDenison Mines (USA) Corp,emtie!t White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan See Figure 3.2-1 for a general layout of the mill yard and related facilities and the restricted area boundary. 3.2.1 Summary of Facilities to be Reclaimed The facilities to be reclaimed include the following: _e __ ~Cell 1 (evaporationw). Cell I was previously referred to as Cell I-\. H is now··--- referred to as Cell I;, _e _Cells 2 and 3, 4A and 4B (tailings)~ aae Cell 4A (aot etiFfeatly tisee). _e __ ~Mi1l buildings and equipmenl~~ _e __ ~--On-site contaminated areas; and~ _e __ ~--Off-site contaminated areas (i.e., potential areas affected by windblown tailings). The reclamation of the above facilities will include the following: Plaeemeffi-6HllaleriBls B:Aa-eebFls from mill deoommissteRiRg ia tailings Cells 1.-2 f!f ~ --'-Placement of contaminated soils, crystals, and synthetic liner material and any·--- contaminated underlying soils from Cell I inm tailings -Cells 2 aae 34A or 4B. e PleeemeRt sf eeA-talRteated soils 8f),staJs an~eHe-l-ffieF-ffitl.terial from Cell 4,4, if! tailiags Cells 2 aHe 3. Formatted: List Paragraph, Indent: Left: 0.25", Hanging: 0.38", Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.75" + Indent at: 1", Tab stops: 0.63", Left + Not at OS' + 0.75" Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5" !....-~Placement ofa compacted clay liner on a portion of the CellI impoundment area to be used for disposal of contaminated materials and debris from the Mffiill site , { Formatted: Font: 9 pt N:\I~Cc!!lIDOtiOD Plan\Rcclllm8tion Plan Rev 3.2B1SECTtlJ Rev),2 B 01,13.) 1 redlinc docxN:lResllHflRtioa PhmIResllHflRtioa PIRH H-ft..j!H!r9ffl"eS5 12 17 ImsECFOJ Be'a 2 A 12 17 Ig-dOO!!o / , , , Page 3-5 Revision 3.2.A.BQ IA~Fflatiol'l8l Ur6AjllFflDenison Mines (U A) Corp.oemtioo White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan decommissioning. (the Cell l-l Tailings Area) _-_-P.lacemenl of male rials and debris from Mill Decommissi,oning inlo tai li ngs Cells 4A or 48 or in the Cell 1 Tailings Area: _-_Placement of an engineered multi-layer cover OR ~e Cell 1 I Tailings A:r~ll;-ilfId-over the entire area of Cells 2,3, 4A and 483 and the Cell I Tailings Area. _-_~Construction of runoff control and diversion channels as necessary~~ _-_~Reconditi0ning ofMmilI and ancillary areas: anch ~ -Reclamation of borrow sources. N'\RcclM!!!t!on PISlIlReclnmntiQn Plan Rev J 2B)sECT03 Rcv3.2.B 01. 13.1 J rtdlj!l¢ dos;xNAA!I!!!!!!I1gtien=P!wAAeo\wunlitm-Pl!!f! .'-' it#tiJH!fl!!!!'~55 12.11 tQ\SHffiJ Re·.·).:!./\ 12 111Q !l9!!!!; ______ ~ ______________ ~ _ ~ ____ ~~_ ~ ~.A , Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Atigned at; 0,25" + Indent at: OS , { Formatt~: Font: 9 PI Page 3-6 Revision 3.2.ABG IHtematioHB:! UFRHiHRl:Denison Mines (USA) Corp~eFtHiett White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan INSERT FIGURE 3.2-1 N-\RcclamatiOij Plnn\Rcc!amation Plan Rev 3 2B\SEClW RcvJ.2 B 01.13. I I n:dlin~.dQcX}':lReelamatieH PIRHIReelamatisH PIGH ~f1 W\SEGIID Rev:! 2 ... 12 17 !Q.!IooIL I .J , , , { Formatted: Font: 9 pt 3.2.2 Tailings and Evaporative Cells Page 3-7 Revision 3.2.ABG IffieFfiatieHai UfRHilimDenison Mines (USA) Corp.:.eFffiioo White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The following subsections describe the cover design and reclamation procedures for Cellsl-I, 2, 3, ~ --and 4J.lA. Complete engineering details and text are presented in the Tailings Cover Design report, Appendix D, previously submitted. Additional information is provided in Attachments D, E and F to this submittal. A six-foot thick soil cover ferto be placed over the uranium tailings and mill decommissioning materials in the Cell 1-1 Tailings Area, Cell 2, Cell 2, Ce1l4A and Cell 4IB was designed using on-site materials that will contain tailings and radon emissions in compliance with regulations of the ·t:J.JTi.te~s Nuelear Regula~ory Gommissien-f!!NRC, the State ofUtah,!9 and by reference, the EwliFeflffieHtai PreteetieH A,geHey ("EPA!!j. The cover consists of a one-foot thick layer of clay, available from within the site boundaries (Section 16 or stockpiles on site), below two feet of random fill (frost barrier), available from stockpiles on site. The clay is underlain by three feet (minimum) random fill soil (platform fill), also available on site. In addition to the soil cover, a minimum three-inch (on the cover top) to 8-inch (on the cover slopes) layer of rip rap material will be placed over the compacted random fill to stabilize slopes and provide long-term erosion resistance (see Attachments D and H for characterization of cover materials). Uranium tailings soil cover design requirements for regulatory compliance include: Attenuate radon flux to an acceptable level (20 picoCuries-per meter squared-per second [pCi/m%ec]) (NRC, 1989) and 40 CFR 61.250-61.256; Minimize infiltration into the reclaimed tailings cells; Nj\Rsc\nmntionPhuIIR£c!amalion Pion ReY 3.2B1SECTOl Rev3.2.B 01, D,l) redlioe,docxNMeelamnlj<m=plan\Rwl!!!!!!Uimt-jl!a I,' ~IHHegri!S5Ii!_17,191,SBGJOH~>6l2"'12,!7IfMoo'l __ _ _ ____ h __________ .J t , { Formatted: Font: 9 pt I Page 3-8 Revision 3.2.ABG Iatematisalli UrllaillmDenison Mines (USA) Corp<9fQ~~ White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Maintain a design life of up to 1,000 years or to the extent reasonably achievable, and in any case for at least 200 years; and Provide long-term slope stability and geomorphic durability to withstand erosional forces of wind, the probable maximum flood event, and a horizontal ground acceleration ofO.1g due to seismic events. Several models/analyses were utilized in simulating the soil cover effectiveness: radon flux attenuation, hydrologic evaluation of infiltration, freeze/thaw effects, soil cover erosion protection, and static and pseudostatic slope stability analyses. These analyses and results are discussed in detail in Sections 3.3.1 through 3.3.5, and calculations are also shown in the Tailings Cover Design report, (Appendix D, Attachment E and Attachment F). The soil cover (from top to the bottom) will consist of: (1) minimum of three inches of riprap material; (2) two feet of compacted random fill; (3) one foot of compacted clay; and (4) minimum three feet of compacted random fill soil. The final grading plan is presented in Section 5, Figure 5.1-1. As indicated on the figures, the top slope of the soil cover will be constructed at 0.2 percent and the side slopes, as well as transitional areas between cells, will be graded to five horizontal to one vertical (5H: 1 V). A minimum of three feet random fill is located beneath the compacted fill and clay layers (see cross-sections on Figures 5.1-2 and 5.1-3). The purpose of the fill is to raise the base of the cover to the desired subgrade elevation. In many areas, the required fill thickness will be much greater. However, the models and analyses presented in the Tailings Cover Design report (Appendix D) were performed conservatively, assuming only a three-foot layer. For modeling purposes, this lower, random fill layer was considered as part of the soil cover for performing the radon flux I N'\RccIND8tiol! Phm\Reclnmnlion pI.n Rev 3 21WiF.Cf03 Rev3.2 B 01 13 I I rcdhnc d!lCx~!ion-fgenl&clflf!lft!joJHl!a / / ~rotlIe5S 12.17 !QI.S~3 2 A 12 !7 10.000" I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt Page 3-9 Revision 3.2.AB9 IRteFR9:BeRal UllleilfffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp~eratieR White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan attenuation calculation, as it effectively contributes to the reduction of radon emissions (see Section 3.3.Z-l). The fill was also evaluated in the slope stability analysis (see Section 3.3.6). However, it is not defined as part of the soil cover for other design calculations (infiltration, freeze/thaw, and cover erosion). l.2.:.~.? _C!{IJ~~ _____________________________________________________ -t ~ ~1LF_o_rm_a_tted __ : F_on_t_: I_ta_lic ______ --' Cell 1-1, used during mill operations solely for evaporation of process liquids, is the northernmost existing cell and is located immediately west ofthe mill. It is also the highest cell in elevation, as the natural topography slopes to the south. The drainage area above and including the cell is 216 acres. This includes drainage from the..:-Mmill site. Cell 1-1 will be evaporated to dryness. The synthetic liner and raffinate crystals will then be removed and placed in tailings Cells MA or 4B~. Any contaminated soils below the liner will be removed and also placed in the tailings cells. Based on current regulatory criteria, the current plan calls for excavation of the residual radioactive materials to be designed to ensure that the concentration of radium-226 in land averaged over any area of 100 square meters does not exceed the background level by more than: ~ ~5 pCi/g, averaged over the first 15 em of soil below the surface, and ··1-- ~ ~15 pCi/g, averaged over a 15 em thick layer of soil more than 15 em below the surface. Formatted: List Paragraph, Indent: Hanging: 0.5", Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.75" + Indent at: 1" A portion of Cell 1 (i.e., the Cell 1 Tailings Area}-l, adjacent to and running parallel to the downstream cell dike, will be used for permanent disposal of contaminated materials and debris from the mill site decommissioning and windblown cleanup. The actual area of Cell I-I Tailings N'\Rcclnma!jQn Plan\Reclrunntion Plan Rev 3.2B1 ECT03 Rev3 2 B 01 J3 I! redhn,doexN;l.R-eofflmolteiH'lnn\R-eolnlllfll:@tPkm I,' ~ 12.17 IQlSHGfll3 8&.3 iLA la 17IQ _ .../ I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt I Page 3-10 Revision 3.2.ABG lntemstisRsl UranjumDenison Mines (USA) Corp~eratieft White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Area needed for storage of additional material will depend on the status of e1l 4A;; and 3-4 B at the time of final mill decommissioning. A portion of the Mmill area decommissioning material may be placed in Ce1l 4~ or 4B; if space is availgtble, but for purposes of the reclamation design the entire quantity of contaminated materials from the -Mmill site decommissioning is assumed to be placed in the Cell 1 Tailings Area-I. This results in approximately 10 acres of the Cell l-I Tailings Aarea and being utilized for permanent tailings storage. This IH'ea is referee te as tile Cell 1 J Ta:iliAgs AreaThe remaining area of, Cell l-I will then be breached and converted to a sedimentation basin. All runoff from the Cell I-I Tailings Area, the MrAill area and the area immediately north of Cell l-I will be routed into the sedimentation basin and will discharge onto the natural ground via the channel located at the southwest comer of the basin. The channel is designed to accommodate the PMF flood. The HEC-l model was used to determine the PMF and route the flood through the sedimentation basin (Attachment G). The peak flow was determined to be 1,344 cubic feet per second (cfs). A 20-foot wide channel will discharge the flow to the natural drainage. During the local storm PMF event, the maximum discharge through the channel will be 1,344 cfs. The entire flood volume will pass through the discharge channel in approximately four hours. At peak flow, the velocity in the discharge channel will be 7.45 feet per second (fps). The maximum flow depth will be 1.45 feet. This will be a bedrock channel and the allowable velocity for a channel ofthis type is 8-10 fps, therefore no riprap is required. A free board depth of 0.5 feet will be maintained for the PMP event. j l_2~?.LC!!!} ________________________________________________________ ,,' 1I....F...;;o.;...rm.;...a...;;tt;:.:ed-,--: F...;;on.;...t_: I_ta_lic ______ -J Cell 2 will be filled with tailings and covered with a multi-layered engineered cover to a minimum cover thickness of six feet. The final cover will drain to the south at a 0.2 percent gradient. N;\Rcclqmaljon PIIlIl\RcclamRtjon PIBn Rev 3.2a\SF.CI03 RcvJ,2 B OJ 13.11 retiliol! dQcxNAAtoIft!ll!lI!SlItflkllAAeo! IllfttiAA-fl!J!n I I ~es5 1!!.1719\86CIOl Ro ,3 2 A Ii! 17 101100: I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt I Page 3-11 Revision 3.2.ABG IRteFRatioRal UrafliumDenison Mines (USA) Corp~erotitm White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The cover will be as described in Section 3.2.2.1 above, and will consist of a minimum ofthree feet of random fill (platform fill), followed by a clay radon barrier of one foot in thickness, and two feet of upper random fill (frost barrier) for protection of the radon barrier. A minimum of three inches of rock will be utilized as armor against erosion. Side slopes will be graded to a 5: 1 slope and will have 0.67 feet (8 inches) of rock armor protection. }: .. .'2..:.?.·i S;.!!!} ______ u _____ u ___________ u ____________ n n n ____ n ____ ~,~ -{ Formatted: Font: Italic Cell 3 will be filled with tailings, debris and contaminated soils and covered with the same multi-layered engineered cover as Cell 2. }:.,.2..:.?..J._C.!!!_4::! _____________________________________________________ --t-' -{L:F-=o:..:rm:::a:.:tt=ed=::...:.F.::on~t::...:I=ta::::liC~ _____ --.J Cell 4A will be filled with tailings, debris and contaminated soils and covered with the same multi-layered engineered cover as Cell 2 and Cell 3. }.2.2.6 Cell4B _______________________________________________________ -1L:F..:.o:..:.rm:.:.:a:..:tt:.:ed=::..:.F..::on.:.:.t::..:I=ta=lic~ _____ ~ Cell 4B will be fi lled with tailings, debris and contaminated soils and covered with the same multi-layered engineered cover as Cell 2, Cell 3 and Cell 4A. Gell 4/\ will be e~'aperated to dF)'Re55-9:Rd the 6!,)'stals, s)'Bthelie LiRer aaEl aay eOflEaFRiRatea soils plaaed iR tlioiliRgS. NOR oORtamisated maklrials iR eell 41\ dittos will be used l6 redtlee-fue set*Aeri't-9lepe.5 afGell3 from Ihe eurreRl 3: [to 5: I. A2QQ feet wide breaeh ftfl8 bearook eA8:AfleJ. ""illallew draiRage erlho proeipilatieR whieh falls iR the Cell area aRd Hem reclaimed areas abe'.e Gell area (See At!aeflffiel~t G, Figtlre A 5.1 1, aRa SeclieRS D aRd E). 3.2.3 Mill Decommissioning N;\Rcclamlltion I'lan\Rcclnmalion Plen Rey 3 2B\.<jECTQ3 Rpv3.2.13 0 I 13.1\ redhne,doex~!!!!!Ijoo-pIaH\BeoIa!!l!!!Wft.!lIA!l I,' ¥!::1HIHJftIf!fe5'J 12 I7,HlISeCfQ] Reup ", !2.!7!Il.d~ .J • I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt I Page 3-12 Revision 3.2.ABG IRtematisRlll UFllRiHmDenison Mines (USA) Corp~effttieR White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan A general layout of the mill area is shown in Figure 3.2.3-1. The uranium and vanadium sections, including ore reclaim, grinding, pre-leach, leach, CCD, SX, and precipitation and drying circuits as well as the alternate feed circuit, decontamination pads. scale house. sample plant. truck shop and all other structures on site will be decommissioned as follows: All equipment including instrumentation, process piping, electrical control and switchgear, and contaminated structures will be removed. Contaminated concrete foundations will be demolished and removed or covered with soil as required. Uncontaminated equipment, structures and waste materials from Mmill decommissioning may be disposed of by sale, transferred to other company-owned facilities, transfen'ed to an appropriate off-site solid waste site, or disposed of in one ofthe tailings cells. Contaminated equipment, structures and illy. waste materials from Mmill decommissioning, contaminated soils underlying the Mmill areas, and ancillary contaminated materials will be disposed of in tailings Cell -4A~, Cell 4B;, or the Cell t+Tailings Area.---.AJ! other II e.(2) byproduct material on site will be disposed of in ell 4A or Cell 4B. Debris and scrap will have a maximum dimension of 20 feet and a maximum volume of 30 cubic feet. Material exceeding these limits will be reduced to within the acceptable limits by breaking, cutting or other approved methods. Empty drums, tanks or other objects having a hollow volume greater than five cubic feet will be reduced in volume by at least 70 percent. Ifvolume reduction is not feasible, openings shall be made in the object to allow soils or other approved material to enter the object. Debris and scrap will be spread across the designated areas to avoid nesting and to reduce the N:\RccIRnlRtiQO Plan\Reclamation Plan Rey 3,2B1SECJ1)3 Rcv3.2.B 01.13.11 re4lino.docxWARffktmatiffit.P.lrnAAeeJoml!lien-Pl!!!l " 3 all ill Ilfl)gfess '#17 lWiECTQ3 1l8'.3.2.A p .11.lll.dOOlt I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt I Page 3-13 Revision 3.2.ABG ~efHlI-tlfafl-H:lmDenison Mines (U A) orp~~oo White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan volume of voids pre 'enl in the placed mass. tockpiled soils, and/or other approved material shall be placed oyer and into the scrap in sufficient amounts to fill th voids between the large pieces and the volume within (he hollow pieces to fonn a coherent mass. See also eelion 3.1 of Attachment A. The estimated reclamation costs for suretv are set out in Attachment C. Attachment C will be reviewed and updated on a yearly basi. N:IReclamlltion Plnn\RcclBmal!on Plan Rev 3 2IDSECT03 Rcvl .2 B 01 .13. II redhnc,docxNAAe!!ia!!!fllioo-pkm\Reel!H!l!!tioo-Plfm 1/' H+ifti!f§!!fe~51? 1'J.IO\llEiCIQ3 8&'/3.2.,'" 12 17. 1 Q-doox: _ _ ~ _ __ h __ _ _ _ _ _ ____ ."r ,{ Formatted: Font: 9 pt , Page 3-14 Revision 3.2.ABQ Wem-aI.-ieeat-l::Jfafl-HtmDenison Mines (USA) Corp.:.tlf1ltitm While Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan INS 'RT FlOUR ' 3.2.3-1 LA YOUT OF MILL YARD AND ORE PAD N;\Reclrunatign Phm\ReclamBljon Plan Rev).28 Ern) Rev3.2. B 01.13.11 rtdlinc.dos:lSNAAoo!!!f!!!I!km.P!!IlAA!I!;llllillllimtP-lM " ~ 1't11.I9\8CGf!!l R .. I¥.2,A 12.17dlHlm _________________________________ oJ' I { formatted: Font: .9 pt CONTOUR INTERVAL 2 fEET 200 0 200 I I ! ! FIGURE 3.2-1 GENERAL LAYOUT SHOWING ACCESS AND RESTRICTED AREA BOUNDARY Page3-JS Revision 3.2.ABG IRtematiOl'lElI UrElRil:lR'lDenison Mines (USA) Corp~eratieR White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan )):.~.? NJ!J Jlt~ ______________________________________________________ ~ _ --{\..:~..::o.:..:.rm:..:.:a:..:tt:..:ed=:.:..:.F..:.:on.;..::t.:..:.: I.;..::ta;::lic:....-_____ ....J Contaminated areas on the Mmill site will be primarily superficial and includes the ore storage area and surface contamination of some roads. All ore will have been previously removed from the ore stockpile area or will be transported and disposed of as contaminated material. All contaminated materials will be excavated and be disposed in one of the tailings cells. The depth of excavation will vary depending on the extent of contamination and will be governed by the criteria in Attachment A, Section 3.2. Windblown material is defined as Mmill-derived contaminants dispersed by wind to surrounding areas. Windblown contaminated material detected by a gamma survey using the criteria in Attachment A, Section 3.2, will be excavated and disposed in one of the tailings cells. Disturbed areas will be covered, graded and vegetated as required. The proposed grading plan for the Mmill site and ancillary areas is shown on Figure A-3.2-J in Attachment A. 3.3 Design Criteria The E!esigR efiterie SI:lR'lR'laries iR I:flis seetioR ere eaftptea frem TeiliRgs Cover DosigR. White MeSll Mill (TiteR , 1996). A e013Y of the Teiliflgs Coyer DesigR rel"orl is iRelt:lE!ee as AppeREih. D, previel:lsly st:lbmiueEi. II ooataiRs all ef tho ealel:llalioRs useE! iR aesigR E!isol:lssea if'!: lRis seatioR. ~RaJ e1esiga inf~oR is iAell:ldee in AUeeRmeRt5 D I:flreugh H to this sl:lbmittal.As required by Part 1.1-1.1 of the GWDP, Denison is in the pl"Ocess of completing an infiltration and contamination transport model of the final tailing cover system to demonstrate the long-tenn ability of the cover to protect nearby groundwater quality. Upon review of such modeling. lhe exeoutive ecretary will determine if changes to the cover systems as set Qutin the iPlan are needed to ensure compliance with the performance criteria contained in part LD.8 of the GWDP. , N-lReclamation PlanlReclamation Plan Rev 3.28 Sr;cr03 Rev' 2 B 0 I ! 3 II f!;d)im;,docxNARe1lIq~fIIflIio<J-IlIM 1'- H&:iojlR!!!fll$S 1;'-17 1Q\S5CE!3 Re' 32".. 12 17 IQ !I'M .../ ; { Formatted: Font: 9 pt Page 3-16 Revision 3.2.ABO IRtematioRElllJfaRil:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp"eR*ies White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Although the modeling has not been completed. modeling results to date suggest that some changes to the final cover design as set out in Ulis Plan will be needed. However, as the details of such fe-design have not been finalized !ltthis time. the approved 2000 cover deiagn and basis will continue to be used for this version of the Plan. This Plan will be amended in the future to incorporate any changes to the design of the tailings cover system that result from thc current modeling effort. The desil!.l1 criteria summaries in this section are adapted from Tailings Cover Design, Mill (Titan, 1996), A copy of the Tailings Cover Design report is included in Appendix D, previously submitted. Tl contains all ofthe calculations used in design discussed in this section. Additional design information is included in Attachments D through H to {his submittal. 3.3.1 Regulatory Criteria Information contained in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix A, 10 CFR Part 40, and Appendix A to 10 CPR Part 40 (which are incorporated by reference into UAC R313-24-4). and 40 CFR Part 192 was used as criteria in final designs under this PfeelamatioR fllan. In addition, the following documents also provided guidance: • ERviFoRmeRtal PfoteetioH AgeHey (EP Aj, 1994, f!!.fJ.e_ f!ytjr:ojqgj~ _ ~v_al~aP2'! _ of:;:-~ -Formatted: Font: Italic " ·Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 Landfill --Performance (HELP) Model, Version 3, __ " -EPAJ6001R-941168b, + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.5" September;~ • ~ll:leleaf Regl:llatory CommissioH (NRC), 1989, "Regulatory Guide 3.64 (Task WM-503-4) Cg~!!~aPf!'! 2[ 1}f}(!.~nJ':/~ !lpf!'!.~a!i~!! PJl_~a!.I!!~'!. Y!l!.nJ1!f!I }!iJl_ '(ajl!'!.fls ___ --{ Formatted: Font: Italic Covers,!!' March;~ !....-~ RC, 1980 l!fi.!.lg~ Jg[[ !,!<;,h.,nJ.t;,..a! !!?~J!/qlJ.. P!~Jg'2.!?i §':..O!£O!lf_/~!eEYq,,! ff!'!.e!!lo!· __ ---( Formatted: Font: Italic Stabili=alion of Uranium Mill Tailings Sites,!!. August;~ ·Formatted: Font: Italic _e _~ UREG/CR-4.620, elson, J. D., Abt, . R., et. aI., 1986, l!]"!f!J&Qd,!J!<?E!e..s_l0J.'-''''' ~.;.;.;;;;.;;;;;;;;;.;.,;;;.;,;;..:.::;;.;;....------{ I ~F~o_rm_a_tt_ed~:F~o~nt~:9~p~t ____________ ~ I N'\RcclgmatiQnPlao\ReclamqrjQn PI n Rev 3.2BISECf03 Rev3.2.B 01 13.11 redlinc d09XNAAey!!ll!!!lt!a!!j>llllAA1'§lIlmtlljOIl PI~I) " H*iH-flftlg!f5!! Ii!'! 1 ! Ol,8ECfQ3 RovU 1\:::I:iH:H~ I Page 3-17 Revision 3.2.ABG liTtematisHai UFElHi\;lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp.~ White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Evaluating Long-Term Stabili=ation Designs of Uranium Mill Tailings Impoundments,!!. June;~ _. _~NUREG/CR-4651, 1987, fIJey{!!sJp'!'{!nt _ of fijptg.l! Re!ig!} _CJ'jt{!rjq l])i j{ip!'{l12 ]'{!stLng_ ~ ~ -{ Formatted: Font: Italic in Flumes: Phase I,!!. May;~ ~ ~U . S. Department of Energy, 1988, !!Eff!9t.. 9f. f!.e~.Ei!!g Jy"1!i_ th..C1!''.!'!li !!1] _ fll::!!!!1 _ ~ --I Formatted: Font: Italic Covers,!!. Albuquerque, New Mexico, October; and. • NUREG 1620, 2003, §.lflJ'..dg.J'd B-eviel~ Plan (0" Ihe !'eview off!. reclamation Plqn (Pi: Jv!i[j _ ~ -I Formatted: Font: Italic Tailings Sites Unde,. Tille [J of/he 1I1'Oflium Mill Tailings radiation Control Acl o(J978. As mentioned above. the requirements set out in Part LD.8 of the GWDP require that the cover system for each tailings eell will be designed and constructed to meet the following minimum requirements for a period of not less than 200 years: • Minimize the infiltration of precipitation or other surface water into tbe tailings, including,+ but not limited to the radon barrier; • Prevent the accumulation of leachate head within the tai lings wasle layer that could rise above or over-lop the maximum FML elevation internal to any disposal ceU, i.e. create a "bathtub" effect: and • Ensure that groundwater quality at the compliance monitoring wells deosn ot exceed the GWQSs or OW Ls specified in Part I.e. t and table 2 of the GWDP. Upon completion of the Infiltration Analysis. this Plan will be revised as necessary to ensure compliance with these requirements. 3.3.2 Radon Flux Attenuation Formatted: List Paragraph, Indent: Left: 0.25", Hanging: 0.25", Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 0.25" + Indent at: 0.75", Tab stops: Not at 0.75" The EH, .. iFeflmeHtai PFeteetieH AgeHey (EPA1 rules in 40_ Cese efFeseFEli Reg\;liatieH (CFRj Part I ,~ Formatted: Font: 9 pt I ~~==~~~~------------~ NjlReflnmnllQn P!!I'l\ReclnmnUon Plan Rev 3,2B\SECT93 Rcv:12 B 01 13.11 rcdtrnc.docxWAAi!f>Ismalioft.llllllAAeclftl1l1lliGn·Plaft 1/ ~l::ftf!We;s Ii!. 11 !Q'S8CFQa B(!"3).· Ii!-17 IO.dOO!!; .. _ .. .. .. _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ______ .J Page 3-18 Revision 3.2.AB9 IRtematisft81 Ur8ftil:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp~eratieft White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 192 require that a "uranium tailings cover be designed to produce reasonable assurance that the radon-222 release rate would not exceed 20 pCi/m2/sec for a period of 1,000 years to the extent reasonably achievable and in any case for at least 200 years when averaged over the disposal area over at least a one year period" (NRC, 1989). NRC regulations presented in 10 CFR Part 40 (incorporate by reference into UAC R313-24-4) also restrict radon flux to less than 20 pCi/m%ec. The following sections present the analyses and design for a soil cover which meets this requirement. l.3.:.2..: 1 !tfl.djcJ{v~ !(nEIy~'i§ ______________________________________________ ~..>""-: >-F;.;o;;.rm;,;;;;;.att;;.ed.;.;;.;.:.;.Fo;;.n.;..t:..;.It;;;.al....;ic ______ ~ Formatted: Widow/Orphan control The soil cover for the tailings cells at White Mesa Mill was evaluated for attenuation of radon gas.-----( Formatted: Widow/Orphan control using the digital computer program, RADON, presented in the NRC's Regulatory Guide 3.64 (Task WM 503-4) entitled !:!.(;(Jjr;-,!!qtl~n_ g[ 8qc{o/'lJ::I!!~ _A!1!'!l!.q!~O!! _ by_lj:ar!he/'l_l!rp_ni~"!. NJ£'_-_ -1\,...F....;o_rm_a_tt_ed_: _Fo_n_t:_Ita_l_ic ______ --' Tailings Covers.!!. The RADON model calculates radon-222 flux attenuation by multi-layered earthen uranium mill tailings covers, and determines the minimum cover thickness required to meet NRC and EPA standards. The RADON model uses the following soil properties in the calculation process: .!....-~--Soillayer thickness [centimeters (cm)]; .!....-~Soil porosity (percent); _e _ ~--Density [grams-per-cubic centimeter (gm/cm3)]; .!....-~Weight percent moisture (percent); _e _ ~--Radium activity (piC/g); _e _~Radon emanation coefficient (unitless); and .!....-~Diffusion coefficient [square centimeters-per-second (cm2/sec)]. Physical and radiological properties for tailings and random fill were analyzed by Chen and Associates (1987) and Rogers and Associates (1988). Clay physical data from Section 16 was .----Formatted: List Paragraph, Indent: Hanging: 0.75", Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 1" + Indent at: 1.25" I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt '\Reclamation Phw\Reclamnljoo Plan Rev 3.2SISECr03 Rev3,2 B 0 1,13.1' redline.docxWAR1'<!k!m<!!joo-plmAAeplamaljoo£!an , HaiR 1l1l!!ffll5S 11-17 IOISgc:r03 R.I .... ],2,A 12 F-11kl00JS..___ _ _ _ __ ___ _ __ __ __ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ ../' Page 3-19 Revision 3.2.ABG IHteFfl8tieRBI UF8Ril:lffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp~~ White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan analyzed by Advanced Terra Testing (1996) and Rogers and Associates (1996). Additional testing of cover materials was performed in April 1999. The test results are included in Attachment D. See Appendix D, previously submitted, for additional laboratory test results. The RADON model was performed for the following cover section (from top to bottom): ~ ~lwo feet compacted random fill (frost barrier); • -.........one foot compacted clay' and at: 1.25", Tab stops: 0.56", Left + 0.88", Left .1---Formatted: list Paragraph, Indent: Left: 0.5", Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 1" + Indent -, + Not at 0.75" ~------------------------~ ~ ~a minimum of three feet random fill occupying the freeboard space between the tailings and clay layer (platform fill). The top one foot of the lower random fill, clay layer and two foot upper random fill are compacted to 95 percent maximum dry density. The top riprap layer was not included as part of the soil cover for the radon attenuation calculation. The most current RADON modeling is included in Attachment F. The results ofthe RADON modeling exercise, based on two different compaction scenarios, show that the uranium tailings cover configuration will attenuate radon flux emanating from the tailings to a level of 18.2 to 19.8 pCi/m2/sec. This number was conservatively calculated as it takes into account the freeze/thaw effect on the uppermost part (6.8 inches) of the cover (Section 3.3.4). The soil cover and tailing parameters used to run the RADON model, in addition to the RADON input and output data files, are presented in Appendix D as part ofthe Radon Calculation brief(See Appendix B in the Tailings Cover Design report, previously submitted in its entirety as Appendix D) and the most current model included as Attachment F to this submittal. Based on the model results, the soil cover design of six-foot thickness will meet the requirements of 40 CFR Part 192 and 10 CFR Part 40. I N'\Reclamation Pl8n\RcclamSliol1 Plan Rey 3 2B\SJiCro3 Rev) 2.8 0 I J3 ! I rcdhnc docxNAAeeIil!l!llliftll-PHm ~!!lftfioo-flh!fl I: jl;;£!HtHlffi!!@SS liU? \Q'SeCfQ3 Re"a.i! 1'\ Ii! !7 1\! dee'!, .. ",t , { Formatted: Font: 9 pt Page 3-20 Revision 3.2.ABG ffitemati6~enison Mines (USA) Corp,eFatie~ White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan );}~?·?§!!1pl."iC:f1! p.a{C!... ____ .. _________________________________________ :.0-< :.;F;.;;o;,;.;rm;,;,;a;;;tt;;;ed;;,;;;.:;,;.;Fo;,;.;n;,;,;t:,;;,Ita;;;l,;;;iC ______ ----< Radon gas flux measurements have been made at the White Mesa Mill tailings piles over Cells 2 and 3 (see Appendix D). Currently lJlese eells ar~Cell 2 is fully CQvered and Cell 3 is partially covered with three to four feet of random fill. DUring the period 2004 through 2007, cell 2 was only partially covered with such random fill. Radon flux measurements, averaged over the covered areas, were as follows (bF~J 1994 1996, IUC J997--W98Denison 2004-2008): Formatted: Widow/Orphan control, Keep with next ~.19~9~4-_-__ -_-_-_-_--_--_-_--_-_-_-_-_-__ -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-.-_--_----_-_-__ --_-_-_--_~~~~--~~~ Formatted: Font: Bold 1998 6.1 pC:illfta'h/s;eeee----.:lJ.o4'"'.t2-tlp~C,;tiJff(mft2i!1!~se~er-----..:;7,....4<Hp{;C;jjil~Aih12W.fs5ie~e~ 9.8 pCilm2.lsee 11.1 pCi/m~ /see 22.4 flCiJ.m,'l.'h15;eeee--414.4.~S-tp~C::i_iilM!RlIR.~2.f.s(se.eee--i2i\,il~.88- pCilml/see N:\Reeluma!jon Plall\RCClmnatiQjl Plan Rev J 2B\SECI03 Rev3,2.n 01 13.11 redhrn:.docxNAAff!!I!!I!!!!9!l-!'km\RwJem!l!i!!!tPlan " H;e-!1!=t!fi!W!55 Ii!. \11Q\SJ!G:HB...Re~H.A 1217 IQ dOOl!! , .J Formatted: Centered I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt I Page 3-21 Revision 3.2.ABG IHtematisHll1 UFIlHiHfflDenison Mines (USA) Corp~eFIltieH White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan .Table 3.3-1 ____________________________ _ ~ ~ Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Centered Average Radon ~Flux from Tailings Cells 2004-2008 (pCi/m2/sec) Lu_uu ~ ______ ~ __ n_ 2006. n ___ 2007. _____ 2008. _____ u +\ ~ . ,--Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Bold .CeIl2 _____ I ~ _____ .LL _ ____ _ 7·2 _______ .ll:i._ _ _ __ 1:2.. __ _ __ _ \' I-----------~~----------~----------~----------+---------~I----------~ --, ~, Formatted: Font: Bold , \\ \\ ££!!1 _____ lQ,JL ____ M ______ l!l.!L ______ ~ ______ ll _________ I ,.~:\\\ It,f.'\\\ \.\1\" "til"\ ,,'4\'\\ \ Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Bold Formatted: Font: Bold \ Formatted Table \ Formatted: Font: Bold \ ""'" ,,~II Empirical data suggest that the random fill cover, alone, is currently providing an effective barrier "illl "~,I' Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Bold , " Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Bold to radon flux. Thus, the proposed tailings cover configuration, which is thicker, moisture adjusted, contains a clay layer, and is compacted, is expected to attenuate the radon flux to a level below that predicted by the RADON model. The field radon flux measurements confirm the conservatism of the cover design. This conservatism is useful, however, to guarantee compliance with NRG-applicable regulations under long term climatic conditions over the required design life of200 to 1,000 years. 3.3.3 Infiltration Analysis The tailings ponds at White Mesa Mill are lined with synthetic geomembrane liners which under certain climatic conditions, could potentially lead to the long-term accumulation of water from infiltration of precipitation. Therefore, the soil cover was evaluated to estimate the potential magnitude of infiltration into the capped tailings ponds. The Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) model, Version 3.0 (EPA, 1994) was used for the analysis. HELP is a quasi two-dimensional hydrologic model of water movement across, into, through, and out of capped and lined impoundments. The model utilizes weather, soil, and engineering design data as input to the model, to account for the effects of surface storage, snowmelt, run-off, infiltration, evapotranspiration, vegetative growth, soil moisture storage, lateral subsurface drainage, and \\\" \\ Formatted: Font: Bold ,'" 11\ 1\ Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Bold \I' \I II \ Formatted: Font: Bold ,I I'. Formatted: Font: 11 pt, Bold '. Formatted: Font: Bold Formatted: Font: Bold ,.1 Formatted: Font: 9 pt I N: eclamaljon PlaUlRcclamntion rIM Rev 3 21llSECT03 R~v3.2 11 01.13 II redlincdocxNARee!nAIfl!jen-p!mJl.R.ejI!!ffl!!ljetHlIftn I,' Hntift-!!fl!mss 12.17 ICl\8ECTQ3 Reo<3 2 ... II! ~ .../ Page 3-22 Revision 3.2.ABG IHtematioRal UF8Ril:lH'l:Denison Mines (USA) Corp.:.eFatieJ:l White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan unsaturated vertical drainage on the specific design, at the specified location. The soil cover was evaluated based on a two-foot compacted random fill layer over a one-foot thick, compacted clay layer. The soil cover layers were modeled based on material placement at a minimum of 9S percent of the maximum dry density, and within two percent of the optimum moisture content per American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) requirements. The top riprap layer and the bottom random fill layer were not included as part of the soil cover for infiltration calculations. These two layers are not playing any role in controlling the infiltration through the cover material. The random fill will consist of clayey sands and silts with random amounts of gravel and rock-size materials. The average hydraulic conductivity of several samples of random fill was calculated, based on laboratory tests, to be 8.87 x 10-7 em/sec. The hydraulic conductivity ofthe clay source from Section 16 was measured in the laboratory to be 3.7 x 10-8 cm/sec. Geotechnical soil properties and laboratory data are presented in Appendix D. Key HELP model input parameters include: Blanding, Utah, monthly temperature and precipitation data, and HELP model default solar radiation, and evapotranspiration data from Grand Junction, Colorado. Grand Junction is located northeast of Blanding in similar climate and elevation; Soil cover configuration identifYing the number oflayers, layer types, layer thickness, and the total covered surface area; Individual layer material characteristics identifying saturated hydraulic conductivity, porosity, wilting point, field capacity, and percent moisture; and N"\Reclamntion Plan\Rccfamnhon Plan Rev 3 2BISEgro3 Rev3.2.B 01 .13 I I redlinc.docxNAltwl!'l!l!!Iioo:PlnmRWllm®oo-lIl!!!l ~~.ss 12;11.1 QlS6Cf!!3 Be·O·a A 12_!7 12 dools I I , , { Formatted: Font: 9 pt Page 3-24 Revision 3.2.ABQ IHternatioaEli UrElaiHffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp.oratioo White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The results of the freeze/thaw evaluation indicate that the anticipated maximum depth of frost penetration on the soil cover would be less than 6.8 inches. Since the random fill layer is two feet thick, the frost depth would be confined to this layer and would not penetrate into the underlying clay layer. The performance of the soil cover to attenuate radon gas flux below the prescribed standards, and to prevent surface water infiltration, would not be compromised. The input data and results of the freeze/thaw evaluation are presented in the Effects of Freezing on Tailings Covers Calculation brief included as Appendix E in the Tailings Cover Design report, which was previously submitted as Appendix D. 3.3.5 Soil Cover Erosion Protection A riprap layer was designed for erosion protection of the tailings soil cover. According to NRC guidance, the design must be adequate to protect the soil/tailings against exposure and erosion for 200 to 1,000 years (NRC, 1990). Currently, there is no standard industry practice for stabilizing tailings for 1,000 years. However, by treating the embankment slopes as wide channels, the hydraulic design principles and practices associated with channel design were used to design stable slopes that will not erode. Thus, a conservative design based on NRC guidelines was developed. Engineering details and calculations are summarized in the Erosion Protection Calculation brief provided in Appendix F in the Tailings Cover Design report, which was previously submitted as Appendix D. Riprap cover specifications for the top and side slopes were determined separately as the side slopes are much steeper than the slope of the top ofthe cover. The size and thickness ofthe riprap on the top of the cover was calculated using the Safety Factor Method (NUREG/CR-4651, 1987), while the Stephenson Method (NUREG/CR-4651, 1987) was used for the side slopes. These methodologies were chosen based on NRC recommendations (1990). N'\Reclamatlon Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\sECfQ3 Rlw32,B 01. 13.11 redlille.d()Cx~RfIltl!ialrJl~tflm.ll.lan I' 3.2,9; in I'fOg@% 12.1 7. I Ol.SECTQl Ro''.E''A 1j!.J7.IO.dee'L __________________________________ / ,~ Formatted: Font: 9 pt Page 3-25 Revision 3.2.ABG IfitematiofiEli UrElfliHffiOenison Mines (USA) Corp.:.~ White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan By the Safety Factor Method, riprap dimensions for the top slope were calculated in order to achieve a slope "safety factor" of 1.1. For the top ofthe soil cover, with a slope of 0.2 percent, the Safety Factor Method indicated a median diameter (050) riprap of 0.28 inches is required to stabilize the top slope. However, this dimension must be modified based on the long-term durability ofthe specific rock type to be used in construction. The suitability of rock to be used as a protective cover has been assessed by laboratory tests to determine the physical characteristics of the rocks (See Attachment H). The North pit source has an over sizing factor of 9.85%. The riprap sourced from this pit should have a 050 size of at least 0.31 inches and should have an overall layer thickness of at least three inches on the top of the cover. Riprap dimensions for the side slopes were calculated using Stephenson Method equations. The side slopes of the cover are designed at 5H: 1 V. At this slope, Stephenson's Method indicated the unmodified riprap 0 50 of3.24 inches is required. Again, assuming that the North pit material will be used, the modified 0 50 size of the riprap should be at least 3.54 inches with an overall layer thickness of at least 8 inches. The potential of erosion damage due to overland flow, sheetflow, and channel scouring on the top and side slopes of the cover, including the riprap layer, has been evaluated. Overland flow calculations were performed using site meteorological data, cap design specifications, and guidelines set by the NRC (NUREG/CR-4620, 1986). These calculations are included in Appendix F of the Tailings Cover Design report (Appendix 0 previously submitted). According to the guidelines, overland flow velocity estimates are to be compared to "permissible velocities," which have been suggested by the NRC, to determine the potential for erosion damage. When calculated, overland flow velocity estimates exceed permissible velocities, additional cover protection should be considered. The permissible velocity for the tailings cover (including the riprap layer) is 5.0 to 6.0 feet-per-second (ft.lsec.) (NUREG/CR-4620). The overland flow velocity calculated for the top of the cover is less than 2.0 ft.lsec., and the calculated velocity on N:IRe.clamation PlanIReclamation Plan Rev:.2BISECT03 Rev3.2 B 01 13 11 redline docxH;.\ReGinmrtlioo:f'fanlSe!l!aIllMiOll-Plfll! I;' ~IHlWI!S9i 1~.I~c:r93 1\8 '~.ith 12.11.IOdomt .../ I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt / the side slopes is 4.9 ft./sec. Page 3-26 Revision 3.2,ABG ~fIteffi6~ioR81 Ur8flilfEftDenison Mines (USA) Corp,emtioo White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The need for a filter or bedding material beneath the riprap was evaluated using methods presented in NUREG/CR-4620. The function of the filter is to prevent stone penetration into the cover, and to pJ"event soH erosion of the cover at the riprap/soil cover interface. The likelihood of soil erosion at the interface is evaluated by calculating the interstitial flow velocity through the riprnp. Interstitial velocities were calculated using procedures presented by Abt e1 31. (199 I), which updates the Leps relationship that is pre,sented in NUREG/CR-4620. Details of these calculations are presented in Attachment G. The interstitial velocities on the top slope and the toe apron arc sufliciently low that a bedding layer is not necessary. However. the interstitial velocity within the riprap on the side slOpes is within the range of values where bedding is conditionally recommended. Because of the wide difference in grain size distributions between the riprap and the random fil l. it is recommended that a 6-inch layer of bedding material be placed between these two materials. A rock apron will be constructed at the toe of high slopes and in areas where runoff might bc+---i Formatted: Right: 0" ~------~------------~ concentrated (See Figure A-5.1-4). The design ofthe rock aprons is detailed in Attachment G. 3.3.6 Slope Stability Analysis Static and pseudostatic analyses were performed to establish the stability of the side slopes of the tailings soil cover. The side slopes are designed at an angle of 5H:IV. Because the side slope along the southern section of Cell 4A is the longest and the ground elevation drops rapidly at its base, this slope was determined to be critical and is thus the focus ofthe stability analyses. N:IReclamation PlanlReclamation Plan Rev 3.2BISECT03 Rev3.2.B 01 . 13.11 Tedline,doc~N4Be!l!am IIIDn.Plan\He!l!runn!lelHll!lll H!t-in-oroirel? I2-RHl'SBGfQ;J Be';) U. 12")7IQ.doos; I .J / I I I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt Page 3-27 Revision 3.2.ABG IHtematisHai UFaHiemDenison Mines (USA) Corp~eratieH White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The computer software package GSLOPE, developed by MITRE Software Corporation, has been used for these analyses to determine the potential for slope failure. GSLOPE applies Bishop's Method of slices to identify the critical failure surface and calculate a factor of safety (FOS). The slope geometry and properties of the construction materials and bedrock are input into the model. These data and drawings are included in the Stability Analysis of Side Slopes Calculation brief included in Appendix G of the Tailings Cover Design report. For this analysis, competent bedrock is designated at 10 feet below the lowest point of the foundation [i.e., at a 5,540-foot elevation above mean sea level (ms])]. This is a conservative estimate, based on the borehole logs supplied by Chen and Associates (1979), which indicate bedrock near the surface. )}Ji..! §£a.!iE .!'-n2{y!~· _______________________ u __________ n _____________ f --1 __ F_o_rm_a_tt_ed_: _Fo_nt_: _It_al_ic ______ --' For the static analysis, a Factor of Safety ("FOS") of 1.5 or more was used to indicate an acceptable level of stability. The calculated FOS is 2.91, which indicates that the slope should be stable under static conditions. Results of the computer model simulations are included in Appendix G of the Tailings Cover Design report. )}A,.? !!~u_d2~t[}tj~ 1I!qlJ'sj~ (S~£s!!ljcjtyL _________________ u u u __ u u _u_ u -f _ -1LF_o_rm_a_tt_ed_: _Fo_nt_:_It_al_ic ______ --' The slope stability analysis described above was repeated under pseudostatic conditions in order to estimate a FOS for the slope when a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.1 Og is applied. The slope geometry and material properties used in this analysis are identical to those used in the stability analysis. A FOS of 1.0 or more was used to indicate an acceptable level of stability under pseudostatic conditions. The calculated FOS is 1.903, which indicates that the slope should be stable under dynamic conditions. Details ofthe analysis and the simulation results are included in Appendix G of the Tailings Cover Design report I N:lReclamation PlanlReclamation Plan Rev 3 2BISECT03 Rev3.2.B 0l.l3.11 redline.docxN;l:Be:o!ftrn!\fkl~l!!i9ft::PIM 1./ iHoe-i1l-fH'-ogFeS5 lil.n.IQ\SJ;GllBJh'.).il .... 12.17 Ul.doo)!; .J I { Formatted: Font: 9 pt Page 3-28 Revision 3.2.ABG -lfttefflatieRal UrnRlumDenison Mines (USA) Corp"eret=ieIt White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan In June of 1994, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory ("LLNL") published a report entitled §!!i§'!lic_ }!a.!q,-c{ _A_n~!y§i§ _ 9i ]"jt!e_ J! _ ~e...c!q"!a!ipfl_ fLqn§,_ Jl-l!~r_e!).~e __ Ll~e!!!1.9!:.e_ J~aJi.9!)'l!I ___ -o( Formatted: Font: Italic, No underline Laboratory, 1994) which included a section on seismic activity in southern Utah. In the LLNL report, a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.12g was proposed for the White Mesa site. The evaluations made by LLNL were conservative to account for tectonically active regions that exist, for example, near Moab, Utah. Although, the LLNL report states that II ••• [Blanding] is located in a region known for its scarcity of recorded seismic events, II the stability of the cap design slopes using the LLNL factor was evaluated. The results of a sensitivity analysis reveal that when considering a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.12g, the calculated FOS is 1.778 which is still above the required value of 1.0, indicating adequate safety under pseudostatic conditions. This analysis is also included in Appendix G of the Tailings Cover Design report. A probabilistic seismic risk analysis (See Attachment E) was performed in April 1999 during an evaluation of cover stability. 3.3.7 Soil Cover-Animal Intrusion To date, the White Mesa site has experienced only minor problems with burrowing animals. In the long term, no measures short of continual annihilation of target animals can prevent burrowing. However, reasonable measures will discourage burrowing including: Total cover thickness of at least six-feet; Compaction of the upper three feet of soil cover materials to a minimum of 95 percent, and the lower three feet to 80-90 percent, based on a standard Proctor (ASTM D-698); and Riprap placed over the compacted random fill material. N;\B.eclamn( on PIM\Reclamntion PIon Rev 3.2B\SECT03 Rev3.2.B 01.13.11 redline.docxWAA.eeift!!!ftlffln PIAR\ReoJAR!f!f!mt.Pktn ;' H±ittProg£eSS JA 17 1.Q\€BCIQa Re -a,itA 12.17 IQ.!lelt'l. _________________________________ JI , { Formatted: Font: 9 pt , Page 3-29 Revision 3.2.ABG .JfitefR!HiefH11l:)rafliltllillenison Mines (USA) CoI'P~EtffitiaR. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 3.3.8 Co er Material/Cover Material Volumes Construction materials fbr reclamation will be obtained from on-site locations. Fill material will be available from the stockpiles that were generated from excavation of the cell for the tailings lacility. II' required additional materials are available locally to lhe west of the site. A clay material source, identilicd in 'cclion 16 at the southern end of the White Mesa Mill site will be used to construcl the one-foot compacted clay layer. Riprap material will be produced from off-site sources. Detailed material quanlitie calculations are provided in Attachment C, Cost Estimates for Reclamation of White Mesa Mill Facilities, as part oflhe volume and costing exerci e. , N;\ReclamRljon PlanlReclamnolln Plnn Rev 3.2BISECT03 Rc:v3 ,2 B 01 13.1! rcdlinc.docx~lIl/Iiitlft.IlI81AAeo!!1!!!!Ilj!lf!-!lkm I,' ~Feg.ess 1217 lQ\SBG1J);;.aQ\·l .l .A 1:!.17.10.dool$ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ ________________ " ____ A I { formatted: Font: 9 pt OENISOJ)~~ Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO 80265 USA MINES Attachment A Tel: 303 628·7798 Fax: 303389-4125 www.denisonmines.com White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2.8 Plans and Specifications for Reclamation of the White Mesa Mill and Tailings Management System January 2011 State ofUtahlle.(2) Byproduct Material License # UT1900479 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. www.denisonmines.com 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO, USA 80265 Tel: 303 628·7798 Fax: 303389-4125 ATTACHMENT A PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR RECLAMATION OF WHITE MESA FACILITIES BLANDING, UTAH PREPARED BY DENISON MINES (USA) CORP. INDEPENDENCE PLAZA 1050 17TH STREET, SUITE 950 DENVER, CO 80265 January 2011 Revision 3.2.B TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A-i Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Page No. 1.0 GENERAL .................................................................................................................. A-l 2.0 CELL 1 RECLAMATION .......................................................................................... A-l 2.1 Scope ............................................................................................................... A-I 2.2 Removal of Contaminated Materials ................................................................ A-I 2.2.1 Raffinate Crystals ................................................................................. A-I 2.2.2 Synthetic Liner ..................................................................................... A-2 2.2.3 Contaminated Soils .............................................................................. A-2 2.3 Cell 1 Tailings Area A-3 2.3.1 General ................................................................................................ A-3 2.3.2 Materials .............................................................................................. A-3 2.3.3 Borrow Sources .................................................................................... A-3 2.4 Liner Construction ........................................................................................... A-3 2.4.1 General ................................................................................................ A-3 2.4.2 Placement and Compaction .................................................................. A-4 2.4.2.1 Methods ................................................................................... A-4 2.4.2.2 Moisture and Density Control ................................................... A-S 2.S Sedimentation Basin ........................................................................................ A-6 3.0 MILL DECOMMISSIONING ..................................................................................... A-8 3.1 Mill ................................................................................................................. A-8 3.2 Mill Site ........................................................................................................ A-I0 3.3 Windblown Contamination ............................................................................ A-I 0 N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3 .2.B c1ean.docx No. Page A-ii Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page 3.3.1 Guidance ............................................................................................ A-12 3.3.2 General Methodology ......................................................................... A-12 3.3.3 Scoping Survey .................................................................................. A-13 3.3.4 Characterization and Remediation Control Surveys ............................ A-15 3.3.5 Final Survey ....................................................................................... A-16 3.3.6 Employee Health and Safety .............................................................. A-16 3.3.7 Environment Monitoring .................................................................... A-I 7 3.3.8 Quality Assurance .............................................................................. A-17 4.0 PLACEMENT METHODS ....................................................................................... A-20 4.1 Scrap and Debris ............................................................................................ A-20 4.2 Contaminated Soils and Raffinate Crystals .................................................... A-21 4.3 Compaction Requirements ............................................................................. A-21 5.0 RECLAMATION CAP -CELLS h,2, 3, 4A, AND 4B ............................................ A-22 5.1 Earth Cover ................................................................................................... A-22 5.2 Materials ....................................................................................................... A-22 5.2.1 Physical Properties ............................................................................. A-22 5.2.2 Borrow Sources .................................................................................. A-29 5.3 Cover Construction ........................................................................................ A-29 5.3.1 General .............................................................................................. A-29 5.3.2 Placement and Compaction ................................................................ A-30 5.3.2.1 Methods ................................................................................. A-30 5.3.2.2 Moisture and Density Control ................................................. A-31 5.4 Monitoring Cover Settlement.. ....................................................................... A-32 N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-iii Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page No. 5.4.1 Temporary Settlement Plates .............................................................. A-32 5.4.1.1 General ................................................................................... A-32 5.4.1.2 Installation .............................................................................. A-32 5.4.1.3 Monitoring Settlement Plates ................................................... A-33 6.0 ROCK PROTECTION .............................................................................................. A-35 6.1 General ........................................................................................................... A-35 6.2 Materials ....................................................................................................... A-36 6.3 Placement ...................................................................................................... A-37 7.0 QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY A SURANCE ................................................... A-37 7.1 Quality Plan ................................................................................................... A-37 7.2 Implementation .............................................................................................. A-38 7.3 Quality Control Procedures ............................................................................ A-38 7.4 requency of Quality Control Tests ............................................................... A-38 N:\Reclamation Plan\Rcclam81ion Plan Rcv 3.2B\ATIACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean. doc" 1.0 GENERAL Page A-I Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The specifications presented in this section cover the reclamation of the Mill facilities. 2.0 CELL 1 RECLAMATION 2.1 Scope The reclamation of Cell 1 (previously referred to as Cell I-I) consists of evaporating the cell to dryness, removing raffinate crystals, synthetic liner and any contaminated soils, and constructing a clay lined area adjacent to and parallel with the existing Cell 1 dike for permanent disposal of contaminated material and debris from the Mill site decommissioning, referred to as the Cell 1 Tailings Area. A sedimentation basin will then be constructed and a drainage channel provided. 2.2 Removal of Contaminated Materials 2.2.1 Raffinate Crystals Raffinate crystals will be removed from Cell 1 and transported to the tailings cells. It is anticipated that the crystals will have a consistency similar to a granular material when brought to the cells, with large crystal masses being broken down for transport. Placement of the crystals will be performed as a granular fill, with care being taken to avoid nesting of large sized materiaL Voids around large material will be filled with finer material or the crystal mass broken down by the placing equipment. Actual placement procedures will be evaluated by the QC officer during construction as crystal materials are brought and placed in the cells. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx 2.2.2 Synthetic Liner Page A-2 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The PVC liner will be cut up, folded (when necessary), removed from Cell 1, and transported to the tailings cells. The liner material will be spread as flat as practical over the designated area. After placement, the liner will be covered as soon as possible with at least one foot of soil, crystals or other materials for protection against wind, as approved by the QC officer. 2.2.3 Contaminated Soils The extent of contamination of the Mill site will be determined by a scintillometer survey. If necessary, a correlation between scintillometer readings and U-natIRadium-226 concentrations will be developed. Scintillometer readings can then be used to define cleanup areas and to monitor the cleanup. Soil sampling will be conducted to confirm that the cleanup results in a concentration of Radium-226 averaged over any area of 100 square meters that does not exceed the background level by more than: 5 pCi/g averaged over the first 15 cm of soils below the surface, and 15 pCi/g averaged over a 15 cm thick layer of soils more than 15 cm below the surface Where surveys indicate the above criteria have not been achieved, the soil will be removed to meet the criteria. Soil removed from Cell 1 will be excavated and transported to the tailings cells. Placement and compaction will be in accordance with Section 4.0 of these Plans and Specifications. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B c\ean.docx 2.3 CellI Tailings Area 2.3.1 General Page A-3 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan A clay lined area will be constructed adjacent to and parallel with the existing Cell 1 dike for permanent disposal of contaminated material and debris from the Mill site decommissioning (the Cell 1 Tailings Area). The area will be lined with 12 inches of clay prior to placement of contaminated materials and installation of the final reclamation cap. 2.3.2 Materials Clays will have at least 40 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. The minimum liquid limit of these soils will be 25 and the plasticity index will be 15 or greater. These soils will classify as CL, SC or CH materials under the Unified Soil Classification System. 2.3.3 Borrow Sources Clay will be obtaned from suitable materials stockpiled on site during cell construction or will be imported from borrow areas located in Section 16, T38S, R22E, SLM. 2.4 Liner Construction 2.4.1 General Placement of clay liner materials will be based on a schedule determined by the availability of contaminated materials removed from the Mill decommissioning area in order to maintain optimum moisture content of the clay liner prior to placing of contaminated materials 2.4.2 Placement and Compaction N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx 2.4.2.1 Methods Page A-4 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Placement of fill will be monitored by a qualified individual with the authority to stop work and reject material being placed. The full 12 inches of the clay liner fill will be compacted to 95% maximum dry density per ASTM D 698. In all layers of the clay liner will be such that the liner will, as far as practicable, be free of lenses, pockets, streaks or layers of material differing substantially in texture, gradation or moisture content from the surrounding material. Oversized material will be controlled through selective excavation of stockpiled material, observation of placement by a qualified individual with authority to stop work and reject material being placed and by culling oversized material from the fill. If the moisture content of any layer of clay liner is outside of the Allowable Placement Moisture Content specified in Table A-5.3.2.1-1, it will be moistened and/or reworked with a harrow, scarifier, or other suitable equipment to a sufficient depth to provide relatively uniform moisture content and a satisfactory bonding surface before the next succeeding layer of clay material is placed. If the compacted surface of any layer of clay liner material is too wet, due to precipitation, for proper compaction of the earthfill material to be placed thereon, it will be reworked with harrow, scarifier or other suitable equipment to reduce the moisture content to the required level shown in Table A-5.3.2.1-1. It will then be recompacted to the earthfill requirements. No clay material will be placed when either the materials, or the underlying material, is frozen or when ambient temperatures do not permit the placement or compaction of the materials to the specified density, without developing frost lenses in the fill. N:\Reciamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx 2.4.2.2 Moisture and Density Control Page A-5 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan As far as practicable, the materials will be brought to the proper moisture content before placement, or moisture will be added to the material by sprinkling on the fill. Each layer of the fill will be conditioned so that the moisture content is uniform throughout the layer prior to and during compaction. The moisture content of the compacted liner material will be within the limits of standard optimum moisture content as shown in Table A-5.3.2.1-1. Material that is too dry or too wet to permit bonding of layers during compaction will be rejected and will be reworked until the moisture content is within the specified limits. Reworking may include removal, re-harrowing, reconditioning, rerolling, or combinations of these procedures. Density control of compacted clay will be such that the compacted material represented by samples having a dry density less than the values shown in Table A-5.3.2.1-1 will be rejected. Such rejected material will be reworked as necessary and rerolled until a dry density equal to or greater than the percent of its standard Proctor maximum density shown in Table A-5.3.2.1-1. To determine that the moisture content and dry density requirements of the compacted liner material are being met, field and laboratory tests will be made at specified intervals taken from the compacted fills as specified in Section 7.4, "Frequency of Quality Control Tests." 2.5 Sedimentation Basin Cell 1 will then be breached and constructed as a sedimentation basin. All runoff from the Mill area and immediately north of the cell will be routed into the sedimentation basin and will discharge onto the natural ground via the channel located at the southwest comer of the basin. The channel is designed to accommodate the PMF flood. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean,docx PageA-6 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan A sedimentation basin will be constructed in Cell 1 as shown in Figure A-2.2.4-1. Grading will be performed to promote drainage and proper functioning of the basin. The drainage channel out of the sedimentation basin will be constructed to the lines and grades as shown. N:\Rcclamalion Plan\Rcclamalion Plan Rev 3.2B\A'nACHMENT A rcv3.2.B clcan.docx PageA-7 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan INSERT FIGURE A-2.2.4-1 SEDIMENTATION BASIN DETAILS N:\I~cclllmation Plan\Rcclamatioll Plan Rev 320\A TrACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean. doc;< Page A-8 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 3.0 MILL DECOMMISSIONING The following subsections detail decommissioning plans for the Mill buildings and equipment; the Mill site; and windblown contamination. 3.1 Mill The uranium and vanadium processing areas of the Mill, including all equipment, structures and support facilities, will be decommissioned and disposed of in tailings or buried on site as appropriate. All equipment, including tankage and piping, agitation equipment, process control instrumentation and switchgear, and contaminated structures will be cut up, removed and buried in tailings prior to final cover placement. Concrete structures and foundations will be demolished and removed or covered with soil as appropriate. These decommissioned areas would include, but not be limited to the following: Coarse ore bin and associated equipment, conveyors and structures. Grind circuit including semi-autogeneous grind (SAG) Mill, screens, pumps and cyclones. The three preleach tanks to the east of the Mill building, including all tankage, agitation equipment, pumps and piping. The seven leach tanks inside the main Mill building, including all agitation equipment, pumps and piping. The counter-current decantation (CCD) circuit including all thickeners and equipment, pumps and piping. Uranium precipitation circuit, including all thickeners, pumps and piping. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-9 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The two yellow cake dryers and all mechanical and electrical support equipment, including uranium packaging equipment. The clarifiers to the west of the Mill building including the preleach thickener (PL T) and claricone. The boiler and all ancillary equipment and buildings. The entire vanadium precipitation, drying and fusion circuit. All external tankage not included in the previous list including reagent tanks for the storage of acid, ammonia, kerosene, water, dry chemicals, etc. and the vanadium oxidation circuit. The uranium and vanadium solvent extraction (SX) circuit including all SX and reagent tankage, mixers and settlers, pumps and piping. The SX building. The Mill building. The Alternate Feed processing circuit Decontamination pads The office building. The shop and warehouse building. The sample plant building. The Reagent storage building. The sequence of demolition would proceed so as to allow the maximum use of support areas of the facility such as the office and shop areas. It is anticipated that all major structures and large equipment will be demolished with the use of hydraulic shears. These will speed the process, provide proper sizing of the materials to be placed in tailings, and reduce exposure to radiation and other safety hazards during the demolition. Any uncontaminated or decontaminated equipment to be considered for salvage will be released in accordance with the terms of License N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rcv3.2.B clean.docx Page A-lO Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Condition 9.10. As with the equipment for disposal, any contaminated soils from the Mill area will be disposed of in the tailings facilities in accordance with Section 4.0 of the Specifications. 3.2 Mill Site Contaminated areas on the Mill site will be primarily superficial and include the ore storage area and surface contamination of some roads. All ore and alternate feed materials will have been previously removed from the ore stockpile area. All contaminated materials will be excavated and be disposed in one of the tailings cells in accordance with Section 4.0 of these Plans and Specifications. The depth of excavation will vary depending on the extent of contamination and will be based on the criteria in Section 2.2.3 of these Plans and Specifications. All other lle.(2) byproduct materials will be disposed of in the tailings cells. All ancillary contaminated materials including pipelines will be removed and will be disposed of by disposal in the tailing cells in accordance with Section 4.0 of these Plans and Specifications. Disturbed areas will be covered, graded and vegetated as required. The proposed grading plan for the Mill site and ancillary areas is shown on Figure A-3.2-1. 3.3 Windblown Contamination Windblown contamination is defined as Mill derived contaminants dispersed by the wind to surrounding areas. The potential areas affected by windblown contamination will be surveyed using scintillometers taking into account historical operational data from the Semi-annual Effluent Reports and other guidance such as prevailing wind direction and historical background data. Areas covered by the existing Mill facilities and ore storage pad, the tailings cells and N:\Reclamation PlanlReclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-I1 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan adjacent stockpiles of random fill, clay and topsoiJ, will be excluded from the survey. Materials from these areas will be removed in conjunction with final reclamation and decommissioning of the Mill and tailings cells. N:\Rcclun18tion Plan\Rcclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATIACHM T A rev3.2.13 clcan,docx Insert FIGURE A3.2-1 Page A-12 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan MILL SITE AND ORE PAD FINAL GRADING PLAN 3.3.1 Guidance The necessity for remedial actions will be based upon an evaluation prepared by Denison, and approved by the Executive Secretary, of the potential health hazard presented by any windblown . materials identified. The assessment will be based upon analysis of all pertinent radiometric and past land use information and will consider the feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and environmental impact of the proposed remedial activities and final land use. All methods utilized will be consistent with the guidance contained in NUREG-5849: "Manual for Conducting Radiological Surveys in Support of License Termination." 3.3.2 General Methodology The facility currently monitors soils for the presence of Ra-226, Th-230 and natural uranium, such results being presented in the second semi-annual effluent report for each year. Guideline values for these materials will be determined and will form the basis for the cleanup of the Mill site and surrounding areas. For purposes of determining possible windblown contamination, areas used for processing of uranium ores as well as the tailings and evaporative facilities will be excluded from the initial scoping survey, due to their proximity to the uranium recovery operations. Those areas include: The Mill building, including CCD, Pre-Leach Thickener area, uranium drying and packaging, clarifying, and preleach. N:\Reciamation Plan\Reciamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-13 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The SX building, including reagent storage immediately to the east of the SX building. The alternate feed circuit. The ore pad and ore feed areas. Tailings Cells No.2, 3, 4A, and 4B. Evaporation Cell No. 1. The remaining areas of the Mill will be divided up into two areas for purposes of windblown determinations: The restricted area, less the above areas; and, A halo around the restricted area. Areas within the restricted area, as shown on Figure 3.2-1 will be initially surveyed on a 30 x 30 meter grid as described below in Section 3.3.3. The halo around the suspected area of contamination will also be initially surveyed on a 50 x 50 meter grid using methodologies described below in Section 3.3.3. Any areas which are found to have elevated activity levels will be further evaluated as described in Sections 3.3.4 and 3.3.5. Initial surveys of the areas surrounding the Mill and tailings area have indicated potential windblown contamination only to the north and east of the Mill ore storage area, and to the southwest of Cell 3, as indicated on Figure 3.2-1. 3.3.3 Scoping Survey Areas contaminated through process activities or windblown contamination from the tailings areas will be remediated to meet applicable cleanup criteria for Ra-226, Th-230 and natural uranium. Contaminated areas will be remediated such that the residual radionuclides remaining N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\A TTACHMENT A rev3.2.B c1ean.docx Page A-14 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan on the site, that are distinguishable from background, will not result in a dose that is greater than that which would result from the radium soil standard (5 pCilgram above background). Soil cleanup verification will be accomplished by use of several calibrated beta/gamma instruments. Multiple instruments will be maintained and calibrated to ensure availability during Remediation efforts. Initial soil samples will be chemically analyzed to determine on-site correlation between the gamma readings and the concentration of radium, thorium and uranium, in the samples. Samples will be taken from areas known to be contaminated with only processed uranium materials (i.e. tailings sand and windblown contamination) and areas in which it is suspected that unprocessed uranium materials (i.e. ore pad and windblown areas downwind of the ore pad) are present. The actual number of samples used will depend on the correlation of the results between gamma readings and the Ra-226 concentration. A minimum of 35 samples of windblown tailings material, and 15 samples of unprocessed ore materials is proposed. Adequate samples will be taken to ensure that graphs can be developed to adequately project the linear regression lines and the calculated upper and lower 95 percent confidence levels for each of the instruments. The 95 percent confidence limit will be used for the guideline value for correlation between gamma readings and radium concentration. Because the unprocessed materials are expected to have proportionally higher values of uranium in relation to the radium and thorium content, the correlation to the beta/gamma readings are expected to be different than readings from areas known to be contaminated with only processed materials. Areas expected to have contamination from both processed and unprocessed materials will be evaluated on the more conservative correlation, or will be cleaned to the radium standard which should ensure that the uranium is removed. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-I5 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Radium concentration in the samples should range from 25% of the guideline value (5 pCi/gram above background) for the area of interest, through the anticipated upper range of radium contamination. Background radium concentrations have been gathered over a 16 year period at sample station BHV -3 located upwind and 5 miles west of the Mill. The radium background concentration from this sampling is 0.93 pCi/gram. This value will be used as an interim value for the background concentration. Prior to initiating cleanup of windblown contamination, a systematic soil sampling program will be conducted in an area within 3 miles of the site, in geologically similar areas with soil types and soil chemistry similar to the areas to be cleaned, to determine the average background radium concentration, or concentrations, to be ultimately used for the cleanup. An initial scoping survey for windblown contamination will be conducted based on analysis of all pertinent radiometric and past land use information. The survey will be conducted using calibrated beta/gamma instruments on a 30 meter by 30 meter grid. Additional surveys will be conducted in a halo, or buffer zone, around the projected impact area. The survey in the buffer area will be conducted on a 50 meter by 50 meter grid. Grids where no readings exceed 75% of the guideline value (5 pCi/gram above background) will be classified as unaffected, and will not require remediation. The survey will be conducted by walking a path within the grid as shown in Figure A-3.3-1. These paths will be designed so that a minimum of 10% of the area within the grid sidelines will be scanned, using an average coverage area for the instrument of one (1) meter wide. The instrument will be swung from side to side at an elevation of six (6) inches above ground level, with the rate of coverage maintained within the recommended duration specified by the specific instrument manufacturer. In no case will the scanning rate be greater than the rate of 0.5 meters per second (rn/sec) specified in NUREG/CR-5849 (NRC, 1992). N:\Reclamation Plan\RecIamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx 3.3.4 Characterization and Remediation Control Surveys Page A-16 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan After the entire subarea has been classified as affected or unaffected, the affected areas will be further scanned to identify areas of elevated activity requiring cleanup. Such areas will be flagged and sufficient soils removed to, at a minimum, meet activity criteria. Following such remediation, the area will be scanned again to ensure compliance with activity criteria. A calibrated beta/gamma instrument capable of detecting activity levels of less than or equal to 25 percent of the guideline values will be used to scan all the areas of interest. 3.3.5 Final Survey After removal of contamination, final surveys will be taken over remediated areas. Final surveys will be calculated and documented within specific 10 meter by 10 meter grids with sample point locations as shown in Figure A-3.3.2. Soil samples from 10% of the surveyed grids will be chemically analyzed to confirm the initial correlation factors utilized and confirm the success of cleanup effort for radium, thorium and uranium. Ten (l0) percent of the samples chemically analyzed will be split, with a duplicate sent to an off site laboratory. Spikes and blanks, equal in number to 10 percent of the samples that are chemically analyzed, will be processed with the samples. 3.3.6 Employee Health and Safety Programs currently in place for monitoring of exposures to employees will remain in effect throughout the time period during which tailings cell reclamation, Mill decommissioning and clean up of windblown contamination are conducted. This will include personal monitoring (film badges/TLD's) and the ongoing bioassay program. Access control will be maintained at the Restricted Area boundary to ensure employees and equipment are released from the site in N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 32B\ATT ACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-17 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan accordance with the current License conditions. In general, no changes to the existing programs are expected and reclamation activities are not expected to increase exposure potential beyond the current levels. 3.3.7 Environment Monitoring Existing environmental monitoring programs will continue during the time period in which reclamation and decommissioning is conducted. This includes monitoring of surface and groundwater, airborne particulates, radon, soils and vegetation, according to the existing License conditions. In general, no changes to the existing programs are expected and reclamation activities are not expected to increase exposure potential beyond the current levels. 3.3.8 Quality Assurance At least six (6) months prior to beginning of decommission activities, a detailed Quality Assurance Plan will be submitted for Executive Secretary approval. The Plan will be in accordance with NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs. In general, the Plan will detail Denison's organizational structure and responsibilities, qualifications of personnel, operating procedures and instructions, record keeping and document control, and quality control in the sampling procedure and outside laboratory. The Plan will adopt the existing quality assurance/quality control procedures utilized in compliance with the existing License. N:lReclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\A TTACHMENT A rev3.2.B c1ean.docx Insert Figure A3.3-1 N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B c1ean.docx Page A-I8 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Insert Figure A3.3-2 N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\A TTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-19 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 4.0 PLACEMENT METHODS 4.1 Scrap and Debris Page A-20 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The scrap and debris will have a maximum dimension of 20 feet and a maximum volume of 30 cubic feet. Scrap exceeding these limits will be reduced to within the acceptable limits by breaking, cutting or other approved methods. Empty drums, tanks or other objects having a hollow volume greater than five cubic feet will be reduced in volume by at least 70 percent. If volume reduction is not feasible, openings will be made in the object to allow soils, tailings and/or other approved materials to enter the object at the time of covering on the tailings cells. The scrap, after having been reduced in dimension and volume, if required, will be placed on the tailings cells as directed by the QC officer. Any scrap placed will be spread across the top of the tailings cells to avoid nesting and to reduce the volume of voids present in the disposed mass. Stockpiled soils, contaminated soils, tailings and/or other approved materials will be placed over and into the scrap in sufficient amount to fill the voids between the large pieces and the volume within the hollow pieces to form a coherent mass. It is recognized that some voids will remain because of the scrap volume reduction specified, and because of practical limitations of these procedures. Reasonable effort will be made to fill the voids. The approval of the Site Manager or a designated representative will be required for the use of materials other than stockpiled soils, contaminated soils or tailings for the purpose of filling voids. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\A TTACHMENT A rev3.2.B c1ean.docx 4.2 Contaminated Soils and Raffinate Crystals Page A-21 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The various materials will not be concentrated in thick deposits on top of the tailings, but will be spread over the working surface as much as possible to provide relatively uniform settlement and consolidation characteristics of the cleanup materials. 4.3 Compaction Requirements The scrap, contaminated soils and other materials for the first lift will be placed over the existing tailings surface to a depth of up to four feet thick in a bridging lift to allow access for placing and compacting equipment. The first lift will be compacted by the tracking of heavy equipment, such as a Caterpillar D6 Dozer (or equivalent), at least four times prior to the placement of a subsequent lift. Subsequent layers will not exceed two feet and will be compacted to the same requirements. During construction, the compaction requirements for the crystals will be reevaluated based on field conditions and modified by the Site Manager or a designated representative, with the agreement of the Executive Secretary. The contaminated soils and other cleanup materials after the bridging lift will be compacted to at least 80 percent of standard Proctor maximum density (ASTM D-698). N :\Reclamation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\A TT ACHMENT A rev3.2.B c1ean.docx 5.0 RECLAMATION CAP -CELLS 1,2,3, 4A AND 4B 5.1 Earth Cover Page A-22 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan A multi-layered earthen cover will be placed over tailings Cells 2,3, 4A and 4B and a portion of Cell 1 used for disposal of contaminated materials (the CellI Tailings Area). The general grading plan is shown on Drawing A-5.I-I. Reclamation cover cross-sections are shown on Drawings A-5.1-2 and A-5.1-3. 5.2 Materials 5.2.1 Physical Properties The physical properties of materials for use as cover soils will meet the following: Random Fill (Platform Fill and Frost Barrier) These materials will be mixtures of clayey sands and silts with random amounts of gravel and rock size material. In the initial bridging lift of the platform fill, rock sizes of up to 2/3 of the thickness of the lift will be allowed. On all other random fill lifts, rock sizes will be limited to 2/3 of the lift thickness, with at least 30 percent of the material finer than 40 sieve. For that portion passing the No. 40 sieve, these soils will classify as CL, SC, MC or SM materials under the Unified Soil Classification System. Oversized material will be controlled through selective excavation at the stockpiles and through the utilization of a grader, bulldozer or backhoe to cull oversize from the fill. N:\Reclamation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Clay Layer Materials Page A-23 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Clays will have at least 40 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. The minimum liquid limit of these soils will be 25 and the plasticity index will be 15 or greater. These soils will classify as eL. SC or CH materials under the Unified Soil Classification System. N:\Reclillnation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Insert AS. 1-1 N:\Reclamation Plao\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-24 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Insert Figure A-5.1-2 N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B c1ean.docx Page A-25 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Inseli FIGURE A-S.1-3 Page A-26 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan RECLAMATION COVER CROSS SECTIONS N:\Reclamation Plan\Rcclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\A'ITACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Insert Figure A-5.1-4 N:\Reclamation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-27 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 5.2.2 Borrow Sources The sources for soils for the cover materials are as follows: Page A-28 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 1. Random Fill (Platform and Frost Barrier) -stockpiles from prevIOUS cell construction activities currently located to the east and west of the tailing facilities. 2. Clay -will be from suitable materials stockpiled on site during cell construction or will be imported from borrow areas located in Section 16, T38S, R22E, SLM. 3. Rock Armor -will be produced through screening of alluvial gravels located in deposits 1 mile north of Blanding, Utah; 7 miles north ofthe Mill site. 5.3 Cover Construction 5.3.1 General Placement of cover materials will be based on a schedule determined by analysis of settlement data, piezometer data and equipment mobility considerations. Settlement plates and piezometers will be installed and monitored in accordance with Section 5.4 ofthese Plans and Specifications. N:\Reclamation Plan\Rec\amation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx 5.3.2 Placement and Compaction 5.3.2.1 Methods Platform Fill Page A-29 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan An initial lift of 3 to 4 feet of random fill will be placed over the tailings surface to form a stable working platform for subsequent controlled fill placement. This initial lift will be placed by pushing random fill material or contaminated materials across the tailings in increments, slowly enough thatthe underlying tailings are displaced as little as possible. Compaction of the initial lift will be limited to what the weight of the placement equipment provides. The maximum rock size, as far as practicable, in the initial lift is 2/3 of the lift thickness. Placement of fill will be monitored by a qualified individual with the authority to stop work and reject material being placed. The top surface (top 1.0 feet) of the platform fill will be compacted to 90% maximum dry density per ASTM D 698. Frost Barrier Fill Frost barrier fill will be placed above the clay cover in 12-inch lifts, with particle size limited to 2/3 of the lift thickness. Frost barrier material will come from the excavation of random fill stockpiles, If oversized material is observed during the excavation of fill material it will be removed as far as practicable before it is placed in the fill. In all layers of the cover the distribution and gradation of the materials throughout each fill layer will be such that the fill will, as far as practicable, be free of lenses, pockets, streaks or layers of material differing substantially in texture, gradation or moisture content from the surrounding material. Nesting of oversized material will be controlled through selective excavation of stockpiled material, observation of placement by a qualified individual with authority to stop work and reject material being placed and by culling oversized material from the fill utilizing a grader. Successive loads of material will be placed on the fill so as to produce the best practical distribution of material. N:\Reciamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2BIATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-3D Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan If the compacted surface of any layer of fill is too dry or smooth to bond properly with the layer of material to be placed thereon, it will be moistened andlor reworked with a harrow, scarifier, or other suitable equipment to a sufficient depth to provide relatively uniform moisture content and a satisfactory bonding surface before the next succeeding layer of earthfill is placed. If the compacted surface of any layer of earthfill in-place is too wet, due to precipitation, for proper compaction of the earthfill material to be placed thereon, it will be reworked with harrow, scarifier or other suitable equipment to reduce the moisture content to the required level shown in Table 5.3.2.1-1. It will then be recompacted to the earthfill requirements. No material will be placed when either the materials, or the underlying material, is frozen or when ambient temperatures do not permit the placement or compaction of the materials to the specified density, without developing frost lenses in the fill. 5.3.2.2 Moisture and Density Control As far as practicable, the materials will be brought to the proper moisture content before placement on tailings, or moisture will be added to the material by sprinkling on the earthfill. Each layer of the fill will be conditioned so that the moisture content is uniform throughout the layer prior to and during compaction. The moisture content of the compacted fill will be within the limits of standard optimum moisture content as shown in Table 5.3.2.1-1. Material that is too dry or too wet to permit bonding of layers during compaction will be rejected and will be reworked until the moisture content is within the specified limits. Reworking may include removal, re-harrowing, reconditioning, rerolling, or combinations of these procedures. Density control of compacted soil will be such that the compacted material represented by samples having a dry density less than the values shown in Table 5.3.2.1-1 will be rejected. Such rejected material will be reworked as necessary and rerolled until a dry density equal to or greater than the percent of its standard Proctor maximum density shown in Table 5.3.2.1-1. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B c1ean.docx Page A-31 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan To determine that the moisture content and dry density requirements of the compacted fill are being met, field and laboratory tests will be made at specified intervals taken from the compacted fills as specified in Section 7.4, "Frequency of Quality Control Tests." 5.4 Monitoring Cover Settlement 5.4.1 Temporary Settlement Plates 5.4.1.1 General Temporary settlement plates will be installed in the tailings Cells. At the time of cell closure, a monitoring program will be proposed to the Executive Secretary. Data collected will be analyzed and the reclamation techniques and schedule adjusted accordingly. 5.4.1. 2 Installation At the time of cell closure or during the placement of interim cover temporary settlement plates will be installed. These temporary settlement plates will consist of a corrosion resistant steel plate 114 inch thick and two foot square to which a one inch diameter corrosion resistant monitor pipe has been welded. The one inch monitor pipe will be surrounded by a three inch diameter guard pipe which will not be attached to the base plate. The installation will consist of leveling an area on the existing surface of the tailings, and placing the base plate directly on the tailings. A minimum three feet of initial soil or tailings cover will be placed on the base plate for a minimum radial distance of five feet from the pipe. 5.4.1.3 Monitoring Settlement Plates N:lReclamation PlanlReclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B c1ean.docx Page A-32 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Monitoring of settlement plates will be in accordance with the program submitted to and approved by the DRC. Settlement observations will be made in accordance with Quality Control Procedure QC-16-WM, "Monitoring of Temporary Settlement Plates." N:\Reclamation 1'lan\RcclamationPlan Rev 3.2B\A1TACl-IMENT A rcv3.2.B clean,doC)( INSERT TABLE 5.3.2.1-1 N:\Reclamation PlanlReclamation Plan Rev 3.2BIATTACHMENT A rev3 .2.B clean.docx Page A-33 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 6.0 ROCK PROTECTION 6.1 General Page A-34 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The side slopes of the reclaimed cover will be protected by rock surfacing. Drawings 5.1-1, 5.1- 2, and 5.1-3 show the location of rock protection with the size, thickness and gradation requirements for the various side slopes. A riprap layer was designed for erosion protection of the tailings soil cover. According to NRC guidance, the design must be adequate to protect the soil/tailings against exposure and erosion for 200 to 1,000 years (NRC, 1990). Currently, there is no standard industry practice for stabilizing tailings for 1,000 years. However, by treating the embankment slopes as wide channels, the hydraulic design principles and practices associated with channel design were used to design stable slopes that will not erode. Thus, a conservative design based on NRC guidelines was developed. Engineering details and calculations are summarized in the Tailings Cover Design report (Appendix D). Riprap cover specifications for the top and side slopes were determined separately as the side slopes are much steeper than the slope of the top of the cover. The size and thickness of the riprap on the top of the cover was calculated using the Safety Factor Method (NUREG/CR-4651, 1987), while the Stephenson Method (NUREG/CR-4651, 1987) was used for the side slopes. These methodologies were chosen based on NRC recommendations (1990). By the Safety Factor Method, riprap dimensions for the top slope were calculated in order to achieve a slope "safety factor" of 1.1. For the top of the soil cover, with a slope of 0.2 percent, the Safety Factor Method indicated a median diameter (Dso) riprap of 0.28 inches is required to stabilize the top slope. However, this dimension must be modified based on the long-term durability of the specific rock type to be used in construction. The suitability of rock to be used as a protective cover has been assessed by laboratory tests to determine the physical N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-35 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan characteristics of the rocks. The gravels sourced from pits located north of Blanding require an oversizing factor of 9.35%. Therefore, riprap created from this source should have a Dso size of at least 0.306 inches and should have an overall layer thickness of at least three inches on the top of the cover. From a practical construction standpoint the minimum rock layer thickness may be up to six (6) inches. Riprap dimensions for the side slopes were calculated using Stephenson Method equations. The side slopes ofthe cover are designed at 5H: 1 V. At this slope, Stephenson's Method indicated the unmodified riprap Dso of 3.24 inches is required. Again assuming that the gravel from north of Blanding will be used, the modified Dso size of the riprap should be at least 3.54 inches with an overall layer thickness of at least 8 inches. Riprap bedding should be placed between the random fill and the riprap on the side slopes. The bedding should consist of medium sand, and should be placed with a minimum layer thickness of 6 inches. 6.2 Materials Materials utilized for riprap applications will meet the following specifications: Material Dso Size DIOO Size Layer Thickness i II I Too Surface Riorao ~ 0.3" 0.6" 6" I II Slope Surface Bedding No. 40 Sieve 3" 6" I I Slope Surface Riprap 3.5" 7" 8" I I Toe Apron Riprap 6.4" 12" 24" N:\Reclamation Plan\RecIamation Plan Rev 3.2B\A TTACHMENT A rev3.2.B c1ean.docx Page A-36 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Riprap will be supplied to the project from gravel sources located north of the project site. Riprap will be a screened product. Riprap quality will be evaluated by methods presented in NUREGI1623 Design of Erosion Protection for Long-Term Stabilization Size adjustment will be made in the riprap for materials not meeting the quality criteria. 6.3 Placement Riprap and bedding material will be hauled to the reclaimed surfaces and placed on the surfaces using belly dump highway trucks and road graders. Riprap and bedding will be dumped by trucks in windrows and the grader will spread the riprap in a manner to minimize segregation of the material. Depth of placement will be controlled through the establishment of grade stakes placed on a 200 x 200 foot grid on the top of the cells and by a 100 x 100 foot grid on the cell slopes. Physical checks of riprap and bedding depth will be accomplished through the use of hand dug test pits at the center of each grid in addition to monitoring the depth indicated on the grade stakes. Placement of the riprap and bedding will avoid accumulation of riprap or bedding sizes less than the minimum Dso size and nesting of the larger sized rock. The riprap and bedding layer will be compacted by at least two passes by a D-7 Dozer (or equivalent) in order to key the rock for stability. 7.0 QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE 7.1 Quality Plan A Quality Plan has been developed for construction activities at the Mill. The Quality Plan includes the following: 1. QC/QA Definitions, Methodology and Activities. N:\Reclarnation Plan\Reclarnation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B c1ean.docx 2. Organizational Structure. 3. Surveys, Inspections, Sampling and Testing. 4. Changes and Corrective Actions. 5. Documentation Requirements. 6. Quality Control Procedures. 7.2 Implementation Page A-37 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The Quality Plan will be implemented upon initiation of reclamation work. 7.3 Quality Control Procedures Quality control procedures have been developed for reclamation and are presented in Attachment B of this Reclamation Plan. Procedures will be used for all testing, sampling and inspection functions. 7.4 Frequency of Quality Control Tests The frequency of the quality control tests for earthwork will be as follows: 1. The frequency of the field density and moisture tests will be not less than one test per 1,000 cubic yards (CY) of compacted contaminated material placed and one test per 500 CY of compacted random fill, radon barrier or frost barrier. A minimum of two tests will be taken for each day that an applicable amount offill is placed in excess of 150 CY. A minimum of one test per lift and at least one test for every full shift of compaction operations will be taken. Field density/moisture tests will be performed utilizing a nuclear density gauge (ASTM D-2922 density and ASTM D-3017 moisture content). Correlation tests will be N:\Rec1amation Plan\Rec1amation Plan Rev 3.2B\A TTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-38 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan performed at a rate of one for every five nuclear gauge tests for compacted contaminated materials (one_ per 2,500 CY placed) and one for every ten nuclear gauge tests for other compacted materials (one per 5,000 CY of material placed). Correlation tests will be sand cone tests (ASTM D-1556) for density determination and oven drying method (ASTM D-2216) for moisture determination. 2. Gradation and classification testing will be performed at a minimum of one test per 2,000 CY of upper platform fill and frost barrier placed. A minimum of one test will be performed for each 1,000 CY of radon barrier material placed. For all materials other than random fill and contaminated materials, at least one gradation test will be run for each day of significant material placement (in excess of 150 CY). 3. Atterberg limits will be determined on materials being placed as radon barrier. Radon barrier material will be tested at a rate of at least once each day of significant material placement (in excess of 150 CY). Samples should be randomly selected. 4. Prior to the start of field compaction operations, appropriate laboratory compaction curves will be obtained for the range of materials to be placed. During construction, one point Proctor tests will be performed at a frequency of one test per every five field density tests (one test per 2,500 CY placed). Laboratory compaction curves (based on complete Proctor tests) will be obtained at a frequency of approximately one for every 10 to 15 field density tests (one lab Proctor test per 5,000 CY to 7,500 CY placed), depending on the variability of materials being placed. 5. For riprap and bedding materials, each load of material will be visually checked against standard piles for gradation prior to transport to the tailings piles. N:\Reclamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx Page A-39 Revision 3.2.B Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Prior to delivery of any riprap materials to the site rock durability tests will be performed for each gradation to be used. Test series for riprap durability will include specific gravity, absorption, sodium soundness and LA abrasion. During construction gradations will be performed for each type of riprap and bedding when approximately one-third (1/3) and two-thirds (2/3) of the total volume of each type have been produced or delivered. In addition, test series for rock durability will be performed on any riprap material at this same time. For any type of rip rap where the volume is greater than 30,000 CY, a test series and gradations will be performed for each additional 10,000 CY of riprap produced or delivered. N:\RecIamation Plan\Reclamation Plan Rev 3.2B\ATTACHMENT A rev3.2.B clean.docx CORP. ATTACHMENT A PLAN AND PE IPICATION FOR RECLAMATION OF WHITE M E A FA I ITTE BLANDIN ,UTAH I)REPARED BY (}lT6R?>I+':nmIAL URANfUM DENISON MI ES (U A) IND EPENDEN E PLAZA 1050 l7TII TREET UITE 950 D VER, 0 80265 January 2011 Revision 3.2.B .---i Formatted: Centered PageA-i Revision ~3 .2.AB4:G IAteFft8tieRal U~Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 GENERAL .................................................................................................................. A-I 2.0 CELL 1-J RECLAMATION ........................................................................................ A-L 2.1 Scope ............................................................................................................... A-l 2.2 Removal of Contaminated Materials ................................................................ A-I 2.2.1 Raffinate Crystals ................................................................................. A-I 2.2.2 Synthetic Liner ..................................................................................... A-2 2.2.3 Contaminated Soils .............................................................................. A-2 2.3 Celll-J Tailings Area A- 3 2.3.1 General ................................................................................................ A-3 2.3.2 Materials .............................................................................................. A-3 2.3.3 Borrow Sources .................................................................................... A-3 2.4 Liner Construction ........................................................................................... A-3 2.4.1 General ................................................................................................ A-3 2.4.2 Placement and Compaction .................................................................. A-4 2.4.2.1 Methods ................................................................................... A-4 2.4.2.2 Moisture and Density ControJ.. ................................................. A-5 2.5 Sedimentation Basin ........................................................................................ A-6 3.0 MILL DECOMMISSIONING ..................................................................................... A-8 3.1 Mill ................................................................................................................. A-8 3.2 Mill Site ........................................................................................................ A-IO 3.3 Windblown Contamination ............................................................................ A-IO N-IRL'ClgmDljQn PllllllhllDlAljon Plnn Sev ) 2R\ATIACHMliNT A mJ 2 B rcdljng,doc5/1!:\!\WDm!!lip.!=I'kln\R..,klmolion-l'IM-3:i-1!in Vf<Hteg" 12 17 12 "IT" CIIUti!'T " M'o;] 2 " d!2'" No. Page A-ii Revision ~3 .2.AB4,O IRteRlatioBB:1 UraA:iemDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan TABLE or CO TENTS (continued) Page 3.3.1 Guidance ............................................................................................ A-12 3.3.2 General Methodology ......................................................................... A-12 3.33 Seoping urvey .................................................................................. A-13 3.3.4 haracter.ization and Remediation Control urveys ............................ A-IS 3.3.5 Final urvey ....................................................................................... A-16 3.3.6 Employee Health and afely .............................................................. A-16 3.3.7 Environment Monitoring .................................................................... A-17 3.3.8 Quality Assuranee .............................................................................. A-17 4.0 PLACEMENT I\I(£TI IOD ....................................................................................... A-20 4.1 erap and Debris ............................................................................................ A-20 4.2 Contaminated Soils and Raffinalc Crystals .................................................... A-21 4.3 Compaction Requiremenls ............................................................................. A-21 I 5.0 RECL.AMATION AP -C . LL I~. 2, L AN9-34A. AND 4B .............................. A-22 5.1 Earth over ................................................................................................... A-22 5.2 Materials ....................................................................................................... A-22 $.2.1 Phy ical Properties ............................................................................. A-22 5.2.2 Borrow ources .................................................................................. A-29 5.3 Cover onslruclion ........................................................................................ A-29 5.3.1 General .............................................................................................. A-29 5.3.2 Placement and ompaction ................................................................ -30 5.3.2.1 Methods ................................................................................. A-30 5.3.2.2 Moisture and Density ontrol ................................................. A-31 5.4 Monitoring Cover Scttlement. ........................................................................ A-32 N'IR.:dgg)IlJjon PIM\B""ll!!TU!lioD Plgn Rev) ZRIIITfIlCHME T II rey) 2 8 willi. dooxN;)WlI!!I!I1ioft=P!qp !IteI!!!llt!ion-pllllt"H:!H!! "rom" 12 17.1FF 'UtCflUaff' FQ :a a " kpc PageA-iU Revision ;3.2.AB4,O fnteFflatieRal UrGRil:l:fllDcnison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page No. 5.4.1 cmporary cLlIemenl Plates .............................................................. A-32 5.4.1 .1 General ................................................................................... A-32 5.4.1.2 Installation .............................................................................. A-32 5.4.1.3 Monitoring etticmenl Plates .................................................. A-33 6.0 ROCK PROT ·· T10 .............................................................................................. A-35 6.1 General .......................................................................................................... A-35 6.2 .Materials ....................................................................................................... A-36 6.3 Placemenl ...................................................................................................... A-37 7.0 QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY A SURA C ' ................................................... A-37 7 . .1 Quality Plan ................................................................................................... A-37 7.2 lmplementation .............................................................................................. A-38 7.3 Quality Control Procedures ............................................................................ A-38 7.4 Frequency of Quality Conlrol Te.sts ............................................................... A-38 N·I8.SP!mnAljon PlanIR..,lgmA!lon riM Rpy 31BWlTACilMOO A (",,32 D !«II!!!p dOCl!N4!!edemnhon--PIQn\R"'I!!!!!QI~1!!=:l&+-in !!!01lt!! .. la !1IQl'U'eIMS!'fR III '3 2' dOCK 1.0 GENERAL Page A-I Revision 3-3 .2.AB4:G IatematisRal UraRiHIHDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The specifications presented in this section cover the reclamation of the 'Hhite Mesa Mill facilities. I 2.0 CELL 1-1 RECLAMATION 2.1 Scope The reclamation of Cell 1 (previously referred to as Cell I-I) consists of evaporating the cell to dryness, removing raffinate crystals, synthetic liner and any contaminated soils, and constructing a clay lined area adjacent to and parallel with the existing Cell 1-1 dike for permanent disposal of contaminated material and debris from the millMill site decommissioning, refefedreferred to as the Cell 1-1 Tailings Area. A sedimentation basin will then be constructed and a drainage channel provided. 2.2 Removal of Contaminated Materials 2.2.1 Raffinate Crystals Raffinate crystals will be removed from Cell 1-1 and transported to the tailings cells. It is anticipated that the crystals will have a consistency similar to a granular material when brought to the cells, with large crystal masses being broken down for transport. Placement of the crystals will be performed as a granular fill, with care being taken to avoid nesting of large sized material. Voids around large material will be filled with finer material or the crystal mass N'\Rcclgm;titw Jllan'BccJMJWipn elM Key 12B\t\'UACIIMENT A rey3? B rcd'jus;.-dDNNAB¢lQfflAfirut--f!nn\J!fflM!O'ten=PkU,.+h.," 'Breges! 12.17.1 WtTIl,CII~fEII'lT A Fe. 3.2 .• ""flaen PageA-2 Revision 3-3.2.AB4:G .J.memaiieAfll UTllfIil:llllDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa. Mill Reclamation Plan broken down by the placing equipment. Actual placement procedures will be evaluated by the Q of'licer during construction as cry tal materials are brought and placed in the cells. N'\RoclwnP1;gn PloolR..,lwnQLioB rim' Rq. J 2IDATfACHMIlNT A my) 2,8 uldJinq dIXxNo\lkoll!ml!!jon=fIwl\fu:dWffll!jgn--f'lqn---H-A--Iv _,,1211l6l"TF"C1iMll!fF-A=rmo~ 2.2.2 Synthetic Liner Page A-3 Revision ,l3.2.AB4,() llltemaasfI&1 UF&IIi~mDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The PVC liner will be cut up, folded (when necessary), removed from Cell 1-1, and transported to the tailings cells. The liner material will be spread as flat as practical over the designated area. After placement, the liner will be covered as soon as possible with at least one foot of soil, crystals or other materials for protection against wind, as approved by the QC officer. 2.2.3 Contaminated Soils The extent of contamination of the miHMilI site will be determined by a scintillometer survey. If necessary, a correlation between scintillometer readings and U-nat/Radium-226 concentrations will be developed. Scintillometer readings can then be used to define cleanup areas and to monitor the cleanup. Soil sampling will be conducted to confirm that the cleanup results in a concentration of Radium-226 averaged over any area of 100 square meters that does not exceed the background level by more than: 5 pCi/g averaged over the first 15 cm of soils below the surface, and 15 pCi/g averaged over a 15 cm thick layer of soils more than 15 cm below the surface Where surveys indicate the above criteria have not been achieved, the soil will be removed to meet the criteria. Soil removed from Cell 1-1 will be excavated and transported to the tailings cells. Placement and compaction will be in accordance with Section 4.0 of these Plans and Specifications. N'\l!s:clornplipn PIPD\Rsj;lorng1ion PIon Rqy 32B\ATTACHMENT A rcyl i ll I!:!!hoed""" R~!!!!!!!lI!!!H>!I!l!\R,",I!!I!!!l!i1ln=PJ~n "",'l!! laJ7 IQl'U'QlMEtrr,'rt] 2' <Nn 2.3 Cell 1-1 Tailings Area 2.3.1 General Page A-4 Revision 33.2.AB4.G InteFflational Ur9:fIitHB.Den ison Mi nes (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan A clay lined area will be constructed adjacent to and parallel with the existing Cell 1-1 dike for permanent disposal of contaminated material and debris from the millMill site decommissioning (the Cell 1-1 Tailings Area). The area will be lined with 12 inches of clay prior to placement of contaminated materials and installation of the final reclamation cap. 2.3.2 Materials Clays will have at least 40 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. The minimum liquid limit of these soils will be 25 and the plasticity index will be 15 or greater. These soils will classify as CL, SC or CH materials under the Unified Soil Classification System. 2.3.3 Borrow Sources Clay will be obtaned from suitable materials stockpiled on site during cell construction or will be imported from borrow areas located in Section 16, T38S, R22E, SLM. I 2.4 biner Construction _______________________ u _______________________ ' -1\.:F..:o.:..:rm.:..::a:..:tted=:.:...: .:..:Un..:d..:er..:lin..:e ______ ~ 2.4.1 General Placement of clay liner materials will be based on a schedule determined by the availability of contaminated materials removed from the millMill decommissioning area in order to maintain optimum moisture content of the clay liner prior to placing of contaminated materials N \Rce!.tJJI)ljon PlgoIRq:;IMlallpn Pion Rey 3.2D1ATIACtrMENT A my) 2» redlinc dogNo\l\ ... I!!IlH)\jgn-jllIlft\hrl!l!l!!!lioo=PIll.!l--H o-in ""'Ilm' I a !7 Ill' 'U!\QIMENI • Ie 12 • d«K 2.4.2 Placement and Compaction Page A-5 Revision ~3.2.AB4.G lR-teFHstiOAal UF8niumDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan I ;:.4.:.?.! J!!.e!,!oj§ _______ u __ Uu __ uu_u ___ h ______________ u __ n __ n _----{ Formatted: Font: Italic Placement of fill will be monitored by a qualified individual with the authority to stop work and reject material being placed. The full 12 inches of the clay liner fill will be compacted to 95% maximum dry density per ASTM D 698. -In all layers of the clay liner will be such that the liner will, as far as practicable, be free of lenses, pockets, streaks or layers of material differing substantially in texture, gradation or moisture content from the surrounding material. Oversized material will be controlled through selective excavation of stockpiled material, observation of placement by a qualified individual with authority to stop work and reject material being placed and by culling oversized material from the fill. If-the moisture content of any layer of clay liner is outside of the Allowable Placement Moisture Content specified in Table A-5.3.2.1-1, it will be moistened and/or reworked with a harrow, scarifier, or other suitable equipment to a sufficient depth to provide relatively uniform moisture content and a satisfactory bonding surface before the next succeeding layer of clay material is placed. If the compacted surface of any layer of clay liner material is too wet, due to precipitation, for proper compaction of the earthfill material to be placed thereon, it will be reworked with harrow, scarifier or other suitable equipment to reduce the moisture content to the required level shown in Table A-5.3.2.1-1. It will then be recompacted to the earthfill requirements. Page A-6 Revision 3-3.2.AB4.G IAteRlaaeRai UF9flil:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan No clay material will be placed when either the materials, or the underlying material, is frozen or when ambient temperatures do not permit the placement or compaction of the materials to the specified density, without developing frost lenses in the fill. ;:.~~.? MojsJ'!r:!JJ:.ng,p_e!l§J!yJ;Qr!!t:.oL _______________________________________ ~ ~ ~ 1I...F_o_rm_a_tt_ed_:_Fo_n_t:_lta_l_ic ______ --' As far as practicable, the materials will be brought to the proper moisture content before placement, or moisture will be added to the material by sprinkling on the fill. Each layer of the fill will be conditioned so that the moisture content is uniform throughout the layer prior to and during compaction. The moisture content of the compacted liner material will be within the limits of standard optimum moisture content as shown in Table A-5.3.2.1-1. Material that is too dry or too wet to permit bonding of layers during compaction will be rejected and will be reworked until the moisture content is within the specified limits. Reworking may include removal, re-harrowing, reconditioning, reroIling, or combinations of these procedures. Density control of compacted clay will be such that the compacted material represented by samples having a dry density less than the values shown in Table A-5.3.2.1-1 will be rejected. Such rejected material will be reworked as necessary and rerolled until a dry density equal to or greater than the percent of its standard Proctor maximum density shown in Table A-5.3.2.1-1. To determine that the moisture content and dry density requirements of the compacted liner material are being met, field and laboratory tests will be made at specified intervals taken from the compacted fills as specified in Section 7.4, "Frequency of Quality Control Tests." 2.5 Sedimentation Basin N·1Jtqc1nmn1jpn PlaoIR",I.myujon Plun Rev 32BWITACUMENT A lOp 2 B (sdllne.dO<J<NAA~lnmbIion-fIWl\JW!WDolj9!1=lll!!tt=H-tln CIflIRII1211 1G' 'U'GII/1~1T • ,~""" P.ag~ A-7 Revision ~3.2.AB4,G IFltemet.ieRel UfBflitlmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Cell I-I will then be breached and constructed as a sedimentation ba in. All runoff from the fflillM ill area and immediately north of the cell will be routed into the sedimentation basin and will discharge onto tbe nalural ground via tJle channel located at the southwest corner of the basin. The channel is designed to accommodate the PMF flood. A sedimentation basin will be constructed in Cell 1-1-as shown in Figure A-2.2.4-I. Grading will be perfonned to promote drainage and proper functioning of the basin. The drainage channel out of the sedimentation basin will be construcled 10 tile lines and grades as shov.'ll. N lRes;lnm.hgo PlalllR""lamPljoll elM Rev 3 WIAITACIlMEIf[ A r"v3 2 H lodljos dll<!!NAASld""Allon--l'!l!n\R..,IQD!lI!jon--Plwt4:£A-H! lUll' ... Iii 17 Ie ·UACllllE!fF-A-r;:.,q U. d" •• Page A-8 Revision :l3.2.ABW Ifttematisftal UFBftiHmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan INSERT FIGURE A-2.2.4-1 SEDIMENTATION BASIN DETAILS NolRs;s;I!II1!!Iljon PlqnlRoolgm.,jQQ r iO!! Roy J 2BIATTr\CtlMENT t\ rc:vJ 2 !l .c:dlinp dpcxN4Bwll!!!!!jgn-J>ljJnlRu!!I!!l.uun-Pl~ !!!!!!lpn' Ii lJ-I9' • Ff4flHMENT • !l! a ~ 1c;<klm Page A-9 Revision ~3.2.AB4.() IRtematisRaI Uf9RiufftDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 3.0 MILL DECOMMISSIONING The following subsections detail decommissioning plans for the millMill buildings and equipment; the millMill site; and windblown contamination. 3.1 Mill The uranium and vanadium processing areas of the millMill, including all equipment, structures and support facilities, will be decommissioned and disposed of in tailings or buried on site as appropriate. All equipment, including tankage and piping, agitation equipment, process control instrumentation and switchgear, and contaminated structures will be cut up, removed and buried in tailings prior to final cover placement. Concrete structures and foundations will be demolished and removed or covered with soil as appropriate. These decommissioned areas would include, but not be limited to the following: Coarse ore bin and associated equipment, conveyors and structures. Grind circuit including semi-autogeneous grind (SAG) millMill, screens, pumps and cyclones. The three preleach tanks to the east of the millMill building, including all tankage, agitation equipment, pumps and piping. The seven leach tanks inside the main millMill building, including all agitation equipment, pumps and piping. The counter-current decantation (CCD) circuit including all thickeners and equipment, pumps and piping. Uranium precipitation circuit, including all thickeners, pumps and piping. N-\&clomD!!on r lnn\Rw1omAliOD r iM Roy 32B1ATTACIIMENT A IcyJ.2B [<'!l!mRdQ9hNA8"'lgmDtim-PIQn\RttIama!\!!f!=JIj~c-jn 1I!!!!!"M12IJ 1~eHMSl'II.' r. H' d&c" Page A-lO Revision ~3 .2.AB4,G ffiteFRlllieAll1 UrllB.il:lA'lDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The two yellow cake dryers and all mechanical and electrical support equipment, including uranium packaging equipment. The clarifiers to the west of the millMill building including the preleach thickener (PL T) and claricone. The boiler and all ancillary equipment and buildings. The entire vanadium precipitation, drying and fusion circuit. All external tankage not included in the previous list including reagent tanks for the storage of acid, ammonia, kerosene, water, dry chemicals, etc. and the vanadium oxidation circuit. The uranium and vanadium solvent extraction (SX) circuit including all SX and reagent tankage, mixers and settlers, pumps and piping. The SX building. The millMill building. The Alternate Feed processing circuit Decontamination pads The office building. The shop and warehouse building. The sample plant building. The Reagent storage building. The sequence of demolition would proceed so as to allow the maximum use of support areas of the facility such as the office and shop areas. It is anticipated that all major structures and large equipment will be demolished with the use of hydraulic shears. These will speed the process, provide proper sizing of the materials to be placed in tailings, and reduce exposure to radiation and other safety hazards during the demolition. Any uncontaminated or decontaminated equipment to be considered for salvage will be released in accordance with the terms of SeI:Iree N·\R..,IMmYon PlunlRoc:lumAiion PIM Roy 3.2IJIATIACIIMENT A ,M.1.B !.,lIin~ dgeaNJlB,;"lrnlllllinn--Pl1lnlBttlflfflA!ion-fl,ut=Z2-tt-jD """"eM Ii! 17 19ViITACHMllNTA m.l 2 A d."" PageA-ll Revision ;3.2.AB+.G I RteFfle!:iettal UranilffilDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Materiel icense Condilion 9.10. As with the equipment for disposal, any contaminated soils from the m+l+MiU area will be disposed of in the tailing facilities in accordance with eelion 4.0 of the pecitications. N'\RS'Clomuljgn PIM'kIQmQl!On PIAl! Rey 3 2B1ATTACI IMEiNT A rev] 2 B Itdlo.e dQQXi'HR;eo1nmruion-Plgn R«'!!I!IHlI!!!!!=fI!!tt=±istin ftmI&"' ' Iii 17 IfP "T£"EHMIDJI • If 3 a ", den 3.2 Mill Site Page A-12 Revision ;3.2.ABW ~iOAIlI UfllfliWflDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Contaminated areas on the millMili site will be primarily superficial and include the ore storage area and surface contamination of some roads. All ore and alternate feed materials will have been previously removed from the ore stockpile area. All contaminated materials will be excavated and be disposed in one of the tailings cells in accordance with Section 4.0 of these Plans and Specifications. The depth of excavation will vary depending on the extent of contamination and will be based on the criteria in Section 2.2.3 of these Plans and Specifications. All other lle.(2) byproduct materials will be disposed of in the tailings cells. All ancillary contaminated materials including pipelines will be removed and will be disposed of by disposal in the tailing cells in accordance with Section 4.0 of these Plans and Specifications. Disturbed areas will be covered, graded and vegetated as required. The proposed grading plan for the millMili site and ancillary areas is shown on Figure A-3.2-1. 3.3 Windblown Contamination Windblown contamination is defined as millMili derived contaminants dispersed by the wind to surrounding areas. The potential areas affected by windblown contamination will be surveyed using scintillometers taking into account historical operational data from the Semi-annual Effluent Reports and other guidance such as prevailing wind direction and historical background data. Areas covered by the existing Mill facilities and ore storage pad, the tailings cells and adjacent stockpiles of random fill, clay and topsoil, will be excluded from the survey. Materials NIRcclnma'!OD Phm\Rc<loma(ign rIM Bey 3 2!lIA'ITACHMBNT A [oy3 1 B .<:dUnp docXN~B.!!!tmQIMm=!'Ie!!\l!..,I!!!!!!!kmt-flloft=H..q..j. "MtnJ 1217 IP' "TF" CIIUfj?EF • M ul2 '\;1ip0c Page A-13 Revision ;3.2.AB4.0 JRtern61ieRw UF~Denison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan [r·om these areas will be removed in conjuncLioll wilh final reclamation and decommissioning of the Mill and tailings cells. N'ReclAmAtion Plnn\Rq:lamAljoa rIM Rqv 3 2IDATIACHMI!NT A rev) 2 D mll;a; d""xNAJ\..,lumo!l9n-t>1Q!)\IW!!!IfD!!Ij<!n-.flloo--H:o-jn .roC ..... 'iH11!!ViFf'EHMllm 4 fl! <l j! • do.,. Page A-14 Revision ;'3.2.AB+.o IRtematisRw UfaRiHHlDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Insert FIGURE A3.2-1 MILL SITE AND ORE PAD FINAL GRADING PLAN N'\RSlllgmatipo PIPOIRs:clgmgl;on PIon Rp" J 2BlAITACHMgNT A rov32 B ,<dUo. d!!C"N"Rqtl!!fl!Q!ion=PI.n\RttI.m.I1Qn-PI~t-in MIfO"!! 12 !l I!JItIiEH\GHM8'fT • "",92-~ <hit!! 3.3.1 Guidance PageA-15 Revision ~3.2.AB4-:G lAteFAatieAru UraAil:lffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The necessity for remedial actions will be based upon an evaluation prepared by mGDenison, and approved by the NRGExecutive Secretary, of the potential health hazard presented by any windblown materials identified. The assessment will be based upon analysis of all pertinent radiometric and past land use information and will consider the feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and environmental impact of the proposed remedial activities and final land use. All methods utilized will be consistent with the guidance contained in NUREG-5849: "Manual for Conducting Radiological Surveys in Support of License Termination." 3.3.2 General Methodology The facility currently monitors soils for the presence of Ra-226, Th-230 and natural uranium, such results being presented in the second semi-annual effluent report for each year. Guideline values for these materials will be determined and will form the basis for the cleanup of the White Mesa-Mill site and surrounding areas. For purposes of determining possible windblown contamination, areas used for processing of uranium ores as well as the tailings and evaporative facilities will be excluded from the initial scoping survey, due to their proximity to the uranium recovery operations. Those areas include: The ffiiHMill building, including CCD, Pre-Leach Thickener area, uranium drying and packaging, clarifying, and preieach. The SX building, including reagent storage immediately to the east of the SX building. The alternate feed circuit. The ore pad and ore feed areas. Tailings Cells No.2, 3, aRd-4A. and 4B. N'IRq;!I!DAI!QD PlooIRecliUDnilQo riM Bey 3 2H1AUACHMENT A [eyl2Jl r""I,""d!'!C1StHRttINDDliflrt-P!nn\!!u!I!fDjJ\~n pfBgreS312 17 IQ'ATT"CIIMENT " Fe 3.2.A.deeJf Page A-16 Revision 3-3.2.ABW IHtematieHll1 UrllHiHffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan B't'llperati't'e eellEvaporation Cell No. 1-1. The remaining areas of the millMiIl will be divided up into two areas for purposes of windblown determinations: The restricted area, less the above areas; and, A halo around the restricted area. Areas within the restricted area, as shown on Figure 3.2-1 will be initially surveyed on a 30 x 30 meter grid as described below in Section 3.3.3. The halo around the suspected area of contamination will also be initially surveyed on a 50 x 50 meter grid using methodologies described below in Section 3.3.3. Any areas which are found to have elevated activity levels will be further evaluated as described in Sections 3.3.4 and 3.3.5. Initial surveys of the areas surrounding the Mill and tailings area have indicated potential windblown contamination only to the north and east of the Mill ore storage area, and to the southwest of Cell 3, as indicated on Figure 3.2-1. 3.3.3 Scoping Survey Areas contaminated through process activities or windblown contamination from the tailings areas will be remediated to meet applicable cleanup criteria for Ra-226, Th-230 and natural uranium. Contaminated areas will be remediated such that the residual radionuclides remaining on the site, that are distinguishable from background, will not result in a dose that is greater than that which would result from the radium soil standard (5 pCi/gram above background). N:\Rq:1omo'!QD P'p"'R«'lImnl,OO PIon Rev ) 2D\ATIACI fMgNT A rryl2 B rqlljng dooxN;;Rffirrnmto1\:=:f1on\RmamHlHm-Ptgf1:::H;tl-m pr......, II la I 1:+Ql"o,:FJ:,>ElliMBNT .... , •• 32 • dllS'!! PageA-17 Revision ;3.2.AB4-:G IRtematisRai UfBRiHffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Soil cleanup verification will be accomplished by use of several calibrated beta/gamma instruments. Multiple instruments will be maintained and calibrated to ensure availability during Remediation efforts. Initial soil samples will be chemically analyzed to determine on-site correlation between the gamma readings and the concentration of radium, thorium and uranium, in the samples. Samples will be taken from areas known to be contaminated with only processed uranium materials (Le. tailings sand and windblown contamination) and areas in which it is suspected that unprocessed uranium materials (i.e. ore pad and windblown areas downwind of the ore pad) are present. The actual number of samples used will depend on the correlation of the results between gamma readings and the Ra-226 concentration. A minimum of 35 samples of windblown tailings material, and 15 samples of unprocessed ore materials is proposed. Adequate samples will be taken to ensure that graphs can be developed to adequately project the linear regression lines and the calculated upper and lower 95 percent confidence levels for each of the instruments. The 95 percent confidence limit will be used for the guideline value for correlation between gamma readings and radium concentration. Because the unprocessed materials are expected to have proportionally higher values of uranium in relation to the radium and thorium content, the correlation to the beta/gamma readings are expected to be different than readings from areas known to be contaminated with only processed materials. Areas expected to have contamination from both processed and unprocessed materials will be evaluated on the more conservative correlation, or will be cleaned to the radium standard which should ensure that the uranium is removed. Radium concentration in the samples should range from 25% of the guideline value (5 pCi/gram above background) for the area of interest, through the anticipated upper range of radium contamination. Background radium concentrations have been gathered over a 16 year period at N:IReclamalion PlanlReclamalion Plan Rey 3,lIDAmCHMENI A rev) 2 B rcdline dOClltelRuhvO!llicft.-.llWn\8ffiwnauM=Jl!oo4-£t-in Pfogfess 12 17 lQ\ATI}CIIH~JT A rea 2'" doelt Page A-I8 Revision ~3 .2.ABW W-ematieRal UFaRiumDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan sample station BHV-3 located upwind and 5 miles west of the White Mesa mill.Mill. The radium background concentration from this sampling is 0.93 pCi/gram. This value will be used as an interim value for the background concentration. Prior to initiating cleanup of windblown contamination, a systematic soil sampling program will be conducted in an area within 3 miles of the site, in geologically similar areas with soil types and soil chemistry similar to the areas to be cleaned, to determine the average background radium concentration, or concentrations, to be ultimately used for the cleanup. An initial scoping survey for windblown contamination will be conducted based on analysis of all pertinent radiometric and past land use information. The survey will be conducted using calibrated beta/gamma instruments on a 30 meter by 30 meter grid. Additional surveys will be conducted in a halo, or buffer zone, around the projected impact area. The survey in the buffer area will be conducted on a 50 meter by 50 meter grid. Grids where no readings exceed 75% of the guideline value (5 pCi/gram above background) will be classified as unaffected, and will not require remediation. The survey will be conducted by walking a path within the grid as shown in Figure A-3.3-1. These paths will be designed so that a minimum of 10% of the area within the grid sidelines will be scanned, using an average coverage area for the instrument of one (1) meter wide. The instrument will be swung from side to side at an elevation of six (6) inches above ground level, with the rate of coverage maintained within the recommended duration specified by the specific instrument manufacturer. In no case will the scanning rate be greater than the rate of 0.5 meters per second (m/sec) specified in NUREG/CR-5849 (NRC, 1992). Page A-19 Revision ~3 .2.AB4,O ~tiORai Urs&il:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 3.3.4 Characterization and Remediation Control urveys After the entire subarea has been classified as affected or unaffected, the affected areas will be further scanned to identify areas of el.evaled activity requiring cleanup. u eh area will b flagged and sufficient soils removed to, at a minimum mcel activity criteria. 'ollowing such remediation, the area ~ ill be scanned again to ensure compliance with activity criteria. A calibrated beta/gamma in trument capable of detecting activity levels of less than or equal LO 25 percent of the guideline valu wi II be used to can all the areas of interest. N'I&dompljon PIM\RcsIQUlilljOIl r IM Rev ] 2PIATIACliMENT A rev) 2 B redhn. dooxW&:olMnotjon-..plQD\Bi!l!O!l!!l'jpn=!>iJ!n,.H;O=tD DfItitR".211 12' !JT'CIIHPHT A fp as " dPCM 3.3.5 Final Survey Page A-20 Revision ;3.2.AB4.G IBtematisRtli UraniumDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan After removal of contamination, final surveys will be taken over remediated areas. Final surveys will be calculated and documented within specific 10 meter by 10 meter grids with sample point locations as shown in Figure A-3.3.2. Soil samples from 10% of the surveyed grids will be chemically analyzed to confirm the initial correlation factors utilized and confirm the success of cleanup effort for radium, thorium and uranium. Ten (10) percent of the samples chemically analyzed will be split, with a duplicate sent to an off site laboratory. Spikes and blanks, equal in number to 10 percent of the samples that are chemically analyzed, will be processed with the samples. 3.3.6 Employee Health and Safety Programs currently in place for monitoring of exposures to employees will remain in effect throughout the time period during which tailings cell reclamation, RtillMill decommissioning and clean up of windblown contamination are conducted. This will include personal monitoring (film badges/TLD's) and the ongoing bioassay program. Access control will be maintained at the Restricted Area boundary to ensure employees and equipment are released from the site in accordance with the current License conditions. In general, no changes to the existing programs are expected and reclamation activities are not expected to increase exposure potential beyond the current levels. N'lRoclamgtioD PlanlRcclamQtiQn riM Rev) 2B\i\Ui\('! IMENT 6 rev) 2.B tq!hnq d9CXN<\R1!clrunn!to!Hl!n"\R~IIIIl-l'l!!!t=l'*o-m progress 12 17 ImAITl,CIIMENT ,4, Fe 32 A aael[ 3.3.7 Environment Monitoring Page A-21 Revision 3-3 .2.ABW IRtematieRw UnmilimDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Existing environmental monitoring programs will continue during the time period in which reclamation and decommissioning is conducted. This includes monitoring of surface and groundwater, airborne particulates, radon, soils and vegetation, according to the existing License conditions. In general, no changes to the existing programs are expected and reclamation activities are not expected to increase exposure potential beyond the current levels. 3.3.8 Quality Assurance At least six (6) months prior to beginning of decommission activities, a detailed Quality Assurance Plan will be submitted for NRGExecutive Secretary approval. The Plan will be in accordance with NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs. In general, the Plan will detail the CemplHly'sDenison's organizational structure and responsibilities, qualifications of personnel, operating procedures and instructions, record keeping and document control, and quality control in the sampling procedure and outside laboratory. The Plan will adopt the existing quality assurance/quality control preeealireprocedures utilized in compliance with the existing License. N'\RecloI!lllUQn PII!Il\Rccl1D!l4ljQn elM Rgy 32B1AlTACIIMIINT " roy] 2 B r«lhn. doc.N~RsoItwotjm=l'lIuMce!qmowm-p!oo--H-o=m IlIl!B!." 1&17 IQ\;\HAEHMt1IT ' m <3 2' d .... Page A-22 Revision 3-3 .2.AB4,(} Iflternatieflal Ur81lil:llftDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Insert Figure A3.3-1 N'\R\lCIP"Wion Plun\Rcclllmuljon Plo" Bey nBlATTACHMENT A roy] 2 B rglli0ad\lCxN:\l\l'!!!f!!!!J!!!en=IllpnlB<!!lomlll1,," PI,. ],2 • In p'OI!!..,Ij! 17IWU'''IIMIRHi"c'H "'d""" Page A-23 Revision 33.2.ABW lRteFflalioAal UnmitifftDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Insert Figure A3.3-2 N'\RcclomAljgo PlanlR«jIA/DAI;QO PIA!! gO' J.2B\AUACHMENT A rev) 2 B rcdljoo.dgcxNjjB1:.okyngJien:PfaMRffiemg"!!!l=f1lq!t-ti-q--in pR,"ro"12171GP~IT' PO a2' dAM 4.0 PLACEMENT METHODS 4.1 Scrap and Debris Page A-24 Revision ~3.2.AB4.G ffitemstieAsl UrBAiHIHDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The scrap and debris will have a maximum dimension of 20 feet and a maximum volume of 30 cubic feet. Scrap exceeding these limits will be reduced to within the acceptable limits by breaking, cutting or other approved methods. Empty drums, tanks or other objects having a hollow volume greater than five cubic feet will be reduced in volume by at least 70 percent. If volume reduction is not feasible, openings will be made in the object to allow soils, tailings andlor other approved materials to enter the object at the time of covering on the tailings cells. The scrap, after having been reduced in dimension and volume, if required, will be placed on the tailings cells as directed by the QC officer. Any scrap placed will be spread across the top of the tailings cells to avoid nesting and to reduce the volume of voids present in the disposed mass. Stockpiled soils, contaminated soils, tailings and/or other approved materials will be placed over and into the scrap in sufficient amount to fill the voids between the large pieces and the volume within the hollow pieces to form a coherent mass. It is recognized that some voids will remain because of the scrap volume reduction specified, and because of practical limitations of these procedures. Reasonable effort will be made to fill the voids. The approval of the Site Manager or a designated representative will be required for the use of materials other than stockpiled soils, contaminated soils or tailings for the purpose of filling voids. PageA-2S Revision ;;3.2.AB4.G IetematisewUfaflillmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 4.2 Contaminated Soils and Raffinate Crystals The various materials will not be concentrated in thick deposits on top of the tailings, but will be spread over the working surface as much as possible to provide relatively uniform settlement and consolidation characteristics ofthe cleanup materials. 4.3 Compaction Reguirements The scrap, contaminated soils and other materials for the first lift will be placed over the existing tailings surface to a depth of up to four feet thick in a bridging lift to allow access for placing and compacting equipment. The first lift will be compacted by the tracking of heavy equipment, such as a Caterpillar D6 Dozer (or equivalent), at least four times prior to the placement of a subsequent lift. Subsequent layers will not exceed two feet and will be compacted to the same requirements. During construction, the compaction requirements for the crystals will be reevaluated based on field conditions and modified by the Site Manager or a designated representative, with the agreement of the NR-G-Fr-ejeet ManagerExccutive Secretary. The contaminated soils and other cleanup materials after the bridging lift will be compacted to at least 80 percent of standard Proctor maximum density (ASTM D-698). N'1Rt:clgmA!!oo PlsolR..,lnmatjgo riM Roy 32B\ATTACHMEHI t\ [gyU B rodljoqd",,,cN"JIS!!I1!moItmt-P!nlRtt!lulTHIfiO!l=Pktn--H-i--in QtOIl<" 12 17 I9'AU"C"HDIT" rq q? " dnCH PageA-26 Revision ~3 .2.AB~ ~~elll UfllBiumDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan I 5.0 RECLAMATION CAP -CELLS 1-1,2, 3. 4A AND ~BA 5.1 Earth Cover A multi-layered earthen cover will be placed over tailings Cells 2 8:R4-3. 4A and 4BA and a portion of Cell 1-4 u ed for disposal of contaminated materials (the Cell 1-4 Tailings Area). The general grading plan is shown on Drawing A-5.1-1. Reclamation cover cross-sections are shown on Drawings A-5.1-2 and A-5.1-3. 5.2 Materials 5.2.1 Physical Properlies The physical properties of materials for use as cover sOLis will meet the following: Random Fill (Plallorm Fill and Frost Barrier) Th se materials will be mixtures of clayey ands and silts with random amounts of gravel and rock size material. Ln the initial bridging lift of the platform fill , rock sizes of up to 2/3 of the thickness of the lift will be allowed. On all other J'andomfill lifls rock sizes will be limited to 2/3 of the lin thicknes with al least 30 percent of the material finer than 40 sieve. For thaI portion pa sing the 0.40 sieve, these soil will classify as CL C Me 01' M materials under the Unified Soil Cia sification ystem. Oversized material will be controlled through selective excavation at the stockpiles and througb thc utilLzation of a grader bulldozer or backh e to cull over ize from the IiII. N'IRcch!!llllllOn PI!II!\R""I'mMnpn Plan Roy 3 2B\AITACHMIiliT A reY) 2 B rcdlinr.d!lCxN:\l\qtlQf!!1Uirut.-.I!!lI!!!I!ItorHlln~ !!t91!fo .. 12 11 1 III 'TF'ClIWNr' It 32 • dOli!! Clay Layer Materials PageA-27 Revision 33.2.AB4.Q fffiematioflal UFBflitiiflDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Clays will have at least 40 percent passing the No. 200 sieve. The minimum liquid limit of (hese soils will be 25 and Ule plasticity index will bc 15 or greater. These soils will classify a CL, C or CH materials under the Unified oil Classification System. PageA-28 Revision ~B.2.AB4.() IRtematisRai UrElRitlffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Insert AS.I-I N'\Rccifl!!Ullioo PInn\RogliDDA1ion elgo RuY 3.2BIATIACHMENT A ",y3 LB r<dline.docxtH8«lt!mftlisl!!:-j>IQn\!\erlwlIfIhll!l-Plllll:H=tHn am ..... Ii 11 1Q!'n'eI!M~'" Page A-29 Revision ~3 .2.ABW IatematiaaallkaaiHfHDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Pian Insert Figure A-S.i-2 ~lom.!!On I'lonlR«lwuQlroB l'lgn Rey ] 28\ATTACHMENI 1\ rcyl 2 B [«Ilioo d"""N4R1:c:lom"Irvn=!llunIBm"lHOljgn-!IlRJl=ti=!H" _~ 'CFPGIIMIiNT ••• 9 a ' dwt Page A-30 Revision ~3.2.AB~ I:nteFFlalieflal UFasil:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Insert FIGURE A-S.1-3 RECLAMATION COVER CROSS SECTIONS N'\ReelnmR!i<m PJ!lnl&eIDlllDhCH. rIM Sey J 2BlATTACHMRm A rev] 2 Q ml!jn ... d!X~·~Rtthl!!!o!ion-fl!!!!\s...J""",~n """"," Ii 11111V;rr,t£Wf6!!T ... ,@ a ~ do., Page A-31 Revision ;3.2.AB4:Q ~fl!.ernatiaA&I UFeflilimDenison Mines (U A) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan . _______________________________________________________________ :>~: ~~~~~a~~~:~u~~~~~I1~~------------~ SECTIONS D Df & E E' JO:ROM FIGURe A 5.1 I N'lKsslerop"QP PIMIR ... lnmmion Plan !ley 3lB\AJTACHMENT A 1m 2 6 !<dlin. d9CjxNAAec","",I!l'!!...flcn\Il1:cl!l!l!tl!"'" pI .. , H 8 ill 11"'''''' Ii J7 19>'U"CmIEm'" 113 a • dw:a Formatted: Tab stops: 3.25", Centered Page A-32 Revision ;J.3.2.ABW inteFAiltiona:l Uf8fli~mDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Insert Figure A-5.1-4 4-----1 Formatted: Indent: Left: 2", First line: 0.5" N'IReolam1!!jpn Ploo\SoolornQl;oo PlllO Rsv 32BlAnACUMENT A rc.yl 2 B rc!lhoe-c!..,.N:\Rec:I",,",I!!!!I=fIIOIl Rffl!!ll!otmn-(lltlll4:i-tt-jl! ~'T'1't3a ''''''''' 5.2.2 Borrow OUl"CCS Page A-33 Revision ~3 .2.AB4:G IAtefAstioRW Ureail:lmDenison Mines (U A) orp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The sources for soils for the cover materials are as follows: I. Random Fi ll (platform and Frost Barrier) -stockpiles from previous cell construction activities currently localed to the east and west of the tailing facilities. 2. Clay -will be from suitable materials stookpiled on site during cell construction or will be imported from borrow areas located in 'ection 16, TI8 R22E . LM. 3. Rock Armor -will be produced through screening of allu ial gravels located in deposits I mile north of Blanding, Utah,; 7 mile north ofthe.mtHMill site. 5.3 Cover Construction 5.3.1 General Placement of covcr materials will be ba ed on a schedule determined by analysis of settlement data, piezometer data and equipment mobility considerations. ctllement plates and piezometers wi ll be install.ed and monitored in accordance with eel ion 5.4 of the e Plans and pecifications. N'\BccIIlJDJll!on PlnnIR,,;lllmlliQD Phm Rey 12B\ATIt\CHMPN! A ,cv3 28 wlina docx)ffiRw"VD.lio!t-Pl.n'l\nllM!oli1!!t-Plt!~ 1!!1'111"" 121119\MHAEIIMENJ'.,,..a a .\:Wa:s 5.3.2 Placement and Compaction Page A-34 Revision 33.2.ABW IBtematisBw UraBiHfHDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan I ):..3~?·!.MeJlJ.o_d§. ______________________________________________________ -' -1 Formatted: Font: Italic Platfonn Fill An initial lift of 3 to 4 feet of random fill will be placed over the tailings surface to fonn a stable working platfonn for subsequent controlled fill placement. This initial lift will be -placed by pushing random fill material or contaminated materials across the tailings in increments, slowly enough thatJhe underlying tailings are displaced as little as possible. Compaction of the initial lift will be limited to what the weight of the placement equipment provides. The maximum rock size, as far as practicable, in the initial lift is 2/3 of the lift thickness. Placement of fill will be monitored by a qualified individual with the authority to stop work and reject material being placed. The top surface (top 1.0 feet) of the platform fill will be compacted to 90% maximum dry density per ASTM D 698. Frost Barrier Fill Frost barrier fill will be placed above the clay cover in 12-inch lifts, with particle size limited to 2/3 of the lift thickness. Frost barrier material will come from the excavation of random fill stockpiles, If oversized material is observed during the excavation of fill material it will be removed as far as practicable before it is placed in the fill. In all layers ofthe cover the distribution and gradation of the materials throughout each fill layer will be such that the fill will, as far as practicable, be free of lenses, pockets, streaks or layers of material differing substantially in texture, gradation or moisture content from the surrounding material. Nesting of oversized material will be controlled through selective excavation of stockpiled material, observation of placement by a qualified individual with authority to stop work and reject material being placed and by culling oversized material from the fill utilizing a N-\RecIQ!Ilo!jeo PIQIlIRRClamol!Qo riM Rev 32BlAlTACliMENT A n;y3 2B mlhnedgc;xNAAmlllnolion-f)u\S .. 'ffim»tintH'lJl!t.='!..a.t-j 1lf9 ..... Ii 17 19l'U'CIiMeII ' ",,13 • dllfi'l! Page A-35 Revision ;3.2.ABW httematiesill UfIlBitlfBDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan grader. Successive loads of material will be placed on the fill so as to produce the best practical distribution of material. If the compacted surface of any layer of fill is too dry or smooth to bond properly with the layer of material to be placed thereon, it will be moistened and/or reworked with a harrow, scarifier, or other suitable equipment to a sufficient depth to provide relatively uniform moisture content and a satisfactory bonding surface before the next succeeding layer of earthfill is placed. If the compacted surface of any layer of earthfill in-place is too wet, due to precipitation, for proper compaction of the earthfill material to be placed thereon, it will be reworked with harrow, scarifier or other suitable equipment to reduce the moisture content to the required level shown in Table 5.3.2.1-1. It will then be recompacted to the earthfill requirements. No material will be placed when either the materials, or the underlying material, is frozen or when ambient temperatures do not permit the placement or compaction of the materials to the specified density, without developing frost lenses in the fill. As far as practicable, the materials will be brought to the proper moisture content before placement on tailings, or moisture will be added to the material by sprinkling on the earthfilI. Each layer of the fill will be conditioned so that the moisture content is uniform throughout the layer prior to and during compaction. The moisture content of the compacted fill will be within the limits of standard optimum moisture content as shown in Table 5.3.2.1-1. Material that is too dry or too wet to permit bonding of layers during compaction will be rejected and will be reworked until the moisture content is within the specified limits. Reworking may include removal, re-harrowing, reconditioning, rerolling, or combinations of these procedures. N·\Bs:clomQUDn l'IIIlIR!!CIAmAUOn ('1M Bey 3 2BlAUACHMENT A ru3 211 Wlio. dooxtf\8« 'MlPI!llfHllgp Bw!.m!llto~n IlfOI'enl2 17 Im"U'EII!IEtE£ " Ie 32 "d Page A-36 Revision :l3.2.AB4.() Ifltematisflal Uf!iflhnflDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Density control of compacted soil will be such that the compacted material represented by samples having a dry density less than the values shown in Table 5.3.2.1-1 will be rejected. Such rejected material will be reworked as necessary and rerolled until a dry density equal to or greater than the percent of its standard Proctor maximum density shown in Table 5.3 .2.1-1. To determine that the moisture content and dry density requirements of the compacted fill are being met, field and laboratory tests will be made at specified intervals taken from the compacted fills as specified in Section 7.4, "Frequency of Quality Control Tests." 5.4 Monitoring Cover Settlement 5.4.1 Temporary Settlement Plates ):..~£.! Y.!!!!f!.r_a{ ______________________________________________________ - _ ,1\..F_o_rm_iltted __ :_Fo_n_t _lta_l_iC ______ --' Temporary settlement plates will be installed in the tailings Cells. At the time of cell closure, a monitoring program will be proposed to the NRG.-Executive Secretary. Data collected will be analyzed and the reclamation techniques and schedule adjusted accordingly. ):..~£.?!f!..s!.qj~a!Jg'!. ____________________________________________________ , _' 1\..F....:o_rm_il.:....tt:..:.ed;:..:....:_Fo_n_t:_lta_l_iC ______ --' At the time of cell closure or during the placement of interim cover temporary settlement plates will be installed. These temporary settlement plates will consist of a corrosion resistant steel plate 1/4 inch thick and two foot square to which a -one inch diameter corrosion resistant monitor pipe has been welded. The one inch monitor pipe will be surrounded by a three inch diameter guard pipe which will not be attached to the base plate. N>\Rccl!l!!!l11ion PIWlIR""I:JIJ!pljon r iM ReV J 2IDAITACHMENT A rsy32..B rqlhne dQlixNtlRttliJmO!j!ln--JllmtlBcth,,",pulO-P!wt+i-Q-1D *,,0,1217 1m :lU" CII'fENT " r~:a PageA-37 Revision ~3 .2.ABW lA'te'rnatiolla.J..tlfaffi.ttm.Dcnison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The installaiion will consist of lev cling an area on the existing surface of the Lailings and placing the base plate directly on the tail.ings. A minimum three feel of initial soil or tailings co er will be placed on the base plate for a minimum radial distance of fLve feet from the pipe. I A4:,. U NJ,_njt2'J!!8 §~/H~/!!?.n! f!q(~~ _________________________________________ ----(,-~_rm_a_tt....;ed_:_F_on....;t_.l_ta_lIc ______ ---J Monitoring of settlement plates will be in accordance with the program submitted to and approved by the NRtDRC. Settl.ement observations will be made in accordance with Quality Conlrol Procedure QC-16-WM "Monitoring of Temporary ettlement Plates." N;\Rcclomgllon PIDnlR""lomnliQJJ Pion Rey J 2B\AT TACIIMENT A rov) 2 B ..rol;n" d"".NtIBJooIIl!U9It1l!t-f1lgnlRulomgumtP!!II)=;;'I-i;g:; .........,,, 12 17,IOlAU,WIIMEIII • r~ PageA-38 Revision 3-3.2.ABW lffiematisflwllfaHiHfHDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan INSERT TABLE 5.3.2.1-1 N'\Reclgmntlon PlonlR<!!lnmotjon PIWl Rey 3.2B\AUACHMENT A ",yl.2 B rWhnc-docxWIIsclsmpIJpn--fllpmR1:clwnp"!!R--Jl1ml--Htln fItI!IS"J'!! Ii 17 IO! 'TPEiIiMENT • !!II] 2 ' dwJt 6.0 ROCK PROTECTION 6.1 General Page A-39 Revision ,l3 .2.+\B4:G IHtemaUeHai UfBHil:lmDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan The side slopes of the reclaimed cover will be protected by rock surfacing. Drawings 5.1-1,5.1- 2, and 5.1-3 show the location of rock protection with the size, thickness and gradation requirements for the various side slopes. A riprap layer was designed for erosion protection of the tailings soil cover. According to NRC guidance, the design must be adequate to protect the soil/tailings against exposure and erosion for 200 to 1,000 years (NRC, 1990). Currently, there is no standard industry practice for stabilizing tailings for 1,000 years. However, by treating the embankment slopes as wide channels, the hydraulic design principles and practices associated with channel design were used to design stable slopes that will not erode. Thus, a conservative design based on NRC guidelines was developed. Engineering details and calculations are summarized in the Tailings Cover Design report (Appendix D). Riprap cover specifications for the top and side slopes were determined separately as the side slopes are much steeper than the slope of the top of the cover. The size and thickness of the riprap on the top of the cover was calculated using the Safety Factor Method (NUREG/CR-4651, 1987), while the Stephenson Method (NUREG/CR-4651, 1987) was used for the side slopes. These methodologies were chosen based on NRC recommendations (1990). By the Safety Factor Method, riprap dimensions for the top slope were calculated in order to achieve a slope "safety factor" of 1.1. For the top of the soil cover, with a slope of 0.2 percent, the Safety Factor Method indicated a median diameter (Dso) riprap of 0.28 inches is required to stabilize the top slope. However, this dimension must be modified based on the long-term durability of the specific rock type to be used in construction. The suitability of rock to be used N;IR""llIlIunigo Phlll\R""lamOljoD 1'100 Roy J 2BV.ITACUMIlNT A roy) 2 U n:dhoR d""!!NASs:e!omphmrl'lgnlfWd .... AltlHl=-fll"!l--'!i-1Hu II"QI"" 12 11 IflWFl'ACW teff .... 11 2 A d...,. Page A-40 Revision 33.2.ABW .lfl.kl~&fl&Wr:atHwnDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan as a protective cover has been assessed by laboratory tests to determine the physical characteristics of the rocks. The gravels sourced from pits located north of Blanding require an oversizing factor of 9.35%. Therefore, riprap created from this source should have a Dso size of , , I at least 0.306 inches and should have an overall layer thickness of at least three inches on the top , " I , I of the cover. From a practical construction standpoint the minimum rock layer thickness may be , " " I " up to six (6) inches. :: I I ,,' ',' ','" ',', I Riprap dimensions for the side slopes were calculated using Stephenson Method equations. The ~::, I , , ','" side slopes of the cover are designed at 5H: 1 V. At this slope, Stephenson's Method indicated the ~:, unmodified riprap Dso of 3.24 inches is required. Again assuming that the gravel from north of ~:! Blanding will be used, the modified Dso size of the riprap should be at least 3.54 inC.hes with anJ~~' , , , I I I " ' overall layer thickness of at least 8 inches. ~\ : ~ , I ' I ' I , I II " JtiBt~P be~dinl?, should be placed be.!"veen the random fill and t..hp IlPIIp qn tile _ ~d~.§!op~~. ~h~ l l:: beddi.ng should consist of medium sand. and should be placed with aroinimum layer !hickness_orJ :'!! I , I 6 · h 'II I , mc es. 'II " :", , I ,", ,"'t ,"'/ 6.2 Materials I" " r"" ,::lI , I Formatted: Font: (Default) "Times New Roman, 12 pt, Not Bold Formatted: Font: (Default) "Times New Roman, 12 pt formatted: Font: (Default) "Times New Roman, 12 pt, Not Bold formatted: Right: 0" formatted: Font: (Default) "Times New Roman, 12 pt formatted: Font: (Default) "Times New Roman, 12 pt, Not Bold formatted: Border: Between : (Single solid line, Auto, 0.5 pt Line width, From text: 1 pt Border spacing: ), Bar: (Single sclid line, Auto, 0.5 pt Line width), Box: (Single sclid line, Auto, 0.5 pt Line width) formatted Table formatted: Border: Between : (Single sclid line, Auto, 0.5 pt Line width, From text: 1 pt Border spacing: ), Bar : (Single solid line, Auto, 0.5 pt Line width), Box: (Single sclid line, Auto, 0.5 pt Line width) formatted: Justified formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5", Line spacing: single, Border: Top: (No border), Bottom: (No border), Left: (No border), Right: (No border), Between : (No border), Bar : (No border) Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Justified, Indent: Hanging: 0.02", "t" ',.'1 , I, Line spacing: Single, Border: Top: (No border), I Materials utilized for riprap applications will meet the following specifications: '" " " '.,"11 , "--1 -----------------l4t;i",: L.-------r--------------------~------------r_----------~----------------~r_-----+~j ,:, , '11 ', LeeatieRMaterial Dso Size DIOO Size Layer Thickness '",' I I ",,'/ '1'1 III .III, III II III Too urface Ri orao 0.3" 0.6" 6/1 ,~/~ I I I .,.{ Slope Surface Beddin~ No. 40 Sieve .. _____ t: __ u u ____ ~ u __________ =tS < Slope Surface Riprap 3.5/1 7" 8" N\Koc!I\!DAUOO PIM\Roc!nmn.joo I'IM Rey HB\ATTACUMIlNT A (gvUB mlhnc;dos.~oo\Rwh.ngljjm=!>lAll4-i-tt-!n 1" .. 11 .... 1217 19\ 'U'GIIIIEN:r' I. (l jI e, d •• ,. Bottom: (No border), Left: (No border), Right: (No border), Between: (No border), Bar : (No border) Formatted: Font: Not Bold formatted: Font: Not Bold formatted: Line spacing: Single, Border: Top: (No border), Bottom: (No border), Left: (No border), Right: (No border), Between : (No border), Bar : (No border) Formatted: Font: Not Bold Formatted: Centered, Line spacing: single, Border: Top: (No border), Bottom: (No border), Left: (No border), Right: (No border), Between : (No border), Bar: (No border) formatted r:::Tlf formatted CT2f: Toe Apron Riprap 6.4" Page A-41 Revision J3.2.AB4.G latemat.ioAal UFIlAiumDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan 12" 24" Riprap will be supplied to the project from gravel sources located north of the project site. Riprap will be a screened product. Riprap quality will be evaluated by methods presented in NUREG/1623 Design of Erosion Protection for Long-Term Stabilization Size adjustment will be made in the riprap for materials not meeting the quality criteria. 6.3 Placement Riprap and bedding material will be hauled to the reclaimed surfaces and placed on the surfaces using belly dump highway trucks and road graders. Riprap and bedding will be dumped by trucks in windrows and the grader will spread the riprap in a manner to minimize segregation of the material. Depth of placement will be controlled through the establishment of grade stakes placed on a 200 x 200 foot grid on the top of the cells and by a 100 x 100 foot grid on the cell slopes. Physical checks of riprap and bedding depth will be accomplished through the use of hand dug test pits at the center of each grid in addition to monitoring the depth indicated on the grade stakes. Placement of the riprap and bedding will avoid accumulation of riprap or bedding sizes less than the minimum Dso size and nesting of the larger sized rock. The riprap and bedding layer will be compacted by at least two passes by a D-7 Dozer (or equivalent) in order to key the rock for stability. 7.0 QUALITY CONTROL/QUALITY ASSURANCE 7.1 Ouality Plan N"IReGliWUII;OQ PhmlRec'wnAuon Plan Roy J 2BlATfACHMIlNT A reyJ 2 B rp;Iljnc d!lCJ5~mjwt-£!on WPIOAIigp-f'lott=Htln !'!f1!I!!~MH>lTAI,,3c!\ dQ" Page A-42 Revision 3-3.2.AB4:G InlerflatieAal UFaflil:lFADenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan A Quality Plan has been developed for construction activities fefm the Wflite Mesa ProjeetMil1. The Quality Plan includes Ule following: 1. QC/QA Definitions, Methodology and Activities. 2. Organizational Structure. 3. Surveys Inspections, Sampling and Testing. 4. flanges and Corrective Actions. 5. Documentation Requirements. 6. Quality Control Procedures. 7.2 Tmplementation The Quality Plan will be implemented upon initiation of reclamation work. 7.3 Quality Control Procedures QuaUty control procedures have been developed for reclamation and are presented in Attachment B of this Reclamation Plan. Procedures will be used for aJl testing, sampling and inspection tuncLions. 7.4 Frequency of Quality Control Tests The frequency or the qual ity control tests for earthwork will be as tallows: 1. The n'equency of the field density and moi~ture tests will be not less than one test per I 000 cubic yards (CY) of compacted contaminated material placed and one lcst pcr 500 CY of compacted random fill, radon barrier or fi'ost barrier. A minimum of two tests will be taken fOI' each day that an applicable amount or fill is placed in excess of 150 CY. A ~IM PIM\Rpdgmg'jQO Pion Rsr 'Z8\AUACHMgNI A "y3ea B W Ho!! doc3MAAwhVUlliion-@kln &WlqmQ)tOf!=fIb!J~-in PI_llpIO"n'CWISm· .. 32' d_ Page A-43 Revision ~3.2.AB4,j} InteFflBtioRft! Unmil:tffiDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan minimum of one test per lift and at least one test for every full shift of compaction operations will be taken. Field density/moisture tests will be performed utilizing a nuclear density gauge (ASTM D-2922 density and ASTM D-3017 moisture content). Correlation tests will be performed at a rate of one for every five nuclear gauge tests for compacted contaminated materials (one_ per 2,500 CY placed) and one for every ten nuclear gauge tests for other compacted materials (one per 5,000 CY of material placed). Correlation tests will be sand cone tests (ASTM D-1556) for density determination and oven drying method (ASTM D-2216) for moisture determination. 2. Gradation and classification testing will be performed at a minimum of one test per 2,000 CY of upper platform fill and frost barrier placed. A minimum of one test will be performed for each 1,000 CY of radon barrier material placed. For all materials other than random fill and contaminated materials, at least one gradation test will be run for each day of significant material placement (in excess of 150 CY). 3. Atterberg limits will be determined on materials being placed as radon barrier. Radon barrier material will be tested at a rate of at least once each day of significant material placement (in excess of 150 CY). Samples should be randomly selected. 4. Prior to the start of field compaction operations, appropriate laboratory compaction curves will be obtained for the range of materials to be placed. During construction, one point Proctor tests will be performed at a frequency of one test per every five field density tests (one test per 2,500 CY placed). Laboratory compaction curves (based on complete Proctor tests) will be obtained at a frequency of approximately one for every 10 to 15 field density tests (one lab Proctor test per 5,000 CY to 7,500 CY placed), depending on the variability of materials being placed. N'\I\CS!lomwjgo PIM\R!!Clrun@oo Plnn Roy ] ?B\A1TACtiMENT A ray) 2 B «<Ilia, dgc:xN:\R.,,"gmQ!KtIJ-flQo\s...wn.u\ln-PIt!~n "Wlfen 12 11101 'TFIICIIMIRII M '9 2 ~ d..". Page A-44 Revision ~3 .2.AB4,G International Unmil:lfflDenison Mines (USA) Corp. White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan I 5. For riprap and bedding materials, each load of material will be visually checked against standard piles for gradation prior to transport to the tailings piles. Prior to delivery of any riprap materials to the site rock durability tests will be performed for each gradation to be used. Test series for riprap durability will include specific gravity, .-----{ Formatted: Line spacing: 1.5 lines absorption, sodium soundness and LA abrasion. During construction gradations will be,performed for each Lype ofripl"'dp and bedding when arwroximate!y one-third (1/3) and ,two-thirds (,213) of the total volume of ea.,c,b lme_have bec_n oroc!u_ced ~r.. <!efi.yered. In _ n __ - addition, (est series rOT rock durability will be performed on any doran material at this~ame __ :.-__ lime, additioRQI test series .~c! gl:!l~,!lio_n~ .;:vJ~ ~~ [I~r~~~~ _~F_ e_a~~ ~~ !>f tj@F.!l[l .... ":h~ _____ ...... aj'lj'lFtlxilRfilely oBe l'hif'8 (1/3) afla ~weUiiFEls (213) onhe tetel ','olliffie of eeeh type have been pf081:l6ea sr aeli¥6fea. For any type of riprap where the volume is greater than 30,000 CY, a test series and gradations will be performed for each additional 10,000 CY of rip rap produced or , , Formiltted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Not Bold -Formiltted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Not Bold -Formiltted: Left, Indent: Left: 0" Formiltted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Not Bold Formiltted: No underline deliveredlL __________________________________________________________ ~ -1 Formatted: font: Not Bold W!&d 4mntiD!! Plw!\Rc<:i!ll!l!lljQD elfin Rev 3.2!MU ACtlMENT A rev] 2 8 red"D. dgqxI'PR1d!l!!lnh"rl!qn'Rffi1lmnhO!!=P"~ m!J'U H 1217 19ViF!"ACIIMRfr • '" '32 • d ... I Page 40: [1] f ormatted Jo Ann Tischler 12/17/2010 4:08:00 PM Border: Between : (Single solid line, Auto, O.S pt Line width, From text: I pt Border spacing: ). Bar : (Single soUd line, Auto, O.S pt Line width), Box: (Single solid line, Auto, 0.5 pt Line width) I Page 40: {2] f ormatted Jo Ann Tischler 12/17/2010 4:08:00 PM Border: Between : (Single solid line, Auto, O.S pt Line width, From text: 1 pt Bord er spacing: ), Bar : (Single sol.id line, Auto, 0.5 pt Line width), Box: (Single solid line, Auto, 0.5 pt Line width) OENISOJ)~~ Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO 80265 USA MINES Attachment C Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 303 389-4125 www.denisonmines.com White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Revision 4.4 Revised Cost Estimates for Reclamation of the White Mesa Mill and Tailings Management System November 2010 State of Utahlle.(2) Byproduct Material License # UT1900479 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. www.denisonmines.com Copy 1 State of Utah 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO, USA 80265 Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 303389-4125 PREFACE TO ATIACHMENT C The White Mesa Mill Reclamation Cost Estimate Revision 4.4 was submitted in its entirety under separate cover in November 2010. This Attachment ("Attachment C") contains a summary table of the White Mesa Mill Reclamation Costs from Revision 4.4 of the Reclamation Cost Estimate. WHITE MESA MILL RECLAMATION COST ESTIMATE November 2010 Revision 4.4 Mill Decommissioning $2,106,401 Cell 1 $1,711,993 Cell 2 $1,589,352 Cell 3 $2,056,143 Cell4A $1,348,393 Cel14B $1,337,266 Miscellaneous $3,295,557 Subtotal Direct Costs $13,445,107 Profit Allowance 10.00% $1,344,511 Contingency 15.00% $2,016,766 licensing & Bonding 2.00% $268,902 UDEQ Contract Administration 4.00% $537,804 Contractors Equipment Floater $82,250 Automobile and General Liability Insurance $284,600 Long Term Care Fund $797,448 Total Reclamation $18,777,388 Revised Bond Amount $18,777,388 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 11/10/2010 -12:02 PM -WMM Rec Plan Est October 2010 Rev 4.4 White Mesa Mill Attachment G Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO 80265 USA Tef : 303 628-7798 Fax: 303 3894125 www.denlsonmines.com White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2.8 Channel, Toe Apron and Rip Rap Filter Blanket Design Calculations for Reclamation of the White Mesa Mill and Tailings Management System January 2011 State of Utahlle.(2) Byproduct Material License # UT1900479 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. www.denisonmines.com 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO, USA 80265 Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 303 3894125 ATTACHMENT G CHANNEL, TOE APRON AND RIP RAP FILTER BLANKET DESIGN CALCULTIONS FOR REC AMATION OF WHITE ME A MILL F ACLLITIES BLANDING, UTAH PREPARED BY D NISON MJNE (U A) CORP. 1050 17'h STREET SillT 950 D NVER COLORADO 80265 January 2011 Revision 3.2.B <l MWH TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM TO: Doug Oliver DATE: January 29, 2010 FROM: Roslyn Stern SUBJECT: Evaluation of need for filter layer on side slopes of Denison's White Mesa Mill Tailings Cell Cover The following evaluation was performed to evaluate the need for a filter layer under the rock layer on the side slopes of the tailings cells cover for the White Mesa Mill. Supporting assumptions, calculations, and discussion are provided following the conclusions and recommendations. Conclusions and Recommendations The calculated interstitial velocities on the top slope and the toe apron are sufficiently low that a bedding layer is not necessary. However, the interstitial velocity within the erosion protection on the side slopes is within the range of values where bedding is conditionally recommended. Because of the wide difference in grain size distribution between the erosion protection and the random fill, it is recommended that a 6-inch layer (for constructability) of bedding material be placed between these two materials. The bedding material should be medium sand with the following specifications: Sieve Size 3 inches No.4 No. 20 No. 200 Percent Passing 100 65-100 20-70 0-5 The need for a rock layer on the sideslopes and underlying filter zone can be evaluated as part of the detailed cover design. The rock layer on the sideslopes could be replaced with a rock mulch (gravel-amended topsoil) that has the appropriate median size for erosion protection. A rock mulch (gravel-amended topsoil) is being proposed for the cover surface. 3665 JFK Parkway TEL 970377 9410 Suite 206 FAX 970377 9406 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 www.mwhglobal.com eMWH TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Supporting Documentation and Discussion Problem Statement Evaluate the need for bedding layer between cover soils and erosion protection material (rock) by estimating interstitial pore velocities using method proposed by Abt et al. (1991). This evaluation is being completed for the currently permitted rock cover design. Assumptions • Reclamation cover, as described in Section 3.2.2 of the 2000 Reclamation Plan (International Uranium Corp, 2000) consists of six-foot soil cover. The cover consists, from bottom to top, of a minimum of three feet of random fill (platform fill), one foot of clay, and two feet of random fill (frost barrier). • Cells 2 and 3 will have final cover placed at a 0.2 percent grade, with 5H: 1 V side slopes (Section 3.2.2.3). • Erosion protection on the top surface of the cover will be provided by placing a minimum of 3 inches of riprap with a median diameter (Dso) of 0.3 inches (Section 3.3.5) and a DlOo of 0.6 inches (Section 6.2 of Attachment A -Plans and Specifications). The overland flow velocity calculated for the top of the cover is less than 2.0 ft/sec (Section 3.3.5). • Erosion protection of the side slopes of the cover will be provided by placing a minimum of 8 inches of rip rap with a Dso of3.5 inches (Section 3.3.5) and a DlOo of7 inches (Section 6.2 of Attachment A -Plans and Specifications). The calculated flow velocity on the side slopes is 4.9 ft/sec (Section 3.3.5). • Erosion protection of the toe apron will be provided by placing riprap with a Dso of 6.4 inches (Section 3.3.5) and a DIOO of 12 inches (Section 6.2 of Attachment A -Plans and Specifications). • As described in Section 5.2 of Attachment A (Plans and Specifications), the random fill used as platform fill and frost barrier protection is specified to have at least 30 percent ofthe material finer than the number 40 sieve, with a DlOo less than 8 inches. • The peak unit discharge from the tailings cells is 1.8 cfs/ft (Attachment 12 to Attachment G -Channel and Toe Apron Design Calculations) 3665 JFK Parkway TEL 970377 9410 Suite 206 FAX 970377 9406 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 www.mwhglobal.com 4I)MWH TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Discussion NUREG-1623, Appendix D, recommends a filter or bedding layer be placed under erosion protection if interstitial velocities are greater than 1 ftlsec, in order to prevent erosion of the underlying soils. Bedding is not required if interstitial velocities are less than 0.5 ftlsec, and recommended depending on the characteristics ofthe underlying soil if velocities are between 0.5 and 1 ftlsec. Interstitial velocities are calculated by procedures presented by Abt et al. (1991) as given in the following equation. This method updates the Leps (1973) relationship that is presented in NUREG/CR-4620 (Nelson et al. 1986): Where: v; = 0.23{g X DIO x S )0.5 Vi = interstitial velocities (ftls), G = acceleration of gravity (ftls2), DIO = rock diameter at which 10 percent is finer (inches), and S = gradient in decimal form. The maximum DIO of the erosion protection is estimated based on Dso required for erosion protection, assuming the erosion protection will have a coefficient of uniformity (CU) of 6 and a band width of 5. Band width refers to the ratio of the minimum and maximum allowed particle sizes acceptable for any given percent finer designation. USDA (1994) recommends CU to be a maximum of 6 in order to prevent gap-grading of filters. Table 1 summarizes the results. T bl 1 R It f B dd· R t a e esu so e mg eqUlremen s Location Top Cover Cover Side Slopes Toe Apron MinimumDso 0.3 3.5 6.4 (inches) MaximumDIO 0.35 1.24 3.73 (inches) Slope (%) 0.2 20 1 Interstitial Velocity 0.03 0.65 0.25 (ftls) 3665 JFK Parkway TEL 970377 9410 Suite 206 FAX 9703779406 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 www.mwhglobal.com OMWH TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM .UILD'NS A • ..,r." JIID"'D References Abt, S.R., J.F. Ruff, and R.J. Wilter (1991). Estimating Flow Through Riprap, Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, v. 117, No.5, May. International Uranium (USA) Corp (2000). Reclamation Plan, White Mesa Mill, Blanding, Utah, Revision 3.0, July. Johnson, T.L. (2002). Design of Erosion Protection for Long-Term Stabilization, NUREG-1623, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), February. Nelson, J.D., S.R. Abt, R.L. Volpe, D. van Zyl, N.B. Hinkle, W.P. Staub (1986) Methodologies for Evaluating Long-Term Stabilization Designs of Uranium Mill tailings Impoundments, NUREG/CR-4620, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), June. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (1994). Gradation Design of Sand and Gravel Filters, National Engineering Handbook, Part 633, Chapter 26, October. 3665 JFK Parkway Suite 206 Fort Collins, Colorado 80525 TEL 970 377 9410 FAX 970377 9406 www.mwhglobal.com OENISOJ)~~ MINES Figures Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO 80265 USA Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 303 389-4125 www.denisonmines.com White Mesa Mill Reclamation Plan Revision 3.2.8 for Reclamation of the White Mesa Mill and Tailings Management System January 2011 State ofUtahlle.(2) Byproduct Material License # UT1900479 Denison Mines (USA) Corp. www.denisonmines.com 1050 17th Street, Suite 950 Denver, CO, USA 80265 Tel: 303 628-7798 Fax: 303389-4125