DRC-2023-001738 - 0901a06881194f37

���'
--�,-;�ERGYFUELS
VIA Expedited Delivery
February 20, 2023
Mr. Doug Hansen Director of Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control Utah Department of Environmental Quality 195 North 1950 West P.O. Box 144880 Salt Lake City, UT 84116
Div of 'Na� ¥an gerrert a'1d Rad ;;it1on Control
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc. 225 Union Blvd. Suite 600 Lakewood, CO, US, 80228 303 974 2140 \111v,v.ener!,!vfuels.com
Re: Transmittal of Annual Seeps and Springs Monitoring Report Groundwater Quality Discharge Permit UGW370004 White Mesa Uranium Mill
Dear Mr. Hansen:
Enclosed are two copies of the White Mesa Uranium Mill Annual Seeps and Springs Monitoring Report for 2022 as required by the Groundwater Quality Discharge Pennit UGW370004, as well as two CDs that contain a word searchable electronic copy of this report.
If you should have any questions regarding this report please contact me at 303-389-4134.
Yours very truly,
1(�&-� ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC. Kathy Weinel Director, Regulatory Compliance
CC: David Frydenlund Scott Bakken Logan Shumway Garrin Palmer Jordan App John Uhrie
DRC-2023-001738
VIA Expedited Delivery
February 20, 2023
Mr. Doug Hansen
Director of Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control
Utah Department of Environmental Quality
195 North 1950 West
P.O. Box 144880
Salt Lake City, UT 84116
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
225 Union Blvd. Suite 600
Lakewood, CO, US, 80228
303 974 2140
www.energyfuels.com
Re: Transmittal of Annual Seeps and Springs Monitoring Report
Groundwater Quality Discharge Permit UGW370004 White Mesa Uranium Mill
Dear Mr. Hansen:
Enclosed are two copies of the White Mesa Uranium Mill Annual Seeps and Springs Monitoring
Report for 2022 as required by the Groundwater Quality Discharge Permit UGW370004, as well as
two CDs that contain a word searchable electronic copy of this report.
If you should have any questions regarding this report please contact me at 303-389-4134.
Yours very truly,
cf<.~&~
ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES (USA) INC.
Kathy Weinel
Director, Regulatory Compliance
CC: David Frydenlund
Scott Bakken
Logan Shumway
Garrin Palmer
Jordan App
John Uhrie
White Mesa Uranium Mill
2022 Annual Seeps and Springs Sampling Report
State of Utah
Groundwater Discharge Permit No. UGW370004
Prepared by:
~~ ' ~ '
/ ENERGY FUELS
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
225 Union Blvd., Suite 600
Lakewood, CO 80228
February 20, 2023
I[
a.
"
. ..
Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... I
2.0 SAMPLING EVENTS ............................................................................................................................ 1
2.2 2022 Srunpling .................................................................................................................................... 1
2.3 Repeat Visits to Dry Seeps and Springs .............................................................................................. 1
2.4 Sampling Procedures ........................................................................................................................... 'I
2.5 Field Data ............................................................................................................................................ 2
2.6 Field QC Samples ............................................................................................................................... 3
3.0 SEEPS AND SPRINGS SURVEY AND CONTOURMAP ................ : ................................................. 3
4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL ..................................................................... .4
4.1 Laboratory Results .............................................................................................................................. 4
4.2 DATA EVALUATION ....................................................................................................................... 4
4.3 Adherence to Sampling Plan and Permit Requirements .................................................................... .4
4.4 Analyte Completeness Review ............................................................................. ·-······························5
4.5 Data Validation ................................................................................................................................... 5
4.5.1 Field Data QA/QC Evaluation ..................................................................................................... 5
4.5.2 Holding Time Evaluation ............................................................................................................. 5
4.5.3 Laboratory Receipt Temperature Check ...................................................................................... 5
4.5.4 Analytical Method Check ............................................................................................................. 5
4.5.5 Reporting Limit Evaluation .......................................................................................................... 6
4.5.6 Trip Blank Evaluation .................................................................................................................. 6
4.5.7 QA/QC Evaluation for Sample Duplicates .................................................................................. 6
4.5.8 Radiologies Counting Error ......................................................................................................... 7
4.5.9 Laboratory Matrix QC Evaluation ............................................................................................... 7
5.0 EVALUATION OF ANALYTICAL DATA .......................................................................................... 9
5 .1 Evaluation of Analytical Results ......................................................................................................... 9
5.1.1 Ruin Spring .................................................................................................................................. 9
5 .1.2 Cottonwood Spring .................................................................................................................... 10
5.1.3 Westwater Seep .......................................................................................................................... 10
5.1.4 Entrance Spring .......................................................................................................................... 10
6.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT ..................................................................................................... 11
6.1 Assessment of Corrective Actions from Previous Period ................................................................. I I
7 .0 ELECTRONIC DATA FILES AND FORMAT ................................................................................... 11
8.0 SIGNATURE AND CERTIFICATION ............................................................................................... 12
Table 1
Table 2A
Table 2B
Table 2C
Table 2D
LIST OF TABLES
Summary of Seeps and Springs Sampling
Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site
Monitoring Wells-Ruin Spring
Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site
Monitoring Wells -Cottonwood Seep
Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site
Monitoring Wells -Westwater Seep
Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site
Monitoring Wells-Entrance Spring
INDEX OF TABS
Tab A Seeps and Springs Field Data Sheets and Photographic Documentation
Tab B Field Parameter Measurement Data
Tab C Survey Data and Contour Map
Tab D Analytical Laboratory Data
Tab E Quality Assurance and Data Validation Tables
E-1 Holding Time Evaluation
E-2 Laboratory Receipt Temperature Check
E-3 Analytical Method Check
E-4 Reporting Limit Evaluation
E-5 Trip Blank Evaluation
E-6 QA/QC Evaluation for Sample Duplicates
E-7 Radiologies Counting Error
E-8 Laboratory Matrix QC Evaluation
Tab F Comma Separated Values Transmittal
11
AWAL
DR
DWMRC
EFRI
GEL
GWQS
LCS
Mill
MS
MSD
Permit
QA
QAP
QC
RPD
TDS
voes
ACRONYM LIST
American West Analytical Laboratory
Dry Ridge Piezometers
Utah Di ision of Waste Management and Radiation Control
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
GEL Laboratories Inc.
Groundwater Quality Standard
Laboratory Control Spike
White Mesa Mill
Matrix Spike
Matrix Spike Duplicate
State of Utah Groundwater Discharge Permit No. UGW370004
Quality Assurance
Groundwater Monitoring Quality Assurance Plan
Quality Control
Relative Percent Difference
Total Dissolved Solids
Volatile Organic Compounds
iii
ll
-..
ANNUAL SEEPS AND SPRINGS SAMPLING REPORT
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This is the 2022 Annual Seeps and Springs arnpling Report for the Energy Fuels Resources
(USA) Inc. ( EFRI'') White Mesa Mi11 (the "Mill"), as required under Part I.F.7 of the Mill's
State of Utah Groundwater Discharge Permit No. UGW370004 (the "Permit") and the Mill s
Sampling and Analysis Plan for Seeps and Springs, Revision: 2, July 8, 2016 (the "Sampling
Plan ).
The Sampling Plan for Seeps and Springs was revised in July 2016 to incorporate changes
requested by the Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control ("DWMRC"). The
Sampling Plan/or Seeps and Springs, Revision: 2, July 8, 2016 was approved by DWMRC by
letter dated August 8, 2016.
2.0 SAMPLING EVENTS
Seeps and springs which were identified near the Mill in the 1978 Environmental Report (Plate
2.6-10 Dames and Moore, January 30, 1978) are to be sampled annually in accordance with the
Sampling Plan and Part I.E.6 of the Permit. The Sampling Plan specifies the following sample
locations: Corral Canyon Seep Corral Springs, Ruin pring, Cottonwood Seep, Westwater Seep
and Entrance Spring (also referred to as Entrance Seep).
2.2 2022 Sampling
In accordance with the Permit and the Sampling Plan, DWMRC was notified of the annual
sampling events. On March 28 2022 EFRI collected the Westwater Seep sample. On May 10
2022 EFRl collected seeps and springs samples from Cottonwood Seep Ruin Spring, Entrance
Seep, and Back Spring (duplicate of Cottonwood Seep). The DWMRC representative was
present for May 10 2022 sampling event and collected a "split" sample from the EFRI sampling
equipment, using sample containers he provided. Corral Canyon Seep and Corral Springs were
dry during the annual sampling event.
2.3 Repeat Visits to Dry Seeps and Springs.
Corral Canyon Seep and Corral Springs, were visited once per calendar quarter in 2022. The
visits were conducted in March May August and November 2022. Corral Canyon Seep and
Corral Springs, were dry during all of the visits could not be sampled and did not warrant
development attempts with limited hand tool excavation at that tin1e.
2.4 Sampling Procedures
Samples were collected and analyzed for the parameters listed in Table 2 of the Permit.
Samples were collected from the locations indicated in Table 1. Sampling procedures for each
seep or spring are determined by the site location and access.
The DWMRC-approved sampling procedures for seeps and springs at the Mill are contained in
the Sampling Plan. Samples collected under this plan were collected either by direct collection
which involves collecting the sample directly into the sample container from the surface water
feature or from spring out-flow or by using a stainless steel ladle to collect water until a
sufficient volume is contained in the ladle for transfer to the sample bottle. Filtered parameters
are pumped through a 0.45 micron filter prior to delivery to the sample bottle.
Ruin Spring
In the case of Ruin Spring, sample bottles for the analytes collected during the May sampling
event (except gross alpha and heavy metals) were filled directly from the spring out-flow which
is a pipe. Samples for heavy metals and gross alpha were collected by means of a peristaltic
pump and delivered directly to the sample containers through a 0.45 micron filter. The
appropriate preservatives for the analytical technique were added to the samples.
Westwater Seep
Westwater Seep, was "developed" prior to the sampling event by Field Personnel. Development
was completed by removing surrounding vegetation and clearing the sampling location in the
spring or seep area. All of the sample containers were filled by means of a peristaltic pump and
delivered directly to the sample containers. Samples for heavy metals and gross alpha were
collected by means of a peristaltic pump and delivered directly to the sample containers through
a 0.45 micron filter. The appropriate preservatives for the analytical technique were added to the
samples.
Cottonwood Seep and Entrance Spring
Cottonwood eep and Entrance Spring were "developed prior to the sampling event by field
Personnel. Development was completed by removing surrounding vegetation and clearing the
sampling location in the spring or seep area. The sample containers were filled by means of a
peristaltic pump and delivered directly to the sample containers. In the case of the samples for
heavy metals and gross alpha, the samples were delivered by a peristaltic pump directly to the
sample containers through a 0.45 micron filter. The samples were preserved by the addition of
the appropriate preservative for the analytical technique.
The tubing on the peristaltic pump that comes into contact with the sample water was disposed of
between each sampling. As a result, no equipment required decontamination, and no rinsate
samples were collected.
2.5 Field Data
Attached under Tab A are copies of the field data sheets recorded in association with the March
and May seeps and springs monitoring events. Photographic documentation of the sampling
sites is also included in Tab A. Sampling dates are listed in Table 1 and field parameters
collected during the sampling program are included in Tab B.
2
2.6 Field QC Samples
TI1e field Quality Control ( 'QC ) samples generated ·during the March and May sampling events
included one trip blank per shipment to each laboratory which received samples for VOCs. The
May sampling event included one duplicate to each laboratory which received samples for
VOCs. The duplicate samples (Back Spring) were submitted blind to the analytical laboratory.
As previously stated no rinsate blanks were collected during this sampling event as only
disposable equipment was used for sample collection.
3.0 SEEPS AND SPRINGS SURVEY AND CONTOUR MAP
Part I.F.7(c) of the Permit requires that a water table contour map that includes the elevations for
each well at the facility and the elevations of the phreatic surfaces observed for each of the seeps
and springs sampled be submitted with this annual report. Tab C includes two contour maps.
The contour map labeled C-1 shows the water table without the water level data associated with
the dry ridge ("DR") investigation piezometers. The contour map labeled C-2 shows the water
table with the water level data associated with the DR investigation piezometers. It is important
to note that Cottonwood Seep is not included in any of the perched water level contouring,
because there is no evidence to establish a hy~lraulic connection between Cottonwood Seep and
the perched water system. Cottonwood Seep is located near the Brushy Basin
Member/Westwater Canyon Member contact, approximately 230 feet below the base of the
perched water system defined by the Burro Canyon Formation/Brushy Basin Member contact.
The stratigraphic position of Cottonwood Seep indicates that its elevation is not representative of
the perched potentiometric surface. Exclusion of the Cottonwood Seep from water level
contouring is consistent with previous submissions. The contour map includes the corrected
survey data from December 2009 as discussed below.
Part I.F.7 (g) of the Permit requires that survey data for the seeps and springs be collected prior
to the collection of samples. DRC previously clarified that the requirement to submit survey data
applies only to the first sampling event and not on an annual basis. The December 2009 and July
2010 seeps and springs survey data shown in Tab C will be used for reporting where seeps and
springs locations and elevations are relevant.
A full discussion of the survey data and the hydrogeology of seeps and springs at the margins of
White Mesa in the vicinity of the Mill and the relationship of these seeps and springs to the
hydrogeology of the site, in particular to the occurrence of a relatively shallow perched
groundwater zone beneath the site, is contained in Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater
Zone and Associated Seeps and Springs Near the White Mesa Uranium Mill Site, dated
November 12, 2010, prepared by Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. and submitted to the Director on
November 15, 2010. Additional information is also contained in the Second Revision
Hydrogeology of the Perched Groundwater Zone in the Area Southwest of the Tailings Cells
White Mesa Mill Site, dated November 7, 2012, prepared by Hydro Geo Chem, Inc. and
submitted to the Director on November 7, 2012.
3
4.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL
4.1 Laboratory Results
Analytical results are provided by the Mill's two contract analytical laboratories GEL
Laboratories, Inc., ("GEL ) and CHEMTECH-FORD Laboratories ("CTF").
The laboratories utilized during this investigation were certified under the Environmental Lab
Certification Program administered by UDEQ Bureau of Lab Improvement for the analyses they
completed.
The analytical data as well as the laboratory Quality Assurance ("QA")/QC summaries are
included under Tab D.
4.2 DATA EVALUATION
The Permit requires that the annual seeps and springs sampling program be conducted in
compliance with the requirements specified in the Mill s approved White Mesa Uranium Mill
Groundwater Monitoring Quality Assurance Plan ( QAP") the approved Sampling Plan and the
Pennit. To meet this requirement, the data validation completed for the seeps and springs
sampling program verified that the program met the requirements outlined in the QAP the
Pennit and the approved Sampling Plan. The MiU Director, Regulatory Compliance performed a
QA/QC review to confirm compliance of the monitoring program with requirements of the
Pe.rm it and the QAP. As required in the QAP data QA includes preparation and analysis of QC
samples in the field, review of field procedures, an analyte completeness review, and quality
control review of laboratory data methods and data. Identification 0f field QC samples collected
and analyzed is provided in Section 4.5 .1. Discussion of adherence to the Sampling Plan is
provided in Section 4.3. Analytical completeness review results are provided in Section 4.4.
The steps and tests applied to check laboratory data QA/QC are discussed in Sections 4.5.1
through 4.5.9 below.
The analytical laboratories have provided summary reports of the analytical QA/QC
measurements necessary to maintain conformance with National Environmental Laboratory
Accreditation Conference certification and reporting protocol. The analytical laboratory QA/QC
Summary Reports including copies of the Mill's Chain of Custody and Analytical Request
Record forms for each set of analytical results follow the analytical results under Tab D. Results
of the review of the laboratory QA/QC information are provided under Tab E and discussed in
Section 4.5 below.
4.3 Adherence to Sampling Plan and Permit Requirements
On a review of adherence by Mill personnel to the Permit, the Director, Regulatory Compliance
observed that QA/QC requirements established in the Permit and the QAP were met and that the
requirements were implemented as required except as noted below.
4
The Permit only requires the measurement of the field parameters pH, conductivity and
temperature. Field parameter measurements collected during this sampling event included pH,
conductivity, temperature redox potential, and turbidity.
4.4 Analyte Completeness Review
The analyses required by the Permit Table 2 were completed.
4.5 Data Validation
The QAP and the Permit identify the data validation steps and data quality control checks
required for the seeps and sp1ings monitoring program. Consistent with these requirements the
Director Regulatory Compliance performed the following evaluations: a field data QA/QC
evaluation, a receipt temperature check, a holding time check an analytical method check, a
reporting limit check, a trip blank check, a QA/QC evaluation of sample duplicates, a gross alpha
counting error evaluation and a review of each laboratory's reported QA/QC information. Each
evaluation is discussed in the following sections. Data check tables indicating the results of each
test are provided under Tab E.
4.5.1 Field Data QA/QC Evaluation
The Director Regulatory Compliance performs a review of field recorded parameters to assess
their adherence with QAP and Permit requirements. The assessment involved review of the Field
Data sheets. Review of the Field Data Sheets noted that the requirements for field data collection
were met
4.5.2 Holding Time Evaluation
QAP Table 1 identifies the method holding times for each suite of parameters. Sample holding
time checks are provided under Tab E. The samples were received and analyzed within the
required holding time.
4.5.3 Laboratory Receipt Temperature Check
Chain of Custody sheets were reviewed to confirm compliance with the sample receipt
requirements specified in the QAP. Sample receipt temperature checks are provided under Tab
E. The samples were received within the QAP required temperature limit.
4.5.4 Analytical Method Check
The analytical methods reported by both laboratories were checked against the required methods specified
in Table 1 of the QAP. Analytical method check results are provided in Tab E.
CTF analyzed ammonia by method A4500-NH3 H. Table 1 of the QAP specifies A4500-NH3 G or
E350.1. The method used by CTF is not included in the approved QAP however, method A4500-NH3 H
is equivalent to E350.1. The difference between A4500-NH3 H and E350. l is the originating and
publishing entity. Method A4500-NH3 H is published in Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
5
::;
and Wastewater and E350.l is an EPA pubJished method. The analytical data generation methods for
both methods are similar and therefore, the data for the two methods are equivalent comparable and
usable for the intended purpose. There is no adverse effect on the data due to the use of an aJternative
method. The laboratory has been reminded to use only QAP listed methods.
4.5.5 Reporting Limit Evaluation
Reporting limits utilized by the laboratory were required to be equal to or lower than the GWQSs
set out in Table 2 of the Permit. For Total Dissolved Solids (' TDS") sulfate and chloride, for
which Ground Water Quality Standards are not set out in Table 2 of the Permit, reporting limits
specified in Part l .E.6.e).(l) were used. Those reporting limits are i'o mg/L for TDS and 1 mg/L
for Sulfate and Chloride. The analytical method reporting Limits reported by both laboratories
were checked against the reporting limits specified in the Permit. Reporting limit evaluations are
provided in Tab E. All analytes were measured and reported to the required reporting limits
except the sample results that had the reporting limit raised due to sample dilution necessary to
accommodate the analyte concentrations in the samples. In all cases the reported value for the
analyte was higher than the increased detection limit.
It is important to note that the CTF reported some analytes lower than the GWDP required limits
(equivalent to the GWQSs). All previous data were reported to the GWQS as required by the
GWDP. These lower RLs resulted in detections being reported in 2022 that have never been
reported before. These detections are not indicative of increasing analyte concentrations, but are
indicative of lower RLs and low level detections.
4.5.6 Trip Blank Evaluation
The trip blank results were reviewed to identify any VOC sample contamination which is the
result of sample handling and shipment. Trip blank evaluation is provided in Tab E. The trip
blank results associated with the samples were less than the reporting limit for the VOCs.
4.5.7 QA/QC Evaluation for Sample Duplicates
Section 9.1.4 a) of the QAP states that the Relative Percent Difference ("RPD ) will be
calculated for the comparison of duplicate and original field samples. The QAP acceptance limits
for RPDs between the duplicate and original field sample is less than or equal to 20% unless the
measured results (described as activities in the QAP) are less than 5 times the required detection
limit. This standard is based on the United Stated Environmental Protection Agency Contract
Laboratory Program National Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Data Review February 1994
9240.1-05-01 as cited in the QAP. The RPDs are calculated for duplicate pairs for the analytes
regardless of whether or not the reported concentrations are greater than 5 times the required
detection limits; however data will be considered noncompliant only when the results are greater
than 5 times the required detection limit and the RPD is greater than 20%. RPDs are also only
calculated when both the sample and the duplicate report a detection for any given analy:te. If
only one of the pair reports a detection, the RPD cannot be calculated. The additional duplicate
information is provided for information purposes.
All duplicate results were within 20% RPD. The duplicate evaluation is provided in Tab E.
6
4.5.8 Radiologies Counting Error
Section 9.14 of the QAP requires that all gross alpha analysis reported with an activity equal to
or greater than the Groundwater Compliance Limits set out in the Permit (for the seeps and
springs samples the Groundwater Quality Standards ("GWQS ] will be used) shall have a
counting variance that is equal to or less than 20% of the reported activity concentration. An
error term may be greater than 20% of the reported activity concentration when the sum of the
activity concentration and error term is less than or equal to the GWQS.
Section 9.4 of the QAP also requires a comparability check between the sample and field
duplicate sample results utilizing the formula provided in the text.
All radiological results were reported were non-detect and therefore within acceptance limits.
Results of routine radiologic sample QC are provided. under Tab E.
4.5.9 Laboratory Matrix QC Evaluation
Section 9.2 of the QAP requires that the laboratory s QA/QC Manager check the following items
in developing data reports: (1) sample preparation information is correct and complete, (2)
analysis information is coITect and complete, (3) appropriate analytical laboratory procedures are
followed, ( 4) analytical results are correct and complete, (5) QC samples are within established
control limits, (6) blanks are within QC limits, (7) special sample preparation and analytical
requirements have been met, and (8) documentation is complete. In addition to other laboratory
checks described above, EFRl's Director, Regulatory Compliance rechecks QC samples and
blanks (items (5) and (6)) to confirm that the percent recovery for spikes and the relative percent
difference for spike duplicates are within the method-specific required limits or that the case
narrative sufficiently explains any deviation from these Jim.its. Results ohhis quantitative check
are provided under Tab E. The lab QA/QC results from both GEL and CTF met these
requirements except as described below.
A number of the seeps and springs samples had. the· reporting limit raised due to matrix
interference and/or sample dilution. In all cases where the detection limit was increased, the
concentration for the analyte was higher than the increased detection limit.
The check samples included at least the following: a method blank, a laboratory control spike
("LCS"), a matrix spike ("MS") and a matrix spike duplicate ("MSD"), or the equivalent, where
applicable. It should be noted that:
• Laboratory fortified blanks are equivalent to LCSs.
• Laboratory reagent blanks are equivalent to method blanks.
• Post digestion spikes are equivalent to MSs.
• Post digestion spike duplicates are equivalent to MSDs.
• For method E900. l, used to determine gross alpha, a sample duplicate was used instead
ofaMSD.
7
:
The qualifiers, and the corresponding explanations reported in the QA/QC Summary Reports for
any of the check samples for any of the analytical methods, were reviewed by the Director,
Regulatory Compliance.
The QAP Section 8.1.2 requires that a MS/MSD pair be analyzed with each analytical batch.
The QAP does not specify acceptance limits for the MS/MSD pair and the QAP does not specify
that the MS/MSD pair be prepared on EFRI samples only. Acceptance limits for MS/MSDs are
set by the laboratories. The review of the information provided by the laboratories in the data
packages verified that the QAP requirement to analyze a MS/MSD pair with each analytical
batch was met. While the QAP does not require it, the recoveries were reviewed for compliance
with each laboratory s established acceptanc1e limits. The QAP does not require this level of
review and the results of this review are provided for infonnation only.
The information from the Laboratory QA/QC Summary Reports indicates that the MS/MSD
recoveries and the associated RPDs for the seeps and springs samples were within acceptable
laboratory limits except as noted in Tab E. The MS/MSD recoveries that were outside the
laboratory established acceptance limits do not affect the quality or usability of the data, because
the recoveries and RPDs above or below the acceptance limits are indicative of matrix
interference most likely caused by other constituents in the samples. Matrix interferences are
applicable to the individual sample results only. The requirement in the QAPs to analyze a
MS/MSD pair with each analytical batch was met and as such the data are compliant with the
QAP.
The information from the Laboratory QA/QC Summary Reports indicates that there were low
LCS recoveries in one analytical batch as indicated in Tab E.
A low LCS recovery for TDS and chloromethane were reported in analytical batch 22C2426.
The low LCSs in batch 22C2426 affected sample Westwater Seep.
The data were flagged in accordance with EPA protocols. The data are usable for the intended
purpose because TDS concentrations are within historic values and are variable based on
ambient conditions present during sample collection. Chloromethane data are usable because
chloromethane, as well as other volatiles, are not frequently detected and the non-detects are
likely accurate.
The information from the Laboratory QA/QC Swnmary Reports indicates that there was a low
Continuing Calibration Verification ("CCV ) recovery for chloromethane. The low CCV
recovery affected all samples in the analytical batch.
The data were flagged in accordance with the changes specified in EPA Method 8260D. The
flagging requirements are new to the revised method and do not adversely affect the data. The
data are usable for the intended purpose becaus,e the seeps and springs do not have historical
detections of volatiles and the nondetect data are likely accurate.
The QAP specifies that surrogate compounds shall be employed for all organic analyses, but the
QAP does not specify acceptance limits for surrogate recoveries. The analytical data associated
8
with the routine quarterly sampling met the requirement specified in the QAP. The information
from the Laboratory QA/QC Swnmary Reports indicates that the surrogate recoveries for the
seeps and springs samples were within acceptable laboratory limits for aJJ surrogate compounds.
The QAP Section 8.1.2 requires that each analytical batch shall be accompanied by a reagent
blank. Contamination detected in analysis of reagent blanks/method blanks will be used to
evaluate any analytical laboratory contamination of environmental samples. The QAP specified
process for evaluation of reagent/method blanks states that nonconformance will exist when
blanks are within an order of magnitude of the sample results. The information from the
Laboratory QA/QC Summary Reports indicates that the reagent (method) blanks for the seeps
and springs samples were non-detect and were therefore within the acceptance criteria specified
in the QAP.
Laboratory duplicates are completed by the analytical laboratories as required by the analytical
method specifications. Acceptance limits for laboratory duplicates are set by the laboratories.
The QAP does not require the completion of laboratory duplicates or the completion of a QA
assessment of them. EFRI reviews the QC data provided by the laboratories for completeness
and to assess the overall quality of the data provided. Laboratory duplicate results are provided
in Tab D.
5.0 EVALUATION OF ANALYTICAL DATA
As previously stated, the samples were analyzed for the grow1dwater compliance parameters
found on Table 2 of the Permit. In addition to these laboratory parameters, the pH, temperature,
conductivity, (and although not required, redox, dissolved oxygen [' DO"] and turbidity) were
measured and recorded in the field.
5.1 Evaluation of Analytical Results
The results of the March and May sampling events show no evidence of Mill influence in the
water produced by the seeps and springs sampled. The lack of Mill influence on seeps and
springs is indicated by the fact that the parameters detected are within the ranges of
concentrations for the on-site monitoring wells and for available historic data for the seeps and
springs themselves. For those detected analytes, concentrations are shown in Tables 2A, 2B 2C
and 2D. The data are compared to available historic data for each seep and spring as well as to
on-site monitoring well data. pecific discussions about each seep or spring are included below.
5.1.1 Ruin Spring
No VOCs or radiologies were detected. Metals and major ions were the only analytes detected.
The metals detections were minimal with only calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium,
chromium, molybdenum nickel, selenium uranium and vanadium having positive detections.
The major ions detected include bicarbonate chloride fluoride, ammonia, nitrate, sulfate and
TDS. A comparison of the 2009 through 2021 data to the 2022 data shows that the
concentrations of most detected analytes remained approximately the same with only minor
changes within the limits of normal analytical deviation. The RLs and the reported values for
chromium nickel, and vanadium were below the GWDP required RL as noted in Section 4.5.5.
9
;::
The reported values for chloride fluoride, ammonia sulfate and selenium increased slightly from
the 2021 sample results and remain below the upper range of historic background values of this
location and/or below the upper range of historic background values (where available) for the on-
site monitoring wells. The differences are not significant and are most likely due to nonnal
fluctuations due to flow rates or seasonal variations due to annual precipitation. Overall the data
reported for Ruin Spring are typical for a surface water sample with no indication of Mill
influence.
5.1.2 Cottonwood Spring
No VOCs or radiologies were detected. Metals and major ions were the only analytes detected.
The metals detections were minimal with calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium, arsenic
chromium, manganese, selenium, uranium and vanadium having a positive detection. The major
ions detected include bicarbonate, chloride, fluoride sulfate, and TDS. A comparison of the
2009 through 2021 data to the 2022 data shows that the concentrations of most detected analytes
remained approximately the same with only minor changes within the limits of nonnal analytical
deviation. The RLs and the reported values for arsenic, chromium, manganese, molybdenum,
selenium, and vanadium were below the GWDP required RL as noted in Section 4.5.5. The
reported values for TDS and sulfate, increased from the 2021 sample results, and remain below
the upper range of historic background values of this location and/or below the upper range of
historic background values (where available) for the on-site monitoring wells. The differences
are not significant and are most likely due to normal fluctuations due to flow rates or seasonal
variations due to annual precipitation. Overall, the data reported for Cottonwood Spring are
typical for a surface water sample with no indication of Mill influence.
5.1.3 Westwater Seep
No VOCs or radiologies were detected. Metals and major ions were the only analytes detected.
The metals detections were minimal with calcium, magnesiwn, potassium, sodium arsenic,
chromium, cobalt, iron, manganese molybdenwn nickel selenium, vanadium and uranium
having positive detections. The major ions detected include bicarbonate, chloride, fluoride
sulfate and TDS. A comparison of the historic data to the 2022 data shows that the
concentrations of most detected analytes remained approximately the same with only minor
changes within the limits of normal analytical deviation. The RLs and the reported values for
arsenic, chromium cobalt, molybdenum nickel, selenium, and vanadium were below the GWDP
required RL as noted in Section 4.5.5. The reported value for fluoride .increased from the 2021
sample results and the reported value remain below the upper range of historic background
values of this location and/or below the upper range of historic background values (where
available) for the on-site monitoring wells. The differences are not significant and are most
likely due to normal fluctuations due to flow rates or seasonal variations due to annual
precipitation. Overall the data reported for Westwater Seep are typical for a surface water
sample with no indication of Mill influence.
5.1.4 Entrance Spring
No VOCs or radiologies were detected. Metals and major ions were the only analytes detected.
The metals detections were minimal with only calcium magnesium, potassium, sodium, arsenic,
10
chromium cobalt, iron molybdenum, nickel, uranium manganese and selenium having positive
detections. The major ions detected include bicarbonate, chloride, fluoride nitrate sulfate, and
TDS. A comparison of the 2009 through 2021 data to the 2022 data shows that the
concentrations of most detected analytes remained approximately the same with only minor
changes within the limits of normal analytical deviation. The RLs and the reported values for
arsenic chromium, cobalt, molybdenum, nickel, and vanadium were below the GWDP required
RL as noted in Section 4.5.5 . The reported values for fluoride, potassium sodium, TDS,
bicarbonate, chloride iron, and manganese increased from the 2021 sample results. The detected
concentrations and the reported value remain below the upper range of historic background
values of this location and/or below the upper range of historic background values (where
available) for the on-site monitoring wells. As stated in Section 2.4 above Entrance Spring is
'developed ' prior to the sampling event by Field Personnel. Development was completed the
day prior to san1pling by removing surrounding vegetation and clearing the sampling location in
the spring or seep area. A shovel or trowel is used to dig a hole in the soil which is allowed to
fill with water. The standing water was sampled. Field Personnel noted the area was muddy and
there is livestock activity in the area. The Entrance Spring sample data and constituent
concentrations are likely affected by the muddy site conditions and livestock activity in the
sampling area.
Overall, the data reported for Entrance Spring are typical for a surface water sample with no
indication of Mill influence.
6.0 CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT
No corrective action reports are required for the 2022 annual sampling event.
6.1 Assessment of Corrective Actions from Previous Period
No corrective action reports were required for the 2021 annual sampling event.
7.0 ELECTRONIC DATA FILES AND FORMAT
EFRI has provided to the Director electronic copies of the laboratory results as part of the annual
seeps and springs monitoring in Comma Separated Values, from the laboratory. A copy of the
transmittal e-mail is included under Tab F.
11
8.0 SIGNATURE AND CERTIFICATION
This document was prepared by Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
By:
Scott A. Bakken
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
12
:.
I
Certification
I certify, under penalty of law, that this document and all attachments were prepared under my
direction or supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel
properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or
persons who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the
information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate,
and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations.
Scott A. Bakken
Vice President, Regulatory Affairs
Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
13
Tables
Table 1: Summary of Seeps and Springs Sampling
Work Order
Location Sample Date No./Lab Set ID Date of Lab Report
Cottonwood Spring 5/10/2022 CTF = 22El012 CTF = 6/3/2022
GEL= 580063 GEL= 6/14/2022
Entrance Seep 5/10/2022 CTF = 22El012 CTF = 6/3/2022
GEL= 580063 GEL = 6/14/2022
Back Spring (Duplicate of 5/10/2022 CTF = 22E1012 CTF = 6/3/2022
Ruin Spring) GEL= 580063 GEL= 6/14/2022
Ruin Spring 5/10/2022 CTF = 22El012 CTF = 6/3/2022
GEL= 580063 GEL= 6/14/2022
Corral Spring Not Sampled -Dry Not Sampled -Dry Not Sampled -Dry
Corral Canyon Seep Not Sampled -Dry Not Sampled -Ory Not Sampled -Dry
Westwater Seep 3/28/2022 CTF = 22C2426 CTF = 4/18/2022
GEL= 575649 GEL = 5/3/2022
Table 2A Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site Monitoring Wells
Ruin Spring
Range of
Average
Constituent 2009 2010 2011 2011 Historic Avg2003
May July 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Values for 20042
Monitoring
Wells'•
Major Ions (mg/I)
Carbonate <1 <1 <1 1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <I <1 <! <1 <1 --
Bicarbonate 233 254 241 239 237 208 204 200 193 208 202 202 186 200 185 --
Calcium 151 136 145 148 147 149 150 162 138 145 158 165 169 154 141 --
Chloride 28 23 25 44 28 26.3 27,1 27.4 24.4 27-4 29.9 23 ,9 25.8 28.1 28.4 ND-213 27
Fluoride 0.5 0.53 0.45 0.5 0.52 0.538 <1 0.445 0.541 0,5 0.414 0.505 0.473 0.468 0.5 ND . 1.3 0.6
Magnesium 32.3 29.7 30.6 3 l.1 31.9 32.1 35.4 31.8 31.l 30.2 33.9 45.6 36.9 34.8 32.9 --
Nitrogen-Ammonia 0 09 <0.05 ND <O 05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0,05 <0.05 0.2 ·--
Nitrogen-Nitrate 1.4 1.7 I. 7 1.6 1.6 1.56 l.54 1.31 1.64 1.55 1.35 1.56 1.39 1.26 1.2 --
Potassium 3.3 3.07 3.2 3.3 3.5 3.46 3 24 3.14 3.18 3.07 3.58 3.31 4,09 3.83 3.2 ---
Sodium 104 93.4 l 10 ill 115 118 119 126 105 113 128 128 139 119 117 --
Sulfate 528 447 486 484 464 553 553 528 490 476 547 474 469 557 595 ND-3455 521
TDS 1010 903 942 905 1000 952 984 1000 916 972 1000 900 1240 1080 992 1019-5548 1053
Metals (ug/1)
Arsenic <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <0,5 ---
Beryllium < 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 < 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <05 <0,5 <0.5 --
Cadmium <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0,5 <0.2 ND-4.78 0.01
Chromium <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 4.2 --
Cobalt <IO <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <0.5 --
Copper <JO <10 <10 <JO <10 <10 <10 <10 <IO <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 --
Iron <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <20 ND-7942 25
Lead <1.0 <1.0 <1 0 <l.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <l .O <1.0 <l.0 <1.0 <l.O <l.O <1.0 <0.5 --
Manganese <IO <IO <IO <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <IO <10 <IO <0.5 ND-34,550 5 '
Mercury <0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <O 5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2 --
Molybdenum 17 17 16 17 16 16.l 16.0 18.3 17.8 17.2 18 20.2 18.7 18.7 17.7 .. -
Nickel <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 0.6 ND-61 0.05
Selenium 12.2 10 I 1.8 10.2 10.8 10.2 12 10 10 10.5 12.2 10.8 10.5 l l.2 l l.7 ND-106.5 12.l
Silver <10 <10 <10 <IO <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <IO <10 <O 5 --
Thallium <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2 --
Tin <JOO <JOO <JOO <!00 <!00 <100 <100 <JOO <100 <100 <JOO <JOO <100 <100 <20 --
Uranium 9,1 l 8.47 9 35 8.63 8.68 9.12 9.61 9.03 8.38 8.49 9.35 9,02 9.32 9.31 9 l ND-59.8 10
Vanadium <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 1.3 --
Zinc <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <IO <10 --
"' I 111, ttt I
Table 2A Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site Monitoring Wells
Ruin Spring
I Range of I
Average
Constituent 2009 2010 2011 20)1 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Historic Ava2003
May July Values for 20042
Monitoring
Wells 1•
Rndiologics (pCi/1)
Gross Alpha <0.2 <0.2 <-0.3 <-0.05 <-0.09 <1.0 <I <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.57 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O ND-36 0.28
VOCS(ug/L)
Acetone <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <10 --
Benzene <1.0 <l.O <l.O <l.O <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <l.O --
Carbon <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 Tc1rachloride <1.0 <1.0 <IO <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 ,0 --
Chloroform <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <l.O <l.O <1.0 <l.O <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
Chloromethane <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
MEK <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <10 --
Methylene Chloride <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <2.0 --
Naphthalene <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <LO <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
Tc1rahydrofuran <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 --
Toluene <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <10 <1.0 <1.0 <l.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
Xylenes <l.O <1 .0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
1 From Figure 3, Table 10 and Appendix B of the Revised Addendum, Background Groundwater Quality Report: New Wells for Denison Mines (USA) Corp 's White Mesa Mill Site, San Juan County, Utah, April 30, 2008, prepared by INTERA,
Inc. and Table 16 and Appendix D of the Revised Background Groundwater Quality Report: !,xisling Wells for Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 's White Mesa Uranium Mill Site, San Juan County, Utah, October 2007, prepared by INTERA, Inc.
2 From Figure 9 of the Revised Addendum, Evaluation of Available Pre-Operational and Regional Background Data, Background Groundwater Quality Report: Existing Wells for Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 's White Mesa Mill Site, San Juan
Couinty, Utah, November 16, 2007, prepared by JNTERA, Inc.
'Range ofaverage historic values for On-Site Monitoring Wells as reported on April 30, 2008 (MW-I, MW-2, MW-3, MW-3A, MW-4, MW-5, MW-11, MW-12, MW-14, MW-15, MW-17, MW-18, MW-19, MW-20, MW-22, MW-23, MW-24,
MW-25, MW-26, MW-27, MW-28, MW-29, MW-30, MW-3 l and MW-32)2
"
Table 28 Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site Monitoring Wells
Cottonwood Spring
Range of
Average
Constituent 2009 20!0 2011 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Historic Avg 1977
May July 2019 2020 2021 2022 Values for 1982 I
Monitoring
Wells'•
Major Ions (mg/I)
Carbonate <I <1 <1 6 <l <1 <1 <l <1 <l <1 <1 <1 <l <1 --
Bicarbonate 316 340 330 316 326 280 251 271 256 280 283 286 280 298 267 -..
Calcium 90.3 92.2 95.4 94.2 101 87.9 99.7 111 102 99.6 109 122 120 108 99.0 .. -
Chloride 124 112 I 13 134 149 I 18 128 133 138 129 153 138 146 143 143 ND-213 31
Fluoride 0.4 0.38 0.34 0.38 0.38 0.417 <l 0.318 0.466 0.344 0.282 0.249 0.233 0.317 0.3 ND-1.3 0.8
Magnesium 25 24.8 25.2 25,2 27.7 23.6 29.0 27.5 29.5 27,1 30.2 35.3 32.9 31.3 28.5 -..
Nitrogen-<0,05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.0512 <0.05 <0,05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.2 Ammonia --
Nitrogcn-N itralc 0.1 <0.1 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 0.124 0.108 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 -..
Potassium 5.7 5.77 6 5.9 6.2 5.53 6.18 5.91 6.11 5.72 6.35 6.78 7.14 7.40 5.9 .. -
Sodium 205 214 229 227 247 217 227 251 221 213 234 268 273 223 214 --
Sulfate 383 389 394 389 256 403 417 442 443 409 428 423 417 443 528 ND -3455 230
TDS 1010 900 1030 978 1040 996 968 1020 1070 1080 1080 1010 860 1110 1130 1019 • 5548 811
Metals (ugn)
Arsenic <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 1.8 -I -
Beryllium <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 --
Cadmium <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2 ND· 4.78 -
Chromium <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 6.6 --
Cobalt <10 <10 <IO <IO <IO <10 <10 <10 <10 <IO <10 <10 <IO <IO <0.5 --
Copper <IO <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <IO <10 <10 <IO <IO <10 <1.0 .. ..
Iron <30 <30 53 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <30 <20 ND -7942 150
Lead <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <0.5 .. -
Manganese <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 0.9 ND· 34,550 580
Mercury <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.2 .. -
Molybdenum <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <IO <10 <10 <10 1.4 ---
Nickel <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <0.5 ND -61 -
Selenium <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 1.4 ND-106.5 -
Silver <10 <IO <10 <10 <IO <IO <IO <IO <10 <IO <IO <10 <10 <IO <0.5 -..
Thallium <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5 <5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2 .. ..
Tin <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <JOO <100 <100 <20 --
Uranium 8.42 8.24 7.87 8.68 8.17 8.95 9.62 9.12 8.84 9.17 10.3 IO.I 10,5 10.6 9.7 ND· 59.8 -
Vanadium <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 2.4 --
Zinc <IO <10 <IO <10 <IO <IO <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 --
.. ,,
Table 2B Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site Monitoring Wells
Cottonwood ~pring
Range or
Average
Constituent 2009 2010 2011 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Historic Avg 1977
May July Values for 1982 1
Monitoring
Wells1*
Radiologies (pCi/1)
Gross Alpha <0.2 <0.2 <0.1 <-0.1 <-0.2 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ND-36 7.2
voes (ug/L)
Acetone <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <10 --
Benzene <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
Carbon <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 tetrachloride ---
Chlorofonn <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ----
Chloromethane <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
MEK <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <10 -..
Methylene <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <2.0 --' --Chloride
Naphthalene <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <!.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ---
Tetrahydrofuran <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ---
Toluene <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 -..
Xylenes <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --..
1 From Figure 3, Table IO al)d Appendix B of the Revised Addendum, Background Groundwater Quality Report: New Wells for Denison Mines (USA) Corp 's While Mesa Mill Site, San Juan County, Utah, April 30, 2008, prepared by
INTERA, Inc. and Table 16 and Appendix D of the Revised Background Groundwater Quality Report: /'°-':isling Wells for Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 's While Mesa Uranium Mill Sile, San Juan County, Utah, October 2007, prepared by
INTERA, Inc.
*Range of average historic values for On-Site Monitoring Wells as reported on April 30, 2008 (MW-I, MW-2, MW-3, MW-3A, MW-4, MW-5, MW-11, MW-12, MW-14, MW-15, MW-17, MW-18, MW-19, MW-20, MW-22, MW-23,
MW-24, MW-25, MW-26, MW-27, MW-28, MW-29, MW-30, MW-31 and MW-32)
I!
Table 2C Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site Monitorin_g Wells
Westweler Seep
Range of
Average
Constituent 2009 2010 2011 May 2011 July 2013 2019 2020 2020 Historic 2012 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 (March) (June) 2021 2022 Values for
Monitoring
Wells1 •
Meior Ions {me I)
Carbonate <I <] <I <I <l <I <I <l <l <l <1 <I -
Bicarbonate 465 450 371 359 399 369 444 450 270 450 320 257 -
Calcium 191 179 247 150 176 125 204 185 118 204 125 104 -
Chloride 41 40 21 32-6 38.0 27 5 36.2 41.6 26.6 40.6 29.2 21.9 ND-213
Fluoride 0.7 0.6 0.54 0.424 0.618 0.574 0.659 0.505 0,555 0.429 0.473 0.5 ND-1.3
Magnesium 45 9 44.7 34.7 Not Sampled Not Sampled Not Sampled Not Sampled 34 47.3 31.7 56.6 43.7 30.8 54.6 30.9 26.4 -
Nitrogen-Ammonia <O 05 0.5 0.06 Dry Dry Dry Dry 0.123 <0.05 <0.05 0.0832 <0.05 0.0593 <0.05 <0.05 <0.2 -
N i1rogen-Ni1.ra1c 0.8 <0.1 <0.1 <O.l <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0,1 <0.1 <0,1 <0.1 -
Potassium 1.19 6.57 3,9 1.98 2.32 2.33 2.94 3.99 1.76 5.28 I 78 1.3 -
Sodium 196 160 112 139 185 133 218 152 117 245 Ill 98.7 -
Sulfate 646 607 354 392 573 318 580 436 307 460 340 278 ND-3455
TDS 1370 1270 853 896 1060 820 1220 1110 1200 1480 876 672 1019-5548
Metals {ul!fl)
Arsenic <5 <5 12.3 <5,0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 1.8 -
Beryllium <0.5 <0.5 0.91 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <O 5 <0.5 -
Cadmium <0.5 <0.5 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2 ND-4.78
Chromium <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 1.4 -
Cobalt <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <to <10 I -
Copper <10 <10 16 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <1.0 -
Iron 89 56 4540 <30 40.1 181 575 1200 401 <30 948 920 ND-7942
Lead <1.0 <1.0 41.4 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <0.5 -
Manganese 37 87 268 171 55.5 144 312 528 369 35.4 432 206 ND -34,550
Mercury <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 Not Sampled Not Sampled Not Sampled Not Sampled <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2 Dry Dry Dry Dry -
Molybdenum 29 29 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <to <10 1.4 -
Nickel <20 <20 29 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 1.7 ND-61
Selenium <5,0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5.0 <5,0 1.4 ND -106.5
Silver <10 <10 <IO <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <to <10 <0.5 -
Thallium <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0,2 -
Tin <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <20 -
Uranium IS.I 46.6 6,64 2.1 19.0 5. 17 13.2 4 92 2.34 12.90 2.07 1.4 ND-59.8
Vanadium <15 <15 34 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 0.6 -
Zinc <to <to 28 <10 <to <to <to <to <to <10 <to <10 -
ti
Table 2C Detected Constituents and Com~ris<>n to Historic Values and M_ill ~ite Monilorin_g Wells
Westwater Seep
Range of
Average
Constituent 2009 2010 2011 May 2011 July 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 2021 2022 Historic
(March) (June) Values for
Monitoring
Wells1 •
Radioloeics (pCi/1)
Gross Alpha <-0.l <0.3 0.5 Not Sampled Not Sampled Not Sampled Not Sampled <1.0 <LO <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 ND-36 Dry Dry Dry Dry
VOCS (ue1Ll
Acetone <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 23 I <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <10 -
Benzene <1.0 <1.0 <I 0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <LO <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <0.4 -
Carbon tetrachloride <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 -
Chloroform <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1:0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 -
Chloromethane <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <LO <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 -
MEK <20 <20 <20 Not Sampled Not Sampled Not Sampled Not Sampled <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <JO Dry Dry Dry Dry -
Methylene Chloride <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <LO <1.0 <1.0 <LO <1,0 <LO <LO <2.0 -
Naphthalene <l.O <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <LO <1.0 <1.0 <l.O -
Tctrahydrofuran <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 -
Toluene <JO <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 -
Xylenes <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <LO <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1,0 <1 .0 <1.0 -
From Figure 3, Table 10 and Appendix B of the 1/evised Adde.nd11111. Background Gro1111dwa1er Quality Report: New Weflsjor De11fso11 Mines (USA) Corp 's While Mesa Mill Sile, San J11a11 Co11111y. Utah , April 30, 2008. prepared by
INTERA, Inc. and Table 16 and Appendix D of the Revised Background Groundwater Quality Report: Existing Wells for Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 's White Mesa Uranium Mill Site, Son Juan County, Utah, October 2007, prepared by
INTERA, Inc.
*Range of average historic values for On-Site Monitoring Wells as reported on April 30,2008 (MW-I, MW-2, MW-3, MW-3A, MW-4, MW-5, MW-I I, MW-12, MW-14, MW-15, MW-17, MW-18, MW-19, MW-20, MW-22, MW-23,
MW-24, MW-25, MW-26, MW-27, MW-28, MW-29, MW-30, MW-31 and MW-32)
Table 2D Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site Monitoring Wells
Entrance Spring
Range of Average
Constituent 2009 20IO 2011 May 201 I ,July 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Historic Values
for Monitoring
Wells'•
Major Ions (ml!ll)
Carbonate <1 <l <1 7 <1 <1 <1 <l <l <I <I <1 <l <1 <I ..
Bicarbonate 292 332 270 299 298 292 247 324 340 402 236 480 242 260 308 --
Calcium 90.8 96.5 88.8 96.6 105 121 103 131 131 129 116 155 144 138 123 --
Chloride 60 63 49 64 78 139 76.8 75.6 75 84.6 75.9 104 76.7 90.3 91.8 ND-213
Fluoride 0.7 0.73 0.58 0.58 0.64 0.71 <I 0606 0.668 0.615 0.454 0.912 0.638 0.625 0.8 ND -1.3
Magncsi11m 26.6 28.9 26.4 28.4 32.7 43 34.9 33.3 38.6 36.4 42.4 48.0 45.1 47.7 44.8 -
Nitrogen-Ammonia 0.28 <0.05 <0.05 0.32 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 0.202 0,0962 0.247 0.102 0.168 <0.05 <0.05 <0.2 -
Ni IIOll.Cn-N i tr ate 1.4 1 1.4 0.5 2.8 2.06 3.65 <0.1 0.403 <l 2.34 <I 2.46 1.55 0.2 -
Potassium 2.4 2.74 2.6 2.9 2 3.83 1.56 1.62 <1.0 3.88 3.64 4.66 4.31 4.04 4.5 -
Sodium 61.4 62.7 62.5 68.6 77.4 127 78.9 93.1 90.8 90.3 96 126 108 98.3 100 -
Sulfate 178 179 166 171 171 394 219 210 245 187 243 160 317 362 323 ND-3455
TDS 605 661 571 582 660 828 688 680 828 752 820 892 964 888 904 1019 -5548
Metals (,ug/1)
Arsenic <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 5.02 <5 9.16 <5 8.94 <5 <5 3.1 -
Beryllium <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0,5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.S <0.5 <0.5 --
Cadmium <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2 ND-4.78
Chromium <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 5.5 -
Cobalt <10 <10 <10 <JO <10 <IO <10 <JO <10 <10 <IO <IO <10 <10 I --
Copper <10 <JO <10 <10 <IO <10 <10 <IO <JO <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <1.0 -
Iron <30 <30 37 55 34 162 37.2 295 94.4 371 <30 453 <30 <30 390 ND-7942
Lead <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <l.O <0.5 --
Manganese 54 II 47 84 <10 259 16.l 367 210 913 405 587 56.3 27.2 629 ND-34,550
Mcrcurv <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2 ..
Molybdenum <10 <10 <JO <10 <10 <10 <IO <JO <JO <10 <10 14.30 <IO <10 1.8 ..
Nickel <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 1.0 ND-61
Selenium 12.l 9.2 13.l 5.5 13.2 11.2 15.9 <5 <5 <5 15.3 <5 15 13.6 5.2 ND -106.5
Silver <JO <JO <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <JO <10 <10 <IO <10 <10 <10 <0,5 --
Thallium <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.2 --
Tin <100 <100 <100 <100 <JOO <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <JOO <100 <JOO <20 -
Uranium 15,2 17.8 18.8 15.3 21.1 38.8 23.2 36 22.0 14.6 27.6 70.1 24.7 36.1 17.5 ND· 59.8
Vanadium <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <15 <IS <15 <15 <15 <15 3.4 -
Zinc <10 <IO <10 <10 <10 <JO <JO <10 <IO <JO <JO <10 <10 <JO <10 --
ti, .. '"1!
Table 2D Detected Constituents and Comparison to Historic Values and Mill Site Monitoring Wells
Entrance Spring
Range of Average
Constituent 2009 2010 20ll May 2011 July 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Historic Value!
for Monitoring
Wells1"
Rndiologics (pCi/1)
Gross Alpha 0.9 <0.5 1.5 1.6 0.5 2.3 I <I I 3.05 I <I I 2.53 <I I 2.63 I <I I <I I <I I ND-36.
voes (ug/L)
Acetone <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <10 --
Benzene <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O -
Carbon tetrachloride <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
Cblorofonn <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
Chl.oromclhane <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 -
MEK <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <10 ..
Mclhvlcnc Chloride <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <2.0 -
Naphthalene <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1 .0 <1,0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 -
Tctrabydrofuran <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 -
Toluene <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 1.32 <1.0 <1.0 13.1 <1.0 5.59 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
Xylencs <1.0 <LO <l.O <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <l.O <LO <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 <1.0 --
1 From Figure 3, Table IO and Appendix B of the Revised Addendum, Backgro,md Groundwater Qualr'ty Repor1.· New Wells for Denison Mines (USA) Corp 's White Mesa Ml({ Sire, San Juc,11 Counry, Utah , April 30, 2008,
prepared by INTERA, Inc. and Table I 6 and Appendix D of the Revised Background Groundwater Quality Report: Existing Wells for Denison Mines (USA) Corp. 's White Mesa Uranium Mlll Site, San Juan County, Utah,
Octobor 2007, prepared by INTERA, Inc.
•Range of average historic values for On-Site Monitoring Wells as reported on April 30, 2008 (MW-I, MW-2, MW-3, MW-3A, MW-4, MW-5, MW-11, MW-1-2, MW-14, MW-15, MW-17, MW-18, MW-19, MW-20, MW-22,
MW-23, MW-24, MW-25, MW-26, MW-27, MW-28, MW-29, MW-30, MW-31 and MW-32)
,1, ,,, I
INDEX OF TABS
Tab A Seeps and Springs Field Data Sheets and Photographic Documentation
Tab B Field Parameter Measurement Data
Tab C Survey Data and Contour Map
Tab D Analytical Laboratory Data
Tab E Quality Assurance and Data Validation Tables
E-1 Holding Time Evaluation
E-2 Laboratory Receipt Temperature Check
E-3 Analytical Method Check
E-4 Reporting Limit Evaluation
E-5 Trip Blank Evaluation
E-6 QA/QC Evaluation for Sample Duplicates
E-7 Radiologic Counting Error
E-8 Laboratory Matrix QC Evaluation
Tab F CSV Transmittal
,..
-..
Tab A
Seeps and Springs Field Data Sheets and Photographic Documentation
Field Data Record-Seeps and Springs Sampling
Seep or Spring Location: JJ e..s+wQ..+er $~
Date For Initial Sampling Visit: ~ / :;i.,g / :;J.D Time: 0 2)' .5 D -~~~------
Sample Collected: ~ Yes o No
Date For Second Sampling Visit: ________ Time: ________ _
Sample Collected: o Yes o No
Date For Third Sampling Visit: _______ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected: o Yes o No
Date For Fourth Sampling Visit: ________ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected: o Yes o No
Sampling Personnel:
Weather Conditions at Time of Sampling: ----------------
Estimated Seep or Spring Flow Rate: -----------------
Field Parameter Measurements:
-pH
-Temperature (°C) _ _,·l:.><--.-,~-----------
-Conductivity µMHOC/cm -~----------
-Turbidity (NTU) (if measured)_~--------
-Redox Potential Eh (m V) (if measured) __,___;i..-=.&--+~-----
D O 2.1.f,~
Analytical Parameters/Sample Collection Method:
Parameter Sample Taken Filtered Samplin2 Metho.d
Direct Peristaltic Ladle Other
-· PwQp (descdbein '.
note$ s.ec--tion) voes lj;}Yes □No □Yes ~No
Metals ~ Yes □No [11Yes □No
Nutrients ~Yes □No □Yes Iii No
Other Non Ill Yes □No □Yes t5 No
Radiologies
Gross Alpha !CJ Yes □No Iii Yes □No
QC Samples Associated with this Location:
o Rinsate Blank
□ Duplicate
D ljJ
D !ill
D Iii
D ijJ
D 00
Duplicate Sample Name: __________ _
D
D
D
D
D
Notes: Ac6l>ca on ~,'±:e ~+ QB '-f L ~""-Mp)e..S &.oJJah, ,>..t 0 850
We11.+u:: \,,-! ,._ 6,.lo.s.~ f;lt".\ cm tb~ S~u~ . L?tj s,'l:e. "'-t o ~55
□
D
D
D
□
=
Field Data Record-Seeps and Springs Sampling
'
Seep or Spring Location: f a+ca L'.lcc J p6':j
Date For Initial Sampling Visit: 5/t o/~2-::t Time: _ _,_,~=:.__ ____ _
Sample Collected: gi Yes □ No
Date For Second Sampling Visit: ________ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected: o Yes o No
Date For Third Sampling Visit: ________ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected: o Yes o No
Date For Fourth Sampling Visit: ________ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected: o Yes D No
Sampling Personnel: _-r;...1,; .. =l'ln.......,e.:.._r _,U~,--..:::D'-'e=~="C.:.......,,L"-;t~.--csa=L..._.!H..J....4,..., __.._f-"-h.:..:.:.L../ 46.i:..T".._. ___ _
Weather Conditions at Time of Sampling:__,__P.~"'71 ~""-'-=-='\-----------
Estimated Seep or Spring Flow Rate: _......,_.....___,_-=----------------
Field Parameter Measurements:
-pH b .'i
-Temperature (°C) ---"-'' w.:••..J....;...' ___________ _
-Conductivity µMHOC/cm _ _..o.;'l,,.____._I ________ _
-Turbidity (NTU) (if measured).~2.=.1,____ _______ _
-Redox Potential Eh (m V) (if measured) ~3,...,'3......__ ____ _
DC> '-8.:l
Analytical Parameters/Sample Collection Method:
VOCs fill Yes D No D Yes l» No D ¥1 D D
Metals oo Yes □ No 11J Yes o No □ ~ □ o
Nutrients ~ Yes o No o Yes SJ No D !jl o o
Other Non [j Yes D No D Yes 'fl No D [j D o
Radiologies
Gross Alpha fJJ Yes o No Yes D No o lil o o
QC Samples Associated with this Location:
o Rinsate Blank
□ Duplicate
Duplicate Sample Name:. ___________ _
Notes: AcciveA 120 S d"c-0-+ D80 [{_ ::fMrvc I Pc::co o.orl Dc'-n J.le,,Jer.w, ,
~h,'I Go ble wtfi. tb~ p1v_Mf?.l nl\ ,Je ~r 5?!"'1pli11J· S-.1>11des c.oll,deJ a+ Ox'.2 6
Field Data Record-Seeps and Springs Sampling
Seep or Spring Location: _C.-o.._+t.~o'-'c-=w=---o~o ... !.._,.6"+p'-'-r ...... i ,,....,j~------------
Date For Initial Sampling Visit: 5/l D/:J..D')..~ Time: 0 ➔ 5 -~___,_-=-=------
Sample Collected: ~ Yes o No
Date For Second Sampling Visit: ________ Time: ________ _
Sample Collected: o Yes D No
Date For Third Sampling Visit: ________ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected: o Yes o No
Date For Fourth Sampling Visit: ________ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected: o Yes o No
Sampling Personnel: ---G,Mltc lJ 1 De;en LI D~,, H, 58.UI; B,,~I t'rohlc
Weather Conditions at Time of Sampling: Po.rt~ C l11wl_j 4> d:h SQM£ ~ •"'d
Estimated Seep or Spring Flow Rate: __ I)_._, ~'i_S~&~P~M __________ _
Field Parameter Measurements:
-pH . I
-Temperature (°C) ~l~"i _.'l~D __________ _
-Conductivity µMHOC/cm _1~7~3~'1 _________ _
-Turbidity (NTU) (if measured)~0 _______ _
-Redox Potential Eh (m V) (if measured) _3-.....1 ':i..._ ____ _
LDC> _L(l),5
Analytical Parameters/Sample Collection Method:
VOCs !SQ Yes D No D Yes r'A No D 111 D D
Metals Ill Yes D No ijl Yes D No D Iii D o
Nutrients 00 Yes D No o Yes ~ No D [!I D D
Other Non Ci Yes D No D Yes ~ No D Ill D D
Radiolo ·cs
Gross Alpha tjJ Yes D No Yes D No D D o
QC Samples Associated with this Location:
□ Rinsate Blank
□ Duplicate
Duplicate Sample Name: __________ _
Notes: Acri \lea {)(\ ~.-+« A+ O<f~'i :!o.nn,c I Peca o..!)rl P1!~"' J.lc,,Jec.son •
~I ~~ t~' ~'"'~1q: •rt s:+. ~:;;'"'f''~,ma:I. Df.f'R<
Field Data Record-Seeps and Springs Sampling
Date For Initial Sampling Visit: 5/1 o/~;b;:l.,
Sample Collected: rgi Yes □ No
Time: 0855
Date For Second Sampling Visit: ________ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected:□ Yes D No
Date For Third Sampling Visit: ________ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected: □ Yes □ No
Date For Fourth Sampling Visit: ________ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected: D Yes o No
Sampling Personnel: -f ....,,r1,r u , o~ L I Dc:g,.,, Y •· Pb~ I G-b 6k·
Weather Conditions at Time of Sampling:~:P_..o ..... d-1--'-'-'7'<,t----=G'-A-1 o"""'J=c...t-r----------
Estimated Seep or Spring Flow Rate: --'D~,'J..=...iS'---....,,&"-'P_M_._ __________ _
Field Parameter Measurements:
-pH ~
-Temperature (°C) _1,__,,"3.=.l.\~)'------------
-Conductivity µMHOC/cm ____...!4_..3..._.g~---------
-Turbidity (NTU) (if measured)_-"'---------
-Redox Potential Eh (mV) (if measured) _.z_'i~I ____ _
OD 87,0
Analytical Parameters/Sample Collection Method:
~ -' : :d ·"--X :. ► •
• ::" ~ ,~~ ; ..... ~ .toe •
• .,,f!..-6-....,.
-I.',.,'
,., ' t~J ~~ ~-:. . ;,...,. . S,,J! ...
VOCs fiQ Yes D No D Yes !:» No lj D D o
Metals 00 Yes D No l'jlJ Yes D No D fia o o
Nutrients 00 Yes □ No o Yes ~ No fl] D o o
Other Non [jl, Yes o No o Yes ~ No ~ D D o
Radiolo ·cs
Gross Alpha , Yes o No Yes o No D ~ D o
QC Samples Associated with this Location:
o Rinsate Blank
□ Duplicate
Duplicate Sample Name:. ___________ _
Notes: Acr1\1,a 00 ~;+LG ""t OS"i1 -rMIYC I Ike.a Q,f)d D t!Sl' Men Jer..so.-. 4
Phil 6-obk ~ ;th ~Mf!C Ol' sife .(:r Sumpl·'!J c,e,tl . .S-..,,ple.$ coll«tlcA o.;i 08S$-
LA s~-k °'-+ O't /j
=
Field Data Record-Seeps and Springs Sampling
Seep or Spring Location: _...,..R........,d'"""-'.___5.-f'p=" ..... 1'.._~~-------------
Date For Initial Sampling Visit: s/l O/;z.Q~l.. Time: 0855
Sample Collected: gi Yes q No
Date For Second Sampling Visit: Time: ------------------
Sample Collected: D Yes o No
Date For Third Sampling Visit: ________ Time: _________ _
Sample Collected: o Yes o No
Date For Fourth Sampling Visit: Time: -------------------
Sample Collected: □ Yes o No
Sampling Personnel: --r~nner ~ .De.el'\ LI o~" 1--1, fh;t Goble
Weather Conditions at Time of Sampling:_P._'1>r_l-i--T1di-----c_1~,)-J-itr----------
Estimated Seep or Spring Flow Rate: _O=-.,... ~;.....='---------------
Field Parameter Measurements:
-pH 7 '-If
-Temperature (°C) ___ l'""'l'-'-,L.f_.:!i ___________ _
-Conductivity µMHOC/cm __._l"i_,_~;a....c_ ________ _
-Turbidity (NTU) (if measured) o ~-----------Redo x Potential Eh (mV) (if measured) _2-_'i_l _____ _
ao &7.t>
Analytical Parameters/Sample Collection Method:
Parameter Sample .T~ken Eilter-ed S~)>lin2Metbp_d
':, Duect 1,P-eristaltic Ladle (1).ther
Pump (describe in
notes section)
voes (iaYes □No □Yes [jlNo I'll D D D
Metals Ill Yes □No ~Yes □No □ t1] □ D
Nutrients 00 Yes □No □Yes sNo fil □ D D
Other Non @Yes □No □Yes ffJNo ~ □ D D
Radiologies
Gross Alpha ~Yes □No ~Yes □No □ ~ D D
QC Samples Associated with this Location:
D Rinsate Blank
flJ Duplicate
Duplicate Sample Name: __ B_~ __ .s_.__ ______ _
Field Data Record-Seeps and Springs Sampling
Seep or Spring Location: ~k~Q~r-°'~l ~(~,°'~fl~tp-T""-0~~5 ...... e_r_i_:5 ________ _
Date For Initial Sampling Visit: s /u/2.on Time: 0 fs 13
Sample Collected: □ Yes lil No
Date For Second Sampling Visit: 5/ 11 / ;J. o~
Sample Collected:□ Yes ~ No
Time: 1,.:~4.
Date For Third Sampling Visit:~· ~/~!\~~----Time: 0 7).,b
Sample Collected: □ Yes IJl No
Date For Fourth Sampling Visit: l 1/~/l)..O~
Sample Collected: □ Yes r,: No
Sampling Personnel:
Time: OSIJI)
Weather Conditions at Time of Sampling: _______________ _
Estimated Seep or Spring Flow Rate: -----------------
Field Parameter Measurements:
-pH
-Temperature (°C) ______________ _
-Conductivity µMHOC/cm -------------Turbidity (NTU) (if measured) _________ _
-Redox Potential Eh (mV) (if measured) ______ _
Analytical Parameters/Sample Collection Method:
Parameter Sample Taken Filtered Samplin_e Method
voes □ Yes oNo □Yes □No
Metals □ Yes oNo o Yes □No
Nutrients □Yes oNo □Yes □No
Other Non □Yes □No □Yes □No
Radiologies
Gross Alpha □Yes □No □Yes □No
QC Samples Associated with this Location:
□ Rinsate Blank
D Duplicate
Direct Peristaltic
Pump
D □
□ D
D D
□ D
D □
Duplicate Sample Name: __________ _
Ladle Other
( describe in
notes section)
D D
□ D
D □
□ D
D D
:
;;
Field Data Record-Seeps and Springs Sampling
Seep or Spring Location: ---=_.......---=r---=c>.."-,C..&._---'5=---r:....:.....:..:...:..;:~----------
Date For Initial Sampling Visit: 3 /;)...zJ ~2-?, Time: _ ____,cOc.._8=-c:=3c:.__0 ____ _
Sample Coilected: o Yes It! No
Date For Second Sampling Visit: 5/ l I /;i.,o~
Sample Coliected: o Yes 1'I No
Date For Third Sampling Visit: ( r I/ l}..0~
Sample Coliected: o Yes ~ No
Date For Fourth Sampling Visit: 11 tasLB-f>~
Sample Collected: o Yes 111.No
Sampling Personnel:
Time: ~
Time: 0b53
Time: 0&3l'.)
Weather Conditions at Time of Sampling: ----------------
Estimated Seep or Spring Flow Rate: ________________ _
Field Parameter Measurements:
-pH
-Temperature (°C) ______________ _
-Conductivity µMHOC/cm ___________ _
-Turbidity (NTU) (if measured) _________ _
-Redox Potential Eh (mV) (if measured) ______ _
Analytical Parameters/Sample Collection Method:
Parameter Sample Taken Filtered Sampling Methqj
'
voes □Yes □No □Yes oNo
Metals □Yes □No □Yes □No
Nutrients □Yes □No □Yes □No
Other Non □Yes □No □ Yes □No
Radiologies
Gross Alpha □Yes □No □Yes □No
QC Samples Associated with this Location:
D Rinsate Blank
o Duplicate
Direct Peristaltic
.Pump
D D
D D
D D
D □
D D
Duplicate Sample Name: __________ _
Ladle Other
(describe in
notes section)
□ D
D D
D D
□ D
D D
:
II
:
TabB
Field Parameter Measurement Data
I
"
Field parameters -
Date
Location Sampled pH Conductivity Turbidjty Redox Temperature DO
Cottonwood Spring 5/10/2022 7.21 1737 0 314 14.90 40.5
Entrance Seep 5/10/2022 6.45 1351 2.1 363 11.41 68.3
Back Spring
(Duplicate of Ruin 7.41 1438 0 241 13.43 87.0
Spring) 5/10/2022
Ruin Spring 5/10/2022 7.41 1438 0 241 13.43 87.0
Westwater Seep 3/28/2022 7.09 1209 0.9 259 10.71 24.3
....
TabC
Survey Data and Contour Map
=
Seeps and Springs Survey Locations
Mid-December 2009 Survey
Location Latitude (N) Longitude (W) Elevation
FROG POND 37°33'03.535811 109°29'04.955211 5589.56
CORRAL CANYON 37°33'07.1392" 109°29'12.390711 5623.97
ENTRANCE SPRING 37°32'01.648711 109°29'33.700511 5559.71
CORRAL SPRINGS 3 7°29'37 .919211 109°29'3 5 .820 l 11 5383.35
RUIN SPRING 3 7°30'06.044811 109°31'23.430011 5380.03
COTTONWOOD 37°31'21.700211 109°32'14.792311 5234.33
WESTWATER 37°3 l '58.502011 109°31 '25. 7345 II 5468.23
Verification Survey July 2010
RUIN SPRING 37°30'06.045611 109°31 '23 .4181 II 5380.01
COTTONWOOD 3 7°3 l '21.698711 109°32'14.792711 5234.27
WESTWATER 37°3 l '58.501311 109°31'25.735711 5468.32
@
TW4-43
~5523
TWN-20
Cl5564
TW4-42
¢5524
MW-38
-9-5463
estimated dry area
temporary perched monitoring
well installed September, 2021
showing elevation in feet amsl
temporary perched nitrate monitoring
well installed April, 2021 showing
elevation in feet amsl
temporary perched monitoring well
installed April, 2019 showing
elevation in feet amsl
perched monitoring well
installed February, 2018 showing
elevation in feet amsl
MW-S h d ·t . II h . • 5504 perc e mom oring we s owing
elevation In feet amsl
I TW4-12 Ii . . II 0 5568 temporary perc · ed momtonng we
showing elevation in feet amsl
TWN-7 h d . . . <>5569 temporary perc e nitrate momtonng
well showing elevation in feet amsl
PIEZ-1 perched piezometer showing
Q 5588 elevation in feet amsl
RUIN SPRING b 5380 seep or spring showing
elevation in feet amsl
\ '
\
' ....
,"';.'\~~; 'it!~-
' ....
-~on¥<1 'Y'MI~
~<i•d
·'°9,
PlfJ.01
,~✓
•aal/1.1$
. • I •
on
TYiN-1a ~}
r-~¥trf, ..
·•tffiS •i-~'•.·: •,\'•, lk ~ ~ ·-;;._.~,iJ.f.;:i,:,, . '{;"~~-:'"-i::.~·;·;.:'.~• '.' :;$• :,; .. ,;ft~~~-;<:. !.,.:
. 41· ;(1£J.f;•:tf;: ~~:Fi?.f· ~~-~~-~J-!:;,_(, .... _;.:,11;; iffi·.nr:·:i:~-::-ir·~~1~.,
t•. .,
.:,l
,..,. '".l_'••··~~ •'t."'"-~?.,,,.,-;"._·· •~•-0~1\IJ&~-r~~· ..... .,.,,_,_. .,.. ·,1►.:•-,-r.·•-1,, ~-,-,..._~,-, ·.:I[_ ,;1,.,,/i1 ·•'t-''w~~ft..ir.:.t//'£6r.iJ...;,, · ·,· ·~.::r-,~~• r -~--)'.;1•· "' · ,\?'" -!.°W · .. ;r.-;. --:-·u~,:; ··~· ~~~ ~~~{~U~:ar~f~i~rltrq;.:1~' -~~ ·' .-,;.tr_.• ' ~ ~ · ~-~~ . ,_. ~ .-..•~~
NOTES: MW-4, MW-26, TW4-1, TW4-2, TW4-4, TW4-11, TW4-19, TW4-21 , TW4-37, TW4-39, TW4-40 and 1W4-41 are chloroform pumping wells;
TW4-22, TW4-24, TW4-25 and TWN-2 are nitrate pumping wells; TW4-11 water level ls below the base of the Burro Canyon Formatlon
HYDRO
GED
CHEM.INC.
KRIGED 3rd QUARTER, 2022 WATER LEVELS
(Dr-series piezometer water levels not included)
WHITE MESA SITE
APPROVED DATE REFERENCE H:/718000/nov22/
seeps_springs/Uwl0922nodr.srf
FIGURE
C-1
@
TW4-43
~5523
TWN-20
IJ5564
TW4-42
¢5524
estimated dry area
temporary perched monitoring
well installed September, 2021
showing elevation in feet amsl
temporary perched nitrate monitoring
well installed April, 2021 showing
elevation in feet amsl
temporary perched monitoring well
installed April, 2019 showing
elevation in feet amsl
MW-38 perched monitoring well
-(?-5463 installed February, 2018 showing
elevation in feet amsl
M;-:504 perched monitoring well showing
elevation in feet amsl
TW4-12 , 0 5568 temporary perched monitoring well
showing elevation in feet amsl
TWN-7 t h d . . . A.5569 emporary perc e nitrate mon,tonng
V well showing elevation in feet amsl
PIEZ-1 perched piezometer showing
~ 5588 elevation in feet amsl
RUIN SPRING b 5380 seep or spring showing
elevation in feet amsl
DIMQ.
s-14~ '
.,
DR,11f .
M4ll
' '
' ' ....
.....
'
-~ m;J,
l
'~j ("-'4
b,in,
1'WN•15
~·~ PlEf.01
•
·'"'':$.~
,wt,1.11
.,,
: MW-4, MW-26, TW4-1, TW4-2, TW4-4, TW4-11, TW4-19, TW4-21, TW4-37, TW4-39, TW4-40 and TW4-41 are chloroform pumping wells;
TW4-22, TW4-24, TW4-25 and TWN-2 are nitrate pumping wells; TW4-11 water level is below the base of the Burro Canyon Formation
HYDRO
GED
CHEM.INC.
KRIGED 3rd QUARTER, 2022 WATER LEVELS
WHITE MESA SITE
APPROVED DATE REFERENCE FIGURE
t~:.
H:/718000/nov22/
seeps_springs/Uwl0922dr.srf C-2
TabD
Analytical Laboratory Data
I Chemtech-Ford Laboratories 9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH-FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
LAB,0~.\TOP.l t;S
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Ruin Spring
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 5/10/22 8:55
Calculations
Anions, Total
Cation/ Anion Balance
Cations, Total
TDS Ratio
Inorganic
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
AmmoniaasN
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate+ Nitrite, Total, as N
Sulfate
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
TDS, Calculated
Metals
Arsenic, Dissolved
Beryllium, Dissolved
Cadmium, Dissolved
Calcium, Dissolved
Chromium, Dissolved
Cobalt, Dissolved
Copper, Dissolved
Iron, Dissolved
Lead, Dissolved
Magnesium, Dissolved
Manganese, Dissolved
Mercury, Dissolved
Molybdenum, Dissolved
Nickel, Dissolved
Potassium, Dissolved
Selenium, Dissolved
Silver, Dissolved
Sodium, Dissolved
rhallium, Dissolved
fin, Dissolved
/anadium, Dissolved
'.inc, Dissolved
Result
16.2
-4.2
14.9
0.96
185
< 1.0
0.2
28.4
0.5
1.2
595
992
1030
<0.0005
<0.0005
<0.0002
141
0.0042
< 0.0005
<0.0010
<0.02
<0.0005
32.9
< 0.0005
< 0.0002
0.0177
0.0006
3.2
0.0117
< 0.0005
117
< 0.0002
<0.02
0.0013
<0.01
>reject Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
rww. ChemtechFord. com
Certificate of Analysis
Units
meq/L
%
meq/L
None
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
1.0
1.0
0.2
1.0
0.1
0.1
10.0
20
5
0.0005
0.0005
0.0002
0.2
0.0005
0.0005
0.0010
0.02
0.0005
0.2
0.0005
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.5
0.0005
0.0005
0.5
0.0002
0.02
0.0005
0.01
PO#:
Receipt: 5/12/22 12:27@2.1 °C
Date Reported: 6/3/2022
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
SM 1030 E
SM 1030 E
SM 1030 E
SM 2340 B
SM2320 B
SM 2320 B
SM4500NH3 H
EPA300.0
EPA300.0
EPA353.2
EPA300.0
SM2540 C
SM 2540C
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA245.l
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
CtF WO#: 22E1012
Preparation
Date/Time
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/13/22
5/13/22
5/19/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/13/22
5/31/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/16/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
Lab ID: 22E1012-02
Analysis
Date/Time
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/13/22
5/13/22
5/19/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/13/22
5/31/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/17/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
~
Page 5 of 28
:
;
Chemtech-F ord Laboratories 9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH·FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
l,,AB◊~.\TO IUES
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Ruin Spring (cont.)
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 5/10/22 8:55
1\lctals (cont.)
Uranium, Dissolved
\'olatilc Organic Compounds
Acetone
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methylene Chloride
Naphthalene
Tetrahydrofuran
Toluene
Xylenes, total
Result
0.009!
< 10.0
< l.0
< l.0
< l.0
< l.0
< 10.0
<2.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
,reject Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
vww. ChemtechFord.com
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Certificate of Analysis
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
0.0005
10.0
l.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
PO#:
Receipt: 5/12/22 12:27@ 2.1 °C
Date Reported: 6/3/2022
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
Method
EPA200.8
EPA 82600 /5030A
EPA 82600 /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 82600 /5030A
EPA 82600 /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 82600 /5030A
EPA 82600 /5030A
EPA 82600 /5030A
EPA 82600 /5030A
CtF WO#: 22E1012
Preparation
Date/Time
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
Lab ID: 22E1012-02
Analysis
Dateffime
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
Flag(s)
J-LOW
A-01
Page 6 of 28
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
Certificate of Analysis
Report Date: June 14, 2022
Company:
Address:
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
6425 S. Highway 191
Blanding, Utah 84511
Contact: Mr. Garrin Palmer
Project: Analytical forSeeps and Springs 2022
Parameter
Client Sample ID:
Sample ID:
Matrix:
Collect Date:
Receive Date:
Collector:
Ruin Spring
580063002
Ground Water
10-MAY-22 08:55
16-MAY-22
Client
Qualifier Result Uncertainty
Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting
GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid "As Received"
Gross Radium Alpha U 0.0715 +/-0.178
The following Analytical Methods were performed:
Method Description
EPA 903.0
Surrogate/Tracer Recovery Test
MDC
0.711
Barium Carrier GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid "As Received"
Notes:
Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 68% confidence level (!-sigma).
RL
1.00
Project:
Client ID:
DNMI00106
DNMIO0I
Ul).its PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method
pCi/L JXC9 05/24/22 1312 2268525
Analyst Comments
Result Nominal Recovery¾ Acceptable Limits
108 (25%-125%)
SRL = Sample Reporting Limit. For metals analysis only. When the sample is U qualified and ND, the SRL column reports the value which is
the greater of either the adjusted MDL or the CRDL.
Column headers are defined as follows:
DF: Dilution Factor
DL: Detection Limit
MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity
MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration
Page 13 of 17 SDG: 580063
Le/LC: Critical Level
PF: Prep Factor
RL: Reporting Limit
SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit
I Chemtech-Ford Laboratories 9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH·FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
LA60~/\TORIES
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Cottonwood Spring
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 5/10/22 9:45
Calculations
Anions, Total
Cation/ Anion Balance
Cations, Total
TDS Ratio
Inorganic
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
Ammonia as N
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate+ Nitrite, Total, as N
Sulfate
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
TDS, Calculated
\lrlals
Arsenic, Dissolved
Beryllium, Dissolved
Cadmium, Dissolved
Calcium, Dissolved
Chromium, Dissolved
Cobalt, Dissolved
Copper, Dissolved
Iron, Dissolved
Lead, Dissolved
Magnesium, Dissolved
Manganese, Dissolved
Mercury, Dissolved
Molybdenum, Dissolved
Nickel, Dissolved
Potassium, Dissolved
Selenium, Dissolved
Silver, Dissolved
Sodium, Dissolved
Thallium, Dissolved
Tin, Dissolved
Vanadium, Dissolved
Zinc, Dissolved
19.4
-7.3
16.7
0.96
267
< 1.0
<0.2
143
0.3
<0.1
528
1130
1180
0.0018
<0.0005
<0.0002
99.0
0.0066
<0.0005
<0.0010
<0.02
< 0.0005
28.5
0.0009
<0.0002
0.0014
<0.0005
5.9
0.0014
<0.0005
214
<0.0002
<0.02
0.0024
<0.01
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
www.ChemtechFord.com
Certificate of Analysis
Units
meq/L
%
meq/L
None
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
1.0
1.0
0.2
1.0
0.1
0.1
10.0
20
5
0.0005
0.0005
0.0002
0.2
0.0005
0.0005
0.0010
0.02
0.0005
0.2
0.0005
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.5
0.0005
0.0005
0.5
0.0002
0.02
0.0005
0.01
PO#:
Receipt: 5/12/22 12:27 @2.1 °C
Date Reported: 6/3/2022
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
Method
SM 1030 E
SM 1030 E
SM 1030 E
SM2340 B
SM 2320 B
SM 2320 B
SM4500NH3 H
EPA300.0
EPA300.0
EPA353.2
EPA300.0
SM2540C
SM2540C
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA245.l
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA 200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
CtF WO#: 22E1012
Preparation
Date/Time
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/13/22
5/13/22
5/19/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/13/22
5/31/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/16/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
Lab ID: 22El012-03
Analysis
Date/Time
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/13/22
5/13/22
5/19/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/13/22
5/31/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/17/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
Flag(s)
Page 7 of 28
I Chemtech-Ford Laboratories 9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com
CHEMTECH-FORO Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
LA!.'0~•\TO~IES
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Cottonwood Spring (cont.)
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 5/10/22 9:45
Metals (cont.)
Uranium, Dissolved 0.0097
Volatile Organic Compounds
Acetone < 10.0
Benzene < 1.0
Carbon Tetrachloride < 1.0
Chloroform < 1.0
Chloromethane < 1.0
Methyl Ethyl Ketone < 10.0
Methylene Chloride <2.0
Naphthalene < 1.0
Tetrahydrofuran < 1.0
Toluene < 1.0
Xylenes, total < 1.0
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
www.ChemtechFord.com
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Certificate of Analysis
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
0.000S
10.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
l.O
PO#:
Receipt: 5/12/22 12:27@ 2.1 ·c
Date Reported: 6/3/2022
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
Method
EPA200.8
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /S030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
CtF WO#: 22E1012
Preparation
Date/Time
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
S/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
Lab ID: 22E1012-03
Analysis
Date/Time
5/20/22
S/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
Flag(s)
J-LOW
A-01
Page 8 of 28
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
Certificate of Analysis
Report Date: June 14, 2022
Company:
Address:
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
6425 S. Highway 191
Blanding, Utah 84511
Contact: Mr. Garrin Palmer
Project: Analytical forSeeps and Springs 2022
Parameter
Client Sample ID:
Sample ID:
Matrix:
Collect Date:
Receive Date:
Collector:
Cottonwood Spring
580063003
Ground Water
10-MA Y-22 09:45
16-MAY-22
Client
Qualifier Result Uncertainty
Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting
GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid "As Received"
Gross Radium Alpha U -0.0850 +/-0.212
The following Analytical Methods were performed:
Method Description
EPA 903.0
Surrogateffracer Recovery Test
MDC
0.890
Barium Carrier GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid "As Received"
Notes:
Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 68% confidence level (I-sigma).
RL
1.00
Project:
Client ID:
DNMI00106
DNMIO0l
Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method
pCi/L JXC9 05/24/22 1312 2268525
Analyst Comments
Result Nominal Recovery% Acceptable Limits
I 06 (25%-125%)
SRL = Sample Reporting Limit. For metals analysis only. When the sample is U qualified and ND, the SRL column reports the value which is
the greater of either the adjusted MDL or the CRDL.
Column headers are defined as follows:
DF: Dilution Factor
DL: Detection Limit
MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity
MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration
Page 14 of 17 SDG: 580063
Le/LC: Critical Level
PF: Prep Factor
RL: Reporting Limit
SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit
Chemtech-F ord Laboratories 9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH-FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
Lt,.BOIIUO~IE5
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Westwater Spring
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 3/28/22 8:50
Calculations
Anions, Total
Cation/ Anion Balance
Cations, Total
TDS Ratio
Inorganic
Alkalinity • Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
Ammonia as N
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate + Nitrite, Total, as N
Sulfate
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
TDS, Calculated
\lctals
Arsenic, Dissolved
Beryllium, Dissolved
Cadmium, Dissolved
Calcium, Dissolved
Chromium, Dissolved
Cobalt, Dissolved
Copper, Dissolved
Iron, Dissolved
Lead, Dissolved
Magnesium, Dissolved
vlanganese, Dissolved
vlercury, Dissolved
'1olybdenum, Dissolved
lickel, Dissolved
otassium, Dissolved
elenium, Dissolved
Iver, Dissolved
idium, Dissolved
1allium, Dissolved
n, Dissolved
nadium, Dissolved
1c, Dissolved
Result
10.7
4.4
11.7
0.970
257
< 1.0
<0.2
21.9
0.5
<0.1
278
672
693
0.0018
<0.0005
<0.0002
104
0.0014
0.001
<0.0010
0.92
< 0.0005
26.4
0.206
<0.0002
0.0014
0.0017
1.3
0.0014
<0.0005
98.7
< 0.0002
<0.02
0.0006
<0.01
)ject Name: Seeps & Springs 2022
IW. ChemtechFord. com
Certificate of Analysis
Units
meq/L
%
meq/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
1.0
1.0
0.2
5.0
0.1
0.1
5.0
20
5
0.0005
0.0005
0.0002
0.2
0.0005
0.0005
0.0010
0.02
0.0005
0.2
0.0005
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.5
0.0005
0.0005
0.5
0.0002
0.02
0.0005
0.01
PO#:
Receipt: 3/31/22 11:00@ 2.6 ·c
Date Reported: 4/18/2022
Project Name: Seeps & Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
SM 1030 E
SM 1030 E
SM 1030 E
SM 2340 B
SM 2320 B
SM2320B
SM4500 NH3 H
EPA300.0
EPA300.0
EPA353.2
EPA300.0
SM 2540C
SM 2540 C
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA245.1
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
CtF WO#: 22C2426
Preparation
Date/Time
4/15/22
4/15/22
4/15/22
4/7/22
4/1/22
4/1/22
4/4/22
4/5/22
4/5/22
4/11/22
4/5/22
4/1/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/14/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
Lab ID: 22C2426-01
Analysis
Dateffimc
4/15/22
4/15/22
4/15/22
4/18/22
4/1/22
4/1/22
4/4/22
4/5/22
4/5/22
4/11/22
4/5/22
4/1/22
4/18/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/15/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/7/22
4/8/22
4/8/22
J-LOW
Page 3 of 21
:
"
Chemtech-Ford Laboratories 9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0 :[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH·FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
lld30•At0Jt 1ES
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Westwater Spring (cont.)
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 3/28/22 8:50
i\lctals (cont.)
Uranium, Dissolved
Volatile Organic Compounds
Acetone
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methylene Chloride
Naphthalene
Tetrahydrofuran
Toluene
Xylenes, total
:>ject Name: Seeps & Springs 2022
rw. ChemtechFord.com
0.0014
< 10.0
< 0.4
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 10.0
<2.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Certificate of Analysis
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
0.0005
10.0
0.4
1.0
1.0
1.0
10.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
PO#:
Receipt: 3/31/22 11 :00@ 2.6 ·c
Date Reported: 4/18/2022
Project Name: Seeps & Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
Method
EPA200.8
EPA 8260B/C /5030A
EPA 8260B/C /5030A
EPA 8260B/C /5030A
EPA 8260B/C /5030A
EPA 8260B/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 8260B/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 8260B/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
CtF WO#: 22C2426
Preparation
Date/Time
4/8/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
Lab ID: 22C2426-01
Analysis
Date/Time
4/8/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
~
Page 4 of 21
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
Certificate of Analysis
Report Date: April 29, 2022
Company:
Address:
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
225 Union Boulevard
Parameter
Contact:
Project:
Client Sample ID:
Sample ID:
Matrix:
Collect Date:
Receive Date:
Collector:
Suite 600
Lakewood, Colorado 80228
Ms. Kathy Weinel
White Mesa Mill GW
Westwater Spring
575649001
Ground Water
28-MAR-22 08:50
06-APR-22
Client
Qualifier Result Uncertainty
Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting
GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid "As Received"
Gross Radium Alpha U 1.00 +/-0.109
The following Analytical Methods were performed:
Method Description
EPA 903.0
SurrogatefI'racer Recovery Test
MDC
0.460
Barium Carrier GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid "As Received"
Notes:
Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 68% confidence level (I-sigma).
RL
1.00
Project:
Client ID:
DNMIO0I00
DNMIO0I
Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method
pCi/L JXC9 04/19/22 1151 2252110
Analyst Comments
Result Nominal Recovery% Acceptable Limits
99.9 (25%-125%)
SRL = Sample Reporting Limit. For metals analysis only. When the sample is U qualified and ND, the SRL column reports the value which is
the greater of either the adjusted MDL or the CRDL.
Column headers are defined as follows:
DF: Dilution Factor
DL: Detection Limit
MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity
MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration
'age 11 of 13 SDG: 575649
Le/LC: Critical Level
PF: Prep Factor
RL: Reporting Limit
SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit
:
I Chemtech-Ford Laboratories 9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH-FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
LA.80~AT0R!ES
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Entrance Spring
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 5/10/22 8:20
Calculations
Anions, Total
Cation/Anion Balance
Cations, Total
TDS Ratio
Inorganic
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
Ammonia as N
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate+ Nitrite, Total, as N
Sulfate
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
TDS, Calculated
i\letals
Arsenic, Dissolved
Beryllium, Dissolved
Cadmium, Dissolved
Calcium, Dissolved
Chromium, Dissolved
Cobalt, Dissolved
Copper, Dissolved
Iron, Dissolved
Lead, Dissolved
Magnesium, Dissolved
Manganese, Dissolved
Mercury, Dissolved
Molybdenum, Dissolved
Nickel, Dissolved
Potassium, Dissolved
Selenium, Dissolved
Silver, Dissolved
Sodium, Dissolved
Thallium, Dissolved
Tin, Dissolved
Vanadium, Dissolved
Zinc, Dissolved
14.4
-0.2
14.3
1.0
308
< 1.0
<0.2
91.8
0.8
0.2
323
904
872
0.0031
< 0.0005
<0.0002
123
0.0055
0.001
<0.0010
0.39
< 0.0005
44.8
0.629
<0.0002
0.0018
0.0010
4.5
0.0052
<0.0005
100
< 0.0002
<0.02
0.0034
<0.01
0 roject Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
.vww. ChemtechFord.com
Certificate of Analysis
Units
meq/L
%
meq/L
None
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
1.0
1.0
0.2
1.0
0.1
0.1
10.0
20
5
0.0005
0.0005
0.0002
0.2
0.0005
0.0005
0.0010
0.02
0.0005
0.2
0.0005
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.5
0.0005
0.0005
0.5
0.0002
0.02
0.0005
0.01
PO#:
Receipt: 5/12/22 12:27 @2.1 ·c
Date Reported: 6/3/2022
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
Method
SM 1030E
SM 1030 E
SM 1030 E
SM2340 B
SM 2320 B
SM 2320 B
SM4500NH3 H
EPA300.0
EPA300.0
EPA353.2
EPA300.0
SM2540C
SM2540C
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA245.l
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
CtF WO#: 22E1012
Preparation
Date/Time
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/13/22
5/13/22
5/19/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/13/22
5/31/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/16/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
Lab ID: 22E1012-01
Analysis
Date/Time
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/13/22
5/13/22
5/19/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/13/22
5/31/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/17/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
.E!!&(!l
Page 3 of 28
--. -
I Chemtech-Ford Laboratories
9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH·FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
L/lt30~,\TO!i1ES
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Entrance Spring (cont.)
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 5/10/22 8:20
Metals (cont.)
Uranium, Dissolved
\ olatilc Organic Compounds
Acetone
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methylene Chloride
Naphthalene
Tetrahydrofuran
Toluene
Xylenes, total
0.0175
< 10.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 10.0
<2.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
www.ChemtechFord.com
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Certificate of Analysis
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
0.0005
10.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
PO#:
Receipt: 5/12/22 12:27 @2.1 ·c
Date Reported: 6/3/2022
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
Method
EPA200.8
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
CtF WO#: 22E1012
Preparation
Date/Time
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
Lab ID: 22E1012-01
Analysis
Date/Time
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
Flag(s)
MS-Low
MS-Low
J-LOW
MS-Low
MS-Low
A-01
Page 4 of 28
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
Certificate of Analysis
Report Date: June 14, 2022
Company:
Address:
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
6425 S. Highway 191
Blanding, Utah 84511
Contact: Mr. Garrin Palmer
Project: Analytical forSeeps and Springs 2022
Parameter
Client Sample ID:
Sample ID:
Matrix:
Collect Date:
Receive Date:
Collector:
Entrance Spring
580063001
Ground Water
10-MAY-22 08:20
16-MAY-22
Client
Qualifier Result Uncertainty
Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting
GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid "As Received"
Gross Radium Alpha U 0.534 +/-0.275
The following Analytical Methods were performed:
Method Description
EPA 903.0
Surrogate/Tracer Recovery Test
MDC
0.873
Barium Carrier GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid "As Received"
Notes:
Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 68% confidence level (I-sigma).
RL
1.00
Project:
Client ID:
DNMI00106
DNMIO0I
Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method
pCi/L JXC9 05/24/22 1312 2268525
Analyst Comments
Result Nominal Recovery¾ Acceptable Limits
106 (25%-125%)
SRL = Sample Reporting Limit. For metals analysis only. When the sample is U qualified and ND, the SRL column reports the value which is
the greater of either the adjusted MDL or the CRDL.
Column headers are defined as follows:
DF: Dilution Factor
DL: Detection Limit
MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity
MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration
Page 12 of 17 SDG: 580063
Le/LC: Critical Level
PF: Prep Factor
RL: Reporting Limit
SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit
I Chemtech-Ford Laboratories
9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH·FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
LA6,0R/\TQl'.!IES
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Back Spring
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 5/10/22 8:55
Calculations
Anions, Total
Cation/Anion Balance
Cations, Total
TDS Ratio
Inorganic
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
Ammonia as N
Chloride
Fluoride
Nitrate+ Nitrite, Total, as N
Sulfate
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
TDS, Calculated
\lctals
Arsenic, Dissolved
Beryllium, Dissolved
Cadmium, Dissolved
Calcium, Dissolved
Chromium, Dissolved
Cobalt, Dissolved
Copper, Dissolved
Iron, Dissolved
Lead, Dissolved
Magnesium, Dissolved
Manganese, Dissolved
Mercury, Dissolved
Molybdenum, Dissolved
Nickel, Dissolved
Potassium, Dissolved
Selenium, Dissolved
Silver, Dissolved
Sodium, Dissolved
Thallium, Dissolved
Tin, Dissolved
Vanadium, Dissolved
Zinc, Dissolved
15.6
-2.2
14.9
1.0
184
< 1.0
<0.2
28.5
0.5
1.2
565
1030
998
< 0.0005
< 0.0005
< 0.0002
141
0.0043
<0.0005
<0.0010
<0.02
<0.0005
32.9
< 0.0005
< 0.0002
0.0177
0.0005
3.2
0.0117
< 0.0005
117
< 0.0002
<0.02
0.0014
<0.01
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
www.ChemtechFord.com
Certificate of Analysis
Units
meq/L
%
meq/L
None
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
1.0
1.0
0.2
10.0
0.1
0.1
10.0
20
5
0.0005
0.0005
0.0002
0.2
0.0005
0.0005
0.0010
0.02
0.0005
0.2
0.0005
0.0002
0.0005
0.0005
0.5
0.0005
0.0005
0.5
0.0002
0.02
0.0005
0.01
PO#:
Receipt: 5/12/22 12:27 @2.1 ·c
Date Reported: 6/3/2022
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
Method
SM 1030 E
SM 1030 E
SM 1030 E
SM 2340 B
SM 23208
SM 2320 B
SM4500NH3 H
EPA300.0
EPA300.0
EPA353.2
EPA300.0
SM 2540 C
SM 2540C
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA 200.7
EPA200.8
EPA245.l
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.7
EPA200.8
EPA200.8
CtF WO#: 22E1012
Preparation
Date/Time
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/13/22
5/13/22
5/19/22
5/12/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/13/22
5/31/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/16/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
Lab ID: 22E1012-04
Analysis
Date/Time
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/31/22
5/13/22
5/13/22
5/19/22
5/12/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/16/22
5/13/22
5/31/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/17/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/20/22
5/20/22
fill!ml
Page 9 of 28
I Chemtech-Ford Laboratories 9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH·FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
tAB'OolA.TOJll[S
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Back Spring (cont.)
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 5/10/22 8:55
\Jrtals ( cont.)
Uranium, Dissolved
Volatile Organic Compounds
Acetone
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methylene Chloride
Naphthalene
Tetrahydrofuran
Toluene
Xylenes, total
0.0090
< 10.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 10.0
<2.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
www.ChemtechFord.com
Units
mg/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Certificate of Analysis
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
0.0005
10.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
PO#:
Receipt: 5/12/22 12:27@ 2.1 ·c
Date Reported: 6/3/2022
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
Method
EPA200.8
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
CtF WO#: 22E1012
Preparation
Date/Time
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/1 9/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
Lab ID: 22E1012-04
Analysis
Date/Time
5/20/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
fil!ml
J-LOW
A-01
Page 10 of 28
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
Certificate of Analysis
Report Date: June 14, 2022
Company:
Address:
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
6425 S. Highway 191
Blanding, Utah 84511
Contact: Mr. Garrin Palmer
Project: Analytical forSeeps and Springs 2022
Parameter
Client Sample ID:
Sample ID:
Matrix:
Collect Date:
Receive Date:
Collector:
Back Spring
580063004
Ground Water
10-MAY-22 08:55
16-MAY-22
Client
Qualifier Result Uncertainty
Rad Gas Flow Proportional Counting
GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid "As Received"
Gross Radium Alpha U -0.00560 +/-0.198
The following Analytical Methods were performed:
Method Description
EPA 903.0
Surrogate/Tracer Recovery Test
MDC
0.876
Barium Carrier GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid "As Received"
Notes:
Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 68% confidence level (1-sigma).
RL
1.00
Project:
Client ID:
DNMI00106
DNMIO0l
Units PF DF Analyst Date Time Batch Method
pCi/L JXC9 05/24/22 1312 2268525
Analyst Comments
Result Nominal Recovery% Acceptable Limits
106 (25%-125%)
SRL = Sample Reporting Limit. For metals analysis only. When the sample is U qualified and ND, the SRL column reports the value which is
the greater of either the adjusted MDL or the CRDL.
Column headers are defined as follows:
DF: Dilution Factor
DL: Detection Limit
MDA: Minimum Detectable Activity
MDC: Minimum Detectable Concentration
Page 15 of 17 SDG: 580063
Le/LC: Critical Level
PF: Prep Factor
RL: Reporting Limit
SQL: Sample Quantitation Limit
Chemtech-Ford Laboratories 9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0 :[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH·FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
lABO~•\TORIES
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Trip Blank
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 3/28/22 8:50
\'olatilc Organic Compounds
Acetone
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methylene Chloride
Naphthalene
Tetrahydrofuran
Toluene
Xylenes, total
Project Name: Seeps & Springs 2022
www.ChemtechFord.com
Result
< 10.0
< 0.4
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 10.0
<2.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
Units
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Certificate of Analysis
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
10.0
0.4
1.0
1.0
1.0
10.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
PO#:
Receipt: 3/31/22 11 :00@ 2.6 ·c
Date Reported: 4/18/2022
Project Name: Seeps & Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
Method
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
EPA 82608/C /5030A
CtF WO#: 22C2426
Preparation
Date/Time
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
Lab ID: 22C2426-02
Analysis
Date/Time
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
4/2/22
Flag(s)
Page 5 of 21
I Chemtech-Ford Laboratories 9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0 :[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com CHEMTECH·FORD Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
LA60RAT0RIB
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Sample ID: Trip Blank
Matrix: Water
Date Sampled: 5/11/22 8:20
Volatile Organic Compounds
Acetone
Benzene
Carbon Tetrachloride
Chloroform
Chloromethane
Methyl Ethyl Ketone
Methylene Chloride
Naphthalene
Tetrahydrofuran
Toluene
Xylenes, total
Result
< 10.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 10.0
<2.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
< 1.0
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
www.ChemtechFord.com
Units
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
ug/L
Certificate of Analysis
Minimum
Reporting
Limit
10.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
10.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
PO#:
Receipt: 5/12/22 12:27@ 2.1 ·c
Date Reported: 6/3/2022
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
Sampled By: Tanner Holliday
Method
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
EPA 8260D /5030A
CtF WO#: 22E1012
Preparation
Date/Time
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
Lab ID: 22E1012-05
Analysis
Date/Time
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
5/19/22
fu.lill).
J-LOW
A-01
Page 11 of 28
9632 South 500 West
CHEMTECH-FORD
LA60~.,\TORIE5
4/18/2022
Work Order: 22C2426
Project: Seeps & Springs 2022
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Attn: Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Client Service Contact: 801.262.7299
The analyses presented on this report were performed in accordance with the
National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) unless
noted in the comments, flags, or case narrative. If the report is to be used for
regulatory compliance, it should be presented in its entirety, and not be
altered.
Approved By:
Patrick Noteboom, Project Manager
Sandy, Utah 84070 801 .262.7299 Main 866. 792.0093 Fax
Serving the lntermountain West since 1953
www.ChemtechFord.com
Page 1 of 21
CH EMTECH-FORD
LABORATORIES
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Project: Seeps & Springs 2022
Project Manager: Tanner Holliday
Laboratory ID
22C2426-01
22C2426-02
Sample Name
Westwater Spring
Trip Blank
Work Order Report Narrative
Sample Preparation
All samples were prepared within method specified holding times. No preparation issues were noted.
Method Blanks
All blank values were within method acceptance criteria. No blank values exceeded the minimum reporting limit for any
analysis in this work order.
Laboratory Control Samples
All laboratory control samples were within method acceptance criteria.
Method Spikes
All method spike recoveries were within method acceptance criteria, except as noted by qualifying flags.
Method Spike Duplicates
All method spike duplicates were within method acceptance criteria, except as noted by qualifying flags.
Corrective Actions
There are no corrective actions associated with this work order.
1 :>reject Name: Seeps & Springs 2022
NWW. ChemtechFord. com
CtF WO#: 22C2426
Page 2 of 21
I
CHEMTECH·FORD
lll.60i(o\TO ~ I ES
Chemtech-Ford Laboratories
Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com
Certificate of Analysis
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Report Footnotes
Abbreviations
ND= Not detected at the corresponding Minimum Reporting Limit (MRL).
PO#:
Receipt: 3/31/22 11:00@ 2.6 ·c
Date Reported: 4/18/2022
Project Name: Seeps & Springs 2022
1 mg/L = one milligram per liter or I mg/kg = one milligram per kilogram = 1 part per million.
1 ug/L = one microgram per liter or 1 ug/kg = one microgram per kilogram= 1 part per billion.
1 ng/L = one nanogram per liter or 1 ng/kg = one nanogram per kilogram = 1 part per trillion.
Flag Descriptions
J-LOW = Estimated low due to low recovery ofLCS or CCV
Project Name: Seeps & Springs 2022
www.ChemtechFord.com
CtF WO#: 22C2426
Page 6 of 21
I
I
!
Address:
Contact:
Phone#:
Email:
Project Name:
Project#:
PO#:
Sampler Name:
American West
Analytical Laboratories
463 W. 3600 S. Sall Lake City, UT 84115
Phone# (801} 263-a686 Toll Free# (888) 26~686
6425 S. Hwy. 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Tanner Holliday
[phone] Cell#:
[e-mail]; kwelnel@;energyfuela.com
Seeps and Springs 2022
Tanner Holliday
n
J,...."J ...... C...'L"/ 2... ~ Date
Sample ID: Sampled
Westwater Spring 3/28/2022
l'tip Blank 3/28/2022
ReUnqul!hil<I "';---J .L. -/"_ L' Dalo~ -Y.lOJ2022 ISionntute f • -I Timu:
PrfnlNBmn: Dccnlvmen 1100
ROllnqOlst,ea by: Onto:
'""""tun) Timo:
PrintNomo
Refinquis/led by: DlltO
Slanaturo
Timo:
PrinlNAfflO!
Reflnquished by. Dale:
~naturo
Tlmo
P!lntNamo:
CHAIN OF CUSTODY 22-Cl-, ~
All analysis will bo ~uctca using NELAP accredlled mell\Ods and all data will lie t1!1)011nd using AWAL's stananl'd nnal)'le lists and
reporting ilml!S,(PQL) unless spectncelly requested otherwise on !his Chain of Cusl(Mly anl!/or attached dOc:umentalion.
AWAL Lab Sample Set#
Page of
I QC Level: I Tum Around Time: Unless other arrangements have been maae, IOue Dato:
3 Standard "~-••~-~••oo~•: the day they are due.
X Include EDD: Laboratory Use Only
o) LOCUS UPLOAD ::;; 8· EXCEL Samples Were: Ufr>5 t , ;, X Field Filtered For:
~ Dlaaolved Metals , Shlppedor~erea ..... Ii It) ::;; ' :ii Ambw(o: Chilled .=,} "' C'I i \ 2
~ -t_, For Compliance With: -'2· lo 0 i 1 ~! D NELAP 3 Temperature ·c
0 D RCRA o' C'I 8l >\ D CWA 4 Received Broken/leaking 0 ;:::.
0 0 :i1 0 SDWA (lmpropel1y Sealed)
~ O') 0 8· 0 ELAPIA2LA y N ..... ... cii' t, 0 0 0 £:!. D NLLAP
C\i' IJ) 0 C'I -; 61 D Non-Compliance 5 PropMy Prese,ved O') 0 O') e=::, \ f;i ... IJ) £:!. .. D Other: y N C :':!:. Ill ..,, i, G' Checked at bench I!! (2. 2 G' -s :i:J C) " 0 Q) >< "' 0 Cl \0 y N C: :s (') ~ 0 "' iS '1:1 ,j I ,,;1 ~ C'I ! "' 0 U) IJ) " C'.l en . ~ Known Hazards 8 Ro«IIV'lldWllntn 5 ::; Ii!; :':!:. ~ .t al .. ...... 8 ...... 0 i i ZI IQ .. Holding Times Time {.) 15. s m rtl -s • 0 & y N 0 E ii: ~ i5 II g SamJ)led "' Ii!; 0 .2 Sample Comments .. CJ)
850 7 w X X X X X X X X X X
850 3 w X COC Tape Was:
1 Present on Outer Package
y N NA
2 Unbroken on Outer Package
y N NA
3 Present on Sample
y N NA
4 Unbroken on Sample
y N NA
Discrepancies Between Sample
Labels and COC RecoRl7
y N
Recelved by: /1
Signature ,'/ I I\ 0 l /15)?__ LllJ oa~ ~l 22-Special Instructions: ,~, ....... ._·, p1mu J J / lco PrintNamo: '{'\ \"cJ B (Ge.\..;. Y\ Sample containers for metals were field filtered. See the
Received by: Datil: Analytical Scope of Work for Reporting Limits and VOC analyte Slgr,alun, list. 1r1me:
Pno!Name.
Received by: Cate:
s_tgnature
111me:
PrtntNama:
Received by: [Uale: l.A'PS --) z.. Ill Y4 Y n~ c; 2<?,~ 29,f:1 SignallJ"'
nme:
PrtntName: Page 7 of 21
I
7... '7 (__ 4,2 (.J
Work Order # 2: 1.: i '2= L ·
Delivery Method: ✓ups D USPS
Fed Ch hC
Sample# Container
-o \ ~D
VV\
A\,,
hi
W(:, ")
-D -z... wr~\
' /
ouner
Jurier
Chemtech lot#
O<
Preservative
>
> 0
5 ~
0 ... .0 -:g, ~ ~ ~ ol! a. C ,: E 1 ] .3 ' v ~ ~ a:
C 0 .., .., .. j ~ .0 E f " z
C ~
0 > .0 .,, .; a: Misc C
1 Volume
for/ml) a:
CHEMTECH FORD LABORATORIES
Sample Receipt
Receiving Temperature Z . Ip • C
Comments
(' \\.q\t\* ('Gu.¾1 """,.•J\S\
(
I
-J/
I -~ --; ·.
--~.."
CHEMTECH-FORD
L •"•$~°':i?.~,-,:,Ji,:,1~5
Sample Condition
(check if yes )
vSeals
~rslntaa
n tw matched co bonles
Plastic Containers
A0 Pli11:sttc:Uf\D1-eJcrv&."d
8° Miscellaneous Plastic
t,. Cyanide Qt (NaOH)
E· Colirorm/Ecoli/HPC
F• Sulfide Qt (Zn Acetate)
l· Mercury 1631
M-Metals Pint (HN03)
~. Nutrient Pint (H2S04)
R-Radiological (HN03)
S· S!Yd&~ Cup~ffub'$
Q. Plast,c Sag
Glass Containe~
D· 6ZS fN•lS203)
G· GI»> U~i,se,ved
H• HAAs fNH"'I)
J• S08/Sl5/S2S {Na2503)
K• SlS.3 HerbtC:ides
0-Oil & Grease fHCI}
p. Phenols (H2S04)
T• TOC/TOX (H3PO0)
U• 531 (MCAA. Na2S2031
v. S24/iHMs !Ascorbic Acid)
w. 8260 voe 11 I HCI)
X· Vial Unpreserved
'f. 614/504 1Na2S203)
z. M1s::ellar.ec~s Glass
Page 8 of 21
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
Analyte % Rec RPO Limits RPO Max Result Source Cone Spk Value MRL OF
Blank -EPA 200. 7
QC Sample ID: BWD0248-BLK1 Batch: BWD0248
Date Prepared: 04/07/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/07/2022
Calcium, Dissolved ND 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved ND 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved ND 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved ND 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved ND 0.5 1.00
Tin, Dissolved ND 0.02 1.00
LCS -EPA 200. 7
QC Sample ID: BWD0248-BSI Batch: BWD0248
Date Prepared: 04/07/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/07/2022
Calcium, Dissolved 96.2 85 -115 9.8 10.2 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved 106 85 -115 0.212 0.200 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved 101 85 -115 10.3 10.2 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved 103 85 -115 10.3 10.0 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved 99.7 85 -115 10.0 10.0 0.5 1.00
Tin, Dissolved 93 .6 85 -155 0.19 0.200 0.02 1.00
Matrix Spike -EPA 200.7
QC Sample ID: BWD0248-MSI Batch: BWD0248 QC Source Sample: XXXXX:XX-XX
Date Prepared: 04/07/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/07/2022
Calcium, Dissolved 94.8 70 -130 58.7 49.1 10.2 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved 109 70 -130 0.218 ND 0.200 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved 102 70 -130 24.4 14.0 10.2 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved 105 70 -130 12.2 1.7 10.0 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved 99.2 70 -130 23.9 14.0 10.0 0.5 1.00
Tin, Dissolved 93.6 70 -130 0.19 0.003 0.200 0.02 1.00
QC Sample ID: BWD0248-MS2 Batch: BWD0248 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-0l
Date Prepared: 04/07/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/07/2022
Calcium, Dissolved 87.1 70 -130 113 104 10.2 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved 105 70 -130 1.13 0.918 0.200 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved 102 70 -130 36.7 26.4 10.2 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved 106 70 -130 11 .8 1.3 10.0 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved 86.2 70 -130 107 98.7 10.0 0.5 1.00
Tin, Dissolved 97.2 70 -130 0.20 0.003 0.200 0.02 1.00
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 200. 7
QC Sample ID: BWD0248-MSD1 Batch: BWD0248 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 04/07/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/07/2022
Calcium, Dissolved 95.6 0.135 70 -130 20 58.8 49.1 10.2 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved 108 1.24 70 -130 20 0.216 ND 0.200 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved 102 0.0176 70 -130 20 24.4 14.0 10.2 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved 105 0.172 70 -130 20 12.2 1.7 10.0 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved 99.2 0.00377 70 -130 20 23.9 14.0 10.0 0.5 1.00
Tin, Dissolved 97.0 3.42 70 -130 20 0.20 0.003 0.200 0.02 1.00
QC Sample ID: BWD0248-MSD2 Batch: BWD0248 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-0 l
Date Prepared: 04/07/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/07/2022
Calcium, Dissolved 81 .6 0.495 70 -130 20 113 104 10.2 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved 103 0.320 70 -130 20 1.12 0.918 0.200 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved 99.7 0.522 70 -130 20 36.5 26.4 10.2 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved 106 0.00591 70 -130 20 11.8 1.3 10.0 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved 83.9 0.221 70 -130 20 107 98.7 10.0 0.5 1.00
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com Page 9 of 21
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWD0248-MSD2
Date Prepared: 04/07/2022
Tin, Dissolved
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
% Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 200.7 (cont.)
Batch: BWD0248 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-0l
Date Analyzed: 04/07/2022
98.8 1.71 70 -130 20 0.20 0.003
Spk Value MRL DF
0.200 0.02 1.00
Page 10 of 21
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
Analyte %Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone SpkValue MRL DF
Blank -EPA 200.8
QC Sample ID: BWD0313-BLK1 Batch: BWD0313
Date Prepared: 04/08/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/08/2022
Arsenic, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Beryllium, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Cadmium, Dissolved ND 0.0002 1.00
Chromium, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Cobalt, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Copper, Dissolved ND 0.0010 1.00
Lead, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Manganese, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Molybdenum, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Nickel, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Selenium, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Silver, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Thallium, Dissolved ND 0.0002 1.00
Uranium, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Vanadium, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Zinc, Dissolved ND 0.01 1.00
LCS -EPA 200.8
QC Sample ID: BWD0313-BS1 Batch: BWD0313
Date Prepared: 04/08/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/08/2022
Arsenic, Dissolved 99.6 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Beryllium, Dissolved 96.4 85 -115 0.039 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Cadmium, Dissolved 99.1 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0002 1.00
Chromium, Dissolved 98.8 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Cobalt, Dissolved 99.4 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Copper, Dissolved 96.1 85 -115 0.038 0.0400 0.0010 1.00
Lead, Dissolved 105 85 -115 0.042 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Manganese, Dissolved 100 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Molybdenum, Dissolved 99.7 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Nickel, Dissolved 94.0 85 -115 0.0376 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Selenium, Dissolved 99.9 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Silver, Dissolved 99.7 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Thallium, Dissolved 105 85 -115 0.042 0.0400 0.0002 1.00
Uranium, Dissolved 107 85 -115 0.043 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Vanadium, Dissolved 98.0 85 -115 0.039 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Zinc, Dissolved 96.7 85 -115 0.04 0.0400 0.01 1.00
Matrix Spike -EPA 200.8
QC Sample ID: BWD0313-MS1 Batch: BWD0313 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-01
Date Prepared: 04/08/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/08/2022
Arsenic, Dissolved 103 70 -130 0.043 0.002 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Beryllium, Dissolved 98.6 70 -130 0.039 ND 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Cadmium, Dissolved 98.7 70 -130 0.039 ND 0.0400 0.0002 1.00
Chromium, Dissolved 95.0 70 -130 0.039 0.001 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Cobalt, Dissolved 94.5 70 -130 0.039 0.001 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Copper, Dissolved 88.5 70 -130 0.036 0.0006 0.0400 0.0010 1.00
Lead, Dissolved 101 70 -130 0.040 ND 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Manganese, Dissolved 89.0 70 -130 0.242 0.206 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Molybdenum, Dissolved 104 70 -130 0.043 0.001 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Nickel, Dissolved 88.3 75 -125 0.0371 0.0017 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Selenium, Dissolved 106 70 -130 0.044 0.001 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Silver, Dissolved 94.9 70 -130 0.038 ND 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com Page 11 of 21
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWD0313-MS1
Date Prepared: 04/08/2022
Thallium, Dissolved
Uranium, Dissolved
Vanadium, Dissolved
Zinc, Dissolved
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
%Rec RPD Limits RPDMax Result Source Cone
Matrix Spike -EPA 200.8 (cont.)
Batch: BWD0313 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-01
Date Analyzed: 04/08/2022
103 70 -130 0.041 ND
107 70 -130 0.044 0.001
97.9 70 -130 0.040 0.0006
99.6 70 -130 0.04 ND
SpkValue MRL DF
0.0400 0.0002 1.00
0.0400 0.0005 1.00
0.0400 0.0005 1.00
0.0400 0.01 1.00
Page 12 of 21
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWD0573-BLK1
Date Prepared: 04/14/2022
Mercury, Dissolved
QC Sample ID: BWD0573-BS1
Date Prepared: 04/14/2022
Mercury, Dissolved
QC Sample ID: BWD0573-MS1
Date Prepared: 04/14/2022
Mercury, Dissolved
QC Sample ID: BWD0573-MSD1
Date Prepared: 04/14/2022
Mercury, Dissolved
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
% Rec RPD Limits RPDMax Result Source Cone Spk Value MRL DF
Blank -EPA 245.1
Batch: BWD0573
Date Analyzed: 04/15/2022
ND 0.0002 1.00
LCS -EPA 245.1
Batch: BWD0573
Date Analyzed: 04/15/2022
96.3 85 -115 0.0048 0.00500 0.0002 1.00
Matrix Spike -EPA 245.1
Batch: BWD0573 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-01
Date Analyzed: 04/15/2022
104 75 -125 0.0052 ND 0.00500 0.0002 1.00
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 245.1
Batch: BWD0573 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-01
Date Analyzed: 04/15/2022
99.4 4.88 75 -125 20 0.0050 ND 0.00500 0.0002 1.00
Page 13 of 21
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
Analyte % Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone SpkValue MRL
Blank -EPA 300.0
QC Sample ID: BWD0139-BLK1 Batch: BWD0139
Date Prepared: 04/05/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/05/2022
Chloride ND 1.0
Fluoride ND 0.1
Sulfate ND 1.0
LCS -EPA 300.0
QC Sample ID: BWD0139-BS1 Batch: BWD0139
Date Prepared: 04/05/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/05/2022
Chloride 98.2 90 -110 49.1 50.0 1.0
Fluoride 91.3 90 -110 4.6 5.00 0.1
Sulfate 95.6 90 -110 47.8 50.0 1.0
Matrix Spike -EPA 300.0
QC Sample ID: BWD0139-MS1 Batch: BWD0139 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-01
Date Prepared: 04/05/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/05/2022
Chloride 99.2 80 -120 71 .5 21.9 50.0 5.5
Fluoride 142 80 -120 7.6 0.5 5.00 0.5
QM-RPO -The recovery was outside acceptance limits for the MS and/or MSD. The RPO between the MS and MSD was
acceptable and indicates the recovery is due to matrix interference. The batch was accepted based on the acceptable recovery
of the LCS and the RPO.
Sulfate 88.3 80 -120 322 278 50.0 5.5
QC Sample ID: BWD0139-MS2 Batch: BWD0139 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 04/05/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/05/2022
Chloride 98.3 80 -120 30500 19500 11100 1110
Fluoride 81.3 80 -120 903 ND 1110 111
Sulfate 89.8 80 -120 11300 1370 11100 1110
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 300.0
QC Sample ID: BWD0139-MSD1 Batch: BWD0139 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-01
Date Prepared: 04/05/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/05/2022
Chloride 99 .9 0.525 80 -120 20 71.8 21.9 50.0 5.5
Fluoride 143 0.391 80 -120 20 7.6 0.5 5.00 0.5
QM-RPO -The recovery was outside acceptance limits for the MS and/or MSD. The RPO between the MS and MSD was
acceptable and indicates the recovery is due to matrix interference. The batch was accepted based on the acceptable recovery
of the LCS and the RPO.
Sulfate 84.4 0.618 80 -120 20 320 278 50.0 5.5
QC Sample ID: BWD0139-MSD2 Batch: BWD0139 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 04/05/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/05/2022
Chloride 99.9 0.615 80 -120 20 30700 19500 11100 1110
Fluoride 80.1 1.50 80 -120 20 890 ND 1110 111
Sulfate 91 .1 1.26 80 -120 20 11500 1370 11100 1110
DF
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com Page 14 of 21
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWD0378-BLK1
Date Prepared: 04/11/2022
Nitrate+ Nitrite, Total, as N
QC Sample ID: BWD0378-BS1
Date Prepared: 04/11/2022
Nitrate + Nitrite, Total, as N
QC Sample ID: BWD0378-MS1
Date Prepared: 04/11/2022
Nitrate + Nitrite, Total, as N
QC Sample ID: BWD0378-MS2
Date Prepared: 04/11/2022
Nitrate + Nitrite, Total, as N
QC Sample ID: BWD0378-MSDl
Date Prepared: 04/11/2022
Nitrate+ Nitrite, Total, as N
QC Sample ID: BWD0378-MSD2
Date Prepared: 04/11/2022
Nitrate + Nitrite, Total, as N
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
%Rec RPD Limits RPDMax Result Source Cone
Blank -EPA 353.2
Batch: BWD0378
Date Analyzed: 04/11/2022
ND
LCS -EPA 353.2
Batch: BWD0378
Date Analyzed: 04/11/2022
98.8 80 -120 2.0
Matrix Spike -EPA 353.2
Batch: BWD0378 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-0l
Date Analyzed: 04/11/2022
105 80 -120 1.0 ND
Batch: BWD0378 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Analyzed: 04/11/2022
100 80 -120 7.3 6.3
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 353.2
Batch: BWD0378 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-0l
Date Analyzed: 04/11/2022
110 5.12 80 -120 20 1.1 ND
Batch: BWD0378 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Analyzed: 04/11/2022
115 2.07 80 -120 20 7.4 6.3
SpkValue MRL DF
0.1 1.00
2.00 0.1 1.00
1.00 0.1 1.00
1.00 0.5 5.00
1.00 0.1 1.00
1.00 0.5 5.00
Page 15 of 21
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
Analyte % Rec RPO Limits RPO Max Result Source Cone Spk Value MRL OF
Blank -EPA 8260B/C /5030A
QC Sample ID: BWD0069-BLK1 Batch: BWD0069
Date Prepared: 04/02/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/02/2022
Acetone ND 10.0 1.00
Benzene ND 0.4 1.00
Carbon Tetrachloride ND 1.0 1.00
Chloroform ND 1.0 1.00
Chloromethane ND 1.0 1.00
Methyl Ethyl Ketone ND 10.0 1.00
Methylene Chloride ND 2.0 1.00
Naphthalene ND 1.0 1.00
Tetrahydrofuran ND 1.0 1.00
Toluene ND 1.0 1.00
Xylenes, total ND 1.0 1.00
LCS -EPA 8260B/C /5030A
QC Sample ID: BWD0069-BS1 Batch: BWD0069
Date Prepared: 04/02/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/02/2022
Acetone 96.6 80 -120 96.6 100 10.0 1.00
Benzene 92.4 80 -120 9.24 10.0 0.4 1.00
Carbon Tetrachloride 80 -120 9.22 1.0 1.00
Chloroform 85.4 80 -120 8.54 10.0 1.0 1.00
Chloromethane 76.7 80 -120 7.67 10.0 1.0 1.00
QM-11 -The Laboratory Control Sample recovery was outside acceptance limits. The analytical batch was accepted based on the
recovery of the Method Spike.
Methyl Ethyl Ketone 115 80 -120 115 100 10.0 1.00
Methylene Chloride 80.9 80 -120 8.09 10.0 2.0 1.00
Naphthalene 102 80 -120 10.2 10.0 1.0 1.00
Toluene 91.3 80 -120 9.13 10.0 1.0 1.00
Xylenes, total 80 -120 28.7 1.0 1.00
Matrix Spike -EPA 8260B/C /5030A
QC Sample ID: BWD0069-MS1 Batch: BWD0069 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-0l
Date Prepared: 04/02/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/02/2022
Acetone 99.2 0-200 496 ND 500 50.0 1.00
Benzene 85.6 70 -130 42.8 ND 50.0 2.0 1.00
Carbon Tetrachloride 0-200 41.4 ND 5.0 1.00
Chloroform 82.2 0-200 41.1 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
Chloromethane 67.9 0 -200 34.0 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
Methyl Ethyl Ketone 113 0 -200 566 ND 500 50.0 1.00
Methylene Chloride 76.0 0-200 38.0 ND 50.0 10.0 1.00
Naphthalene 102 0-200 51 .2 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
Toluene 85.2 70 -130 42.6 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
Xylenes, total 0 -200 132 ND 5.0 1.00
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 8260B/C /5030A
QC Sample ID: BWD0069-MSD1 Batch: BWD0069 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-0l
Date Prepared: 04/02/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/02/2022
Acetone 95.7 3.55 0-200 200 479 ND 500 50.0 1.00
Benzene 85.4 0.234 70 -130 20 42.7 ND 50.0 2.0 1.00
Carbon Tetrachloride 0-200 200 41 .8 ND 5.0 1.00
Chloroform 81.2 1.22 0 -200 200 40.6 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
Chloromethane 67.4 0.739 0-200 200 33.7 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
Methyl Ethyl Ketone 108 4.24 0-200 200 542 ND 500 50.0 1.00
Methylene Chloride 77.3 1.70 0-200 200 38.6 ND 50.0 10.0 1.00
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com Page 16 of 21
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWD0069-MSDI
Date Prepared: 04/02/2022
Naphthalene
Toluene
Xylenes, total
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
%Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 8260B/C /5030A (cont.)
Batch: BWD0069 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-01
Date Analyzed: 04/02/2022
93.7 8.78 0-200 200 46.8 ND
83.6 1.90 70 -130 20 41.8 ND
0 -200 200 130 ND
Spk Value MRL DF
50.0 5.0 1.00
50.0 5.0 1.00
5.0 1.00
Page 17 of 21
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWD0046-BLK1
Date Prepared: 04/01/2022
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
QC Sample ID: BWD0046-DUP1
Date Prepared: 04/01/2022
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Hydroxide (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Total (as CaCO3)
QC Sample ID: BWD0046-DUP2
Date Prepared: 04/01/2022
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity-Hydroxide (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Total (as CaCO3)
QC Sample ID: BWD0046-DUP3
Date Prepared: 04/01/2022
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Hydroxide (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Total (as CaCO3)
QC Sample ID: BWD0046-BSI
Date Prepared: 04/01/2022
Alkalinity -Total (as CaCO3)
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
% Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone Spk Value MRL DF
Blank -SM 2320 B
Batch: BWD0046
Date Analyzed: 04/01/2022
ND 1.0 1.00
ND 1.0 1.00
Duplicate -SM 2320 B
Batch: BWD0046 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-01
Date Analyzed: 04/01/2022
0.621 20 258 257 1.0 1.00
20 ND ND 1.0 1.00
20 ND ND 1.0 1.00
0.621 20 258 257 1.0 1.00
Batch: BWD0046 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Analyzed: 04/01/2022
0.200 20 301 300 1.0 1.00
20 ND ND 1.0 1.00
20 ND ND 1.0 1.00
0.200 20 301 300 1.0 1.00
Batch: BWD0046 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Analyzed: 04/01/2022
0.154 20 260 260 1.0 1.00
20 ND ND 1.0 1.00
20 ND ND 1.0 1.00
0.154 20 260 260 1.0 1.00
LCS -SM 2320 B
Batch: BWD0046
Date Analyzed: 04/01/2022
97.7 90 -110 231 236 1.0 1.00
Page 18 of 21
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
Analyte %Rec RPO Limits RPO Max Result Source Cone
Blank -SM 2540 C
QC Sample ID: BWD0016-BLK1 Batch: BWD0016
Date Prepared: 04/01/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/01/2022
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) ND
J-LOW -Estimated low due to low recovery of LCS or CCV
Duplicate -SM 2540 C
QC Sample ID: BWD0016-DUP1 Batch: BWD00 16 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 04/01/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/01/2022
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 2 10 2320
J-LOW -Estimated low due to low recovery of LCS or CCV
QC Sample ID: BWD0016-DUP2 Batch: BWD0016 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-0l
Date Prepared: 04/0 l/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/01/2022
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 3 10
J-LOW -Estimated low due to low recovery of LCS or CCV
LCS -SM 2540 C
QC Sample ID: BWD0016-BS1 Batch: BWD0016
Date Prepared: 04/01/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/01/2022
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 80 90 -110
J-LOW -Estimated low due to low recovery of LCS or CCV
CtF WO#: 22C2426
www.ChemtechFord.com
652
320
2360
672
Spk Value MRL OF
10 1.00
20 1.00
20 1.00
400 20 1.00
Page 19 of 21
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
Analyte %Rec RPD Limits RPDMax Result Source Cone SpkValue MRL DF
Blank -SM 4500 NH3 H
QC Sample ID: BWD0067-BLK1 Batch: BWD0067
Date Prepared: 04/04/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/04/2022
Ammonia as N ND 0.2 1.00
LCS -SM 4500 NH3 H
QC Sample ID: BWD0067-BS1 Batch: BWD0067
Date Prepared: 04/04/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/04/2022
Ammonia as N 97.2 90 -110 4.86 5.00 0.2 1.00
Matrix Spike -SM 4500 NH3 H
QC Sample ID: BWD0067-MSI Batch: BWD0067 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-0 I
Date Prepared: 04/04/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/04/2022
Ammonia as N 106 80 -120 0.53 ND 0.500 0.2 1.00
Matrix Spike Dup -SM 4500 NH3 H
QC Sample ID: BWD0067-MSD1 Batch: BWD0067 QC Source Sample: 22C2426-01
Date Prepared: 04/04/2022 Date Analyzed: 04/04/2022
Ammonia as N 105 0.756 80 -120 20 0.53 ND 0.500 0.2 1.00
tF WO#: 22C2426
ww. ChemtechFord. com Page 20 of 21
Surrogates Report for Work Order (WO) -22C2426
QCID Analyte %Rec LCL UCL Result SpkValue
Blank -EPA 8260B/C /5030A
BWD0069-BLK1 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 104 64.2 126 10.4 10.0
BWD0069-BLK1 4-Bromofluorobenzene 97.1 71.4 122 9.71 10.0
BWD0069-BLK1 Toluene-dB 100 63.2 129 10.0 10.0
LCS -EPA 8260B/C /5030A
BWD0069-BS 1 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 106 64.2 126 10.6 10.0
BWD0069-BS 1 4-Bromofluorobenzene 101 71.4 122 10.1 10.0
BWD0069-BS 1 Toluene-dB 98.9 63.2 129 9.89 10.0
Matrix Spike -EPA 8260B/C /5030A
BWD0069-MS1 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 106 64.2 126 52.8 50.0
BWD0069-MS1 4-Bromofluorobenzene 100 71.4 122 50.2 50.0
BWD0069-MS1 Toluene-dB 100 63.2 129 50.0 50.0
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 8260B/C /5030A
BWD0069-MSD1 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4 99.6 64.2 126 49.8 50.0
BWD0069-MSD1 4-Bromofluorobenzene 102 71.4 122 51.0 50.0
BWD0069-MSD1 Toluene-dB 100 63.2 129 50.0 50.0
Surrogate Recoveries (Field Samples}
LabNumber Analyte Result SpkLvl %Rec LCL UCL
8260B Low Level Volatiles
22C2426-01 Toluene-dB
22C2426-01 4-Bromofluorobenzene
22C2426-01 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
8260B Low Level Volatiles
22C2426-02 Toluene-dB
22C2426-02
22C2426-02
tF WO#: 22C2426
4-Bromofluorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
ww. ChemtechFord. com
10.0
10.0
10.2
9.71
10.1
9.85
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
100
100
102
97.1
101
98.5
63.2 129
71.4 122
64.2 126
63.2 129
71.4 122
64.2 126
Batch DF
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
BWD0069 1.00
Qualifier
Page 21 of 21
[ijijl I Laboratories LLc
a member of The GEL Group INC
FO Box 30712 Ctia~esron SC 2£14 t 7
2040 Sa•;ace Road Clla~eston SC 29407
P S4, 556 8171
F S4o 7G6 117S
May 03, 2022
Ms. Kathy Weinel
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
225 Union Boulevard
Suite 600
Lakewood, Colorado 80228
Re: White Mesa Mill GW
Work Order: 575649
Dear Ms. Weinel:
GEL Laboratories, LLC (GEL) appreciates the opportunity to provide the enclosed analytical results for the
sample(s) we received on April 06, 2022. This original data report has been prepared and reviewed in accordance
with GEL's standard operating procedures.
Test results for NELAP or ISO 17025 accredited tests are verified to meet the requirements of those standards,
with any exceptions noted. The results reported relate only to the items tested and to the sample as received by
the laboratory. These results may not be reproduced except as full reports without approval by the laboratory.
Copies ofGEL's accreditations and certifications can be found on our website at www.gel.com.
Our policy is to provide high quality, personalized analytical services to enable you to meet your analytical needs
on time every time. We trust that you will find everything in order and to your satisfaction. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to call me at [phone], ext. 4289.
Purchase Order: DW16138
Enclosures
Sincerely,
Julie Robinson
Project Manager
!IIHUIIWllll 11111 1 1111111111111
gel.com
Page 2 of 13 SDG: 575649
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
White Mesa Mill GW
SDG: 575649
May 03, 2022
Laboratory Identification:
GEL Laboratories LLC
2040 Savage Road
Charleston, South Carolina 29407
[phone]
Summary:
Receipt Narrative
for
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
SDG: 575649
Sample receipt: The sample arrived at GEL Laboratories LLC, Charleston, South Carolina on April 06, 2022
for analysis. The sample was delivered with proper chain of custody documentation and signatures. All sample
containers arrived without any visible signs of tampering or breakage. There are no additional comments
concerning sample receipt.
Sample Identification: The laboratory received the following sample:
Laboratory ID Client ID
575649001 Westwater Spring
Case Narrative:
Sample analyses were conducted using methodology as outlined in GEL's Standard Operating Procedures. Any
technical or administrative problems during analysis, data review, and reduction are contained in the analytical
case narratives in the enclosed data package.
The enclosed data package contains the following sections: Case Narrative, Chain of Custody, Cooler Receipt
Checklist, Data Package Qualifier Definitions and data from the following fractions: Radiochemistry.
Page 3 of 13 SDG: 575649
Julie Robinson
Project Manager
Sheet 1 of 1
CHAIN OF CUSTODY
Samples Shipped to: GEL Laboratories, LLC Contact: Tanner Holliday -2-0-40-S-av_a_g_e_R_o .... ad_________ Ph: 435 678 2221
Charleston, SC 29407 [e-mail]
[phone]
Chain of Custody/Sampling Analysis Request
Proiect Samplers Name Samplers s ignature
Seeps and Sorinas 2022 Tanner Holliday l:\u1,r1J/ ,c_llr/JJJ/4.; /'
(/
Time
Sample ID Date Collected Collected Laboratory Analysis Requested
Westwater Sorina 3/28/2022 850 Gross Alpha
Comments: Please send report to Kathy Weinel at [e-mail]
Relinquished By:(Signature)
Page 4 of 13 SDG: 575649
Date/Time Re ·
3/30/2022
1100
Date/Time Re
Date/Time -
., ~ / Laboratories LLC
: • "'·, SAMPLE RECEI-Ff &. REVIEW FO.RM
Client: LJNMT SDC'.11.:V•::OC/Wuric o,..:er: c;--;-:::::::. lrL.I C.\ .· ·!
Rccci vcd ll y: BE /)ate Rccci'lcd: .4 -6 -_:) 2i ' ... v ~ FcC:Ex fapres.< FedEx Groun~ UPS Fi~ld Service.~ Courier Otl1cr
Currier 2.nd Trocking Number .
lz It-; Y1Y Os 9'2.J.~ 01f-:,..
Suspected Hoz.,rd Information Ii 0 •Ir Net Comtls > lOOqmt oo s1unplcs nol marked "r:wioacth•c", conloct die Rndiution Safety Group for further im"CSlig:ilion. >-z
\ Haz.1rd Class Shipped: UN;:
AIShiotx.-d as a DOT Hwutluus? lrUN29l0, Is tho RadioOClive Shipment Survey Complio.nt? Yes_ No_
B) Did 1he client designnlc 1he ~•mplcs :w to be \ COC not:uinn l'o(" radin:.acrivc slickc~ nn cunc~ni:m equal clhmt Jeii!,'llatiun.
n:ccivcd M rndio:u:tivc"! _, ~
' Ma,lmun, Net CounL< Obsen•ed0 (ObSCl'\'Cd Cou111s • An:, B,ckground Counts): ( /-t;)/mMtr C) Did the RSO cl:i.ssify the s,mplcs as
radio.iclivc:"? Classllicd as: Rad I R•d 2 R,d J
, COC notation or ha,.3rd label< on containers equal client dc<i£Rotion.
D) Ditl lhc c:licnr d..:si1m:1h: s;in,nh:s nrt: h:iz:udous?
If D or I> is yes, sclca Hazards below.
El DiJ the RSO iJen1ifv oossiblc h,ozanls? '-PCB's Flantmable Foreign Soil RCRA A.sbesros B•ryUium O1her.
Somplc Receipt Critorin Ii ~ 0 CommenWQualiCiors (Roquin:d Cur Nuu.ConCum1lng lt•ms) ;,.. z
Shipping containers received intac1 and \ t::;J',I' 0,,.1, Applk3hk: Sc.-1l!broken D;sm:i,c:" c.tin1.;1in~r Lc~tint: cu,u~\ltcr Od.:r (~es.:n"bc) < 1 scaled? ~ tit .
2 Chain of custody documcn1s included \ ~ Ci<elc A{!plic~Me:' Oic-nl c:onuc1cd .1nd cun,id~d COC • COC c.rc:.1cd uron n:c:i:ipl ' with shipment'/ ~ ~
Prc«:m,rlun 11-krhoo: w.,1 le,; kc Packs Dty ia: c::::,J. Orhcr. 20 3 Samples requiring cold preservation ~ 0311 tl!mpc1':lturc.s :zn: rccun.l~d in Celsius TEMP: within (0 < 6 de~. Cl?~
4 Daily check pcrfum,cd aml po..<sed on IR :?~! T•nircr,tu..: Dc,icc Serio! #:fR;!,21 v' ~.; temperature gun? '-'"· Sccondory Tc111pcra1un: Dc,icc Serial~ (If Applicnblc): a -~ ,.
~-
Cln:k llppllcoMc: Sc;iit, ~roken Ol1tu.EC'd ce1mi1incr Lc-.akn; cont:iinc-t O.hcr ldc~n'l<>l ' s Sample containers intact und s.,aled'/ \ .
~j ... ..
G Samp:c.li requiring chemical prcscrva1io;1 \ S.,niple Hl'J. :.nd Ctinr:.i~rs. Arrcc1cd: .. . at proper pH? rr Pcd~n~Lion a.JJ~.d. Lc,uf:
tJl trY~ = l:ncon:.< o, Soll Klis pn:.sont for sollll.<7 Yes No NA_{lfycs, l~kc to VOA fn:~) '
7 Do any samples require Volarilc I \
Do liquid VOA vi,J~ conroin acid preservation? YC'I No NA__(lfun~nown, select No) ,--.
Analysis? > An: liquid VOA viols f11:c ofho,dtpoco? Yes_ No_ NA_
~~ s~mplc ID's :md c:nnl:lini:u :iffcctcd:
-V>~ ,
8 Samples received ,~ilhin holding time'? \ ; ID'• >11d tC.~IS arfcc:icd:
'
9 Sample ID's on COC l'IUICch !D's on ~t
ID':£ ~111.J cun1uincr.a 3ffc.crcU:
bottles? \ .,
10 Date & ti= on COC malch dulc & time \ Ci11:l• Applico~I<: No dulos on conr:un,rs No limes on con1.tlncrs COC mlss,n~ info Other (d.:scribc)
on boltlcs?
11 Nu,nber of containers received match \ y!. Circle AppHc:iblc: No coniaincr count on COC Ocher (dc.0ibc)
number indicated on COC? [~ Arc s:unplc containers idcniifiabk us l
12 ' ~,.
GEL nrovidcd l>v use of GEL lilicls?
ii. COC form is properly ~gncd in Cin:lc Applicable: 13 rclinqulshcd/rcceivcd ~ctious? \ !•1"1 11:l inqui shell Other (tk<cril-..J
Common\s (Use Continuaiiun Funn ifnecdcdl:
j 1. I
PM (or PMA) rcvi~"~ lnici:cl~ f\.\\LI..,.. D:tle ~ 17 ,~ :.l. Pogc __ / of _J_ -
GL-CHL·SR-001 Rev 7
Page 5 of 13 SDG: 575649
GEL Laboratories LLC -Login Review Report
GEL Work Order/SDG: 575649
Client SDG: 575649
Seeps and Springs 2022 Work Order Due Date: 04-MAY-22
Report Date: 03-MAY-22
Work Order: 575649
Page 1 of 2
Collector: C
Project Manager:
Project Name:
Purchase Order:
Package Level:
EDD Format:
Julie Robinson
DNMI00100 White Mesa Mill GW
DW16138
LEVEL3
EIM_DNMI
GELID Client Sample ID Client Sample Desc.
575649001 Westwater Spring
Client Sample ID
-001 Westwater Spring
Status Tests/Methods
REVW GFPC, Total Alpha Radium,
Liquid
Collect
Date & Time
Package Due Date:
EDD Due Date:
Due Date:
NG1
Receive Time # of
Date & Time Zone Cont.
28-MAR-22 08:50 06-APR-22 10:00 -2
Product
Reference
Gross Alpha
Fax Date PM Comments
Product: GFCTORAL Workdef ID: 1458614 In Product Group? No Group Name:
Method: EPA 903.0
Product Description: GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid
Samples: 001
Parmname Check: All parmnames scheduled property
CAS#
Contingent
Tests
Parmname
Gross Radium Alpha
Action Product Name Description
Client RDL or
PQL & Unit
Samples
04-MAY-22
04-MAY-22
04-MAY-22
Lab
Matrix
Prelogin #: 20190487484
Project Workdef ID: 1294356
SDG Status: Closed
Logged by:
Fax Days to
Due Date Process CofC#
Prelog Lab Field
Group QC QC
GROUND WATER 20
Reporting
Units
pCi/L
Aux Data
Group Reference:
Path: Drinking Water (903.0 or 9315)
Product Reference: Gross Alpha
Moisture Correction: "As Received"
Parm Included Included Custom
Function in Sample? in QC? List?
REG y y No
Receive
Codes
°' -.::t" \0
lr) c--lr)
("f)
Login Requirements: Include? Comments ~
Requirement t)
ci 0 r:n
\0
Q) ~ p..
GEL Laboratories LLC -Login Review Report
Peer Review by: ____________ _ Work Order (SDG#), PO# Checked? ____ _
Report Date: 03-MAY-22
Work Order: 575649
Page 2 of 2
C of C signed in receiver location? _____ _
O"I "st" '° in r:--1£)
ci 0 00
~ -t+--t 0
r:--
i ~
List of current GEL Certifications as of 03 May 2022
State Certification
Alabama 42200
Alaska 17-018
Alaska Drinking Water SC000l2
Arkansas 88-0651
CUA 4200904046
California 2940
Colorado SC000l2
Connecticut PH-0169
DoD ELAP/1SO17025 A2LA 2567.01
Florida NELAP E87156
Foreign Soils Permit P330-15-00283,P330-15-00253
Georgia SC000l2
Georgia SOW A 967
Hawaii SC000l2
Idaho SC000l2
Illinois NELAP 200029
Indiana C-SC-01
Kansas NELAP E-10332
Kentucky SOW A 90129
Kentucky Wastewater 90129
Louisiana Drinking Water LA024
Louisiana NELAP 03046 (AI33904)
Maine 2019020
Maryland 270
Massachusetts M-SC0l2
Massachusetts PF AS Approv Letter
Michigan 9976
Mississippi SC00012
Nebraska NE-OS-26-13
Nevada SC000 I 22021-1
New Hampshire NELAP 2054
New Jersey NELAP SC002
New Mexico SC000l2
New York NELAP 11501
North Carolina 233
North Carolina SOWA 45709
North Dakota R-158
Oklahoma 2019-165
Pennsylvania NELAP 68-00485
Puerto Rico SC00012
S. Carolina Radiochem 10120002
Sanitation Districts ofL 9255651
South Carolina Chemistry 10120001
Tennessee TN 02934
TexasNELAP TI04704235-22-20
Utah NELAP SC000 I 22021-36
Vermont VT87156
Virginia NELAP 460202
Washington C780
Page 8 of 13 SDG: 575649
Radiochemistry
Technical Case arrative
Energy Fuels Resources
SDG #: 575649
Product: GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid
Analytical Method: EPA 903.0
Analytical Procedure: GL-RAD-A-044 REV# 10
Analytical Batch: 2252110
The following samples were analyzed using the above methods and analytical procedure(s).
GEL Sample ID#
575649001
1205063056
1205063057
1205063058
1205063059
1205063060
Client Sample Identification
Westwater Spring
Method Blank (MB)
575649001 (Westwater Spring) Sample Duplicate (DUP)
575649001 (Westwater Spring) Matrix Spike (MS)
57564900 I (Westwater Spring) Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
The samples in this SDG were analyzed on an "as received" basis.
Data Summary:
All sample data provided in this report met the acceptance criteria specified in the analytical methods and
procedures for initial calibration, continuing calibration, instrument controls and process controls where
applicable, with the following exceptions.
Miscellaneous Information
Additional Comments
The matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate, 1205063058 (Westwater SpringMS) and 1205063059 (Westwater
SpringMSD), aliquots were reduced to conserve sample volume.
Certification Statement
Where the analytical method has been performed under NELAP certification, the analysis has met all of the
requirements of the NELAC standard unless otherwise noted in the analytical case narrative.
'age 9 of 13 SDG: 575649
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
Qualifier Definition Report
for
DNMIO0l Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
Client SDG: 575649 GEL Work Order: 575649
The Qualifiers in this report are defined as follows:
* A quality control analyte recovery is outside of specified acceptance criteria
** Analyte is a surrogate compound
U Analyte was analyzed for, but ool detected above the CRDL.
ReviewN alidation
GEL requires all analytical data to be verified by a qualified data reviewer. In addition, all CLP-like deliverables
receive a third level review of the fractional data package.
The following data validator verified the information presented in this data report:
Signature: ~ 61'--Name: Kenshalla Oston
Date: 29 APR 2022 Title: Analyst I
1age 10 of 13 SDG: 575649
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
QC Summary
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
225 Union Boulevard
Suite 600
Lakewood, Colorado
::::ontact: Ms. Kathy Weinel
Norkorder: 575649
'armname OM
:ad Gas Flow
,atch 2252110
QC 1205063057 575649001 DUP
}ross Radium Alpha u 0.0551 u
Uncertainty +l-0.109
QC 1205063060 LCS
}ross Radium Alpha 531
Uncertainty
QC 1205063056 MB
}ross Radium Alpha u
Uncertainty
QC1205063058 575649001 MS
}ross Radium Alpha 2150 u 0.0551
Uncertainty +l-0.109
QC 1205063059 575649001 MSD
}ross Radium Alpha 2130 u 0.0551
Uncertainty +l-0.109
Notes:
Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 68% confidence level (I-sigma).
The Qualifiers in this report are defined as follows:
**
<
>
Analyre is a surrogate compound
Result is less than value reported
Result is greater than value reported
The TrC is a suspected aldol-condensation product
C Un its
0.139 pCi/L
+l-0.106
424 pCi/L
+l-4.85
0.207 pCi/L
+l-0.169
1650 pCi/L
+l-17.7
1670 pCi/L
+l-18.7
RPO%
NIA
1.32
A
B
BD
C
D
F
For General Chemistry and Organic analysis the target analyte was detected in the associated blank.
Results are either below the MDC or tracer recovery is low
Analyte has been confirmed by GC/MS analysis
Results are reported from a diluted aliquot of the sample
Estimated Value
H Analytical holding time was exceeded
K Analyte present. Reported value may be biased high. Actual value is expected to be lower.
L Analyte present. Reported value may be biased low. Actual value is expected to be higher.
M M if above MDC and less than LLD
age 12 of 13 SDG: 575649
Reoort Date: April 29, 2022
REC¾ Rane Anlst
NIA JXC9
79.8 (75%-125%)
76.7 (75%-125%)
78.6 (0%-20%)
Page 1 of
Date Timt
04/19122 11 :'.
0411912211:'.
04119122 11 :'.
04119122 11 :'.
04/19122 11 :'.
...
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
QC Summary
Norkorder: 575649
'armname NOM Sam le C Units RPD%
M Matrix Related Failure
NI A RPD or %Recovery limits do not apply.
See case narrative
Analyte concentration is not detected above the detection limit
Consult Case arrative, Data Summary package, or Project Manager concerning this qualifier
One or more quality control criteria have not been met. Refer to the applicable narrative or DER.
Sample results are rejected
Analyte was analyzed for, but not detected above the CRDL.
Gamma Spectroscopy--Uncertain identification
Gamma Spectroscopy--Uncertain identification
REC% Ran e Anlst
NI
ND
NJ
Q
R
u
UI
UJ
UL
X
y
ot considered detected. The associated number is the reported concentration, which may be inaccurate due to a low bias.
A
h
Consult Case arrative, Data Summary package, or Project Manager concerning this qualifier
QC Samples were not spiked with this compound
RPD of sample and duplicate evaluated using +/-RL. Concentrations are <5X the RL. Qualifier Not Applicable for Radiochemistry.
Preparation or preservation holding time was exceeded
Page 2 of
Date Timt
/A indicates that spike recovery limits do not apply when sample concentration exceeds spike cone. by a factor of 4 or more or %RPO not applicable .
.. The Relative Percent Difference (RPO) obtained from the sample duplicate (DUP) is evaluated against the acceptance criteria when the sample is greater than
five times (SX) the contract required detection limit (RL). In cases where the duplicate value is less than 5X the RL, a control limit of+/-the RL is used to
~valuate the DUP result.
* Indicates that a Quality Control parameter was not within specifications.
For PS, PSD, and SDILT results, the values listed are the measured amounts, not final concentrations.
Where the analytical method has been performed under NELAP certification, the analysis has met all of the
requirements of the NELAC standard unless qualified on the QC Summary.
Page 13 of 13 SDG: 575649
9632 South 500 West
CHEMTECH·FORD
LA60olt\TORIES
6/3/2022
Work Order: 22E1012
Project: Seeps and Springs 2022
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Attn: Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Client Service Contact: 801.262. 7299
The analyses presented on this report were performed in accordance with the
National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) unless
noted in the comments, flags, or case narrative. If the report is to be used for
regulatory compliance, it should be presented in its entirety, and not be
altered.
Approved By:
Melissa Connolly, Project Manager
Sandy, Utah 84070 801 .262.7299 Main 866.792.0093 Fax
Serving the lntermountain West since 1953
www.ChemtechFord.com
CHEMTECH-FORD
LABOAATORl~S
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Project: Seeps and Springs 2022
Project Manager: Tanner Holliday
Laboratory ID
22E1012-01
22E1012-02
22E1012-03
22E1012-04
22E1012-05
Set Comments
Sample Name
Entrance Spring
Ruin Spring
Cottonwood Spring
Back Spring
Trip Blank
Work Order Report Narrative
Due to laboratory error during the 8260D analysis, the LCS, MS, and MSD were not spiked for Tetrahydrofuran. The
samples were analyzed for spectral evidence of Tetrahydrofuran .
Sample Preparation
All samples were prepared within method specified holding times. No preparation issues were noted.
Method Blanks
All blank values were within method acceptance criteria. No blank values exceeded the minimum reporting limit for any
analysis in this work order.
Laboratory Control Samples
All laboratory control samples were within method acceptance criteria.
Method Spikes
All method spike recoveries were within method acceptance criteria, except as noted by qualifying flags.
Method Spike Duplicates
All method spike duplicates were within method acceptance criteria, except as noted by qualifying flags.
Corrective Actions
The corrective action required with this workorder is to implement a new procedure to verify which analytes need to be
spiked if they are not included in the laboratory standard spiking solution.
:>reject Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
NWW. ChemtechFord.com
CtF WO#: 22E1012
I
CHEMTECH·FORD
LA60R,\TO~IES
Chemtech-Ford Laboratories
Serving the lntermountain West Since 1953
9632 South 500 West
Sandy, UT 84070
0:[phone] F: [phone]
www.ChemtechFord.com
Certificate of Analysis
Energy Fuels Resources, Inc.
Tanner Holliday
6425 South Highway 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Report Footnotes
Abbreviations
ND = Not detected at the corresponding Minimum Reporting Limit (MRL).
PO#:
Receipt: 5/12/22 12:27@ 2.1 °C
Date Reported: 6/3/2022
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
I mg/L = one milligram per liter or I mg/kg = one milligram per kilogram = I part per million.
I ug/L = one microgram per liter or I ug/kg = one microgram per kilogram = 1 part per billion.
I ng/L = one nanogram per liter or I ng/kg = one nanogram per kilogram = I part per trillion.
Flag Descriptions
A-01 = The sample was analyzed for spectral evidence ofTHF and none was detected.
J-LOW = Estimated low due to low recovery of LCS or CCV
MS-Low = Estimated low due to Matrix Spike recovery.
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
www.ChemtechFord.com
CtF WO#: 22E1012
Page 12 of 28
American West
Analytical Laboratories
463 W. 3600 S. Sall Lake City, UT 84115
Phone# (801) 263-a686 Toll Free# [phone] 1-~ Fax# [phone] Email [e-mail]
www.awal-labs.com
Client: Energy Fuels Resources, Inc,
Address: 6425 S. Hwy. 191
Blanding, UT 84511
Contact: Tanner Holliday
Phone#: [phone] Cell#:
Email: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Project Name: Seeps and Springs 2022
Project#:
PO#:
Sampler Name: Tanner Holliday
Date
Sample ID: Samcled
Entrnce Spring 5/10/2022
2 . Rulo Spring 5/10/2022
· Cottonwood Spring
6
8
9
I
I
!
Back Spring
Trip Blank
Roljnqub'1<d by: \ _J/ // / ,.,
Sloontur,, •~ •-•-
V
Prtn!Namo: TanMr liolllM•
ROllnqulS!l<!d Dy:
Slana11/rll
P~nlf'/amo:
Relinquished by:
Slonature
Prlo!Name
Relinquished by:
SlanahJm
Prtn!Nam0-
5/10/2022
5/10/2022
5/10/2022
Datu.
5111/202:
Tono
110(
Doto:
Timi!'
Date:
Time:
Date
Time:
I
Time
Samcled
820
855
945
855
820
Recetved by:
Slqnalw9
PdntName:
CHAIN OF CUSTODY
All analysis will be conducted using NELAP accredlled melhoc!S and all dala will be reported using AWAL's standard analyte lists and
reporting limits (POL) unless specmcally requested otherwise on this Chain of Custody and/or attached documentation.
QC Level: I Turn Around Time: Unless olher arrangemenls have been made,
slgned reports wfll be emailed by 5:00 pm on
3 Standard the day they are due
I o X Include EDD:
LOCUS UPLOAD ::E '"
I "° u EXCEL
:r: "° X Field FIitered For:
~ ::E Dlaaolved Metals ..... Id° iri ::E :i 'I' ~ ljf of ~ z For Compliance With:
ci '& ¼ 0 NELAP
0 0 RCRA a' ~ :i >" □ CWA ;:::: \ ci \u_ \ -□ SOWA 0 C) ~ "> ::> □ ELAP/A2LA ..... .. ~ 0 0 d' l ~ ~ u 0 0 \..: Cl} □ NLLAP ~ 0 ~ -; \ □ Non-Compliance "> 0 u ,,....; ~ ... Ir) ~ .. \"Ci E-< 0 Other: 0 :::t. GI \"° u' I!? S!l. 2 )..,. u' 1 • u <( Ill 0 " )( 0 " IC :s C') i "' \.; I • ~ C: 0 'I' ~ ., C'l ~ ., 0 Ir) Ir) ,\! ] CD rn ~ Known Hazards ::; ol C: • :::t. ,u ~ 1:t I . ..:-8 Ql ..... 0 IQ • Q, s C') 1 ~ • z 0 & 0 E ~ \~ s a g ., .2 Samele Comments .. UI • (,) ,
7 w X X X X X X X X X X
7 w X X X X X X X X X X
7 w X X X X X X X X X X
7 w X X X X X X X X X X
3 w X
Date: Special Instructions:
Tlme:
2.2. C /Cf'L
.?9£1(.a 'd ,-...., ' I •-
AWAL Lab Sample Set#
Page 1 of 1 I°"' Da<°'
Laboratory Use Only
Samples Were:
1 Shipped or hand delivered
2 Ambient or Chilled
3 Temperature 2 · {_ ·c
4 Received BrokenlleakJng
(lmproperty Sealed)
y N
5 Property Preseived
y N
Checked at bench
y N
6 Received Wllhln
Holding Times
y N
COC Tape Was:
1 Present on Outer Package
y N NA
2 Unbroken on Outer Package
y N NA
3 Presenl on Sample
y N NA
4 Unbroken on Sample
y N NA
Discrepancies Between sample
Labels and COC Record?
y N
Sample containers for metals were field filtered. See the
-(~
I
Rocetv'.'.!Y (I Slanatu , t /J cf?~. _/ 007✓ /, 5 1/?_ 1 1...-Analytical Scope of Work for Reporting Limits and VOC analyte
..---[. -
Prtn1 Name C t l '"•
1-/4 ,; _/ ,
,_/ ~('<-Time/c) S (\ list.
Received by: I DaIe·
~W'lnatura
1Time:
Prtl!tName· l
Received by: Date:
Slonature
nme:
Print Name:
, 7 -~ /<'1 / 2 1../ L-'-· ~
Work Order# !J:.? ,,-t.., G ~( ...... _, ~.?--. '
Delivery Method:
fiUPS Cl USPS
dEx D Ch h courier
Courier ti
I z__ f 'i{l r~ i'. ~ If. 0 .0
?z__ ~ i ~ .,, ~ ! > u ·
~ l > .0 5 .., .. ~-Chemtech,Lot # ~ > ,;;
.c C -~ 0 ,, l c ·
"'
., ·-
~ t ,,
1 i Sample# Container Preservative ii .r 1 ::=_
cr-uc.; flt/-' C I I <!., ..... A--
/1.., er,·~,(_
y,./) / I k'(,._
Ah ...::-1,1 ... I-
,~(_?-) CI ;'.,_,,_f
c5 L-..., 0) c_· //c._ I-
Misc
Vcilume
(oz/ml)
CHEMTECH FORD LABORATORIES
Sample Receipt
Receiving Temperature ~-i 0 c
·,;;, .. ~; :;,.rtr:.:{(: ._
Comments
CHEMTECH-FORD
L /\ 8 CJ ;.: •\ r CJ ~ I f
Sample Condition
(!:li_e;ck.if yes )
Containers Intact
COC can be matched to bottlC?s
Carree! (ont;i1nL>rs(s)
Sufficen1 Sample Volume
Rt!cei'oled within Holding Timt'
Pla_stic GQ,atainers
A• Pliilitlc UnptttkNl-d
81 Miscellaneous Plastic
C• Cy;:mide Qt (NaOH)
r-Colilorm/[coli/HPC
F· Sulfide Ql (Zn Acetate)
l-Mercury 1631
M Metals Pint (HN03)
N-Nutrient Pint {H2S04)
R-Radiological (HN03)
S, Sludge Cups/Tubs
Q. Plastic Sac
Glass Containers
D-625 (Na25203)
G-Glass Unpreserved
H HMs (NH4CI)
I· SOB/515/525 (Na2503)
K· 515,3 Herbicides
0-Od & Grease (HCI)
P-Phenols (H2S04)
T · TOC/TOX (H3P04)
U-531 (MCM, Na2~203)
V SZ4/THMs (Ascorb1< Acid}
W-B260 voe (LI HCI)
X· Vial Unpreserved
Y 624/504 (Na2SI031
l M1scelianeou:. Gla!>s
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
Analyte %Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone SpkValue MRL DF
Blank-EPA 200.7
QC Sample ID: BWE0967-BLK1 Batch: BWE0967
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
Calcium, Dissolved ND 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved ND 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved ND 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved ND 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved ND 0.5 1.00
Tin, Dissolved ND 0.02 1.00
LCS -EPA 200. 7
QC Sample ID: BWE0967-BS1 Batch: BWE0967
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
Calcium, Dissolved 90.2 85 -115 9.2 10.2 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved 97.6 85 -115 0.195 0.200 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved 95.3 85 -115 9.7 10.2 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved 96.4 85 -115 9.6 10.0 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved 94.6 85 -115 9.5 10.0 0.5 1.00
Tin, Dissolved 90.3 85 -155 0.18 0.200 0.02 1.00
Matrix Spike -EPA 200.7
QC Sample ID: BWE0967-MS1 Batch: BWE0967 QC Source Sample: 22El012-01
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
Calcium, Dissolved 73.5 70 -130 130 123 10.2 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved 91.6 70 -130 0.572 0.389 0.200 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved 91.0 70 -130 54.0 44.8 10.2 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved 97.0 70 -130 14.2 4.5 10.0 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved 85.8 70 -130 109 100 10.0 0.5 1.00
Tin, Dissolved 90.4 70 -130 0.18 0.004 0.200 0.02 1.00
QC Sample ID: BWE0967-MS2 Batch: BWE0967 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
Calcium, Dissolved 87.2 70 -130 69.6 60.7 10.2 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved 101 70 -130 0.203 ND 0.200 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved 95.3 70 -130 30.5 20.8 10.2 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved 99.2 70 -130 11.1 1.2 10.0 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved 91.3 70 -130 45.0 35.8 10.0 0.5 1.00
Tin, Dissolved 93.5 70 -130 0.19 ND 0.200 0.02 1.00
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 200. 7
QC Sample ID: BWE0967-MSD1 Batch: BWE0967 QC Source Sample: 22El012-0l
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
Calcium, Dissolved 69 .5 0.314 70 -130 20 130 123 10.2 0.2 1.00
QM-4X -The spike recovery was outside of QC acceptance limits for the MS and/or MSD due to analyte concentration at 4 times
or greater the spike concentration. The QC batch was accepted based on LCS and/or LCSD recoveries within the acceptance
limits.
Iron, Dissolved 95.4 1.32 70 -130 20 0.580 0.389 0.200 0.02 1.00
Magnesium, Dissolved 91.3 0.0586 70 -130 20 54.1 44.8 10.2 0.2 1.00
Potassium, Dissolved 99.8 1.94 70 -130 20 14.5 4.5 10.0 0.5 1.00
Sodium, Dissolved 81.5 0.391 70 -130 20 109 100 10.0 0.5 1.00
Tin, Dissolved 92.6 2.47 70 -130 20 0.19 0.004 0.200 0.02 1.00
QC Sample ID: BWE0967-MSD2 Batch: BWE0967 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
Calcium, Dissolved 85.8 0.203 70 -130 20 69.4 60.7 10.2 0.2 1.00
Iron, Dissolved 99.7 1.64 70 -130 20 0.199 ND 0.200 0.02 1.00
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWE0967-MSD2
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022
Magnesium, Dissolved
Potassium, Dissolved
Sodium, Dissolved
Tin, Dissolved
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www. ChemtechFard.cam
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
% Rec RPO Limits RPO Max Result Source Cone
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 200.7 (cont.)
Batch: BWE0967 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
94.5 0.262 70 -130 20 30.4 20.8
98.2 0.908 70 -130 20 11 .0 1.2
90.0 0.274 70 -130 20 44.8 35.8
93.6 0.0535 70 -130 20 0.19 ND
Spk Value MRL OF
10.2 0.2 1.00
10.0 0.5 1.00
10.0 0.5 1.00
0.200 0.02 1.00
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
Analyte %Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone SpkValue MRL DF
Blank -EPA 200.8
QC Sample ID: BWE1024-BLK1 Batch: BWE1024
Date Prepared: 05/20/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/20/2022
Arsenic, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Beryllium, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Cadmium, Dissolved ND 0.0002 1.00
Chromium, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Cobalt, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Copper, Dissolved ND 0.0010 1.00
Lead, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Manganese, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Molybdenum, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Nickel, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Selenium, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Silver, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Thallium, Dissolved ND 0.0002 1.00
Uranium, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Vanadium, Dissolved ND 0.0005 1.00
Zinc, Dissolved ND 0.01 1.00
LCS -EPA 200.8
QC Sample ID: BWE1024-BS1 Batch: BWE1024
Date Prepared: 05/20/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/20/2022
Arsenic, Dissolved 97.9 85 -115 0.039 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Beryllium, Dissolved 102 85 -115 0.041 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Cadmium, Dissolved 97.2 85 -115 0.039 0.0400 0.0002 1.00
Chromium, Dissolved 98.8 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Cobalt, Dissolved 97.0 85 -115 0.039 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Copper, Dissolved 97.3 85 -115 0.039 0.0400 0.0010 1.00
Lead, Dissolved 99.6 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Manganese, Dissolved 97.0 85 -115 0.039 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Molybdenum, Dissolved 98.9 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Nickel, Dissolved 97.9 85 -115 0.0392 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Selenium, Dissolved 99.8 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Silver, Dissolved 96.8 85 -115 0.039 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Thallium, Dissolved 101 85 -115 0.040 0.0400 0.0002 1.00
Uranium, Dissolved 101 85 -115 0.041 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Vanadium, Dissolved 94.1 85 -115 0.038 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Zinc, Dissolved 98.2 85 -115 0.04 0.0400 0.01 1.00
Matrix Spike -EPA 200.8
QC Sample ID: BWE1024-MS1 Batch: BWE1024 QC Source Sample: 22El012-0l
Date Prepared: 05/20/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/20/2022
Arsenic, Dissolved 102 70 -130 0.044 0.003 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Beryllium, Dissolved 105 70 -130 0.042 ND 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Cadmium, Dissolved 96.6 70 -130 0.039 0.00002 0.0400 0.0002 1.00
Chromium, Dissolved 92.9 70 -130 0.043 0.005 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Cobalt, Dissolved 93.8 70 -130 0.039 0.001 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Copper, Dissolved 99.2 70 -130 0.040 0.0005 0.0400 0.0010 1.00
Lead, Dissolved 99.4 70 -130 0.040 ND 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
Manganese, Dissolved 58 .3 70 -130 0.653 0.629 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
QM-4X -The spike recovery was outside of QC acceptance limits for the MS and/or MSD due to analyte concentration at 4 times
or greater the spike concentration. The QC batch was accepted based on LCS and/or LCSD recoveries within the acceptance
limits.
Molybdenum, Dissolved 103 70 -130 0.043 0.002 0.0400 0.0005 1.00
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
Analyte %Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone Spk Value
Matrix Spike -EPA 200.8 (cont.)
QC Sample ID: BWE1024-MS1 Batch: BWE1024 QC Source Sample: 22E1012-01
Date Prepared: 05/20/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/20/2022
Nickel, Dissolved 93.3 75 -125 0.0383 0.0010 0.0400
Selenium, Dissolved 103 70 -130 0.047 0.005 0.0400
Silver, Dissolved 81.5 70 -130 0.033 ND 0.0400
Thallium, Dissolved 101 70 -130 0.041 ND 0.0400
Uranium, Dissolved 103 70 -130 0.059 0.017 0.0400
Vanadium, Dissolved 94.1 70 -130 0.041 0.003 0.0400
Zinc, Dissolved 157 70 -130 0.06 0.001 0.0400
QM-07 -The spike recovery was outside acceptance limits for the MS and/or MSD. The batch was accepted based on
acceptable LCS recovery.
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
MRL DF
0.0005 1.00
0.0005 1.00
0.0005 1.00
0.0002 1.00
0.0005 1.00
0.0005 1.00
0.01 1.00
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWE0705-BLK1
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Mercury, Dissolved
QC Sample ID: BWE0705-BS1
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Mercury, Dissolved
QC Sample ID: BWE0705-MS I
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Mercury, Dissolved
QC Sample ID: BWE0705-MSD1
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Mercury, Dissolved
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO} -22E1012
%Rec RPO Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone SpkValue MRL DF
Blank -EPA 245.1
Batch: BWE0705
Date Analyzed: 05/17/2022
ND 0.0002 1.00
LCS -EPA 245.1
Batch: BWE0705
Date Analyzed: 05/1712022
108 85 -115 0.0054 0.00500 0.0002 1.00
Matrix Spike -EPA 245.1
Batch: BWE0705 QC Source Sample: 22El012-01
Date Analyzed: 05/17/2022
115 75 -125 0.0058 ND 0.00500 0.0002 1.00
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 245.1
Batch: BWE0705 QC Source Sample: 22El012-01
Date Analyzed: 05/17/2022
113 2.19 75 -125 20 0.0056 ND 0.00500 0.0002 1.00
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
Analyte % Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone SpkValue MRL DF
Blank -EPA 300.0
QC Sample ID: BWE0580-BLK1 Batch: BWE0580
Date Prepared: 05/12/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/12/2022
Chloride ND 1.0 1.00
QC Sample ID: BWE0730-BLK1 Batch: BWE0730
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
Chloride ND 1.0 1.00
Fluoride ND 0.1 1.00
Sulfate ND 1.0 1.00
LCS -EPA 300.0
QC Sample ID: BWE0580-BS1 Batch: BWE0580
Date Prepared: 05/12/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/12/2022
Chloride 100 90 -110 50.1 50.0 1.0 1.00
QC Sample ID: BWE0730-BS1 Batch: BWE0730
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
Chloride 101 90 -110 50.5 50.0 1.0 1.00
Fluoride 98.4 90 -110 4.9 5.00 0.1 1.00
Sulfate 101 90 -110 50.5 50.0 1.0 1.00
Matrix Spike -EPA 300.0
QC Sample ID: BWE0580-MS1 Batch: BWE0580 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 05/12/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/12/2022
Chloride 66.8 80 -120 30500 27200 5000 550 1.00
QM-010 -The MS recovery was outside acceptance limits but passed Duplicate Spike acceptance limits. The batch was
accepted based on the acceptability of the MSD as the batch Spike.
QC Sample ID: BWE0580-MS2 Batch: BWE0580 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 05/12/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/12/2022
Chloride 98.9 80 -120 29000 24000 5000 550 1.00
QC Sample ID: BWE0730-MS1 Batch: BWE0730 QC Source Sample: 22E 1012-01
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
Chloride 107 80 -120 199 91.8 100 11.0 1.00
Fluoride 109 80 -120 11.7 0.8 10.0 1.1 1.00
Sulfate 97.7 80 -120 421 323 100 11.0 1.00
QC Sample ID: BWE0730-MS2 Batch: BWE0730 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
Chloride 104 80 -120 30200 25000 5000 550 1.00
Fluoride 115 80 -120 577 ND 500 55.0 1.00
Sulfate 115 80 -120 10600 4910 5000 550 1.00
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 300.0
QC Sample ID: BWE0580-MSD 1 Batch: BWE0580 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 05/12/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/12/2022
Chloride 97.3 4.86 80 -120 20 32000 27200 5000 550 1.00
QC Sample ID: BWE0580-MSD2 Batch: BWE0580 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Prepared: 05/12/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/12/2022
Chloride 97.2 0.288 80 -120 20 28900 24000 5000 550 1.00
QC Sample ID: BWE0730-MSD1 Batch: BWE0730 QC Source Sample: 22El012-0l
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
Chloride 103 2.02 80 -120 20 195 91.8 100 11 .0 1.00
Fluoride 104 4.46 80 -120 20 11.2 0.8 10.0 1.1 1.00
Sulfate 98.9 0.278 80 -120 20 422 323 100 11.0 1.00
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWE0730-MSD2
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Chloride
Fluoride
Sulfate
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
%Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 300.0 (cont.)
Batch: BWE0730 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
104 0.0164 80 -120 20 30200 25000
97.1 17.2 80 -120 20 485 ND
114 0.285 80 -120 20 10600 4910
Spk Value MRL DF
5000 550 1.00
500 55.0 1.00
5000 550 1.00
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWE0707-BLK1
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Nitrate + Nitrite, Total, as N
QC Sample ID: BWE0707-BSI
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Nitrate + Nitrite, Total, as N
QC Sample ID: BWE0707-MS1
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Nitrate + Nitrite, Total, as N
QC Sample ID: BWE0707-MS2
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Nitrate+ Nitrite, Total, as N
QC Sample ID: BWE0707-MSD1
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Nitrate + Nitrite, Total, as N
QC Sample ID: BWE0707-MSD2
Date Prepared: 05/16/2022
Nitrate + Nitrite, Total, as N
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
% Rec RPO Limits RPO Max Result Source Cone Spk Value MRL OF
Blank -EPA 353.2
Batch: BWE0707
Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
ND 0.1 1.00
LCS -EPA 353.2
Batch: BWE0707
Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
100 80 -120 2.0 2.00 0.1 1.00
Matrix Spike -EPA 353.2
Batch: BWE0707 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
116 80 -120 2.6 1.4 1.00 0.1 1.00
Batch: BWE0707 QC Source Sample: 22El012-0l
Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
104 80 -120 1.2 0.2 1.00 0.1 1.00
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 353.2
Batch: BWE0707 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
107 3.56 80 -120 20 2.5 1.4 1.00 0.1 1.00
Batch: BWE0707 QC Source Sample: 22El012-01
Date Analyzed: 05/16/2022
103 0.563 80 -120 20 1.2 0.2 1.00 0.1 1.00
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
Analyte % Rec RPO Limits RPO Max Result Source Cone Spk Value MRL DF
Blank -EPA 8260D /5030A
QC Sample ID: BWE0982-BLK1 Batch: BWE0982
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
Acetone ND 10.0 1.00
Benzene ND 1.0 1.00
Carbon Tetrachloride ND 1.0 1.00
Chloroform ND 1.0 1.00
Chloromethane ND 1.0 1.00
J-LOW -Estimated low due to low recovery of LCS or CCV
Methyl Ethyl Ketone ND 10.0 1.00
Methylene Chloride ND 2.0 1.00
Naphthalene ND 1.0 1.00
Tetrahydrofuran ND 1.0 1.00
Toluene ND 1.0 1.00
Xylenes, total ND 1.0 1.00
LCS.-EPA 8260D /5030A
QC Sample ID: BWE0982-BS1 Batch: BWE0982
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
Acetone 77.8 70 -130 77.8 100 10.0 1.00
Benzene 114 70 -130 11.4 10.0 0.4 1.00
Carbon Tetrachloride 113 70 -130 11 .3 10.0 1.0 1.00
Chloroform 93.8 70 -130 9.38 10.0 1.0 1.00
Chloromethane 83.6 70 -130 8.36 10.0 1.0 1.00
J-LOW -Estimated low due to low recovery of LCS or CCV
Methyl Ethyl Ketone 108 70 -130 108 100 10.0 1.00
Methylene Chloride 107 70 -130 10.7 10.0 2.0 1.00
Naphthalene 102 70 -130 10.2 10.0 1.0 1.00
Tetrahydrofuran 70 -130 ND 20.0 1.0 1.00
Toluene 113 70 -130 11 .3 10.0 1.0 1.00
Xylenes, total 119 70 -130 35.6 30.0 1.0 1.00
Matrix Spike -EPA 8260D /5030A
QC Sample ID: BWE0982-MS 1 Batch: BWE0982 QC Source Sample: 22El012-0l
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
Acetone 64.7 70 -130 323 ND 500 50.0 1.00
MS-Low -Estimated low due to Matrix Spike recovery.
Benzene 79.9 70 -130 40.0 ND 50.0 2.0 1.00
Carbon Tetrachloride 75.1 70 -130 37.6 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
Chloroform 53.9 70 -130 27.0 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
MS-Low -Estimated low due to Matrix Spike recovery.
Chloromethane 38.3 70 -130 19.2 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
J-LOW -Estimated low due to low recovery of LCS or CCV
Methyl Ethyl Ketone 87.5 70 -130 438 ND 500 50.0 1.00
Methylene Chloride 55.7 70 -130 27.8 ND 50.0 10.0 1.00
MS-Low -Estimated low due to Matrix Spike recovery.
Naphthalene 63.7 70-130 31 .8 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
MS-Low -Estimated low due to Matrix Spike recovery.
Tetrahyd rofuran 70 -130 ND ND 100 5.0 1.00
Toluene 79.4 70 -130 39.7 ND 50.0 5.0 1.00
Xylenes, total 81.8 70 -130 123 ND 150 5.0 1.00
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 8260D /5030A
QC Sample ID: BWE0982-MSD1 Batch: BWE0982 QC Source Sample: 22EIOI2-0l
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
Analyte %Rec RPD Limits RPD Max Result Source Cone
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 8260D /5030A (cont.)
QC Sample ID: BWE0982-MSD1 Batch: BWE0982 QC Source Sample: 22E1012-01
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022 Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
Acetone 68.1 5.14
MS-Low -Estimated low due to Matrix Spike recovery.
Benzene 83.2 4.05
Carbon Tetrachloride 78.2 4.04
Chloroform 57.5 6.46
MS-Low -Estimated low due to Matrix Spike recovery.
Chloromethane 39.9 4.09
J-LOW -Estimated low due to low recovery of LCS or CCV
Methyl Ethyl Ketone 92.4 5.47
Methylene Chloride 59.9 7.27
MS-Low -Estimated low due to Matrix Spike recovery.
Naphthalene
Tetrahydrofuran
Toluene
Xylenes, total
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
72.3 12.6
81.5 2.61
82.5 0.812
70 -130
70 -130
70 -130
70 -130
70 -130
70 -130
70 -130
70 -130
70 -130
70 -130
70 -130
20 340 ND
20 41 .6 ND
20 39.1 ND
20 28.8 ND
20 20.0 ND
20 462 ND
20 30.0 ND
20 36.2 ND
20 ND ND
20 40.8 ND
20 124 ND
SpkValue MRL DF
500 50.0 1.00
50.0 2.0 1.00
50.0 5.0 1.00
50.0 5.0 1.00
50.0 5.0 1.00
500 50.0 1.00
50.0 10.0 1.00
50.0 5.0 1.00
100 5.0 1.00
50.0 5.0 1.00
150 5.0 1.00
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWE0648-BLKI
Date Prepared: 05/13/2022
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
QC Sample ID: BWE0648-DUP1
Date Prepared: 05/13/2022
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Hydroxide (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity-Total (as CaCO3)
QC Sample ID: BWE0648-DUP2
Date Prepared: 05/13/2022
Alkalinity -Bicarbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Carbonate (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity-Hydroxide (as CaCO3)
Alkalinity -Total (as CaCO3)
QC Sample ID: BWE0648-BS1
Date Prepared: 05/13/2022
Alkalinity -Total (as CaCO3)
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
% Rec RPO Limits RPO Max Result Source Cone SpkValue MRL OF
Blank -SM 2320 B
Batch: BWE0648
Date Analyzed: 05/13/2022
ND 1.0 1.00
ND 1.0 1.00
Duplicate -SM 2320 B
Batch: BWE0648 QC Source Sample: 22El012-01
Date Analyzed: 05/13/2022
0.551 20 309 308 1.0 1.00
20 ND ND 1.0 1.00
20 ND ND 1.0 1.00
0.551 20 309 308 1.0 1.00
Batch: BWE0648 QC Source Sample: XXXXXXX-XX
Date Analyzed: 05/13/2022
0.188 20 106 106 1.0 1.00
20 ND ND 1.0 1.00
20 ND ND 1.0 1.00
0.188 20 106 106 1.0 1.00
LCS -SM 2320 B
Batch: BWE0648
Date Analyzed: 05/13/2022
98.6 90 -110 233 236 1.0 1.00
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWE0637-BLK1
Date Prepared: 05/13/2022
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
QC Sample ID: BWE0637-BS1
Date Prepared: 05/13/2022
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
QC Sample ID: BWE0637-DUP1
Date Prepared: 05/13/2022
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
QC Sample ID: BWE0637-DUP2
Date Prepared: 05/13/2022
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
%Rec RPO Limits RPO Max Result Source Cone
Batch: BWE0637
Date Analyzed: 05/13/2022
ND
Batch: BWE0637
Date Analyzed: 05/13/2022
98 90 -110 392
Batch: BWE0637 QC Source Sample: 22El012-0l
Date Analyzed: 05/13/2022
0 10 904 904
Batch: BWE0637 QC Source Sample: XXXXX:XX-XX
Date Analyzed: 05/13/2022
0.2 10 1800 1810
SpkValue MRL OF
10 1.00
400 20 1.00
20 1.00
20 1.00
Analyte
QC Sample ID: BWE0909-BLK1
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022
Ammonia as N
QC Sample ID: BWE0909-BS1
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022
Ammonia as N
QC Sample ID: BWE0909-MS1
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022
Ammonia as N
QC Sample ID: BWE0909-MSDI
Date Prepared: 05/19/2022
Ammonia as N
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
QC Report for Work Order (WO) -22E1012
%Rec RPD limits RPD Max Result Source Cone
Blank -SM 4500 NH3 H
Batch: BWE0909
Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
ND
LCS -SM 4500 NH3 H
Batch: BWE0909
Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
100 90 -110 5.01
Matrix Spike -SM 4500 NH3 H
Batch: BWE0909 QC Source Sample: 22El012-0l
Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
105 80 -120 0.59 0.07
Matrix Spike Dup -SM 4500 NH3 H
Batch: BWE0909 QC Source Sample: 22E 1012-01
Date Analyzed: 05/19/2022
104 0.966 80-120 20 0.59 0.07
Spk Value MRL DF
0.2 1.00
5.00 0.2 1.00
0.500 0.2 1.00
0.500 0.2 1.00
Surrogates Report for Work Order (WO} -22E1012
QCID Analyte
BWE0982-BLK1 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
BWE0982-BLK1 4-Bromofluorobenzene
BWE0982-BLK1 Toluene-dB
BWE0982-8S1 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
BWE0982-8S1 4-Bromofluorobenzene
BWE0982-8S1 Toluene-dB
BWE09B2-MS1 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
BWE09B2-MS1 4-Bromofluorobenzene
BWE09B2-MS1 Toluene-dB
BWE0982-MSD1 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
BWE0982-MSD1 4-Bromofluorobenzene
BWE09B2-MSD1 Toluene-dB
::;tF WO#: 22E1012
'IIWw.ChemtechFord. com
%Rec LCL UCL Result
Blank -EPA 8260D /5030A
85.3 64.2 126 8.53
102 71.4 122 10.2
100 63 .2 129 10.0
LCS -EPA 8260D /5030A
80.9 64.2 126 8.09
101 71.4 122 10.1
98.6 63.2 129 9.86
Matrix Spike -EPA 8260D /5030A
70.0 64.2 126 35.0
81.6 71.4 122 40.8
100 63.2 129 50.0
Matrix Spike Dup -EPA 8260D /5030A
75.0 64.2 126 37.5
84.6 71.4 122 42.3
89.9 63.2 129 45.0
SpkValue Batch DF
10.0 BWE0982 1.00
10.0 BWE0982 1.00
10.0 BWE0982 1.00
10.0 BWE0982 1.00
10.0 BWE09B2 1.00
10.0 BWE0982 1.00
50.0 BWE0982 1.00
50.0 BWE0982 1.00
50.0 BWE0982 1.00
50.0 BWE0982 1.00
50.0 BWE0982 1.00
50.0 BWE0982 1.00
Surrogate Recoveries (Field Samples)
LabNumber Analyte
8260 Low Level Volatiles
22E1012-01 Toluene-dB
22E1012-01 4-Bromofluorobenzene
22E1012-01 1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
8260 Low Level Volatiles
22E1012-02 Toluene-dB
22E1012-02
22E1012-02
4-Bromofluorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
8260 Low Level Volatiles
22E1012-03 Toluene-dB
22E1012-03
22E1012-03
4-Bromofluorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
8260 Low Level Volatiles
22E1012-04 Toluene-dB
22E1012-04
22E1012-04
4-Bromofluorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
8260 Low Level Volatiles
22E1012-05 Toluene-dB
22E1012-05
22E1012-05
4-Bromofluorobenzene
1,2-Dichloroethane-d4
CtF WO#: 22E1012
www.ChemtechFord.com
Result
10.0
10.3
8.73
10.0
9.79
8.37
9.69
9.53
7.94
10.0
10.2
8.35
10.0
10.0
7.71
Spklvl
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
%Rec
100
103
87.3
100
97.9
83.7
96.9
95.3
79.4
100
102
83.5
100
100
77.1
LCL UCL Qualifier
63.2 129
71.4 122
64.2 126
63.2 129
71.4 122
64.2 126
63.2 129
71.4 122
64.2 126
63.2 129
71.4 122
64.2 126
63.2 129
71.4 122
64.2 126
[ijij11 I Laboratories LLc
a member of The GEL Group INC
P•.) 8,,x 20,12 Cr,a1lesw1. SC 2'.1,1'7
20-1(1 S::,•;,·,ae Roacl Charle,ton SC 29407
P ss::, 5513 s171
F 8-l=: iGGJ • 78
June 14, 2022
Mr. Garrin Palmer
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
6425 S. Highway 191
Blanding, Utah 84511
Re: Analytical for Seeps and Springs 2022
Work Order: 580063
Dear Mr. Palmer:
GEL Laboratories, LLC (GEL) appreciates the opportunity to provide the enclosed analytical results for the
sample(s) we received on May 16, 2022. This original data report has been prepared and reviewed in accordance
with GEL's standard operating procedures.
Test results for NELAP or ISO 17025 accredited tests are verified to meet the requirements of those standards,
with any exceptions noted. The results reported relate only to the items tested and to the sample as received by
the laboratory. These results may not be reproduced except as full reports without approval by the laboratory.
Copies ofGEL's accreditations and certifications can be found on our website at www.gel.com.
Our policy is to provide high quality, personalized analytical services to enable you to meet your analytical needs
on time every time. We trust that you will find everything in order and to your satisfaction. If you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to call me at (843) 556-8 I 71 , ext. 4289.
Purchase Order: DW16138
Enclosures
Sincerely,
Julie Robinson
Project Manager
i11mruu1111111 111111111111 ;11111
gel.com
Page 2 of 17 SDG: 580063
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
Analytical for
SDG: 580063
June 14, 2022
Laboratory .Identification:
GEL Laboratories LLC
2040 Savage Road
Charleston, South Carolina 29407
[phone]
Summary:
Receipt Narrative
for
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
SDG: 580063
Sample receipt: The samples arrived at GEL Laboratories LLC, Charleston, South Carolina on May 16, 2022
for analysis. The samples were delivered with proper chain of custody documentation and signatures. All sample
containers arrived without any visible signs of tampering or breakage. There are no additional comments
concerning sample receipt.
Sample Identification: The laboratory received the following samples:
Case Narrative:
Laboratory ID
580063001
580063002
580063003
580063004
Client ID
Entrance Spring
Ruin Spring
Cottonwood Spring
Back Spring
Sample analyses were conducted using methodology as outlined in GEL's Standard Operating Procedures. Any
technical or administrative problems during analysis, data review, and reduction are contained in the analytical
case narratives in the enclosed data package.
The enclosed data package contains the following sections: Case Narrative, Chain of Custody, Cooler Receipt
Checklist, Data Package Qualifier Definitions and data from the following fractions: Radiochemistry.
Page 3 of 17 SDG: 580063
~~
Julie Robinson
Project Manager
;,--e<.:;;£ , ■J '
( -~ ~ -'1
-.. r/ _ f' ENERGY FUELS RESOURCES
Sheet 1 of 1
CHAIN OF CUSTODY
Samples Shipped to: _G_E_L_l_a_b_or_a_to_ri_es __ ,_L_L_C _______ Contact: Tanner Holliday
2040 Savage Road Ph: 435 678 2221
Charleston, SC 29407 [e-mail]
[phone]
Chain of Custody/Sampling Analysis Request
p . t roJec s amp ers N ame s amp1ers s· t 1ana ure
Seeps and Springs 2022 Tanner Holliday baN\IA_ /./~
p
Time
Sample ID Date Collected Collected Laboratory Analysis Requested
Entrance Spring 5/10/2022 820 Gross Aloha
Ruin Spring 5/10/2022 855 ~rossAlpha
Cottonwood Spring 5/10/2022 945 Gross Aloha
Back Spring 5/10/2022 855 Gross Alpha
Comments: Please send report to Kathy Weinel at [e-mail]
Relinquished By:(Signatur. )
-:jQN\tl(_ )/4
Relinquished By:
Page 4 of 17 SDG: 580063
ner Holliday
Date/Time Received By:(Signat
5/11/2022
1100
~ I Laborato~ies ,LC ' ' -
Client: I /N::l"\ L SDG/ARICOC/Work Order: ,'\ ~ (',O '1 ---~ ':>-I<.. "
Received Bv: TYE DatcReceivcd: ~ \ l l Q\"77 : .. . \.
c~i Fedfa Express FedEx Ground UPS icld Services Courier Other
SAMPLE RECEIPT & REVIEW FORNI .
Carrier ond Tracking Number
rz.. l8"9 \/4\l l2 qi-~a--lJSl ll~
Suspected Ha,.ard Information l'.l C •{f Net Counts> IOOcpm on samples 1101 marked "radioae1ive", L-uncact the Radiotion Safety Group ·ror further invc.~tigacion. >-2:
v Ho,.ard Cl:1.ss Shipped: UN#:
A)Shin.,,.d a.< a DOT Ha1.ordou.,? 1
tr UN29 IO, Is che Radioactive Shipmen I Survey Compliant? Y c.,_ No_
8) Did lhe client designa1e the samples arc 10 be V COC notution or r.1diouctivc $ticker.; on cont~incrs equal client designation.·
rcccivcd a., rJdioa<:tiVc? -
✓ . __.Sdl
q Did the RSO classify the somples as Maximum Net Cou11~< Observed• (Observed Cooo11s • Arca Background Coun1s): c..._CrM / mR/Hr
rodlo_,ctive? , Classified as: Rad I Rad 2 Rad 3 •
Dl Did the clicut dc.si,1101c sumDIC.< urc h"'-'lrduu.,? Iv
1
~~orntiu11 ur hu1.ard labels 011 c-oncaincr.; cq11:tl client designation.
Iv We D or E is ye.,, select H:u:ard< below.
E) Did the RSO idcmify aossiblc hm,rd.s? PCB's Aammablc Forcig,1 Soil RCRA Asbestos Beryllium 01hcr.
Sample Receipt Criteria \'.I 1 C Comments/Qualifiers (Rcq!'lrc~ for Non-Conronning llcms) >-2:
Shipping concaincrs received incact and l/ , / Ciiclo ,\ppllcoblc: Seal( b,rokc:n D~111isct1 ca't1,ilf11~~ t.:.al:ing cont::1inc:r Other (dc>en"bcJ
l sealed?
2 Chain of CIL<;tody documents included Iv' ~ Circle 1\pplicabk:: Clionl conlacted ond prO\"il.lcd COG ~ CDC cr<><cd upon receipt
w.ith shipm:nt? ~· / ~
Iv Pn:llcrvation Method: Wet kc kc Pa<:ks Dryicc~ Ocher.
TEMP: / I a c__ 3 Samples requiring cold preservation •all tcmper-Jturcs arc recorded i,; Celsius
will,in (0 s. 6 de2. en~
Daily check performed and pa.o;.1ed on [R VII Tcmpcr:1turc Device Seri~!#: lR2-2Q .
4 temperature gun? Sccondury Tcmpcr:uure Device Serial # (ff Applicablc)1 rv < J Citcle Applic11b\e: Si::.l.l( bru\;i:n D:un:iscd c:un~Ulcr ~\:in,s c:ont.aiuc:r Q,!14..,-(dc,cribc)
5 S11mpfc concainers intact and sealed? ~ C: ..
G Sample.< requiring cherr.icnl preservation V S:uuplc. ID$ gnd Conttti.ttc('!( AfT\!ctci.1:
at proper pH? rt ercscf\;;Uion uc.h!,:"9. Lt,cfl:
J( Yes, arc Encores or Sui! Ki1.< present rur sulills? Ye~ · No NA (ff yes. take tu VOA F~•.cr)
7 Do any s.implc.< require Volatile :.:v Do 11quid VOA vial~ contain ocid preservation? Yc.s Nu NA (lfuuknuwn, ~elcc.l No)
Analysis? Arc. liquid VOA vials free uf head.~p,cc? Y cs_ \'\lo_ NA_
Sample ID's anti c:mHilincr!<i aff'c:t:h:J:
~
8 Sample.< received within holding time? I ✓ ID's al\d 1c.,1.< olTe<:tcd:
..
Sample (D's on COC match ID'$ on .j < ro·s aud «mrainc,s •ffcctcd:
9 bottles?
10 Date & time on COC match date & time I ✓/ Cin:le Applicnblc: No dole., un concaincr.; No times on w1m1in0rs COC missing info Other (dc,~cribc)
on bottle.~?
ll Number of containers received ma1ch
l
Vic App!ic:ible: No container cuu111 on COC Other (describe) I
number indicated on COC?
Arc sample container.< identifiable as 12 GEL orovidcd bv use of GEL labels?
COC form is properly signed in 13 Circle Appli◄:nblc; Nut relinquished Other (dc.<1.-ribc) .
relinquished/received sections? .
Commcn!S (Use Co111inua1io11 Furm if 11ccllcd):
('\,,., \ I • -I I --
PM (or PMA) rcvic\\s Initials "if n uN Date ll / / I Id 1 agc __!_ur I u
Page 5 of 17 SDG: 580063 GL-CHL-SR-001 Rev7
GEL Laboratories LLC -Login Review Report
GEL Work Order/SDG: 580063
Client SDG: 580063
Seeps and Springs 2022
Project Manager:
Project Name:
Purchase Order:
Package Level:
EDD Format:
Julie Robinson
DNMI00106 Analytical for
DW16138
LEVEL3
EIM_DNMI
GELID Client Sample ID Client Sample Desc.
580063001 Entrance Spring
580063002 Ruin Spring
580063003 Cottonwood Spring
580063004 Back Spring
Collect
Date & Time
10-MAY-22 08:20
10-MAY-22 08:55
10-MAY-22 09:45
10-MAY-22 08:55
Work Order Due Date: 14-JUN-22
Package Due Date:
EDD Due Date:
Due Date:
JAR1
Receive Time #of
Date & Time Zone Cont.
16-MAY-22 09:15 -2 1
16-MAY-22 09:15 -2 1
16-MAY-22 09:15 -2 1
16-MAY-22 09:15 -2 1
14-JUN-22
14-JUN-22
14-JUN-22
Lab
Matrix
GROUND WATER
GROUND WATER
GROUND WATER
GROUND WATER
Report Date: 14-JUN-22
Work Order: 580063
Page 1 of 2
Collector: C
Prelogin #: 202205150319
Project Workdef ID: 1329132
SDG Status: Closed
Logged by:
Fax Days to Prelog Lab Field
Due Date Process CofC # Group QC QC
20
20
20
20
Client Sample ID Status Tests/Methods
Product
Reference Fax Date PM Comments Aux Data
Receive
Codes
-001 Entrance Spring
-002 Ruin Spring
-003 Cottonwood Spring
-004 Back Spring
REVW GFPC, Total Alpha Radium,
Liquid
REVW GFPC, Total Alpha Radium,
Liquid
REVW GFPC, Total Alpha Radium,
Liquid
REVW GFPC, Total Alpha Radium,
Liquid
Product: GFCTORAL Workdef ID: 1461303
Method: EPA 903.0
Product Description: GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid
Samples: 001, 002, 003, 004
Pannname Check: All parmnames scheduled properly
CAS# Pannname
Gross Radium Alpha
Gross Alpha
Gross Alpha
Gross Alpha
Gross Alpha
In Product Group? No
Action Product Name Description
Contingent
Tests
Group Name:
Client RDL or
PQL&Unit
Samples
Reporting
Units
pCi/L
Group Reference:
Path: Drinking Water (903.0 or 9315)
Product Reference: Gross Alpha
Moisture Correction: "As Received"
Parm Included Included Custom
Function in Sample? In QC? List?
REG y y No
(""l
0 0
00
Ir)
0
Cl
r---......
4-t 0
\0
C1.)
t"d Cl..
GEL Laboratories LLC -Login Review Report
Login Requirements:
Requirement Include? Comments
Peer Review by: ____________ _ Work Order (SDG#), PO# Checked? _____ _
Report Date: 14-JUN-22
Work Order: 580063
Page 2 of 2
C of C signed in receiver location? _____ _
M
\0 0 0
00
1£)
ci
Q CZl
r----~ 0
r---
QJ
~ ~
List of current GEL Certifications as of 14 June 2022
State Certification
Alabama 42200
Alaska 17-018
Alaska Drinking Water SC00012
Arkansas 88-0651
CLIA 42D0904046
California 2940
Colorado SC00012
Connecticut PH-0169
DoD ELAP/ ISO 17025 A2LA 2567.01
Florida NELAP E87156
Foreign Soils Permit P330-15-00283,P330-15-00253
Georgia SC00012
Georgia SOW A 967
Hawaii SC00012
Idaho SC00012
Illinois NELAP 200029
Indiana C-SC-01
Kansas NELAP E-10332
Kentucky SOWA 90129
Kentucky Wastewater 90129
Louisiana Drinking Water LA024
Louisiana NELAP 03046 (AI33904)
Maine 2019020
Maryland 270
Massachusetts M-SC012
Massachusetts PF AS Approv Letter
Michigan 9976
Mississippi SC00012
Nebraska NE-OS-26-13
Nevada scooo 122022-4
New Hampshire NELAP 2054
New Jersey NELAP SC002
New Mexico SC00012
New York NELAP 11501
North Carolina 233
North Carolina SOWA 45709
North Dakota R-158
Oklahoma 2019-165
Pennsylvania NELAP 68-00485
Puerto Rico SC000I2
S. Carolina Radiochem 10120002
Sanitation Districts ofL 9255651
South Carolina Chemistry 10120001
Tennessee TN 02934
Texas NELAP T104704235-22-20
Utah NELAP SC000I22021-36
Vermont VT87156
Virginia NELAP 460202
Washington C780
Page 8 of 17 SDG: 580063
Radiochemistry
Technical Case Narrative
Energy Fuels Resources
SDG #: 580063
Product: GFPC, Total Alpha Radium, Liquid
Analytical Method: EPA 903.0
Analytical Procedure: GL-RAD-A-044 REV# 10
Analytical Batch: 2268525
The following samples were analyzed using the above methods and analytical procedure(s).
Client Sample Identification
Entrance Spring
Ruin Spring
Cottonwood Spring
Back Spring
Method Blank (MB)
GEL Sample ID#
580063001
580063002
580063003
580063004
1205096974
1205096975
1205096976
1205096977
1205096978
57855800l(NonSDG) Sample Duplicate (DUP)
57855800l(NonSDG) Matrix Spike (MS)
57855800l(NonSDG) Matrix Spike Duplicate (MSD)
Laboratory Control Sample (LCS)
The samples in this SDG were analyzed on an "as received" basis.
Data Summary:
All sample data provided in this report met the acceptance criteria specified in the analytical methods and
procedures for initial calibration, continuing calibration, instrument controls and process controls where
applicable, with the following exceptions.
Preparation Information
Homogenous Matrix
Sample had light sandy sediment and a sulfur odor. 1205096975 (Non SDG 578558001DUP), 1205096976 (Non
SDG 578558001MS) and 1205096977 (Non SDG 578558001MSD).
Quality Control (OC) Information
Matrix Spike (MS) Recovery
Matrix spike (See Below) recovery requirement not met due to the matrix of the sample.
Sample Analyte Value
1205096976 (Non SDG 578558001MS) Gross Radium Alpha 51.3* (75%-125%)
Matrix Spike Duplicate (See Below) recovery requirement not met due to the matrix of the sample.
Sample Analyte Value
1205096977 (Non SDG 578558001MSD) Gross Radium Alpha 58.8* (75%-125%)
Page 9 of 17 SDG: 580063
Miscellaneous Information
Additional Comments
The matrix spike and matrix spike duplicate, 1205096976 (Non SDG 578558001MS) and 1205096977 (Non
SDG 578558001MSD), aliquots were reduced to conserve sample volume.
Certification Statement
Where the analytical method has been performed under NELAP certification, the analysis has met all of the
requirements of the NELAC standard unless otherwise noted in the analytical case narrative.
Page 10 of 17 SDG: 580063
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
Qualifier Definition Report
for
DNMIO0l Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
Client SDG: 580063 GEL Work Order: 580063
The Qualifiers in this report are defined as follows:
* A quality control analyte recovery is outside of specified acceptance criteria
** Analyte is a surrogate compound
U Analyte was analyzed for, but not detected above the CRDL.
ReviewN alidation
GEL requires all analytical data to be verified by a qualified data reviewer. In addition, all CLP-like deliverables
receive a third level review of the fractional data package.
The following data validator verified the information presented in this data report:
Signature: j~ ~ Name: Theresa Austin
Date: 14 JUN 2022 Title: Group Leader
Page 11 of 17 SDG: 580063
C
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
QC Summary
Energy Fuels Resources (USA), Inc.
6425 S. Highway 191
Blanding, Utah
:::ontact: Mr. Garrin Palmer
Norkorder: 580063
'a rmname
~dGas Flow
,atch 2268525
QC1205096975 578558001 DUP
}ross Radium Alpha
QC1205096978 LCS
}ross Radium Alpha
QC1205096974 MB
}ross Radium Alpha
QCI205096976 578558001 MS
}ross Radium Alpha
QCI205096977 578558001 MSD
}ross Radium Alpha
Notes:
OM
Uncertainty
522
Uncertainty
Uncertainty
2150
Uncertainty
2070
Uncertainty
2.05 U
+/-0.439
2.05
+/-0.439
2.05
+/-0.439
u
Counting Uncertainty is calculated at the 68% confidence level (I-sigma).
The Qualifiers in this report arc defined as follows:
**
<
>
Analyte is a surrogate compound
Result is less than value reported
Result is greater than value reported
The TIC is a suspected aldol-condensation product
C
0.952
+/-0.287
407
+/-5.60
-0.151
+/-0.0878
1100
+/-18.3
1220
+/-19.1
Units
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
RPO%
73.3
10.2
A
B
BD
C
D
F
H
K
L
For General Chemistry and Organic analysis the target analyte was detected in the associated blank.
Results arc either below the MDC or tracer recovery is low
Analyte has been confirmed by GC/MS analysis
Results are reported from a diluted aliquot of the sample
Estimated Value
Analytical holding time was exceeded
Analyte present. Reported value may be biased high. Actual value is expected to be lower.
Analyte present. Reported value may be biased low. Actual value is expected to be higher.
M M if above MDC and less than LLD
M Matrix Related Failure
age 16 of 17 SDG: 5 80063
Reoort Date: June 14, 2022
Page 1 of
REC% Ran e Anlst Date Tinu
(0% -100%) JXC9 05/24/22 13:
78.1 (75%-125%) 05/24/22 13::
05/24/22 13:.
51.3* (75%-125%) 05/24/22 13:.
58.8* (0%-20%) 05/24/22 13:"
GEL LABORATORIES LLC
2040 Savage Road Charleston, SC 29407 -[phone] -www.gel.com
QC Summary
Norkorder: 580063
'armname NOM Units RPD% REC% Ran e Anlst
NI A RPD or %Recovery limits do not apply.
Nl
ND
NJ
Q
R
u
UI
UJ
UL
X
y
I\
h
See case narrative
Analyte concentration is not detected above the detection limit
Consult Case Narrative, Data Summary package, or Project Manager concerning this qualifier
One or more quality control criteria have not been met. Refer to the applicable narrative or DER.
Sample results are rejected
Analyte was analyzed for, but not detected above the CRDL.
Gamma Spectroscopy--Uncertain identification
Gamma Spectroscopy--Uncertain identification
Not considered detected. The associated number is the reported concentration, which may be inaccurate due to a low bias.
Consult Case Narrative, Data Summary package, or Project Manager concerning this qualifier
QC Samples were not spiked with this compound
RPD of sample and duplicate evaluated using +I-RL. Concentrations are <5X the RL. Qualifier Not Applicable for Radiochemistry.
Preparation or preservation holding time was exceeded
Page 2 of
Date Timt
NI A indicates that spike recovery limits do not apply when sample concentration exceeds spike cone. by a factor of 4 or more or %RPO not applicable.
" The Relative Percent Difference (RPD) obtained from the sample duplicate (DUP) is evaluated against the acceptance criteria when the sample is greater than
five times (5X) the contract required detection limit (RL). In cases where the duplicate value is less than 5X the RL, a control limit of +I-the RL is used to
evaluate the DUP result.
* Indicates that a Quality Control parameter was not within specifications.
For PS, PSD, and SDIL T results, the values listed are the measured amounts, not final concentrations.
Where the analytical method has been performed under NELAP certification, the analysis has met all of the
requirements of the NELAC standard unless qualified on the QC Summary.
Page 17 of 17 SDG: 580063
TabE
Quality Assurance and Data Validation Tables
Table E-1 Holding Time Evaluation
Cottonwood Entrance Back Spring West Water Required Holding Time Spring Seep (duplicate of Ruin Spring Seep Ruin Spring)
Carbonate 14 days OK OK OK OK OK
Bicarbonate 14 days OK OK OK OK OK
Calcium 6 months OK OK OK OK OK
Chloride 28 days OK OK OK OK OK
Fluoride 28 days OK OK OK OK OK
Magnesium 6 months OK OK OK OK OK
Nitrogen-Ammonia 28 days OK OK OK OK OK
Nitrogen-Nitrate 28 days OK OK OK OK OK
Potassium 6 months OK OK OK OK OK
Sodium 6 months OK OK OK OK OK
Sulfate 28 days OK OK OK OK OK
pH (s.u.) NIA OK OK OK OK OK
TDS 7 days OK OK OK OK OK
6 months ( except
mercury which is 28
Metals days) OK OK OK OK OK
Radiologies 6 months OK OK OK OK OK
VOCS (including THF) 14 days OK OK OK OK OK
* -Corral Spring, and Corral Canyon were all dry and no samples were collected.
E-2 Laboratory Receipt Temperature Check
Work Order Number/Lab Set ID It.eceipt Temp
CTF -22El012 2.1°c
CTF -22C2426 2.6°C
GEL-575649 NIA
GEL-580063 NIA
NI A = These shipments contained samples for the
analysis of Gross Alpha only. Per Table I in the
approved QAP, samples submitted for Gross Alpha
analyses do not have a sample temperature requirement.
E-3: Analytical Method Check -Routine Samples
Parameter QAP/Permit Method Method Used by Lab
Ammonia ( as N) A4500-NH3 G or E350.l A4500-NH3 H
Nitrate+ Nitrite (as N) E 353.1 or E353.2 E353.2
Metals E 200.7 or E200.8 E200.7, E200.8
Mercury E200.7 orE200.8 orE245.l E245.l
Gross Alpha E900.0 or E900.l or E903.0 E903.0
voes SW8260B or SW8260C or SW8260D SW8260B/C, SW8260D
Chloride A4500-Cl B, A4500-Cl E, or E300.0 E300.0
Fluoride A4500-F C or E300.0 E300.0
Sulfate A4500-SO4 E or E300.0 E300.0
TDS A2540C A2540C
Carbonate as CO3, Bicarbonate as HCO3 A2320B A2320B
Calcium, Magnesium, Potassium, Sodium E200.7 E200.7
E-4 Reporting Limit Evaluation
Parameter Permit-Specified RL
Ammonia ( as N) 25 mg/L
Nitrate+ Nitrite (as N) 10 mg/L
Metals ug/L
Arsenic 50
Berylliwn 4
Cadmiwn 5
Chromium 100
Cobalt 730
Copper 1300
Iron 11000
Lead 15
Manganese 800
Mercury 2
Molybdenum 40
Nickel 100
Selenium 50
Silver 100
Thalliwn 2
Tin 17000
Uraniwn 30
Vanadium 60
Zinc 5000
Gross Alpha 15
voes ug/L
Acetone 700
Benzene 5
Carbon tetrachloride 5
Chloroform 70
Chloromethane 30
MEK 4000
Methylene Chloride 5
Naphthalene 100
Tetrahydrofuran 46
Toluene 1000
Xylenes 10000
Major Ions mg/L
Chloride I
Fluoride 4
Sulfate 1
TDS 10
Carbonate as CO3, Bicarbonate as HCO3 Not Specified
Calcium, Magnesium, Potassium, Sodium Not Specified
All analyses were reported to the required RLs unless noted in the text.
E-5: Trip Blank Evaluation
Blank Sample Date Analyte Result (ug/L)
Acetone ND
Benzene ND
Carbon tetrachloride ND
Chloroform ND
Chloromethane ND
22C2426 3/28/2022 Methylene chloride ND
Methyl Ethyl Ketone ND
Naphthalene ND
Tetrahydrofuran ND
Toluene ND
Xylenes, Total ND
Acetone ND
Benzene ND
Carbon tetrachloride ND
Chloroform ND
Chloromethane ND
22El012 5/11/2022 Methylene chloride ND
Methyl Ethyl Ketone ND
Naphthalene ND
Tetrahydrofuran ND
Toluene ND
Xylenes, Total ND
E-6 Duplicate Sample Relative Percent Difference
Back Spring
Major Ions (mg/I) Ruin Spring (Duplicate of Ruin RPD%
Spring)
Carbonate <1.0 <1.0 N/C
Bicarbonate 185 184 0.5
Calcium 141 141 0.0
Chloride 28.4 28.5 0.4
Fluoride 0.5 0.5 0.0
Magnesium 32.9 32.9 0.0
Nitrogen-Ammonia 0.2 <0.2 N/C
Nitrogen-Nitrate 1.2 1.2 0.0
Potassium 3.2 3.2 0.0
Sodium 117 117 0.0
Sulfate 595 565 5.2
TDS 992 1030 3.8
Metals (ug/1)
Arsenic <0.5 <0.5 N/C
Beryllium <0.5 <0.5 N/C
Cadmium <0.2 <0.2 N/C
Chromium 4.2 4.3 2.4
Cobalt <0.5 <0.5 N/C
Copper <1.0 <1.0 N/C
Iron <20 <20 N/C
Lead <0.5 <0.5 N/C
Manganese <0.5 <0.5 N/C
Mercury <0.2 <0.2 N/C
Molybdenum 17.7 17.7 0.0
Nickel 0.6 0.5 18.2
Selenium 11.7 11.7 0.0
Silver <0.5 <0.5 N/C
Thallium <0.2 <0.2 N/C
Tin <20 <20 N/C
Uranium 9.1 9.0 I.I
Vanadium 1.3 1.4 7.4
Zinc <10 <10 N/C
Radiologies (pCi/1)
Gross Alpha <1.00 <1.00 N/C
voes (ug/L)
Acetone <10 <10 N/C
Benzene <1.0 <1.0 N/C
Carbon tetrachloride <1.0 <1.0 N/C
Chloroform <1.0 <1.0 N/C
Chloromethane <1.0 <1.0 N/C
MEK <10 <10 N/C
Methylene Chloride <2.0 <2.0 N/C
E-6 Duplicate Sample Relative Percent Difference
'
Back Spring
Major Ions (mg/I) Ruin Spring (Duplicate or Ruin RPO¾
Spring)
Naphthalene <1.0 <1.0 N/C
Tetrahydrofuran <1.0 <1.0 N/C
Toluene <1.0 <1.0 N/C
Xyleyies <1.0 <1.0 N/C
NIC = Not Calculated
E-7 Radiologies Counting Error
Gross Alpha Counting
Gross Alpha minusRn&U Error $ Witlun
Sample ID minusRn&U Precision(±) 20% GWQS GWQS?
Cottonwood
Spring <1.0 0.212 NIA 15 NIA
Entrance Seep <1.0 0.275 NIA 15 NIA
Back Spring
( duplicate of
Cottonwodd
Spring) <1.0 0.198 NIA 15 NIA
Ruin Spring <1.0 0.178 NIA 15 NIA
Westwater Seep <1.0 0.109 NIA 15 NIA
NIA -The sample results are non-detect and the QAP required checks are not applicable.
E-8: Laboratory Matrix QC
Matrix Spike % Recovery Comparison
MSD REC RPO
Lab Report Well Analyte MS%REC %REC Range RPO LIMIT
22El012 NA Chloride* 66.8 97.3 80-120 4.86 20
Calcium* NC NC 70-130 NC 20
Manganese* NC ** 70-130 ** **
Zinc 157 ** 70-130 ** **
Acetone 64.7 68.1 70-130 5.14 20 22El012 Entrance Spring Chloroform 53.9 57.5 70-130 6.46 20
Chloromethane 38.3 39.9 70-130 4.09 20
Methylene Chloride 55.7 59.9 70-130 7.27 20
Naphthalene 63.7 72.3 70-130 12.6 20
22C2426 Westwater Spring Fluoride 142 143 80-120 0.391 20
580063 NA Gross Alpha 51.3 58.8 75-125 10.2 20
* Recovery was not calculated as the analyte level in the sample was greater than 4 times the spike amount
"'* CTF routine QC does not include a MOS for metals analyzed by 200.8. Precision is determined by other QC samples as
allowable by the analytical method.
NA= QC was not performed on an EFRI sample.
Laboratory Duplicate % Recovery Comparison
All Laboratory Duplicate Recoveries were within the laboratory established acceptance limits.
Laboratory Control Sample
Lab Report Analyte LCS%REC REC Range
Cb loromethane 76.7 80-120 22C2426 TDS 80 90-110
Surrogate % Recovery
All surrogate recoveries were within the laboratory established acceptance limits.
Method/Laboratory Reagent Blank detections
All method blank results were within the laboratory established acceptance limits.
TabF
CSV Transmittal
Kathy Weinel
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Dear Mr. Goble,
Kathy Weinel
Monday, February 20, 2023 12:21 PM
Phillip Goble
'Dean Henderson'; David Frydenlund; Garrin Palmer; Logan Shumway; Scott Bakken;
Jordan Christine App; John Uhrie PE PhD
Transmittal of CSV Files White Mesa Mill 2022 Annual Seeps and Springs Monitoring
22(2426 FINAL EnergyFuels-Client 18 Apr 22 1600.csv; 22E1012 FINAL EnergyFuels-
Client 03 Jun 22 1037.csv; 575649.csv; 580063.csv
Attached to this e-mail are the electronic copies of laboratory results for the annual seeps and springs monitoring
conducted at the White Mesa Mill during 2022, in Comma Separated Value (CSV) format.
Please contact me at 303-389-4134 if you have any questions on this transmittal.
Yours Truly
Kathy Weinel
i!F •o:::it""n < Energy Fuels Resources (USA) Inc.
Kathy Weinel
Director, Regulatory Compliance
t:303.389.4134I c: I t:303.389.4125
[e-mail]
225 Union Blvd., Suite 600
Lakewood, CO 80228
http://www.energyfuels.com
This e-mail is intended for the exclusive use of person(s) mentioned as the recipient(s). This message and any attached files with it are confidential and may
contain privileged or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient(s) please delete this message and notify the sender. You may not use, distribute
print or copy this message if you are not the intended recipient(s).
1