RI i

TINTO Rio Tinto America, Inc.Kennecott Uranium Company42 Miles NW of Rawlins, P.O. Box 1500Rawlins; Wyoming 823341500TEL: 1-307-328-1476, 1-307-324-4924FAX: 1-307-324-4925

3 November 2009

Mr. Keith McConnell, Deputy DirectorDecommissioning and Uranium Recovery Licensing DirectorateU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionMail Stop T-7E 18Washington, DC 20555-0001

Dear Mr. McConnell:

Subject: Docket Number: 040-08584 - Source Material License SUA-1350License Condition 9.7 - Revised Surety Submittal/Five (5) Year Rebaselining

Enclosed please find the revised 2009 Surety Rebaselining Report for the Sweetwater UraniumProject, Source Material License SUA-1350. An annual surety update is required by License on orbefore July 30 of each year (three (3) months prior to the anniversary date (October 30) of theapproved surety arrangement) pursuant to License Condition 9.7. In addition, every five (5) years thesurety must be rebaselined to current costs.

An original surety rebaselining report was submitted under cover of letter dated July 28, 2009. Thisreport was reviewed and a Request for Additional Information (RAI) was sent dated Friday, October16, 2009 regarding this submittal. In response to this request and in response to the conference callwith James Webb of your staff on Wednesday, October 14, 2009, enclosed please find a revised 2009Surety Rebaselining Report that rebaselines the site's surety to current costs and includes the revisionsrequested by James Webb. The new proposed surety amount is $10,113,000.00 rounded to the nearest$1,000. The facility remains on standby. Its operational status has not changed since the previoussurety submittal dated July 23, 2008. In addition, the facility's operating status has not changed sincethe last surety rebaselining submitted on May 25, 2004.

If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.

S'c pelay urr

car PaulsonFacility Supervisor

cc: James Webb (2 copies)Director, DMSS, Region IV w/o enc.Manuel Perez-Palacios, Rio Tinto TreasuryJack Welch, Rio Tinto Shared Services w/o enc.Rich Atkinson

" Akbc* Kent Bruxvoort* Consulting Engineers

* 2009 SURETY REBASELINING REPORT* RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL* INFORMATION (RAI) DATED OCTOBER 16, 2009

* For:

* SWEETWATER URANIUM FACILITY

* SUA-13500 SWEETWATER COUNTY, WYOMING

* KENNECOTT URANIUM COMPANY* P.O. Box 1500* Rawlins, Wyoming 82301

* By:

* KBC ENGINEERS* P.O. Box 273477* FORT COLLINS, CO 80528

* OCTOBER 21,2009

* P.O. Box 273477, Fort Cottins, CO 80527 9 office: 970.416.8382 •cetl: 970.219-2832

* TABLE OF CONTENTS

S2009 SURETY REBASELIN IN G REPO RT ....................................................................Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................................................. 2

* R.0 Response to the RAI Dated O ctober 16, 2009 .................................................................................................... 3S1.0 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................... 5

2.0 Cost Estimate Description ................................................................................................................................................ 62.1 Mill Area Decom m issioning ....................................................................................................................... 72.2 Cleanup of Contam inated Soils ...................................................................................................... 72.3 Ground W ater Remediation ..................................................................................................................... 82.4 Existing Im poundment Reclamation .................................................................................................... 92.5 Radiological Survey and Monitoring ..................................................................................................... 92.6 Project Management & Mobilization/Demobilization ........................................................................... 9

* 2.7 Contingency ............................................................................................................................................... 92.8 Long-Term Surveillance Fee .................................................... 10

* 3.0 Surety Sum mary, 2009 .................................................................................................................................... ................. 10S4.0 References ........................................................................................................................................................................... I

0

S

~Page 2

~1012112009

* R.0 RESPONSE TO THE RAI DATED OCTOBER 16,,2009

* The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) sent on October 16, 2009 to the licensee ofKennecott Uranium Company's Sweetwater Uranium Facility, Source Material License SUA-

* 1350, a Request for Additional Information (RAI) regarding the 2009 Surety RebaseliningReport dated July 28, 2009. Below are responses to the RAI, and in this revised report is theentirety of the 2009 Rebaselining Report pursuant to the responses. Below are the NRC's

• requests for additional information in bold font, and our responses follow immediately in italics.

0 I. The 2009 Surety Rebaselining Report, Appendix A, makes several referencesto Guideline No. 12, Standard Reclamation Performance Bond Format and

0 Cost Calculation Method Wyoming DEQ 10/2005. NRC staff notes that the* October 2005 version of Guideline 12 is not current. Please revise the surety• estimates to current dollars using the most current version of Guideline No.

12 or other current industry unit cost information.• All unit costs in this revised 2009 Surety Rebaselining Report which derived from the Wyoming• DEQ's Guideline 12 have been revised to reflect the most current version of the Guideline, dated* September 2008.

2. The 2009 Surety Rebaselining Report, Appendix A, makes several referencesto unit costs derived from the 2006/2007 soil cleanup in the catchment basin

* area. NRC staff notes that the 2006/2007 soil cleanup cost information is not* current. Please adjust the surety estimate to current dollars.• All unit costs in this revised 2009 Surety Rebaselining Report which derived from the unit costs

experienced during the 2006/2007 soil cleanup in the catchment basin area have been updated to* current costs. The April 2006 value of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) - All Urban Consumers was* at 201.5; the April 2009 CPI value was 213.240, an increase of 5.8%.• 3. NRC staff noted that the 2009 Surety Rebaselining Report, Appendix A, by

KBC Engineers did not include the cost estimate for chemical disposal. Costestimates for chemical disposal were included in the 2004 surety submittal.

* Please include the cost estimates for the chemical disposal in the 2009 surety* submittal or provide justification for not including it in the 2009 surety

submittal.A line item for what was termed "chemical disposal" in the 2004 surety submittal has been added

• in the Mill Area Decommissioning component of this cost estimate; this line item corresponds to• disposal of the Ion Exchange (I-X) resin and tank, currently stored at the facility, into the tailings* impoundment.

4. NRC staff observed that cost estimates in Appendix A of the 2009 SuretyRebaselining Report for the Existing Impoundment Reclamation (Sections A,

* D, and E), and the Radiological Survey and Monitoring (All Sections) did not• provide references for some of the unit costs. NRC staff could not

satisfactorily determine if the unit costs were adequate. Please provide areference for the unit costs.

* Each of the unit costs used in the revised estimate herein has been referenced to footnotes at the* bottom of each spreadsheet provided in Appendix A so that the source for each unit cost can be* cdearly identified.

0Page 310/21/2009

* 5. Please identify the final disposition of the major equipment, structures, and* concrete discussed in Appendix A, for the Mill Area Decommissioning.

Discussion has been added in Section 3.0 of this resubmitted 2009 Surety Rebaselining Report tomake clear the disposition of the major equipment, structures, and concrete from the mill area

* decommissioning, which as II e.(2) material will be placed within the tailings impoundment..

0

00000000000

0

000000000000000 Page 4

1 0/21/2009

0

* 1.0 INTRODUCTION

* KBC Engineers has prepared this update of the cost estimate on which the surety is based forKennecott Uranium Company's Sweetwater Uranium Facility, Source Material License SUA-

* 1350. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requires that sureties be rebaselined tocurrent costs every 5 years. This 2009 surety cost estimate is a rebaseline of the 2004 estimate

• prepared by MFG, Inc., "Sweetwater Uranium Project, 2004 Surety Update, July 2004."

Costs are estimated based upon third party costs to reclaim, remediate, and decommission* facilities and lands affected by past project operations. The cost estimate was prepared in* accordance with NUREG- 1620 - Standard Review Plan for the Review of a Reclamation Plan for Mill* Tailings Sites Under Title II of the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act, and in accordance with

approved reclamation and decommissioning plans.

* The attached Figure I depicts site facilities within the NRC restricted area boundary, and Figure* 2 depicts the tailings impoundment based on a December 2008 survey of the tailings surface.

• From December 2005 through November 2007 contaminated soils from beneath the• Sweetwater catchment basin were removed and placed in the tailings impoundment. Unit costs* from this effort were used where possible because they provide the best recent, local estimate

of applicable construction costs. Each of these unit costs were adjusted to current values basedon the ratio of the CPI-AII Urban Consumers in April 2009 to the CPI in April 2006.

0

0

~Page 5

~1012112009

S

* 400' 0 400'

SCALE: I" = 400'

I" I J

S r I!ANK ,-

• V-" .9'-- ....

SI M'MI'LL AE

-TNKAIMI

(INMN

FIUR SWETAERU

M L AE

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

400' 0 40

SCALE: I" = 400'

0

I:QU(P .

2-4

I

1 -1.

43

0

S

0

S

S

0

0

0

2.0 COST ESTIMATE DESCRIPTION

Reclamation and decommissioning costs for the facility were estimated based on plansapproved by the NRC and were prepared for the following items:

1.0 Mill Area Decommissioning2.0 Cleanup of Contaminated Soils3.0 Ground Water Remediation4.0 Existing Impoundment Reclamation5.0 Radiological Survey and Monitoring6.0 Project Management & Mobilization/Demobilization7.0 Contingency8.0 Long-Term Surveillance Fee

Unless stated otherwise, approved reclamation and decommissioning plans were thoseprepared by Shepherd Miller, Inc., as part of the Final Design for the mill and tailings facilities,prepared from July 1, 1997 through March 1, 1999. All soils, equipment, concrete andstructures removed during the process of decommissioning and reclamation of the site, asI I e.(2) material, will be placed in the tailings impoundment.

For all unit costs, labor and equipment overhead, as well as contractor profit, were included.Unit costs taken from external sources such as RS Means Cost Data or Wyoming Departmentof Environmental Quality Guideline No. 12, "Standardized Reclamation Performance Bond Formatand Cost Calculation Methods" were selected such that overhead and contractor profit wereincluded. A line item (Item 6.0 above) for project management by a third party and formobilization and demobilization was provided with the cost estimate. Project management wasestimated at 3 percent of the subtotal of reclamation and decommissioning costs, andmobilization and demobilization was estimated at 3.5 percent of the subtotal of reclamation anddecommissioning costs, as described in Section 2.6 below.

Table I. Key Unit Costs Used in the 2009 Rebaselining of the Surety.Item Description Unit Cost DiscussionExcavate, haul & place topsoil; $3.17/cy Loader and truck operationsoil excavation and placement 2006/2007 Catchment Basin ExcavationSoil excavation and placement $ I .1 0/cy Scraper operation, flat, 1000' haul

WDEQ Guideline No. 12Revegetation $794/acre 2006/2007Catchment Basin ExcavationBuilding demolition $0.3 I/cf RS Means, includes O&P, steel building, on a

total building volume basisConcrete demolition $4.30/sf WDEQ Guideline No. 12, with 10% profitRadiological verification survey $1150/acre MFG, 2004, plus inflation

Detailed calculations of the estimated cost to reclaim and decommission the facility arepresented in spreadsheet form in Appendix A. Specific backup material for the unit costs isprovided in Appendix B.

Page 610/21/2009

0

* 2.1 MILL AREA DECOMMISSIONING

Costs for decommissioning the mill area were estimated for each of the buildings located within• the NRC restricted area boundary, including the mill, solvent extraction (S/X) building, main* shop, tire and lube building, administration building, external tanks, and miscellaneous buildings.* Dismantling costs for mill and S/X equipment were determined based on level-of-effort

estimates for crews to dismantle and demolish the various pieces of equipment, using RS MeansHeavy Construction Cost Data (2009) data for labor crews. Building demolition costs were also

* derived from RS Means, which are provided on a cubic foot basis for the total building volume.* The per cubic foot cost applied to each structure was multiplied by a constant to account for

the level of effort required to demolish internal walls within each building, and was adjustedusing the Rawlins, Wyoming Location Factor. For example,. the unit cost for demolishing the

* S/X building ($0.31 per cubic foot for steel buildings), with very few internal walls, and after* equipment is removed, was multiplied by 0.5 to account for the lack of walls and by the 0.826

Location Factor. Engineering drawings of the various buildings were examined for accuratevolume estimation. All equipment, structures and concrete from the mill area decommissioning

* effort, as I I e.(2) material, will be placed within the tailings impoundment.

* Unit costs for removal and disposal of concrete pads for each building were derived from theWDEQ Guideline No. 12. Unit costs provided in Guideline No. 12 do not include contractorprofit and were therefore increased by 10 percent.

* 2.2 CLEANUP OF CONTAMINATED SOILS

The cost for cleanup of contaminated soils was estimated for anticipated contamination in the• vicinity of the mill as well as for wind-blown tailings. The site operated during the early 1980s• with mill and S/X process fluids pumped to a catchment basin that was constructed per design

with concrete side slopes and an unlined bottom. Consequently, seepage from the catchmentbasin containing hydrocarbons and radionuclides contaminated the unsaturated soils, perchedon clay layers, and contaminated the upper 50 feet of the Battle Spring Aquifer in the vicinity of

* the catchment basin. The perched zones were dewatered and up to approximately 50 feet of* unsaturated soils were excavated. A total of about 233,000 cubic yards of soil were placed in

the tailings impoundment. Excavation commenced in late 2005 and placement of backfill soilsfrom the ore pad, placement of topsoil, and revegetation were completed in November 2007.

• Seepage along the west wall of the excavation, near the clarifier, clarified solution, and raffinatetanks, was detected, indicating contamination west of the limits of excavation. However, theextent of such contamination will not be known until the mill, tank slab, and S/X buildings are

* decommissioned. A curtain wall of synthetic liner material was installed to limit the potential* for the seepage fluids to reenter the backfill soils of the catchment basin excavation.

The Catchment Basin Excavation Completion Report was submitted to the NRC on May 6,0 2008. Comments were received dated November 19, 2008 and a response to those* comments, including RESRAD modeling results, was submitted on January 27, 2009.* Radiological verification sampling indicated that the catchment basin contamination has been

*Page 7* 10/21/2009

* cleaned up, in the area that could be safely excavated without removal of, or damage to, the• mill and S/X buildings. Additionally, the Completion Report and the Response to the Request

for Additional Information have been submitted to the NRC. Thus, for the purposes ofestablishing the surety amount for the facility, this contaminated soils cleanup effort is assumed

• to be completed. The costs for the catchment basin excavation were itemized in the back-up• calculations for the surety cost estimate for reference purposes, but a line item amount of $0• for this task was listed in the cost summary.

* Costs were estimated for cleanup of contaminated soils beneath the mill and S/X buildings• originating from the catchment basin, which was evidenced by the seepage in the west wall of* the catchment basin excavation. These costs were estimated based on the assumption that the

depth of contamination would be the same as for the catchment basin excavation.Furthermore, the lateral extent of the contamination west of the catchment basin excavation

• was assumed to be roughly the same as observed within the catchment basin excavation.* Movement of fluids containing hydrocarbons and radionuclides within the unsaturated soils

below the catchment basin was assumed to be primarily downward, driven by gravity. Hence,the extent of westward contamination was estimated by assuming a symmetrical shape for theultimate contamination zone, using the location of the catchment' basin and the general shape of

• the catchment basin excavation pit as a guide.

The extent of windblown tailings around the existing tailings impoundment was estimated in the•1997 pre-scoping survey, in which a total of 88 acres were identified as potentially being

* contaminated (Shepherd Miller, Inc., Volume VI, Part 2, 1998). It was assumed that 6" of soilwould be removed over these 88 acres, and that 12" of topsoil would be placed.

2.3 GROUND WATER REMEDIATION

• Approved ground water remediation at the site is through the project's Corrective ActionProgram, defined in its NRC license. Seven pumpback wells in the vicinity of the tailingsimpoundment (TMWs 7, 17, 18, 57, 58, 59, 75 and 96) are used to pump ground water intoevaporation lagoons within the tailings impoundment. Four wells are point of compliance wells

* (TMWs 15, 16, 17 and 18), and 35 other monitoring wells are also sampled. For purposes of• this surety calculation, we assumed that the 7 pumpback wells would continue to operate, and

would be sampled quarterly. Additionally, 14 monitoring wells in the vicinity of the catchmentbasin (two of which, TMWs 96 and 97, are pumpback wells assumed to continue to operate)

* would continue to be sampled quarterly for hydrocarbons and three metals, per License• Condition II .3.1

Telesto Solutions, Inc. in 2009 completed a study entitled "Ground Water Plume• Interpretation," in which it concluded that the concentrations of several metals and* radionuclides in monitoring wells were not decreasing. Telesto suggested that this may be due

to a slow back-diffusion of chemical mass from near-stagnant zones within the aquifer intomore permeable zones and/or to a slow continuing contribution of chemical mass fromperched areas above the aquifer. Hence, Telesto concluded that'the time the ground water

* pumping program will likely need to continue for longer than the 10 years assumed by MFG in* the 2004 rebaselining. Based on Telesto's conclusion, this cost estimate was prepared based on

Page 810/21/2009

0 an assumed 20-year remediation program. The cost of the program was calculated to be the• present value of an annuity in which the interest rate equals a conservative investment rate• minus inflation, which was assumed to be 3.0 percent. It was assumed that pumps and wells will

be maintained annually and that pumps will be replaced periodically.

* 2.4 EXISTING IMPOUNDMENT RECLAMATION

Tailings within the existing impoundment were regraded during 2007 and 2008 in an effort toprepare the impoundment for future reclamation or reuse and to create a more level surface

* for construction of evaporation lagoons. The attached Figure 2 depicts the contours of this* surface as of December 2008. As a consequence no additional tailings regrading is required

within the impoundment. Furthermore, it is anticipated that soil removed during windblowntailings and mill area soil cleanup will be placed in the impoundment. Reclamation of the

* existing impoundment will consist of completion of dewatering, covering the tailings surface• with embankment soil to a level close to the natural pre-construction ground surface, placing

topsoil, revegetating, and monitoring for radon emanation and settlement.

* 2.5 RADIOLOGICAL SURVEY AND MONITORING

* The costs for soil analysis for radionuclide concentrations were estimated based on publishedcost data for a local laboratory (Energy Labs, 2009). The methods used to clean up windblown

0 tailings and to perform radiological verification were taken from Shepherd Miller's "Final Design0 - Volume VI, Part 2 - Mill Decommissioning Addendum to the Existing Impoundment

Reclamation Plans." It was assumed that 240 acres would be tested during a scoping survey forsoil contamination, 16 of which would be located in the mill vicinity; that 160 acres would beidentified as primary or secondary areas as defined by Shepherd Miller; that 88 acres would be

• identified as primary area; and that 90% of the primary area would be defined as "PI", as* defined by Shepherd Miller, and that 10% of the primary area would be defined as "P2." In* 2004, MFG, Inc. estimated verification costs with GPS technology at about $1,000 per acre.

This unit cost was assumed for this cost estimate to have increased at a rate about equivalent• to inflation.

* 2.6 PROJECT MANAGEMENT & MOBILIZATION/DEMOBILIZATION

Mobilization and demobilization of equipment was assumed to be 3.5 percent of the subtotal of* reclamation costs for Items 1.0 through 5.0 listed above. This is based on the contracted terms• of the 2006/2007 catchment basin soil cleanup effort at Sweetwater. Project management was

assumed to be 3 percent of the subtotal of reclamation costs, based on direction within WDEQGuideline No. 12.

• 2.7 CONTINGENCY

The subtotal for reclamation costs for Items 1.0 through 5.0 was increased by a contingency• factor of I5%.

Page 9*10/21/2009

2.8 LONG-TERM SURVEILLANCE FEE

0S

0

000

The Long-Term Surveillance Fee was estimated, based on email correspondence dated July 16,2009 with James Webb of the NRC, from the Bureau of Labor Statistic's inflation calculator tobe $827,043.7 1.

3.0 SURETY SUMMARY, 2009

The cost estimate, totaled at $10, I 13,000, detailed in Appendix A, and described above, islisted by line item in Table 2.

Table 2. Cost, Estimate Summary for 2009 Surety RebaseliningDescription Sub-Item Cost Item Cost

1.0 Mill Area DecommissioningEquipment Demolition $280,479Structure Demolition 778,031Concrete Disposal 599,670Re-vegetation 14,768 $1,672,948

2.0 Cleanup of Contaminated SoilsMill Area $1,765,054Tailings Area 744,955 $2,510,009

3.0 Ground Water Remediation $796,8574.0 Existing Impoundment Reclamation

Dewatering $77,215Earthwork 1,899,110Revegetation 65,902NESHAP Analysis 11,600Settlement Monitoring 29,700 $2,083,527

5.0 Radiological Survey and MonitoringSoil Sampling $204,000Decommissioning Equipment 10,100Gamma Survey 353,400Environmental Monitoring 7,460Personnel Monitoring 4,180 $579,140

Subtotal $7,642,4816.0 Project Mgmt & Mob/Demob (6.5%) $496,7617.0 Contingency (15%) $1,146,3728.0 Long-Term Surveillance Fee $827,044

Total (rounded to nearest $1000) $10,113,000

Page 1010/21/2009

* 4.0 REFERENCES

Energy Labs, 2009. www.energylab.com.

* Kennecott Uranium Company, License Number SUA- 1350, "U.S. Nuclear RegulatoryCommission Materials License, Amendment 26."

Kennecott Uranium Company, May 6, 2008. "Sweetwater Uranium Project, Catchment Basin* Excavation Completion Report, Volume I of I1."

• MFG, Inc., 2004. "Sweetwater Uranium Project, 2004 Surety Update," July 2004, Revision 2.

• RS Means, 2009. "Heavy Construction Cost Data, 2 3 rd Annual Edition." RS Means Company,• Inc., Kingston, Massachusetts.

Shepherd Miller, Inc., 1997. "Final Design Volume VI, Existing Impoundment Reclamation Plan,"August 26, 1997.

* Shepherd Miller, Inc., 1998. "Final Design Volume VI, Part 2, Mill DecommissioningAmendment to the Existing Impoundment Reclamation Plan," June 9, 1998.

• Shepherd Miller, Inc., 1999. "Final Design Volume VIII, Response Report to the Request for* Additional Information Dated December 3, 1998," February 3, 1999.

• Shepherd Miller, Inc., 1999. "Final Design Volume IX, Second Response Report," March I,1999.

* Telesto Solutions, Inc. 2009. "Final Ground Water Plume Interpretation, Sweetwater Uranium• Facility," February 2009.

* U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statisics, 2009.* www.bls.gov/data/inflationcalculator.htm

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1978. "NUREG- 1620 - Standard Review Plan for the* Review of a Reclamation Plan for Mill Tailings Sites Under Title II of the Uranium Mill* Tailings Radiation Control Act."

Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, September, 2008. "Guideline No. 12,Standardized Reclamation Performance Bond Format and Cost Calculation Methods."

SPage 1110/21/2009

00S

SS00SSSSSSSSSSS* APPENDIX A* Cost EstimateS0SS0SSSSSSS0S0SSSSSS

Sweetwater Uranium Project SUA-1 350 2009 Surety Rebaselining

00S

S0

000

0000

0

0

0S0

0

0

COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY

F Description Subitem Cost Item Cost Total Cost

1.0 Mill Area DecommissioningA. Equipment DemolitionB. Structure DemolitionC. Concrete DisposalD. Revegetation

2.0 Cleanup of Contaminated SoilsA. Mill AreaB. Tailings Area

3.0 Ground Water Remediation

4.0 Existing Impoundment ReclamationA. DewateringB. EarthworkC. RevegetationD. NESHAP AnalysisE. Settlement Monitoring

5.0 Radiological Survey and MonitoringA. Soil SamplingB. Decommissioning EquipmentC. Gamma Survey - VerificationD. Environmental MonitoringE. Personnel Monitoring

$280,479778,031599,67014,768

$1,765,054744,955

$796,857

$77,2151,899,110

65,90211,60029,700

$204,00010,100

353,4007,4604,180

$1,672,948

$2,510,009

$796,857

$2,083,527

$579,140

$7,642,481

$496,761

$1,146,372

$827,044

Subtotal

6.0 Project Mgmt & Mob/Demob (6.5%)

7.0 Contingency (15%)

8.0 Long-Term Surveillance Fee

Total $10,112,658

SkbcKent Bruxvoort

Consulting Engineers 10/21/2009

Sweetwater Uranium Project SUA-1350 2009 Surety Rebaselining

MILL AREA DECOMMISSIONING

Description I Quantity Units I Unit Cost I Total Cost

S

0

0

0

S

A. Equipment Demolitiona1. Mill, Grinding2. Mill, Boiler3. Mill & SIX, Electrical4. Mill, Leach5. Mill, Thickening6. Mill, Yellowcake7. SIX, Settling8. SIX, Storage Tanks9. IX Resin & Tank10. Health Physics

Subtotal

B. Structure Demolitionb

1. Mill Building2. SIX Building3. Clarifier (75' Diam)4. Clarifier Soln Tank (65' Diam)5. Raffinate Tank (50' Diam)6. Main Shop7. Admin Building8. Tire & Lube Building9. Misc Buildings10. Misc Tanks

Subtotal

C. Concrete Disposalc1. Mill Building, concrete demo2. SIX Building, concrete demo3. Main Shop, concrete demo4. Admin Building, concrete demo5. Tire & Lube Building, concrete6. Misc Buildings, concrete demo7. Concrete Disposal On Site

Subtotal

D. Revegetationd1. Ripping Compacted Surface2. Revegetation

Subtotal

155

2020251520103

110

2,167,875528,00088,36033,18049,075902,000197,250270,000225,00032,000

48,17526,40022,55013,0509,00015,0003,550

18.618.6

daysdaysdaysdaysdaysdaysdaysdaysdaysdays

cu ftcu ftcu ftcu ftcu ftcu ftcu ftcu ftcu ftcu ft

sq ftsq ftsq ftsq ftsq ftsq ft

cu yds

acresacres

$1,5831,5831,1201,5831,5831,5831,5831,5831,583720

$0.1690.130.130.130.130.1950.260.1690.1950.13

$4.304.304.304.304.304.306.40

$70794

$23,7457,915

22,40031,66039,57523,74531,66015,8304,749

79,200$280,479

$366,37168,64011,4874,3136,380

175,89051,28545,63043,8754,160

$778,031

$207,153113,52096,96556,11538,70064,50022,717

$599,670

$1,30214,768$14,768

$1,672,948Total

Notes:

1) All structures within the NRC bonded area boundary are included in the decommissioning.2) Unit costs derive from the following sources:aCrew 1 = Means Crew B-1 B (w/o crane) = foreman, equip operator, 2 laborers (use Sweetwater crane)

Crew 2 = 2 electricians @ $70/hr eachCrew 3 = 1 HP tech + equipment

bRS Means Heavy Construction Cost Data, 2009; = $0.31/cf x 0.826 = $0.26/cf- 50% reduction applied to RS Means unit cost for no internal walls- adjust reduction for amount of internal walls

cGuideline No. 12, Standard Reclamation Performance Bond Format and Cost Calculation MethodWyoming DEQ, 9/2008; with regional cost adjustment for Rawlins from Means, 2009

dUnit costs from the 2006/2007 soil cleanup in the catchment basin area, adjusted to 2009 dollars.

SkbcKent Bruxvoort

Consulting Engineers 10/21/2009

Sweetwater Uranium Project SUA-1350 2009 Surety Rebaselining

CLEANUP OF CONTAMINATED SOILS

IDescription I Quantity Units IUnit Cost I Total Cost

S

0

0

S

S

0

A. Mill Areaa1. Scoping Survey2. Soil Removal, Haul & Place3. Cleanup Verification Program4. Haul & Compact Backfill Soil5. Topsoil Placement6. Health Physics7. Revegetation8. Data Analysis & Report

Subtotal

4.94140,000

4.94154,0003,340

11.38300

accu yds

accu ydscu yds

lump sumachrs

cu ydscu yds

ac

$4008.462,5003.543.17

10,580794106

$3.173.17794

$1,9761,184,400

12,350545,16010,58810,5801,096

31,800$1,765,054

$225,029450,05469,872

$744,955

B. Tailings Areab

1. Soil Removal2. Topsoil Placement3. Revegetation

70,987141,973

88Subtotal

Total $2,510,009.

S

0

0

SSSSS

Notes:

1) The Catchment Basin Area soils cleanup was completed in 2007. The unit costs for this remediationeffort are provided for reference as recent, site-specific cost data, adjusted to 2009 dollars.Catchment Basin Area Units Unit Cost Adj Unit Cost

1. Scoping Survey ac $400 $4002. Soil Removal, Haul & Place cu yds 8.00 $8.463. Highwall Liner Installation sq ft 1.50 $1.594. Cleanup Verification Program ac 2,500 $2,5005. Haul & Compact Backfill Soil cu yds 3.35 $3.546. Topsoil Placement cu yds 3.00 $3.177. Seepage Collection lump sum 25,000 $26,4508. Health Physics lump sum 10,000 $10,5809. Revegetation ac 750 $79410. Data Analysis & Report hrs 100 $106

2) Unit costs derive from the following sources:aUnit costs derived from the 2006/2007 soil cleanup in the catchment basin area, adjusted to 2009 dollars.

Verification costs include soil sampling and analysis costs. Scoping & verification survey costs from MFG.bSoils cleanup due to wind-blown tailings; depth = 6"; radiological survey costs totaled on separate worksheet.

kakbcKent Bruxvoort

Consulting Engineers 10/21/2009

Sweetwater Uranium Project SUA-1350 2009 Surety Rebaselining

GROUND WATER REMEDIATION & WELL DECOMMISSIONING

IDescription I Quantity I ý Units Unit Cost Total Cost

Annual Remediation Costs1. Pumping, electricitya2. Inspection & Maintenanceb

3. Ground Water Samplingb

4. Maintenance/Replacement Materials5. Ground Water Testing - Tailings Wellsc6. Ground Water Testing - CB Wellsd

Subtotal

A. Total Remediation Costse

1. Total Cost for # Years of RemediationSubtotal

8,76096641

2856

hrshrshrs

lump sumeaea

$0.23100100

5,000415265

$2,0159,6006,4005,00011,62014,840

$49,475

$736,060$736,060

$8,09649,3683,333

$60,797

20 yrs 3.00%

B. Well Abandonmentf1. Plug Perched Wells2. Plug Ground Water Wells3. Plug Deep Wells

23663

eaeaea

$352748

1,111Subtotal

Total $796,857

Notes:

00SSSS00S000SSSSSS

1) Ground water to be pumped to evaporation cells within existing tailings impoundment.2) Unit costs derive from the following sources:a50 gpm, 60% efficiency, 2.36 kW: $0.0965 per kW-hr; national average for commercial electricity,

PacificCorp: Rocky Mountain Power, www.rockymountainpower.netbConsultant to spend one week per quarter performing repairs and replacements, and sampling.

Field engineer @$100/hour, typical hourly rate for consultants in region, with travel costs embedded.cEnergy Labs, Casper WY, published rates www.energylab.com; 7 pumpback wells quarterly

dEnergy Labs, Casper WY, published rates www.energylab.com; 14 monitor wells quarterlyepresent value of an annuity, with interest rate the difference between investment rate and inflation

fGuideline No. 12, Standard Reclamation Performance Bond Format and Cost Calculation MethodWyoming DEQ, 9/2008: $30 +$4.00/LF + 10% profit

N kbcKent Bruxvoort

Consulting Engineers 10/21/2009

Sweetwater Uranium Project SUA-1 350 2009 Surety Rebaselining

EXISTING IMPOUNDMENT RECLAMATION

LDescription Quantity IUnits Unit Cost Total Cost

0

0

S

0

0

0

0

OS

0

S

0

0

A. Dewatering1. Dewatering System Completion2. Pumping, Electricitya3. Inspection & Maintenanceb

4. Maintenance Materials

5. Data Analysis & Reportb

Subtotal

B. Earthwork1. Level Embankmentse

2. Place TopsoildSubtotal

C. Revegetation1. Seed, Drill, and Apply Mulchd

Subtotal

D. NESHAP Analysis/Method 1151. Cannister Setup/Retrievalb

2. Cannister Testinge3. Data Analysis & Reportb

Subtotal

E. Settlement Monitoring1. Install Monumentsf

2. Quarterly Data Collection (3 yrs)b

3. Data Analysis & Reportb

Subtotal

18,760160

140

lump sumhrshrs

lump sum

hrs

$50,000

0.23100

5,000105

1,150,100 cu yds

200,000 cu yds

83

4011020

4512

40

ac

hrseahrs

eaeahrs

$1.10

3.17

$794

$100

50105

$3001,000

105

$50,0002,01516,0005,000

4,200$77,215

$1,265,110

634,000$1,899,110

$65,902$65,902

$4,000

5,500

2,100$11,600

$13,50012,000

4,200$29,700

Total $2,083,527

Notes:

1) Embankment soil volume = 1,361,000 cy (remaining volume above tailings to final grade) lesssoil placed in the tailings impoundment from soil cleanup (140,000 cy + 71,000 cy)2) Unit costs derive from the following sources:a50 gpm, 60% efficiency, 2.36 kW: $0.0965 per kW-hr; national average for commercial electricity,

PacificCorp: Rocky Mountain Power, www.rockymountainpower.netbConsultant rates are typical for the region. Field engineer rate includes embedded travel costs.

Consultants rates for reporting include averaged staff engineer and project manager billing rates.Daily survey rate for local surveyor is about $1000.

cGuideline No. 12, Standard Reclamation Performance Bond Format and Cost Calculation MethodWyoming DEQ, 9/2008: 657G push-pull scraper fleet, level ground, 1000' one-way haul

= $0.995/cy + 10% profitdUnit costs derived from the 2006/2007 soil cleanup in the catchment basin area, adjusted to 2009 dollars.eCannister testing cost based on invoice for 2009 Method 115 testing by Energy Labs for the facility.

fSettlement monuments installed at one per acre; unit cost based on engineering estimate.

SkbcKent Bruxvoort

Consulting Engineers 10/21/2009

Sweetwater Uranium Project SUA-1350 2009 Surety Rebaselining

RADIOLOGICAL SURVEY AND MONITORING

Description Quantity Units Unit Cost Total Cost

A. Soil Sampling1. Digestion for Radiochemistrya2. Ra-226 Analysisa

3. Ra-226, Th-230, U-nat Analysisa

4. Sample Collectionb

5. Data Analysis & Reportb

Subtotal

B. Decommissioning Equipment1. Equipment Scan/End of Dayb

2. Equipment Scan/Free Releaseb

3. Data Analysis & Reportb

Subtotal

C. Gamma Survey - Verification1. Scoping Surveyc2. Performance Evaluation Survey'3. Verification - Primary & Secondaryc4. Verification - Tertiary Areasc5. Data Analysis & Reportb

87844043864080

404020

eaeaeahrshrs

hrshrshrs

0

0

0

D. Environmental Monitoring1. Air Pumpc2. Calibration Equipmentc3. Air Monitoring Samplerc4. Data Analysis & Reportb

Subtotal

Subtotal

2241

14480200

16161620

402016

aclump sum

acachrs

wkswkswkshrs

eaeahrs

$25.0075.00175.00

100105

$100100105

$40045,2001,150400105

$14017025105

$2575105

$21,95033,00076,65064,0008,400

$204,000

$4,0004,0002,100

$10,100

$89,60045,200165,60032,00021,000

$353,400

$2,2402,720400

2,100$7,460

$1,0001,5001,680

$4,180

$579,140

E. Personnel Monitoring1. Bioassay Urinalysisa

2. Personal Radiation Badge Testinga3. Data Analysis & Reportb

Subtotal

Total

Notes:

1) Unit costs based on the following assumptions:Primary & secondary areas total 144 acres; 88 acres primary & 56 acres secondary

- The 88 acres assumed to be split as 79 acres P1 & 9 acres P2 (lOim x 1Om grid)- P1 areas: 10% soil samples for Ra-226; P2 areas: 100% soil samples for Ra-226, U-nat & Th-230- Secondary areas, 5% of grids to be soil sampled for Ra-226 (lOim x 10m grid)

Tertiary areas, 5% of grids to be soil sampled for Ra-226 (50m by 50m grid)2) Unit costs derive from the following sources:alUnit costs for lab analysis taken from Energy Labs, Casper, WY web site: www.energylab.com.bConsultant rates are typical for the region. Field engineer rate includes embedded travel costs.

Consultants rates for reporting include averaged staff engineer and project manager billing rates.cBased on previous surety update by MFG (2004), adjusted to 2009 dollars

Aý=kbcKent Bruxvoort

Consulting Engineers 10/21/2009

Sweetwater Uranium Project SUA-1350 2009 Surety Rebaselining

LONG-TERM SURVEILLANCE FEE

Maintenance Fee Calculation

Year

1978 AvgMay-09

CPI, All Urban-Consumers

65.2213.856

Fee Amount

$250,000$820,000.00

Notes:

Long Term Surveillance Fee is equal to $250,000 in 1978 dollars (1978 average), indexed toinflation, as determined from the Consumer Price Index (CPI), for all urban consumers, U.S. Bureauof Labor statistics (per 10 CFR 40, Appendix A, Criterion 10).

The figure calculated from the Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics online calculatorfrom 1978 to 2009 is $827,043.71, purportedly calculating from the average 1978 CPI to the mostrecent month for the given year for all goods and services consumed by urban households.

Online Calculator: 1 $827,043.71

000000000

000

0000

Use of the value above is based on email from James Webb of NRC dated July 16, 2009.

kz kbcKent Bruxvoort

Consulting Engineers 10/21/2009

00000000000000000000

0 APPENDIX BUnit Cost Backup Material0

00000000000000000000

* Page 1 of 2S

S 9-16-2009 U.S. Department Of LaborBureau of Labor Statistics

Washington, D.C. 20212

Consumer Price Index

All Urban Consumers - (CPI-U)

U.S. city average

*All items

S1982-84=100Percent changeAnnual Dec- Avg-

Year Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Avg. Dec Avg

1913 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.7 9.8 9.9 9.9 10.0 10.0 10.1 10.0 9.91914 10.0 9.9 9.9 9.8 9.9 9.9 10.0 10.2 10.2 10.1 10.2 10.1 10.0 1.0 1.01915 10.1 10.0 9.9 10.0 10.1 10.1 10.1 10.1 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.3 10.1 2.0 1.0

1916 10.4 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7 10.8 10.8 10.9 11.1 11.3 11.5 11.6 10.9 12.6 7.91917 11.7 12.0 12.0 12.6 12.8 13.0 12.8 13.0 13.3 13.5 13.5 13.7 12.8 18.1 17.41918 14.0 14.1 14.0 14.2 14.5 14.7 15.1 15.4 15.7 16.0 16.3 16.5 15.1 20.4 18.01919 16.5 16.2 16.4 16.7 16.9 16.9 17.4 17.7 17.8 18.1 18.5 18.9 17.3 14.5 14.61920 19.3 19.5 19.7 20.3 20.6 20.9 20.8 20.3 20.0 19.9 19.8 19.4 20.0 2.6 15.6

1921 19.0 18.4 18.3 18.1 17.7 17.6 17.7 17.7 17.5 17.5 17.4 17.3 17.9 -10.8 -10.51922 16.9 16.9 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.7 16.8 16.6 16.6 16.7 16.8 16.9 16.8 -2.3 -6.11923 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.9 16.9 17.0 17.2 17.1 17.2 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.1 2.4 1.81924 17.3 17.2 17.1 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.1 17.0 17.1 17.2 17.2 17.3 17.1 0.0 0.01925 17.3 17.2 17.3 17.2 17.3 17.5 17.7 17.7 17.7 17.7 18.0 17.9 17.5 3.5 2.3

1926 17.9 17.9 17.8 17.9 17.8 17.7 17.5 17.4 17.5 17.6 17.7 17.7 17.7 -1.1 1.11927 17.5 17.4 17.3 17.3 17.4 17.6 17.3 17.2 17.3 17.4 17.3 17.3 17.4 -2.3 -1.71928 17.3 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.2 17.1 17.1 17.1 17.3 17.2 17.2 17.1 17.1 -1.2 -1.71929 17.1 17.1 17.0 16.9 17.0 17.1 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.3 17.2 17.1 0.6 0.01930 17.1 17.0 16.9 17.0 16.9 16.8 16.6 16.5 16.6 16.5 16.4 16.1 16.7 -6.4 -2.3

1931 15.9 15.7 15.6 15.5 15.3 15.1 15.1 15.1 15.0 14.9 14.7 14.6 15.2 -9.3 -9.01932 14.3 14.1 14.0 13.9 13.7 13.6 13.6 13.5 13.4 13.3 13.2 13.1 13.7 -10.3 -9.91933 12.9 12.7 12.6 12.6 12.6 12.7 13.1 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.2 13.0 0.8 -5.11934 13.2 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.3 13.4 13.4 13.4 13.6 13.5 13.9 13.4 13.4 1.5 3.11935 13.6 13.7 13.7 13.8 13.8 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.8 13.8 13.7 3.0 2.2

1936 13.8 13.8 13.7 13.7 13.7 13.8 13.9 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 13.9 1.4 1.51937 14.1 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.4 14.5 14.5 14.6 14.6 14.5 14.4 14.4 2.9 3.61938 14.2 14.1 14.1 14.2 14.1 14.1 14.1 14.1 14.1 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.1 -2.8 -2.11939 14.0 13.9 13.9 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 13.8 14.1 14.0 14.0 14.0 13.9 0.0 -1.41940 13.9 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.1 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.1 14.0 0.7 0.7

1941 14.1 14.1 14.2 14.3 14.4 14.7 14.7 14.9 15.1 15.3 15.4 15.5 14.7 9.9 5.01942 15.7 15.8 16.0 16.1 16.3 16.3 16.4 16.5 16.5 16.7 16.8 16.9 16.3 9.0 10.91943 16.9 16.9 17.2 17.4 17.5 17.5 17.4 17.3 17.4 17.4 17.4 17.4 17.3 3.0 6.11944 17.4 17.4 17.4 17.5 17.5 17.6 17.7 17.7 17.7 17.7 17.7 17.8 , 17.6 2.3 1.71945 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.9 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.1 18.2 18.0 2.2 2.3

1946 18.2 18.1 18.3 18.4 18.5 18.7 19.8 20.2 20.4 20.8 21.3 21.5 19.5 18.1 8.31947 21.5 21.9 21.9 21.9 21.9 22.0 22.2 22.5 23.0 23.0 23.1 23.4 22.3 8.8 14.41948 23.7 23.5 23.4 23.8 23.9 24.1 24.4 24.5 24.5 24.4 24.2 24.1 24.1 3.0 8.11949 24.0 23.8 23.8 23.9 23.8 23.9 23.7 23.8 23.9 23.7 23.8 23.6 23.8 -2.1 -1.21950 23.5 23.5 23.6. 23.6 23.7 23.8 24.1 24.3 24.4 24.6 24.7 25.0 24.1 .5.9 1.3

1951 25.4 25.7 25.8 25.8 25.9 25.9 25.9 25.9 26.1 26.2 26.4 26.5 26.0 6.0 7.91952 26.5 26.3 26.3 26.4 26.4 26.5 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.5 0.8 1.91953 26.6 26.5 26.6 26.6 26.7 26.8 26.8 26.9 26.9 27.0 26.9 26.9 26.7 0.7 0.81954 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.8 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.8 26.8 26.8 26.7 26.9 -0.7 0.71955 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.7 26.8 26.8 26.9 26.9 26.9 26.8 26.8 0.4 -0.4

1956 26.8 26.8 26.8 26.9 27.0 27.2 27.4 27.3 27.4 27.5 27.5 27.6 27.2 3.0 1.51957 27.6 27.7 27.8 27.9 28.0 28.1 28.3 28.3 28.3 28.3 28.4 28.4 28.1 2.9 3.31958 28.6 28.6 28.8 28.9 28.9 28.9 29.0 28.9 28.9 28.9 29.0 28.9 28.9 1.8 2.81959 29.0 28.9 28.9 29.0 29.9 29.1 29.2 29.2 29.3 29.4 29.4 29.4 29.1 1.7 0.71960 29.3 29.4 29.4 29.5 29.5 29.6 29.6 29.6 29.6 29.8 29.8 29.8 29.6 1.4 1.7

1961 29.8 29.8 29.8 29.8 29.8 29.8 30.0 29.9 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 29.9 0.7 1.01962 30.0 30.1 30.1 30.2 30.2 30.2 30.3 30.3 30.4 30.4 30.4 30.4 30.2 1.3 1.01963 30.4 30.4 30.5 30.5 30.5 30.6 30.7 30.7 30.7 30.8 30.8 30.9 30.6 1.6 1.31964 30.9 30.9 30.9 30.9 30.9 31.0 31.1 31.0 31.1 31.1 31.2 31.2 31.0 1.9 1.31965 31.2 31.2 31.3 31.4 31.4 31.6 31.6 31.6 31.6 31.7 31.7 31.8 31.5 1.9 1.6

1966 31.8 32.0 32.1 32.3 32.3 32.4 32.5 32.7 32.7 32.9 32.9 32.9 32.4 3.5 2.91967 32.9 32.9 33.0 33.1 33.2 33.3 33.4 33.5 33.6 33.7 33.8 33.9 33.4 3.0 3.11968 34.1 34.2 34.3 34.4 34.5 34.7 34.9 35.0 35.1 35.3 35.4 35.5 34.8 4.7 4.21969 35.6 35.8 36.1 36.3 36.4 36.6 36.8 37.0 37.1 37.3 37.5 37.7 36.7 6.2 5.51970 37.8 38.0 38.2 38.5 38.6 38.8 39.0 39.0 39.2 39.4 39.6 39.8 38.8 5.6 5.7

1971 39.8 39.9 40.0 40.1 40.3 40.6 40.7 40.8 40.8 40.9 40.9 41.1 40.5 3.3 4.41972 41.1 41.3 41.4 41.5 41.6 41.7 41.9 42.0 42.1 42.3 42.4 42.5 41.8 3.4 3.21973 42.6 42.9 43.3 43.6 43.9 44.2 44.3 45.1 45.2 45.6 45.9 46.2 44.4 8.7 6.21974 46.6 47.2 47.8 48.0 48.6 49.0 49.4 50.0 50.6 51.1 51.5 51.9 49.3 12.3 11.01975 52.1 52.5 52.7 52.9 53.2 53.6 54.2 54.3 54.6 54.9 55.3 55.5 53.8 6.9 9.1

1976 55.6 55.8 55.9 56.1 56.5 56.8 57.1 57.4 57.6 57.9 58.0 58.2 56.9 4.9 5.81977 58.5 59.1 59.5 60.0 60.3 60.7 61.0 61.2 61.4 61.6 61.9 62.1 60.6 6.7 6.51978 62.5 62.9 63.4 63.9 64.5 65.2 65.7 66.0 66.5 67.1 67.4 67.7 65.2 9.0 7.61979 68.3 69.1 69.8 70.6 71.5 72.3 73.1 73.8 74.6 75.2 75.9 76.7 72.6 13.3 11.31980 77.8 78.9 80.1 81.0 81.8 82.7 82.7 83.3 84.0 84.8 85.5 86.3 82.4 12.5 13.5

5 ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/cpi/cpiai.txt 10/14/2009

VPage 2 of 2

1981 87.0 87.9 88.5 89.1 89.8 90.6 91.6 92.3 93.2 93.4 93.7 94.0 90.9 8.9 10.3

1982 94.3 94.6 94.5 94.9 95.8 97.0 97.5 97.7 97.9 98.2 98.0 97.6 96.5 3.8 6.2

1983 97.8 97.9 97.9 98.6 99.2 99.5 99.9 100.2 100.7 101.0 101.2 101.3 99.6 3.8 3.2

1984 101.9 102.4 102.6 103.1 103.4 103.7 104.1 104.5 105.0 105.3 105.3 105.3 103.9 3.9 4.3

1985 105.5 106.0 106.4 106.9 107.3 107.6 107.8 108.0 108.3 108.7 109.0 109.3 107.6 3.8 3.6

1986 109.6 109.3 108.8 108.6 108.9 109.5 109.5 109.7 110.2 110.3 110.4 110.5 109.6 1.1 1.91987 111.2 111.6 112.1 112.7 113.1 113.5 113.8 114.4 115.0 115.3 115.4 115.4 113.6 4.4 3.6

1988 115.7 116.0 116.5 117.1 117.5 118.0 118.5 119.0 119.8 120.2 120.3 120.5 118.3 4.4 4.1

1989 121.1 121.6 122.3 123.1 123.8 124.1 124.4 124.6 125.0 125.6 125.9 126.1 124.0 4.6 4.8

1990 127.4 128.0 128.7 128.9 129.2 129.9 130.4 131.6 132.7 133.5 133.8 133.8 130.7 6.1 5.4

1991 134.6 134.8 135.0 135.2 135.6 136.0 136.2 136.6 137.2 137.4 137.8 137.9 136.2 3.1 4.21992 138.1 138.6 139.3 139.5 139.7 140.2 140.5 140.9 141.3 141.8 142.0 141.9 140.3 2.9 3.01993 142.6 143.1 143.6 144.0 144.2 144.4 144.4 144.8 145.1 145.7 145.8 145.8 144.5 2.7 3.0

1994 146.2 146.7 147.2 147.4 147.5 148.0 148.4 149.0 149.4 149.5 149.7 149.7 148.2 2.7 2.61995 150.3 150.9 151.4 151.9 152.2 152.5 152.5 152.9 153.2 153.7 153.6 153.5 152.4 2.5 2.8

1996 154.4 154.9 155.7 156.3 156.6 156.7 157.0 157.3 157.8 158.3 158.6 158.6 156.9 3.3 3.01997 159.1 159.6 160.0 160.2 160.1 160.3 160.5 160.8 161.2 161.6 161.5 161.3 160.5 1.7 2.31998 161.6 161.9 162.2 162.5 162.8 163.0 163.2 163.4 163.6 164.0 164.0 163.9 163.0 1.6 1.6

1999 164.3 164.5 165.0 166.2 166.2 166.2 166.7 167.1 167.9 168.2 168.3 168.3 166.6 2.7 2.22000 168.8 169.8 171.2 171.3 171.5 172.4 172.8 172.8 173.7 174.0 174.1 174.0 172.2 3.4 3.4

2001 175.1 175.8 176.2 176.9 177.7 178.0 177.5 177.5 178.3 177.7 177.4 176.7 177.1 1.6 2.8

2002 177.1 177.8 178.8 179.8 179.8 179.9 180.1 180.7 181.0 181.3 181.3 180.9 179.9 2.4 1.6

2003 181.7 183.1 184.2 183.8 183.5 183.7 183.9 184.6 185.2 185.0 184.5 184.3 184.0 1.9 2.32004 185.2 186.2 187.4 188.0 189.1 189.7 189.4 189.5 189.9 190.9 191.0 190.3 188.9 3.3 2.72005 190.7 191.8 193.3 194.6 194.4 194.5 195.4 196.4 198.8 199.2 197.6 196.8 195.3 3.4 3.4

2006 198.3 198.7 199.8 201.5 202.5 202.9 203.5 203.9 202.9 201.8 201.5 201.8 201.6 2.5 3.22007 202.416 203.499 205.352 206.686 207.949 208.352 208.299 207.917 208.490 208.936 210.177 210.036 207.342 4.1 2.82008 211.080 211.693 213.528 214.823 216.632 218.815 219.964 219.086 218.783 216.573 212.425 210.228 215.303 0.1 3.8

2009 211.143 212.193 212.709 213.240 213.856 215.693 215.351 215.834

•ftp ://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/epi/cpiai.txt 10/14/2009

SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS

DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITYLAND QUALITY DIVISION

GUIDELINE NO. 12

STANDARDIZED RECLAMATIONPERFORMANCE BOND FORMAT AND COST

CALCULATION METHODS

* b. CONTRACTOR PROFIT, OVERHEAD, MOBILIZATION AND• DEMOBILIZATION COSTS: The Dataquest Cost Reference Guides used to

construct the appendices do not include these costs. If an operator uses theseappendices in bond calculations, there is still a need for this distinct line item cost in

* the bond. Assorted references place these items from 8 to 15 percent of the total• bond cost. Presently LQD is using 10 percent.

c. PRECONSTRUCTION INVESTIGATION AND STABILIZATION: This itemaddresses all field work necessary to document and mitigate dangerous and/or

* quickly deteriorating conditions, such as slumping highwalls or drainage problems.* Any assessment under this item will be based upon the LQD's knowledge of specific

site conditions and the length of time between cessation/forfeiture and initiation ofthe final reclamation project. When necessary, reference sources place this cost at 1

* to 2 percent. LQD is using 1 percent.

0 d. COSTS FOR AN INDEPENDENT FIRM TO MANAGE THE FINAL• RECLAMATION PROJECT: LQD Administrator Rick Chancellor and the WMA* agreed that the Office of Surface Mining's sliding scale would be used for this item.

A copy of that is attached as Appendix R.

* e. COSTS FOR ON SITE MONITORING PROGRAMS FOR TEN YEARS AFTER* COMPLETION OF THE FINAL RECLAMATION PROJECT (INCLUDES SUCH

ITEMS AS UTILITIES AND GROUNDWATER SAMPLING): Costs of this itemwill vary depending upon specific permit commitments. The LQD uses a range of

* 1/2 to 2 percent. Usually LQD uses 0.5 percent.

f. COSTS FOR SITE SECURITY DURING THE FINAL RECLAMATION PROJECTAND LIABILITY INSURANCE COST DURING THE FINAL RECLAMATION

• PROJECT AND OVER THE FULL BONDING PERIOD: LQD Administrator Rick* Chancellor and the WMA agreed that $200,000 per year of project life would be

adequate.

* g. LONG-TERM ADMINISTRATION AND ACCOUNTING COSTS: LQD* Administrator Rick Chancellor and the WMA agreed to a range of $250,000 to

$400,000 based on the project size.

* h. ANY OTHER SITE-SPECIFIC PERMIT COMMITMENTS SHOULD ALSO BE• INCLUDED HERE: Costs will vary according to specific permit commitments.

* The LQD has historically used the following sources to establish the range of percentages* list in the Miscellaneous Items.

Means Heavy Construction Cost Data (current edition), published by R. S. Means

Company, Inc., Kingston, MA

* Means Site Work Cost Data (current edition), published by R. S. Means Company, Inc.,Kingston, MA

DE 9/2008 12

00

0S

0

00

0

0

0

Appendix BCalculations for Moving Materials With a Caterpillar 657G Push-Pull Scraper Fleet

NOTE: DRILLING AND BLASTING COSTS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THESE CALCULATIONS. THE LQD DOES NOT CONSIDER DRILLING AND BLASTING COSTS NECESSARY

WHEN USING APPENDIX B.

Material Movement By Scrapers

1) Caterpillar 657G Push-Pull Scraper2) Material Density3) Payload

4) Maximum Vehicle Speed Loaded

5) Operating Efficiency Factor (50 Min./Hr.)6) 657G PP Operating Costs7) Labor Costs8) Supervision Labor Costs9) Supervisor Transportation10) 1/8 of I - 14,000 Gal. Water Trucks + 1 Operator11) 1/8 of I - 16H Blade for Road Work + 1 Operator12) 1/2 - D9R for Ripping Ovb. and Misc. Work + 1 Operator

13) Total Hourly Costs

2,850. LB/BCY104,000. LB

35.0 BCY33.0 MPH

0.83 %$384.18 Per Hour$38.56 Per Hour$5.45 Per Hour$3.30 Per Hour

$30.92 Per Hour$20.44 Per Hour

$107.25 Per Hour

$590.10

CPH 37CPH 37

CPH 37CPH 37100% E-WWYDOT-WDD1/8 of WYDOT-WDD1/8 of 100% E-W1/8 of 100%E-W1/8 of 100% E-W'/a of 100% E-W

TO USE TABLE:

Case #1: Level Ground

Locate your approximate grade by reference to case number. Determine cost per BCY by using distance colurms that approximates your distance. No calculations are necessary.

Loaded (0% grade + 4% rolling = 4% total) Emotv (0% grade + 4% rolling = 4% total)

One-WayDistance

(Ft)

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

5000

5500

6000

6500

7000

LoadTime

(Mill.)

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

1.10

TravelTime

Loaded(Min.)

0.42

0.68

0.92

1.15

1.37

1.59

1.81

2.02

2.22

2.43

2.64

2.85

3.05

3.26

Maneuver& Spread

Time(Min.)

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

0.60

Travel TotalTime CycleEmpty Time(Min.) (Min.)

0.36

0.57

0.75

0.92

1.09

1.26

1.44

1.61

1.78

1.95

2.13

2.30

2.47

2.64

2.48

2.95

3.37

3.77

4.16

4.55

4.95

5.33

5.70

6.08

6.47

6.85

7.22

7.60

TripsPer

Hour

24.2

20.3

17.8

15.9

14.4

13.2

12.1

11.3

10.5

9.9

9.3

8.8

8.3

7.9

Efficiency AdjustedPayload Factor Productivity(BCY) (50 min/hr) (BCY/Hr)

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

35.0

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

0.83

706

593

519

464

421

385

354

328

307

288

270

255

242

230

OperatingCosts

($/BCY)

$0.836

$0.995

$1.137

$1.272

$1.402

$1.533

$1.667

$1.800

$1.922

$2.049

$2.186

$2.314

$2.438

$2.566

DE 9/2008 18

Appendix KCost Estimates for Demolition and Removal of Railroad Spurs and Facilities Buildings

0S

S

SS

S

S

REGIONAL ADJUSTEDTASK COST PER UNIT COST COST PER UNIT

($) ADJUSTMENT 1 ($)

Track Removal 7.93/lin. ft. 97.4% 7.72/lin. ft.

Ballast Removal 3.63/cy 97.4% 3.54/cy

Building Demolition and Disposal"' 2,'3

Mixture of Types 0.24/ft3 97.4% 0.234/ft3

Explosive Demolition, Concrete or Steel 0.22/ft3 97.4% 0.214/ft3

Disposal (Average) 8.41/cy 97.4% 8.19/cy

City Landfill Dump Charges $95.00/ton 97.4% $92.53/ton

Concrete Footings and Foundations

6" Thick With Rebar 4.73/sq. ft. (A'.,) 97.4% 4.61/sq. ft.

Footings - 2' Thick, 3' Wide 16.85/lin. ft. 97.4% 16.41/lin. ft.

Concrete Disposal On-Site 7.04/cy (B"") 97.4% 6.86/cy

8261 U 4W L~ IM.

Note: Operators may also provide a verifiable cost estimate from a qualified contractor for these demolitiontasks. This estimate may be used for one to three consecutive years, assuming few substantial changesin mine facilities.

I

2

3

Costs From: 2008 Means Heavy Construction Cost Data & Building Construction Cost DataBased on Total Volume of Building, does not include disposal costBased on Concrete Structures Volume Only, does not include disposal cost

(.7 5 0, c8 U %

C.~y

WIrA to a'.

It z(.3)Isj 4

5 DE 9/2008 37* '.I4~ IC~~

Appendix LAbandonment and Sealing of Cased Drill Holes and Monitor Wells

TOTAL

TASKS UNIT COST UNITS COST

DRILL HOLE RECLAMATION COSTS

Site Locating $10.00/site

Sealing Using High-Solids Bentonite Grout1'2_< 500' deep $4.00/lin. ft.

*< 1,000' deep $6.28/lin. ft.

Capping Using a Pre-cast Concrete Cap (if needed) $7.50/hole

Site Grading $30.00/site

Seeding - Small Site (15'x 25') $1.00/site

Contouring & Seeding - Large Sites (100' x 100') $250.00/site

MONITORING WELL RECLAMATION COSTS

Site Locating $10.00/site

Removal of Top Few Feet of Casing (Backhoe & Welder) $15.00/well

Sealing Using High-Solids Bentonite Grout1'2

_ 500' deep $4.00/lin. ft.< 1,000' deep $6.28/lin. ft

Site Smoothing (Hand Work) & Seeding $5.00/site

Costs based on industry sources.

1 Assumes a hole/well size of 5" diameter.

2 Gassy or artesian wells would require class G neat cement plugging @ $6.46/ft. for wells up to 500' deep and$7.64/ft. for holes over 500' deep.

(-au.) wt-ký (k~ti) Cba 46i?ý_ 40

0

0

0S

DE 9/2008 38

SS

0

0S

0

0

S

S

0

0

0

000

0

0

0

Appendix PCost Estimate for Scarification of Compacted Surfaces

INPUT, UNIT AS COMMENT/

INDICATED SOURCE

CATERPILLAR 16H MOTOR GRADER

Speed in Miles Per Hour (First Gear) 2.4 Miles/Hour CPH 37

Width of Scarifying Pass 12 Feet CPH 37

Feet Per Mile 5,280 Feet

Square Feet Per Acre 43,560 Sq. Ft.

Operating Efficiency Factor 50 Min./Hr. 0.83% CPH 37

Operating Costs $124.99 Per Hour 100% of E-W

Labor Costs $38.56 Per Hour WYDOT-WDD

Supervision Labor Costs $5.45 Per Hour 1/8 of WYDOT-WDD

Supervisor Transportation $3.30 Per Hour 1/8 of 100% of E-W

Total Hourly Costs $172.30

SCARIFICATION RATE

(2.4 Miles/Hour)x(5,280 Ft./Mile)x(12 Ft./Pass) 152,064 FtZ/Hour

(152,064 Ft2/Hour)/(43,560 Ft2/Acre) 3.49 Acres/Hour

(3.49 Acres/Hour)x(0.83 Efficiency Factor) 2.90 Acres/Hour

OPERATING COSTS

($172.30/Hour)/(2.90 Acres/Hour) $59.41 Per Acre

DE 9/2008 41

0

0

00

0S

0

0

Appendix RReclamation Management Costs

Project Management FeeGraph 2

24

1*6

100,000

10,000

1,000

100

100 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Percent of Inflated Direct Costs

Graphical extension ofReference lines'010 000 016 0050 and 0300

From Means 1998 Building Construction Cost Data,Copyright R.S. Means Co., Inc., Kingston, MA,

781-585-7880, all rights reserved.

43

00

S0

DE 9/2008

0

0

0

Remit To: Energy Laboratories, Inc.Accounts ReceivablePO Box 30975Billings, MT 59107-0975

Account Number:

Invoice Number:Invoice Date:

AUG 2 6 2009 Purchase Order:

... ... -Invoice Total:

Amount Received:

Amount Due:

K10582908308918/2612009

09166

$5.525.00$0.00

$5.525.00

K1058290830891000D5525000291384524 I------------------------------------------------------- ý-- ---- ------ ý- --------------------------------------------------------------

uetacn ana Return stub witn PaBILL TO: Kennecott Uranium Company

Attn: Shelley SchutterlePO Box 1500Rawlins, WY 82301-1500

INVOICEInvoice Date: August 26. 2009

Invoice No: 290830891Il IFrom:

2393 Salt Creek Hwy (82601) * PO Box 3258 - Casper, WY82602-(307) 235-0515

Project Name: Sweetwater Uranium

Purchase Order 09166

Account Number K1058

TERMS: NET 30 DAYSInterest charged after 30 days 1.5% per month.VISA/MasterCard payments accepted.

Item Remarks Matrix Test Price Mult Price Qty Test Total

WorkOrder C09080013Radon Flux (LAACC) Air $50.00 1 $50.00 130 $6,500.00

Comments:

1111 IH 111111 lil lll'lll/ 11IF100031256

Subtotal:

15% Discount:

Order Amount:

INVOICE TOTAL:

Amount Received:

AMOUNT DUE:

$6,500.00

-975.00

5,525.00

$5,525.00

Page 1 of 1

I-

Ir

RADIOCHEMISTRYList of Acronyms

0

000000

S00

0

0

0

0

0

A Standard Methods

ASTM American Society for Testing &Materials

US Environmental ProtectionAgency

HN0 3 Nitric Acid

LAACC Large Area Activated CharcoalCanister

North Eastern Health RadiologicalLaboratory

NORM Naturally Occurring RadioactiveMaterials

SW

TSP

Solid Waste - 846

Total Suspended Particulate

USNRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Version 2009.1.0

www. enerqyIab. comRadiochemistry - 1

0

0

0

RADIOCHEMISTRY

1. MATRIX DIGESTIONS - Prior to analysis

MATRIX PREPARATION AMOUNT OF SAMPLE PRICETECHNIQUE REQUIRED

Drinking Water HNO 3 to pH <2 1000 mL plastic N/A

Drinking Water -222 Radon None Required 3-40 mL VOA vials - no N/A

headspace NA

Mine and Process Water- Soluble Constituents HNO 3 to pH <2 2000 mL plastic 15.00

Mine and Process Water- Total Constituents SW 3010 2000 mL plastic 15.00

Solids - Core, Sediments, Sludges, Soils, Rock SW 3050 100 g 25.00

Vegetation - USNRC Guidelines Ashing, Acid Digestion 4 Kg+ 100.00

Biomass - USNRC Guidelines Ashing, Acid Digestion 1 Kg 100.00

Air Filters Acid Leaching Filter sample and 25.00blank filter

Oils Acid Leaching 100 g 25.00

2. RADIOCHEMICAL ANALYSES - Dririking Water

ANALYSIS METHOD Drinking REPORTING UNITS PRICEWater MCL LIMIT

Gamma Emitting Radionuclides E901.1 NA dependent pCi/L $75.00sample size piL $50

Gross Alpha Radioactivity E900.0 15 1.0 pCi/L 50.00

Gross Beta Radioactivity E9100.0 50 (see note) 2.0 pCi/L 50.00

Gross Alpha and Beta Radioactivity E900.0 NA 1.0/2.0 pCi/L 75.00

Gross Radium Alpha 00-0 1 1i 5(minus Radon & Uranium) 00-02 15 1.0 pCi/L 50.00

226 50(see note)0.p i/ 75 0226 Radium (Alpha Emitting Isotopes) E903.0 0.2 pCi/L 75.00

228 Radium E904.0 5.0 (seenote) 1.0 pCi/L 75.00

222 Radon ASTM D5072-92 300 100 pCi/L 50.00

Radioactive Strontium E905.0 NA (see note) 2.0 pCi/L 100.00

Tritium E906.9 NA (see note) 1200 pCi/L 75.00

Isotopic Uranium (234U, 235U, 238U) E907.0 30 1 ug/L 100.00

Uranium E908.0 30 1 ug/L 25.00

Uranium (this method is currently beingreviewed by EPA for approval for drinking E200.8 30 1 ug/L 10.00water)

Sample Location: Entry point to distribution

Notes:Gross Beta Activity MCL = 4 mRem/year - = 50 pCi/L. Regulation specifies monitoring for vulnerable systems.The Radium MCL is for a combined Radium 226+Radium 228 = 5.0 pCi/L.

Version 2009.1.0www.enerqvlab. corn

Radiochemistry - 2

000

0

0

00

000

000

S

0

0

0S00

RADIOCHEMISTRY

RADIOCHEMICAL ANALYSES - Applicable to most matrices listed above (after digestion)Reporting Limits are matrix dependent

ANALYSIS METHOD REPORTING UNITS PRICELIMIT

Gamma Emitting Radionuclides E901.1 dependent on pCi/L $75.00GamaEitingRaoncliesE90.1sample size

Gross Alpha Radioactivity E900.0 1.0 pCiIL 50.00

Gross Beta Radioactivity E900.0 2.0 pCiIL 50.00

Gross Alpha and Beta Radioactivity E900.0 1.0/2.0 pCi/L 75.00

Gross Radium Alpha 00-02 1.0(minus Radon & Uranium) 00-02_1.0_pi/L_50.00210 Lead E905.0 Mod. 1.0 pCi/L 75.00

210 Polonium RMO-3008 1.0 pCi/L 75.00

40Potassium E901.1 dependent on pCi/L 75.00sample size

226 Radium (Alpha Emitting Isotopes) E903.0 0.2 pCi/L 75.00

228 Radium E904.0 1.0 pCi/L 75.00

222 Radon ASTM D5072-92 100 pCi/L 50.00

Radioactive Strontium E905.0 10 pCi/L 100.00

Isotopic Thorium (228Th, 23°Th, 232Th) E907.0 0.2 pCi/L 100.00

230 Thorium E907.0 0.2 pCi/L 75.00

232 Thorium E200.8/SW 6020 1.0 pCi/L 25.00

Tritium E906.9 1200 pCi/L 75.00

234 235 238Isotopic Uranium (2U, U, U) E907.0 0.2 pCi/L 100.00

Uranium, natural .E908.0 0.2 pCi/L 25.00235Uranium E200.8/SW 6020 1.0 pCi/L 10.00

Uranium, natural E200.8sw 600.0003 mg/L 25.00.. .620.2 pCi/L

4. BIOASSAY - Uranium and other radionuclides in urine per USNRC Guideline 8.22.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED QC REQUIRED REPORTING LIMIT UNITS PRICEVOLUME, mL

Isotopic Uranium 1000 plastic client specific 0.1 pCi/L 125.00

Uranium 100 plastic 25% 5.0 pg/L 25.00

Version 2009.1.0www.enerqylab.com

Radiochemistry - 3

0

00

0

0

RADIOCHEMISTRY

5. RADIOLOGICAL FIELD SERVICES

SERVICE PRICE

Radon - inside air by charcoal canister method (Ramses II Detector) $20.00

Consulting Radiation Safety Officer - USNRC Accepted 100.00/hour

Surface Gamma Surveys - baseline, decontamination and decommissioning, process operations by Quote

Air Quality Sampling - TSP, High Volume Air Sampling by Quote

Equipment Decontamination and Release Surveys by Quote

Emanation Coefficient by Quote

Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM) Surveys - oilfield related by Quote

Large Area Activated Charcoal Canister (LAACC) Tailings Surveys - Radon Flux by Method El 15 by Quote

Indoor Radon and Radon Progeny Measurements - Single or Multiple Site by Quote

Custom Radiation Safety Courses - mining, milling, and reclamation projects by Quote

6. RADIOLOGICAL EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION AND REPAIR

SERViCE PRICE

Portable Radiation Detection Instrument $75.00/ea

Probes for the above instrument 75.00/ea

Stand-alone Detector - SAC-R5, RD-14, etc. 75.00/ea

Alpha and Beta Sources, plated disc 50.00/ea

NOTE: All the above calibrations include a certificate and plateau graph where appropriate. Source calibrations includestatistical analysis.

Air Sampling pumps - low volume or-high volume samplers 50.00/ea

Rotometers 50.00/ea

General laboratory and field instrument repair and adjustment - excludes post repair calibration by Quote

Instrument design or modification by Quote

Version 2009.1.0www. enerqylab. corn

Radiochemistry - 4