Laserfiche WebLink
Section 3 <br />Results <br />Table 3-7 Interpretation of Isotherm Plots <br />Sample ID Isotherm Kd sloe Notes <br />Arsenic <br />V4WR4 Linear 0.824 10.7 Figure 3-1 <br />WSWR3 No trend No trend Figure 3-2 <br />SJWR3 Linear 0.588 15.9 Figure 3-3, 1 outlier removed <br />TPWR3 Linear 0.940 8.1 Figure 3-4, 1 outlier removed <br />SVWR2 No trend No trend Figure 3-5 <br />Vanadium <br />V4WR4 Linear 0.990 25.9 Figure 3-11 <br />WSWR3 Linear 0.813 22.7 Figure 3-12 <br />SJWR3 Linear 0.870 26.6 Figure 3-13 <br />TPWR3 Linear 0.725 23.4 Figure 3-14 <br />SVWR2 Linear 0.716 14.7 Fi ure 3-15 <br />Selenium <br />V4WR4 No significant attenuation Figure 3-6 <br />WSWR3 No si nificant attenuation Figure 3-7 <br />SJWR3 Linear (0.512) 1 3.3 Figure 3-8 <br />TPWR3 No significant attenuation Figure 3-9 <br />SVWR2 No significant attenuation Figure 3-10 <br /> <br />The isotherm shown in Figure 3-20 likely represents a solubility control due to the <br />formation of a uranium mineral within the batches. Some of the other isotherms that <br />do not exhibit clear adsorption isotherms are shown in Figures 3-2,3-5, and 3-17. <br />These may also exhibit solubility control, except the solubility varies from one batch <br />to the next. In the case of selenium, very little, if any, attenuation occurred, and for the <br />one sample in which a linear isotherm was obtained (SJWR3), the r2 was low (0.512) is <br />indicating a poor linear fit, and the Kd was low (3.3 L/kg). <br />Table 3-8 provides the calculated partition coefficient (Kd) and the retardation factors <br />(R) for each of the elements of concern in each waste rock tested. <br />• <br />am 3-5 <br />7184986-Denison MlneslTask Order 3 - DMO Sampling and Analysis PlankTask 3.12 - Sal, Ore, Rock Data Assessment ReportlSunday Rock RepallAttachmentslA[tenuation Report working draft 040309.doc