1992-04-24_REVISION - M1988112 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

C~ Mined Land Reclamation Division and Board April 23, 1992 Page 2 J One of the lysimeters was not installed at the appropriate location. Accordingly, a new Stipulation was entered into between Dos Hermanos and Battle Mountain providing fora third lysimeter to be installed close to the tailing pond area. A decree was entered by the Court on November 12, 1991 date incorporating bath of Dos Hermanos' Stipulations with Battle Mountain along with St:~pulations with other parties and findings by the trial court. Water quality issues were of primary importance to Dos Hermanos and cone of the significant reasons that Dos Hermanos participated in the Water Court proceedings. Dos Hermanos is greatly concerned about what is currently occurring at the Battle Mountain mine site. Our first knowledge of a problem was reading an article in the Denver Post early this month. After that, we received copies of corresponden<:e between Helen Sigmond and Robert Krassa along with a copy of a report prepared by Adrian Smith. Mr. Scott G. Mefford, an expert in ground water hydrology, testified for Dos Hermanos and other objectors at the taster Court proceedings. His letter to me of April 21, 1992 is of extreme concern. A copy of the letter is attached hereto as ]Exhibit B. Dos Hermanos cannot understand how cyanide was found in the samples in all three samplings namely December, 1991, February, 1992 and April, 1992 and that we first learned about it at this late date. It is my understanding that Battle Mountain is contending that there are laboratory problems which may be responsible for the results. Unless this is conclusively established, the more logical premise is that cyanide found in the porcelain cups located approximately 50 feet below ground means that there was improper containment of the cyanide solution by Battle Mountain. In short, there appears to be a leak somewhere in the containment system. We are not able to attend the MLRB hearings on today's date. However, we would ask that the MLRB do the following. We would request that optimum measures be taken by the MLRB to assure us, along with other neighbors, that independent sampling and testing is occurring at any potential location where samples can be taken to determine the nature, extent and potential proliferation of the problem. Likewise, to the extent that additional lysimeters need to be installed downgradient of the mine site, this should likewise occur, In the event that it is determined that the immediate problem cannot be corrected, we would request that the mine not be allowed to operate. in addition, clear, independent safeguards and testing mechanisms should be put into place to make sure that this problem does not occur in the future with monitoring by the MLRB.