My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1993-01-29_REVISION - M1988112
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1988112
>
1993-01-29_REVISION - M1988112
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/20/2021 7:34:39 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 9:45:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1988112
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
1/29/1993
Doc Name
BATTLE MTN RESOURCES INC BMRI SAN LUIS DMG PN M-88-112
From
BATTLE MTN GOLD CO
To
DMG
Type & Sequence
AM1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
~_ <br />The most likely explanation for the cadmium concentrations <br />appears to be sample contamination from residual cadmium <br />nitrate in the barrel filter. Contamination from the barrel <br />filter explains the higher dissolved concentrations than <br />total concentrations, since total samples are not filtered. <br />we were not aware of potential cadmium contamination <br />problems from the use of cadmium nitrate as a pre-treatment. <br />According to hydro-geochemist, Dr. Adrian Smith, cadmium <br />sorbs onto sampling equipment and is not easily removed <br />during routine washing and rinsing of sample equipment. <br />Once the cadmium is sorbed, de-sorption does not occur <br />consistently. Cadmium is released as a result of a solution <br />chemistry process rather than simply being rinsed from the <br />sampling equipment by subsequent washing or sampling events, <br />This explains the incer_sistercy cf cc3.~;,ium levels after use <br />of the barrel filter to pre-treat samples. <br />Laboratory error or contamination is not completely ruled <br />out given the difference in duplicate samples taken of <br />August 6 and October 16. <br />During the bi-weekly sampling event of November 23, 1992, <br />the process point samples were tested for sulfides using <br />lead acetate paper. The sulfide tests were negative. <br />Unlike previous negative sulfide tests, the cyanide samples <br />were not pre-treated with cadmium nitrate. The preliminary <br />analysis reports from Core laboratories show that the <br />cadmium concentrations are below detection limits; these <br />reports were faxed to you on January 13, 1993. <br />All monitoring points with detectable cadmium concentrations <br />were sampled during the week of January 18, 1993. .a rush on <br />cadmium results has been requested from Core Labs. <br />If you have any questions, please call. <br />Sincerely, <br />1~1'nno 01 ~c-0V1 <br />Alana L. Scott <br />Environmental Engineer <br />cc: Jim Pendleton <br />Harry Posey <br />Anne Baldrige <br />Ken Kluksdahl <br />Mike Young <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.