Laserfiche WebLink
,e <br />~ • III III III III IIII III • <br />GERSH & DANIELSON <br />ATTORNEYS AT LAW <br />LURE J. O. NIELSON IT )5 $NERM.N STREET <br />w IL ES w. 0ER5w SUITE IB TS <br /> OENVER,COL0 R..00 80203 <br /> 1]031 B63-IIIS <br />• •O winEO ONLT IN N[w rOwn TELELO PIER 1]OJI B R-ia 05 <br />December 14, 1992 <br />Philip M. Rocker <br />President <br />Mineral Policy Center <br />1325 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. <br />Suite 550 <br />Washington, DC 20005 <br />Dear Phil: <br />Thank you for your December 10, 1992, letter. <br />PO BAN C.TRUITT <br />^ ^ Of COVNSEi oc^ <br />R~CE~~A'~= ~-~ <br />pEC 151992 <br />DIVISIOi~~ OF <br />MIN~RALS ~ GEG~~'t. <br />1. ESattle Mountain Gold. For various reasons, it appears <br />that the data from the independent monitoring company; which was <br />retained to do cyanide sampling as a check against th~ company's <br />figures, has not yet produced results. However, th company's <br />results indicate that the cyanide levels are now withinthe permit <br />conditions in the tailings pond liquids. <br />This leaves unanswered the question of the cyanid levels in <br />the pore spaces of the tailings solids. I have asked Dr. Jim <br />Pendleton of our staff to contact you to ascertain how a can come <br />to grips with this concern. I hope he and you could dime up with <br />a practical. suggestion as to how your concerns could be'addressed. <br />2. Summitville. You are certainly prescient on this <br />subject. <br />I do want to correct one misimpression, which is that the <br />money that the company was allowed to draw on was som~thing they <br />were entitled to under the terms of our earlier settlement <br />agreement with them and was in no way contingent upon Qr replaced <br />by the proceeds of the sale of the Bodie property. <br />Frankly, everything I hear about the potential ma ketability <br />of the Bodie property causes me concern, and I want }~ou to know <br />that we are certainly not relying on that sale for much. <br />I do want you to know, however, that it appears that the <br />company is attempting to avoid responsibility for the continuing <br />operation of the water treatment plant. Summitville Consolidated <br />Mining Co., the immediate owner of the site, paid its employees <br />