Laserfiche WebLink
i , <br /> <br />21 <br />t 1 those data, did I? <br /> 2 Q What was your analysis from looking at <br />' 3 th <br />h <br />i <br />t <br />? <br /> e geoc <br />em <br />s <br />ry data <br /> 4 A It was based on a very limited sample, <br /> 5 that you had conflicting data points in which you <br />' 6 rejected the ones that were uncomfortable, and that <br /> 7 the critical questions of what is in the field <br />' 8 composition of the deposited tailings wial be <br /> 9 dependent on field conditions which haven't been <br /> l d <br />l <br /> 0 mo <br />ed or reported. <br />e <br /> 11 Q Did you review the analysis ghat was in <br /> 12 the application of the possible leakage through the <br />' 13 liner? <br /> 14 A Yes. <br />' 15 Q Did you disagree with the conclusions in <br /> 16 that analysis? <br />t <br /> 17 A Yes. <br />' 18 Q Did that analysis not follow standard <br /> 19 EPA procedures for (inaudible), for hazardous <br /> 20 facility plants? <br /> 21 A The analysis, which is for the benefit <br /> ti <br />f <br />d <br />b <br />li <br />it' <br />i <br />th <br /> 22 eve <br />s Ques <br />o <br />the boar <br />-- i <br />e <br />on 2 <br />n <br />e <br /> 23 adequacy sort of interrogatories, we will call it <br /> 24 that -- was fine, as far as it went, but it didn't <br />' 25 address problems of flaws in what is assumed to be <br />' AGREN, BLANDO & BILLINGS <br /> <br />