Laserfiche WebLink
- ~ iii iiiiiiiiniu iii ~ <br />1 <br />STATF~OF <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION ~ of ~o~ <br />Department of Natural Resources N~,~'~r$ <br />1313 Sherman St.. Room 215 ~ ~ <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />303 866-3567 r' y676 `, <br />Fnx~303 832-8106 <br />Roy Romer, <br />Gwemor <br />Michael B. Long, <br />DR>•E: August 25, 1992 °'"_`°"°``e"°' <br />T0. The Mined land Reclamati <br />FROM: Jim Pendleton ! \ ~" <br />RE: Considerat' Dance Deadline for Tailings Pond Cyanide levels; <br />Battle Mountain Resources, Incr's San Luis Project; Permit -88-112 <br />Background <br />During the July 22, 1992 Board Meeting in Alamosa, the Board considered and <br />adopted an additional corrective action Order requiring Battle Mountain <br />Resources, Inc. to comply with interim standards for weak acid disc ciable <br />(WAD) cyanide in its tailings ponds. The Board also requested that the <br />Division, during the August Board Meeting, provide a recommendation for a <br />deadline by which the operator must be in full compliance. <br />Dissenting Opinion <br />In response to the Board's inquiry, I presented my opinion discoura <br />imposition of a specific deadline ("date certain"). I observed tha <br />additional corrective action Orders issued by the Board on June 25, <br />July 22, 1992, both required BMRI "to use all reasonably practical <br />continue to lower the cyanide levels in all tailings ponds to the l <br />reasonably achievable levels, and to continue to use its best effor <br />times to achieve this goal." Further, these orders also stated: "I <br />time the staff, or other parties, believe that BMRI is not doing ev <br />reasonably practical, BMRI can be brought back to the Board for fur <br />action, including civil penalties and further corrective action ord <br />is my opinion that this Order subjects BMRI to an extremely demandi~ <br />performance standard. Further, I believe it also provides the Divi <br />the parties, with broad latitude to question BMRI's rate and method <br />affecting compliance. I am also concerned that the need to meet a <br />deadline may cause BMRI to select abatement options which aren't ne <br />in the interest of optimizing long term environmental conditions. I <br />deliberations during the past month have not lead me to change then <br />ing the <br />the <br />1992 and <br />teps to <br />nest <br />s at all <br />at any <br />^y thing <br />ter <br />^s." It <br />on, and <br />ecific <br />scarily <br />opinions. <br />