Laserfiche WebLink
~ iii iiiiiiiiiiiu iii ~ <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Depanmenl of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: 1303) 8663567 <br />FAX. (703) A32-8106 <br />MEMO <br />TO: Loretta Pineda, Bruce Humphries, Jim Stevens <br />FROM: James Dillie ~~; <br />DATE: March 24, 1997 <br />RE: DISCUSSION WITH CHRIS DONLON-Alamosa Valley Courier <br />Involving the San Luis Project, File No. M-88-112 <br />~~~~~ <br />DEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Roy Romer <br />Governor <br />lames S Lochhead <br />EKeculrve Daecror <br />Michael B. Lang <br />Division Direcror <br />I received a phone call from Ms. Donlon on March 24, 1997. She asked several <br />questions regarding: 1) the possible violation involving a possible out-of containment <br />discharge of cyanide, 2) the risk to human health (or to wildlife) from dhe discharge, <br />3) monitoring requirements at the site, 4) duration of monitoring, 5) reclamation <br />requirements, and 6) amount of bond. <br />I explained to Ms. Donlon that the company reported finding holes in the (bottom of two <br />leach tanks on November 25, 1996, while cleaning the tanks, and tha8 the Division <br />confirmed the holes during an inspection on December 13, 1996. In addition, she was <br />told that the Division sent BMRI a Reason to Believe letter on Decemfber 26, 1996, <br />outlining the possible violation. I stressed that this was a possible violation, since the <br />Board has not yet determined if the discharge is in fact a violation of the Act or Rules. <br />I detailed the process that will occur during the March 26, 1997 Board Meeting and told <br />Ms. Donlon to call me Thursday morning (March 27, 1997), if she wanted the results of <br />the hearing. <br />Ms. Donlon was told that there was no risk to human health (or to wildlife) as a result <br />of the discharge since, it appears, the cyanide did not reach the fresh water aquifer. <br />She asked if 12 ppm cyanide would affect human health or wildlife. I told her that <br />under certain circumstances, 12 ppm cyanide would have an adverse afl~ct on certain <br />aquatic life. <br />The groundwater and surface water monitoring requirements were also explained to <br />Ms. Donlon. <br />In addition, Ms. Donlon was provided with a general description of the reclamation <br />requirements and was told that the existing bond amounted to $6,100,Op0. <br />M'\ose\gaw\Donlon jd <br />