Laserfiche WebLink
:- <br />POWDERHORN <br />COAL COMPANY <br />September 29, 1999 <br />Daniel I. Hernandez <br />Assessment Officer <br />Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />Re: Notice of Civil Penalty <br />Dear Mr. Hernandez: <br />III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />999 <br />P.O Box 1430 <br />Palisade, Coloratlo 61526 <br />1970) 464-7951 <br />Fax (970) 464-7161 <br />RECEIVED <br />OCT 071999 <br />Division of Minerals 8 Geology <br />In regard to the Notice of Violation No. CV 99-007 issued on August 20, 1999, <br />Powderhorn Coal would like to express several concerns relating to this violation. <br />First and foremost, Powderhorn Coal has always and continues to place a high <br />priority on all issues relating to the environment in Colorado. It is our goal to <br />work with yQu in helping to protect our environment. <br />The sampling at Pond #12 at the time of inspection raises questions as to the <br />accuracy and preparation of the samples. Two different samples were taken in <br />separate bottles, leading one to question which sample was representative. The <br />samples were not analyzed for seven days at the Grand Junction Lab. Our <br />concern as to the accuracy of samples include: <br />How well was the sample mixed before the tests were made? <br />Had the sample been refrigerated or iced to 4 degree centigrade and <br />brought back to room temperature before tests were performed? <br />The duplicate determinations do not appear to be within the 5 percent <br />range of average weight and the results between labs were not even <br />remotely consistent <br />References made in the Grand Junction Lab report indicates that the <br />sample was turbid and that the amount of filter loading affects the results. <br />In our opinion, the accuracy of results of this sample is in question. <br />