Laserfiche WebLink
iii iiiiiiiiiiiuiii , <br />r <br />STATE OF <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1713 Sherman St.. Ruom 21 S <br />Denver, CO 90203 <br />Phone: 13031 Bbb-3167 <br />F.4X' 13031 83 b8106 <br />February 4, 1993 <br />Ms. Anne C. Baldrige <br />Battle Mountain Gold Company <br />5670 Greenwood Plaza Blvd. Ste 106 <br />Englewood, CO 80111 <br />pF' p0~ <br />"~ b <br />~`i <br />'o <br />f. ~ J (7 . <br />IBt~ . <br />Roy Romer <br />Governor <br />Michael B. Lang <br />Division Director <br />RE: Status of Third Party Sampling; Battle Mountain Resources, <br />Inc.; San Luis Project; Permit No. M-88-112 <br />Dear Ms. Baldrige: <br />Pursuant to your letter of February 1, my various rece t contacts <br />with Alana Scott, Dean Massey and yourself, and co tacts with <br />RCG/Hagler Bailly, Inc., it is appropriate that I bring you up to <br />date on the status of third party sampling at the San Luis <br />facility. <br />The results of the first third party sampling trips have been <br />received along with Dr. Maest's report. A copy of the deport, sans <br />data and field notes, will be faxed under this cover, and the <br />entire document is enclosed. The Division will complete its review <br />of the report by early next week and forward our comme~ts to both <br />you and RCG/HBI. Dr. Maest has agreed to amend they report as <br />necessary during the week of February 8, and that report will be <br />placed in the public file. You will have the oppdrtunity to <br />comment on the original report prior to its public iss{~ance. <br />Although the Division has yet to approve the third party sampling <br />report, I anticipate from a cursory reading that it will convince <br />the Division to make changes in the sampling routine as~well as in <br />the measurement parameters. This may lead to changes~in the MOU <br />and the Sampling Protocol. <br />Concerning your comment that the MOU is not being fo~lowed, you <br />should recognize these things. The first sampli g was not <br />initiated until RCG/HBI had studied the background documents and <br />made arrangements with BMRI for sampling. RCG/HBI initiated <br />sampling on November 23 and samples were delivered Ito the lab <br />November 25. The results of analyses were longer in coming than <br />ordinarily expected (six weeks as opposed to the anticipated four), <br />and analyses were mailed from Core Labs on January 8. The option <br />not to request that samples be analyzed on a rush basis was mine, <br />