Laserfiche WebLink
<br />PEOPLES ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SERVICES <br />RT. 1 BOX 3-A <br />SAN LUIS, COLORADO 81152 <br />June 11, 1992 <br />Mine Land Reclamation Division <br />1313 Sherman St. Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado <br />Attn: Dr. James Pendleton <br />Dear Dc Pendleton, <br />Peoples Alternative Energy Services (PAES) would like to comment on <br />materials we have received in the past month regarding the curre}rt state <br />of the Battle Mountain Gold (BMG) issue. <br />1) PAES would like to know if data on cyanide have been taken frdm <br />random or same points. Also at what level (depth) in the pond w@re <br />samples taken. Is it better to have consistent sampling points rather then <br />random levels? If samples have been taken at random points and at only <br />one or two levels then how accurate is historical data? Because <br />stratification was noted in a June 2 letter to BMG by Harry Posey of your <br />staff we would like to ask that the Division to clarify the consistency of <br />vertical and horizontal sampling points. We also would like to reinforce <br />the importance of vertical and horizontal sampling. <br />2) We would also like to voice our concern about all the assumptions <br />regarding the actual levels of cyanide. Does anyone really know hbw <br />much cyanide there is in the ponds or are we totally dependent oh <br />theoretical assumptions which always seem to refute the validity pf testing <br />results? Evaluations of cyanide levels depend on correct assumptions--and <br />it is our feeling that laboratory testing are at best only (if informed) <br />guesses. <br />3) We are also wondering if BMG or the Division has put all data gathered <br />on cyanide to date (since September 1991 or earlier) into a computer <br />format for better cross-referencing? <br />4) Are testing labs monitoring matrix interference? In their "adequacy <br />letter responses (#2) BMG consultants stated that thiocyanate caused <br />interference in testing from the start. We noticed that often thiocyanate <br />interference has been used to discredit test results. To clear up thQ cloud <br />over the validity of the data all limitations need to be considered. Also are <br />labs now considering matrix interference by carbonate after Peroxide is <br />added? <br />5) When will a sedimentary core sample be taken? <br />