Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />Minutes, June 24-25, 1992 <br />a ~ D~4FT <br />Subject To Board Approval <br />Division with a reptlrt evaluating the necessity of installing <br />additional monitoring wells within 30 days after verbal approval. Any <br />additional monitoring wells will be installed and completed within 30 <br />days of the Division's approval of the operator's report. <br />The Division further recommended that operation of the ore processing <br />plant be ceased, if the operator fails to meet any of the deadlines <br />imposed. In response to a question from the Board, Staff said the <br />operator's bond is adequate. <br />In response to a question from Frank Johnson, Staff clarified that the <br />Division's recommendations are for interim standards to be effective <br />through October 15, 1992. The operator will cease the use of Hydrogen <br />Peroxide by October 1, 1992. <br />Ms. Jacquez said she felt the recommended interim standards should be <br />considered a permit amendment. She and Mr. Flynn stated objections to <br />the Division's recommendations. The Board stated that the Division's <br />recommendations, if accepted, would be considered corrective actions. <br />The Board discussed the matter of the number to be used for cyanide <br />analysis of water samples and whether this would be WAD, total or <br />free. Mr. Duchane said total cyanide exceeds WAD cyanide levels by <br />about 10 ppm. Staff said a benefit of testing for WAD levels is that <br />several different techniques can be used on-site for measu-ing. <br />The Director commented that the Division feels that the water should <br />continue to be circulated with activity occurring in the pond, in order <br />for detoxification to occur and to prevent stagnation of the pond and <br />tailings. It was clarified that the Board should determine whether the <br />operator will be allowed to continue to operate using cyanide during an <br />interim detoxification process. <br />The consensus of the Board was that the approach being -ecommended by <br />the Division toward resolution of this matter is adequate. However, <br />the Board requested that the Division, during it report at the July <br />1992 Board Meeting, provide recommendations for further reductions in <br />cyanide levels, based on the information obtained during the interim. <br />Staff said that after the 50 ppm level is reached, the operator should <br />be required to continue an aggressive use of Hydrogen Peroxide to <br />achieve the lowest level of cyanide in the shortest possible time. <br />Staff clarified that at this time the Division still corsiders 4.4 and <br />3.8 as the goals for total and WAD cyanide levels. <br />Board Member Danielson recommended that a fourth condition be added to <br />the those recommended by the Division which states that the company <br />should continue to employ all reasonably practicable measures to reduce <br />the cyanide concentrations as low as practicable and that the Division <br />should report back to the Board anytime it is believed that the company <br />is not using all reasonably practicable measures to comply with this <br />condition. <br />