Laserfiche WebLink
04/17/1996 14:19 <br />3039383774 FREIRICHLAW <br />• III III'lllllllll'll <br />Eva_ _ _ _ 999-- <br />Attorney at Law <br />The Broadway Suites <br />1942 Broadway, Suite 309 <br />Boulder, Colorado 80302 <br />April 17, 1996 <br />FACSIMILE LETTER <br />TO: Allen Sorenson <br />FAX NO: 832-8106 <br />FROM: Evan Freirickt <br />RE: Gold Hill Mill <br />PAGES (including cover sheet): 1 <br /> <br />PAGE 01 <br />Telephone <br />303-444-3029 <br />Facsimile <br />303-938-3774 <br />IF YOU EXPERIENCE TROUBLE WITH THIS TRANSMISSION, <br />PLEASE CALL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. <br />MESSAGE: I have reviewed your letter of April 12, 1996 and request <br />clarification. <br />Why does the Liepartment not require the water to be treated prior to <br />land application? <br />I understand that ground water is contaminated to the same levels as <br />the Hazel A water, but why would you want to disperse the contamination <br />into top soil and ground cover where repeated application will concentrate <br />the contamination? <br />In addition, what will be the effects on air quality as a result of <br />evapotranspiration? If you cannot drink it, won't land application risk <br />worker, wildlife, and public inhalation? <br />Should not the water discharged from the Hazel A meet the same <br />standards as the water in the tailings pond? <br />Can the contaminated water in the Hazel A be traced to mining <br />activity? If so, would not water treatment be a reasonable requirement of <br />land application? <br />~o--z/~ <br />Evan Freirich <br />cc: Bob Mason <br />