My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL56096
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL56096
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:41:01 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 11:07:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1983141
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
5/14/1992
From
COM INC
To
MLRD
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />COM, INC. <br />P. O. BOX 80905 <br />SEATTLE, WA 98108 <br />(206) 932-1800 <br />May 14, 1992 <br />Mr. William York-Feirn <br />MLRD <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, Co 80203 <br />Dear Bill, <br /> <br />III IIIIII IIIIIII III <br />999 <br />Thank you for sharing the letter from Ms. Dobson with me. I <br />have the following questions/concerns. <br />ORE CONCENTRATES: The test results of the concentrates noted <br />in the letter, don't match the concentrates that we shipped <br />to the smelter. I have attached a copy of the smelter report <br />showing vastly different content. Particularly, notice the <br />Mercury content in our concentrates is nonexistent. I'm not <br />sure what that means. Could the concentrates have been mixed <br />in the lab? Was the sample even from our property? I would <br />be interested in your view. <br />WATER DISCHARGE: It is interesting to note that the <br />permitted levels for discharge seem obviously unattainable, <br />does this require a technical revision to accommodate mill <br />discharge water? At any rate, it is my understanding that <br />the Board views this discharge as an accident, and that <br />proper procedures were implemented 'to insure against this <br />happening again. <br />WATER USE PERMIT: Does the Division have any current <br />information to indicate what industry standards are in <br />groundwater evaluation? <br />TAILINGS POND 6 LINER: The fence going up now seems to <br />satisfy the concerns about this issue. Analysis of our <br />monitoring shows no tailings leaks, all holes were above the <br />freeboard. <br />In spite of the issues raised, I get the feeling that the <br />level of concern that this is a hazardous operation seems <br />low. I hope I am not misreading that statement. <br />The point about the challenge to mining as a traditional <br />industry in Boulder County is of course of significant <br />concern to all of us. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.