Laserfiche WebLink
i <br />had determined that the core matched the criteria, the core <br />was shipped to the project engineer's laboratory for <br />development of a composite sample. <br />Laboratory personnel in consultation with the project <br />geochemical expert selected two distinctively different samples <br />' for each of the four rock types. The two different samples were <br />selected in an attempt to model both expe~:ted overall <br />conditions and expected worst case conditions. In the Santa <br />' Fe Conglomerate, the pink gneiss and the mudstone rock types, <br />the different samples were selected based on color differences, <br />' indicating either a composition change or oxidation. In the <br />case of the biotite/biotite amphibole altered gneiss rock type, <br />1 the different samples were selected based on a change in grain <br />size which indicated possible reworking of the rtaterial. <br />For the southern waste rock/tailings disposal area two <br />tailings samples generated during a test milling process at <br />' Battle Mountain Gold's Battle Mountain, Nevada Laboratory were <br />tested. Test results are presented in Section D.6. In addition, <br />' tests were performed on combined tailings and waste rock <br />samples. Three combined samples were tested, tailings/ <br />' conglomerate, tailings/pink gneiss, and tailings/interburden. <br />The mudstone waste rock type was not tested since this waste <br />rock type represents a very small percentage of the waste rock <br />at the .site. <br />' The geochemical testing program consisted of the <br />following test series: <br />I. Whole rock analyses; <br />' 2. Acidification/neutralization potentials; <br />3. Leachability; and <br />4. Humidity cell testing. <br />1 <br /> <br />D-19 (Revised 4/20/89) <br />