My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP19119
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP19119
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:47:53 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 2:33:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1988112
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
7/15/1993
Doc Name
MEMO SUMMARY REPORT FOR APRIL 1993 THIRD-PARTY MONITORING TRIP
From
HAGLER BAILLY INC
To
DMG
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.
/
69
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
to <br />cyanide spike recoveries performed on samples with detectable cyanide concentrations that <br />may have analytical interferants. Therefore, the only important QA/QC analysis that used <br />Battle Mountain samples was the total cyanide spike analysis on the unfiltered upper tailings <br />pond sample. The result for this spike recovery analysis was 87%, whiah is within the <br />acceptable guidelines for spike recoveries for ryanide (75-125%). The unfiltered upper <br />tailings pond total ryanide concentration reported in the Analytical Report is 680 µg/I, while <br />the original value reported in the Quality Control Report is only 220 µg/1 (page 26). <br />According to Core Laboratories (personal communication, Lyn Benkers, 715/93)), this is <br />because the sample was diluted 1:3, and the actual analyzed concentration (not corrected <br />for dilution) was reported. The spike added was 80 µg/1 and the analyzed' value was 290 <br />µg(l. The original value is 220 µg11, and the %R is 87%. Given the problems with WAD <br />and total cyanide and the noted differences in ryanide concentrations in filtered and <br />unfiltered samples, it would be important to conduct spike recoveries on every process point <br />sample, especially unfiltered samples. <br />3.4 LABORATORY TURNAROUND T1317E <br />The laboratory turnaround time was somewhat improved for this sampling. Core <br />Laboratories received the samples on April 29, 1993. The date of the Analytical Report <br />from Core Laboratories was May 27, 1993, which is a turnaround time of slightly under one <br />month. <br />4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE <br />SAMPLING <br />Groundwater well samples were collected on this monitoring trip, and all <br />cyanide concentrations were below detection. <br />WAD cyanide concentrations were higher than total concentrations in both <br />unfiltered and filtered lower tailings pond samples. 'Fora] cyanide <br />concentrations were higher in filtered than unfiltered samples for both the <br />upper tailings pond and the lower tailings pond samples. VVAD cyanide <br />concentrations were also higher in 5ltered than in unfiltered samples at these <br />same locations. These results indicate that fairly significant analytical <br />problems still e~dst with ryanide determinations in samples from the site. <br />- Given the problems with WAD and total ryanide and the noted differences <br />in ryanide concentrations in fitered and unfiltered samples, it would be <br />important to conduct spike recoveries on every process point sample, <br />especially unfiltered samples. <br />RCGl1-iagler, Bailiy, Inc. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.