My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP34097
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP34097
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:10:47 AM
Creation date
11/27/2007 6:44:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1988112
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
7/7/1993
Doc Name
THIRD PARTY MONITORING-BATTLE MOUNTAIN GOLD CO-SAN LUIS PROJECT M-88-112
From
DMG
To
BATTLE MOUNTAIN RESOURCES INC
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.
/
73
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 />Letter to Ken Kluksdahl <br />Third Party Monitoring Report ~2 <br />Harry H. Posey - July 6, 1993 <br />Page 2 <br />RCG/HBI made four recommendations in the subject report as follows: <br />1. "Back-up parts or a second pump should be kept on site." <br />The Division concurs with this assessment. <br />2. "Differences between dissolved and total metal concentrations <br />warrant collection of matched (either filtered or unfiltered, <br />preferably unfiltered) samples for total and WAD cyanide and <br />metals: determine cyanide on both filtered and unfiltered samples <br />from the process points for the next third-party monitoring." <br />The Division understands that this recommendation was instituted during <br />the third and fourth sampling events. <br />3. " ..Two strategies are recommended for improving the cyanide <br />determinations in the process-point samples: (1) send the samples <br />to another laboratory or have Core Labs use alternative cyanide <br />methods; and/or (2) have Core Labs or another lab perform a series <br />of experiments (described in Section 3.3) to determine the cause <br />of the analytical problems." <br />The analytical reports for WAD and Total cyanide indicate clearly that <br />the values given in the analytical reports do not accurately reflect <br />the actual amount of cyanide shown in the samples. WAD cyanide values <br />are routinely higher than Total, which is impossible, and spike <br />recoveries are poor and indicate that a less than adequate amount of <br />the cyanide was recovered by the lab. <br />The Division is not in a position to evaluate the problems with the <br />analytical method or with the laboratory. Battle Mountain must show <br />either through tests recommended by RCG/HBI or by another appropriate <br />set of tests that values reported to the Division for purposes of <br />proving compliance with permit standards are indeed accurate within <br />acceptable limits. <br />4. "Because of the poor spike recovery rates for total and WAD <br />cyanide, always use one of the unfiltered process point samples, <br />preferably the collection pond, for the laboratory quality control <br />spike analysis." <br />As noted above, it is evident that the amounts of cyanide reporting to <br />the analytical methods employed are less than occur in the samples. <br />Thus, for purposes of demonstrating compliance with permit standards, <br />it is appropriate that the process point with the highest ambient <br />cyanide levels should be used for the laboratory QC spike analysis. In <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.