Laserfiche WebLink
t <br />4 <br />~ III IIIIIIIIIIIII IIl <br /> <br />KRASSA, LWDIiOLM, KUMLI & MADSEN <br />Attorneys end Counselors at law <br />3050 Broadway, Suite 202 <br />Boulder, Colorado 80304 <br />'telephone (303) 442-2156 <br />Facsimile (303)443-3617 <br />Shayoe M. Medea <br />14x1 F. Kumli, m• <br />David C. liodbdm <br />Robert F. T. Knua, P.C. <br />•A4o Milord b Prurdre M GJffomiu <br />Slepheu C. Miller, P.C., gfo.avr! <br />Helen Sigmond, Esq. <br />Lucero, Kadinger 6 Lester <br />311 San Juan Avenue <br />P. O. Sox 1270 <br />Alamosa, CO 81101 <br />Re: Battle Mountain <br />Dear Helen: <br />April 14, 1992 <br />~( ~~ LarrlD, <br />~~r~ . <br />lPa 15 1997~`,,.:.::~~. <br />Pur(r(d O1Jicr <br />1(23 N. F~'vabnh St. <br />PMe6b, Colo"do 61003 <br />(/19) 512-3413 <br />(!l4) 512-391T ftyimlk <br />Pkare Dlien Comryudewee <br />w Borldn O~iee <br />This letter will respond to your letter of April 3, 1992, <br />addressed to Bill Hillhouse and myself. 1 understand that you are <br />writing on behalf of your client Costilla County Conservancy <br />District ("CCCD^"). <br />You asked that the CCCD be allowed to take samples from the <br />tailing pond. Samples already are being required by the MLRD, to <br />be conducted under the supervision of that agency. The level of <br />cyanide in the tailings pond was not asserted by any party in the <br />Water Court litigation to be per se within the jurisdiction of the <br />Water Court. As you know, the Court held that it did not need to, <br />and did not, reach the question of whether water quality concerns <br />were within the jurisdiction of the Court at all. Notwithstanding, <br />and without conceding that the matter falls within the Water <br />Court's jurisdiction in any way, Battle Mountain will report <br />results of the analysis of tailing pond samples to you <br />simultaneously with its reporting of those sample results to the <br />t4LRD. It would not be appropriate for CCCD representatives to go on <br />the property to to};e their own samples, not only due to operational <br />reasons but also because the sampling is already being conducted <br />under MLRD supervision. <br />As to the lysimeter results, only one of the three lysimeters <br />has produced moisture to date and only in very small amounts. As <br />you know, the Decree provides, at paragraph 26(a) toward the bottom <br />of page 28, that sampling will be done "if sufficient volume of <br />fluid is obtained for testing." The amount of moisture produced so <br />far has not been sufficient to allow reliable analysis. Battle <br />Mountain believes that the intent of this part of the Decree is to <br />require reporting of results of analysis only of a sufficiently <br />large sample. <br /> <br />