Laserfiche WebLink
- ~ !~ N <br />~_ III 111111 III IIII III <br />`~ 999 <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources I~~~~ <br />1 313 Sherman A ,Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: 1303) 866-3567 <br />FAx. (}03) 832-8106 <br />DEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Roy Romer <br />Guvernur <br />DATE: May 17, 1995 lames 5. Lochhead <br />Executive Direcor <br />TO: Berhan Keffelew / Michael B. Long <br />Drvisiun Director <br />FROM: Harry Posey ~~~~~r(/ <br />RE: Review: Letter dated May 2, 1995 in Re: Submission of Information on 1995 <br />Construction of Cresson Valley Leach Facility and Response to OMLR <br />Letter of April 13, 1995; CC&V, Cresson Mine, Permit No. M-80-244 <br />This review evaluates three documents: <br />1. Letter from CC&V cited in the title (May 2 Letter). <br />2. 72-hour D.I. Contact Tests -Pad 2 (Attachment 1). <br />3. Proposal of Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company in the Matter of Water <br />Classifications and Standards for the Arkansas River Basin §3.2.0, 5 CCR 1002--8 <br />[proposal dated March 29, 1995 to Water quality Control Commission] (WQCC <br />Proposal). <br />REVIEW <br />Attachment 1. Attachment 1, as presented, is the company's rendition of leach tests that were <br />reported to the company by Mid Continent Labs. For the Division to accept the information, <br />the company should submit copies of the original information sheets to the Division for <br />review. Essential QA/QC information should be included. The units for each measurement <br />should be noted. The name, address and key contact persons at the analytical lab should be <br />identified. The summary report supplied by CC&V, while convenient, is not verified and <br />therefore may contain errors from the originals. <br />I am not familiar with the 72-hour D.I. Contact Test, and as I do not know the location of <br />the analytical lab, I cannot contact them directly for an explanation. This is not say that the <br />tests are invalid, but rather that the procedure is one with which I simply am not familiar. <br />Please ask the Company to furnish an explanation of the analytical procedure. <br />The six samples, P2-1 through P2-6, which are reported in Attachment 1, are not identified <br />adequately in the May 2 Letter. Please have the company identify the samples, explain how <br />