Laserfiche WebLink
~ DRAF'~' III IIIIIIIIIIIIIiII <br />Minutes, October 21-22, 1992 Subject To Board Approval 38 <br />Staff Presentation by Larry Oehler: <br />36. FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING <br />BATTLE MOUNTAIN RESOURCES, INCORPORATED File No. M-88-112 <br />333 Clay Street, 42nd Floor <br />Houston, TX 77002 <br />All persons wishing to give testimony were sworn. <br />Secs. 15, 16, 17, 20, 21 and 22, T32S, R71W, 5th P.M., <br />Costilla County, 2,200 acres; 112 open pit gold and silver. <br />Status report on progress towards completion of Boaz•d ordered <br />corrective actions, as amended. Status of reducing the <br />cyanide concentrations of waste stream and waste disposal <br />areas to levels that comply with the permit. Approval of a <br />Memorandum of Understanding between the Division a.nd Battle <br />Mountain Resources, Incorporated for an "Agreement for <br />Environmental Sampling Services" between BMRI and RC3jHagler- <br />Bailey, Incorporated--third party sampling contractor <br />(continued from the August 1992 Board Meeting). <br />Staff presented EXHIBIT A, a written status report, and <br />provided the Board with an update regarding the operator's <br />progress toward completion of the twelve abatement <br />requirements which the Board imposed during March of this <br />year. No significant changes were reported. The operator is <br />continuing to comply with the Board Order, although the site <br />is still not in compliance with permitted conditions, <br />regarding cyanide concentrations. <br />Staff presented EXHIBIT B, an October 20, 1992 memo to the <br />Division's file, and said the operator had executed a contract <br />for third-party sampling with RCG/Hagler, Bailly, .Cnc. On <br />October 19, 1992 the Division and the operator signed a MOU, <br />regarding the third-party sampling. Staff said tine first <br />sampling should occur during the first week of November <br />(1992). <br />The consensus of the Board was that as long as the operator <br />remains in compliance with the Board Order and i:s making <br />progress on all of the remaining abatement items, there would <br />be no need for the matter to presented during formal Board <br />Meetings each month. The Board asked that the Division update <br />them, by written report, regarding the operator's process each <br />month that this Item is not scheduled for presentati~~n. <br />Mr. Dean Massey, an attorney representing the operator, stated <br />that he concurred with the reports made by the Division. He <br />said the operator would not have a problem with the suggestion <br />