United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research
and Development
Washington, DC 20460
EPA/625/K-94/002
June 1994
Seminar Series on
Managing
Environmental
Problems at
Inactive and Abandoned
Metals Mine Sites
August 8-9, 1994—Anaconda, MT

November 15-16, 1994—Denver, CO

November 17-18, 1994—Sacramento, CA

-------

-------
                                 EPA/625/K-94/002
                                 June 1994
           Seminars

   Managing Environmental
   Problems at Inactive and
Abandoned Metals Mine Sites
                                             X——1
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
      Office of Research and Development
                              Printed on Recycled Paper

-------
                                 Notice

This document has been reviewed in accordance with  U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency policy. Mention  of trade names or commercial products does  not constitute
endorsement by EPA or recommendation for use.

-------
                                      Contents

Understanding the Reasons for Environmental Problems From Inactive Mine Sites	1
Dirk VanZyl

Importance of Characterization in Addressing
Environmental Problems From Inactive Mine Sites	7
Andy Robertson
U.S. Bureau of Mines Technology: New Environmental Applications	19
William Schmidt

Case Study #2: An Improved Version of a
Constructed Wetland Mine Drainage Treatment System	 25
Ronald Cohen

Case Study #3: Biotreatment at Mine Closure for Alpine and Desert Sites	33
Leslie Thompson

Case Study #4: Acid Mine Drainage — Reclamation
at the Richmond Hill and Gilt Edge Mines, South Dakota	49
Thomas Durkin

Case Study #5: Sharon Steel/Midvale Tailings Superfund Site	57
William Cornell

Case Study #6: Innovative Approaches To Address
Environmental Problems for the Upper Blackfoot Mining Complex	63
Judy Reese, J. Chris Pfahl, and Thomas Mclntyre

Technologies To Address Environmental Problems at Inactive Mine Sites	79
Martin Foote
                                          in

-------

-------
            Understanding the Reasons for Environmental Problems
                             From Inactive Mine Sites
Dirk Van Zyl
Golder Associates Inc.
Lakewood, CO
Dr. Van Zyl has a B.S. (honors) in civil engineering from the University of Pretoria, South Africa,
and an M.S. and Ph.D. in civil engineering from Purdue University.  As a researcher, consulting
engineer,  and university professor, he has over 20 years of civil/geotechnical  engineering
experience and  is a registered professional engineer in 11 states.

Dr. Van Zyl  is  director of  mining in the Denver office of Golder Associates  Inc.  He is
responsible for technical and marketing efforts for mine waste disposal, mine closure, and heap
leach projects. He also provides engineering design and regulatory support in negotiations for
permits.  He has supported regulatory development in the United States and internationally.
He is a member of the Society of Mining, Metallurgy,  and Exploration,  Inc., the American
Society of Civil Engineers, and the South African Institute of Mining  and Metallurgy.  He has
published  over 50  technical papers,  research reports, and  books,  and served  as editor of
conference proceedings. He has coordinated and presented numerous short courses for the
Society of Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc., and the U.S. Forest Service.
                                           -1-

-------
"Understanding the Reasons for
 Environmental Problems From
 Inactive Mine Sites"
                              Presented by
                    Dirk Van Zyl, P.E., Ph.D.
                           Director Mining
                       Colder Associates Inc.
                          Denver, Colorado
"Mining not only produced wealth, power,
and fame for the United States; it also
attracted world-wide attention and
investment to this underdeveloped nation,
one that was sorely in need of a financial
transfusion".
                        MINING AMERICA
                        Duane A. Smith, 1987
                    University Press of Kansas
"Without mining-from coal to iron to gold-
the United States could not have emerged as
a world power by the turn of the century,
nor could it have successfully launched its
international career of the twentieth
century."
                        MINING AMERICA
                        Duane A. Smith, 1987
                     University Press of Kansas
                                         -2-

-------
   "All this development did not take place
   without disturbance-environmental, personal,
   economic, political and social. Mining left
   behind gutted mountains, dredged-out streams,
   despoiled vegetation, open pits, polluted creeks,
   barren hillsides and meadows, a littered
   landscape, abandoned camps and burned-out
   miners and the entrepreneurs  who came to mine
   the miners."
                                  MINING AMERICA
                                 Duane A. Smith, 1987
                             University Press of Kansas
i MINING AMERICA, Duane A. Smith, 1987, Univ. Press of Kansas


                    Pictorial Slides
     Aspects of Mineralization

     • Gold and silver hi oxidized zones near
        surface, sulfides at depth
      • Sulfide minerals (lead, zinc, copper) hi
        sulfide mineralization
      • Other metals can be associated with
        mineralization, e.g., arsenic, iron,
        mercury and cadmium
                                                        -3-

-------
 Historic Mine Development

  • Prospecting for surface outcrops
  • Orebodies close to surface or vein type
    mining, e.g., lead-zinc in
    Kansas/Missouri, gold and silver in
    Rocky Mountains
  • Shafts or Adits
  • Gravity dewatering important
  • Mining activity increased surface area
    exposed to water and oxygen
 Mineral Extraction
    Physical processes - increase surface
    area
    Amalgamation - mercury introduced
    Smelting - air pollution, firewood
    consumption
    Cyanidation - introduced in 1890's
    Flotation - no significant chemical
    residues, increased surface area
Water Quality Data Comparison For
Selected Mineralized Areas in Colorado
finfiseer
?«
AlXBiC
CKtotam
Csfsw
AbnCnck
JlMowti
(ADC 1991)
NA
5.7
f
3
7
10,2
4,9
259
261
MS
WithtmuFoik
BctowCropij
Crtek
(Oa 1931)
3.44
2
5.4
3.360
WithtnuA Fork
Beto-OcTO
Citck
(OCI1991)
NA
NA
62
26,00(9
Silver Creek u
Bridge Hwy
145 (Mir 1966
la Dec 1968)
7.9 Man
8.4 Mu
7.4 MM
NA Man
NA Mu
NA Mtn
NA Man
NA Mix
NA Min
111 Mean
1.100 Mix
0 Min
(All values in ug/1)
                                                -4-

-------
Water Quality Data Comparison...
Parameter
Iron
Lead
Silver
Zinc
Alum Creek
at Mouth
(Aug 1991)
126.500
171.500
103.000
4.2
6.3
2
<0.5
652
843
543
Wightman Fork
Below Cropsv
Creek
(Oct 1981)
6.300
18.5
1.02
770
Wightman Fork
Below Cropsy
Creek
(Oct 1991)
82.000
NA
<0.2
6.300
Silver Creek at
Bridge Hwy
145 (Mar 1966
to Dec 1968)
5.407 Mean
125,000 Max
0 Min
655 Mean
6.350 Max
0 Min
NA
855 Mean
2.000 Mas
100 Min
(All values in ug/1)
 Some Reasons for Environmental
 Problems from Inactive Mine Sites

 «  Natural Mineralization
 •  Mining activities resulted in increased
  exposure to water and air
 •  Poor understanding of environmental
  effects of mining
 •  Economic incentives driving force
 •  Chemicals used for hydrometallurgical
  and flotation extraction typically not a
  concern
 Some Reasons for...
 •  Problems are now highlighted because:
  - Changes in environmental
    awareness
  - Changes in regulatory environment
  - Better understanding of
    environmental processes-multimedia
    perspective
  - Increased analytical capabilities
                                               -5-

-------
   Other Issues
     Unrealistic regulatory limits
    - Baseline vs. drinking or aquatic
      water standards for natural
      discharge
    - Discharge from treatment plant
     Site-specific risk issues-not always
    recognized
Conclusions
• Natural mineralization is biggest
  source of environmental problems

• Mining increased exposure of sulfides
  and other minerals to oxygen and
  water

• Present concept: Design for closure
                                               -6-

-------
          Importance of Characterization in Addressing Environmental
                        Problems From Inactive Mine Sites
Andy Robertson
Steffen, Robertson and Kirsten (Canada) Inc.
Vancouver, BC
Dr. Robertson  has a B.Sc.  in civil engineering  and a Ph.D. in rock mechanics from the
University of Witwatersrand, South Africa.  After a few years spent working for a  mining
company as a rock mechanics engineer and for a specialist foundation engineering company
doing specialized site investigation and foundation  designs and  contract supervision, Dr.
Robertson became a cofounderof the firm Steffen, Robertson and Kirsten (SRK), Inc., Consulting
Geotechnical and Mining Engineers. He has 28 years of experience in mining geotechnics, of
which the last 10 years have been devoted extensively to geoenvironmental engineering for
mine sites.

Dr. Robertson has been responsible for developing the engineering capabilities of the North
American practice of SRK over the past 17 years and has specialized personally in technology
for the safe and environmentally protective disposal of mine tailings and waste rock, acid mine
drainage prediction and modeling, mine closure  plan development, and financial assurance
and remediation of abandoned mines. He has been extensively involved in the preparation and
writing of a number of manuals on these subjects, which are now widely used in  the mining
industry.  In addition, he gives  regular short courses and consults internationally to mining
companies  and regulatory authorities on these topics.  He serves on  a number of advisory
boards,  including the  University of British Columbia Board of  Studies for the Geological
Engineering Program and the Mine Waste Technology Pilot Program (Butte, Montana), as well
as on a  number of mining project specific review boards.
                                          -7-

-------
 "The Importance of
 Characterization in Addressing
 Environmental Problems from
 Inactive Mine Sites"

                            Presented by
                   Dr. A. Mac.G. Robertson
                 Stiffen Robertson ind Khstm
                 Consulting Engineer* and Scientist*
Technical References
   Draft ARD Technical Guide
       •  British Columbia Acid Mine
        Drainage Task Force Report
   Mine Rock Guidelines
       •  Saskatchewan Environment
        and Public Safety
   Ontario Closure Guidelines
       • Ontario Ministry of Northern
        Development and Mines
Site Characterization Steps
 Planning

• Investigation

'Evaluation
                       AH Steps
                       considered/or
                       appropriate and
                       adequate site
                       characterization
                                            -8-

-------
Planning
  Definition of Potential Concerns
        • what problems should be
         considered?
  Methodology for Site Characterization
        • how to look at the site?
  Initial Information Requirements
        • where to start?
Investigation
  Techniques for Initial Reconnaissance
        • what can be seen from the site?
  Evaluation of Existing Information
        • are data sufficient to define
         concerns?
  Additional Data  Collection
        • where do we go from here?
Evaluation
  "Quantification" of Potential Issues of
   Environmental Liability
        • what are the real problems
  Evaluation of Alternative Control
   Measures
        • how can these problems be
         solved?
  Cost/Benefit Evaluation
        • what is the best control measure
         for the cost?
                                               -9-

-------
Site Characterization for
Reclamation	

  Physical
        • components must be stable, safe
         and not move
  Chemical
        • materials must not decompose
         and yield soluble contaminants
  Land Use and Aesthetics
        • site must be useful and look good
Approach  (eg. Rock Piles)

  Initial
    •initial reconnaissance and evaluation
    •geographic comparisons
    •lithoiogic, geochemical units
Approach (eg. Rock Piles)

  Detailed
    •quantify mine rock units, production
    •material distribution and sampling
    •laboratory static and kinetic testing
    •hydrology and geohydrology
    •physical and chemical modelling
    •environmental impact
                                             -10-

-------
 Initial Reconnaissance and
 Characterization for ARD
    •detect signs of ARD
    •assess the factors that control ARD
    •evaluate control measures
    •evaluate the environmental impact
    •assess characterization requirements
     for subsequent stages
J

~*\
            Pictorial Slides
Kinetics of Acid Generation
            1   «   *   4   •   •
pH Controls During Acid
Generation
            Pictorial Slides
                                          -11-

-------
Solubility of Metals
     1OOO

      180
   W
   al  u> •

   I  -.
           i  4  •  •  r  i  r
            Pictorial Slides
Kinetics of Contaminant Front
Migration
         m*frt
-------
 Reconnaissance...
  Where to Look
    •at and as close to source as possible
    •color changes, paste pH
    •surface pools
    •seeps at toe of waste
    •decants and surface runoff
    •ground water monitoring wells
Reconnaissance...

  When to Look
    •spring & fall for water quality (freshet
     and rains)
    •summer for staining and precipitates
    •first snowfall for "hot spots"
Reconnaissance...
  Field Clues
    •visible sulfides
    •red, orange, yellow, white, blue
     staining or precipitates or water
    •dead vegetation
    •melting snow or steaming vents on
     wastes
    •dead fish and other biota
                                             -13-

-------
Reconnaissance...
  Water Quality
    •low pH in seeps, ground water, decant
    •elevated or rising sulfate and metals
    •increasing acidity or decreasing
     alkalinity
  Geochemistry
    •low paste pH of mine wastes
    •high conductivity in field extractions
Identify Site Components

    •underground workings
    •open pit workings
    •mine rock and overburden piles
    •tailings facility
    •water management and water
     treatment facilities
    •all other infrastructure
Mine Rock Characterization

  Physical
    •size and layout (topography)
    •construction methods and lifts
    •grain size distribution and variation
    •hydrology (run-on and run-off)
             Pictorial Slides
                                              -14-

-------
Mine Rock...
  Chemical
    •mineralogy
    •paste pH,
    •field extraction's for conductivity
    •seep water quality
        •pH, conductivity, sulfate, metals
    •downstream water quality
             Pictorial Slides
Mine Rock...

  Land Use
    •visual
    •soils
    •vegetation
    •drainage
Tailings Characterization

 Physical
    •size and layout (topography)
    •structures and stability
    •deposition methods and zones
    •grain size distribution
    •surface and subsurface drainage
             Pictorial Slides
                                              -15-

-------
 Tailings...
  Chemical
    •mineralogy
    • paste pH,
    •field extractions for conductivity
    •seep water quality
        •pH, conductivity, sulfate, metals
    •downstream water quality
             Pictorial Slides
Tailings...

  Land Use
    •visual
    •soils
    •vegetation
    •drainage
             Pictorial Slides
Underground Workings
Characterization
 Physical
    •layout and geometry
    •mining methods, slopes and backfill
    •openings and subsidence zones
    •drainage and flood levels
            Pictorial Slides
                                             -16-

-------
 Underground...
  Chemical
    •mineralogy of exposed rock and
     backfill
    •drainage pH, conductivity, water quality
    •downstream water quality
             Pictorial Slides
Underground...
  Land Use
    •visual
    •safety
    •subsidence
    •drainage
Open Pit Characterization

 Physical
    •layout and geometry
    •contained waste and backfill
    •slope stability
    •inflow and flooding, groundwater
            Pictorial Slides
                                            -17-

-------
Open Pit...

  Chemical
    •wall rock and backfill mineralogy
    •paste pH
    •field extractions for conductivity
    •seep water quality
        •pH, conductivity, sulfate, metals
    •downstream water quality
             Pictorial Slides
Open Pit...

 Land Use
    •visual
    •safety
    •subsidence
    •drainage
             Pictorial Slides
         Stages of Sampling and Testing for
   Site Reconnaissance and Characterization of ARD
SUge
1 Problem
Screening
2 Source
Dcflnitioa
3 Kinetic
Characterization
4 Control
Chinctcrizatioa
Identify
Geological
Units
Oeocbemica!
Units
Geochemical
Classification
Evaluation of
Controls
Test
Static
Static
(Definition)
Kinetic
Kinetic
Question
What we
have
What we
have
How it will
behave
How to
modify (he
behavior
                                               -18-

-------
                       U.S Bureau of Mines Technology:
                        New Environmental Applications
William Schmidt
Bureau of Mines
Washington, DC
Mr. Schmidt has worked for the federal government for 22 years in areas related to mining and
minerals processing. After graduating from the Colorado School of Mines and before joining
the government in 1971, he worked for 8 years in the private sector, mostly on assignments
related to tunneling and construction engineering.

Mr. Schmidt has managed various government programs related to regulation of coal mining,
mining research,  and metallurgical research.  For the Department of  Energy, he served as
director of the Office of Coal Technology, where he was responsible for a $70 million per year
coal  mining and  preparation research program.  At the Department of Interior's Office of
Surface Mining (OSM), he was assistant director for Program  Operations and Inspection,
responsible for OSM's enforcement, oversight, and Abandoned Mined Lands (AML) programs.
Mr. Schmidt has visited Europe and Asia a number of times as a government technical expert.
He works  for the Bureau of Mines in Washington, where he is chief of the Division of
Environmental Technology. In this position, in addition to his research program management
responsibilities, he oversees the Bureau's technical assistance to the U.S. Forest Service, EPA,
and other agencies in the environmental cleanup arena.
                                         -19-

-------
       Proven Tools for New Uses


     U. S. Bureau of Mines
   Remediation Technology

             William B. Schmidt
 USBM Environmental Research

 Mine drainage technology
  •• Acid mine drainage coal
  » Acid Mine Drainage metal and non-metal
   mines

 Solid mine waste and subsidence

 Hazardous waste treatment technologies
  - Characterization
  »• Treatment

 Abandoned Mine Land (AML) remediation
 USBM Environmental Technology
	Distribution of Funding
     FT 95 Funding'
       S19.4M
                                      -20-

-------
 Mine Drainage Technology	

Prediction
  - fundamental sulfide reactions
  - geochemical models (correlated with static
   and kinetic testing and field test results)
  - host rock and waste rock dumps
Mine Drainage ...
Mitigation/Control
  - seals, grouts, and caps
  - passivation

Treatment (Contaminant Removal)
  «• chemical
  - biological
Solid/Subsidence Technology

 Reprocessing/process modification
   •• pyrite removal
   - heavy metal removal

 Pyrometallurgical treatment (high temp)
   - vitrification
   * metal extraction
                                              -21-

-------
 The Problem With Recovering
      Metals From Wastes
               PERCENT EXTRACTION
 Solid/Subsidence
Waste disposal
  •• Hy ash
  - dump stability

Subsidence effects
  * prediction
  «• prevention
Hazardous Waste Technologies
    (CERCLA/RCRA Wastes)

Characterization
  •• geophysical
  •• geochemical
  »• imaging

Treatment
  »• electro-dissolution w/ organic acids
  > teaching/recovery
  •• superfund technical support
                                         -22-

-------
 Abandoned (Coal) Mine Land
	Technologies	
 Mine fires
  - extinguishment
  •• containment

 Subsidence
  • void detection
  - subsidence control (backfilling)
 Abandoned (Coal) Mine Land...

 AMD (Coal)
  » constructed wetlands
  - bacteriacides

 Shaft/Entry Seals
  - lightweight concrete
  - inflatable forms

 Hydrologic Controls
 ET Customers	

 USEPA
  - ORD/RREL
  - Superfund
  - Great Lakes Nat'l Program Office

 USFS
  - Acid Mine Drainage
  - Slope Stability
                                           -23-

-------
 ET Customers...
OSM/DOI
  «• Technical assistance
  " Regulatory tech base

NPS/DOI
  •• Site remediation
  •• Technical assistance
Targets for ET Technology

Hazardous Sites on Federal Lands

Hazardous Waste Sites

General Mine Waste Problems

Special Studies
  - Urban rivers
  - Great lakes
  - Municipal wastes
  - Other (rad wastes, mixed wastes, etc.)
                                            -24-

-------
                                 Case Study #2:

                An Improved Version of a Constructed Wetland
                        Mine Drainage Treatment System
Ronald Cohen
Colorado School of Mines
Golden, CO
Dr. Cohen received a B.A. degree in biophysics from Temple University in Philadelphia. He
also received a Ph.D. in environmental sciences and engineering from the University of Virginia,
where he combined disciplines of water quality engineering, water chemistry, hydrology, and
applied math.  He has worked as a project chief in the National Research Program at the U.S.
Geological Survey and currently is  associate  professor  of  environmental  science and
engineering at the Colorado School of Mines.  Dr. Cohen  has been working on treatment,
geochemistry, and transport of mine drainage materials for 5 years. In addition, he has studied
the distributions of 239'240plutonium and 137cesium in regions of the front range both affected
and unaffected by the Rocky Flats Plutonium Weapons Plant.  Also, he has participated in
studies of surface runoff, storm  runoff, graphic  information systems, and stream transport
modelling.  He has reviewed  the Department of Energy's  Treatment Plans and Treatment
Reports and made suggestions for additional remediation technologies.

Dr. Cohen has received the First Prize for Environmental Projects from the American, Consulting
Engineers Council for development of treatment systems for acid  mine drainage.  He is the
recipient of a Certificate of Special Recognition from the U.S. Congress for environmental work
associated with Department of Energy nuclear weapons plants.  He was selected to review the
National  Five Year Plan for Environmental Remediation of the Weapons Plants.  He has
published numerous papers in  journals such as the Journal  of the American  Society of Civil
Engineers, Limnology and Oceanography, and  others.  He has worked on contaminant
problems in Charlotte Harbor  (Florida), Chesapeake Bay, San  Francisco Bay, the Potomac
River, and Clear Creek and the Eagle River (Colorado). Currently, Dr. Cohen teaches courses
on  contaminant transport, water quality,  water quality modelling, and hydrology at the
Colorado School  of Mines. He  has designed curriculum  and coordinated  the Hazardous
Materials Management Program for professionals dislocated from the energy and minerals
industry.
                                         -25-

-------
          Case Study #2:
   An Improved Version of a
  Constructed Wetland Mine
 Drainage Treatment System

                   by
              Ronald Cohen
        Colorado School of Mines
               Golden, CO
  Wet Substrate Bioreactor for Removal of
Metals: Treatment Expanded for Removal of
	Arsenic and Chromium	

 PROBLEM: Remove metals to detection limits
 Inexpenslvoly-tow capital costs, low operation and
 maintenance
 • Remove not only Fe, Cd, Zn, Pb, and Cu, but also
   metals that appear In anlonlc forms, Arsenic and
   Chromium
 • Balsa pH of acidic waters (as low as pH 2) to near
   neutral
 • Minimize the size of the system
 • Optimize conditions for bacterial production of
   •ulfldes; sulfldes react with metals to form precipitates
  Wet Substrate Bioreactor for Removal of
Metals: Treatment Expanded for Removal of
       Arsenic and Chromium
  SOLUTION: Upflow reactor filled with composted
  livestock manure that has been mixed with highly
  porous calcined clay ceramics
  • Removal of Arsenic, Cd, Zn, Pb, and Cu to below
    detection limits
    Removal of 86-99% of Chromium and Fe
    Reactor life: 3-5 years
    Maintenance: Check for clogged pipes once a week
    M«UI> can be recycled from spent substrate
    Three, 20' x 20* x 8' systems In operation
                                            -26-

-------
    Cell B: Fresh O
    1.0
Output/
 Input
          20    40   60   80
              Days from Start
        Evidence
   Works in winter
   pH increases
   Sulfide in the substrate
   Metal removal
   Sulfate decreases
Simultaneous Isotopic and AVS
 Analyses on Same Substrate
Samples from Cell B
Rates in nanomoles S-VcmVday
Site
Isotopic
Surface
Bottom
Surface
Control
AVS Method
Surface
Date
10/90
11/90
11/90
11/90
11/90
Rate
600
440
750
12.2
670
%DEV
10.9 (4)
10.4 (3)
8.6 (6)
29 (3)
35 (6)
                                 -27-

-------
          Conclusions
1. Plants did not contribute
  significantly to metal removal and
  are not required
2. Loading rate can be estimated
  using sulfide generation information
3. Major goal is to maximize activity of
  sulfate reducing bacteria and
  optimize hydraulic regime
      Summary of Design

 	Parameters	

  • Upflow configuration
  • Size and volume based on:
     1) Minimum hydraulic residence time of 20 - 30
       hour* or;
     2) Sulphide production rate of 300 - 600 nanoMoles
       S-VcmVday and metal loading rates, moles
       per day
  • Can use single or multiple stage systems in
    series as space permits
  • Composted livestock manure as organic
    substrate
                              'Subttrat*
                              Uindacap*
                              Fabric

                              Gravti
                                         -28-

-------
     pH in Single Stage Wells
 pH
                    Doubt* fio*
              \       \
     July I  Una.   I
(it.  I
          Wirframbomn
          »20-from bottom
100 -i
95-
90-
85-
Parccnt
Bwnoval an-
ofZN
75-

70-
65-
60-
J





Double flow
\

uly Aug.


\N

Double
flow again
\

S«pt ' Oet ' Nov.
Data
      100
 Pncant
R*mov*l
 ofUad
                                     Nov.
                                              -29-

-------
        10O
 Ptrctnt  60'
 Btmovil
  of Iron  50-
                                       Doub
                      Doublaflow     llowaqlln
            July >   Aug.    •     S*pt     '  Oct  «  Nov.
100-
S6~
so-
Ptrcanl
B»
-------
100-
80-
Percent 80-
Removal
of Iron ...
20-
0.
-20.
(

•f* 17~1*' "' B
• a
o . "
"a
a
D •
K-
•
) 50 100 150 200 250 300 3!
Residence Time (h)


a

8-
7-

6-
PH 5.

4-
3'
2'
1"

« * *F : - «
K
>» ^
* K
K
R
"BJ ,g * rfF J D


° 0 50 100 150 200 250
RMldwitUm*(h)

BlnflUMl
KEHIlMM








300





















350

-31-

-------

-------
                                Case Study #3:

            Biotreatment at Mine Closure for Alpine and Desert Sites
Leslie Thompson
Pintail Systems, Inc.
Aurora, CO
Ms. Thompson received a B.S. in biology from Purdue University and has continuing education
and graduate coursework in geochemistry,  environmental engineering, and environmental
microbiology.  She  has worked as a chemist, microbiologist, and  chief of research and
development of bioremediation processes in mining and engineering companies. She has over
20 years of experience in chemical manufacturing, mining, and waste remediation.

Ms. Thompson is employed at Pintail  Systems,  Inc.,  as vice president of research and
development. Her responsibilities include management of the environmental research program,
oversight of field engineering, and development of innovative biotreatment processes for
industrial waste remediation.  Under her leadership, new bacterial treatment processes have
been developed for control  of acid mine drainage, heavy metal wastes, complexed metal
cyanides, nitrates, phenolic  wastes, and aromatic hydrocarbons from petroleum  and coal
gasification production operations. Ms. Thompson is a member of the American Chemical
Society, the Society of Mining Engineers, the Metallurgical Society, the American Society of
Microbiologists, and the Mining and Metallurgical Society of America.
                                         -33-

-------
  * PINTAIL
 L
Wins Operations
  Environmental  Impact
  Mining Waste
  | Environmental Impact
• Cyanide, heavy metal and nitrate wastes have
 the potential to impact:
  • Groundwater
  • Surface water
  • Soil
  • Atmosphere
  • Terrestrial and aquatic organisms
 Mining Issues
I Issues, Goals and Solutions
 1 Issue
    Perceived conflict between a strong economy
    or mining industry and a healthy environment
 'Goal
    Create a balance between conservation,
    resource development and the environment
    (reclamation and protection)
                                                   -34-

-------
 Mining Issues
I Issues, Goals and Solutions
• Solutions
    Biotreatment of cyanide, nitrate and metal
    wastes using engineered natural processes

    Conventional chemical/physical treatments for
    mine wastes
   Bio-treatment Development
 Laboratory Research
 and Testing
                                              -35-

-------
   Cyanide Biodecomposition
   | Reacllons	

  • M,CNr + 2H20 +1/2 02 •* M/bacteria + HC03+ NH3
   Cyanide Biodecomposition
    Reactions
 • NH3 •» NH2OH •» HNO? •* N02 -» N03
 > CM t bacteria -* purines, pyridines, amino acids,
              proteins
   Bacteria Isolation
NatiEenl solution
                      Nulrlant/bactarla
                        solution
                Pictorial Slides
                                                 -36-

-------
   Bioaugmentation
 > Enhancement of a bacteria population's natural ability
  to use or transform undesirable components of an
  environment.
     1. Growth to working biotreatment concentrations
     2. Elimination of non-working portions
       ofmicrobial community
     3. Selection of beneficial mutations
 Process Description
I Treatment Bacteria Bio-augmentation
    1 Augment bacteria
       • Stress in waste infusion media
       • Temperature stress
       • Eliminate non-working species
       • Improve reaction kinetics
       • Define optimal growth nutrients
    Decomposition of Ferrocyanides
    I Native Bacteria vs Augmented Bacteria
o Ferrocyanide decomposition
 100
                                       Control, no
                                       treatment
                                       Population #1
                                       Population #2
       Native bacteria    Augmented bacteria
                                                         -37-

-------
    Ferrocyanide Biodecomposition

   | Tolal Cyantde (mg/L) vs Time	
Total cyanide, mg/L
 25

 20

 15

 10

  5

  0
      Start    8 hour   18 hour  24 hour
                        Biotreated
                        cyanide

                        Control
  Cyanide Biodecomposition
   Column tests
Activated
carbon
 Bacteria/nutrient
    solution
                             I
                 Ellluent solution
                      Cyanide-
                      contaminated
                      leached ore
                      residue in
                      PVC column
                 Pictorial Slides
Spent Ore Cyanide Treatment
| Column Leachate Solution WAD Cyanide
WADCMImoA)
160]
10i
«_


M_
a M_




= j



*!
>



\
\ '

^
< *
'!
\
'
^

K
SS
$



a •
•1 ,
p=):


- •»
N


s


M
^1
\


= :


5 «


^
^
f

•
...

Ei



H.
[•


-,
_


-,
.

•^1
-•
t 1 \


" ™l
I


^


— Bio-1B
- *Bio-2S
*BiO-3C
. -FeS04
i , * Peroxide

" -^ Water"
Rinse
8 0.1 02 03 0.4 9.5 OS 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5
Tons ol Effluent Solution per Ton of Ore


                                                      -38-

-------
    Heap Bio-detox Pilot Test
    | Biotreatment Sequence	
    1. Stack 1000 tons of leached ore residue
      on liner.
    Heap Bio-detox Pilot Test
    Biotreatment Sequence
  2. Add treatment bacteria concentrate to sump.
Bacteria solution
            Sump
   Heap Bio-detox Pilot Test
   | Biotreatment Sequence	
  3. Apply bacteria solution to residue with
     spray system.
     Sump/Application Bacteria
                                                 -39-

-------
    Heap Bio-detox Pilot Test

   | BlDlrealment Sequence	

   4. Collect pile leachate solution in sump.

                    4
     Uachatt Solution Collection
    Heap Bio-detox Pilot Test

   [ Blolrealment Sequence	

 5. Analyze leached ore residue and leachate
    solutions.
                           ^	^    TCN, NO,
TCN,K04.Co,J           5
 Mn,Cu,Au -
      Sump/ Application Bacteria
      UachaU Solution Collection
                 Pictorial Slides
     Microbial Cyanide Decomposition

    11500 ton Field Test, Average CN Removal
Tout cyanide, mg/kg
 80
          DayO
Day 70
                                      Bacteria
                                      treatment
                                      Control,
                                  j    untreated
                                                    -40-

-------
  Successful  Biotreatment
  I Requirements
  • Establishment of treatment bacteria in
   environment
  • Biodecomposition/bio-mineralization reaction
   rate improvements
  1 Physical contact of treatment bacteria with
   pollutants
  Site-specific Design Criteria
 | Biotreatment Field Test	
    • Ore/waste geochemistry
    • Field bacteria production
    • Background waste microbiology
    • Application engineering
  Yellow Pine Unit
 |  Site conditions for heap cyanide bio-detox	
• Located near Yellow Pine, Idaho (approx. 50 miles
 northeast of McCall)
• Elevation -6500'
• Treatment start: end of March, 1992
»Treatment end: September, 1992
• 1.3 million ton agglomerated oxide ore
• Single leach pad,  114'depth
                                                        -41-

-------
     Yellow Pine Unit
    I Valley County, Idaho
Coewtf,
   Yellow Pine Unit
   | Spent Ore Cyanide Bio-Detox
  • Laboratory Phase
       CN oxidizing bacteria isolated/augmented and
       tested in flask and column test program

  > Field Mobilization
       Bacteria concentrate and nutrients transported
       to mine

  • Field Re-culturing
       Bacteria grown in a 3-stage culturing system
   Heap Detox Treatment Goals
  I Yellow Fine 1.3 Million Ton Heap	

  • Reduce WAD CN from 47 to 0.2 mg/l in heap
    leachate solutions
  • Run In situ cyanide oxidation in spent ore to
    remove cyanide point source
  • Complete treatment in one operating season
  * Enhance gold production during detox
    operations
  L
                  Pictorial Slides
                                                        -42-

-------
  Spent Ore Bioremediation
  1.3 Million Ton Cyanide Heap Bio-Detox
-WAD CN (mg/L)
en

40-
30-
?n
m
n
y
vV\




I
x
V


\
Tons sol




<»_
0 50 100 150 2C
Days
^-
ution/Tons ore
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0



^>

 Field vs. Lab Cyanide Biotreat
I Hecla Yellow Pine Bio-detox
Cyanide, mg/L
1000 	 -
inn >^
10-
•)
or °-2p
nm
	
" e>

omCN

	 - -
"*^-*
s



/
K^
x_

*ieid(\
Lab('

^

'AD)
rCN)


X^
    0    0.1    0.2   0.3   0.4   0.5   0.6
            Tons solution per tons ore
 Field Biotreatment Au Recovery
  Biotreatment vs. Water Rinse
            0.01     0'.1      Ol2     0'.3
                 Tons solution per tons ore
                                                -43-

-------
 Yellow Pine Heap Bio-detox
I Spent Ore Cyanide Blolreatmenl Results	

• ON detox complete after 5 month treatment
• Conventional chemical treatment time estimates
 greater than 2 operating seasons
* Enhanced gold recovery during biotreatment
Spent Ore Cyanide Biotreatment
I  Yellow Pfna Unit Environmental Recognition	

• Hecla Mining Company received 1992
  "Industrial Pollution Control Award" for Idaho
  from the Pacific Northwest Pollution Control
  Association.
Cyprus-Amax Copperstone
                                                 -44-

-------
 Copperstone Site Conditions
  Heap Cyanide Bio-detox
 • Located near Parker, Arizona
 • Elevation approximately at sea level
 • Treatment started in mid-July, 1993
 • Treatment completed in December, 1993
 •1.2 million tons ore
 • Single leach pad
  Detox Treatment Goals
 | Cyprus Copperstone 1.2 million ton heap	
• Reduce WAD and total cyanide from 30 to <0.2 mg/L
 in heap leachate solutions
• Treat spent ore to remove cyanide source
• Complete treatment in less than 6 months
• Enhance  gold production during detox operations
  Copperstone Treatment  Design
 I Bacteria Application	
1 Culture and nutrients applied to heap in a drip
 irrigation system
1 Decrease in WAD and total cyanide measured in
 pregnant and reclaim solutions.
• Field vs. Lab Cyanide Biotreat
                Pictorial Slides
                                                     -45-

-------
 Field vs.  Lab Cyanide Biotreat

| Cyprus Copperslons 1.2 million ton heap	
  Cyanide, mg/L
1000
          0.1    0.2    0.3     0.4
            Tons solution per tons ore
Copperstone Spent Ore  Detox
 Copper and WAD CN in Leachate Solutions
       3   5   7   9  11  13  15   17   19
                   Weeks
 Spent Ore Detox - Heap Closure
 I Blolreatmentvs Water/Barren Solution Rinse
   0    0,1   0.2    0,3   0.4   0.5   0.6   0.7
    	Tons solutionn'ons Ore	
                                                 •46-

-------
  Bio-detox Treatment Results
  Cyprus Copperstone Spent Ore Cyanide Biotreatment
• WAD and total CN detox complete after less than
 70-day treatment cycle
• Enhanced gold recovery during biotreatment
• WAD and TCN treatment complete with application
 of <0.3 tons solution/ton ore
 Biotreatment Advantages
 Mine Waste Remediation
     In situ treatment

     Natural, non-toxic by-products
  Biotreatment Advantages
   Mine Waste Remediation
Complete detoxification
 • Solid and aqueous waste treatment ends
   long-term liability
 • Shorter duration/fewer pore volumes for spent
   ore detox
                                                  -47-

-------
  Biotreatment Advantages
   Mine Waste Remediation
 Cost effective compared to conventional
 treatments
 Re-vegetation potential
  * Site reclamation promotes natural growth on
   decomissioned heaps, plant areas
Biotreatment Advantages
I Mine Waste Remediation	
   • Final solution
      • No continuing liability
      • Eliminate monitoring
   • Establishes corporate environmental
     commitment
               Pictorial Slides
                                                -48-

-------
                                Case Study #4:

                   Acid Mine Drainage—Reclamation at the
               Richmond Hill and Gilt Edge Mines, South Dakota
Thomas Durkin
South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Pierre, SD
Mr. Durkin has an A.S. degree in biology from Nassau Community College, a B.S. degree in
earth science from Adelphi University, and an M.S. degree in geology from the South Dakota
School of Mines and Technology. He is a certified professional geologist. He has worked as
a commissioned officer in the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Corps,
and as a mine regulator for the State of South Dakota for the  past eight years.

Mr. Durkin is employed by the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources
as a hydrologist in the Office of Minerals and Mining. His duties have involved him with the
geochemical aspects of mine wastes and mine waste management issues relating to large scale
surface gold mines in the Black Hills. He is concerned particularly with regulating problems
associated with acid mine  drainage  and developing  effective prevention, control,  and
reclamation requirements. He is a member of the Western Governors' Association Mine Waste
Task Force and the Abandoned Mine Waste Working Group of the Committee to Develop On-
site Innovative Technologies.   He is a member of the American Institute  of Professional
Geologists, the Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, Inc., and the South Dakota
Academy of Science.
                                        -49-

-------
        Acid Mine Drainage:
 Reclamation at the Richmond Hill
        and Gilt Edge Mines,
            South Dakota
                  by

            Thomas V. Durkin
              South Dakota
 Department of Environment and Natural Resources
        Office of Minerals and Mining
           EPA Seminar Series
 Managing Environmental Problems at IAM Sites
 Anaconda, MT - Denver, CO - Sacramento, CA     I
GENERAL STATEMENT
The most significant environmental issue that
has arisen in the South Dakota mining industry
over the last several years is that of Acid
Mine Drainage (AMD). The magnitude of the
potential environmental impacts and the
financial liabilities has only recently
been recognized.
 History - Richmond Hill Mine

     * Historical Perspective

     * Property Ownership

     * Permitting of Active Mine

     * Mining/Processing Method
            Pictorial Slides
                                        -50-

-------
       Site Characteristics
     Elevation - 5,500 to 6,000 ft.

     Climate:
     - Temperature
     - Rainfall

     Geology
      History Continued ...
   >  Discovery of AMD Problem

   >  Environmental/Economic Assessment
     of Problem

   >  Enforcement Action

   >  AMD Mitigation Plan and Bonding
     Development and Permitting

   >  Closure/Postclosure Maintenance
     and Monitoring Requirements
 Discovery of AMD Problem

* Jan/Feb 1992 - Sulfide Ore Stockpile
  Sulfide Waste in Spruce Gulch Depository

* April 1992 - AMD Detected

* Water Quality Monitoring Results
           Pictorial Slides
                                         -51-

-------
Environmental/Economic Assessment

 >  Descriptive/Predictive Geochemical Tests:
   Phase Is Static - ABA/NAG Tests, Paste pH's
   Phase lit Kinetic • Humidity Cells,
        Mineralogies! Analyses
   • Quantification of Problem (Tonnages)

 >  Environmental Impacts
   - Hydrologlc Impact studies
   - Mass balance assessments
   • Aquatic Impact studies
   - Investigations of contaminant migration
    pathways

 *  Short Terra / Long Term Mitigation Options

 >  Mitigation Costs — Reclamation Bonding
   Environmental Liability
             Pictorial Slides
                Geology
      Acid
      Generating
Non-Acid
Generating
      Altered PC
      Amphibolite



      Tertiary
      Breccia
Unaltered
Amphibolite
             Pictorial Slides
   Acid Generating Potential
         for various lithologies


 >  ABA Values/Static Test Results

 >  Kinetic Test Results

 >  Contaminants (Metals) Generated
                                              -52-

-------
      AMD  Mitigation Plan
  	SHORT TERM Control Actions
   >  Collection and Treatment Surface Runoff
   >  10 yr, 24 hr Storm Event Containment Pond
     Below Spruce Waste Dump
   >  Base Addition
     Soda Ash and Caustic Soda
   >  Metal Hydroxide (Sludge) Precipitation/Removal
   >  Pump Partially Treated Dump Discharge
     To Large Lined  Stormwater Pond
   >  Entac Treatment and Lime Addition to Dump
   >  Anoxic Limestone Drain
              Pictorial Slides
  DENR Enforcement Action
>  December 1992 Notice of Violations
   and Order
>  $489,000 Penalty
   Mine Permit Violations
   Water Quality Standard  Violations
>  AMD Control/Mitigation Requirements
      AMD Mitigation Plan
   LONG TERM Control Requirements/Actions
   >  Remove Acid Generating Material From Dump
      2,700,000 Tons Waste Rock
      Backfilled In Pit Impoundment
   >  Control Site Water Balance
   »  Cap Pit Impoundment
      - Covers reactive waste rock
      - Covers reactive pit floor rock
   >  Reclaim Acid Generating Leach Pads
      - 727,000 tons reactive spent ore
      - Heap decommislonlng (neutralization) plan
   >  Reclaim Ancillary Facilities
           (Mine Permit Amendment)
                                                -53-

-------
          Cap Design - Pit Impoundment
               Richmond Hill Mine
       Root
       Zone
             Topsoil
Thermal
Protection/
Drain Layer
(Spent Ore)
             Compacted
             Clay
             Crushed Limestone
             Waste Rock
             4^ In.
4ft.
             2S.
                          II.
                          max
              Pictorial Slides
 Richmond Hill Reclamation Bond
         Increase Due to Acid Mine Drainage
           Total Current Bond: $10.700,000
                                 Before AMD
                                  roblem
   After AMD
   Problam

 Richmond Hill Reclamation Bond
	Increase doe to AMD Problems	

              $10,700,000
                RecJalM Wa«te Dump
                      1*      Backfill
                               24%
 P»d Reclamation
     49%
                               Contingency
                                  16%
                             Original (unaffoctad)
                                                -54-

-------
            Postclosure
  Postclosure Period Begins at Reclamation
  Surety Release

  30 Year Postclosure Period
  Can Be Extended

  Postclosure Bond Required
  (Currently Set at $1,700,000)

  Remedial Action Can Be Required
  (Rebuild Cap, Etc.)
    Postclosure Monitoring

  "Performance Monitoring"

  Periodic Monitoring of Water, Air, and
  Biota at Various Locations Around
  Reclaimed Facility (Pit, Dump, Pads)

  Lysimeters
  Temperature Probes (Thermistors)
  Oxygen Meters
  Neutron Probes

  Annual Performance Monitoring Meetings
            Pictorial Slides
   Postclosure Maintenance

> Remove Deep Rooting Vegetation, and Burrowing
  Animals From Cap

> Ensure Adequate Vegetative Cover

> Repair Erosion Damage
  Maintain Erosion Controls

> Other Remedial Actions (if AMD Reoccurs)
                                          -55-

-------
Brohm's Tailings Reclamation Project

Relic Gilt Edge Tailings
Strawberry Creek
         Pictorial Slides
   Conclusions
                                  -56-

-------
                                  Case Study #5

                  Sharon Steel/Midvale Tailings Superfund Site
William Cornell
Bureau  of Mines
Rolla, MO
Mr. Cornell graduated from the University of Missouri—Rolla with a B.S. in metallurgical
engineering.  He  has been employed by the Bureau of Mines for 11 years and  has been
involved mainly with mineral processing projects. He is a group supervisor in charge of projects
in the following areas:  beneficiation of rare earth minerals; the remediation of heavy metal
tailings; the characterization of heavy metal contaminated tailings, residues, and soils; and the
remedial  treatment of carbon-contaminated processing wastes.  Mr. Cornell has  published
extensively in the fields of minerals processing and process mineralogy, and was involved with
a team that won an RD-100 Award in 1987 for a fine particle beneficiation process to upgrade
cobalt values from Missouri lead ores.
                                          -57-

-------
• INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND

• SITE REPRESENTATION

• SITE CHARACTERIZATION

* BENEFICIATION STUDIES

• COST ANALYSES

« CONCLUSIONS
  INTRODUCTION & BACKGROUND
      - Objective of the Study
      - Technical Approach
      - Site Description
      - Site History
             OBJECTIVE
    Ddermin* H physical bensfidailon methods can be us
    trad Ut« fellings to produce two fractions, ont "cUan"
    thai con bf ndosHid on silt, and on* "conlamindtd"
    could bt (half vtth by othir mians.
                                 -58-

-------
                 DEFINITION
"Clean" material  is defined as containing
less  than 500 ppm Fb, less than  70 ppm As,
and  passing TCLP.
        TECHNICAL APPROACH
1.  Review existing data  and determine if they suggest
a method to represent the site.
2.  Conduct studies 1o characterize the materials on
tha sit*.
3.  Conduct studies to determine the response of the
materials  to state-of-the-art beneffcialion methods.
4,  Assess Information and data developed io prepare
a report for EPA.
           Pictorial Slides
   1906 to 1927
   — 465  ton  capacity gravity mill
   — No Zn  recovery
   — Tailings deposited on river
     bank  west of  the  mill.
                                               -59-

-------
     1927 to 1971
     - Converted to flotation In 1927
     — With upgrades reached  final
       capacity of 1700 tpd.
     - Pb and Zn circuits
     - Pyrite recovery for Au
• SITE REPRESENTATION
  - Review of Production Records
  - Review of Previous Sampling Studies
  - Review of Supplementary Data
   SITE CHARACTERIZATION
   - Chemical Analyses
   - Mineralogical Analyses
           Pictorial Slides
                                  -60-

-------
   CHEMICAL ANALYSES
   - Drill  Hole
   - Bulk Samples
       Pictorial Slides
•  MINERALOGICAL ANALYSES
  - Drill Hole
  - Bulk Samples
      Pictorial Slides
  BENEFICIATION STUDIES
  — Gravity
  — Froth Flotation
                            -61-

-------
      GRAVITY TESTS
          Pictorial Slides
FROTH FLOTATION


  » Statistical Design
  • Bench Scale  Flotation
  • Large Scale Flotation

          Pictorial Slides
         CONCLUSIONS
     A similarity exists between the
     material In Panda A & B and the
     material In Ponds C A: D.
     In Pond* A Jc B up fa 75% of iha
     material can be treated to balow
     800 ppm Pb.
     In Pond* C & D up to 38 pet of t
     material can be treated to below
     350 ppm.
     Total co»t of treatment le*e than
                              -62-

-------
                                Case Study #6

       Innovative Approaches To Address Environmental Problems for the
                       Upper Blackfoot Mining Complex

Parti

Judy Reese
Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences
Helena, MT
Judy Reese has a B.S. in geology from Wayne State University and an M.S. in environmental
studies from the University of Montana.  She also has Grades 7-12 teaching certification in
earth science and chemistry. Ms. Reese worked in minerals exploration for 8 years for Utah
International, BMP-Utah International, Placer Dome, and Meridian Gold Company.

Ms. Reese has worked for the Montana Department of Health and Environmental Sciences Solid
and Hazardous Waste Bureau's state Comprehensive Environmental Cleanup and Responsibility
Act (CECRA) and federal (CERCLA) Superfund programs since  1991.  She is the project
manager of the Upper Blackfoot Mining  Complex site, and she is responsible for all  CECRA
related aspects of the site.  She also manages a few other CECRA sites and participates on the
Clark Fork River Site-Specific Water Quality Criteria committee.
                                        -63-

-------
  INNOVATIVE APPROACHES
         TO ADDRESS
      ENVIRONMENTAL
  PROBLEMS AT THE UPPER
BLACKFOOT MINING COMPLEX
   Judy Reese- MDHES, Superfund
      Chris Pfahl - ASARCO
   Tom Mdhtyre - MSE, MWTPP
                MONTANA
         UPPER BLACKFOOT MINING COMPLEX
           Lewis & Clark County, Montana
                            -64-

-------
          MINING HISTORY
          Heddleston District


 1889  Ore first discovered
 1898  Mike Horse Mine discovered
 1919  Mike Horse mill built
 1940  First electric power
 1945  Purchased by ASARCO
 1955  Ceased mining

 Total production: 450,000 tons

 1962-1973 Exploration of a copper
          molybdenum ore body
           OWNERSHIP


1898-45  Miscellaneous small groups

1945-64   ASARCO

1964-81   Anaconda Company /ASARCO

1979    Anaconda merged with ARCO

1981    ASARCO purchased all of the
        Anaconda holdings
     Department of State Lands
     Abandoned Mines Bureau
             1987 -1990
     Department of Health and
      Environmental Sciences
              CECRA
           1991 - present
                                -65-

-------
PICTORIAL SLIDES TO FOLLOW
 CONTAMINATION SOURCES

     Acid Mine Drainage

       RockWaste Piles

          Tailings
  CONTAMINATED MEDIA
       Surface Water
       Ground Water
      Stream Sediments
           Soils
 PICTORIAL SLIDES TO FOLLOW
MIKE HORSE MINE ADIT
WATER QUALITY mg/L

Aluminum
Cadmium*
Copper
Iron
Manganese
Sulfate
Zinc

.14
.02
.15
4.2
8.7
346.0
26.0
Ranges
1.3
.2
1.8
74.0
53.0
- 2,927.0
90.0
sMCL
.2

1.0
.3
.05
250.0
5.0
                          -66-

-------
  GROI3ND WATER QUALITY mg/L
               Ranges
 *MCL = .005 mg/I
sMCL
Aluminum
Cadmium*
Iron
Manganese
pH
.7
.2
2.2
.1
2.7
- 10.3

- 164.2
- 105
- 7.3
.2

.3
.05
6.5 - 8.5
	
MINE WASTE mg/kg

Aluminum
Arsenic
Cadmium
Copper
Mercury
Manganese
Lead
Zinc


3,278
42
1
59
50
11
112
23

Ranges
18,240
3,555
134
7,405
3,400
. - 8,540
21,803
4,333
J
                1993
VOLUNTARY REMEDIAL ACTIONS


 • Lower Carbonate Removal

 • Upper Carbonate Respository

 • Mike Horse Creek Stream Diversion

. • Mike Horse Treatability Pond

 • Mike Horse Channel Reconstruction
                                    -67-

-------
                    1994
   VOLUNTARY REMEDIAL ACTIONS
     Finish Mike Horse treatability pond

     Remove Anaconda Mine waste

     Construct Mike Horse Repository

     Construct first phase wetland cells
            FIVE YEAR SCHEDULE

.Site	1993  1994  1995  1996   1997
 CARBONATE
  Removal/Reclaim
  Repository
 MIKE HORSE
  Pond
  Water treatment
  Repository
 ANACONDA
  Waste Dumps
  Water treatment
 PAYMASTER
  Water treatment?
  Reclaim
 EDITH & MARY P.
 TAILINGS POND
                                        -68-

-------
                                  Case Study #6

            Innovative Approaches To Address Environmental Problems for the
                          Upper Blacldbot Mining Complex
Part 2
J. Chris Pfahl
ASARCO, Inc.
Wallace, ID
Mr. Pfahl has a B.S. in mining engineering from the Montana College of Mineral Science and
Technology. He is a licensed professional engineer in the states of Idaho and Colorado, and
a licensed professional land surveyor in Idaho. He has been employed by ASARCO, Inc., in
various engineering, supervisory, and management positions for the past 17 years.

Mr. Pfahl is a site manager with ASARCO. He is responsible for all  of ASARCO's activities at
the Bunker Hill Superfund site at Kellogg, Idaho; the Triumph Proposed Superfund Site at Sun
Valley, Idaho; the Upper Blaclcfoot Mining Complex State Superfund Site at Lincoln, Montana;
and several inactive mine site reclamation projects in Colorado, Idaho, and Montana.
                                         -69-

-------
  Cleanup Approach
  Perform Cleanup Under
  Existing Permit System
  Consolidate Mine Wastes
  Permit Discharge
  Treat Discharges Passively
   Carbonate Mine
  Consolidate Tailings On
  Waste Dump
  Problems Associated With
  Excessive Moisture
  Reclaim As Wetlands
Pictorial Slides To Follow
              TAILMEtPOM)
   tPPER OLACXFOOT MINING COMPLEX
                          -70-

-------
    Mike Horse Adit
        Discharge
   Infiltration Control
   Oxidation Pond
   Adit Plug
   Jet Pump Aerator

Pictorial Slides To Follow

    Anaconda Mine
  Consolidate Mine Wastes
  At Mike Horse Dump
  Blackfoot River Floodway
Pictorial Slides To Follow
     Passive Water
        Treatment
   Wetland Treatment
   Theory
   Phase I Wetlands
   Phase 2 Wetlands
                         -71-

-------
CUT
    cm. A
                           I**T
        .
•tr.«»«i»Aei now ou.
MV-Moomo tartct now ou.
               .
               V "• --/A  «£:•
                    T; ---- T1
               ou.    VI  • "V
    SECTION THRU TREATMENT CELLS
    Miscellaneous Mine

            Dumps


     Mary P Mine

     Edith Mine

     Paymaster Mine

     Upper Mike Horse Creek
 Pictorial Slides To Follow
         Mike Horse

            Tailings




•    1975 Flood Damage


•    Subsequent Repairs

•    Future Activities
                              -72-

-------
                                  Case Study #6

            Innovative Approaches To Address Environmental Problems for the
                          Upper Blaclcfoot Mining Complex
PartS
Thomas Mclntyre
MSE, Inc.
Butte, MT

Tom Mclntyre has a degree in mineral  processing engineering from Montana College of
Mineral Science and Technology.  Since graduating in 1981, Mr. Mclntyre has worked in the
lead industry with ASARCO, Inc., and in the environmental industry for MSE, Inc. He spent 11
years with ASARCO, working initially as an operations department head for all of the
departments within ASARCO—East Helena Primary Lead Smelter. Mr. Mclntyre later was put
in charge of special projects, which included a stint as plant engineer.

Since leaving ASARCO in 1991, Mr. Mclntyre has worked for MSE, Inc., primarily on the staff
of the Mine Waste Technology Pilot Program (MWTPP).  He is the technical project manager
for MWTPP Activity III, Projects 2 and 3. Additionally, Mr. Mclntyre is working towards an M.S.
in metallurgical engineering with an emphasis on mine waste.
                                         -73-

-------
  GROUTING AS A HYDROGEOLOGICAL CONTROL
     FOR ACID ROCK DRAINAGE REDUCTION
          AT THE MIKE HORSE MINE
          NEAR LINCOLN, MONTANA

        MINE WASTE TECHNOLOGY
             PILOT PROGRAM
          ACTIVITY III, PROJECT 2

              T. MCINTYRE
                  and
            A. L. MCCLOSKEY
    MOBILE TOXIC CONSTITUENTS - WATER
         METALS, SEMI-METALS AND SOME
         NON-METALS

         A RESULT OF, IN PART, ACID
         GENERATION

         TRANSPORT OF SOLUBLE SPECIES
         PROVIDED BY WATER INFLOWING
         INTO MINES FROM THE LOCAL
         HYDROLOGY
       MINING/MINERAL PROCESSING
       ROLE

       •     INDIRECT MECHANISMS, I.E.,
            CHANGES IN GEOLOGY AND
            HYDROGEOLOGIC SYSTEM

            DIRECT MECHANISMS, I.E.,
            REAGENT USAGE, CRUSHING
            AND GRINDING. ETC.
Photo of Mike Horse Mine Portal Pre-May 1993
                                   -74-

-------
          CLAY-BASED GROUTING
        DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
 TECHNOLOGY DESCRIPTION


*     SITE CHARACTERIZATION

+     GROUT FORMULATION

*     GROUT PLACEMENT
          CLAY-BASED GROUTING
        DEMONSTRATION PROJECT
SITE CHARACTERIZATION

«•     PHYSICAL GEOLOGY

+     HYDROGEOLOGY

+     GEOCHEMISTRY

*     PHYSICAL-MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF
      ROCK
  APPLICATION - ASARCO INCORPORATED'S
            MIKE HORSE MINE

CLAY-BASED GROUT SELECTION
      ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND CHEMICAL
      COMPOSITION

      •      KAOLINITIC/ILLITIC CLAYS
      •      PORTLAND CEMENT
      •      FLY ASH FILLER
      •      PROPRIETARY ADDITIVES
                                   -75-

-------
  APPLICATION - ASARCO INCORPORATED'S
            MIKE HORSE MINE
CLAY-BASED GROUT SELECTION (continued)

+     PAST HISTORY

+     LOW MAINTENANCE

*     RHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES

*     STRUCTURAL/MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

4-     COST vs TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES
  APPLICATION - ASARCO INCORPORATED'S
            MIKE HORSE MINE

COMPLETED SITE CHARACTERIZATION

*     SITE SURFACE GEOLOGY

*     SITE PHYSICAL GEOLOGY/LITHOLOGY

*     AQUIFER TESTING
      •      SLUG TESTS
      •      STATIC GROUNDWATER LEVEL
  APPLICATION - ASARCO INCORPORATED'S
            MIKE HORSE MINE

COMPLETED SITE CHARACTERIZATION
(continued)

*     TRACER TESTING

*     FLOW MEASUREMENTS

+     ROCK MECHANICS
                                   -76-

-------
Mike Horse Mine Site Map
Project Site Map
Photo of Site
Photo of Drilling
Photo of Core
Photo of Borehole Plugging
Photo of WellenCo - Geophysical
Photo of WellenCo - Geophysical
Geological Cross Section
Geological Cross Section
   APPLICATION - ASARCO INCORPORATED'S
             MIKE HORSE MINE

 TESTS TO BE UTILIZED FOR EVALUATION

 +     WATER BALANCE

 +     AQUIFER TESTING

 +     TRACER TESTING

 •     CORE DRILLING
                                     -77-

-------

-------
    Technologies To Address Environmental Problems at Inactive Mine Sites
Martin Foote
Mine Waste Technology Pilot Program
MSE, Inc.
Butte, MT
Dr. Foote has a B.S. in chemistry and an M.S. in geochemistry from Montana College of
Mineral Science and Technology, and a Ph.D. in geology from the University of Wyoming. He
has worked as a geologist, geochemist, and consultant to the mining industry for 11 years. He
also has worked with  both federal and  state regulatory organizations in  environmental
remediation, permitting, and development.

Dr. Foote is employed by MSE, Inc., as a technical project manager for the Mine Waste
Technology Pilot Program. This program is funded by EPA and jointly administered by EPA and
Department of Energy  (DOE) to conduct research and field demonstrations on new and
innovative technologies for treating or remediating mine wastes.  He has  served on the
Technology Screening Group  for the In Situ Remediation  Integrated program  and reviewed
grant applications for the Small Business Innovation Research program for DOE.
                                        -79-

-------
             TECHNOLOGIES
                  TO
  ADDRESS ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS
                  AT
          INACTIVE MINE SITES

MINE WASTE TECHNOLOGY PILOT PROGRAM
             MARTIN FOOTE
                MSE Inc.
    SOURCE CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES

           Bactericide Addition
             Caps and Seals
           In-Situ Vitrification
         Inundation or Saturation
          Reducing Atmosphere
   SOURCE CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES (2)

           Subsurface Plugging
            Sulfide Extraction
          Temperature Reduction
             Water Control
                               -80-

-------
  PATHWAY INTERRUPT TECHNOLOGIES

         Alkaline Reagent Addition
         Capping and Revegetation
            Chemical Addition
          Chemical Stabilization
              Encapsulation
            Plugs and Barriers
       TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES

               Adsorption
          Anoxic Limestone Drain
           Biological Adsorption
           Biological Reduction
        Chelation Chromatography
     TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (2)

           Chemical Oxidation
          Chemical Precipitation
Coagulation, Sedimentation, and  Flocculation
             Column Flotation
           Copper Cementation
                                 -81-

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (3)

            Dilution
           Distillation
   Electrochemical Precipitation
       Electrocoagulation
         Electrodialysis
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (4)

     Electrokinetic Osmosis
         Electrophoresis
         Electrowinning
          Evaporation
   Filtration and Ultrafiltration
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (5)

      Freeze Crystallization
         Froth Flotation
     Gas Hydrate Formation
         Ion Exchange
                             -82-

-------
TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES (6)

          Ion Flotation
        Physical Oxidation
        Reverse Osmosis
        Solvent Extraction
                               -83-
                                       *U.S. Governmsnt Printing Office: 1994 — 550-001/00152

-------

-------