STUDY OF ADVERSE EFFECTS OF SOLID




WASTES FROM ALL MINING ACTIVITIES




       ON THE ENVIRONMENT
             PEDCo ENVIRONMENTAL

-------
                                PEDCo  ENVIRONMENTAL

                                                11499 CHESTER ROAD
                                              CINCINNATI. OHIO 4.5246
                                                      (513) 7B2-A7OO
                STUDY OF ADVERSE EFFECTS  OF  SOLID

                WASTES FROM ALL MINING ACTIVITIES

                       ON THE ENVIRONMENT
                           Prepared by

                    PEDCo Environmental,  Inc,
                       11499 Chester Road
                     Cincinnati, Ohio   45246
                     Contract No. 68-01-4700
                          Prepared for

             U.S.  Environmental Protection  Agency
            Industrial Extraction Processes  Division
                     401 M. Street Southwest
                        Washington, D.C.
                        January  10,  1979
CHESTER TOWERS
                                BRANCH OFFICES
                          Crown Canter
                         Kansas City. Mo.
Professional Village
 Cnapel HIM. IM.C.

-------
     This report has been reviewed by the U.S.  Environmental
Protection Agency and approved for publication.   Approval does
not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and
policies of the Environmental Protection Agency,  nor does mention
of trade names or commercial products constitute  endorsement  or
recommendation for use by the U.S. Government.

-------
                             PREFACE

     This report presents the results of a study of the adverse

environmental effects of solid wastes generated by the mining

industry, which herein is considered to encompass the recovery of

metallic ores, nonmetallic ores, and solid mineral fuels (coal).*v.

Solid wastes include those from both mining and beneficiation of

ores, including leaching, but exclude those from roasting,

smelting, refining, and other chemical processing.

     This study, conducted by PEDCo Environmental, Inc.,

Cincinnati, Ohio, under Contract No. 68-01-4700, is intended to

assist the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in

determining whether the disposal of mineral resource wastes

should be regulated; if so, how; and if not, why not.

     The EPA Project Officers were Don O'Bryan of the Industrial

Extraction Processes Division, Office of Energy, Minerals and

Industry; and Jon Perry of the Office of Solid Waste Management

Programs, and subsequently Jack Hubbard of the Resource Extraction

and Handling Division, Industrial Environmental Research

Laboratory.  Their guidance and advice throughout the project are

gratefully acknowledged.
     * Solid mineral fuels in this study include only coal.
Uranium was addressed under the metallic ores category.  Oil shale,
which is a solid mineral fuel, was not specifically addressed in
this study; however, the study report does reference the fact that
the expected expansion in this industry could substantially
increase the annual production of mineral resource solid waste.

                               iii

-------
     The PEDCo project director was Richard 0. Toftner, the
project manager was Robert S. Amick, and the assistant project
manager was Jack S. Greber.  Principal investigators and authors
were Robert S. Amick, Jack S. Greber, Robert L. Hearn, Robert L.
Hoye, and A. Christian Worrell/ III.  Technical assistance was
provided by Dr. Roy E. Williams, professor of hydrogeology at the
University of Idaho and senior mining consultant.
     Many other individuals and organizations also contributed to
the study.  The following were especially helpful in offering
their advice and assistance in arranging contacts with the mining
industry:  David R. Cole, Colorado Mining Association;
C. Christopher Hagy, China Clay Association; Erland G. Johnson,
Arizona Mining Association; Karl W. Mote, Northwest Mining
Association; and James R. Walpole, American Mining Congress.
     Several Federal and state governmental agencies provided
valuable data.  Some of the personnel at these agencies who
provided helpful input are Paul Marcus, Monte Shirts, and John
Morning, U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C.; Roy Soderberg,
U.S. Bureau of Mines, Spokane, Washington; Tim Fields, Kurt
Jakobsen, Bruce Weddle, Al Galli, and Ron Kirby, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.; Ronald Hill, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio; Dr. Dave
Maneval, Appalachian Regional Commission, Washington, D.C.;
Edward Johnson, U.S. Forest Service, Washington, D.C.; Kenes
Bowling, Interstate Mining Compact, Lexington, Kentucky; and
Sanford Darby, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Macon,
Georgia.
                                iv

-------
     Finally, the cooperation of mining companies and their



representatives who provided pertinent information during site



visits is gratefully acknowledged.  The following companies were



particularly helpful:  Erie Mining Company, Hoyt Lakes, Minnesota;



Consolidation Coal Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Colowyo



Coal Company, Craig, Colorado; Energy Fuels Corporation,




Steamboat Springs, Colorado; Freeport Kaolin Company, Gordon,



Georgia; Engelhard Minerals and Chemicals Corporation, Mcltyre,



Georgia; J.M. Huber Corporation, Huber, Georgia; International



Minerals Corporation, Bartow, Florida; Agrico Chemical Company,



Bartow, Florida; Union Carbide Corporation, Uravan, Colorado;



Western Nuclear, Inc., Wellpinit, Washington; Dawn Mining Company,



Spokane, Washington; Duval Sierrita Corporation, Tucson, Arizona;



Cyprus Pima Mining Company, Tucson, Arizona; Magma Copper Company,



San Manuel, Arizona; Hecla Mining Company, Wallace, Idaho; Climax



Molybdenum Company  (AMAX, Inc.), Climax, Colorado; Climax



Molybdenum Company  (AMAX, Inc.), Leadville, Colorado; Environmental



Services, Inc.  (AMAX, Inc.), Denver, Colorado.  All of the



individuals whom we met at these facilities were cooperative and



helpful.

-------
                                                         CONTENTS

                                                             Page

PREFACE	     iii

TABLES	      ix

FIGURES	      xi

CONVERSION FACTORS  	     xii

SI UNITS  .	     Xiv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 	      XV

       Background and Scope	      xv

       Study and Approach	     xix

       Industry Profile 	     xxi

       Sources, Quantities, and Characteristics of
         Mineral Resource Solid Wastes  	   xxvii

       Mining Waste Disposal, Stabilization, and Control.  xxxvii

       Environmental and Health Assessment  	   xlvii

       Laws and Regulations	    xlix

       Identification of Mineral Resource Solid Waste
         Problems by Industry 	     Ixi

       References for Executive Summary 	     Ixv


1      INTRODUCTION . '.	       1


2      INDUSTRY PROFILE 	 	      12

         Nature of Mining Industry  	      13

         Magnitude of the Mining Industry 	      41

         References for Section 2	      58


3      SOURCES, QUANTITIES, AND CHARACTERISTICS OF
         MINERAL RESOURCE SOLID WASTES  ...  	      60

         Sources and Classification of Mineral Resource
           Solid Wastes	      61
                                vi

-------
                                                  CONTENTS

                                                      Page

  Quantities of Mineral Resource Solid Wastes  . .      68

  Land Impacted by Mineral Waste Disposal  ....      79

  Characteristics of Mineral Resource Solid Wastes      82

  References for Section 3	     108


RECLAMATION—DISPOSAL, STABILIZATION,; AND CONTROL      111

  Site Selection and Mine Design	     112

  Disposal of Overburden and Waste Rock	     118

  Stabilization/Control/Reclamation  	     139

  References for Section 4	     154


ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH ASSESSMENT  	     157

  Atmospheric Pollution  	     158

  Water Pollution	     164

  Effects on Physiography  	     178

  Effects on Flora and Fauna .	     181

  Impacts on Human Health and Welfare  	     185

  References for Section 5	     197


LAWS AND REGULATIONS	     200

  Federal Regulations  	     202

  State Laws and Regulations	     223

  Local Laws and Regulations	     232
IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREAS
  ASSOCIATED WITH MINERAL RESOURCE WASTES  ....     237

  Acid-Forming Mineral Resource Wastes 	     238

                         vii

-------
                                                         CONTENTS

                                                             Page

         Mineral Resource Wastes Containing Radioactive
           Materials	     244

         Other Potentially Hazardous Mineral Resource
           Wastes	     251

         Combining of Mineral Resource Wastes 	     264

         Airborne Fugitive Emissions From Mine Wastes and
           Tailings Ponds 	     265

         Identification of Mineral Resource Solid Waste
           Problems by Industry 	     267

         References for Section 7	     271

Appendix A	     274

Appendix B	     276

Appendix C	     284

Appendix D	     300

Glossary	     301
                              Vlll

-------
                                                   LIST OF TABLES

No.                           Title                          Page

 1   Abandoned and Inactive Underground Mines in the
       United States as of 1966	      44

 2   Primary Production Statistics for the Domestic
       Mineral Commodities  	      45

 3   Land Utilization by the Mining Industry in the
       United States in 1930-71, by State and Function  .      51

 4   Comparison of Land Uses in the United States in 1971      53

 5   Status of Land Disturbed by Surface Mining in the
       United States as of July 1, 1977, by States  ...      56

 6   Status of Land Disturbed by Surface Mining in the
       United States from January 1, 1965, to July 1,  1977     57

 7   1975 Solid Waste Production Statistics at Surface
       and Underground Mines and Estimated Total Solid
       Wastes for 1977, 1985, and 2000	      70

 8   Mineralogic and Lithologic Summary of Mineral Deposits    90

 9   Grain Size Distribution of Molybdenum Tailings at
       the.Climax Molybdenum Company Mines  	     103

10   Methods Employed for the Disposal, Stabilization,
       and Control of Solid Wastes Generated by Mining/
       Beneficiating Operations 	     113

11   Chemical Binding Surface Treatments in Descending
       Order of Rank by the USBM, Salt Lake City  ....     146

12   Cost Comparison of Stabilization Methods 	     149

13   Fugitive Dust Emissions from Selected Coal Surface
       Mining Operations  	     160

14   Summary of Estimated Emissions from Some Mining
       Operations	     161

15   Characteristics of Seepage Water from a Tailings
       Pile in Elliot Lake, Ontario	     165

16   Summary of Sources of Acid and Heavy Metal Pollution     169

17   Summary of Types of Pollution and Length of Stream
       Affected	     170

                               ix

-------
                                                   LIST OF TABLES

No.                           Title                          Page

18   Characteristics of Runoff from Coal Mine Wastes in
       the Shawnee National Forest/ Southern Illinois  .      172

19   Concentrations of Sulfuric Acid that are Toxic to

20
21
22
23
Fish 	 	
A Classification of the Effects of Metals 	
Body Burden, Human Daily Intake, and Content in the
Earth's Crust of Selected Elements . 	

Tolerance Levels for Metals in Drinking Water and
184
187
188
189

       Results of Sampling of Community Water Supplies
24
25
26
Metal Carcinogenesis in Experimental Animals . . .
Effects of Mfitals on Reproduction 	
Ranking of Potential Environmental Impact by Mineral
191
192
268

-------
                                              LIBRARY
                                              U S.
                                                " LIST OF FIGURES

No.                           Title                          Page

 1   The scope of mining activities can be divided into
       three major phases	      17

 2   Room-and-pillar mining  is the most common underground
       method used in the United  States	      23

 3   In open-stope mining, no  pillars are left to support
       the walls	      25

 4   Stull stoping can be used to mine narrow veins ...      26

 5   In shrinkage stoping, the ore deposit is stoped from
       beneath	      27

 6   The block caving method is used to mine large ore
       bodies covered by barren or low-grade capping that
       is too thick to strip away	      29

 7   Area strip mining is performed by digging successive
       trenches and refilling  each as the next one is dug      32

 8   Contour stripping is used to remove mineral outcrops
       around hillsides 	      34

 9   Open pit mining is a surface mining technique used
       when ore deposits are near the surface	      35

10   This generalized flowsheet shows the processes
       involved in extensive beneficiation  	      38

11   Geographic distribution of land utilized by mining
       activities 1930-71 is depicted graphically ....      52

12   Land utilized by mining is shown by selected
       commodity, 1930-71 	      54

13   Land usage by mining in the  United States, 1930-71,
       is shown according to function 	      55

14   This photo shows an example  of mine wastes and
       tailings at an inactive mine site	      77

15   The ratio of land reclaimed  by the mining industry
       to that used doubled  in 1971 compared with the
       ratio for the 42-year period between 1930 and 1971      81

16   This diagram shows a modified block cut	     121
                              XI

-------
                                           LIST OF FIGURES
No.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Title
This figure shows box-cut mining using two cuts . .
This figure illustrates square-set stoping, a type
Shown above are the three basic methods of tailings
Some methods used to minimize seepage outflow are
There are various routes of water gain and loss at
Solubilities of oxides and hydroxides of various
metals are related to pH 	 	
In Pennsylvania the responsibility of overseeing the
coal mining industry is divided as illustrated . .
In Kentucky the responsibility of overseeing the
Page
122
126
129
131
151
173
230
coal industry is divided as illustrated  	      231
                        xii

-------
                       CONVERSION FACTORS
To convert



Inches



Feet



Miles (statute)



Square feet




Acres



Cubic feet



Cubic yards



Gallons



Gallons



Ounces (troy)



Pounds



Tons (short)
    To



Centimeters



Meters



Kilometers



Square meters




Hectares



Cubic meters



Cubic meters



Cubic meters



Liters



Grams



Kilograms



Megagrams
 Multiply by



 2.540




 0.3048




 1.609




 0.0929




 0.4047



 0.0283



 0.7645



 0.003785



 3.785



31.103



 0.4537



 0.907
                               Xlll

-------
Quantity



Length



Mass



Time



Temperature
 BASIC SI UNITS



      Name



      meter



      kilogram



      second



      Kelvin




DERIVED SI UNITS
Symbol



  m



  kg



  s



  K
Quantity
Area
Volume
Density





Factor by which unit
is multiplied














1012
109
106
103
102
10 :
ID'1
ID'2
io-3
ID'6
ID'9
ID'12
ID'15
io-18
Name
square meter
cubic meter
kilogram/meter
SI PREFIXES
Prefix
tera
giga
mega
kilo
hecto
deka
deci
centi
milli
micro
nano
pico
femto
at to
Symbol
m2
m3
kg/m3

Symbol
T
G
M
k
h
da
d
c
m
y
n
P
f
a
                              XIV

-------
                        EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

                      Background and Scope


     The U.S. mining industry generates about 2.3 billion tons

(2.1 petagrams) of solid wastes each year.  These wastes, second

only to agricultural wastes in magnitude, account for about 40

percent of total solid wastes generated annually in the United

States.  The rate of mineral resource solid waste generation has

more than doubled since 1967.

     For purposes of this investigation, solid wastes are

considered to be those wastes from both mining (surface and

underground) and beneficiation (e.g., crushing, screening, and

concentrating), including leaching.*  They do not include wastes

from roasting, smelting, refining, and other chemical processing,

even though these wastes are sometimes discarded in tailings

ponds, whereupon they constitute the primary source of hazardous

materials in the tailings pond.

     As might be expected, problems associated with the handling

and disposal of mineral resource solid wastes have multiplied as

quantities have increased.  For example, waste impoundments have

failed, and the resulting disasters have cost lives and been
     * Although leaching is addressed in this study, the
quantities of waste associated with leaching operations are not
included because they are almost impossible to calculate.
                               xv

-------
detrimental to the environment.  Then, too, recent studies

indicate that some mineral resource wastes can be harmful,

particularly those containing heavy metals, radioactive materials,

or acid-forming minerals.

     Despite the above, Congress recently concluded that

information regarding these potential dangers is insufficient to

form the basis for regulatory action and mandated a study of

these wastes under the authority of Section 8002(f) of

P.L. 94-580, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was directed to conduct

this study.

     The scope and objective of the study are described in the

following excerpt from Section 8002(f), MINING WASTE: -

     "The Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of
     the Interior, shall conduct a detailed and comprehensive
     study on the adverse effects of solid wastes from active and
     abandoned surface and underground mines on the environment,
     including, but not limited to, the effects of such wastes on
     humans, water, air, health, welfare, and natural resources,
     and on the adequacy of means and measures currently employed
     by the mining industry, Government agencies,  and others to
     dispose of and utilize such solid wastes and to prevent or
     substantially mitigate such adverse effects.   Such study
     shall include an analysis of -
               (1) the sources and volume of discarded material
          generated per year from mining;
               (2) present disposal practices;
               (3) potential dangers to human health and the
          environment from surface runoff of leachate and air
          pollution by dust;
               (4) alternatives to current disposal methods;
               (5) the cost of those alternatives in terms of
          the impact on mine product costs; and
               (6) potential for use of discarded material as a
          secondary source of the mine product.
                               xv i

-------
     In furtherance of this study, the Administrator shall, as he
     deems appropriate, review studies and other actions of other
     Federal agencies concerning such wastes with a view toward
     avoiding duplication of effort and the need to expedite such
     study.  The Administrator shall publish a report of such
     study and shall include appropriate findings and
     recommendations for Federal and non-Federal actions
     concerning such effects."

     This technical document is in response to the study outlined

above.  Emphasis has been placed on whether or not the disposal

of mineral resource solid wastes should be regulated and by what

means.  This document does not make recommendations for such

regulation; its purpose is to provide data .for use by those who

will make these recommendations.

     As a result of this investigation the EPA may reach one of

the following conclusions:

     (1)  Mineral resource solid wastes should not be regulated
          further because they are being properly handled and
          disposed of at this time, and the handling and disposal
          of the wastes are being properly regulated by existing
          Federal, state, and/or local regulations.

     (2)  The handling and disposal of mineral resource solid
          wastes are not being properly regulated at this time;
          therefore the appropriate sections of the Resource
          Conservation and Recovery Act should be applied to
          assure the proper regulation of these wastes.

     (3)  The handling and disposal of mineral resource solid
          wastes are not being properly regulated at this time
          and additional regulation is needed, but the Resource
          Conservation and Recovery Act is not the proper vehicle
          to use to impose these regulations.

     (4)  Even with this study, the information available is not
          sufficient to make a decision concerning the regulation
          of mineral resource solid wastes; therefore additional
          studies are needed to secure this information.

     In this study mineral resource solid wastes are separated

into three categories: (1) mine wastes, (2) beneficiation wastes,
                               xvi i

-------
(3) miscellaneous wastes.  Mine wastes are those undesirable

materials extracted along with ores.  Beneficiation wastes  (or

tailings) are the materials discarded during ore processing.

Miscellaneous wastes are minor wastes such as site preparation

wastes  (e.g., drilling muds and removed vegetation), construction

wastes  (e.g., scrap iron and wood), damaged or used reagent or

product containers, domestic sewage sludges, and residuals from

pollution control equipment.  The wastes in this last category

are minor in volume and importance; therefore little attention is

given to them in this study.

     It is not certain which, if any, mineral resource solid

wastes are actually covered by the Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act.  The following exceptions stated in the act would

seem to eliminate at least some of them:

     (1)  Industrial discharges, which are point sources subject
          to NPDES permits (Subtitle A, Section 1004, parenthesis
          27) .

     (2)  Source, special nuclear, or byproduct material as
          defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
          (Subtitle A, Section 1004, parenthesis 27).

     At many of the active .mine sites, waste disposal areas will

eventually be rehabilitated or reclaimed to some extent.*

Moreover, the amount of land being reclaimed annually by mine

operators in some states actually exceeds the amount disturbed
     * As of August 3, 1977, the coal mining industry is required
to reclaim all land disturbed by surface mining activities, as
well as land disturbed by the surface effects of underground
mining.
                                xvi 11

-------
because part of the lands being reclaimed are those that were

devastated by mining activities before passage of surface mining

and reclamation legislation.  Despite these positive aspects,

solid wastes generated by mining activities still pose a threat

to the environment because  (1) little was done before the late

sixties to control and rehabilitate waste disposal areas, thus

large amounts of unstabilized wastes had already accumulated; (2)

there is often no one to assume responsibility for the large

quantities of waste materials at the numerous inactive mining

sites; (3) although they may eventually be stabilized and

reclaimed, wastes generated at active mines pose a threat to the

environment until such action is taken; (4) because of poor

reclamation techniques and a lack of maintenance programs, some

reclaimed lands may ultimately revert to unreclaimed condition.

                         Study Approach

     As much information as possible was acquired, compiled, and

analyzed, given the time constraints and broad scope (all mining

industries) of the study.  This information formed the data base
                      i
report for the technical study and document.

     Data gathering involved four major tasks.  The first was to

search the literature for information (published and unpublished)

dealing with the generation, control, regulation, and environmental

effects of mineral resource solid wastes.   This task required

several computerized searches and contacting a number of public,

academic, and governmental libraries.
                               xix

-------
     The second task was to contact various governmental agencies
whose realm of responsibility includes the mining industry and/or
effects of the industry.  Information was obtained in the form of
documentation (published and unpublished) and personal
communications.   (The agencies and personnel contacted are listed
in Appendix A.)
     The third task was to contact various trade associations
that could provide industry contacts, furnish answers to both
general and specific questions, and help arrange mine site
visits.  A total of six such mining associations were contacted.
     The final task was to visit mine sites to obtain specific
operational and solid waste data and to solicit opinions and
input from mining personnel regarding the issues of the project.
Selection of sites to be visited was based on the following
criteria:  (1) the volume of waste generated by a particular
industry; (2) the number of mines comprising an industry and
their geographic distribution; (3) the importance of the
materials contained in the solid wastes  (e.g., heavy metals,
radioactive constituents, acid forming materials)  generated by
the various industries.  The nineteen sites visited represented
nine industries:  copper, iron, coal, phosphate, uranium, lead,
zinc, silver, and molybdenum.
                                xx

-------
                        Industry Profile

     Ores recovered in the United States fall into one of three

categories:  metals, nonmetals, or solid mineral fuels.*  Deposits

of these ores range from unconsolidated surface deposits to deep

orebodies.  An ore may contain only one recoverable commodity, as

is common with the nonmetallic ores, or it may be comprised of a

combination of recoverable commodities, as is common with the

metallic ores.  The value of the associated minerals (coproducts

and/or byproducts) often makes an otherwise unprofitable orebody

economically recoverable.

     Mining industry activities take place in three distinct

phases.  Phase I involves the prospecting and exploration

required to locate, characterize, and prove a potential orebody.

Phase II involves extraction of the ore, which may be accomplished

by various 'underground or surface mining techniques.  The

extraction method is determined by the characteristics of the

deposit and the surrounding parent rock and terrain as well as by

special considerations such as economics, safety regulations, and

ecological considerations.  Both surface and underground mining

techniques are practiced in the United States.  Surface mining,

an open-air method of extraction, includes placer,  strip, open

pit,  quarry mines, and some variations and combinations thereof.
     * Coal is the only solid mineral fuel covered in this study.
Uranium is addressed under the metallic ores category.  Oil shale
is not specifically addressed, but the report does reference the
fact that the expected expansion of this industry could
substantially increase the total amount of mineral resource solid
wastes generated annually.


                               xx i

-------
Underground methods include room-and pillar, stope, block caving,
longwall mining, and some variations thereof.  Phase III involves
the beneficiation of the extracted ore.  (Beneficiation is the
processing of an ore in order to regulate product size, remove
unwanted constituents, and improve its quality, purity, or assay
grade.)  The extent of beneficiation required varies from simple
sizing and cleaning to elaborate crushing and flotation schemes.
The beneficiation phase sometimes results in a final product and
sometimes serves only as an intermediate step in the process
flow.
     Although each state in the Union has some kind of mining
activity, the volume of crude ore they produce varies greatly;
e.g., in 1975 Delaware produced 985,000 tons (900 gigagrams),
                                                          2
whereas Florida produced 241 million tons (220 teragrams).
Total U.S. crude ore production in 1975 was 3.2 billion tons (2.9
petagrams)(Table I), which represents the output of some 21,473
                                                  3 4
metal, nonmetal, and bituminous and lignite mines. '
     An undetermined number of nonoperating mines (inactive and
abandoned) also continue to have an impact on the environment,
although data are inadequate to assess the total extent of this
impact.  An unpublished, report mentioned in a recent publication
indicates there were approximately 88,000 inactive and abandoned
underground mines in 1966.   More recent estimates indicate the
present number to be greater than 200,000.
                               xxi i

-------
                                      TABLE I




       PRIMARY PRODUCTION  STATISTICS FOR THE DOMESTIC MINERAL COMMODITIES



X
X
H-
H-
H-





Ratio of crude ore Crude ore production Percent of crude ore
to marketable product (1,000 tons) handled by surface
ComnodUtes 1 ,000 tons: 1,000 tons I97S 1977(e) 1985(e) 2000(e) and underground mines*
METALS
Bauxite 1.7:1 3.290 4,000 4,050 2.700 100 surface
Copper 193.5:1 269.000 288,315 483. 750 735.300 89.1 surface
10.9 underground
Gold 374.815:1 10.120 15.708 26.180 33.880 85.8 surface
14.2 underground
Iron Ore 2.8:1 239.000 162.857 259.200 320.000 96.2 surface
3.8 underground
Lead 17.3:1 9.850 10,197 12.456 16.781 100 underground
Mercury 236.8:1 63 288 225 225 93.4 surface
6.6 underground
Silver 2.165:1 1.100 3.740 4.400 5,000 28. 3 surface
71.7 underground
Uranium 630.9:1 6.940 9,464 22.712 37.854 60.6 surface
39.4 underground
Zinc 7S o., 8,580 11.945 15,480 28.380 0.9 surface
99..1 underground
Otherl ' 61.081 56.200 91.960 130,990
Total metals 609.024 562.673 920,413 1.311.110
Major
associate
mineral st

gallium
gold
silver
lead
molybdenum
copper
lead
silver
platinum group
manganese
titanium
copper
line
copper
gold
silver
none
copper
lead
zinc
antimony
vanadium
molybdenum
copper
lead
cadmium
silver
copper


Major
producing
stalest

Arkansas
Alabama
Georgia
Arizona
Michigan
Utah
New Mexico
South Dakota
Nevada
Arizona
Minnesota
Michigan
Missouri
Idaho
Colorado
Utah
Nevada
California
Alaska
Idaho
Arizona
Colorado
Utah
New Mexico
Wyoming
Tennessee
Missouri
New York
Colorado


Total
number
of nines*

12
61
99
68
33
12
64
164
36
60
609
(continued)

-------
                              TABLE  I.   (continued)
Ratio of crude ore Crude ore production Percent of crude ore
to narketable oroduct (1.000 tons) handled by surface
Commodities I .-000 tons:) .000 tons 1975 1977(e) 1985(e) 2000(e) and underground nines*
Major
associate
•ineralst
Major Total
producing nunber
stalest of nines*
NONMETALS
Asbestos 15.0:1 1.450 1.575 2.400 3.000 100 surface



Clays 1.0:1 43.400 56.251 100,000 190.000 100 surface


—
Oiatomite '-^l 872 956 1.500 3.000 100 surface




Feldspar 1.9:1 1.310 1.454 2.185 3.800 100 surface

X
X
!-••
< Gypsum 1.0:1 10,100 13.900 15.000 20.000 80.8 surface
19.2 underground


Mica (scrap) 7.9:1 521 1.296 1.501 1.849 100 surface



Per lite 1.4:1 706 1.085 1.260 2.240 100 surface



Phosphate rock 3.8:1 186.000 186.200 304.000 323.000 100 surface

none



silica.
sand and
gravel

none




lithiuB
•lea
clays


limestone
clay


clay
feldspar
llthtUB

none



uranium
fluorine
California
Vermont
Arizona
North Carolina
Georgia
Texas
Ohio
North Carolina
California
Kansas
Nevada
Oregon
Washington
North Carolina
Connecticut
Georgia
California

Michigan
California
Te>as •
Iowa
North Carolina
Alabama
Georgia
South Carolina
New Mexico
Arizona
California
Nevada
Florida
North Carolina
3



1.249



IS




18




68



12



12



47

                                                                               California
                                                                               Idaho
(continued)

-------
                            TABLE I.  (continued)
Ratio of crude ore Crude ore production
to marketable product (1,000 tons)
Commodities 1>000 tons:!, 000 tons 197S I977(e) 1985(e) ?000(e)
NONMETALS (continued)
Potassium salts 8.6:1 17.600 19,952 17.200
Pumice 1.0:1 3.B90 4,109 6.500
Salt . 1.1:1 . 14,900 47.227 85,580
Sand and gravel 1.0:1 789,000 898,000 1,390.000 2.
* Sodium carbonate 2.0:1 8.010 12.276 22,000
3 (natural)
Stone: crushed 1.0:1 899,000 914,000 1.550,000 2.
Stone: dimension 2.2:1 2,330 3,080 3,300
Talc 1.2:1 645 1.265 2,040
Other" 10.483 10,800 16.200
Total nonmetals 1,990,417 2,173.426 3,247,066 5.

8.600
10.600
142.230
090,000
34,000
500.000
3,300
2,880
26,700
365,199
Percent of crude ore
handled by surface
and underground mines*

100 underground
100 surface
3.2 surface
96.8 underground
100 surface
100 underground
96.2 surface
3.8 underground
96. 1 surface
3.9 underground
75 surface
25 underground


Major
associate
mineral st

none
none
magnesium
bromine
potassium salts
none
none
clay
lithium
gypsum
clay
lithium
gypsum"
none


Major
producing
stalest

New Mexico
Utah
California
Oregon
California
Arizona
Louisiana
Texas
New York
Michigan
California
Alaska
Texas
Michigan
Wyoming
California
Pennsylvania
Illinois
Texas
Missouri
Indiana
Georgia
Vermont
Ohio
Vermont
Montana
New York
Texas


Total
number
of mines*

8
224
19
7.007
3
5.203
381
40
96
14.405
(continued)

-------
                                                            TABLE  I.     (continued)
X
X
Commodities

1975
Crud
1977(e)
le ore production
. (1.000 tons) 	
198S(eJ 2000 (eT
Percent of crude ore Major
handled by surface associate
and underground mines* Minerals!
Major Total
producing number
stalest of Mines*
SOLID MINERAL FUELS
Coal, anthracite
Coal, bituminous
and lignite
Total mineral fuels
Total all commodities
6.203
648.000
654.203
3.253.400
6.200
685.000
691.200
3.427.300
6.000
993.000
999.000
5.166.500
6.000
1.655,000
1.661.000
8.337.300
94 surfacet none
6 underground
56 surfacett none
44 underground


Pennsylvania
Kentucky
West Virginia
Pennsylvania
Illinois


291 1
6.168tt
6.459
21.478
     • U.S. Bureau of Mines.  Minerals yearbook,  1975 ed.  Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1975.
     t U.S. Bureau of Mines.  Mineral facts and problems,  bicentennial edition.   Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office. 1976.
     S U.S. Bureau of Mines.  Mineral cumnodity summaries 1978. Washington. U.S.  Department  of the Interior. 1978.
     1 Antimony, beryllium, nanganiferous  ore, molybdenum, monaiite. nickel, platinum group  metals, rare earth metals, tin.  titan tun.  llaenite.
tungsten,  vanadium.
    *• Abrasives, aplite.  barite. boron minerals, fluorspar, graphite, greensand  marl, iron  oxide pigments (crude), kyanlte. lithium Minerals.
Magnesite. millstones, olivine. vermiculite.
    ft 1977 Keystone Coal  Industry Manual.  New York. McGraw-Hill  Mining Publications. 1977.
     (e) Estimate.
     Note:  Crude ore estimates for the other categories were calculated as a percent of the total crude ore production for each year.   The percentage
used was derived  from the 1975 data and assumed to be the same for the other y«;ars.
     Note:  Metric conversion table in front matter.

-------
            Sources,  Quantities, and Characteristics
                of Mineral Resource Solid Wastes

      Although mine wastes are generally referred to as overburden

at surface mining operations and waste rock or development waste

rock at underground operations, they are also referred to by such

names as "gob," "spoil," and "refuse."  Overburden associated

with the mining of most nonmetallic ores generally consists of

topsoil and other unconsolidated materials (sand, gravel, and

silt) and occasionally weathered bedrock.  Overburden associated

with the mining of most metallic ores contains varying amounts of

bedrock in addition to topsoil and other unconsolidated materials.

Waste rock associated with underground mining operations consists

of both the consolidated and unconsolidated materials generated

during various stages of mine development (e.g., shaft, tunnel,

and drift development) and those generated during ore extraction.

     The large volumes of solid wastes generated by the

beneficiation of ores are normally referred to as tailings.

Several other terms (grit, slimes, gob, fines, and refuse) are

also used to describe these wastes, but tailings is the term used

throughout this document.  Tailings may be wet or dry, depending

on the method of concentration.

     Researchers' estimates of total annual generation of mineral

resource solid wastes in the United States vary according to the

number of mineral mining industries covered, the extent of the

processing operations included  (e.g., mining and beneficiation

only or mining, beneficiation, smelting, and refining), and the
                                XXVI1

-------
method of calculation.  Most estimates range between 1.6 and 2.0

billion tons (1.4 and 1.8 petagrams) per year. ' '

     Annual solid waste production statistics in this study are

calculated from  (1) U.S. Bureau of Mines data, (2) values

appearing in various published and unpublished documents,  (3)

information provided by the mining industry.  Beneficiation waste

quantities are calculated on a dry weight basis.  The quantities

of water used to slurry these wastes to impoundments are not

included.  Estimates of beneficiation wastes do not include those

associated with  leaching operations because it is almost

impossible to calculate these values.  In most cases, both mine

and beneficiation waste quantities have been calculated for each

commodity (Table II) .  When insufficient data made it 'impossible

to calculate beneficiation wastes for some mineral commodities

(e.g., stone and zinc from surface mines), only mine waste

statistics were  presented.

     It is also  important to note that insufficient data precluded

estimating annual production of mine solid wastes for the coal

industry.  Although actual quantitative data are not available,

the amount of mine solid waste (particularly overburden) produced

annually by the  coal industry is known to be larger than the

total amount of  mine waste generated by all the other industries

combined.*
     * Many individuals consider overburden produced by the coal
industry to be a resource rather than a waste because of its use
in reclamation projects.  This philosophy is based on the fact
that in recent years most overburden has been reclaimed to some
extent.  The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977,
which requires the reclamation of all overburden generated by the
coal industry, has contributed to the support of this philosophy.

                               xxviii

-------
                                             TABLE  II
X
X
H-
X
      1975 SOLID WASTE PRODUCTION STATISTICS AT SURFACE AND UNDERGROUND MINES AND  ESTIMATED
                           TOTAL SOLID WASTES FOR  1977, 1985,  AND 2000

                                            (1,000  tons)

Commodity

METALS
Bauiite
Copper
Cold
Iron Ore
Lead
Mercury
Silver
Uranium
Zinc
Other"
Total metals
NONMETALS
Asbestos
Clays
Oiatomite
feldspar
Gypsum
Mica (scrip)
Per lite
Phosphate rock
Potassium salts
Pumice
Salt
Sand and gravel
Sodium carbonate (natural)
Stone:
Crushed and broken
Dimension
Talc, soapstone, pyrophyllite
Others*
Total nonmetals
MINERAL FUELS
Coal, anthracite
Coal, bituminous and lignite
Total mineral fuels
Total all commodities
Surface
Mine
Mste

13.300
689,000
9.030
256,000
1
509
21
154,000
4?
44.210
1.166,11?

250
37,100
849
1.980
13.400
254
20
216.000
NA
118
87
NA
NA

71.200
1.210
1.760
27,726
371.954




1.538.066
Solid oast* statistics for 1975*
mining operations Underground mining operations Totals, all mining operations

Tallingst

1.407
237.850
8.560
150.816
1
59
315
4.994
9
9
404.001 1

1.353
9
298
627
500
456
195
137.300
- NA
2
283
39.450tt
NA

P
9
93
9
180.557




584.550

Total

14.707
926.850
17.590
406,816
1
568
336
158.994
42?
44.2100
.570.113

1.603
37. IOOP
1.147
2,607
13,900
710
215.
353,300
NA
120
370
39.4501*
NA

7). 200?
1.210?
1.853
27.7264
552.511




2.122.624
Mine
•aste

M
1.360
212
1.890
2.450
1
348
2.420
2.740
1.173
12.593

w
10
NA
NA
206
NA
NA
U
460
NA
617
NA
4.050

300
NA
9
109
5.761




18.354

Taillngst

U
29.003
1.569
3.779
9.282
1
791
2,735
8.127
f
55.286

W
9
NA
NA
8
NA
NA
W
IS. 760
NA
68J
NA
4.010

0
NA
a>
8
20.461




75.747

Total

U
30.363
1.781
5.669
11,732
1
1.139
$.155
10.867
1.173*
67,879

W
I0»
NA
NA
214
NA
NA
W
16.220
NA
1,300
NA
8,060

3009
NA
9*
1099
26.222




94.101
Mine
•aste

13.300
690.360
9.242
257.890
2.450
509
369
156.420
2.782
45.383
1,178.705

250
37.110
849
1.980
13.606
254
20
216,000
460
118
704
NA
4.050

71.500
1.210
1.769
27.835
377.715




l.596.4<0



Grand 1975 Hasle-to-ore Estimated solid wastes!
Tailingst

1.407
266.853
10.129
154.595
9.282
59
1.106
7.729
8.127
»
459.287

1.353
,1
298
627
508
456
195
137.300
157760
2
966
39.450"
4.010

9
9
93
9
201.018


107.10!"
I07.IOIM
767.406
total

14.707
957,213
19.371
412,485
11.73?
568
1.475
164.149
10.909
45.3839
1.637.992

1,603
37.1109
1.147
2.607
14.114
710
215
353.300
16.220
120
1.670
39.450tt
8.060

71.5009
1.2109
1.862
25,176|»
578,733


107.101*1
I07.IOIH
2.323,J26
ratios

4.47
3.56
1.91
1.73
1.19
9.02
1.34
23.65
1.27
0.74


1.11
0.85
1.31
1.99
1.40
1.36
O.30
1.90
O.91
0.03
0.11
0.05
1.01

0.08
0.52
2.89
2.40



0.17


1977

17,880
1,026.401
30.002
281.743
12.134
2.598
" 5.012
223.824
13,854
41.58%
1.655.036

1.748
48.37W
1.252
2.893
19.460
1,763
326
353,780
18.156
124
5.194
44.900
12.399

73.1209
1 .6029
3.653
25.9200
614.666


116.450
116.450
2.269.702
1985

18.104
1,772.150
95.507
448.935
14.823
2.030
5.896
&37.I39
19.660
68.0508
2.982.294

2.664
86,009
1.965
4,348
21.000
2.041
378
577,600
15.652
195
9.414
69.500
22.220

124.0009
1,7169
5.896
38.880*
983,469


163.810
168.810
4.134,573
2000

12.069
2.617.668
64,710
553.600
19.969
2.030
6.700
895.247
36.043
96.9330
4.304.969

3.330
163.40C9
3.930
7.562
28.000
2.515
672
613.700
7.826
318
15.645
104.500
34.340

200.0009
1.7169
8.323
64.0809
1.259.857


281.350
281.350
5.864.176
      (continued)

-------
                                                     TABLE   II     (continued)

     • ticept •here  Indicated otherwise, all  |g?5  solid waste statistics utre  adapted from lables  ?  and  II of  the Preprint from the
H7S Bureau of Nines Minerals yearbook! Mining and Quarrying Trends in the Metal  and Nonmetal  Industries; United State! Department
of the Interior. Bureau of Mines.
     t Estimated iol Id Haste statistics include hnlh mine xjslrs anrl lailinqs  unless nthpruisi- irnlu 4i"-l.
     I Tailings are reported on a dry weight  basis
     • Value  less  than 500 tons.
     • Estimates for tailings not available on these commodities;  therefore the solid waste statistics  Include mine Haste only.
    •• Antimony, beryllium, manganl.fercius ore, molybdenum, nonailte, nickel, plat Inum-group metals,  rare-earth metals, titanium, llmenlte,
tungsten,  vanadium, and guantlty of metal Items Indicated by symbol W.
    tt Abrasives,  apllte. barlte. boron minerals,  fluorospar. graphite, grrensand  marl.  Iron oilde pigments  (crude), kyanlte, lithium minerals.
magnetite, millstone, ollvtne. venntcullte.
    it Sand end gravel tailings estimated as  S percent of total material handled.
    11 Value obtained from the minerals yearbook.  1975, Volume I;  Metals. Minerals and fuels;  United States  Department of Interior; Bureau of
Mines; U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C., 1977.  This value Includes tailings  Haste  (coal preparation plant Haste) only.  Mine
solid Haste data (overburden and development  naste rock) are not available for the coal  Industry.  Although  actual quantitative data are not
available. It Is known that vast quantities of nine naste (particularly overburden) are generated  annually by  the coal Industry.  In fact, the
amount of mine naste produced annually by the coal Industry alone  Is probably  larger than the  total  amount of mine waste generated by all other
Industries combined.
     M • Withheld  to avoid disclosing Individual company confidential data.
    HA • Not applicable or values so small  that no data Here recorded.
    Note:  Metric  conversion table In front matter.

-------
     The calculations made in this study indicate that the mining



industry generated about 2.3 billion tons (2.1 petagrams) of



mineral resource solid wastes in 1975 (Table II).  The 1985 and



2000 figures are projected to be at least 4 and 6 billion tons



(4.6 and 5.4 petagrams).  Calculations are based on current



ore-to-waste ratios (assuming they will remain relatively constant)




and projected ore production statistics.  If ocean and oil shale



mining become major commercial enterprises/ as is expected, the



amount of mining solid waste generated annually could double.



     Sixty-eight percent of the mineral resource solid wastes



generated in 1975 were mine waste; 32 percent were beneficiation



waste.  Overburden associated with surface mining operations is



by far the largest source of mineral resource solid wastes,



representing about 65 percent of the total generated by all



mining operations in 1975.  Total solid wastes  (overburden and



tailings) produced at surface mining operations in 1975 were



about 23 times greater than those generated at underground mines.



Mine wastes account for about 12 percent of total wastes



generated at surface mining operations, whereas tailings are the



major source of waste at underground mining operations,



representing about 80 percent of the annual total.



     Sixty-five different mining industries generate solid



wastes, but five industries are responsible for 85 percent of the



total.  The copper industry is the largest contributor, followed



by the iron, phosphate, uranium, and bituminous coal industries
                               XXXI

-------
in that order.*  All of these major producers use open pit

mining, and as the Nation's mineral reserves become depleted, it

is necessary to mine lower grade ores at increasingly greater

depths.  Both factors increase the volumes of solid waste produced

per unit of product produced.

     Attempts have been made to estimate the total accumulated

mineral resource solid wastes at both active and inactive mining

sites.  An early estimate indicated total mineral solid wastes

accumulated would be about 25 billion tons (22.7 teragrams)  by

1972.    In a more recent document it was estimated that they

would total approximately 30 billion tons (27.2 teragrams)  by

1975.    It should be pointed out that these estimates were based

on annual mineral solid waste production statistics;  therefore

they do not actually represent the amount of waste deposited in

mine waste heaps and tailings impoundments.   For the following

reasons, all the mineral resource waste generated does not end up

in waste heaps or tailings ponds and remain untouched for an

indefinite period of time:   (1)  some of the waste generated at

underground mines is used to fill in mined-out areas, thus

remaining underground; (2) overburden at some surface mining

operations is used as mine backfill; (3) a portion of the

tailings (sometimes as much as 50 percent)  at some underground

mines is backfilled into mined-out areas; (4) tailings and mine
     * This comparison does not consider the substantial
quantities of mine solid waste produced annually by the coal
industry.
                               XXX11

-------
wastes are sometimes used in onsite road and dam construction;



(5) wind and water erosion processes remove mineral resource



wastes from their place .of deposition and spread them over



adjacent and distant land areas.  This process is evident in the



yellow stream channel of southern Ohio and West Virginia and in



some valley bottoms covered with tailings in the West.




     The characteristics of mineral resource solid wastes can be



described best by analyzing their physical, chemical, and



biological properties.  The chemical and physical properties of



these wastes vary considerably, depending on their origin and on



such factors as climate, geograpic location, mining and



beneficiating methods, and disposal practices.  Conversely,



biological properties vary little because most freshly deposited



solid wastes are normally void of any flora or fauna.



     Mine wastes associated with the extraction of both metallic




and nonmetallic ores consist of glacial till, unsegregated silts,



clays, sands and gravels, and broken bedrock, however, wastes



associated with nonmetallic ores contain less broken bedrock and



more glacial tills, clays, and sands and gravels, and sometimes



(e.g., in the mining of sand and gravel, central Florida



phosphate, and clay) very little bedrock is encountered.



     Tailings consist essentially of the finely crushed ore rock



known as gangue; therefore the mineralogical composition



generally corresponds to that of the host rock from which the ore



was derived.  Tailings normally contain various mixtures of



quartz, feldspars, carbonates, oxides, ferromagnesian minerals,





                               xxxiii

-------
and minor amounts of other minerals.    They also contain traces



of the reagents that are added during beneficiation.  The



physical and chemical characteristics of tailings vary even more



than those of mine wastes.  The pyrite content of tailings (and



other mine wastes) is a critical factor in the analysis of




potential impact on the environment.  The presence of pyrite



almost inevitably results in the production of acid runoff, acid



seepage or acid mine drainage, and in subsequent difficulties



with reclamation.



     The presence of pyrite and some other minerals in mine and



beneficiation wastes means that these wastes are potentially



hazardous to human life and the environment.  Usually, wastes




associated with coal and metallic ore mining operations contain



more potentially hazardous materials than those associated with



nonmetallic ore mining operations.  In some cases concentrations



of potentially hazardous materials are no greater in the mine



wastes than they are in the land on or in which the wastes are



disposed and therefore do not increase the potential for adverse



impact on the area.  Wastes from some uranium and phosphate



mining operations are a possible exception, because some of these



wastes may contain radioactive materials (uranium and radium)



above background levels.    Another exception is the wastes from



some operations  (particularly eastern coal mining operations and



some metal mining operations)  in which the wastes contain



pyrite.  If pyrite is present along with water and oxygen, acid



water will form and undesirable materials will become soluble.





                               xxxiv

-------
Sometimes such potentially hazardous elements as heavy metals or
radioactive materials associated with mine wastes are inert or
chemically stable because of pH and solubility conditions.
     Some tailings (particularly those from coal and metallic ore
mining operations) may contain potentially hazardous substances
in higher concentrations than the land on which they are disposed.
The fine-grained texture of tailings also:makes them susceptible
to wind and water erosion.  When properly handled and disposed
of, these fine-grained wastes can be contained and stabilized.
There have been several cases in past years, however, where
tailings have not been properly stabilized, and these materials
have resulted in severe deterioration of groundwaters, surface
waters, and the land with which they come in contact.
     Almost all mining operations disturb the land surface to
some extent.  A U.S.  Bureau of Mines report detailing land
utilization by the mining industry during the period from 1930 to
1971 estimated some 3.65 million acres (14.8 square gigameters)
or approximately 0.16 percent of the Nation's land area had been
affected.   Of this total, about 59 percent was disturbed by
excavation, 38 percent by solid waste disposal (mine wastes and
tailings),  and the remaining 3 percent by subsidence as a result
of underground workings.  Unfortunately,  these figures do not
reflect land disturbed by mass movement or erosion and
transportation of discarded mineral resource solid wastes by
surface waters.  In Idaho, for example, most of the floor of the
valley of the South Fork of the Coeur d'alene River is covered by
                               XXXV

-------
tailings that have been eroded, transported, and redeposited by
flood waters.  Therefore it is clear that the 0.16 figure is too
low.
     On a commodity basis, the bituminous coal industry accounted
for 40 percent of the total land used; sand and gravel, 18 percent;
crushed and broken stone, 14 percent; clays and copper, 5 percent
each; iron ore, 3 percent; and phosphate rock,' 2 percent.   The
states in which the mining industry has utilized 100,000 acres
(404 square megameters) or more are, in decreasing order of
usage, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Kentucky, Indiana, and
California.
     The U.S. Bureau of Mines has also estimated that about 40
percent of these 3.65 million acres (14.8 square gigameters) has
been reclaimed to some extent, but the Bureau does not distinguish
among degrees of reclamation.  According to the Bureau, 163,000
acres (660 square megameters) of the 206,000 acres (834 square
megameters), or about 79 percent, was reclaimed in 1971, but to
an unknown degree.  Thus, the ratio of land reclaimed to land
used had doubled in 1971 compared with the ratio of the previous
42-year period average.  The precise meaning of this statistic is
not clear because "reclamation" is not defined.  If the statistics
are to be useful in the decision-making process, an effort should
be initiated to evaluate degrees of reclamation.  Also, reclaimed
land often evolves toward a condition not significantly different
from unreclaimed land if careful maintenance is not practiced for
several years.

                               xxxvi

-------
     As a result of existing and pending state and Federal



legislation  (particularly the Surface.Mining and Reclamation Act



of 1977), the ratio of land disturbed per year to land reclaimed



is expected to continually decrease.  In addition, the quality of



land reclamation efforts is expected to increase as a result of



stricter and more specific regulatory requirements.  The



provisions in the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act for



rehabilitation of abandoned mine lands (orphaned lands)  will also



contribute to a decrease in the amount of land left devastated by



mining operations.



        Mining Waste Disposal, Stabilization, and Control



     With a few exceptions, the technology is well established



for disposal of the over 2 billion tons (1.8 petagrams)  of



mineral resource solid wastes generated annually and for



stabilization of these wastes to ensure public safety and to



control air and water pollutants.  Overburden and waste rock are



usually placed in waste piles or backfilled into previously



excavated areas during the mining operation.  Tailings generated



by beneficiating operations at both surface and underground mines



are usually disposed of in tailings ponds.   Techniques are



available to control seepage from leaching these deposits.  The



extent of application .of these techniques,  however, varies



considerably, both geographically and by the type of mining



industry.   Therefore,  there are areas (especially abandoned mine



lands)  in which the control measures currently being applied are



insufficient to protect human health and the environment.






                               xxxvii

-------
     Stabilization and control technologies encompass a variety



of proven methods for providing structural stability for tailings



dams and overburden/waste rock piles; for preventing the evolution



of excessive fugitive dust from tailings pond slopes/ inactive



tailings, and overburden/waste rock piles; for preventing both



surface and groundwater pollution by seepage and runoff from



tailings ponds and overburden/waste rock piles; and for ultimately



creating a reclaimed area that is permanently satisfactory from




both the functional and aesthetic standpoint.



     Currently viable disposal, stabilization, and control



methods are described and discussed in this study according to



type of solid waste (Table III).



     Site Selection and Mine Design.  Some measures can be taken



prior to developing new mining areas to ensure minimal adverse



impacts on the environment.  Careful site selection, planning,



and design can transform an area with potentially adverse


                                                14
conditions into safe solid waste disposal sites.    Careful site



selection can also minimize the engineering costs of transforming



an unsuitable site into a usable one.



     Initial investigations of the feasibility of a mining,



and/or beneficiating facility must consider the fate of the solid



wastes that will be generated.  Historically, the primary concern



has been to locate one or more areas of acceptable size near the



production site.  Recently, however, environmental regulations



and greater concern for public safety have introduced new



variables into the site selection process.  These variables are






                               xxxviii

-------
                                                                 TABLE  III
                          METHODS EMPLOYED  FOR  THE  DISPOSAL,  STABILIZATION,  AND  CONTROL
                           OF  SOLID WASTES  GENERATED BY  MINING/BENEFICIATING OPERATIONS
         Type of  solid waste
     Disposal method
     Stabilization/control method
         Overburden  (surface mining)  and
         waste rock  (underground mining)
Stockpiles  adjacent to surface and under-
ground mines and on the outside slopes of
open pit  mines.
X
X
X
p-
X
         Tailings  from the mills of  both
         underground and surface mines
Backfilling of previously excavated areas
adjacent  to the active overburden removal
at surface mines (block-cut/box-cut mining
method).  Backfilling of underground mines
with waste rock.
Utilization  as construction material  (e.g.,
tailings dam or embankments, highway con-
struction) .

Tailings pond.
          (continued)
Maintenance  of  an  angle of  repose to prevent
landsliding  and/or excessive  slope erosion.

Employment of physical  (e.g., contouring inter-
ceptor ditches, windbreaks, watering), chemical
(wetting and crusting agents),  and vegetative
surface stabilization techniques to control
surface water and  fugitive  dust pollution.

If pyrite is present in the overburden, separ-
ation and isolation of the  overburden  in order
to prevent the  emission of  the  associated
hazardous wastes  (heavy metals  and the corro-
siveness associated with  the  acid water
produced).

Employment of physical  (windbreaks and water-
ing) , chemical  (wetting and crushing agents),
and vegetative  surface stabilization technique*
to control surface water  and  fugitive dust
pollution at surface mines.   Not generally
applicable to open pit copper mining.

Nothing additional required at  underground
mines.

Minimal stabilization/control required, except
for suppression of. .fugitive dust, during trans-
fer and handling.  '

For new facilities, conduction  of preliminary
site evaluations  for ultimate selection of a
location with the  least adverse impact on the
environment  (if practical,  a  site with an
impervious material base  or with an underlying
aquifer sufficiently depressed  to prevent
groundwater  contamination,  and  one which is
removed from accumulation of  surface water
runoff).

Construction of the tailings  dam and embank-
ments by prescribed engineering design
practices to ensure structural  stability.

If the material under a tailings pond  has a
saturated hydraulic conductivity greater than
10~7 cm/s, scaling the bottom and inner slopes
of the pond  to  prevent contamination is neces-
sary if the  pond contains hazardous wastes such
as pyrite-rich  tailings.

-------
                                       TABLE  III   (continued)
Type of  solid waste
Disposal method
                                                                                 Stabilization/control  method
                                 Backfilling underground mines  (either by
                                 sluicing or truck hauling)
                                       Elimination  or minimizing of tailings pond dis-
                                       charge to surface streams through  (1) recycle
                                       of water for sluicing at mill,  (2) maintaining
                                       sufficient freeboard on dan,  (3) maximizing
                                       pond surface area (through site selection) to
                                       maximize evapotranspiration.

                                       Where elimination of tailings pond discharge to
                                       surface streams  is impractical, treatment of
                                       tailings pond to produce an effluent which
                                       meets pertinent  water quality standards (e.g.,
                                       addition of  lime to aid solids  settling and
                                       adjust pH, provision of sufficient retention
                                       time and length-to-depth ratio  to allow the re-
                                       quired solids settling time).

                                       Rmploymcnt of physical (windbreaks, intercep-
                                       tor ditches  and  watering), chemical  (wetting
                                       and crusting agents), and vegetative surface
                                       stabilization techniques on tailings dam and
                                       embankment slopes and on dry, inactive areas
                                       of tailings  ponds to prevent surface water and
                                       fugitive dust pollution.

                                       Ensure that  potential hazardous tailings sluice
                                       water does not make contact with an infiltra-
                                       tion gallery to  a subterranean  aquifer.

                                       when dry tailings (such as coal gob piles) are
                                       used to backfill underground mines, suppression
                                       of fugitive  dust from transfer  and handling of
                                       the material.
 (continued)

-------
                                                  TABLE III    (continued)
          Type of solid waste
                                       Disposal method
                                                                                             Stabilization/control method
X
Miscellaneous wastes.  Includes
mine site development wastes
(e.g..  drilling muds, scalped
vegetation), construction debris,
and domestic garbage from food
consumed on site.
                                           Utilization as construction material (e.g.,
                                           tailings dam or embankments, mining haul
                                           roads, aggregate for asphalt paving mate-
                                           rial and concrete for highway and building
                                           construction) and as agricultural additive
                                           as a fertilizer filler or supplement.

                                           Combination with overburden, waste rock,
                                           and/or tailings.
                                           Separate disposal in sanitary landfill on
                                           or off site.
                                           Lake/marine disposal
                                                                              Minimal stabilization/control required,  except
                                                                              for suppression of fugitive dust during  trans-
                                                                              fer and handling.
Minimal stabilization/control  methods  required
in addition to those  prescribed  above.
                                                                              Periodic coverage of garbage with  inert  mate-
                                                                              rial not subject to emission of fugitive emis-
                                                                              sions (similar to prescribed sanitary landfill
                                                                              methodology) .

                                                                              Very little can be done prior to or after dis-
                                                                              charge of the tailings to the lake or marine
                                                                              environment.   Isolation of the lake from dis-
                                                                              charge to surface streams is possible, but not
                                                                              often practiced.

-------
intended to (1) protect the quality of groundwater from degradation



by leachates emanating from and passing through overburden and



waste rock piles and tailings/ (2) protect surface water from



silt loads and dissolved solid loads generated by erosion and



corrosion of these wastes, (3) prevent fugitive dust from these



wastes, (4) protect human life from catastrophic failure caused


                            14
by floods or seismic events.



     Disposal of Overburden and Waste Rock.  An estimated 90



percent of the overburden and waste rock (soil, sand, clay,



shale, gravel, boulders, and other unconsolidated materials) that



are removed to gain access to an orebody are permanently disposed



of in waste piles adjacent to or near the mine.    Overburden



from open pit mines is usually discarded on the outside slopes of



the pit.  For many years overburden and waste rock have also been



disposed of as part of the normal mining process, by immediately



backfilling them into previously excavated areas (stopes in



underground mines).  It is estimated that 10 percent of these



wastes are now being disposed of in this manner, and the trend



is toward increasing this percentage.    Some industries



(e.g., practically all coal,  kaolinic clay, central Florida



phosphate) are already backfilling almost all their mine wastes.



     Utilization of overburden and waste rock as byproducts has



been and will probably continue to be limited almost exclusively



to construction material.  Selected portions of these wastes with



sufficient strength and proper drainage characteristics can be



used on site to construct roads and tailings pond embankments.
                              xlii

-------
Certain wastes that are not easily eroded have also been used to

cover wastes that are less stable and more subject to weathering.

     Overburden and waste rock have also been marketed as

construction materials for offsite application.  Sometimes mining

companies and the offsite users have an arrangement whereby the

user loads and hauls the material off the mine site without any

exchange of money.  Offsite uses include aggregate for concrete

and asphalt mixes, fill material, and subbase for highway

construction.  Certain mine wastes may provide a better material

for use in specific applications than conventional materials,

and in some instances, may result in cost savings.

     Despite the many potential uses that have been researched

and developed for overburden and waste rock, the vast quantities

generated annually, coupled with the severe economic limitations

associated with shipping distances from remotely located mines,

preclude utilization as a practical means of disposal.  The

amount of overburden and waste rock currently used as byproducts

is miniscule (less than 1 percent).
                      i
     Disposal of Tailings.  Nearly all (99+ percent)  of the

tailings generated annually by beneficiating processes are

disposed of in terrestrial impoundments or tailings ponds.  The

rest are backfilled into underground mines, discharged to lakes

or saltwater bodies, or utilized as construction materials

(Table III),15

     Tailings are discharged into a pond as a slurry.  The slurry

is typically 50 to 85 percent water by weight, but it may be as



                              xliii

-------
low as 15 percent in oil shale tailings.  '    Tailings ponds are
usually situated in small valleys or against hillsides and
contained by a dam.  When they are situated in flat areas/ dikes
                           18
must be built on all sides.
     Earth liners are commonly used in tailings ponds.  If a
supply of clay or clayey soil is available near the site, this is
generally the most economical liner to use.  Tailings slimes with
low permeability can be used, or commercial bentonite, whose
sealing ability is affected by pH, can be added to these clayey
soils to reduce their permeability to acceptable levels.
Artificial liners such as soil cement, petroleum derivatives,
plastic, and rubber are available, but they are more expensive
than earth materials, and earthwork may still be required to
prepare the ground surface.  All liner materials must be
                                                           18
resistant to possible corrosive effects of the pond liquid.
     Some underground metal mines have adopted the practice  of
backfilling (usually hydraulically) abandoned stopes with the
                             14
coarser fraction of tailings.    The main advantages are improved
and less expensive recovery of the underground orebody,  some
reduction in volume of tailings that must be impounded (reducing
the surface area needed), and lessening of postmining surface
subsidence.
     The major disadvantages of hydraulic fill are introduction
of additional water into the mine, occasional spills, and the
necessity of importing material for tailings embankments (because
the removal of so much of the coarse fraction of the tailings
                              xliv

-------
makes it impossible to construct embankments exclusively of



tailings).  Bureau of Mines investigations of the use of



backfilling in the Coeur d'Alene district of northern Idaho



indicate that it should be possible to dispose of a greater



percentage of tailings by filling underground openings than has


                  19
been the practice.    Using tailings as fine as No. 200 sieve



may be feasible, which would mean that 50 percent or more of the



average copper, lead, or zinc tailings from underground mining


                    19
could be backfilled.    Since 1974, the major limitation on this



practice has been the annually high cost of the energy required



to remove excess water from the finer-grained tailings, which is



necessary to achieve the engineering properties required for



underground stability.  Fine-grained tailings are not free-draining,



     Tailings utilization also is essentially restricted to



construction material, primarily for highways.  Onsite uses



include haul road construction, tailings pond embankments, and



aggregate for paving mixtures.  Offsite uses include fill for



highway embankments, subbase material for concrete and asphalt



highways, antiskid snow-control material for highways, and



aggregate for concrete and asphalt paving mixes.  Some tailings,



however, cannot be used in construction.



     Stabilization/Control/Reclamation.  The importance of



implementating disposal, stabilization, and control techniques



for mineral resource solid wastes is underscored by the magnitude



of its generation.  In the past land reclamation was not practiced



as widely,  and today degrees of reclamation vary widely.  The
                               xlv

-------
current trend toward more stringent legislation/ however, is
causing mining companies to become increasingly aware of their
obligation to restore the land and to escalate reclamation
activities.  For example, the recent Federal Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act is adding a new dimension to
reclamation of coal mine lands.
     The high visibility of unsightly coal-preparation waste
piles, especially in the highly populated East, and the fact that
approximately 40 percent of the total land disturbed by past and
present mining activities is the result of coal mining operations
have caused coal mining companies to become leaders in practicing
reclamation concurrently with extraction operations.  This
concept is catching on rapidly in other mining industries (such
as copper/ phosphate rock, and iron), even though the mine wastes
from these industries are not yet covered by a Federal reclamation
law.
     Restoration of a mined area to the desired condition
involves landscaping, stabilization by physical and chemical
means (especially during ongoing mining activities), soil
amelioration, and revegetation.  Company policy and the various
desired goals of reclamation efforts (such as lakes created from
abandoned open pit mines or quarries, grazing lands, park and
recreational areas, crop lands, sports areas, campgrounds,
sanitary landfills, and;home sites)  determine the manner and
sequence in which these procedures are applied.
                               xlvi

-------
               Environmental and Health Assessment
     Mineral resource solid wastes affect human health and the
environment both directly and indirectly.  Direct effects are
obvious  (e.g., large areas of land are required for containment
of mine waste), but they do not result from the hazardous
properties of the wastes.  It is the indirect or secondary
pollution that can result from these properties.
     The direct effects of waste production and disposal on the
physiography and aesthetics of a mining area are apparent.  Even
though areas used for waste disposal are revegetated (with
difficulty), the angular configuration commonly associated with
dams or banks often does not blend easily with the existing
landscape.  It is not always possible to return the large areas
of land required for waste disposal back to their original state
after mining operations are terminated.  Occasionally,  however,
reclamation actually improves land use.
     Proper design of impoundments and spoil banks is critical.
Failure of refuse banks has resulted in great loss of life and
destruction of property.  Two examples are the failure of a coal
waste heap in Aberfan, Wales, in 1966, which killed 144 persons,
and the failure of a coal waste dam in Buffalo Creek, West
Virginia, in 1972, which resulted in the death of 125 persons and
the destruction of hundreds of homes.
     Surface water is the environmental medium most significantly
impacted by indirect pollution from mineral resource solid wastes.
Drainage from waste heaps may contain acid-forming materials

                              xlvii

-------
(primarily pyrite), which raise the acid level beyond the
buffering capacity of streams and have a pH so low as to be
considered corrosive.  It is also common for this drainage to
dissolve any heavy metals that may be present.  This drainage may
also contain beneficiation reagents and radioactive materials.
Moreover, erosion of overburden piles or waste banks has caused
large volumes of sediment to enter surface waters.  Increases in
acidity, alkalinity, turbidity, or metals concentrations are
known to have adverse effects on aquatic life, but the extent of
their effect on humans is unknown.
     Groundwater quality is impacted by leachate and/or seepage
from tailings ponds and mine waste piles, which may contain a
variety of undesirable constituents such as radioactive materials,
processing reagents, and heavy metals.  The significance of this
impact depends on such factors as climate, the nature of the
soil or rock strata,'and the depth of the water table.  Arid
regions of the West should be affected less severely because the
water either evaporates or is recycled.  Polluted groundwater may
affect vegetation.  Plant uptake of metals depends upon the
chemical form of the metals, soil conditions,  and plant species.
The same is true of the:revegetative potential of the actual mine
wastes.  The discharge of contaminated groundwaters into streams
can also have an adverse impact on surface waters.
     Some atmospheric emissions can be generated by mineral
resource solid wastes.  For example, waste banks at coal mines,
when accidentially ignited, emit particulates, sulfur oxides,

                              xlviii

-------
nitrogen oxides, and hydrocarbons, including benzo(a)pyrene.



Although some of the components of the emissions from mineral



resource wastes are considered hazardous, concentrations are



usually too small to pose a significant threat to human health or



the environment.  An exception is the radon gas emitted from




uncovered, dry, uranium tailings.  In general, the remoteness of




most large mining operations limits the impact of air emissions




on human health.




                      Laws and Regulations




     The regulatory framework within which'most mines must



operate consists of a rather imposing and oftentimes cumbersome



array of guidelines, criteria, and regulations characterized by



jurisdictional overlapping between and within governmental



levels.  This overlapping contributes to confusion and delay on



the part of mine owners and regulators alike.  The growing



Federal involvement in the regulation of mining operations,



however, especially in the area of pollution control, has the



potential for reducing or eliminating these differences, thereby



providing a more effective and uniform system for protecting the



environment (Table IV).



     Legislation applicable to the control of mineral resource



solid wastes varies, depending on whether the mine is on public



or private land and on the regulations promulgated by each state



and local authority.  On public land, the granting of mining



rights under the laws encompassing the Federal mineral leasing



program is generally preceded by preparation of an environmental
                              xlix

-------
                                        TABLE  IV

        FEDERAL LAWS AFFECTING THE DISPOSAL OF  MINING SOLID  WASTES
                           Environmental  Laws  Governing Mining

                        Resource Conservation  and  Recovery Act of 1976
                        Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977

Mining Laws  (not specifically environmental)      General Environmental Laws (not specifically mining)

Federal Mineral Leasing Laws:                    National Environmental Protection Act
 U.S.  Mining  Laws of 1972                        Clean Air Act
 Mineral Leasing Act of 1920                       Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977
  Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 1976             Federal Water Pollution Control Act
 Minerals Leasing Act For Acquired Land             Clean Water Act
 Materials Act of 1947                           Safe Drinking Water Act
Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration      Endangered Species Act of 1973
                                                National Historic Preservation Act

                                   Miscellaneous Laws

                   Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899  (Section 13, Refuse Act)
                   Atomic Energy Act of 1974
                    Energy Reorganization Act  of 1974

-------
impact statement required by the National Environmental Policy



Act.  On private land, solid waste disposal is generally affected



by a large number of state and local regulatory agencies whose



authority covers the control of mining and beneficiating operations.



Federal air and water quality guidelines have•indirectly affected



the disposal of solid wastes from private mining operations for



some time.  The Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act




and Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, however, have



the potential for the most direct impact on all phases of mining



operations.



     The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act provides the



states with broad powers, according to Federally approved state



plans, to develop and enforce regulations on surface coal mining



and reclamation operations.  It covers surface mining operations



and the surface effects of underground mining operations, but it



applies only to coal mining operations.  This leaves the other



mining industries largely within the control of varying state



sponsored regulations.  The Resource Conservation and Recovery



Act places strict limitations on the discharge and disposal of



all solid wastes.  At the present time its application to the



mining industry and specific mining byproducts remains uncertain.
                               li

-------
     The following points summarize the findings of this

investigation.

     1.   The three mineral mining categories addressed in this

          study (metallic minerals, nonmetallic minerals and

          coal) generate as estimated 2.3 billion tons (2.1

          petagrams) of mine and beneficiation solid wastes

          annually, most of which is disposed of on the land.

          The mine wastes (overburden) associated with surface

          mining operations are by far the largest source of

          mineral resource solid wastes, comprising about 65

          percent of the total produced annually.  The combined

          mine wastes and tailings generated at surface mines are

          also much greater in volume than the combined wastes

          generated at underground mines.  More than 65 different

          mining industries generate solid wastes, but 5 of these

          are responsible for 85 percent of the total:  the

          copper industry, which contributes the most, is

          followed by iron, phosphate, uranium, and bituminous

          coal industries in that order.*  Of the three mineral

          mining categories, the metallic mineral mining industry

          generates the most solid wastes.*

     2.   Mineral resource wastes associated with most nonmetal

          mining operations usually do not contain elements or

          compounds that pose a significant threat to human
     * This comparison does not consider the substantial
quantities of mine solid wastes produced by the coal industry,

                               lii

-------
     health or the environment.   Any potentially hazardous



     elements (such as heavy metals or radioactive materials)



     that may be associated with these wastes are usually



     inert or chemically stable  because of pH and solubility



     conditions of the wastes;  however, some concern has



     arisen about hazardous materials associated with the



     mineral resource wastes from a few nonmetals mining



     industries.  Two examples  are the wastes from the few



     existing asbestos mines and several talc and vermiculite



     mines, which contain asbestos fibers; and the wastes



     associated with central Florida phosphate mining and



     beneficiating operations,  which contain some radioactive



     constituents.



3.    Because the chemical characteristics of mine wastes



     associated with coal and metals recovery are more



     complex, these wastes pose  a more serious threat to the



     environment than those associated with nonmetals mining.



     Mine wastes from eastern coal mines often contain



     unstable sulfide minerals  (e.g., pyrite and marcasite),



     and the leachate produced  by these minerals when they



     interact with water is acidic in nature.  On the other



     hand, wastes from western  coal mines, which ordinarily



     do not contain pyrite, tend to be alkaline, have a high



     pH, and contain a variety  of dissolved materials



     (primarily salts).   The overburden and waste rock



     removed during the mining  of some metallic ores (e.g.,






                         liii

-------
     copper,  lead, zinc, and molybdenum)  in the West,



     also contain pyrite; and in cases where oxygen and



     water are available together, these wastes produce acid



     water similar to that produced by eastern coal mine



     wastes.   Because these wastes also contain heavy metals,




     the acid leachate formed contains dissolved metals that



     are hazardous to the environment.  In the Central Rocky



     Mountains, copper,  zinc, and arsenic are almost always



     associated with acid mine drainage.   Best available



     estimates indicate  that 25 percent of the hard rock or



     metallic mineral industries generate mine wastes with



     sufficient pyrite to produce acid water.  This figure



     is estimated to be  about 90 to 95 percent for eastern



     coal mines, and about 40 to 50 percent for all coal



     mines.



4.    Beneficiation wastes (tailings)  associated with some



     metallic ore and eastern coal mining operations contain



     significant levels  of hazardous materials that can



     adversely impact the environment.  The hazardous



     materials are a result of the constituents, particularly



     heavy metals, contained in the ores  being processed.



     Generally, the presence of hazardous materials is a



     bigger problem with tailings than it is with mine waste



     because (1) the concentrations of hazardous materials



     are usually higher  in tailings;  (2)  the fine grain size



     of tailings increases the solubility of the materials






                          liv

-------
contained in the waste; (3) the fine grain size of



tailings increases the likelihood of wind and water



erosion; (4) the presence of processing reagents in



tailings creates a complex chemical environment that



complicates hazardous waste problems; (5) overburden is



often returned to the excavated area, where it is



protected from erosive forces.



     The presence of pyrite in tailings significantly



increases the potential hazard because it results in



acidic conditions that increase the likelihood of the



leaching of the hazardous metals in the waste.



Quantitative data are not available concerning the



exact amount of tailings that produce acid drainage and



associated heavy metals problems, but best available



estimates indicate that 25 percent of the metallic



mineral industries generate sufficient pyrite to produce



acid waters containing hazardous levels of heavy metals,


                                             21 3
and about 40 to 50 percent of the coal mines.  '



     The problem of hazardous materials in tailings is



increased when other industrial wastes are combined



with the tailings.  Such combination produces a more



complex chemical environment and a waste with a



character entirely different from that of ordinary mine



or beneficiation wastes.  Examples of other industrial



wastes that are added to tailings at some operations
                      Iv

-------
          are effluents from refinery plants and fertilizer

          processing operations and blowdown from sulfuric acid

          plants.   Although wastes are combined in several

          different mining industries, the combining occurs most

          frequently in the copper, lead,  and zinc industries.

          The extent of generation of combined wastes is not

          known,  but an estimate of 50 to 100 million tons (45 to

          91 Gg)  of such waste per year appears reasonable.*

               Hazardous effects associated with tailings are

          further complicated when these wastes contain potentially

          toxic substances resulting from the use of certain

          beneficiation reagents (e.g., sodium cyanide and copper

          sulfate).  These reagents are used in some copper,

          lead, zinc, and gold and silver operations.  Toxicity

          problems can also result from carryover of organic

          flotation reagents into tailings, although the extent

          of this problem is uncertain at this time and more

          analytical testing is needed to increase the

          understanding of the effects of these reagents.

          Research is currently being performed to develop

          nonhazardous reagents.

     5.   The problem associated with uranium mining and

          beneficiation operations is the discharge of significant
     * PEDCo engineering estimate based on calculations made in
this study and literature values.
                               Ivi

-------
volumes of radioactive beneficiation wastes (8 million



tons or 7.2 Gg per year), which can result in the



release of airborne and waterborne radionuclides to the



environment.  Moreover, the growing demand for uranium




as fuel in nuclear power plants is expected to more




than double its production by 1985 and this intensifies




the concern for the potential health and environmental




hazards associated with this industry.  Uranium tailings




are generally disposed of by impounding them in unlined



ponds, and up to 50 percent of the liquid portion of



the tailings impounded may be lost by seepage, resulting



in subsequent pollution of groundwater.  Lined ponds



represent a recent advance in state-of-the-art technology



for containment of tailings.  Liners may be clay,



treated clay, or synthetic.  The current trend is



toward synthetic liners because the acid waters typical



of most uranium tailings break down clay materials.



     The proposed RCRA Regulations for Hazardous Wastes



(Federal Register, December 18, 1978) now regulate only



the overburden and waste rock from uranium mining



operations.  Data on the environmental impact of these



mine wastes is limited, but compared with the threat



posed by beneficiation wastes, it is believed to be



much less significant.



     PL 95-604, The Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation



Control Act of 1978 (November 8, 1978) has authorized






                    Ivii

-------
EPA to set health and environmental standards for these
wastes, to be regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission and "agreement states."
     The real problem associated with the airborne
radionuclides from the phosphate mining industry is
apparently limited to reclaimed, inactive mining areas
where beneficiation and reclamation processes are no
longer practiced and radioactive materials are left
exposed.  There appears to be no groundwater contamination
by radium 226 from active mining and beneficiation
operations.
Although the mineral resource wastes produced by the
mercury and beryllium industries contain some constituents
that could be considered potentially hazardous, these
wastes are not of significant concern because:  (1)
only small amounts of solid wastes are produced by
these industries [less than 3 million tons (2.7 gegagrams)
per year] because of the small number of operations in
each industry (the beryllium industry consists of one
mine, and the mercury industry consists of less than
fifteen);  (2). the climate and topography of the areas
where mercury and beryllium operations are located are
such that wind and water erosion of wastes is not a
problem; (3) there are no acid drainage problems
associated with either of these industries.
Some scientists and regulators have exhibited concern
about the release of asbestos fibers into the environment
                     Iviii

-------
          as a result of some mining and beneficiating operations

          [e.g.f the highly publicized Reserve Mining Company's

          daily disposal of 67,000 tons (61 megagrams) of taconite

          tailings containing asbestos fibers into Lake Superior].

          Other industries that have received attention because

          of the release of asbestos to the environment include

          the direct mining of asbestos and selective operations

          in the vermiculite, copper, gold, and talc mining

          industries.  The amount of mineral resource solid

          wastes generated by these industries that may result in

          the release of asbestos fibers to the environment is

          estimated to be less than 5 million tons (4.5 gigagrams)

          per year.*  Based on air and water monitoring surveys

          and some epidemiological studies, scientists have

          concluded that no significant environmental impact

          results from the mining and beneficiating of minerals

          containing asbestos fibers.

     8.   Emissions of nonhazardous fugitive dust from dry,

          inactive tailings ponds, especially those resulting from

          high winds in the arid West and Southwest,  can have a

          significant impact on the immediate surrounding area;

          however, the relative overall impact of these emissions

          on regional air quality is insignificant compared with

          other fugitive dust sources.
     * PEDCo Engineering estimate based on calculations made in
this study and literature values.


                               lix

-------
9.   With a few exceptions,  adequate disposal,  stabilization,

     and control methods are available to protect human

     health and the environment from the effects of mineral

     resource wastes.   Historically, widespread deficiencies

     in the application of these methods have left vast

     areas of mined lands exposed to natural forces of

     erosion.  Currently, and especially recently, industry

     is accelerating the extent of application  of these

     methods; however,  a significant amount of  improvement

     is still needed.   In particular, problem areas where

     these methodologies should receive increased application

     include:

     0    Control of mineral resource wastes that produce
          acid water.

     0    Reclamation of waste disposal areas located where
          conditions are adverse (e.g., where climate,
          topography,  and soil characteristics  are less than
          favorable).

     0    Reduction of the release of hazardous materials
          (primarily radioactive agents from uranium mining
          and berieficiation  and heavy metals from the
          metallic mineral and coal mining industries) to
          surface and groundwaters via seepage  and percolation.

10.   Apparent gaps in current Federal environmental regulations

     governing mineral resource wastes include:

     0    Surface water regulations do not prohibit seepage
          from ponds nor require monitoring to  detect
          possible contamination of aquifers.

     0    Groundwater regulations do not take into account
          regional differences in the quality of natural
          groundwater.

     0    Air quality regulations do not include coverage of
          radioactive emissions.

                          Ix

-------
          State regulations vary widely in their coverage; some



          are up to date, whereas others are antiquated;



          generally they are weak in the same areas delineated



          for Federal regulations.



     11.  A major conclusion drawn from this study is that data



          are generally sparse concerning mineral resource wastes



          and that more information is needed to assess their



          potential impact on human health and the environment.



          Additional data should include more field and laboratory



          testing to determine the types and quantities of



          potentially harmful materials in wastes and how time



          affects the interaction of these constituents in the



          associated complex chemical environment of some mineral



          resource wastes.  Additional groundwater and surface



          water monitoring data are also needed to determine the



          amount of hazardous materials escaping from waste



          disposal areas via seepage, percolation, and runoff.



          Finally, more bioassay testing is needed to determine



          lethal and sublethal concentrations of the hazardous



          materials associated with mineral resource solid wastes.



Identification of Mineral Resource Solid Waste Problems by Industry



     A priorities-ranking system has been developed in an effort



to identify the mining industries that have the greatest relative



impact on human health and the environment as a result of the



solid wastes they produce.  Five criteria were chosen to judge



the potential adverse impacts (Table V).  Each criterion was
                               Ixi

-------
                         TABLE V
   RANKING OF  POTENTIAL  ENVIRONMENTAL
                  IMPACT  BY MINERAL
Intanaity ol

1.

1.


Criteria* n
KM criteria
a. Naiardoua
b. Nonnaurdowi
Total quantity el Mineral reoourca
•attae
Priority ratine
(•aeed en Million tone per year)*


0
0


0
I'SI


10
16


10 .
It-lS)
'•pact


to
36


16
(2t-7S)

Major

106
SO


40
J.  Number ol domeatic Binae
     Priority rating
     (Meed en total number el
4.  Projected frowth/daclme el
   induatry
     Priority retine
all
         0         10  .      10       40
       11-10)    (11-21)   llt-106)    l>100
1I77-1IISH


1-0-51
(t-lS)
114-401
1 -501



Matala
Baueite
Copper
Cold
Iron ore
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Silver
Urania*
tine
Other'
iienmetala
Aabeatoa
Claye
Oiatoeute
reldapar
Gypauei
Mica lacrap)
Perlite
Phoaphata rock
Potaadum aalta
Pumice
tail
land and araval
Sodium carbonate
Stone
Cruahad and broaan
Oimenaion
Talc, aoapatone:. ' pyropfiylllte
Otnerl :
Mineral Puele

bitumineua. and ll«nite)
Hal

0
to
20
20
to
20
20
20
100
to
0

20
0
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
0

0
0

0
to
lib)

10
JO
10
JO
JO
0
10
10
JO
JO
6

0
10
0
0

10
0
JO
0
0
0
JO
0

10
0
0
0
so
1

10
40
10
40
10
0
10
0
40
10
10

0
10
0
0
10
0
0
40
10
0
0
10
10

10
0
0
10
46
J

10
20
20
20
20
10
0
10
40
10
0

0
46
16
10
10
10
10
10
0
40
10
40
0

40
40
10
0
40
4 Total acora

0
JO
JO
JO
IS
0
JO
IS
JO
IS
J6

JO
JO
)0
IS
s
s
s
JO
s
JO
JO
JO
10

JO
s
16
IS
IS

JO
110 '
• 0
140
115
JO
70
ts
140
us
46

SO
100
40
Jl
JS
*s
is
140
IS
70
40
110
40

100
4S
SO
IS
10S
     •  lee Appendta  D for an explanation of UM criteria uW la tJua ta£la.
     •  Valvea ttaaad  on data contained In Table 7 of  tbll docwent.
     I  Valuea baaed  on data contained in Table 2 of  tnia decent.
     t  AntlKny. berylliu*. ea»«anifareua ore. •onetlta. nlclal. platlni*
 froup vetala. rare earth aatala,  tin. titanium, iiaanita. tuneitan. vanadluv.
     f  AMraei»ea. apllte. barite. boron einarala. fluorapar. erapnita.
 freenaand aarl. iron o»de pievnta I crude),  kyanite. lltbiu* unerala.
 •afneaite. •illatonae. olivine. varmiculite.
                               Ixii

-------
weighted according to its relative importance, i.e., Criterion



l(a) carries the most importance and Criterion 4, the least.



Four arbitrary values are assigned to indicate the degree to



which that criterion applies to each industry.  For example,



Criterion l(a) concerns hazardous wastes from mining and



beneficiation; if a specific industry generates an insignificant



amount of hazardous wastes, it receives a:.value of 0 for that



criterion; if hazardous wastes are a minor problem, the industry



receives a value of 20; if they are a major problem, it receives



a value of 100.



     The values assigned to each criterion for a particular



industry are then totaled, thus providing a comparison for



determining which industries are likely to have the greater



impact on the environment.



     Despite the quantitative "total score" ranking of each



mineral industry, however, the end result is at best a qualitative



ranking of industries.  Thus, the listing cannot be interpreted



to mean the adverse environmental impact from uranium, for



instance, is six times greater than that from diatomite.  In



fact, rankings for minerals such as diatomite are based exclusively



on criteria that measure the size and extent of an industry,



i.e., RCRA criteria (impact from hazardous and nonhazardous



wastes)  are not involved, and these industries are actually



considered environmentally insignificant on the whole.



     Although this priority ranking of individual mineral



industries is arrived at by a seemingly somewhat arbitrary






                              Ixiii

-------
process, it does reveal the major industries (e.g., uranium,



coal, copper, phosphate) that would be expected to have the



greatest adverse environmental and health impacts.



     This listing and the discussion in this report should



provide background information needed to develop a long-term



strategy regarding the role of the Federal Government in the



control of industrial solid wastes.
                              Ixiv

-------
                REFERENCES FOR EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 1.  Office of Solid Waste Management Programs.   A comprehensive
       assessment of solid waste problems, practices, and needs.
       Prepared by AD Hoc Group for Office of Science and
       Technology, Executive Office of the President, Washington,
       May 1969.

 2.  Peisse, F.H., D.W. Lockard, and A.E.  Lindquist.   Coal
       surface mining reclamation cost in the western United
       States.  Bureau of Mines Information Circular  IC8737.
       Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977.

 3.  U.S. Bureau of Mines.  Minerals yearbook, 1975 ed.   (Preprint)
       Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975.

 4.  Bel, L.C.  1977 Keystone coal industry manual.  New York,
       McGraw Hill Mining Publications, 1977.

 5.  Office of Water and Hazardous Materials.  Inactive  and
       abandoned underground mines, water pollution prevention
       and control.  U.S. EPA Publication 440/9-75-007.
       Washington, 1975.

 6.  Paone, J., J.L. Morning, and L. Giorgetti.   Land utilization
       and reclamation in the mining industry, 1930-71.   U.S.
       Bureau of Mines Information Circular IC8642.  Washington,
       U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974.

 7.  Offices of Research and Development.   Availability  of mining
       wastes and their potential for use as highway  material.
       v. 1, 2, and 3.  Federal Highway Administration Report
       No. FGWA-RD-76 106.  Washington, 1976.

 8.  Office of Research and Development.  Vegetative  stabilization
       of mineral waste heaps.  U.S. EPA Publication  600/2-76-087.
       Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976.

 9.  Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration. Mine refuse
       impoundments in the United States.   MESA Informational
       Report 1028.  January 1977.

10.  Dean, K.C., and R. Havens.  Methods and Costs for Stabilizing
       Tailings Ponds.  Presented at the American Mining
       Congress Mining Convention/Environment Show, Denver,
       Colorado, September 9-12, 1973.

11.  Office of Research and Development.  Water pollution caused
       by inactive ore and mineral mines,  a national  assessment.
       U.S. EPA Publication 600/2-76-298.   Washington, U.S.
       Government Printing Office, 1976.
                               Ixv

-------
12.  Volpe, R.L. Geotechnical Engineering Aspects of Copper
       Tai  ngs Dams.  Presented at the American Society of
       Civil Engineers National Convention, Denver, Colorado,
       November 3--7, 1975.

13.  Midwest Research Institute.  A study of waste generation,
       treatment, and disposal in the metals mining industry,
       for Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste Management
       Division, Washington, PB-261052, October 1976.

14.  Williams, R.E.  Waste production and disposal in mining,
       milling, and metallurgical industries.  San Francisco,
       Miller Freeman Publication, Inc., 1975.  489 p.

15.  Personal communication.  R.E. Williams, professor of
       hydrogeology, University of Idaho, to J. Greber, PEDCo.
       May 30, 1978.

16.  Personal communication.  J. Bowen, Erie Mining Company, to
       R. Amick during PEDCo visit to Hoyt Lakes, Minnesota, iron
       ore mining operations, January 30, 1978.

17.  Spendlove, J.J.  Bureau of Mines research on resource
       recovery, reclamation, utilization, disposal, and
       stabilization.  Information Circular 8750, 1977.

18.  Mead, W.E., and G.W. Condrat.  Groundwater Protection and
       Tailings Disposal.  Presented at the American Society of
       Civil Engineers National Convention, Denver, Colorado,
       November 3-7, 1975.

19.  Kealy, C.D.,, and R.E. Williams.  Flow through a tailings pond
       embankment.  Water Resources, 7(1), 143-154, July 1971.

20.  Collins, R.J., and R.H. Miller.  Availability of mining
       wastes and their potential use as highway material, v. 1.
       Classification and technical environmental analysis,
       prepared for Federal Highway Administrator Offices of
       Research and Development.  Report No. FHWA-RD-76 106
       by Valley Forge Laboratories, May 1976.

21.  Personal communication.  Selected experts in various state
       and Federal agencies to Dr. Roy E. Williams, professor of
       hydrogeology, University of Idaho.  August 1978.
                               Ixvi

-------
                            SECTION 1




                          INTRODUCTION





     Since its origin, the U.S. mining industry  [considered here




to encompass the recovery of all types of ores  (metallic,



nonmetallic, and solid mineral fuels)] is estimated to have



generated more than 30 billion tons (27.2 Pg) of solid wastes as



a result of developing, extracting, and processing (beneficiating)



activities.  Recently, the rate of generation has increased



rapidly because larger, more efficient mining machines are used



and more ore, deeper orebodies, and lower grade ores are mined to



meet the increased demand for minerals.  The current rate,



estimated to be approximately 2.3 billion tons  (2.1 Pg) per year



and second only to agricultural wastes in magnitude,  accounts for



about 40 percent of the total solid wastes generated annually in



the United States.   This is more than twice the amount generated



by the mining industry in 1967.



     The task of contending with mineral resource solid wastes



already generated and those being generated is a serious one, but



it is likely to be even more difficult in the future as the



industry is forced to mine deeper and even lower grade orebodies.



By 1985 the Nation's mining industries are expected to generate



about 4 billion tons (3.6 Pg)  of solid waste annually, and by



2000 the annual figure is projected to reach 6 billion tons

-------
 (5.4 Pg).  Should ocean and oil shale mining become major

commercial enterprises  (as expected), these quantities could

double.

     Problems associated with the handling and ultimate disposal

of mineral resource solid wastes multiply as quantities increase.

For example, failure of waste impoundments have caused disasters,

harmful materials have contaminated surface and groundwaters and

the atmosphere, and in some cases negligence on the part of mine

operators has jeopardized the public and the environment.

     Although many mineral resource solid wastes are inert, some

can be harmful, particularly those containing heavy metals,

radioactive constituents, or acid-forming minerals (primarily

pyrite).

     Having recently concluded that information regarding

potential dangers posed by mineral resource solid wastes is not

sufficient to form the basis for legislative action at this time,

Congress mandated a study of these wastes under the authority of

Section 8002(f) of P.L. 94-580, the Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), and directed the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency to conduct this study.*

     The scope and objective of the study are described in the

following excerpt from Section 8002(f), MINING WASTE:
     * By way of clarification, in 1977 Congress concluded that
sufficient information was available to form the basis of
legislation for the coal industry and passed the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA).  Although SMCRA now applies
only to the coal industry, it could eventually affect other
mineral mining industries as well.

-------
      "The Administrator, in consultation with the Secretary of
      the Interior, shall conduct a detailed and comprehensive
      study on the adverse effects of solid wastes from active and
      abandoned surface and underground mines on the environment,
      including, but not limited to, the effects of such wastes on
      humans, water, air, health, welfare, and natural resources,
      and on the adequacy of means and measures currently employed
      by the mining industry, Government agencies, and others to
      dispose of and utilize such solid wastes and to prevent or
      substantially mitigate such adverse effects.  Such study
      shall include an analysis of -
               (1) the sources and volume of discarded material
          generated per year from mining;
               (2) present disposal practices;
               (3) potential dangers to human health and the
          environment from surface runoff of leachate and air
          pollution by dust;
               (4) alternatives to current disposal methods;
               (5) the cost of those alternatives in terms of
          the impact on mine product costs; and
               (6) potential for use of discarded material as a
          secondary source of the mine product.
      In furtherance of this study, the Administrator shall, as he
      deems appropriate, review studies and other actions of other
      Federal agencies concerning such wastes with a view toward
      avoiding duplication of effort and the need to expedite such
      study.  The Administrator shall publish a report of such
      study and shall include appropriate findings and
      recommendations for Federal and non-Federal actions
      concerning such effects."

      This report is in response to the study outlined above.  It

is based on published and unpublished data and information

acquired during visits to selected mine sites; no sampling tests

were  conducted in the field.  Particular emphasis is placed on

the question of whether the disposal of mineral resource wastes

should be further regulated; if so, how; if not, why not.  It is

important to note that this study does not provide recommendations

for such regulation;  rather, it provides data for use by those

who will make these recommendations.

-------
     This investigation could result in the EPA recommending one

of the  following courses of action:

      (1)  Mineral resource solid wastes should not be regulated
          further because they are being properly handled and
          disposed of at this time under existing Federal,
          state, and/or local regulations.

      (2)  The handling and disposal of mineral resource solid
          wastes are not being properly regulated at this time;
          therefore the appropriate sections of the Resource
          Conservation and Recovery Act should be applied to
          assure the proper regulation of these wastes.

      (3)  The handling and disposal of mineral resource solid
          wastes are not being properly regulated at this time;
          additional regulation is needed, but the Resource
          Conservation and Recovery Act is not the proper vehicle
          to use to impose these regulations.

      (4)  The information available is not sufficient to make a
          decision concerning the regulation of mine solid
          wastes; therefore additional studies are needed before
          a decision can be made.

     In this investigation solid wastes are considered to be

those wastes from mining (surface and underground) and

beneficiation (e.g., crushing, screening, and concentrating),

including leaching.  Wastes from roasting, smelting, refining,

and other chemical processing are not included, although

occasionally these wastes are discarded in tailings ponds and

thereby constitute a primary source of hazardous materials in the

pond.

     In this study mineral resource solid wastes are separated

into three categories: (1)  mine wastes, (2) beneficiation wastes,

(3)  miscellaneous wastes.   Mine wastes consist of unwanted

materials removed during ore extraction.  Beneficiation wastes

consist of discarded materials removed during ore processing.

-------
Miscellaneous wastes consist of minor wastes such as site

preparation wastes  (e.g., drilling muds and removed vegetation),

construction wastes  (e.g., scrap iron and wood), damaged or used

reagent or product containers, domestic sewage sludges, and

residuals from pollution control equipment.  Because miscellaneous

wastes are minor in volume and importance compared with mine and

beneficiation wastes/ little attention is given to them in this

study.

     There is some question as to which, if any, mineral resource

solid wastes are actually covered by RCRA.  The following

exceptions stated in the act would seem to eliminate at least

some of them:

     (1)  Industrial discharges, which are point sources subject
          to NPDES permits (Subtitle A, Section 1004, parenthesis
          27).

     (2)  Source, special nuclear, or byproduct material as
          defined by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,  as amended
          (Subtitle A, Section 1004, parenthesis 27).

     This investigation addresses all mineral resource solid '

wastes associated with the extraction and beneficiation of

metallic ores, nonmetallic ores, and solid mineral fuels (coal),*

even though some of these wastes may eventually be exempted from
     * Coal is the only solid mineral fuel actually addressed in
this study.  Uranium was addressed under the metallic ores
category.  Oil shale, which is a solid mineral fuel, has not
been specifically addressed in this study; however, the report
does refer to the fact that the expected expansion of this
industry could substantially increase the annual production of
mine solid waste.

-------
coverage by RCRA.  The decision not to exclude the wastes that

qualify as exemptions is based on our interpretation of Section

8002(f) of RCRA and the legislative history of the act.  That

section 8002(f) does not refer to any specific exemptions covering

mineral resource solid wastes was interpreted to mean that all

mineral resource solid wastes as they are typically defined

(e.g., overburden, underground mine development waste rock,

tailings) should be addressed.  Although the legislative history

of RCRA is supportive of the exemptions referred to above, the

history of the act indicates that the exemptions are not final as

stated in the House Report on H.R. 14496.*  H.R. 14496 states

that

     "... overburden resulting from mining operations and
     intended for return to the mine site is not considered to be
     discarded material within the meaning of this legislation.
     This however does not preclude any finding by the
     Administrator that specific mine wastes are hazardous wastes
     within the scope of this legislation.  Nor does this preclude
     consideration of mine waste as discarded material sometime
     in the future."

     Estimates indicate that large volumes of mine solid wastes

have accumulated at both active and inactive mining sites.  If

not properly disposed of and stabilized, these wastes can pose a

threat to human life and the environment.  Because estimates of

accumulated solid wastes are based on annual production statistics,

they do not represent the actual amount of waste that has been

deposited in mine waste heaps and tailings ponds.  In other
     * H.R. 14496 is the House bill that, together with S. 3622,
formed the basis for the legislation that was ultimately enacted,

-------
words, all of the wastes generated are not placed in waste heaps

or tailings ponds, where they remain untouched for an indefinite

period of time.

     Following are some of the factors that reduce the amount of

mineral solid wastes that accumulate in mine waste heaps and

tailings ponds:

     0    Some of the wastes generated at underground mines
          remain underground to fill in mined-out areas.

     0    At some surface mining operations overburden is used as
          mine backfill.

     0    At some underground mines a portion of the tailings
          (sometimes as much as 50 percent) is backfilled into
          mined-out areas.

     0    Mine and tailings wastes are sometimes used in onsite
          road and dam construction.

     0    Some wastes are reprocessed for their mineral values,
          thus reducing the initial amount to be disposed of.

     The disposal areas at most active mining operations will

eventually be rehabilitated or reclaimed to some degree.  In some

states the amount of land mine operators are reclaiming annually

actually exceeds the amount disturbed.   Some operators are

reclaiming lands affected by mining activities before passage of

surface mining and reclamation legislation.  Despite these

positive aspects, however, mineral resource solid wastes still

pose a threat to the environment for the following reasons:  (1)

because little was done before the late sixties to control and

rehabilitate waste disposal areas, large amounts of unstabilized

wastes had already accumulated;  (2)  often there is no one to

assume responsibility for the large quantities of waste materials

-------
at the numerous inactive mining sites; (3) although some wastes



at active mines may eventually be stabilized and reclaimed, they



can pose a threat to the environment until such action is taken;



 (4) because of poor reclamation techniques and a lack of



maintenance programs, some reclaimed lands may ultimately revert



to unreclaimed condition.




     The approach to this project was to acquire, compile, and



analyze as much available information as possible given the time



constraints and broad scope  (all mining industries) of the study,



and to use this information in the data base report that formed



the basis for the technical study and document.  The data



gathering consisted of four major tasks,  each concerned with a



particular information source.



     The first task was to perform a literature search for




information (published and unpublished) dealing with the



generation, control, regulation, and environmental effects of



mineral resource solid wastes.  It involved conducting several



computerized searches (e.g., NTIS, MEDLINE, TOXLINE) and



contacting a number of public, academic,  and governmental



libraries.  All the material gathered was reviewed for content



and recorded on standard PEDCo literature survey forms.



     The second task was to contact various governmental agencies



whose realm of responsibility includes the mining industry and/or



effects of the industry.  The contacts were initiated through



letters and telephone conversations, normally followed by meetings,

-------
Information was obtained in the form of documentation (published

and unpublished) and personal communications.  Appendix A lists

the agencies and personnel contacted.

     The third task was to contact various trade associations

that could provide industry contacts, furnish answers to both

general and specific questions, and help arrange mine site visits,

The following trade associations were contacted:

     American Mining Congress  (AMC), Washington
          0    Jim Walpole, Legal Counsel

     Arizona Mining Association (AMA), Phoenix
          0    E. J. Johnson

     Northwest Mining Association  (NWMA), Spokane
          0    Carl Mote, Executive Director

     Colorado Mining Association, Denver
          0    Dave Cole, Executive Director

     China Clay Association, Atlanta
          0    Chris Haggy, Senior Legal Counsel

     National Coal Association/Bituminous Coal Research
          (NCA/BCR) Coal Conference in Louisville

     The final task was to visit mine sites to obtain specific

operational and solid waste data and to solicit opinions and

input from mining personnel regarding the issues of this project.

(The mining trade associations arranged most visits.)  The

following mine sites (listed by industry) were visited:

-------
      Iron  ore
        Erie  Mining  Company,  Hoyt  Lakes, Minnesota

      Coal
        Consolidation  Coal  Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
        Colowyo  (W.R.  Grace and  Company), Craig, Colorado
        Energy Fuels Corporation,  Steamboat Springs, Colorado

      Clay
        Freeport Kaolin Company, Gordon, Georgia
        Engelhard, Mclntyre,  Georgia
        J.M Huber Corporation, Huber, Georgia

      Phosphate
        International  Mineral Corporation, Bartow, Florida
        Agrico Chemical Company, Bartow, Florida

      Uranium
        Union Carbide  Corporation, Uravan, Colorado
        Union Carbide  Corporation, Rifle, Colorado
        Western Nuclear, Inc., Wellpinit, Washington
        Dawn  Mining  Company,  Spokane, Washington

      Copper
        Duval Sierrita Corporation, Tucson, Arizona
        Cyprus Pima, Tucson, Arizona
        Magma Copper Company, Tucson, Arizona

      Lead-Zinc-Silver
        Hecla Mining Company, Wallace, Idaho

      Molybdenum
        Climax Molybdenum Company  (AMAX, Inc.)/ Climax, Colorado
        Climax Molybdenum Company  (AMAX, Inc.), Leadville, Colorado
        Environmental Services,  Inc.  (AMAX, Inc.), Denver, Colorado

      The report covers five major topics, each covered in a

separate section.   Section 2 characterizes the mining industry

according  to various factors such as kinds and quantities of ores

mined,  geographic location of various mining industries, and

mining  and beneficiation methods currently in use.  Section 3

describes  the sources, quantities, and characteristics of mineral

resource solid wastes.  Section 4 assesses and evaluates solid

waste disposal and stabilization technologies now used by the
                                10

-------
mining industry.  Section 5 presents an environmental assessment



of the direct effects of mine solid waste and the resultant or



indirect effects of these wastes on human life and the environment,



Section 6 evaluates the results of the survey concerning the




regulation of the disposal and management of mineral resource




solid wastes by existing and pending Federal, state, and local




legislation.




     Section 7 discusses the major potential environmental




problems associated with mineral resource solid wastes.  The



information contained therein is based partially on the criteria



presented in the hazardous and nonhazardous pollutant sections




of the proposed RCRA regulations.



     English units followed by International System of Units  (SI)



(Mechthy 1969) units in parentheses are used throughout the text.



English units only are used on tables and figures, and the reader



is referred to a metric conversion table in the front matter.



Basic SI units, derived SI units, and SI prefixes are also



presented there for the reader's convenience.
                                11

-------
                            SECTION 2




                        INDUSTRY PROFILE






     An assessment of the adverse effects of solid waste generated



by the U.S. mining industry should begin with a description of



the nature and extent of the industry.  The nature of the




industry is described in terms of kinds of ore and ore complexes



mined, byproduct/coproduct relationships, and current typical



extraction and beneficiation methods.  The extent of the industry




is defined in terms of number of active and inactive mines, their




geographic distribution, and present and projected production




statistics (including a comparison of the amount of ore recovered




from surface and underground mines).




     The ores covered in this document can be separated into




three main categories:  metals, nonmetals, and solid mineral



fuels.  The metals category can be subdivided into ferrous and



nonferrous metals.  Ores and ore complexes belonging to each



category are extracted from U.S. mines.



     The domestic ores extracted range from unconsolidated



surface (placer)  deposits to ore bodies located deep underground.



Many deposits,  especially in the nonmetal and solid mineral fuel



categories, are mined to recover a single mineral commodity;



whereas other deposits (ore complexes) are mined to recover a



primary mineral and its associated coproducts or byproducts.  The




                                12

-------
value of these associate minerals  sometimes makes it economically



feasible to recover an otherwise unprofitable mineral deposit.



Most of these coproducts and byproducts are associated with



metallic ores.
                                        •



     Ore extraction methods vary with the kind of ore and its



physical surroundings.  Both surface mining and underground




mining are practiced in the United States.  Surface mining, an




open-air method of extraction, includes placer, strip, open pit,




and quarry mines and some variations and combinations thereof.



Underground methods include room-and-pillar, stope, block caving,



and longwall mining and some variations of these.



     Beneficiation (ore processing) varies with each commodity.



It ranges from size reduction and classification of construction



material ores to complex grinding and flotation of metal ores.



     The quantity of solid waste generated by the mining industry



relates directly to the quantity of material handled and the



quantity of salable product.  Because the most recent quantitative



data on crude ore production were published in 1975, it was



necessary to estimate the amount of crude ore mined and processed



for various commodities in 1977.   Production quantities were also



projected for 1985 and 2000 as a basis for estimating the amount



of mining wastes that will be produced in those years.





                  Nature of the Mining Industry




     Ores and Ore Complexes.  Descriptions of the four



classifications of domestic ores are as follows:
                               13

-------
     Ferrous Metals.  Ferrous metals include iron and those

metals that can be alloyed with iron to produce various iron

products, steel, and superalloys.  Domestically mined metals in

this group are iron, molybdenum, nickel, tungsten, and vanadium.

Rhenium, also a ferrous metal, is produced as a byproduct during

the roasting of molybdenite concentrate obtained from domestic

porphyry copper ores.

     Much of the domestic ferrous metal demand is met by imports,

primarily because of geographic relationships between domestic

sources and the consumer and cost-quality demands.  Essentially

all of the nickel and a third of the iron ore requirements are

met by imports.  Other ferrous metals supplied primarily by

imports are chromium, cobalt, columbium, manganese, and tantalum.

     Domestic demand for ferrous metals by the construction and

transportation industries, which are the major consumers of these

metals, calls for high-quality products.  The major emphasis in

coming years will involve improving product quality and perhaps

finding suitable substitutions for the less abundant metals.

     Nonferrous Metals.   Many nonferrous metals occur in

association with the same ore.  For example, some complex copper

ores yield selenium, tellurium, gold, silver, and other nonferrous

metals as well as copper.  Among nonferrous metals that are not

mined in the United States for their exclusive economic value are

bismuth,  cadmium,  gallium, germanium, hafnium, indium, selenium,

tellurium, and thallium.   These ores are captured during the

refining or smelting of more economically attractive ores like

copper or zinc.
                               14

-------
     Nonferrous metals that are extracted from domestic mines

include:  antimony, aluminum, copper, gold, lead, mercury, rare

earths, silver, tin, titanium, uranium, and zinc.

     Several other nonferrous metals (arsenic, cesium,

platinum-group metals, radium, rubidium, and scandium) are not

recovered from domestic ores; they either are imported in

finished or semifinished form or are produced from imported raw

ores.

     Nonferrous metals are used primarily in consumer goods, in

the transportation and construction industries, and in electrical

components.  Both the demand for and the value of these metals

are expected to increase.  Output could be increased and cost

decreased through the development of improved mining and

processing methods that would make possible the use of submarginal

domestic ores.

     Nonmetals.  Although nonmetals usually are mined as the only

recoverable constituent of an ore, some coproducts and byproducts

are associated with these ores.  The following nonmetals are

extracted from domestic mines:

     asbestos            graphite                 potash
     barite              gypsum                   salt
     bentonite           lightweight aggregates   sand and gravel
     boron               limestone                soda ash
     clay                mica                     stone
     diatomite           peat                     talc, soapstone,
     feldspar            perlite                   pyrophyllite
     garnet              phosphate rock

     These nonmetallic minerals are used by a variety of

industries.  In decreasing order of consumption the major ones

are construction, agriculture, metal working, industrial chemicals,

                                15

-------
and plastics and  fibers.  New construction, renovations, and the



improved standard of  living of a growing population are likely to



sustain the high demand for these minerals.  Domestic sources of



nonmetallic commodities are expected to be adequate to meet the



demand.




     Solid Mineral Fuels.  The only solid mineral fuels of



concern in this report are anthracite, bituminous, and lignite



coals.  The demand and production of anthracite coal are expected



to remain fairly constant until 1980, at which time electric



utilities could increase their demand for this fuel.  Demand and



production of bituminous and lignite coals are expected to



increase continuously through the year 2000.



     Mining Activities.  Mining activities encompass prospecting



and exploring for a mineral deposit through finding, proving,



developing, extracting, and processing the ore.  These activities



can be divided into three major phases:  Phase I, Premining;



Phase II,  Mining; Phase III, Postmining (Figure 1).



     An additional phase of the mining operation is the



reclamation of the mine site and other affected areas.  Because



the term "mined-land reclamation" has been used indiscriminately



to refer to anything from seeding to restoring the mined land to



its original condition, the term "reclaimed" has little meaning



in the context of mine wastes.   As currently used, the term



"mined-land reclamation" refers to returning the disturbed land



to a condition and/or use equal to or higher than that prior to



mining.   Reclamation is usually conducted simultaneously with
                               16

-------
PHASE I |
PREMINING i
•
PHASE II
MINING
J PHASE III
| POSTMINING
FINDING
PROVING
PLANNING
OPENING AND
DEVELOPING


EXTRACTION
SURFACE
UNDERGROUND
DREDGING
ORE TO
PROCESSING

PROCESSING

TO FURTHER PROCESSING
OR CONSUMER PRODUCTS
                              TRANSPORTING
                              UNLOADING
                                                       CONCENTRATING
                                                       DEWATERING
                                                       THERMAL DRYING
                                                       LEACHING
DRILLING                       r^V:.-                  SIZE REDUCTION
SAMPLING
SHAFTING AND/OR TUNNELING
SELECTION OF OPERATING METHODS
DESIGN AND ENGINEERING
SHAFT SINKING AND TUNNELING
CLEARING AND GRUBBING
STRIPPING
UNDERGROUND AND SURFACE
CONSTRUCTION


     Figure 1.   The scope of mining activities can  be divided into
three  major phases.
Source:   Given,  I.A., ed.   SME mining handbook.  v.  1.  New York,
            Society of Mining Engineers of  the American Institute  of
            Mining, Metallurgical,  and Petroleum Engineers,  Inc.,  1973

-------
the operation phases of extraction and beneficiation in present

mining operations.  Reclamation practices are discussed in detail

in Section 4 of this report.

     Premining Activities.  Phase I activities involve prospecting

and exploration to locate, characterize, and prove a potential

ore body.

     Prospecting usually includes ground and geochemical

reconnaissance, examination of aerial photographs, and sometimes,

sampling and drilling.  (Most modern prospecting activities leave

the ground relatively undisturbed.)

     If the results of prospecting are favorable, exploration

activities are begun.  The following is a list of some of the

methods used:

          (1)  Geological method—a study of the geology of an
               ore deposit and its general setting.  Involves
               geologic mapping and plotting by the use of such
               tools as a transit, stadia, compass, and tape.

          (2)  Geochemical method—a study of the chemistry of
               rocks, soils, waters, and the atmosphere.

          (3)  Biochemical method—a study of plant material to
               determine trace metal content.

          (4)  Geophysical method--a study of the physical
               characteristics of rocks and minerals.  The six
               basic geophysical exploration methods commonly
               employed are gravity, seismic, magnetic,
               electromagnetic, electric, and radiometric.

     The physical work involved in exploration usually includes

trenching,  pitting,  and drilling.   Generally trenches and pits

are dug with bulldozers, backhoes, mechanical or hydraulic

rippers,  and septic tank diggers.   Drilling equipment ranges in

size and complexity from simple hand-operated augers to

                               18

-------
small-scale oil-field rigs.  Exploration drilling  is used  to



study the ore  itself and the thickness and characteristics of  the



overburden.



     Results of the exploration study are used to  locate and



characterize  (prove) the ore deposit.  Data obtained from



exploration studies may also be of value in planning extraction




and hauling facilities, developing beneficiation operations, and



establishing waste handling and disposal methods.



     Once the  shape and size of an ore deposit, its general



geological characteristics, its average grade, etc., have  been



established, site development begins.  Such development depends



largely on the kind of ore body and the mining method to be



applied.  Activities during mine development include development



drilling, access road construction, clearing and grubbing,



adit or shaft development, overburden removal, establishment of



utilities and communication, and construction of beneficiation



facilities and general offices.  Required equipment ranges from



small, simple units such as backhoes and dump trucks to



sophisticated systems involving earth movers, draglines, and



power shovels.



     Although efforts are made to develop mine sites in harmony



with the environment, some alteration and disturbance of the



topography are unavoidable.  Frequently an Environmental Impact



Statement (EIS) is required, either during the development stage



or just before.  The EIS involves a detailed study of soil,



water, and air in the vicinity of the site and the potential
                               19

-------
 impacts of acqess roads and other developmental features.



 Generally, activities are halted  (often for a year or more) while



 the study is conducted.  Considerably more detail may be required



 if Federal land is involved, but an environmental impact study is



 almost always a part of the premining operations.  Further, many



 states  (e.g., Montana, North Dakota, Utah, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania,



 Colorado, West Virginia, New York, Wyoming, and Illinois) require



 the posting of a bond by a mining company during the development



 stage.  These bonds, which can be substantial, are designed to



 insure that funds will be available for reclamation at the



 appropriate time.



     Mining Activities.  Phase II activities involve either



 surface or underground mining techniques.  Although these




 extraction methods are inherently different, some operations are



 common to both (e.g., loosening the ore to allow removal and



 loading and transporting the ore).



     Although some mineral deposits can be removed by power



 equipment such as front-end loaders, draglines, and dredges,



 most must first be loosened by drilling and blasting.  Drilling



 consists of boring blast holes into the bedded minerals, usually



with tractor- or truck-mounted pneumatic rotary or percussion



drills.   Blasting is then used to displace the minerals from



 their deposits and to fragment them into sizes that require



minimum secondary breakage and are easily handled by loading and



 hauling equipment.   Once engineered, blasting practices consist



 simply of loading blast holes with a predetermined amount of






                                20

-------
explosives, stemming, and detonating.  Blasting frequency ranges
from several shots per day to one per week, depending on the mine
capacity and the size of individual shots.
     Minerals are also broken out of a body of rock by hydraulic
jets.  This method can also provide immediate transportation of
the materials.  Rate of removal depends on the host material, the
grade of the opening (if underground), and groundwater flow.  It
can be employed underground in either flat or vertical veins;
however, additional water is required to flush out the mined
material in a flat vein.  Hydraulic mining has been used in
placer mining, especially for gold.  Its current use is limited.
     Normally, shovels and front-end loaders are used to
excavate and load broken minerals.  At most surface mines,
haulage vehicles with a capacity of 20 to 150 tons (18 to 136 Mg)
are used to transport minerals from the mine to the beneficiation
facility, although off-the-highway vehicles capable of handling
350 tons (318 Mg)  are also in use.  At underground mines,
conveyors or haulage trucks are used to convey the crude ore to a
"skip," which transports it to the surface.
     Underground Mining.  An underground mine is a facility
constructed to permit the extraction and removal of a mineral
from a natural deposit beneath the earth's surface.  The area of
land covering these extraction and removal activities and any
land surfaces disturbed by these.activities are considered to be
part of the mine.   In some cases,  a mine may also encompass areas
affected by ancillary surface operations, e.g., haul roads or

                               21

-------
access  roads,  truck haulage  systems, workings,  impoundments,

dams, ventilation  shafts, drainage tunnels, entryways,  solid

waste disposal areas, holes  or depressions, repair areas, storage
                      2
areas,  and  structures.

     The choice of an underground mining method depends on a
                   2
number  of factors.

     1.   The  quality, size, geometry, and depth of the ore
          deposit.

     2.   The  amount and distribution of the minerals in the
          deposit.

     3.   The  physical and chemical properties of the ore and the
          parent rock.

     4.   The  economics of the mining operation.

     5.   Special considerations  (e.g., ecological, social, and
          safety).

     Some of the more common methods of underground extraction

are described  in the following paragraphs.

     In room-and-pillar mining, all of an ore stratum is removed

except occasional columns or pillars, which are left to provide

support for the overlying rock strata.  This method is common

where ores are flat-lying or in gently dipping beds (Figure 2).

When the rooms are mined out, supports may be left in place or

removed (or partially removed)  for their mineral value.  The

structure of some areas is such that the pillars must be left in

place to prevent subsidence and its disturbance of the land

surface.  The pillars are left in place in a regular pattern

during the mining operation.   If they are to be removed, those

farthest from the haulage exits are mined out first, allowing the

roof to cave.in.
                                22

-------
                                        -HAUL-DUMP MACHINE
PROPOSED PILLAR
              Figure 2.  Room-and-pillar mining  is the most
         common underground method used in  the United States.


         Source:  Colorado Mining Association.   Anatomy of a
                    mine—from prospect to  production.  Denver,
                    1975.
                              23

-------
     Room-and-pillar mining is well adapted to mechanization, and
many different types of ore deposits are mined by this method.
It  is the most common underground mining method used in the
United States from the standpoint of total production tonnage.
More than 75 percent of the underground mines producing 1200 tons
(1.1 Gg) or more per day use this method.  Recovery of ores
varies from 35 percent at depths below 3000 ft (914 m) to more
than 90 percent at shallow depths if the pillars are recovered.
     In open-stope mining, small ore bodies are mined out
completely and no pillars are left to support the walls.  In some
varieties of rock it is possible to mine out huge stopes, which
may remain open for years (Figure 3).  If the ore is low grade,
some of it is left in place (as random pillars) to support the
walls.  Sometimes these pillars .are "robbed" just before a
portion of the mine is abandoned so that the collapse of the
stope walls will not affect the operation.
     Sometimes the stoping method can be used to mine narrow
veins by placing an occasional wooden beam across the stope to
support the vein walls.  This is called stull stoping (Figure 4).
     In shrinkage stoping, the ore deposit is stoped from beneath,
allowing the broken ore to support the stope walls (Figure 5).
This method is used primarily in steeply dipping vein deposits,
where the walls and mineral body require little or no support.
Enough space is left above the broken ore for a miner to stand
and drill overhead,  and broken ore is drawn off as needed to
maintain this headroom.  After the stoping is completed, all the
broken ore is removed and the walls are allowed to collapse.
                                24

-------
SECTION A-A
                          B'
              PLAN
                                    SECTION B-B1
         Figure 3.  In open-stope mining,  no pillars
    are left to support the walls.


    Source:   Colorado Mining Association.   Anatomy of a mine.
                         25

-------
                            STORE SUBDRIFT
                              ELEVATION

                            LACED MANWAYS
                             AND CHUTES
                                  RAISE CUMBER
                                  CUT OUT
            SUNSHINE MINE
            ALIMAK RAISING
     Figure  4.   Stull stoping  can be used to mine
narrow veins.

Source:  Wilhelm,  G.L.  A description of mining
           practices in U.S. deep-vein silver mines.
           Colorado Mining Association.  1974.  Mining
           Yearbook.
                      26

-------
           PftWMlOT^
            liiiw
           K.Vici.VlltalU.|»V a)V?'•* ".'•...W i.>J
           n III «jur     '•"U

		_. .,„.,.,	 -,„,..,.,, ,     „,, ,..,,„ w.,-..a..RaagfiaBpAjft;i., ..„,„„,„,,.,,,,„
           Figure 5.   In  shrinkage stoping, the ore deposit
      is stbped from beneath.
      Source:  Colorado Mining  Association.  Anatomy of a mine.
                            27

-------
     Other variations of stoping include cut-and-fill stoping


 (used in wider, irregular ore bodies), rill stoping, hydraulic

                                4
 filling, and square-set stoping.


     The block caving method is used to mine large ore bodies


 covered by barren or low-grade capping that is too thick to strip


 away.  A series of evenly spaced crosscuts are made below the


 bottom of the ore to be caved, from which raises are driven up to


 the ore.  The entire ore body is then undercut so that it will


 slowly cave into the raises  (Figure 6).  The ore's own weight


 provides enough force to break it up and move it downward, where


 it is drawn from beneath, trammed to the shaft, and hoisted or


 hauled to the surface.  As the broken ore is removed, the


 overburden descends until fragments eventually appear in the


 raises, indicating that the ore body is mined out.  This type of


mining often leaves behind a surface depression (caused by the


 sinking overburden material).  These surface depressions can


become sources of groundwater recharge to the mine, which


ultimately may produce acid mine drainage at the portal.


     In longwall coal mining, coal seams are removed in one


operation along a continuous face, sometimes several hundred


yards long.  The coal is cut by plows or shearers that move along


 the face.  Shield supports provide an all steel roof running the


 length of the face,  which is moved as the face advances.


Recovery of as much as 90 percent of the coal is possible, and 70


to 80 percent is common on 500-ft (152-m)  faces; this compares


with 55 percent recovery in average room-and-pillar mines.


                                28

-------
                                                  SURFACE
                                                // '  '
                                                /////////'s////
                                               ALL ORE  WITHDRAWN


'/.
      Figure  6.   The  block caving method is used  to  mine
large ore bodies  covered by barren or low-grade capping that
is too thick  to strip away.

Source:  Colorado Mining Association.  Anatomy of a  mine.
                           29

-------
     Longwall mining, which is used widely in Europe, has been


gaining acceptance in the United States since the first face was


installed in 1960.  Projections indicate that the 4 percent  (of


total) underground production contributed by longwall mining in


1975 will increase to 15 percent by 1985 and possibly match the


contribution of continuous mining by the year 2000.   Three major


factors have contributed to increased usage of longwall mining in


the United States:  (1) high productivity, (2) health and safety,


(3) increased recovery of coal.   Surface subsidence is also more


predictable than with room-and-pillar mining.


     Surface Mining.  Surface mining is an open-air method of


extracting metals, nonmetals, and solid mineral fuels.  This


method can be used to recover minerals in any kind of rock as

                                                          2
long as overburden removal is not prohibitively expensive.


Surface mining is used to recover coal; copper, iron, and


aluminum ores;  placer deposits of gold, tin,  and platinum; and


sand,  gravel, stone, gypsum, and clays among others.  The


largeness and efficiency of recently developed earth-moving


machinery and auxiliary equipment used in this method make it


possible to recover many ore deposits that could not be


economically mined underground.


     In general,  surface mining operations entail removal of the


overburden covering the deposit, extraction of the mineral, and


transport of the mineral to the beneficiation site.


     The four basic categories of surface mining—placer mining,


strip mining, open pit mining, and quarrying—are described in


the following paragraphs.

                                30

-------
     Placer mining is used to recover heavy minerals  from



unconsolidated surface deposits.  Gold, tin, platinum, diamonds,



and various industrial metallic minerals such as zircon, ilmenite,



and rutile are recovered in this manner.



     The two primary techniques used in placer mining are



hydraulic mining and dredging.  In hydraulic mining, pressurized




water is directed at the deposit, usually a mineral bearing



gravel or sand, to disintegrate the gravel and wash the material



through sluice boxes.  In dredging, a water-based floating



operation is used to raise mineral-bearing silt, sand, gravel,



etc., in a scoop or by suction.



     Strip mining, the term commonly used to describe the method



used to surface-mine coal, generally falls into two categories:



area stripping, the method used when terrain is relatively flat



and coal seams are roughly parallel to the surface; and contour



stripping, which is used when terrain is hilly.



     Area stripping begins with digging a trench through the



overburden.   The material removed from this initial trench is



placed on adjacent undisturbed land, and the exposed coal is



removed by power shovels and front-end loaders.  As each



successive cut is made parallel to the initial trench, the



overburden is placed in the preceding cut (Figure 7).  The



distance from the first trench to the final one is often a mile



(1.6 km)  or more, and the area between is covered with ridges of



overburden that must eventually be reclaimed.   The land also must
                                31

-------
OR 161 NAT GROUND
   SURFACE  .
         ---   -
   MINERAL SEAM
        Figure  7.   Area  strip mining is performed by digging
   successive trenches and refilling each as the next one is
   dug.

   Source:  Processes, procedures,  and methods to control
              pollution  from mining activities.  Environmental
              Protection Agency Document 430/9-73-011.
              Washington,  U.S.  Government Printing Office, 1973,
                               32

-------
be returned to its natural contours as provided for by the

Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977.

     Contour stripping involves the removal of mineral outcrops

around hillsides.  This is accomplished by removing the overburden

above the mineral, starting at the outcrop and following the

mineral around the hillside (Figure 8).  Additional cuts are made

into the hillside until the ratio of overburden to mineral

becomes too great for the ore to be removed economically.  At

this point auger mining may be used to recover additional

mineral.  Augers up to 7 ft (2.1 m) in diameter are used to drill

holes in excess of 200 ft (61 m) into the hillside to obtain

additional quantities of mineral (usually coal).   Contour mines

can be very long,"even though the life of this kind of mine is

usually short.  Contour stripping temporarily disturbs the land

(until it is reclaimed) by producing a hillside shelf bordered by

a highwall on one side and a precipitous slope on the other.*

     Open pit mining is a method used to recover ore deposits

that apex at or near the surface (Figure 9).  It is commonly used

to recover metallic ores, notably copper, iron, beryllium,

mercury, and aluminum.  Open pits range in size from small borrow

pits (to supply construction materials for a locality) to the

enormous copper mines of the West.   Overburden is removed to

expose the ore for excavation.  Removal usually involves blasting,
     * This type of surface coal mining is specifically regulated
under the provisions of the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of
1977.
                               33

-------
                                    ^x vi; UNDISTURBED AREA
                                        ''      '      *•""
   BENCH

   ,   ...           BENCH
^v;^;i^;>;^^':'-^'v>'./' v
^^"^^^^-^•:••^
                                     _



    '^VV-'^:''"V"J^>V-'.^ 'X UNDISTURBED AREA  - -': •'";'" :-.-""^
       *•'.': '••**-. 'sx^ ••• 'p.   '-.*.'•. -..•.•••.••.••••»...•.'•.•''»'•.•'•<
                                      " . 'V-
        Figure  8.   Contour stripping is used to remove mineral
  outcrops  around  hillsides.

  Source:   Office  of  Water and Hazardous Materials, Development
             document for interim final effluent limitations
             guidelines and New Source Performance Standards
             for the  coal mining point source category.  U.S.
             Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C.,
             1976.
                             34

-------
                                      TOO DEEPLY BURIED UNDER
                                   WASTE TO BE  STRIPPED AND MINED
      Figure  9.   Open pit mining is a surface  mining
technique used when ore deposits are near  the  surface.
Source:  Colorado Mining Association.  Anatomy of a mine,
                           35

-------
loading, and hauling from the pit.  This mining method produces

an open pit ringed by a series of descending benches.

     Quarry mining is normally used to recover nonmetallic

minerals, primarily construction materials.  The method of

extraction is essentially the same in open pits and quarries.

     Beneficiation.  Beneficiation is the processing of an ore to

control product size, remove unwanted constituents, and improve
                                        o
product quality, purity, or assay grade.   The beneficiation of

most construction materials (e.g., sand and gravel, crushed

stone, and gypsum) results in a final product.  Most other ores

(especially metals) require further processing after beneficiation,

These additional processing operations  (e.g., smelting and

refining) are not covered in the scope of this report.

     Some operations are integrated (particularly the mining and

processing of ferrous metals).  Mining, beneficiation, and one or

more of these extra processing steps (smelting, refining,

fabricating, and marketing, in that order) take place on site.

Notable examples of integrated operations are the copper industry,

in which several of the leading producers are integrated, and the

coal industry, in which a coal-using utility may be situated at

the mine site.  When operations are integrated, solid wastes from

mining and beneficiation could be combined with wastes from

smelting, refining, and fabricating; however, efforts are

usually made to segregate the wastes.

     Factors such as environmental impact and transportation costs

influence the location of the beneficiation facilities.  Although
                                36

-------
some beneficiation facilities are located a considerable distance



from a mine  (either for environmental reasons or because outlying



mines feed to a common facility), most are located at or very



near the mine site to minimize transportation costs.



     Some ores require extensive beneficiation  (Figure 10),



whereas others do not.  Most require some size reduction  (or



comminution), either to separate desirable from undesirable



material (gangue) or to increase the surface area of the ore to



allow further processing.  Initial size reduction of run-of-mine



ore takes place during primary crushing.  This step reduces the



crude ore to a manageable size in preparation for additional



treatment.   Sometimes all, sometimes only a portion, of the



crushed material goes to the secondary crushers for further



reduction,  which may be the final comminution process or only an



intermediate step.  A further step, either wet or dry grinding,



reduces the ore to the optimum size for further treatment.



     Solids usually are separated according to size to obtain



maximum production from the crushing and grinding equipment.



Because commercial crushing and grinding produce a distribution



of sizes regardless of the characteristics of the feed, screening



and classification are also required in almost all beneficiation



processes.



     Concentration is used primarily in the beneficiation of



metallic ores.  These ores normally contain mixtures of various



minerals, which must be separated from unwanted gangue before they



can become useful.  Flotation, gravity concentration,  magnetic






                               37

-------
U)
00
FROTH FLOTATION
GRAVITY CONCENTRATION
MAGNETIC SEPARATION
ELECTROSTATIC SEPARATION
DRY SCREENING EXTRACTIVE METALLURGY
WET SCREENING AGGLOMERATION
MINED fc
ORE
SIZE in_ ^rorrNTwr.
REDUCTION SCREENING
PRIMARY CRUSHING
SECONDARY CRUSHING
DRY GRINDING
WET GRINDING
^ n flir*: TTirATinfj ^

MECHANICAL
HYDROCLONES
CONCENTRATION






SCREENS
CENTRIFUGES
CLASSIFIERS
SEDIMENTATION
FILTRATION
FLOCCULATION
ROTARY DRYING
FLASH DRYING
CONTINUOUS TRAY DRYING
FLUIDIZED BED DRYING
__ THERMAL
DRYING

ORE^
CONCENTRATE
                 Figure  10.  This generalized flowsheet shows the processes
             involved  in  extensive beneficiation.
             Source:  Given, I.A., ed.   SME  mining engineering handbook,

-------
separation, electrostatic separation, and leaching are used for


this purpose.


     Froth flotation is the most widely used method of


beneficiating complex and low-grade ores.  This complex


physicochemical process takes place in an ore pulped with water.


The surfaces of one or more minerals in the pulp are made


water-repellent, and these minerals attach themselves to air


bubbles.  As the mineral-laden bubbles rise to the surface, they


are skimmed off and sent to further concentration steps.  By


changing process conditions (such as pH), a sequential series of


flotations may be obtained from a given pulp.  Frothers are also


used to keep the air bubbles intact so that the floated minerals

                                       9
will remain on the surface for removal.


     Gravity concentration separates solids of different specific


gravities in a fluid medium (usually water or air, but sometimes


a heavy medium such as suspensions of magnetite and ferrosilicon),


Mineral mixtures susceptible to separation by gravity methods are


those in which valuable minerals and gangue differ appreciably in


specific gravity.  Methods include the simple sluice, the pinched


sluice, Humphrey's spiral, the sink-float mechanism, the jig, the

                                       2
shaking table, and various dry methods.


     Magnetic separation sorts one solid from another by means of


a magnetic field.  The only important highly magnetic mineral is


magnetite.  Many other minerals are measurably susceptible to


magnetic action, but fewer than 20 are amenable to magnetic


separation, and these are classed as weakly magnetic.




                               39

-------
     Electrostatic separation is used to recover ilmenite,


rutile, and zircon from beach sands and to remove feldspar and

                 2
mica from quartz.   This separation is based on the characteristic


behavior of particles subjected to a surface electrical charge


on or before entering an electrostatic field.


     Leaching dissolves gangue or metal values in aqueous acids

                                                    9
or bases, liquid metals, or other special solutions.   Leaching


solutions can either be strong general solvents (e.g., sulfuric


acid) or weaker specific solvents (e.g., calcium sulfate).


General solvents attack several ore constituents, whereas


specific solvents attack only one or, at most, a few.  Solvent


action can be increased by heating,  agitating, or applying


pressure.


     There are a variety of leaching techniques.  In-vat leaching


takes place in a container, which may or may not be equipped to


heat, agitate, or pressurize.  In situ leaching takes place in


the ore body (the solvent is introduced into the ore body by


pumping or percolation through overburden).  Heap or dump leaching


refers to the leaching of stored tailings or ore on a surface


that has been lined with an impervious material (clay or plastic


sheeting).   In this technique the solvent is sprinkled over the


heap and the leached material is collected in furrows or troughs.


Metals covered in this report that require some recovery by


leaching are gold,  copper,  mercury,  and silver.


     If wet screening, classification, or concentration techniques


are used or if ore moisture content is initially high (as in
                               40

-------
dredged material), some form of dewatering must precede the



drying process.  The dewatering process includes the use of



screens, centrifuges, classifiers, sedimentation, filtration, and



flocculation.



     In commercial drying of concentrates, heat is transferred by



convection  (direct contact between the wet solid and hot air).



Rotary, flash, continuous-tray and fluidized-bed dryers are some



of the variety of commercial thermal dryers available.  After


                                                     2

drying, the mineral is generally stored for shipment.



     All these beneficiation processes mentioned are not required



for every mineral ore.  Many construction materials require only



size reduction, screening, and drying; whereas metals require



extensive concentration steps.  To use the generalized flowsheet,



however, it is only necessary to delete those steps that are



unnecessary for a specific mineral.




                Magnitude of the Mining Industry




     A domestic demand for more than 4 billion tons (3.6 Pg) of



new mineral supplies each year results from an annual per capita



consumption of some 20 tons (18 Mg).    The tremendous increase



in the size and value of this industry over the past century has



been critical to the growth of the Nation, and it is expected to



continue to play an essential role in the future.



     Number of Mines.  In 1975 there were 21,473 metal, nonmetal,


                                                  11 12
and solid mineral fuel mines in the United States.  '    The



combined total of metal and nonmetal mines increased from 14,775



to 15,014 between 1965 and 1975.   An increase in nonmetal mines



                               41

-------
for the recovery of, sand and gravel and stone was offset somewhat



by decreases in all metal mines  (1,631 to 609) and other nonmetal



mines  (1,914 to 1,814).  The decreases in metal and nonmetal



mines represent the closing of many small mines; larger mines



[producing over 10 million tons  (9.1 Tg) of crude ore per year]



actually increased in number (14 to 25) during this 10-year



period.  Copper, iron ore, molybdenum, phosphate rock, sand and



gravel, and stone recovery accounted for the large mines in 1975.



     Inactive and abandoned mines  (as well as active) put a



significant stress on the environment, ranging from unfavorable



aesthetics to sediment transport and acid drainage that affect



miles of streams.  Inactive and abandoned mines and their



associated waste disposal areas contribute a large portion of the



total pollution resulting from mining activities.



     The terms "inactive" and "abandoned," often used



interchangeably, refer to nonoperating mines.  Inactive implies



that the mine is not currently operating but could reopen,



depending on market conditions or changes in extraction and/or



processing technology that would make resumed mining economically



feasible.   Abandoned implies that the legal right to resume



mining has been relinquished.    Nonfuel mineral mines are rarely



abandoned.



     Adequate data are not available to assess the impact of



inactive and abandoned mines.  An unpublished report cited in a



recent publication indicates that the number of inactive and



abandoned underground mines was approximately 88,000 in 1966





                               42

-------
          14
 (Table 1).    Recent estimates indicate more than 200,000



 inactive and abandoned underground mines exist in the United


       14
 States.    An accurate national assessment of inactive and



 abandoned mine sites is needed.



     The Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of



 1977 requires each state to survey inactive and abandoned surface



 coal mines within its borders as a prerequisite to certification.



 If and when noncoal mines are impacted by this regulation, they



 too will be surveyed.



     Mine Production.  The most recent compilation of domestic



mine production statistics is found in the Bureau of Mines



Minerals Yearbook, 1975 edition.    Statistics on ore, waste, and



marketable product by commodity presented in the chapter entitled


 "Mining and Quarrying Trends in the Metal and Nonmetal Industries,"



were used to develop ratios of crude ore to marketable product



 for each commodity.  These ratios were then combined with



projected marketable product production for the years 1977, 1985,



and 2000 to estimate the quantity of crude ore that will be mined



for each commodity (Table 2).  The estimated marketable product



figures used in making these estimates were obtained from the



Bureau of Mines Minerals Facts and Problems and the Bureau of Mines



Commodity Summaries 1978.



     Crude ore production estimates are based on the assumption



that the ratio of crude ore to marketable product developed with



1975 data will remain constant through the year 2000.  It is



probable that the ratio of crude ore to marketable product will
                                43

-------
                              TABLE 1

          ABANDONED AND  INACTIVE UNDERGROUND MINES  IN
                  THE UNITED STATES  AS OF  1966*
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Total
Coal
310
6

269
32
565



115

11
1,605
960
1,138
528
12,045


564



1
466
334

5


48

5

2,187
251
61
7,824


1
2,931
21
44

14,397
247
20,616

26
67,613
Metal
64

773
186
3,045
1,699
6


62

1,749
39

60
681
4

7
7
7
278
87

1,520
1,691

1,346
24
26
277
61
78
12
35
283
1,140
160
2
30
172
42
31
1,348
17
14
907

389
295
18,654
Nonmetal
27

6

82
7
3


28

208
124
2

13
120
1


1
6

1
36
146

10
3

23
17
1,129

53

3
55
4
17

11

8
3
6
52
9
1

2,215
     * Office of Water and Hazardous Materials.  Inactive and

abandoned underground mines,  water pollution prevention and

control.  U.S. Environmental  Protection Publication  440/9-75-007.

Washington, 1975.

                                44

-------
                                     TABLE 2




       PRIMARY PRODUCTION STATISTICS FOR THE DOMESTIC  MINERAL COMMODITIES
Ratio of crude ore Crude ore production Percent of crude ore
to marketable product (1.000 tons) handled by surface
Commodities 1,000 tons: 1,000 tons '975 1977(e) 1985(e) 2000(e) and underground mines*
Major
associate
mlneralst
Major Total
producing number
states! of mine**
METALS
Bauxite 1.7:1 3,290 4,000 4.050 2,700 100 surface
Copper 193.5:1 269.000 288,315 483.750 735,300 89.1 surface
10.9 underground
Gold 374,815:1 10.120 15,708 26,180 33.880 85.8 surface
14.2 underground
Iron Ore 2.8:1 239.000 162,857 259,200 320.000 96.2 surface
3.8 underground
Ui
lead 17.3:1 9.850 10.197 12.456 16,781 100 underground
Mercury 236.8:1 63 288 225 225 93.4 surface
6.6 underground
Silver 2,165:1 1.100 3.740 4.400 5.000 28.3 surface
71.7 underground
Uranium 630.9:1 6,940 9.464 22.712 37.854 60.6 surface
39.4 underground
Zinc ,c o.i 8.580 11.945 15,480 28.380 0.9 surface
"•° 99.1 underground
Other* 61.081 56,200 91,960 130,990
Total metals 609,024 562.673 920,413 1.311,110
gal Hun
gold
silver
lead
molybdenum
copper
lead
silver
platinum group
manganese
titanium
copper
zinc
copper
gold
silver
none
copper
lead
Zinc
antimony
vanadium
molybdenum
copper
lead
cadmium
silver
copper


Arkansas
Alabama
Georgia
Arizona
Michigan
Utah
New Mexico
South Dakota
Nevada
Arizona
Minnesota
Michigan
Missouri
Idaho
Colorado
Utah
Nevada
California
Alaska
Idaho
Ari zona
Colorado
Utah
New Mexico
Wyoming
Tennessee
Missouri
New York
Colorado


12
61
99
68
33
12
64
164
36
60
609
(continued)

-------
                          TABLE 2.  (continued)
CoModities
Ratio of crude ore Crude ore production Percent of crude ore
to marketable product (1.000 tons) handled by surface
1,000 tons:l. 000 tons 1975 1977(e) 1985(e) 2000(e) and underground mines*
Major
associate
mineralst
Major Total
producing number
states! of mines*
NONHETALS
Asbestos
Clays
Diatonite
Feldspar
Gypsum
Mica (scrap)
Perlite
Phosphate rock
15.0:1 1,450 1.575 2.400 3.000 100 surface
1.0:1 43.400 56.251 100.000 190.000 100 surface
1.5:1 872 956 1.500 3,000 100 surface
1.9:1 1,310 1,454 2,185 3.800 100 surface
1.0:1 10.100 13,900 15.000 20.000 80.8 surface
19.2 underground
7.9:1 521 1,296 1.501 1,849 100 surface
1.4:1 706 1,085 1.260 2.240 100 surface
3.8:1 186,000 186.200 304.000 323,000 100 surface
none
silica.
sand and
gravel
none
lithium
mica
clays
limestone
clay
clay
feldspar
lithium
none
uranium
fluorine
California
Vermont
Arizona
North Carolina
Georgia
Texas
Ohio
North Carolina
California
Kansas
Nevada
Oregon
Washington
North Carolina
Connecticut
Georgia
California
Michigan
California
Texas -
Iowa
North Carolina
Alabama
Georgia
South Carolina
New Mexico
Arizona
California
Nevada
Florida
North Carolina
California
Idaho
3
1.249
IS
18
68
12
12
47
(continued)

-------
                            TABLE  2.   (continued)
Ratio of crude ore
to marketable product
Commodities 1,000 tons:!. 000 tons 1975
NONMETALS (continued)
Potassium salts 8.6:1 17.800


Pumice 1.0:1 3.890


Salt 1.1:1 14.900



Sand and gravel 1.0:1 789,000



Sodium carbonate 2.0:1 8.010
(natural)
Stone: crushed 1.0:1 899.000



Stone: dimension 2.2:1 2.330



Talc 1.2:1 645



Other** 10,483
Total nonmetals 1,990.417
Crude ore production
(1,000 tons)
1977(e) 1985(e)

19.952 17,200


4,109 6.500


47,227 85.580



898.000 1.390,000 ?,



12,276 22,000

914,000 1.550,000 2,



3,080 3,300



1.265 2.040



10,800 16,200
2,173.426 3.247.066 5,

2000(e)

8,600


10,600


142,230



090.000



34,000

500.000



3,300



2.880



26.700
365.199
Percent of crude ore
handled by surface
and underground mines*

100 underground


100 surface


3.2 surface
96.8 underground


100 surface



100 underground

96.2 surface
3.8 underground


96.1 surface
3.9 underground


75 surface
25 underground




Major
associate
mineralst

none


none


magnesium
bromine
potassium salts

none



none

clay
lithium
gypsum

clay
lithium
gypsum

none





Major
producing
states!

New Mexico
Utah
California
Oregon
California
Arizona
Louisiana
Texas
New York
Michigan
California
Alaska
Texas
Michigan
Wyoming
California
Pennsylvania
Illinois
Texas
Missouri
Indiana
Georgia
Vermont
Ohio
Vermont
Montana
New York
Texas


Total
number
of mines*

8


224


19



7.007



3

5.203



381



40



96
14.405
(continued)

-------
                                                              TABLE  2.     (continued)
oo
Camodittes

1975
Crude
1977(e)
ore production
(1.000 tons)
1985(e) 2000(e)
Percent of crude ore Major
handled by surface associate
and underground mines* minerals!
Major Total
producing number
states! of nines*
SOLID MINERAL FUELS
Co*1. anthracite
Coil, bituninous
and lignite
Total nineral fuels
Tota) all comnodities
6,203
646,000
654.203
3.253,400
6.200
685.000
691,200
3.427.300
6.000 6.000
993.000 1.655,000
999.000 1.661,000
5,166.500 8,337.300
94 surfacet none
6 underground
56 surfacett none
44 underground


Pennsylvania
Kentucky
West Virginia
Pennsylvania
Illinois


291 1
6.168tt
6.459
21.478
     * U.S. Bureau of Mines.  Minerals yearbook. 1975 ed.   Washington,  U.S.  Government Printing Office, 1975.
     t U.S. Bureau of Mines.  Mineral facts and problems,   bicentennial  edition.  Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976.
     i U.S. Bureau of Mines.  Mineral commodity summaries  1978.  Washington,  U.S.  Department of the Interior, 1978.
     1 Antimony, beryllium, manganiferous ore, molybdenum, monazHe,  nickel, platinum group metals, rare earth metals, tin, titanium, ilmentte,
tungsten,  vanadium.
    ** Abrasives, apllte,  barite, boron minerals, fluorspar, graphite,  greensand  marl, iron oxide pigments (crude), kyantte, lithium minerals.
•agneslte. Millstones, olivine. vermicullte.
    tt  1977 Keystone Coal  Industry Manual.  New York, McGraw-Hill  Mining Publications, 1977.
     (e)  Estimate.
     Note:  Crude  ore estimates  for the other  categories were calculated as  a percent of the  total crude ore production for each year.  The percentage
used was derived  from the 1975 data and assumed  to be the same for the  other years.
     Note:  Metric conversion table In front matter.

-------
actually increase somewhat from 1975 to 2000 as increased



reliance on lower grade resources necessitates removal of more



ore per unit of marketable product.  The crude ore estimates will



then be somewhat low.



     In 1975 the U.S. mining industry produced 2.6 billion tons



(2.4 Pg) of crude ore, excluding coal.    A total of 4.2 billion



tons (3.8 Pg) of material  (crude ore and waste) was handled.



Eleven states reported handling more than 100 million tons  (91



Tg) of material each, and three states  (Arizona, Florida, and



Minnesota)  accounted for 33 percent of the total material



handled.  The 1975 production of bituminous and lignite coal by


                                                  12
domestic mines was over 648 million tons (588 Tg).



     Land Utilization.  All mining operations disturb the land



surface to some extent.  Increased demand for minerals has



resulted in technological advances in both equipment design and



mining engineering practices and increased land use (because of



the need to extract greater quantities of materials to meet the



increasing demand for minerals in lower grade ore deposits).



Exploitation of more low-grade and submarginal deposits also



requires more land usage for disposal of the greater quantities



of solid wastes associated with low-grade ores.



     A U.S. Bureau of Mines report detailing the land utilization



(exclusive of secondary transport of wastes)  by the mining



industry during the period from 1930 to 1971 estimated some 3.65


                      2
million acres (14.8 Gm ), approximately 0.16 percent of the



Nation's land area, had been affected.    These data are broken
                               49

-------
down geographically by state and type of mining activity  (Table  3


and Figure 11).  Although underground mines undercut extensive


areas, the total area they affected was greatly overshadowed by


that affected  by surface mines.  In 1971 alone, some 206,000

             2
acres  (834 Mm  ) of land were affected by mining operations.


     Exclusive of land affected by wastes transported from


mining areas by wind and water, a comparison of mining land usage


with other land usage during the 1930 to 1971 period shows that


the land area  used by mining was similar to that used by


railroads or airports in operation at the end of 1971 (Table 4).


It is estimated that highways utilized six times more land than


mining during  this period.  Approximately 72 percent of the


mining land usage was accounted for by three commodities:


bituminous coal, sand and gravel, and stone (Figure 12).


     Mining industry land usage encompasses the mined area,


mining waste disposal areas, areas affected by subsidence, and


processing waste disposal areas.  The excavated area accounts for


more than half of the total land required for mining operations,


and waste disposal areas account for about a third  (Figure 13).


     A survey conducted by the Soil Conservation Service estimates

                                   2
a total of 5.7 million acres (23 Gm )  or 0.25 percent of the


Nation's land area had been affected by surface mining as of July


1, 1977 (Tables 5 and 6).    Of this total, approximately 1.9

                     2
million acres  (7.7 Gm )  has been reclaimed to some extent, either


naturally or by the landowners.  The remaining 3.8 million acres
                                50

-------
                                        TABLE  3
   LAND UTILIZED  BY THE  MINING  INDUSTRY*  IN THE  UNITED  STATES
                     IN  1930-71, BY  STATE AND  FUNCTIONt
                                          (acres)
State
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Surface
Mined
area
39,700
22,300
26,600
18,700
105,000
30,200
8,730
960
71,500
23,600
3,460
16,700
201,000
125,000
38,300
27,500
146,000
12,900
7,620
17,800
14,600
64,600
72,300
7,680
55,300
22,200
9,170
12,000
3,750
18,500
19,600
55,800
24,100
25,700
206,000
24,800
22,100
221,000
1,730
9,840
10,900
40,500
54,000
18/900
2,870
42,600
24,500
96,500
32,300
14,800
mining
Waste
area
12,900
3,550
34,900
6,180
57,100
5,750
2,180
230
10,300
5,420
810
3,980
63,800
39,300
10,100
7,970
49,000
3,260
1,900
4,760
3,650
17,100
37,900
1,890
15,500
14,100
2,310
11,100
1,020
4,590
13,900
12,600
6,550
8,350
63,400
6,900
5,290
64,500
370
2,300
2,980
12,300
13,300
19,200
860
13,100
6,470
30,600
8,730
9,040
Underqround
Subsided or
disturbed area
2,080
100
2,910
260
2,230
1,320



10

520
6,320
1,270
260
70
9,470


180

1,690


180
350

2,160

210
4,310
190

70
2,980
130

35,600


100
1,430
520
920

3,620
260
22,200
60
620
mininq
Surface
waste area
4,830
60
360
290
12,200
3,310



30

3,010
14,600
2,930
570
150
22,100
10

400

840


610
600
10
2,170

100
2,140
190

150
6,860
300

43,600


120
2,200
570
2,200
30
8,410
400
51,800
30
1,450
3enef iciation
Surface
waste area
5,510
3,610
37,600
4,130
50,400
8,200
1,390
130
7,040
5,240
540
17,100
10, 500
6,060
6,030
8,290
7,030
2,070
1,020
2,540
2,100
15,300
26,100
1,140
30,700
5,450
1, 360
13,700
530
5,000
7,840
27,400
6,020
770
12,600
3,410
6,600
16,500
220
2,390
2,420
11,300
9,650
25,500
3,630
11,100
4,350
8,770
5,780
2,410
Total
land
utilized f-
65,100
29,600
102,000
29,500
227,000
48,800
12,300
1,330
88,800
34,300
4,810
41,300
297,000
175,000
55,300
44 , 000
234,000
18,200
10,500
25,600
20,300
99,500
136,000
10,700
102,000
42,800
12,800
41,100
5,300
28,400
47,800
96,300
36,600
35,100
292,000
35,500
34,000
381,000
2,330
14,500
16,500
67,800
78,000 •
66,700
7,380
78,800
35,900
210,000
46,900
28,300
     Totals
                   2,170,000
733,000
105,000
                                                          190,000
454,000
                                                3,650,000
     * Excludes  oil and gas; also does not include land disturbed by waste that has been eroded,
transported, and deposited  in some other area by wind and running water.  Figures  also omit areas
damaged by acid  mine drainage and SO- fumes.
     t Prtone, j., J.L. Morning, and L. Giorgetti.  Land utilization and reclamation in the mining
industry, 1930-71.  Bureau  of Mines Information Circular ICB642.  Washington, U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1974.
     § Data may  not add to  totals shown because of independent rounding.
     Note:  Metric conversion table in front  matter.
                                           51

-------
(Jl
                                                    ACRES UTILIZED
                                                     C=D Under 20.000
                                                     I—1 20,000-50.000
                                                     ES3 50.000-150,000
                                                     • Over 150,000
                 Figure 11.   Geographic distribution  of land utilized by mining
            activities 1930-1971 is depicted graphically.
            Source:   Paone,  J.   Land utilization and  reclamation 1930-71.

-------
                            TABLE 4

          COMPARISON OF LAND USES IN THE UNITED STATES
                            IN 1971*t
          Activity                                Million acres

Total United States                                  2,271.3

Agriculture§                                         1,283.0

  Cropland                                             472.1

  Grassland pasture and range                          603.6

  Forest land grazed                                   198.0

  Farmsteads, farm roads                                 8.4

Forest land not grazed                                 525.6

Urban areas                                             34.6

National Park system                                    29.6

Highways                                                22.7

State Park system                                        8.6

Miningll                                                  3.7

Airports                                                 3.3

Railroads                                                3.2

Municipal and county park and recreational areas         1.0


     * Estimates based primarily on reports and records of the

Bureau of Census and Federal and state agencies.

     t Paone, J.  Land utilization and reclamation 1930-71.

     § 1969 data.

     11 Land utilized 1930-71, exclusive of land affected by

transport of wastes by natural processes.

     Note:   Metric conversion table in front matter.

                               53

-------
             PHOSPHATE
               ROCK
                2%
 IRON ORE
   3%
COPPER
 5%
     Figure 12.   Land utilized by mining  is shown by
selected commodity,  1930-71.
Source:  Paone,  J.
Land utilization  and reclamation 1930-71
                            54

-------
               SUBSIDED
                 AREA
                  3%
                             WASTE AREA
                           FROM UNDERGROUND
                                5%
                                  PROCESSING
                                  WASTE AREA
                                     13%
                    WASTE AREA
                   FROM SURFACE
                     MINING
                      20%
                                 MINED AREA
                                 (EXCAVATED)
                                 :'-- 59%
. n,ft Figure 13.   Land usage  by mining in  the United  States,
J.930-71,  is shown according  to function.

Source:   Paone, J.  Land utilization and reclamation  1930-71
                            55

-------
                                              TABLE   5

         STATUS OF  LAND  DISTURBED  BY SURFACE  MINING  IN  THE  U.S.
                            AS  OF  JULY  1,  1977,   BY STATES*
                                                (acres)



Land needing
Reclamation not required
b/ my U.
State
Alabama
Alaska*
Arizona*
Arkansas
California
Caribbean Area*
Colorado
Connecticut*
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Ha«an
Idaho
1 1 1 inoi s
Indiana
loxa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana*
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts*
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi*
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska*
Nevada
lie* Hampshire
Ne« Jersey*
Ne« He, ico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
IhTde IsUnd*
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
TOTAL
Coal
nines
72.29?
2,700
400
5,623
10

7.069



1.680


116,711
25,88?
13,997
41.256
101,637


2.804

142


70,688
1.995




22


1.050
196.709
36,118 •

240.000


890
29,583
3,310
635

23,724
48
84.868

9,657
1,093,520
Sand ind
gravel
16,611
4.300
6.400
21.483
7,970
2.550
8,334
16.740
2,912
11.162
3,353
15
5.100
20,330
11,875
10,147
11,150
980
37,324
28,833
7,430
32.041
39,424
30,047
45,966
4,473
4.655
17.969
1,221
12,725
24,610
11,860
30,917
11,908
2.010
22,621
6,659
3.521
11,000
2.592
9,065
10.153
4,950
152,457
3,999
3,877
3,788
9,701
4.554
41,607
3.673
799,042
Other
mined
areas
19,929
4,000
60.900
11,479
80,998
1.000
15,861
787
63
235,700
24,008
115
1,500
14,192
6,522
6.421
10,159
4.712
2,549
2,075
1,181
10,330
23,422
44.801
7.821
28.187
18.340
4,029
2.555
417
5,570
1,806
19,251
4.792
200
18.923
14,105
17.568
20.500

2.128
5,259
2.305
37,104
4,414
2.078
1,251
8.174
995
7.555
12.376
830,407
reclamation




Reclamation required
by la-
Coal
mines
34,807


2,859
500

1.195



764


40.899
74.581
341
815
154.218


5.703




8,772
4,766




3.709


6.725
77.050
6.298
3
60,000



3.127
3,725
133

8,222
1,190
7,658

62,028
570,088
Sand and
gravel
5,498


20
17,642

11,672


3,365
4,623

18.200
8,582
4,176
8.457
3,634
2.299

2,293
9.741

15.662
12.444

1.046
4,492




1.057
15,979
7,096

16.659
2,766
6.814
15.000

4,395
6.826
810
6.289
4,637
377
3.929
11,822

11.884
7,665
257.051
Other
mined
areas
6.252


1.592
51,316

6.513


20,922
13.772

3.500
4,557
1.894
9.638
3.978
2.780

923
1.734

4.072
7.891

6,055
6.598




26,072
5,037
3,909

8.427
4,110
1.538
25,000

3,194
695
1.135
4.989
10.216
60
2,003
1.073

2.865
12,787
267,097
Land not
requiring
ret 1 ana t ion
85,673
4,000
121.800
9,449
59,061
710
14.023
4,590
1.498
61,266
23.247

2.500
88,860
64.711
10,519
20,117
154.495
10,457
6,794
19,824
11,750
27,600
66.919
14,415
22.051
12,528
11,005
1.953
547
8,263
2,207
18.477
7,000
38.595
190.578
16.255
7,387
250,000
.1,47'J
9.815
7.149
101.596
48.456
7.521
1.536
'0,060
10,245
137.105
11,605
5.511
1.898.203
Total
land
disturbed
241,062
15.000
189.500
52,505
216,777
4,260
64.687
22,117
4,473
332.415
71,447
130
30.800
296.131
139,641
59.520
91,109
421,121
50.340
40,918
48.417
54,121
110.322
162.102
66,202
141,272
53.334
33.003
5,729
13.669
38,443
46,733
89.662
34.705
48.580
530,967
65.311
26,831
621.500
6,06?
28,597
30.972
146.506
256,330
31,555
7,928
112.977
42,253
235,180
85.516
113,697
5.715.408
    • Basic Statistics - Status of land disturbed by surface mining In the U.S. as of July 1, 1977, by states,  (draft)

U.S. Soil Conservation Service. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, 1977.  (Values do not include land disturbed by waste

that has been eroded, transported, and deposited in some other area by wind and running water.  Figures also omit ireas damaged by

acid mine drainage and S0? fumes.)

    Note: Metric conversion table in front matter.
                                               56

-------
                              TABLE 6


     STATUS  OF LAND DISTURBED BY SURFACE MINING IN THE U.S
               FROM JANUARY  1, 1965 TO JULY  1,  1977*

                          (thousand acres)
1965
Land
Land
Total
requiring reclamation
not requiring reclamation
land disturbed
2040.
1147.
3187.
6
2
8
1972
2181
1823
4004
.2
.7
.9
1974
2542.
1876.
4418.

7
0
7
1977
3817.
1898.
5715.

2
2
4
           * Basic Statistics - Status of land disturbed by surface


       mining in the U.S.


           Note:  Metric conversion table in front matter.
       2
(15 Gm )  has not been reclaimed at all.   Reclamation of  2.7

                     2
million  acres (11 Gm ) of  this land is not  required by law.   This


study  presents information on both reclaimed  and unreclaimed


surface-mined land in each state (by county).
                                  57

-------
                    REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2


 1.  Peisse, F.H., D.W. Lockard, and A.E. Lindquist.  Coal
       surface mining reclamation cost in the western United
       States.  Bureau of Mines Information Circular IC8737.
       Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977.

 2.  Given, I.A., ed.  SME mining engineering handbook, v.  1.
       New York, Society of Mining Engineers of the American
       Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers,
       Inc., 1973.

 3.  Update:  Underground mining in the U.S.  Mining Engineering,
       July 1975.

 4.  Colorado Mining Association.  Anatomy of a mine--from
       prospect to production.  Denver, 1975.

 5.  Williams, R.E.  Waste production and disposal in mining,
       milling and metallurgical industries.  Miller Freeman
       Publishing Company, San Francisco, 1975.

 6.  Coal Age.  Coal age operating handbook of underground mining.
       v. 1.  Coal Age Library of Operating Handbooks.  New York,
       McGraw Hill, Inc., 1977.

 7.  U.S. Department of the Interior.  Surface mining and our
       environment.  A Special Report to the Nation.  Washington,
       U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967.

 8.  Thrush, P.W., ed.  A dictionary of mining, mineral, and
       related terms.  Washington,  U.S. Government Printing
       Office, 1968.

 9.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Development document
       for interim final and proposed effluent limitations
       guidelines and New Source Performance Standards for the
       ore mining and dressing industry,  point source category.
       2 v.  U.S. EPA Document 440/1-75-061.   Washington,
       U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975.

10.  U.S. Bureau of Mines.  Mineral facts and problems,
       bicentennial edition.   Washington, U.S. Government
       Printing Office,  1975.

11.  U.S. Bureau of Mines.  Minerals yearbook, 1975 ed.  (Preprint)
       Washington, U.S.  Government Printing Office, 1975.

12.  Bel, L.C.   1977 Keystone coal industry manual.  New York,
       McGraw Hill Mining Publications, 1977.
                                58

-------
13.  Office of Research and Development.  Water pollution caused
       by inactive ore and mineral mines, a national assessment.
       U.S. EPA Publication 600/2-76-298.  Washington, U.S.
       Government Printing Office, 1976.

14.  Office of Water and Hazardous Materials.  Inactive and
       abandoned underground mines, water pollution prevention
       and control.  U.S. EPA Publication 440/9-75-007.
       Washington, 1975.

15.  Personal Communication.  E. Johnson, U.S. Department of
       Agriculture, to J. Greber, PEDCo.  March 23, 1978.

16.  Paone, J., J.L. Morning, and L. Giorgetti.  Land utilization
       and reclamation in the mining industry, 1930-71.  U.S.
       Bureau of Mines Information Circular IC8642.  Washington,
       U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974.

17.  Basic Statistics - Status of land disturbed by surface
       mining in the U.S. as of July 1, 1977, by states.  (Draft)
       U.S. Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of
       Agriculture, Washington, 1977.
                               59

-------
                            SECTION  3

           SOURCES, QUANTITIES, AND  CHARACTERISTICS OF
                  MINERAL RESOURCE SOLID WASTES
     Mineral resource wastes are estimated to comprise 40 percent

of the solid wastes produced annually in the United States; they

are second only to agricultural wastes in volume.   In 1975 these

wastes amounted to about 2.3 billion tons (2.1 Pg), and by the

years 1985 and 2000, annual generation could reach as high as

4 and 6 billion tons  (3.6 and 5.4 Pg).  It should be pointed out

that all of the waste generated does not necessarily end up in

waste heaps and impoundments.  Some is returned directly to the

mine, some is used in onsite construction projects (roads, dams,

base fill, etc.), some is sold as byproducts, and at some

underground operations a portion is backfilled into mined-out

areas and therefore remains underground.  It should be noted also

that most mining companies that now dispose of solid wastes on

the land eventually reclaim or rehabilitate these disposal areas

to some degree.  The above comments would seem to lessen the

magnitude of the problem; however, large volumes of solid wastes

continue to be deposited on the land each year, and volumes of

solid wastes generated during past operations still remain at

numerous inactive mine sites throughout the country.   Dean and

Havens estimated that by 1972 total mineral resource solid wastes
                                60

-------
at active and inactive mining sites would total 25 billion tons


                                           2           2
(22.7 Pg) and cover 2 million acres  (8.1 Gm ) of land.   Unless



properly handled and stabilized, solid wastes of this  magnitude



will pose a serious threat to the environment.



     This section presents an analysis of the nature and extent



of solid wastes associated with surface and underground mining



and processing of metallic ores, nonmetallic ores, and solid



mineral fuels (bituminous, lignite, and anthracite coals).  For



purposes o'f this document, processing wastes are considered to be



those generated by ore beneficiation  (including leaching).



Mineral resource wastes generated by roasting, smelting, refining,



and other chemical processing following beneficiation  are not



included.



   Sources and Classification of Mineral Resource Solid Wastes



     In the mining industry both the extraction of ore from the



earth (mining) and the processing of the ore to recover a



marketable product (beneficiation)  generate solid wastes.  The



number and kinds of steps involved in mining and processing vary



throughout the industry; therefore the quantities and



characteristics of the solid wastes generated also vary.



     The beneficiation steps are determined by the nature of the



ore deposit, its associated geologic materials,  and the desired



end product.  For example, at some sites beneficiation of many



nonmetal minerals (e.g., sand and gravel,  feldspar, stone)  may



consist only of crushing and classifying or simply classifying to



produce a marketable product,  whereas crushing,  classifying,




                                61

-------
concentrating, and drying may be required at others.  On the other



hand, ferrous and nonferrous metal ores must be further treated



after mining and beneficiation to obtain a marketable product.



Copper, for example, must be smelted, refined, and fabricated




before it is marketable.  Conversely, in the solid mineral fuel



industry, numerous small coal mine operations now extract the



coal from the mine and transport it directly to the consumer, and



little or no processing is involved.  At most large operations,



however, the coal is crushed, screened, and washed before it is



marketed.  In the future, other beneficiation steps, including



flotation to remove pyrite, may become commonplace in the coal



industry.



     Although there is a wide variation in the required



processing steps, typical mining operations require ore




extraction and some form of beneficiation to produce either a



marketable product or a concentrate suitable for further



processing.   Most beneficiation operations are at or near the



mine site to minimize costs of transporting unwanted material.



Occasionally, however, ore must be transported to a site some 25



to 75 miles (40 to 121 km)  away because (1)  land is not available,



either for the beneficiation facility or to dispose of the waste



it generates; (2) proper utilities are not available; (3)



environmental considerations prohibit a mine and a processing



facility at the same site;  (4)  a single common beneficiation



facility is used to process ore from several mines in a region.
                                62

-------
     Normally processing steps beyond beneficiation  (e.g.,
smelting, refining, fabricating, and exfoliation) are  located
away from the mine site.  Occasionally, however, these operations
are located on site.  For example, some large copper operations
and lead-zinc operations are completely integrated.  Mining,
beneficiating, smelting, refining, fabricating, and marketing
operations are all located in the same general area.  The solid

waste problems at such operations are considerably more complex
than those involving only mining and beneficiating.  When
combinations of wastes other than mine and beneficiation wastes
are discarded along with mine and beneficiation wastes, the
probability of the development of hazardous conditions increases
significantly.
     Because the most common arrangement is one in which the
beneficiation facility is on or near the extraction site, this
document considers only those mineral resource solid wastes
generated by ore extraction and beneficiation.
     The sources of solid waste evaluated in this study are
divided into three general categories:  (1)  mine wastes,  (2)
beneficiation wastes,  (3) miscellaneous wastes.
     Mine Wastes.  These wastes are generally referred to as
overburden at surface mining operations and waste rock or
development waste rock at underground operations (although they
are also called gob, spoil, and refuse).  Thickness and
characteristics of overburden vary according to the kind  of
deposit and the mining method.   Although almost all overburden is
cverlaid by some topsoil, its thickness and quality vary.
                                63

-------
     Overburden associated with the mining of most nonmetallic
ores generally consists of topsoil and other unconsolidated
materials  (e.g., sand, gravel, silt) and occasionally a little
bedrock.  Overburden associated with the mining of most metallic
ores contains varying amounts of bedrock in addition to topsoil
and other unconsolidated materials.  The waste rock associated
with underground mines consists of both the consolidated and
unconsolidated materials generated during various stages of mine
development  (e.g., shaft, tunnel, adit, and drift development)
and that produced in association with ore extraction.  The pyrite
content of mine waste is a critical factor in regard to whether
or not it constitutes a hazard to the environment, particularly
in humid climates.
     Overburden disposal methods are a function of the kind of
deposit being mined, the mining method, and the waste-to-ore
ratio (see Section 5 for additional details).  The most common
methods are  (1) casting the overburden into mined-out areas;
(2) piling the waste on the land along the edges of the mine cut;
(3) hauling the waste by truck, rail, scrapper, or conveyor to a
mine waste dump on or near the mine site.
     Regardless of the disposal method, it is common practice to
segregate topsoil from the rest of the overburden and stockpile
it for later use in reclamation projects.  At some ferrous and
nonferrous metal mining operations the bedrock portion of the
overburden is segregated into two categories—barren rock and
submarginal or low-grade ore.  The barren rock, which has no

                                64

-------
potential ore value, is usually combined with other useless



components of the overburden.  The submarginal or low-grade ore,



which contains low concentrations of the material that is being



mined, is stockpiled (sometimes in several different piles



according to mineral identification, grade, or concentration) for



possible recovery processing at some future time when market



conditions and technology advancements make such processing



economically feasible.



     Waste rock generated during the early development of



underground mines is hauled to the surface and disposed of in



mine waste dumps similar to those at many surface mining



operations.  After the initial developmental stages, much of the



waste rock is disposed of in underground mined-out areas.



     A small portion of the mine waste at some surface and



underground mining operations is used in onsite road and dam



construction or sold as a byproduct.



     Beneficiation Wastes.  Beneficiation, which separates the



valuable mineral or minerals from the undesirable components of



an ore, creates large volumes of solid wastes.  Wastes can be wet



or dry, depending on the beneficiation method, but most are in a



wet or slurry state.  Beneficiation wastes are normally referred



to as "tailings"; however, other terms are also used, depending



on the type of mineral being processed,  the geographic location



of the operation, and the physical and chemical characteristics



of the waste.  In the kaolinitic clay industry, the waste created



when crude clay ore is passed through a degritting operation to






                                65

-------
remove coarse  sand and mica by gravity settling boxes and/or wet



cyclones  is referred to as "grit."  In the phosphate industry,



the ore beneficiation process produces two separate solid waste



streams,  one composed of coarser sandy materials  (referred to as



"waste sands"  or  "sand tailings") and the other composed of very




fine phosphatic clays (called "slimes," "clay slimes," or "waste



slimes").  The solid wastes produced during coal beneficiation



(cleaning) are typically referred to as "gob," "slurry," "culm,"



or "black water."  Other terms include "washery rejects,"



"fines,"  and "refuse."  Although each of these terms is used to



describe  solid wastes generated during the beneficiation of ore,



"tailings," the most widely accepted term, is the one used



throughout this document.



     Most tailings are disposed of by pumping them to impoundments



referred  to as settling ponds, slurry ponds, tailings ponds,



storage ponds,  or impoundments.   These ponds are contained by



embankments.   (See Section 5 for additional information.)  They



range from small pits,  natural depressions, and swamp areas to



engineered 1000-acre structures with massive retaining dams and



regulated construction design.   They generally are located



adjacent to or near mine waste disposal areas, and mine wastes



are often used in the construction of tailings ponds.



     Although beneficiation wastes usually represent 95 to 100



percent of the total material discharged to tailings ponds,  such



materials as mine drainage, noncontact cooling waters,  some



surface runoff, residuals from pollution control equipment,
                                66

-------
treated domestic wastewaters/ and leaching precipitates are



sometimes discharged into these ponds.  At some of the large



integrated operations, smelter slag and refinery sludges are



sometimes combined with beneficiation waste.  At still other



facilities, the tailings pond is used to dispose of construction



wastes (e.g., scrap iron and wood), organic wastes from



cafeterias (e.g., food scraps and paper), and damaged or used




product and reagent containers.  Most mining and beneficiation



facilities segregate the wastes as much as possible for



environmental reasons and to avoid contamination of recirculating



process waters.  The practice of combining other mineral resource



wastes with tailings during disposal influences whether or not



beneficiation wastes constitute an environmental hazard.



     Small quantities of tailings are disposed of by using them



for onsite construction (e.g., roads, base fill), selling them as



byproducts, and occasionally, reprocessing them to recover



mineral values.  At some underground mining operations as much as



50 percent of the tailings may be backfilled into the mine to



fill in mined-out areas.



     Miscellaneous Wastes.  The solid wastes that make up this



third category are generated from various sources at a mining



operation.  They include residuals from pollution control



equipment (dry and wet), treated domestic wastewaters,



construction wastes, used or damaged product or reagent



containers, and general office and cafeteria wastes.   These



wastes are usually disposed of in the tailings ponds or landfilled





                                67

-------
on site.  Prospecting, exploration, and mine site development
also create minor amounts of solid wastes such as drilling
muds; soils and bedrock from exploration pits, trenches, and
shafts; removed vegetation; soils and bedrock resulting from road
and building construction; and construction wastes  (scrap wood
and iron).
           Quantities of Mineral Resource Solid Wastes
     The large quantities of solid wastes generated by the mineral
mining industry include overburden from surface mining operations
(e.g., soils, sand and gravel, barren rock, submarginal or
low-grade ore), waste rock from underground mines (e.g., some
unconsolidated materials, mine development wastes, submarginal
ores), beneficiation wastes (tailings), and a variety of
miscellaneous wastes  (e.g., drilling muds, residuals from
pollution control equipment, and damaged construction materials).
Most of these wastes are generated by mining and beneficiation;
therefore the remainder of this section deals with these sources.
     Researchers' estimates of the quantity of solid waste
produced annually by the U.S.  mining industry vary according to
the number of mineral mining industries covered, the extent of
the processing operations included (e.g., mining and beneficiation
only or mining, beneficiation, smelting, and refining), and the
calculation method.   Most estimates range between 1.6 and 2.0
billion tons (1.4 and 1.8 Pg)/yr. ' '    Annual solid waste
production statistics in this study are calculated from U.S.
                                68

-------
Bureau of Mines data, data appearing in various published and

unpublished documents, and information provided by the mining

industry.

     Benefication waste quantities are calculated on a dry

weight basis; the quantities of water used to slurry these

wastes to impoundments are not included.  Estimates of

beneficiation wastes do not include wastes associated with

leaching operations because they are almost impossible to

calculate.  In most cases, both mine and beneficiation waste

quantities have been calculated for each commodity (Table 7).

When insufficient data made it impossible to calculate

beneficiation wastes for some mineral commodities (e.g., zinc

from surface mines), only mine waste statistics are presented.

It is also important to note that annual production of mine solid

waste (overburden and development waste rock)  has not been

estimated for the coal industry because data were insufficient.

Although actual quantitative data are not available,  it is

believed that the amount of mine waste (particularly overburden)

produced annually by the coal industry is larger than the total

amount of mine waste generated by all other mineral industries

combined.*
     * It should be noted that many individuals consider
overburden produced by the coal industry to be a resource rather
than a waste because of its use in reclamation projects.  This
philosophy is based on the fact that in recent years most
overburden has been reclaimed to some extent.  The Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977, which requires the reclamation
of all overburden, has contributed to further support of this
philosophy.


                                69

-------
                                        TABLE 7

1975 SOLID WASTE PRODUCTION STATISTICS AT SURFACE  AND UNDERGROUND MINES  AND ESTIMATED
                     TOTAL SOLID WASTES FOR 1977,  1985,  AND 2000
                                     (1,000 tons)

Commodity

METALS
Bauiite
Copper
Gold
Iron Ore
lead
Mercury
Sil.er
uranium
Zinc
Omer"
Total metals
NONMETALS
Asbestos
Clays
Oiatonite
Feldspar
G/psum
Mica (scrap)
Perl it*
Phosphate rock
Potassium salts
Pumice
Salt
Sand and gravel
Sodium carbonate (natural)
Stone:
Crushed and broken
Oinension
Talc, soapstone. pyrophyllite
OtherU
Total nonmetals
MINERAL FUELS
Coal, anthracite
Coal, bituminous and lignite
lotal mineral fuels
Tola) all commodities
Surface
Mine
•aste

13.100
689.000
9.030
256,000
1
509
21
154.000
42
44.210
1.166. 112

250
37.100
649
1.980
13.400
254
20
216.000
NA
118
87
NA
NA

71.200
1.210
1.760
27.726
371.954




I.', 18.U66
mining operations

Tailings'

1.407
237,850
8,560
150.816
1
59
315
4.994
,1
I'
404.001 1

1.353
^
298
627
500
456
195
137.300
NA
2
2B3
39. 4501 1
NA

0

93
*
180.557




',84 . 550

Total

14.707
926.850
17.590
406.816
1
568
336
158.994

44.2100
.570.113

1.603
37.100H
1.147
2.607
13.900
710
215
353.300
NA
120
370
39.450
NA

71.200-
1.210*
1,853
27.726*
552.511




2.l22.tc'4
Solid oaste statistics for 1975*
Underground mining operations Totals, all mining operations
Mine
waste

M
1.360
212
1.890
2.450
1
348
2.420
2.740
1.173
12.593

U
10
NA
NA
206
NA
NA
U
460
NA
617
NA
4.050

300
NA
9
109
5.761




l«. 154

Tailings'

U
29.003
1.569
3.779
9.282
1
791
2,735
8.127
f
55.286

U
0
NA
NA
8
IIA
NA
W
15.760
NA
683
NA
4.010

3
NA
ii
20.461




75.747

Total

U
30.363
1,781
5.669
11.732
t
1.139
5.155
10,867
1 . 1 7 3tf
67.879

U
10*
NA
NA
214
NA
NA
W
16.220
NA
1.300
NA
8.060

300*
NA
9t»
109*
26.222




94.101
Mine
waste

13.300
690.360
9.242
257.890
2.450
509
369
156.420
2.782
45.383
1.178.705

250
37.110
849
I.9HO
13.606
254
20
216,000
460
118
704
NA
4,050

71 .500
1.210
1.769
27.835
377.715




l.^b.4.0
Grand 1975 Uaste-lo-ore Estimated solid «aste>'
Tai 1 ingst

1.407
266.853
10.129
154.595
9.282
59
1.106
7.729
8.127
*
459,287

1.353
I
298
627
5118
456
195
137,300
15.760
2
966
39.450-
4.010

*
0
93
0
201.018


107.101"
107. IOI««
'f.7.406
total

14.707
957.213
19.371
412.485
11.73?
56H
1.475
164.149
10.909
45, 38 1s
1.637.992

1.603
37.110*
1.147
2.607
14,114
710
215
353.300
16.220
120
1.670
39.450"
8.060

71.500*
1.210*
1.662
25.176*
578,733


107.1011'
107.101"
2.32J.J26
ratios

4.47
3.56
1.91
1.73
1.19
9.02
1.34
23.65
1.27
0.74


1.11
0.85
1.31
1.99
1.40
1.36
0.30
1.90
0.91
0.03
0.11
0.05
1.01

0.08
0.52
2.89
2.40



0.17


1977

17.880
1.026.401
30.002
281.741
12.134
2.598
5.012
223.824
13.854
41.588)1
1.655.036

1.748
48.376*
1.252
2.893
19.460
1.763
326
353.780
18.156
124
5,194
44.900
12.199

71.120*
1 .602*
3.653
25.920*
614.666


116.450
116.450
2.269.702
1985

16.104
1.772.150
95.507
448.915
14.823
2.010
5.896
517.119
19.660
68.05V
2.982.294

2.664
86,00*
1.965
4.348
21.000
2.041
378
577.600
15.652
195
9.414
69,500
22.220

124.000*
1.716,.
5.896
38.880k-
981.469


163.810
168.810
4.114.573
2000

12.069
2.617.6*8
64.710
553.400
19.969
2.030
6.700
895.247
36.043
96.93*
4.304.969

3.330
163. 40C*
3.930
7.562
28.000
2.415
672
613.700
7.626
318
15.645
104.500
34.340

200.000*
1.716«
8.123
64.080*
1.259.8S7


281.350
281.350
S.8t4.l76
  (continued)

-------
                                              TABLE  7.      (continued)
     • (icept where  Indicated otherwise,  all  1975  solid waste statistics were adapted from Tables ? and II  of the Preprint from the



197S Bureau of Mines minerals yearbook; Mining  and Quarrying Trends in the Metal and Nnnmptal Industries;  United States Department



of the Interior,  Bureau of Mines.



     t Estimated  solid waste statistics  include hnth mine w.i-.lr*. an«l tailint|S unless Mtherwi-.r imli( 4l<"l.



     i Tailings are  reported on a dry weight  basis



     i Value less than SOO tons.



     f Estimates  for tailings not available on  these commodities; therefore  the solid waste statistics include mine waste only



    •• Antimony,  beryllium, manganlferous ore,  molybdenum, monaHte. nickel, platInum-qroup metals, rare-earth metals, titanium,  ilmenite.



tungsten, vanadium,  and quantity of metal items Indicated by symbol W.



    M Abrasives, apllte, barlle. boron minerals,  fluorospar, graphite, qri-pnsand marl, iron onlde pigments (crude), kyanlte. 1 it Mum minerals,



magneslte, millstone, ollvlne, vermlcullte.



    Si Sand and gravel tailings estimated as  5  percent of total material handled.



    11 Value obtained from the minerals yearbook,  1975, Volume  I; Metals, Minerals and Fuels; United States Department of Interior; Bureau of



Mines; U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 19".  This value  Includes tailings waste (coal preparation plant waste) only.  Mine



solid waste data  (overburden and development  waste rock) are not available for  the coal Industry.  Although actual quantitative data are not



available. It Is  known that vast quantities of  mine waste (particularly overburden) are generated annually by the coal industry.   In fact, the



amount of nine watte produced annually by the coal  Industry alone  Is probably larger than the total amount of mine waste generated by all other



Industries combined.



     M • Withheld to avoid disclosing Individual company confidential data



    NA • Not applicable or values so small that no data were recorded.



    Note:  Metric conversion table In front matter.

-------
     For the reasons stated above, the quantitative data



discussed in the following pages do not reflect the mine waste



produced annually by the coal industry.  If this statistic were



known, the annual production of mineral resource waste would be



considerably larger than that estimated in this study and the




coal industry would be shown to be by far the major single



producer of solid waste.




     Mineral resource waste figures in this report are based on



current ore-to-waste ratios and projected ore production



statistics, assuming that the ratio of ore to waste will remain



relatively constant.  This assumption probably results in



underprojections because demand for products derived from mining



activities is likely to grow, and as higher grade ores become



depleted, it will become necessary to handle greater amounts of



material to meet these growing needs.  Thus mineral resource



solid wastes are expected to increase in volume, not only because



of increased production, but also because of the need to treat



lower-grade ores.  The degree to which the U.S. relies on ore and



concentrate imports in the future will also affect solid waste



production.  (It should be noted that should ocean and oil shale



mining become major commercial enterprises, as is expected, the



amount of mineral resource solid waste generated annually could



double.)1



     Calculations made in this study indicate that the mining



industry generated about 2.3 billion tons (2.1 Pg)  of mine and



beneficiation wastes in 1975 (Table 7).  By the years 1985 and
                                72

-------
2000 it is projected that the mineral mining industries will




produce between 4 and 6 billion tons  (4.6 and 5.4 Pg) of solid




wastes annually.  Sixty-eight percent of the mineral resource



solid wastes generated in 1975 were mine wastes, and 32 percent



were beneficiation wastes.  If the wet weight of tailings  (dry



weight plus weight of water used to slurry the tails) were



considered, total weight of tailings would surpass that of mine




waste, but this would be somewhat misleading because not all of



the water used to slurry tailings to settling ponds remains in




the ponds.  That which is not entrapped in the tailings is




recycled back to the beneficiation plant, some is lost to




groundwater via seepage, some is evaporated, and the rest is




discharged into waterways.



     Overburden associated with surface mining operations is by



far the largest source of mineral resource solid wastes,



comprising about 65 percent of the total produced in 1975



(Table 7).  The total amount of solid waste (overburden and



tailings)  produced at surface mining operations in 1975 was about



23 times greater than the quantity of waste generated at



underground mines.



   •  Tailings represent the major source of wastes at underground



mining operations, comprising about 80 percent of the annual



total.  This is the reverse of the situation at surface mining



operations, where mine wastes make up the larger portion



(approximately 72 percent).  Quantities of mine waste are low at



underground mines because after the initial developmental stages,






                                73

-------
most of the material extracted is ore.  Relatively  little waste

rock is removed during extraction.

     Of the three mineral mining categories  (metallic minerals,

nonmetallic minerals, and solid mineral fuels), metallic mineral

mining operations generate the most solid wastes  (70 percent of

the total mineral resource solid wastes produced  in 1975 as

opposed to 25 percent by the nonmetallic mineral  industry and 5

percent by mineral fuels industry).*  There are two general

reasons for the greater generation:  many of the metallic

minerals are recovered from large open pit mines, and tremendous

volumes of mine waste must be removed to reach the ore; and

metallic mineral ores are of a lower grade than those in the

nonmetals and solid mineral fuels industries, making the

waste-to-product ratio much higher.

     Although more than 65 different mining industries generate

solid waste, 5 of these are responsible for 85 percent of the

total (Table 7).  Of these five,  the copper industry contributes

the most,  followed by the iron, phosphate, uranium, and bituminous

coal industries in that order.*  The copper industry alone

produced more solid waste in 1975 than did all of the nonmetals

industries together.   There is a definite relationship between

the states leading in the production of mineral resource solid

waste and the five major contributing industries.  For example,
     * This comparison does not consider the substantial
quantities of mine solid waste produced annually by the coal
industry.
                                74

-------
Arizona, which leads in the production of mineral resource  solid


waste, is also the largest copper-producing  state.  Other states


that are major contributors to mineral resource  solid waste are


Minnesota (iron mining), Florida  (phosphate  mining), Utah  (copper


and uranium mining), Wyoming  (bituminous coal and uranium mining),


and New Mexico (copper, bituminous coal, and uranium mining).


     The quantities of solid waste generated at  some individual


mining operations are staggering.  For example,  the Kennecott


Copper Corporation Bingham Canyon mine produces  approximately  115

                                                               4
million tons  (104.3 Gg) of waste rock and overburden each year.


Several copper beneficiation operations generate up to 50,000


tons (45.4 Mg) of tailings per day, and some operations are


approaching 100,000 tons (90.7 Mg) per day.   Several tailings


dams 250 ft (76.2 m) high and a few 400 to 600 ft (121.9 to


182.3 m) high are planned.   It is estimated that copper tailings


are generated at a rate of more than 100 million tons (90.7 Gg) a


year in Arizona alone,  and accumulations in that State probably


exceed 4 billion tons (3.6 Pg).   The same source estimates that


taconite tailings are being produced in Minnesota at the rate of


120 million tons (109 Gg)  a year,  and that accumulations


probably amount to 2 to 3 billion tons (1.8 to 2.7 Pg)  across the


100-mile (190-km) length of the Mesabi taconite mining range


there.


     The enormity of these values is best illustrated by the fact


that the New Cornelia tailings dam near Ajo,  Arizona,  is the

                                                                  4
largest dam in the world in terms of the total volume of material.
                                75

-------
This dam contains an estimated 275 million cubic yards  (210 Mm3)



of material, more than  50 percent greater than the second  largest,



the Tarbela Dam in Pakistan.  One researcher estimates  that



enough copper tailings  will be generated in the United  States



between the years 1974  and 2000 to fill 100 square miles  (2.06


  2                                         7
Mm ) to an average depth of 170 ft (51.8 m).



     In addition to the large volumes of wastes produced at



active mining and beneficiating operations, tremendous  heaps of



mine wastes and tailings have been left behind at numerous



inactive mine sites across the United States.  Although no



comprehensive national  inventory has been made of total



accumulated solid wastes at these sites, some fairly complete



inventories by some individual states provide accurate  solid



waste accumulation values.  Although waste heaps associated with



inactive mine sites vary in size, they are usually much smaller



than the massive waste piles at active mining operations.  When



considered as a whole, however, the waste heaps at these numerous



inactive sites represent a large volume of material,  and because



they often are visible from major roads and highways, they can



seriously degrade the aesthetics of an area (Figure 14).



     Attempts have been made to estimate the total accumulated



mineral resource solid wastes at both active and inactive mining



sites.   The estimates vary depending on the number of mineral



industries included,  the dates used as base years for initial



mineral production,  and the method of calculation.  An  early



estimate indicated an accumulation of about 25 billion  tons





                                76

-------
                         MINE WASTES
                        AND TAILING
     Figure 14.   This  photo shows an example of mine
wastes and tailings  at an inactive mine site.

-------
 (22.7 Pg) by 1972.  An estimate in a more recent document indicated

an accumulation of about 30 billion tons  (27.2 Pg) by 1975.

Because these estimates are based on annual mineral resource

solid waste production statistics, it should be noted that they

do not actually represent the amount of waste deposited in mine

waste heaps and tailings ponds.  As pointed out earlier, all of

the waste generated does not accumulate in waste heaps or

tailings ponds.

     At many active mining operations, mineral resource solid

wastes disposal areas will eventually be rehabilitated or

reclaimed to some extent.*  The amount of land being reclaimed

annually by mine operators in some states is actually greater

than the amount disturbed each year.  In a few cases, lands that

were devastated by mining activities prior to the passage of

surface mining and reclamation legislation are being reclaimed.

Despite the fact that all mineral resource solid wastes do not

accumulate on the land and that substantial efforts are being

made by many industries to reclaim disposal areas, mineral

resource solid wastes still pose a threat to the environment for

the following reasons:  (1) little was done before the late

sixties to control and rehabilitate waste disposal areas,  and

large amounts of unstabilized wastes had already accumulated;  (2)

in many cases there is no one to assume responsibility for the
     * As of August 3, 1977, the Surface Mining Control and
Reclamation Act requires the coal mining industry to reclaim all
land disturbed by surface mining activities as well as land
disturbed by the surface effects of underground mining.

                                78

-------
large quantities of waste materials that have accumulated at

numerous inactive mine sites;  (3) although they will eventually

be stabilized and reclaimed to some degree, some mineral wastes

being generated at active mines pose a threat to the environment

until such action can be taken.

             Land Impacted by Mineral Waste Disposal

     Substantial quantities of land have been disturbed by the

disposal of mineral resource solid wastes.  According to the U.S.

Bureau of Mines, during the 42-year period from 1930 through 1971

the mining industry utilized* 3.65 million acres (14.8 Gm ) of
     9
land.   This figure does not include land disturbed by wastes

that have been eroded, transported, and redeposited by wind and

water.  Of this total, about 38 percent was disturbed (directly)

by solid waste disposal, 59 percent by excavation,  and the

remaining 3 percent by subsidence as a result of underground

workings.  Of the total disturbed (directly)  by waste disposal
                                2
[about 1.4 million acres (5.7 Gm )], 52.6 percent was by the

disposal of overburden and other surface mine wastes, 13 percent

by disposal of beneficiation wastes, and 5 percent by disposal of

underground mine wastes.

     The U.S. Bureau of Mines has also estimated that about 40
                                            2
percent of these 3.65 million acres (14.8 Gm )  has been reclaimed,
     * "Utilized" here refers to lands that have been directly
impacted by the mining industry.  Because the effect on adjacent
lands is not included, the figures presented do not include all
lands that were disturbed; they include only lands that were
utilized directly.
                                79

-------
but to an undefined extent.9  In 1971, 163,000 acres  (660 Mm2) of

                         2
the 206,000 acres  (834 Mm ) of land disturbed, or about  79 percent,


was reclaimed to some degree.  Thus, the ratio of land reclaimed


to land used doubled in 1971 compared with the ratio  for the 42-


year period average (Figure 15).  About 30 percent of the land


reclaimed to some degree between 1930 and 1971 was waste disposal


land; about 68 percent was land impacted by excavation.  These


figures may be influenced by variations in the definition of


"reclaimed."


     The solid mineral fuel (coal) and nonmetal mining industries


each accounted for 43 percent of the directly used surface land


during 1930 to 1971, and the metal mining industry accounted for


the remaining 14 percent.  On a commodity basis, the mining of


bituminous coal accounted for 40 percent of the total land used;


sand and gravel, 18 percent; crushed and broken stone, 14 percent;


clays and copper, 5 percent each; iron ore, 3 percent; and


phosphate rock,  2 percent.   The commodities that require large


land usage also produce large volumes of solid wastes (Table 7);


however,  the order of importance is different.  For example, the


sand and gravel industry requires more land than any other


industry except coal,  but ranks only seventh among leading


producers of mineral solid waste.  Conversely, the copper


industry ranks fourth in land use (behind coal, sand and gravel,


and crushed stone), but it is the major producer of solid wastes.


The sand and gravel industry is made up of many more individual


excavated areas (mines)  than the copper industry, but the ratio
                                80

-------
   100
    80
        3,650,000 ACRES
                  206.000 ACRES
 Z
 LU
 O
 DC
 LU
 Q.
    60
    40
    20
1,460,000 ACRES
         UTILIZED  RECLAIMED

               1930-71
                                             163,000 ACRES
                   UTILIZED  RECLAIMED

                          1971
     Figure  15.   The ratio of land reclaimed by  the
mining industry  to that used doubled in 1971 compared
with the ratio for the 42-year period between  1930
and 1971.*

     * Degrees of success of reclamation are essentially
omitted from this calculation.  Thus the comparison of
ratios may be misleading in that reclaimed land
ultimately may be in a condition similar to unreclaimed
land.

Source:  Paone,  J.,  J.L. Morning, and L. Giorgetti.   Land
           utilization and reclamation in the  mining
           industry, 1930-71.  U.S. Bureau of  Mine
           Information Circular IC8642.  Washington,  U.S.
           Government Printing Office, 1974.
                            81

-------
of waste to marketable product is much lower than in the copper


industry.


     In every state in the Union some land is being used to


dispose of mineral resource solid wastes.  The mineral mining

                                          2
industry has utilized 50,000 acres  (202 Mm ) or more for solid


waste disposal in Pennsylvania, California, West Virginia,


Illinois, Ohio, Kentucky, Arizona, and Minnesota (in decreasing


order).  Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Illinois, Ohio, and


Kentucky are the major coal-producing states; California is the


major producer of sand and gravel and crushed stone; Arizona


leads in the production of copper; and Minnesota leads in the


production of iron ore.


     As a result of current and pending state and Federal


legislation (particularly the Surface Mining and Reclamation Act


of 1977), the ratio of land disturbed per year to land reclaimed


is expected to continually decrease.  In addition,  the quality of


land reclamation efforts is expected to increase because of the


more strict and more specific requirements of mining and


reclamation laws.  The provisions in the Surface Mining Control


and Reclamation Act for rehabilitating abandoned mine lands will


also contribute to a decrease in the amount of land that has been


left disturbed by coal mining operations.



        Characteristics of Mineral Resource Solid Wastes


     The characteristics of mineral resource solid wastes are


described here because they influence such important factors as


(1) the potential environmental and health hazards associated



                                82

-------
with the wastes,  (2) methods of waste disposal and  stabilization,



 (3) the potential for reprocessing the wastes or developing a



byproduct from them.  This can best be illustrated  by analyzing



their physical, chemical, and biological properties.  These



analyses are followed by a description of mine and  beneficiation



solid wastes resulting from these properties.



     Physical Properties.  The physical properties  are color,



weight, and texture.  The most important of these is texture,



which refers to the size, character, arrangement, and mode of



aggregation of the fragments, particles, or crystals that compose



a waste.  Texture determines the physical structure and



appearance of the waste.



     Size (used most frequently as an indicator of  the texture of



a material)  is determined by securing samples of waste, letting



them dry, weighing them, and then using appropriate sieves,



hydrometers, and/or counting devices to sort the material.  If



some of the mineral resource waste particles are too large to



pass through the sieves, a standard rule is used to measure size.



Knowing the total weight in each particle size range makes it



possible to calculate the fractional percentage of each size



range and hence classify the vaste.



     Chemical Properties.  Chemical or mineralogic composition



is one of the most important properties of mine and beneficiation



solid wastes.  It is a function of the presence of organic and



inorganic chemicals and organic matter (detritus, humus,  etc.).



Knowledge of the chemical and mineralogic composition of a waste






                                83

-------
helps to determine  (1) whether the wastes pose a potential threat



to the environment or to human health,  (2) whether the waste will



support vegetative growth,  (3) whether the waste materials can be



used as byproducts.



     Before the chemical and mineralogic characteristics of a



waste can be determined, the elements and chemical compounds it



contains must be determined.  The quantities or concentrations of



the materials contained in a waste are also important because the



manner in which chemical materials express their effects is



strongly influenced by their concentrations.  For example, low



concentrations of some trace elements can cause the waste to be



nonsupportive of vegetative growth, whereas high concentrations



of certain trace elements may act as phytotoxicants.  A further



complicating point is that the chemical constituents of a waste



interact with one another and the ultimate effects of these



materials are influenced by the manner in which they



interact—phosphorus at 40 ppm is beneficial to plant growth when



calcium is high (64 ppm), but it is toxic when calcium is low (8



ppm).10



     It is also important to determine whether the chemical



elements and compounds in the waste are stable.  Stability



determines whether a material is chemically active or inactive



(inert).   Stable materials are basically inert or unavailable,



whereas unstable materials are chemically active or available.



The stability or availability of the chemical elements and



compounds in waste is determined largely by the solubility and






                                84

-------
reaction rates of these materials, which are influenced by pH and



the particle size or surface area of the wastes.



     These interrelationships can be further explained by



analyzing the chemistry of a mineral resource waste that consists



of sulfide-containing materials such as pyrite.  When a material



containing pyrite remains undisturbed in the earth, the pyrite is



relatively stable because the rock is in an oxygen-deficient



environment and because it is in large solid masses and not



intimately exposed to water.  When the material is extracted and



deposited on the land in a waste dump, the pyrite becomes



reactive or unstable because it has been placed in an oxidizing



environment and can come in contact with water.  The pyrite



reacts with oxygen and water, thereby producing an acidic



condition and lowering the pH.  The solubility of some of the



chemical constituents of the waste increases as a result of the



low pH conditions, causing these materials to occur in greater



concentrations in water emanating from the wastes.



     The waste materials in mine waste dumps and tailings



impoundments consist of a large size range of broken, crushed,



and ground particles that have resulted from blasting, extracting,



handling, and processing of large masses of rock.  A decrease in



particle size results in an increase in surface area, which in



turn enhances the reaction rates of the chemical constituents



associated with the wastes.



     As this discussion indicates, the reactivity or availability



of the chemical elements and compounds in a mine waste is a





                                85

-------
function of several interacting factors, such as pH, solubility,



and rate of reaction.



     Another chemical property of interest is the availability of



water soluble salts in mineral resource wastes, such as those of




sodium and calcium.  Because the salt content of a material



directly affects water availability to plants, it is important to



know the salinity of a waste when developing reclamation/



revegetation plans.  Wastes that are highly saline hold water so



tightly  (by increasing the osmotic pressure) that plants cannot



absorb it.  In some heavily saline wastes, the osmotic gradient



can actually be reversed to such an extent that the waste



materials absorb water from the plant, thereby killing it



instantly.  Heavy irrigation prior to revegetation is required to



dissolve and remove salts in order to alleviate this condition.



     The salinity of mineral resource wastes influences other



chemical properties such as alkalinity, particularly if the salts



in the wastes are largely sodium salts.  The percentage of cation



exhange capacity (CEC) attributable to sodium is a measure of its



alkalinity.  When sodium accounts for more than 15 percent of the



total CEC, the waste material is alkaline.  Mining wastes can be



alkaline, saline, or both.   The waste is alkaline when sodium is



excessive; it is saline when the total salts are excessive.



     As this discussion indicates,  chemical characteristics of



mineral resource wastes are a function of several complex



interacting factors such as the kinds and concentrations of



chemical elements and compounds present and how they interact to





                                86

-------
control such properties of the wastes as acidity, alkalinity,

salinity, pH, reactivity, and solubility.  These properties,  in

turn, influence the potential environmental and health hazard

associated with mineral resource wastes because they have a

direct impact on such characteristics as toxicity, radioactivity,

reactivity, corrosiveness, and flammability.

     Biological Properties.  The biological properties of mining

wastes refer to the flora and fauna present.  This parameter  is

rarely measured or discussed because freshly deposited mining

wastes are almost void of flora or fauna, primarily for the

following reasons.  Normal soils contain several chemically and

physically defined layers, which are typically referred to as the

A, B, and C horizons.  The A horizon contains organic matter that

is being decomposed by bacterial and other biological action.

These processes (not fully understood) occur only in the A horizon

or topsoil material and are necessary for vegetative growth.  In

the past, mining operations caused the soil and rock profiles to

be overturned; the soil horizons were buried and rocky overburden

was brought to the surface.  More recently, some state regulations

and the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act have called

for topsoil to be removed separately and returned to the surface
                                                       <
for reclamation.  Tailings disposal areas contain mostly ground

and processed bedrock mixed with some soil; therefore little

organic material and no defined soils are associated with tailings.

     The chemical and physical properties of mineral resource

wastes will change naturally with time,  and eventually fauna and


                                87

-------
flora will reappear.  Because this occurs at an extremely slow

rate, most wastes require some form of amelioration  (particularly

the return of topsoil) before they will support biological

activity.

     Characteristics of Mine Wastes.  Mine wastes  (from both

surface and underground mines) constitute a mixed  lot.  The

properties of both surface and underground wastes  depend on the

origin of the wastes and on such factors as climate, geographic

location, kind of mining activity, and method of disposal.

Because the physical and chemical characteristics  of mine waste

heaps vary considerably from site to site, and because numerous

different mining industries are being addressed, only the most

general statements can be made about them in this  document.  The

biological properties of mine wastes do not vary as much as the

physical and chemical properties because most wastes are

essentially void of biota.

     Mine solid wastes (overburden or underground  waste rock) are

generated by extraction activities.  Surface mining operations,

such as open-pit copper,  iron, and uranium mines,  generally

produce the most waste.   The waste materials associated with

these and other metallic ores consist of glacial till,

unsegregated silts,  clays, sand and gravel, and broken bedrock.

Although the wastes associated with nonmetallic ores are the

same,  they contain less broken bedrock and more glacial tills,

clays,  and sand and gravel.   In the mining of some shallow

nonmetallic ores (e.g.,  sand and gravel,  phosphate, and clay)

very little bedrock is encountered.
                                88

-------
     The rock and soil materials in mine wastes can also vary



greatly in size  (from large boulders to gravel and sand particles)



as a result of variations in ore formations and different mining



techniques.  Generally waste materials associated with metal and



coal mining operations are larger than those associated with



nonmetal mining activities.




     The chemical characteristics of mine wastes are even more



variable than the physical characteristics.  They are a function



of the kinds of soils and host rock being removed in association



with ore extraction  (Table 8).  To understand fully the chemical



characteristics of the waste, factors such as pH, solubility, and



salinity must be considered.



     The mine wastes associated with most nonmetal mining



operations usually do not contain chemical elements or compounds



that pose a serious threat to human health or the environment.



If potentially hazardous elements (such as heavy metals or



radioactive materials) are associated with these wastes, they



are usually inert or chemically stable because of pH and



solubility conditions.  There has been some concern about



hazardous materials being associated with the mine wastes



generated by a few nonmetals mining industries.   For example,



mine wastes from the few existing asbestos mines and one



vermiculite mine located in the West contain asbestos fibers.



Although human exposure to this material is unlikely to occur,



its inhalation is considered dangerous.   Another example is the



overburden associated with central Florida phosphate mines, which





                               89

-------
                                     TABLE 8




             MINERALOGIC AND LITHOLOGIC  SUMMARY OF MINERAL  DEPOSITS*
Commodity
Metals
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Bismuth
Cadmium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Gold
Iron
Lead
Ore
Bauxite
Stibnite
Ar sen ite
Bismuth
Greenockite
Chromite
Cobalt ite
Azurite
Born ite
Chalcocite
Chalcopyrite
Covellite
Enargite
Malachite
Calaverite
Native gold
Sylvanite
Hematite
Siderite
Anglesite
Cerussite
Galena
Rock type(s)
Igneous (residual)
Igneous, sedimentary
Igneous, sedimentary
Igneous, sedimentary
Sedimentary
Igneous, metamorphic
Metamorphic
Igneous, sedimentary
Igneous, sedimentary
Sedimentary, igneous
and metamorphic
Sedimentary, metamorphic
and igneous
Mineral and/or rock
Host rock material of mine waste
Syenite
Quartz veins
Quartz veins
Monzonites,
carbonates
(With zinc
minerals)
Per idotites
Metamorphic
Granitic rocks,
sandstone,
limestone
Quartz, volcanics
Shales, limestone,
sandstones, gneiss
and gabbro
Carbonates, shales,
quartzites, slates
Clays, soil, host rock
Host rock
Host rock
Host rock

?;ost rock
Host rock
Soil, host rock
Host rock
Soil, host rock
Host rock
Constituents of
mine waste
Aluminum, silicates
Quartz, sulfides
Quartz, sulfides
Barite, fluorite,
sulfides, iron oxides

Olivine, corundum

Host rock and minerals
Silica, pyrite
Host rock and sulfides
Barite, fluorite,
sulfides, oxides
(continued)

-------
                               TABLE  8.   (continued)
Commodity
Manganese




Mercury

Molybdenum

Nickel


Platinum

Silver



Strontium
Thorium

Tin
Titanium

Tungsten

Uranium



Ore
Braunite
Manganite
Psilomelane
Pyrolusite
Rhodochrosite
Cinnabar

Molybdenite
Wulfenite
Pentlandite
Garnierite

Native
platinum
Argentite
Cerargyrite
Native Silver
Proustite
Strontianite
Thorianite

Cassiterite
Ilmenite
Rutile
Scheelite
Wolframite
Carnotite
Uraninite
(complex
oxide)
Rock type) s)
Igneous, sedimentary
and metamorphic



Metamorphic, sedimentary

Igneous

Igneous


Igneous

Igneous, sedimentary



Igneous, sedimentary
Igneous, sedimentary

Igneous, sedimentary
Igneous, sedimentary

Igneous, sedimentary

Igneous, sedimentary



Mineral and/or rock Constituents of
Host rock material of mine waste mine waste
Clays, limestone. Most rock, soil
schist



Slate, quartzite. Host rock, soil
limestone
Granite, monzonite Host rock

Quartz, diorite. Host rock
norite, green-
stones
Pyroxenites, Host rock
dunites
Quartz, quartzite. Host rock
volcanics


Marls, dolomite Host rock
Granite, sandstone Host rock

Granite, alluvium Host rock
Syenite, alluvium. Host rock
beach sands
Granite, alluvium Host rock
residium
Granite, phosphate Barren host rock
rock, shales,
sandstones

Impure host rock
minerals



Quartz, opal, pyrite

Fluor ite, sulfides.
iron oxides
Pyrrhotite, silicates,
oxides

Ferromagnesian
silicates
Quartz, barite.
manganese oxides, and
basemetal sulfides

Sulfur, gypsum
Silica, impure host
rock
Granite, quartz
Iron oxides, impure
host rock
Quartz, fluorite.
micas
Impure host rocks.
quartz, carbonates


(continued)

-------
                                     TABLE 8.   (continued)
ro
Commodity
Vanadium
Zinc
Nonmetals
Asbestos
Barium
Bentonite
Borate
Diatomite
Dolomite
Fluorspar
Garnet
Graphite
Gypsum
Ore
Patronite
(complex)
Carnotite
(vanadate)
Roscoelite
(mica)
Sphalerite
Smithsonite
Hemimorphite
Chrysotile
Barite
Montraorillo-
nite
Borax
Opal

Fluorite
Complex
silicates
Carbon
Gypsum
Rock type(s)
Sedimentary
Sedimentary, igneous
Metamorphic
Sedimentary
Igneous
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Metamorphic
Metamorphic
Sedimentary
Mineral and/or rock
Host rock material of mine waste
Shales, limestone,
phosphate rock,
sandstones
Carbonates, gran-
itic rocks,
quartzites, slates
Serpentine
Barbonates, shales
Montmorilloni tic
Evaporites (salts)
Monomeneralic

Calcite, dolomite
Silicates
Schist, gneiss
Shales, clays
Barren host rock
Host rock
Host rock
Clays, soil, host rock
Shale, sandstone, clay
Clays, soil, alluvium,
host rock
Clays, soil, host rock
Host rock and related
types
Common sediments, host
rock
Host rock
Host rock, soil
Host rock, soil
Constituents of
mine waste
Mica, impure host
rare V minerals

rock
Pyrite, fluorite,
barite, impure host
rock
Magnesium, silicates
Calcite, quartz,
fluroite
Impure clay
Impure borates
Clays, sand, etc.

Host rock, barite
Silicates







Host rock, silicates
Anhydrite

            (continued)

-------
                                      TABLE 8.   (continued)
ID
Commodity
Kaolin
Limestone
Magnesium
Nepheline
syenite
Olivine
Pegmatite
Phosphate
Potash
Quartz
Rock salt
Stone
(dimension)
Ore
Kaolinite
Limestone
Carnallite
Nepheline
Forsterite
Fayalite
Beryl
Feldspar
Lithium
minerals
Micas
Quartz
Rare earths
Apatite
Colophonite
Sylvite
Quartz
Halite
Granites
Marbles
Serpentine
Rock type(s)
Igneous (residual and
sedimentary)
Sedimentary
Sedimentary
Igneous
Metamorphic
Igneous, metamorphic
Igneous, sedimentary
Sedimentary (e vapor ites)
Igneous, sedimentary
Sedimentary
Igneous, metamorphic,
sedimentary
Mineral and/or rock
Host rock material of mine waste
Granite (residium)
and common clays

Dolomite
Monomineralic
Dunite
Granite, schist
Phosphorite, quano,
apatites
Shales, clays
Granitic rocks,
alluvium
Common sediments
Granite, marble,
conglomerate,
sandstone
Host rock, soil
Host rock, soil and
related types
Host rock, soil
Host rock, soil
Host rock, soil
Host rock, soil
Host rock, clays, sand,
soil
Host rock
Host rock, clays, soil
Host rocks and related
types
Host rock (impure)
Constituents of
mine waste
Silicates, impure
clays, iron oxides
Impure limestone,
iron oxide
Impure host rock
minerals
Biotite, hornblende
Iron and magnesian
silicates
Host rock, impurities
biotite, hornblende,
iron oxides
Limes, silica, iron
oxides, uranium
oxides, clays
Impure e vapor ites
Iron oxides, calcite
clays
Impure salts,
anhydrite, gypsum
Impure host rock
             (continued)

-------
                                                    TABLE  8.    (continued)
10
Commod i ty
Sulfur
Talc
Mineral Fuels
Coal
Ore
Native sulfur
Pyrite
(Steatite)
(Soapstone -
fine
crystalline)
Anthracite
Bituminous
Lignite
Rock type(s)
Igneous, sedimentary
Metamorphic
Metamorphic
Host rock
Common sediments,
volcanics
Altered limestone,
serpentine,
gneiss, schist,
slate
Shales, limestone
Mineral and/or rock
material of mine waste'
Most rock
Host rock
Host rock, soils, clays
Constituents of
mine waste
Salts, anhydrite,
sulfides, etc.
Silicates
Limestone, shale,
pyr ite
                     * Adopted from Table 3 of Water pollution caused by inactive ore and mineral  mines - a national assessment.



                EPA-600/2-76-298.  Prepared by Toups Corporation.  Santa Ana, California.  Prepared  for Resource Extraction



                and  Handling Division; Industrial  Environmental Research Laboratory; Cincinnati, Ohio.  December 1976.

-------
contains some radioactive constituents.  These radioactive



materials do not pose a serious threat to ground and surface



waters because they are not soluble at mine water pH, but they



can be carried into the atmosphere via fugitive dust.  These



materials are placed at the toe of overburden piles and



subsequently buried as a precaution against this occurrence.



     The chemical characterisitcs of mine wastes associated with




coal and metals mining are more complex and pose a more serious



threat to the environment than those generated by the nonmetals



mining industries.  Mine wastes from eastern coal mines commonly



contain unstable sulfide minerals (e.g., pyrite and marcasite),



and the leachate produced by these minerals upon interaction with



water is acidic in nature.  In contrast, wastes from western coal



mines, which ordinarily do not contain pyrite, tend to be



alkaline, have a high pH, and contain a different variety of



dissolved materials (primarily salts).  Although the concentrations



of the salts vary, they are usually sufficient to present a



problem.  The overburden and waste rock removed during the mining



of some metallic ores (e.g., copper, lead,  and zinc) in the West



also contain pyrite; hence where oxygen and water are available



together, these wastes produce acid water similar to that



produced by eastern coal mine wastes.   Because these wastes also



contain heavy metals,  the acid leachate formed contains dissolved



metals that are hazardous to the environment.   In the Central



Rocky Mountains, copper, zinc, and arsenic  are almost always



associated with mine drainage.





                               95

-------
     Most mineral resource solid wastes are void of flora and



fauna because they generally contain little organic matter and



few nutrients, have no defined soil layers, retain little



moisture, and sometimes contain toxic elements.  Natural



amelioration of the waste materials does occur and some biota



will reappear, but this is an extremely slow process.



     In general, the characteristics of mine solid wastes




associated with inactive mine sites are similar to those



associated with wastes at active sites.  With time, physical and



chemical weathering decreases the particle size of the waste



materials, wastes that were chemically stable when deposited



remain stable, and those that were unstable become more stable.



Because natural amelioration of some wastes occurs, biota will



have reappeared in some cases; however, in other cases wastes




will still be almost completely void of biological activity as a



result of extremely adverse chemical and physical conditions.



     Characteristics of Beneficiation Solid Wastes.  The physical



and chemical characteristics of tailings are largely a function



of the kinds and amounts of impurities associated with the ore,



the mineral processing techniques used, and the degree of



difficulty in separating the ore from the rock.  Tailings consist



essentially of finely crushed rock; therefore the mineralogical



composition generally corresponds to that of the host rock from



which the ore was derived (Table 8).



     Tailings normally contain various mixtures of quartz,



feldspars, carbonates, oxides, ferromagnesian minerals, and minor





                                96

-------
                          12
amounts of other minerals.    They also contain traces of the



reagents that are added during beneficiation.  The physical and



chemical characteristics of tailings vary even more than those of



mine wastes.  The biological characteristics do not vary because



unrestored tailings are almost always void of biological activity,



     Tailings are usually the major solid waste of concern from



an environmental and health effects standpoint.  For ease of



presentation, the physical and chemical characteristics of



tailings are discussed on an industry basis.  Because all the



many industries cannot be discussed, certain ones were selected



on the basis of the volume of tailings they generate and/or the



importance of the materials contained in them.



     Copper Tailings.  Copper tailings consist of sand, silt,



and clay-sized particles.  Clay minerals normally are absent.



Virtually all of the tailings are soil-sized particles, ranging

                    4
from 10 to 270 mesh.   Some -270-mesh particles are found in



copper tailings but their quantity is, small.  One operator



reports copper tailings containing approximately 45 percent



solids by weight, and particle size distribution ranging from

                                                  4
about 15 percent +65 mesh to 55 percent -200 mesh.   Copper



tailings generally consist of hard angular particles.   According



to Volpe, most copper tailings are nonplastic, their specific



gravity values range from 2.64 to 2.78, and they exhibit


                              12
uniformly high shear strength.



     Although the chemical composition of copper tailings varies



with location, most are basically a siliceous material with trace
                                97

-------
amounts of copper and other heavy metals.  Age is a major



contributing  factor to their variation.  For example, most



freshly deposited copper tailings are alkaline; however, aging



and weathering processes produce a sharp decline in pH, probably



because of the biochemical oxidation of pyrite with the subsequent



formation of  sulfuric acid.  Concentrations of soluble salts,



which can be  quite high in some tailings, are also affected by



time.  Rainwater dissolves the salts, and if the tailings are



adequately permeable, natural weathering processes will




substantially reduce their concentration in most copper tailings.



     Taconite and Iron Ore Tailings.  Taconite tailings are



nearly 100 percent soil-sized particles (mostly sand and silt;



little clay).   Particle diameter ranges between 0.02 and 5 mm,



and fragments are generally sharp and angular.  Chemically,



taconite tailings are predominantly siliceous and rich in iron,



but low in alkali.  Nonetheless, these tailings are generally



alkaline.    Recently, controversy has arisen in Minnesota over



the presence of asbestos-like fibrous particles in taconite



tailings.   These fibers are reported to be present only in



taconite ores from the eastern portion of the Mesabi range.



     The beneficiation of high-grade iron ores produces both



coarse and fine tailings.   In Minnesota, these tailings are



usually separated on a 1/4-in.  (6.35-mm) screen.   They vary in



mineral character and generally contain enough residual iron to



be black in color.  They are considerably less siliceous than the



taconite tailings and contain higher percentages of iron.   The
                                98

-------
tailings generated by the beneficiation of high-grade  ores  in



Minnesota show an iron content of as high as  25  to  35  percent.



     Lead-Zinc Tailings.  Lead and  zinc, recovered  primarily from



sulfide-bearing ore minerals, are normally found as coproducts  in



dolomitic or limestone parent rocks.  Tailings are  separated from



lead-zinc ores by grinding and flotation.  The tailings  that once



were generated by jigging and tabling were coarser  than  those



produced by flotation.  Most jig tailings have been recovered and



reground for secondary recovery by  flotation; however, some jig



tailings are still scattered around mountain  valleys in  the West.



     Tailings from lead-zinc operations are separated  into coarse



and fine fractions.  Lead-zinc tailings generated by operations



in northwest Illinois consist of -9/16-in. (-14.2-mm)  washed


                                            14
dolomite gravel and -48 mesh flotation sand.      Lead-zinc



operations in Tennessee also separate tailings into a  coarse



[1-3/4-in. (45.4-mm) to 1/4-in. (6.35-mm)] and fine (-20 mesh)



fraction.  At mining operations in  some states (e.g.,  Missouri,



Pennsylvania, Colorado, Idaho, and Washington),  tailings are



separated when sandfilling is utilized.  The  coarse fraction is



placed back in the mine and the slimes are sent  to  the tailings



pond.



     It is difficult to generalize about the  chemical  composition



of lead-zinc tailings because it varies with  geology.  Emery and



Kim report that the tailings at a Gilman,  Colorado, operation



contain from 65 to 75 percent pyrite (which would render this



material acidic in nature).    The tailings produced at a Boss,
                                99

-------
Missouri, operation on the other hand, are composed essentially


of calcium and magnesium oxides.  Leachate from some lead-zinc


tailings piles contains lead and zinc as well as such metals as

                                             4
copper, iron, nickel, selenium, and antimony.


     Uranium Tailings.  Uranium tailings normally occur as fine


to medium sands.  When upstream construction is utilized, the


coarser sand materials settle first and the lighter slimes last


as the tailings are discharged to the impoundment.  At one


uranium beneficiating operation, the size distribution of the


sand portion of the tailings (which is about 70 percent of the


solids) was reported to be 3 percent +28 mesh, 40 percent +65


mesh, 70 percent +100 mesh, and 100 percent +200 mesh.    Most


of the sand portion is deposited along the outer rim of the


disposal areas.  The size distribution of the slimes portion


(about 30 percent of the solids) is  33 percent -200 mesh to +325


mesh and 67 percent -325 mesh.   This material is deposited near


the rear of the ponds and around the decant points.  Uranium mill


tailings are too coarse to prevent seepage, regardless of


separation techniques.  Consequently, the Nuclear Regulatory


Commission requires that the ponds be lined prior to licensing.


     The main chemical constituents of concern in uranium


tailings are the radioactive materials (radium, uranium oxides,


thorium, and radon gas).  The 30 percent slimes contain about 80


percent of the radiation values, whereas the 70 percent coarse


sand contains only 30 percent.     Wind erosion of uranium


tailings is of particular concern because of the radioactive



                                100

-------
materials associated with them.  Havens and Dean report that




exposures above the radiation protection guide value of 0.05



rem/year can be absorbed downwind of uranium tailings.




     Gold Tailings.  At one mining operation gold tailings are



reported to be fine, sharp-edged, jagged particles, which are




very abrasive.  The size distribution is reported to be:








               Sieve size, mesh    Passing, percent




                     80                  99.0



                    100                  97.6




                    150                  94.6



                    200                  90.3



                    270                  82.4



                    325                  72.1








The chemical composition of the tailings was reported to be:



                    Si(X                 52.8 percent



                    Al«03                 1.6 percent



                    FeO                  34.0 percent



                    MgO                   8.2 percent



                    MnO                   0.5 percent



                    CaO                   1.0 percent



                    Na 0                  0.5 percent








     Some gold beneficiation operations use sodium cyanide as a



processing reagent, and some of this material ends up in the
                                101

-------
tailings.  The discharge of cyanide is regulated by the NPDES


permit system, but seepage, which could contain some of this


material, is unregulated.


     Molybdenum.  The Climax Molybdenum Company has recorded the


grain size distribution of molybdenum tailings for their Urad,


Climax, and Henderson mines (Table 9).  The size of the particles

                               4
ranges between 14 and 400 mesh.   The chemical and mineralogical


compositions of the tailings generated at the Henderson and


Climax operations are as follows:


     Henderson Mine                          Climax Mine


                           (percentages)
Quartz


Aluminum Oxide


Ferric Oxide


Ferrous Oxide


Magnesium Oxide


Calcium Oxide


Sodium Oxide


Potassium Oxide
75 - 80


 7-12


 0.2 - 3


    -V 1


  ^ 0.1


0.12 - 1


 0.5 - 4


   4-8
                                        Plagioclase


                                        Mica


                                        Pyrite


                                        Clay minerals


                                        Fluorite


                                        Limonite


                                        Calcite


                                        Magnetite


                                        Topaz


                                        Rutile


The presence of iron pyrite in the tailings produced at the


Climax operation makes the tailings somewhat acidic.
Quartz           35 - 45


Alkali feldspar  18 - 23


                 13 - 17


                  4-6


                  4-6


                  4-6


                  2-4


                  1-3


                  1-3


                0.5 - 1.5


                0.5 - 1.5


                0.5 - 1.5
                                102

-------
                            TABLE 9

        GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF MOLYBDENUM TAILINGS AT
              THE CLIMAX MOLYBDENUM COMPANY MINES*
                    (percent fines by weight)
Sieve
size Henderson
(mesh) Mine
14
20
28
35 97
48 90
65 76
100 65
150 54
200 35
270§
325§
400§
Climax
Mine
99.8
99.5
98.5
95.8
89.5
81.1
70.7
60.3
50.0
44.2
41.5
35.5
Urad
Minet




88
78
66
55
48
42
38
35
     * Offices of Research and Development.  Availability of

mining wastes and their potential for use as highway material,

v. 1, 2, and 3.  Federal Administrative Report No. FHWA-RD-76 106,

Washington, 1976.

     t The Urad Mine has been recently closed.

     § U.S. Sieve series number.
                              103

-------
     Phosphate.  The beneficiation wastes associated with



phosphate ore processing consist of two separate  fractions:   sand



tailings and waste fines  (or slimes).  Sand tailings particles



range from 16 to 150 mesh, which is in the range  of a fine to


            4

medium sand.   They are composed of 90 percent quartz sand,  8



percent carbonate fluorapatite, and 2 percent feldspar and heavy



minerals.



     Grain size distribution of phosphate slimes, which are



essentially colloidal clay particles, varies by location because



of differences in the nature of the matrix being  mined and in



beneficiation methods.  A typical slime particle  is -0.003 in.



(-0.1 mm) in diameter, and more than 70 percent of the particles


                   4

are less than 1 ym.   The slimes are usually 2 to 6 percent



solids when slurried to an impoundment.  Because  of their



colloidal particle size, the settling rate of slimes is very



slow; solids contents are often no more than 20 percent after


                  18
years of settling.



     These clay-like waste slimes contain a substantial amount of



phosphate mineral.   Analysis of phosphate slimes  in central



Florida shows them to be composed primarily of carbonate



fluorapatite,  montmorillonite,  and quartz, with lesser amounts of


                                     18
kaolinite,  attapulgite,  and feldspar.



     Coal Tailings.   Coal tailings (commonly called refuse in the



industry)  are those wastes generated by coal cleaning or



preparation.   These tailings are typically classified as coarse


                                                       4

or fine;  the dividing point is usually the No.  4 sieve.





                               104

-------
Coarse tailings normally comprise about 70 to 80 percent by


weight of the total tailings.  The remaining 20 to 30 percent  (a


silt or slurry) is removed during washing and pumped to an


impoundment or slurry pond.


     Coarse tailings associated with the preparation of anthracite


and bituminous coals are similar in appearance.  They are a dark


gray and are composed largely of slate or shale particles


intermixed with some coal and varying amounts of pyrite.  Some


bituminous tailings also contain grayish rock, which, when


disposed of, will weather and decompose into silt or soil-size

                                      4
particles within a few days to a week.   The percentage of


carbonaceous material is normally rather high in older refuse


banks because efficient cleaning or preparation plants were not


available in the past.  Because these high concentrations of


carbonaceous material (coupled with poor disposal practices)  have


resulted in numerous fires, some of these banks contain some


reddish-colored incinerated material called "red dog."


     Anthracite and bituminous tailings are markedly similar in


appearance.   Coarse refuse varies widely in size, consisting of a


mixture of rock, flat shale or slate particles, some coal, and


varying amounts of pyrite.   Anthracite and bituminous coal waste


slurry (fines)  are somewhat similar in size and appearance to


the fine beneficiation tailings for other minerals previously


described.


     Several investigations have been made to ascertain the


physical properties of coarse and fine coal tailings.  Some of
                               105

-------
the more recent studies, by the U.S. Bureau of Mines Spokane



Mining Research Center and Michael Baker, Jr., Inc., show that



coarse coal tailings are well graded, and nearly all particles



are less than 4 in.  (101.6 mm) .   '   '    These studies also



indicate that fine tailings are more uniform in gradation than



coarse tailings.



     Results of other laboratory  tests to determine other



physical factors, such as specific gravity, permeability, and



shear strength, indicate that the density, permeability, and



shear strength of coarse coal tailings are fairly uniform after



the tailings are compacted to their maximum dry density and that


                                            19 20 21
they are quite stable if properly compacted.  '  '    The same



physical properties and field moisture conditions of coal slurry



combine to make deposits of this material unstable with very



little strength-carrying capability.



     Chemical characteristics of coal tailings vary according to



the mineralogy of the deposit, the efficiency of the preparation



plant,  and the method of disposal.  Most coal tailings in the



eastern United States contain some pyrite and marcasite, and the



leachate from these minerals is acidic in nature.   Pennsylvania



State University recently investigated a number of anthracite



tailings disposal sites and determined that the pyrite content foj



all materials tested ranged between 3.0 to 4.4 percent pyrite.



     Results of U.S.  Bureau of Mines tests of coarse coal



tailings indicate that the predominant components of the waste


                                           18
are iron,  magnesium,  potassium,  and sodium.    The Bureau's tests





                               106

-------
of fine tailings indicate that they contain 60 percent silica
(SiO_), 25 percent alumina  (Al 0,), and 7 percent iron oxide
(Fe203).18
     Beneficiation Wastes at Inactive Mine Sites.  As at active
sites, the characteristics of tailings associated with inactive
mine sites vary as a function of  (1) mineralogy of the deposit
that was mined, (2) beneficiation method, (3) disposal method.
Because the mineralogy of the deposit mined has the greatest
influence, copper tailings at an abandoned site would exhibit
some similar physical and chemical properties to those at an
active site.  Tailings at inactive sites sometimes contain higher
concentrations of chemical materials (e.g.,  heavy metals,
sulfates)  because former beneficiation methods were less
efficient.  Generally, most tailings that are chemically stable
when deposited remain stable, and those that are unstable slowly
stabilize with time.  Some tailings, however, do become more
unstable with time, as chemical and physical weathering and
biochemical reactions expose additional materials and make them
available to react chemically.
                               107

-------
                   REFERENCES FOR SECTION 3


1.  Office of Solid Waste Management Programs.  A comprehensive
      assessment of solid waste problems, practices and needs.
      Prepared by AD Hoc Group for Office of Science and
      Technology, Executive Office of the President, Washington,
      May 1969.

2.  Dean, K.C., and R. Havens.  Methods and Costs for Stabilizing
      Tailings Ponds.  Presented at the American Mining
      Congress Mining Convention/Environment Show, Denver,
      Colorado, September 9-12, 1973.

3.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Development document
      for interim final and proposed effluent limitations
      guidelines and New Source Performance Standards for the
      mineral mining and processing industry, point source
      category.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Publication
      440/l-76/059a, Group II.  Washington, U.S. Government
      Printing Office, 1976.

4.  Collins, R.J., and R.H. Miller.  Availability of mining
      wastes and their potential use as highway material -
      v. 1 - Classification and technical environmental analysis,
      prepared for Federal Highway Administrator, Offices of
      Research and Development.  Report No. FHWA-RD-76 106 by
      Valley Forge Laboratories, May 1976.

5.  Donovan, R.P., R.M. Felder, and H.H. Rogers.  Vegetative
      stabilization of mineral waste heaps.  EPA-600/2-76-087,
      Research Triangle Institute for Industrial Environmental
      Research Laboratory, Office of Energy, Minerals, and
      Industry, Environmental Protection Agency, Research
      Triangle Park, North Carolina, April 1976.

6.  Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration.  Mine refuse
      impoundments in the United States.  MESA Informational
      Report 1028.  January 1977.

7.  Office of Assistant Director - Mining.  Bureau of Mines.
      U.S. Department of the Interior.   Evaluation of mill tailing
      disposal practices and potential  dam stability problems
      in southwestern United States.  General Report, v. 1.
      Report No.  BuMines OFR 50(1)-75.   Washington,  D.C. 1974.

8.  Office of Research and Development.   Water pollution caused
      by inactive ore and mineral mines, a national  assessment.
      U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Publication
      600/2-76-298.   Washington, U.S. Government Printing
      Office, 1976.
                             108

-------
 9.  Paone, J., J.L. Morning, and L. Giorgetti.  Land utilization
       and reclamation in the mining industry, 1930-71.  U.S.
       Bureau of Mines Information Circular IC8642.  Washington,
       U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974.

10.  Treshow, M.  Environment and plant response.  McGraw Hill
       Book Co., New York, 1970.

11.  Office of Air and Water Programs.  Methods for identifying
       and evaluating the nature and extent of nonpoint sources
       of pollutants.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
       Publication 430/9-73-014.  Washington, U.S. Government
       Printing Office, October 1973.

12.  Volpe, R.L.  Geotechnical Engineering Aspects of Copper
       Tailings Dams.  Presented at the American Society of
       Civil Engineers National Convention, Denver, Colorado,
       November 3-7, 1975.

13.  Dean, K.C.  Utilization of Mine, Mill, and Smelter Wastes.
       Proceedings;  First Mineral Waste Utilization Symposium:
       Chicago, Illinois, March 27-28, 1968.

14.  Drake, H.J. and J.E. Shelton.  Disposal of Iron and Steel
       Slag.  Proceedings; Fourth Mineral Waste Utilization
       Symposium.   Chicago, Illinois, May 4-8, 1974.

15.  Emery, J.J.,  C.S. Kim, and R.P. Cotsworth.  Base
       stabilization using palletized blast furnace slag.
       American Society for Testing and Materials, Journal of
       Testing and Evaluation, vol. 4, No. 1, January, 1976.

16.  Personal Communication.   Robert G. Beverly,  Dirctor of
       Environmental Control, Union Carbide, to Jack Greber,
       PEDCo.  February 8, 1978.

17.  Havens, R. and K.C.  Dean.  Chemical stabilization of uranium
       tailings at Tuba City, Arizona.  U.S. Department of the
       Interior, Bureau of Mines,  1969.

18.  U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines.  The Florida
       phosphate slimes problem:  a review and bibliography.
       U.S. Bureau of Mines Staff, Washington.  Information
       Circular No.  8527, 1971.

19.  Busch, R.A.,  R.R. Backer, and L.A. Atkins.  Physical property
       on coal waste embankment materials.  U.S.  Department of
       the Interior, Bureau of Mines, Report of Investigations
       No. 7964, 1974.
                               109

-------
20.  Busch, R.A., R.R. Backer, L.A. Atkins, and C.D. Kealy.
       Physical property data on fine coal refuse.  U.S.
       Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines, Report of
       Investigations No. 8062, 1975.

21.  Baker, M., Jr., Inc.  Investigation of mining-related
       pollution reduction activities and economic incentives in
       the Monongahela River- Basin.  Report to the Appalachian
       Regional Commission, April 1975.

22.  Luckie, P.T., J.W. Peters, and T.S. Spicer.  The evaluation
       of anthracite refuse as a highway construction material.
       Pennsylvania State University, Special Research Report
       No. SR-57, July 30, 1966.
                              110

-------
                            SECTION 4

        RECLAMATION—DISPOSAL, STABILIZATION, AND CONTROL


     With a few exceptions, technology is well established for

disposal of the over 2 billion tons (1.8 Pg) of mineral resource

solid wastes generated annually.  It is also well established for

the stabilization of these wastes to protect the public and for

the control of air and water-pollutants.   Overburden generated

by surface mining and waste rock generated by underground mining

are usually placed in waste piles or backfilled into areas

previously excavated during the mining operation.  Tailings

generated by beneficiation operations (at both surface and

underground mines) are usually disposed of in tailings ponds.

Techniques are available to control seepage from and leaching of

these deposits.  Because the extent to which these proven
          /
technologies are applied varies considerably by geographic

location and type of mining industry,  there are areas where the

control measures now being used are insufficient to protect human

health and the environment.  This particularly applies to

abandoned mine sites.

     A variety of proven technologies are available for providing

structural stability for tailings dams and overburden/waste rock

piles; for preventing the evolution of excessive fugitive dust

from tailings pond slopes, inactive tailings, and overburden/


                               111

-------
waste  rock piles;  for preventing both  surface and groundwater


pollution from  tailings ponds and overburden/waste rock piles;


and  for ultimately creating a reclaimed area that is functionally

                               2
and  aesthetically  satisfactory.


     Currently  viable disposal, stabilization, and control


methods are described and discussed in the following pages


according to type  of solid waste  (Table 10).


                 Site Selection and Mine Design


     Although this section deals primarily with reclamation of


land at active  and abandoned mine sites, it also covers measures


that can be taken  prior to developing new mining areas to ensure


minimal adverse environmental impact.  Planning and design can


transform a potentially unsuitable area into a safe site for

                     2
solid waste disposal.   Careful site selection can minimize the


engineering costs of transforming an unsuitable site into a


usable one.


     Initial feasibility investigations of a mining and/or

                                                       \
beneficiating facility must consider the fate of the solid waste


that will be generated.   In the past the primary concern was to


locate one or more areas of acceptable size near the production


site.  Recently, however,  new variables such as environmental


regulations and greater concern for public safety have been


introduced into the site selection process.  These variables are


intended (1)  to protect groundwater from degradation by leachates


emanating from and passing through overburden and waste rock


piles and tailings, (2)  to protect surface water from silt loads
                               112

-------
                                                                     TABLE  10
                            METHODS  EMPLOYED FOR THE  DISPOSAL,  STABILIZATION,  AND  CONTROL
                             OF  SOLID  WASTES GENERATED  BY MINING/BENEFICIATING  OPERATIONS
           Type of solid waste
     Disposal  method
     Stabilization/control method
           Overburden (surface mining) and
           waste rock (underground mining)
U>
            Tailings from the mills of both
            underground and surface mines
            (continued)
Stockpiles  adjacent  to  surface and under-
ground mines and  on  the outside slopes of
open pit mines.
Backfilling of  previously  excavated areas
adjacent to the active  overburden removal
at surface  mines (block-cut/box-cut mining
method). Backfilling of underground mines
with waste  rock.
Utilization as construction material  (e.g.,
tailings dam or embankments, highway  con-
struction) .

Tailings pond.
Maintenance  of an angle of repose to prevent
landsliding  and/or excessive slope erosion.

Employment of  physical (e.g.,  contouring inter-
ceptor ditches, windbreaks, watering),  chemical
(wetting and crusting agents),  and vegetative
surface stabilization techniques to control
surface water  and fugitive dust pollution.

If pyrite is present in the overburden, separ-
ation and isolation of the overburden in order
to prevent the emission of the associated
hazardous wastes (heavy metals and the corro-
siveness associated with the acid water
produced).

Employment of  physical (windbreaks and water-
ing) , chemical (wetting and crushing agents),
and vegetative surface stabilization technique*
to control surface water and fugitive dust
pollution at surface mines.  Not generally
applicable to  open pit. copper mining.

Nothing additional required at underground
mines.

Minimal stabilization/control required, except
for suppression of fugitive dust during trans-
fer and handling.

For new facilities, conduction of preliminary
site evaluations for ultimate selection of a
location with  the least adverse  impact on the
environment (if practical, a site with an
impervious material base or with an underlying
aquifer sufficiently depressed to prevent
groundwater contamination, and one which is
removed from accumulation  of surface water
runoff).

Construction of the tailings dam and embank-
ments by prescribed engineering design
practices to ensure structural stability.

If  the material under  a tailings pond  has a
saturated hydraulic conductivity greater than
Id"' cm/s, sc.ilinn rlio hot torn aru! inner slopes
of  the pond to prevent contamination is nect-;s-
:;aiy  if  the pond contains  hazaitlous wastes such
.is  pyrite-rich tailings.

-------
                                   TABLE 10.    (continued)
Type of  solid waste
                                       Disposal method
                                                                                   Stabilization/control method
                                  Backfilling  underground mines (either by
                                  sluicing  or  truck hauling)
Elimination or minimizing of tailings  pond dis-
charge to surface streams through  (1)  recycle
of water for sluicing at mill,  (2)  maintaining
sufficient freeboard on dam, (3)  maximizing
pond surface area (through site selection) to
maximize evapotranspiration.

Where elimination of tailings pond  discharge to
surface streams is impractical, treatment of
tailings pond to produce an effluent which
meets pertinent water quality standards  (e.g.,
addition of lime to aid solids settling  and
adjust pH, provision of sufficient  retention
time and length-to-depth ratio to allow  the re-
quired solids settling time).

Employment of physical (windbreaks,  intercep-
tor ditches and watering), chemical  (wetting
and crusting agents), and vegetative surface
stabilization techniques on tailings dam and
embankment slopes and on dry, inactive areas
of tailings ponds to prevent surface water and
fugitive dust pollution.

Ensure that potential hazardous tailings sluice
water does not make contact with an Infiltra-
tion gallery to a subterranean aquifer.

when dry tailings (such as coal gob piles) are
used to backfill underground mines,  suppression
of fugitive dust from transfer and  handling of
the material.
       (continued)

-------
                                               TABLE  10.     (continued)
            Type of solid waste
                                       Disposal  method
                                                                                               Stabilization/control method
Ul
Miscellaneous  wastes.   Includes
mine site development wastes
(e.g., drilling muds, scalped
vegetation), construction debris,
and domestic garbage from food
consumed on site.
                                              Utilization as  construction material (e.g.,
                                              tailings clam or embankments, mining haul
                                              roads,  aggregate for  asphalt paving mate-
                                              rial and concrete  for highway and building
                                              construction) and  as  agricultural additive
                                              as a fertilizer filler or supplement.

                                              Combination with overburden, waste rock,
                                              and/or  tailings.
                                              Separate disposal  in  sanitary landfill on
                                              or off site.
                                              Lake/marine disposal
                                                                              Minimal  stabilization/control required, except
                                                                              for suppression of fugitive dust during trans-
                                                                              fer and  handling.
Minimal stabilization/control methods  required
in addition to those prescribed above.
                                                                              Periodic coverage of garbage with inert mate-
                                                                              rial not subject to emission of fugitive emis-
                                                                              sions (similar to prescribed sanitary  landfill
                                                                              methodology) .

                                                                              Very little can be done prior to or after dis-
                                                                              charge of the tailings to the lake or  marine
                                                                              environment.   Isolation of the  lake from dis-
                                                                              charge to surface streams is possible, but not
                                                                              often practiced.

-------
and dissolved solid loads generated by erosion and corrosion of

these wastes, (3) to prevent these wastes from generating

fugitive dust,  (4) to protect human life from catastrophic

failure of tailings dams, etc. caused by floods or seismic

events.

     To guarantee such protection, other variables, including

topography, hydrogeologic environment, availability of appropriate

construction materials, hydrology, seismic conditions, direction

and velocity of prevailing winds, and frequency and intensity of

precipitation (atmospheric conditions), must also be considered.

Proper evaluation of so many variables requires an

interdisciplinary approach to the selection of disposal sites for

large volumes of mineral resource solid wastes, even though the

evaluation of all the variables is not required for some wastes.

Modern legal and social constraints make it impossible for a

single engineer or geologist to accomplish the site selection in

a manner that precludes unanticipated postconstruction expenditures
                        2
for corrective measures.

     The following are some of the guidelines to be considered

where applicable:

     Topography.

     0    Roads in disposal areas should be fitted to the
          topography to keep alterations of natural conditions at
          a minimum.

     0    To the extent feasible, overburden and waste rock piles
          should be designed to blend with the natural topography.

     0    Alteration of topography should be designed to divert
          all drainage away from waste piles and tailings ponds.
                               116

-------
     Hydrogeology.  It may be necessary to employ bore holes and

geophysical methods to determine the following:

     0    Location and depth of bedrock, unconsolidated materials,
          and groundwater flow system.

     0    Grain size distribution, permeability, and engineering
          properties of the unconsolidated materials  (so that
          potential settlement, leakage, and other failure
          problems can be anticipated and corrective measures
          incorporated into the design of the disposal facility).

     0    Groundwater flow system characteristics and background
          water quality.

Faults and landslides should be identified so that failure-prone

areas can be avoided if accidental release of the material to be

discarded constitutes a hazard to health or to the environment

(e.g., location of a tailings dam over a fault area can be

avoided).

     Construction Materials for Tailings Ponds.

     0    Exploration should include pitting, trenching, and
          drilling to determine the location, characteristics,
          and quantities of potential materials of construction
          (including mine rock and naturally occurring materials).

     0    Materials for the tailings pond embankment should be
          selected critically to ensure that the coarsest,
          strongest, least compressible, and most permeable
          material available is used for maximum stability and
          controlled seepage.^

     0    Slimes should be placed as far away from the outer
          embankment as possible.

Failure to follow these guidelines concerning construction

materials could result in a catastrophic failure such as the

recent collapse of a tailings dam at Buffalo Creek, West Virginia.
                               117

-------
     Hydrology.  Data on water quality and quantity  should be

acquired.  Precipitation, runoff, and stream-flow data are used

to determine the following:

     0    Amount of freeboard that must be maintained on the dam
          if the tailings pond is located in a draw.

     0    Size of diversion system required to handle peak flows
          if they are so great that the dam must be  bypassed or
          if the quality of the water behind the dam is so poor
          that it cannot be allowed to enter a stream.

     0    Design of the dam's spillway.

     0    Design of the dam itself, especially if the waste is
          placed in a draw, a gently sloping sidehill, a
          horizontal plateau, or a large valley bottom.

     Meteorological Conditions.  Data should be acquired to allow

for the following:

     0    Proper design of erosion measures such as  slope angle.

     0    Revegetation program planning.

Wind direction and velocity data should also be acquired so as to

avoid sites that are upwind from the prevailing wind direction of

towns,  recreational areas, and farm lands when the waste piles

are expected to generate considerable amounts of fugitive dust

despite conscientious application of dust-suppression techniques.

             Disposal of Overburden and Waste Rock

     It is estimated that 90 percent of the overburden and waste

rock (soil,  sand, clay,  shale, gravel,  boulders, and other

unconsolidated materials)  removed to gain access to  an ore body
                                                          4
is disposed of in stockpiles near or adjacent to the mine.

Overburden from open pit mines is usually discarded on the

outside slopes of the pit.  For many years overburden and waste

                               118

-------
rock have been disposed of  (in unique  situations)  by  immediately



backfilling previously excavated areas (stopes  in  underground



mines) as part of the normal mining process, particularly  in the



lead and zinc mines in Idaho; in most.underground  mining operations,



however, backfilling is not considered an acceptable  practice.



     Some overburden and waste rock are used as byproducts



(primarily construction materials), but the amount is miniscule



(less than 1 percent).



     Stockpiling.  The 1.5 billion tons (1.4 Pg) of overburden



and waste rock stockpiled annually (Table 7) may create adverse



environmental impact in terms of surface and groundwater



pollution, air pollution from fugitive dust emissions, and



aesthetics.  This amount includes nearly 100 percent  of the



wastes from open pit copper mining operations [689 million tons



(625 Gg)] and about 93 percent of the  wastes from  uranium


       5 6
mining. '   The overburden can be placed immediately  adjacent to



the excavated area (which was the practice on the  downhill slopes



of eastern coal contour strip mines such as those  in West



Virginia, Kentucky, and eastern Ohio ); hauled by  truck or



conveyor to fill in the head of a hollow or saddle in the  ridge



line of mountainous terrain (a common  practice in  the lead, zinc,



silver, and uranium surface mining areas of Washington and

     o

Idaho ); or deposited on the outside slopes of open pit copper



mines in the Southwest.



     Regardless of where they are located and the  surrounding



conditions, nearly all wastes require  some kind of stabilization.




                               119

-------
Wastes disposed of in areas where the relatively gentle slopes


will naturally support native vegetation are the rare exceptions.


     Backfilling.  Disposal of overburden from surface mines by


backfilling occurs primarily when mining methods involve


placement of overburden into an adjacent previously excavated


area.  These mining methods include the following:


     Modified Block-Cut or Pit Storage Mining (Figure 16).  This


method was developed as an alternative to standard contour strip


mining methods for recovering coal; it facilitates contour


regrading, minimizes overburden handling, and contains overburden


within the mined areas.  Only the material from the first box-cut


is deposited in adjacent low areas  (such as a saddle in the ridge


line) or at the head of a hollow.  Thus far, experience with this


method has been limited to terrain slopes of less than 20 degrees


and average highwall heights of 60 ft (18 m); however, this


technique has proven to be feasible in steeper terrain.  Because


the amount of open highwall needed for auger mining is limited,

                                                    g
it could hinder auger recovery of highwall reserves.


     This mining method appears to be no more expensive than any


other method where contour regrading is required, and it could


prove to be less expensive.


     Box-Cut Mining Employing Two Cuts.   The box-cut method using


two cuts (Figure 17)  is a refinement of the contour mining


procedure.  Initially,  vegetation is removed and suitable topsoil


overburden is stockpiled.   The remaining overburden is removed to


a predetermined elevation.   The box-cut operation then begins



                               120

-------
             CUT 1
           HIGHWALL—
            HILL


        DIAGRAM A
                        VALLEY
        CZD SPOIL BANK
        CZJ SPOIL BACKFILL
        ^" OUTCROP BARRIER

               CUT 2

                CUT 1^-
             HIGHWALL—•


               HILL
        DIAGRAM B
                                                   VALLEY
             CUT 2

             CUT 1
            HIGHWALL


             CUT 3
           HILL
        DIAGRAM C
VALLEY
   HILL
DIAGRAM D
               CUT 3
VALLEY
                         VALLEY
         HILL
                                 DIAGRAM F
                                        CUT 5
                                                   VALLEY
Figure  16.  This diagram  shows a modified block cut.

Source:   Skelly  and Loy.   Processes,  procedures, and methods
            to  control pollution from  mining  activities.
            Environmental  Protection Agency Document
            430/9-73-011,  prepared  under Contract No.
            68-01-1830, U.S.  Environmental Protection
            Agency,  Office of Water Program Operations,
            Washington, 1973.
                              121

-------
  •DIVERSION  DITCH


          HIGHWALL
   MINERAL SEAM
                    ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE
                            FIRST STEP
                                                                TOE  OF

                                                                FILL
  -DIVERSION DITCH
    •HIGHWALL
   /;•'••'A   SPOIL FROM
 /. - " • ; 7'.~S  FIRST PIT
/ .".   i> ' •-- •
                  Xj. '  • , 1° • ." a • -" « ''"' '
   MINERAL SEAM
                       ORIGINAL GROUND SURFACE
                          SECOND STEP
                                       TOE OF

                                       FILL-,
      Figure  17.  This figure shows box-cut mining using
two cuts.
                                                 (continued)
                             122

-------
-DIVERSION DITCH

    •HIGHWALL

         SPOIL FROM
                                  EXCESS SPOIL FROM
                                      AND SECOND PITS
             BARRIER-

   •1 ^U^HSStlS.,P l T

      MINERAL SEAM
                                ORIGINAL
                              GROUND SURFACE
                       THIRD STEP
DIVERSION DITCH
                                   REVERSE-TERRACE SLOPE
    HIGHWALL

    \     FINISHED GRADE
       \    SURFACE
                               ORIGINAL
                            GROUND SURFACE
                                                         TOE OF
                     FOURTH STEP
   Source:
                Figure 17.   (continued)

              Skelly  and Loy.   Processes, procedures,  and
                methods to control pollution.
                          123

-------
nearest the exposed highwall, and this overburden is cast on the


bench over the low wall barrier.  The mineral is extracted  from


the first cut opening.  A second cut is then made toward the low


wall barrier, and the overburden is backfilled into the first cut


trench.  After completion of mining, the remaining second cut

                       9
overburden is regraded.


     Backfilling often results in a reverse terrace because it is


usually done with poorer material.  This can be overcome somewhat


by segregating the overburden, putting topsoil back as a final


cover, and properly vegetating the area; however, it is difficult


to segregate overburden when the box-cut mining method is used.


     Area mining.  Area mining (Figure 7) generally is used in


relatively flat terrain where mineral seams are roughly parallel


to land surface.  Although area mining has been used almost


exclusively for coal, it can be used for any mineral found in

                                        9
seams whose geometry is similar to coal.


     An area mine is usually started with a box-cut, or trench,


which extends to the limits of the property or vein deposit and


has an adjacent parallel bank of overburden.  Overburden from


each successive parallel cut is placed in the preceding trench.


The last cut is bounded by overburden material on one side and an


undisturbed highwall on the other.


     Area mining is likely to be used extensively in the


development of western coal fields,  and revegetation is extremely

                                             9
difficult in these arid and semiarid regions.
                               124

-------
     In some underground mining methods, waste rock is backfilled
into previously mined sections as it is excavated, thus
eliminating the surface stockpiling of this material.  These
mining methods include cut-and-fill stoping, square-set stoping
(Figure 18), and to a very limited extent, block caving.
Although these methods were developed primarily to provide
structural stability to the mined areas, they nonetheless result
in an essentially environmentally safe means of waste disposal.
     Utilization.  Utilization of overburden and waste rock as
byproducts has been and will probably continue to be limited
almost exclusively to its use as construction material.  Selected
portions of these wastes with proper chemical characteristics can
be used on site to construct roads and tailings pond embankments.
Certain wastes that are not easily eroded have also been used as
cover for less stable wastes that are more subject to weathering.
     Overburden and waste rock also may be marketed as construction
materials for offsite application.  Sometimes mining companies
and offsite users have an arrangement whereby the user loads and
hauls the material off the mine site without any exchange of
money.   Offsite uses include aggregate for concrete and asphalt
mixes,  fill material, and subbase for highway construction.
Certain mining wastes may provide a better material for use in
specific applications than conventional materials,  and in some
instances,  may result in cost savings.
     The U.S.  Bureau of Mines has extensively investigated wastes
from such mining operations as slate and lime rock quarries and

                               125

-------
                               RAISE SET
      GIRT
                    FLOOR

                     CAP
POST
                                                      FILL
VERTICAL SECTION

          BLOCKING
                FLOOR
 WASTE ROCK
 BACKFILLED
  DOWNWARD
AS  EXCAVATION
  PROCEEDS
   UPWARD
                       POST
                             LEAD SET
  CAP
               GIRT
                                                       CORNER SET
                                    PLAN OF A MINING FLOOR
           Figure  18.   This figure illustrates square-set stoping,
      a  type of underground mining.

      Source:  Colorado Mining  Association.   Anatomy of  a mine--
                 frpra  prospect  to production.   Denver,  1975.
                                 126

-------
 phosphate  rock mines.   In  some  cases  these  wastes  were  found  to



 have potential uses.  For  instance, waste slate  for  asphalt road



 surface mixtures and waste  slate dust as a  filler  for briquettes



 normally containing either  limestone  or portland cement were


                                                           12
 found to be equivalent  to  the conventional  materials used.



     Despite the many potential uses  that have been  researched



 and developed for overburden and waste rock, the vast quantities



 generated  annually, coupled with the  severe economic limitations



 associated with the long shipping distances from the remotely



 located mines, preclude utilization as a practical means of



 disposing  of mine solid wastes  in most cases.



                      Disposal of Tailings



     Nearly all (99+ percent) of the  tailings generated annually



 by beneficiating processes are disposed of  in terrestrial



 impoundments or tailings ponds.  The  rest are backfilled into



 underground mines, discharged to lakes or saltwater bodies, or


                                              4

 utilized as construction materials (Table 10) .



     Tailings Ponds.  Tailings are discharged into a pond in the


                                                             2 12
 form of a slurry,  typically 50 to 85 percent water by weight.  '



 These ponds are usually situated in small valleys or against



 hillsides,  and a single dike is constructed to contain the



 tailings.   In flat areas,  dikes must be built on all sides.



     The tailings characteristic that varies the most is



 grain-size distribution (described in detail by selected minerals



 in Section 3).   This characteristic is significant because it



determines the method required for safe containment.   If they





                              127

-------
contain a sufficient percentage of coarse materials  (usually
called "sands"), the tailings can be segregated during disposal,
and the coarse sands can be used as a confining embankment for
finer materials, which will not drain and have low shear strength.
These coarse materials can be separated by gravity (in a method
called "upstream construction") or by cycloning (in a method
called "downstream construction") (Figure 19).
     If the tailings do not contain sufficient sands to form a
safe, well-drained embankment of acceptable density,  permeability,
and shear strength, materials (either natural rock or mine waste
rock) must be imported to construct the embankment (Figure 19).
     The foundation requirements for tailings embankments are
identical to those for any other kind of dam or embankment.  The
foundation material must be strong enough to support the weight
of the structure without shear failure or movement under the
load.  The latter factor is particularly significant when
disposal is on steep slopes or draws, because the weight of the
embankment plus the effect of the water in the slurry may produce
landslide conditions, especially if the area is subject to
seismic events.
     If hazardous wastes are present in the tailings, foundation
materials should also be impermeable enough to prevent leakage
from the tailings pond to the groundwater flow system beneath the
pond and embankment and to springs alongside the embankment.   If
such impermeable materials are not available, the pond should be
lined,  the foundation material treated chemically, or the tailings

                               128

-------
                                       DISCHARGE  ALONG
                                         EMBANKMENT
     f-FREE WATER
             =^r~-  SLIMES
          (A) UPSTREAM CONSTRUCTION
                                   DISCHARGE
                                   ALONG EMBANKMENT
          (B) DOWNSTREAM CONSTRUCTION
                                                      1'CYCLONED"
                                                       SANDS
DISCHARGE
OPPOSITE
EMBANKMENT
        SANDS
                         FREE WATER
CONSTRUCTED
EMBANKMENT
           (C) CONSTRUCTION WITH IMPORTED MATERIALS
      Figure  19.   Shown above are  the three basic
methods of tailings pond  construction.
                             129

-------
carefully segregated and the water level maintained over the


           2
slime zone.   Cutoff walls and blankets and cores may also be



required to prevent leakage through and beneath the embankment



when appropriate materials are not available  (Figure 20).



     Earth liners are sometimes used for tailings ponds,



especially where a supply of clay or claylike material  is



available near the site.  Tailings slimes may be used if their


                     2
permeablility is low.   Commercial bentonite, whose permeability



is increased by low pH water, can be added to fine-textured soils



to reduce their permeability to acceptable levels.  Artificial



liner materials include soil cements, treated bentonite petroleum



derivatives, plastics, elastomers, and rubber.  These liners are



more expensive1 than earth materials, and earthwork is still



required to prepare the ground surface.  In some cases  liner



materials must be resistant to possible corrosive effects of the



pond liquid and to sunlight if they are not covered immediately



after placement.  The uranium milling industry is currently the



largest user of tailings pond liners.  Such usage has not become



common in other mining industries.  Tailings pond seepage and



consequent groundwater pollution can occur if (1)  the site has



not been selected properly,  (2)  tailings are too coarse or are



improperly distributed in the pond,  (3) poor quality water is



introduced into the tailings pond from nonbeneficiation sources



(such as acid mine drainage),  (4)  if pyrite concentration in the


                                                           14
tailings is sufficient to oxidize and produce acid seepage.
                               130

-------
               IMPERMEABLE
                MATERIAL
                            o.
        o^^
                 BLANKET AND CORE •
                                    IMPERMEABLE
                                     MATERIAL
         TAILINGS viv;-.;;.;:-/':-;.;.;.:-:^
                    <^ r> °
           SAND AND GRAVELD*
             FOUNDATION  CUTOFF WALL
                CUTOFF WALL AND
                  OPEN TRENCH
                                        TO MILL OR
                                        TREATMENT
                                          PLANT
IMPERMEABLE
 MATERIAL
     Figure 20.  Some  methods used  to minimize  seepage
outflow  are shown above.

Source:   Williams, R.E.   Waste production and disposal
            in mining,  milling, and  metallurgical
            industries.   San Francisco,  Miller Freeman
            Publication,  Inc., 1975.   489 p.
                          131

-------
     The slope of the embankment must be determined by the


climatic conditions  (as revealed by the site selection


investigation) and by the physical properties of the material


used in the embankment  (angle of internal friction, density,


permeability, shear  strength, angle of repose).  Model studies


are helpful in determining stable slope angles once these


variables have been  identified.  The safety factor for a tailings


dam is obtainable through standard engineering procedures once


the slope, physical  properties of the embankment material


(especially density), and the configuration of the phreatic  (free

                      2
water)  line are known.


     Tailings ponds  normally are drained by decant towers,


siphons, or pumps.   Regardless of the method used to remove the


water from tailings  ponds, however, great care must be taken to


design sufficient freeboard to handle peak runoff/ particularly


if tailings embankments are in draws.  Alternatively, diversion


structures may be constructed to handle the runoff predicted by


the hydrologic analysis conducted during the site selection


process.  Diversion  structures should also be used if the poor


quality of the water within the pond precludes its being

                       2
discharged to a stream.


     Embankments should include monitoring devices to ascertain


that the structure is performing adequately.  Instrumentation


should include piezometers to monitor the configuration of the


phreatic line, subembankment pressures, and the quantity and


quality of the leachate.  The main groundwater zone should be
                               132

-------
monitored to check the impact of the tailings pond leachate.   If

contamination of the groundwater is detected, leachate can be

recovered by pumping the groundwater out unless the saturated

materials are very low or very high in permeability.    Slope
indicators should be installed to be sure creep does not occur or
                                               2
to detect it before failure if it should occur.

     Backfilling Underground Mines.  The practice of backfilling

underground mines with beneficiation tailings was reportedly
first employed in 1864 at an anthracite coal mine in Shenandoah,
                                                       14
Pennsylvania, where backfilling was done hydraulically.    Almost

all underground metal mines in Idaho have adopted the practice of
                                                                   2
backfilling abandoned stopes with the coarser fraction of tailings.

On a national scale, however, backfilling is not considered a

good mining technique; neither is it economically feasible,
except in unique situations.
     The main environmental advantages of backfilling with coarse
tailings are improved recovery of the underground ore body, some
reduction in volume of tailings that must be impounded (thus
reducing the surface area needed),  and lessening of surface
subsidence.   The major disadvantages of backfilling are that it
introduces additional water into the mine,  it results in
occasional spills, and it necessitates importing material for
tailings embankments when too much of the coarse fraction is
removed from the tailings.   The Bureau of Mines investigations of
backfilling in the Coeur d'Alene district of northern Idaho

indicate that it should be possible to dispose of a greater
                               133

-------
percentage of tailings by backfilling than has been the practice.



Using tailings as fine as No. 200 sieve is believed feasible,



which would mean that as much as 50 percent of the average copper,



lead, or zinc tailings from underground mining could be backfilled.



The primary objection to backfilling with finer tailings is cost



and the risk of poor drainage and reduced strength, which could



introduce the possibility of bulkhead failures.  Some investigators



believe, however, that essentially all underground tailings can



be used if electrokinetic backfilling is utilized to assure


                2
proper drainage.   The primary deterrent, especially since 1974,



is the cost of energy required to dewater the finer tailings



electrpkinetically.



     Lake/Marine Disposal.  Subaqueous disposal of tailings in



freshwater and saltwater bodies has been practiced occasionally



by a few operations in the United States and Canada and more


                                 2 16
frequently on a world-wide basis. '    Under permit in I960, the



Reserve Mining Company Silver Bay taconite plant discharged



73,700 tons (67 Mg) of tailings per day into Lake Superior



through a trough 58 miles (107 km)  long and 3 miles (6 km)  wide



at a depth of 900 ft (274 m).  This much publicized event is the



best known example of this disposal method in the United States.



     Although the idea of marine disposal of tailings (like



domestic refuse and sewage disposal of this type)  is initially



objectionable in that it involves pouring untreated wastes



directly into the water,  several operating and environmental



advantages may be considered:
                               134

-------
Operating advantages   '   '
      0    Once the disposal facility has been constructed,
          operating costs would be low, perhaps even  zero.

      0    The storage area would be more or less limitless in
          volume.

      0    The system contains few components that are subject to
          mechanical failure.

      0    This practice offers the greatest physical  safety in
          that it eliminates possible impoundment failure or
          slumping.

Environmental advantages:

      0    The nature of seawater (markedly alkaline)  and its low
          levels of oxygen at depth prevent the generation of
          acidity, thus minimizing problems of acid mine drainage
          and the release of soluble heavy metals.

      0    If the disposal point has been carefully chosen, no
          visual impact should occur.

      0    The greater volume and turbulence of the sea, compared
          with lakes, are likely to promote maximum dilution and
          mixing of any soluble toxic constituents.

      0    Because the biological composition of seawater is
          different from that of freshwater, the impact of
          toxicants will be different, perhaps less.

      0    Reclamation and revegetation problems are eliminated.

     The main operating disadvantages are lack of control over

what happens to the tailings after disposal and little chance of

future reworking them for metal recovery.   The principal

environmental disadvantages, apart from those of toxicity

(mentioned above), also relate to inaccessibility after dumping.

In land impoundment,  decanted tailings liquid can be chemically

treated to render it innocuous.   Marine disposal, on the other

hand, does not entail separation of liquid and solid phases;

therefore incorporation of any chemical purification stages

                              135

-------
before discharge would probably be much more difficult.  The most


important environmental disadvantage is that the tailings smother


all the benthic life in the vicinity of disposal.


     There is a significant cost advantage associated with


lake/marine disposal when compared with, for example, the proposed


alternative closed-circuit land disposal system for the Reserve
Mining Company.  This system will cover 7.6 square miles  (19.7




                                                               19,20
  2
Mm )  and cost an estimated $252 million, which is the largest
single mining environmental cost recorded in the United States.


Despite cost and operating advantages, the environmental


disadvantages of subaqueous disposal are overriding; consequently,


waste discharge permits for subaqueous disposal in the United


States (under Public Law 92-500) are expected to be difficult, if

                          2
not impossible, to obtain.


     Utilization.  Tailings, like overburden and waste rock, are


utilized almost exclusively as construction material, primarily


for highways.  The utilization of tailings having acceptable


engineering properties is considered the best disposal method,


both economically and environmentally.  On the mine site,


tailings are used to construct haul roads and tailings pond


embankments and as an aggregate for paving mixtures.  Off site,


primary construction uses are as fill for highway embankments,


subbase material for concrete and asphalt highways, antiskid


snow-control material for highways, and aggregate for concrete


and asphalt paving mixes.  Tailings from nearly all mining


industries have been used for highway construction fill in all


mining states.

                               136

-------
     All industry tailings cannot be used as construction



material.  For example, the radioactivity of uranium tailings



 (high in concentrated radium 226) and other minerals whose host



rock contains radium  (e.g., phosphate) precludes their safe use



as construction materials.  The high levels of radon from uranium



tailings, used as fill material for residential home foundations



in the West, illustrates this point.



     The near completion of the interstate highway system within



the last decade precludes further use of vast quantities of



tailings for highway construction on a nationwide basis.  On a



regional basis, however, a cornerstone of the development plan



for the 13-state Appalachian region is a modern road transportation



network.  This plan presents the possibility of combining the



elimination of coal refuse banks with their concurrent utilization



in this highway network.  Coal refuse characteristics (especially



the tendency for spontaneous combustion and acid drainage)  were



once believed to preclude its extensive use in highway



construction.  These problems, however, have been solved (through



U.S. and British research) by proper compaction and soil cover



techniques.  In addition, coal refuse has distinct advantages



over conventional highway construction materials in terms of



workability during wet and freezing weather.   Research/demonstration



studies are being conducted by the U.S. Environmental Protection



Agency,  U.S. Department of Transportation,  West Virginia University,



and others to develop these properties further.  Utilization of



coal refuse as a highway construction material by the road


                                                                    21
building agencies in several Appalachian states is being considered.



                               137

-------
     Some other construction material uses for tailings are as



filler for brick manufacturing and fill for reclamation of



swamplands for commercial and recreational purposes.  The



economic potential of using raw coal waste material and fly ash



in the manufacture of bricks, blocks, lightweight aggregate, and



other products has become more attractive in the last few years.



In Great Britain large volumes of coal waste and fly ash are used



to manufacture useful products, and such usages are becoming more



frequent in the United States.  Raw coal waste and fly ash have



also been tested for use in mine subsidence control in several


                                 22
research studies in recent years.



     Another potential utilization of coal refuse, which may have



a promising economic incentive, is the production of alumina.



Annual domestic requirements for aluminum may increase to from 5



to 10 times the present level by the year 2000.  It has been



predicted that by 1980 or shortly thereafter the industry may



begin processing low-grade bauxites, clays, shales, and other


                             22
materials to meet the demand.    High-grade aluminum sulfate was



produced from coal refuse as early as 1962.  Renewed interest in



this utilization of coal refuse may be very timely because



unstable international conditions make foreign imports


           22
unreliable.        :



     Utilization of numerous coal refuse banks in the Appalachian



region as highway construction material appears promising,  but



the nationwide outlook for extensive disposal of the vast



quantities of noncoal tailings by utilization is dim.  This is
                                138

-------
due in part to the economic limitations of transporting this


material from the remotely located mines.


                Stabilization/Control/Reclamation


     The importance of implementing disposal, stabilization, and


control techniques is underscored by the magnitude of mineral


resource waste production (detailed in Section 3).  Land


reclamation has not always been practiced as widely as it is


today.  Even now the extent of reclamation varies widely.  The


trend toward more stringent legislation, however, is making


mining companies increasingly aware of their obligation to


restore the land and to escalate reclamation activities.  The


recently passed Federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation


Act is adding a new dimension to reclamation of coal mine lands.


This subsection discusses stabilization and control methods that


are being implemented (at both active mines and abandoned mines),


which are designed to prevent air and water pollution and to

                                                       2
create as aesthetically acceptable an area as possible.


     The high visibility of the unsightly coal-preparation waste


piles, especially in the heavily populated East,  and the fact


that approximately 40 percent of the total land disturbed by past


and present mining activities is the result of coal mining


operations have made coal mining companies lead in the area of


reclaiming mined lands concurrently with extraction operations.


Nevertheless,  this concept of the extraction-rehabilitation


sequence is catching on rapidly in noncoal mining industries
                                139

-------
 (such as copper, phosphate rock, and iron), even though these


mine wastes are generally less visible and spacious than coal


mine wastes.


     In the coal industry, restoration of a mined area to the


desired condition includes landscaping, stabilization by physical


and chemical means (especially during ongoing mining activities),


soil amelioration, and revegetation.  In other mining industries,


one or more of these steps may be taken.  Company policy and the


various desired goals of reclamation efforts (such as creation of


lakes from abandoned open pit mines or quarries, grazing lands,


park and recreational areas, crop lands, sports areas, campgrounds,


sanitary landfills, and home sites) determine the manner and


sequence in which these procedures are applied.


     Landscaping.  Landscaping involves the shaping of the


surface of mineral resource wastes and/or adjacent areas to


achieve some predetermined objective.  Primarily intended for


environmental control of water/wind erosion and leaching,


landscaping can also be used for such purposes as reshaping an


area around a lake for recreational use.  The key to success in


the landscaping rehabilitation phase of any reclamation program


is the formulation and implementation of an extraction-rehabilitatic


plan,  as opposed to the practice of simply extracting ore from


the ground and recovering the product from it.   Such a plan would

                                2
fulfill the following objectives :
                                140

-------
      (1)  Creation of final topography that blends with  the
          adjoining undisturbed landscape.

      (2)  Creation of a surface drainage pattern that does not
          promote ponding unless the pond is planned and properly
          designed.

      (3)  Creation of a soil condition capable of supporting
          plant life equal to that of the regional landscape.

      (4)  Provision for ground cover for erosion control as soon
          as soil conditions allow.

      (5)  Provision for use at some economic value if at all
          possible.

      (6)  Organization of the various steps in the operating
          sequence for optimum operating efficiency.

     Although only (1) and (2) deal directly with landscaping,

all are essential to successful reclamation.  In some reclamation

projects it is desirable not to duplicate the landscape of the

surrounding environment.  This applies to recreation projects in

areas where the water table is sufficiently near the surface to

facilitate the creation of artificial lakes and to agricultural
                                                          2
areas where forested hills are needed to relieve monotony.

     It is important to plan preliminary overburden removal to

include segregation of the top organic soil layer for subsequent

regrading and revegetation.  Overburden segregation is also

important for water pollution control, in that potentially

pollutant material such as pyritic material (which forms acid

drainage) can be isolated from contact with surface and leaching

waters.  When segregation is practiced, the layer of potentially

pollutant material is sandwiched between layers of low-permeability,

clean material in the final regrading, then covered by a layer of
                                141

-------
         9
 topsoil.   This  technique  is particularly applicable  to  the cut

                                       2
 and  fill method  of  flat area stripping.


      In  the contour stripping technique commonly practiced on  the


 steeper  slopes of Appalachia, overburden segregation  is  difficult


 to implement.  Stripped waste tends to move downslope, making


 retrieval extremely expensive because it must be accomplished


 against gravity.  The downslope movement is also devastating to

                                                       2
 vegetation and to the quality of down-gradient streams.


      Overburden  segregation is seldom applied at abandoned


 surface mining areas where the waste material is a mixture of


 various materials.  Although postmining landscaping and


 revegetation have been demonstrated as feasible reclamation


 procedures in such  areas, they are expensive.


      Physical and Chemical Waste Stabilization.  Physical or


 chemical stabilization of mine wastes is sometimes substituted


 for revegetation to minimize air pollution and water pollution,


 especially during ongoing mining operations.  Chemical


 stabilization is also frequently used simultaneously with


 revegetation so that plants will not be destroyed by abrasion or

                                                       2
 erosion before they mature and form a protective cover.


     Physical Methods.  Physical control methods involve placing


 a separate cover or barrier over the waste pile to reduce the


wind speed reaching the fine particulates of the pile, consolidate


 the surface by binding particles,  impede moisture loss from the


 surface,  and generally protect and isolate the underlying waste


 from the environment.  Physical methods effect control by putting



                                142

-------
a lid over the waste or isolating it within an enclosure.  The

freedom and ease of interaction of the surface with the
                             9
environment are thus reduced.   Stabilization is usually

accomplished with a rock cover composed of erosion-resistant

waste rock from the mining operation (if such exists).  Gunite,

asphalt, and concrete are also effective, but they are expensive.

Smelter slag has been used, as well as bark covers and imported

topsoil.  Because all physical stabilization methods  (except the

use of imported topsoil) have the disadvantage of creating a

waste pile that seldom blends with its natural surroundings,
                             2
they are not widely utilized.

     Fugitive emissions from mining haul roads used to transport

wastes are most effectively controlled by paving these roads with

concrete or asphalt.  This approach is so expensive, however,

that it has not been given widespread serious consideration.

Exceptions are the paving of main haul roads that are intended

for long-term use.  Available control methods for controlling

fugitive dust emissions that are attendant to solid waste

                        23
disposal are shown below  :

                                          Control efficiency
   Source           Control method        	(percent)	

Unpaved roads       Paving                        85
                    Chemical stabilization        50
                    Watering                      50
                    Speed reduction             Variable
                    Oiling and double-chip
                     surface                      85
Road shoulders      Stabilization                 80

     Water spraying (the most frequently employed method of

suppressing dust from mining haul roads)  is a straightforward


                                143

-------
method of  reducing wind erosion by maintaining high  surface


moisture;  however, it  is not widely practiced to control


windblown  fugitive dust from overburden piles because of the vast


areas involved and the fact that fugitive dust from  overburden


piles is usually not a significant problem.  Also, it provides


only temporary control.  Moreover, climatic variables, such as


lack of readily available water and/or freezing plumbing,

                                                   9
adversely  affect operating costs and effectiveness.


     Improved fugitive dust control of overburden/waste rock


piles, dry tailings piles, and haul roads can be achieved by


adding a surface-active agent to the spray water to  reduce its

                                                         9
surface tension and increase its dust wetting properties.   With


greater wetting properties, less water solution is required to


agglomerate and stabilize the surface layer of the pile.  Water


quantity equalling 1/2 to 1 percent of the pile weight is


necessary  if a wetting agent is added, as opposed to 5 to 8

                                             9
percent by weight when using untreated water. .


     Chemical Stabilization.  Chemical stabilization involves


mixing a reagent with overburden and tailings to form an


air- and water-resistant crust or layer that effectively stops


dusts from blowing and inhibits water erosion.  Although


stabilization is not as durable as soil covering or vegetation,


it can be used on sites unsuited for vegetative growth because of


harsh climatic conditions or the presence of vegetable poisons in


the waste piles or tailings, or in areas where soil-covering


material is not available.   Chemical stabilization can also be
                              144

-------
applied to control erosion of active tailings ponds.  Application

of chemicals on the dry, inactive portions of these ponds can

restrict air pollution while other portions are still active

(wet).  Satisfactory long-term chemical stabilization is

difficult to achieve, however, because the surfaces of tailings
                             24
piles are seldom homogeneous.    Freezing and thawing also tend

to break the crust.

     Chemically stabilized waste surfaces are seldom meant to be

permanent, and they offer the same aesthetic disadvantage as

physically stabilized wastes.  The most desirable aspect of

chemical stabilizers is that they may prevent the destruction of

vegetative covers during early growth stages.

     The U.S. Bureau of Mines in Salt Lake City has tested over

70 chemical compositions and has named the 13 best according to

their effectiveness (Table 11).

     Vegetative Stabilization (Revegetation).  Revegetation

(installing a vegetative cover) is used to accomplish the

following:

     0    Help stabilize erodible slopes and thus minimize
          stream pollution.

     0    Control dust.

     0    Improve aesthetics of an area.

     0    Increase evapotranspiration so that a minimum percentage
          of precipitation enters the runoff cycle.

     0    Facilitate the crop producing potential of some areas
          for purposes of profit.

     0    More rapidly stabilize the oxidation of pyrite and the
          concomitant production of acid mine drainage by preventing
          continuous exposure of new pyrite by erosion.

     0    Restore wildlife habitats.

                               145

-------
                                                     TABLE  11
          CHEMICAL  BINDING  SURFACE TREATMENTS  IN  DESCENDING ORDER  OF RANK BY
                                         THE USBM,   SALT  LAKE  CITY*
Name
Coherex
Description
Resinous adhesive
Dose
240 gal/acre
Cost
$65/acre
$650/acre
Remark st
Good wind resistance
Good water-jet
resistance
Supplier
witco Chemical Co.
Lignosulfonates
SP-400 Soil Card
DCA-70



Cement and milk of lime

Paracol TC 1842

Pamak WTP


Petroset SB-1

Potassium silicate
 with an SiO^-to-I^O
 ratio of 2.5

PB-4601
Reosol cationic
 neoprene

Dresinol,  TC  1843

Sodium silicates with
 ratios of 2.4 to 2.9
 SiO2 to 1 NajO
Calcium
Sodium    Lignosul-
Ammonium   fonates
2400 Ib/acre
                         Elastomeric  polymers    55  gal/acre
                       90 gal/acre

                       50 gal/acre



Resin emulsion

Wax,  tar,  and pitch
 product

Elastomeric polymers
Polymeric stabilizing
 plant

Elastomeric polymer
 emulsion

Ammonium casein
S130-$170/acre
                                        S130/acre
                                  Exceptionally effective
                                   on sand tailings;
                                   satisfactory on both
                                   acidic and alkaline
                                   tailings
                                                                                  Alco Chemical Co.
                                                                                                             Union Carbide
                 $190/acre

                 S250/acre

                 $250/acre


                 5250/acre

                 $450-$920/acre



                 S500/acre


                 $500/acre


                 $500/acre

                 $200/acre
                                            Phillips Petroleum
                                                         Calcium chloride can be
                                                          used in place of some
                                                          of the sodium silicate
     * Donovan,  R.P., R.M. Felder,  and H.H.  Rogers.   Vegetative stabilization of mineral waste heaps.   EPA-600/2-76-087,

Research Triangle  Institute for  Industrial  Environmental  Research Laboratory, Office of Energy,  Minerals,  and Industry,

Environmental  Protection Agency,  Research Triangle  Park,  North Carolina, April 1976.

     t Test conditions of:

          a) Water  jet at various pressures to simulate water erosion.

          b) Hind  tunnel at 100  mph and various orientations to simulate wind erosion.

-------
     Selection of a vegetative cover is based primarily on the


condition of the waste to be covered and on local topographic and


climatic conditions.  The most significant waste characteristic


is soil pH; however, organics, nutrients, salt content, and


grain-size distribution also play major roles.  Although the most


significant climatic factor is the nature and distribution of


precipitation, the mean, maximum, and minimum temperatures


(annual and daily) are also significant.  Heavy metals will


affect some plants if their concentrations are sufficiently high.


Some plants will grow on beneficiation wastes, in spite of


significant increases in their heavy metal uptake, whereas others


will die.


     Nutrients required for plant growth include nitrogen,


calcium, magnesium, sulfur, potassium, phosphorus, and trace


quantities of various metals.  Tailings are particularly


difficult to revegetate because they are usually deficient in


plant nutrients, sometimes contain excessive salts and heavy


metal phytotoxicants, consist of unconsolidated sands or shales


that destroy young plants by sandblasting and/or burial during

                                                             2
surface water erosion, and lack normal microbial populations.


Tailings are always deficient in nitrogen, and it must be added;


with the proper choice of nitrogen-fixing vegetative species and


sufficient organic matter, however, the nitrogen balance can be

                                      g
restored without continued supplement.


     Revegetation can be accomplished by transplanting or (most


commonly) by seeding.  Seeding techniques are drilling,
                               147

-------
broadcasting, and hydroseeding.  Hydroseeding has been more


widely adopted  for waste heaps when slopes are appreciable and

                                               2
additives are necessary to enhance germination.   Fertilizers


and mulches can also be utilized with the drilling and


broadcasting techniques.


     Given enough time and resources, any mineral waste heap in


the United States could be covered with vegetation; the problem


is to establish a cover at a cost compatible with the value of


the land before and after the reclamation.  In spite of the


lengthy and intensive investigations of vegetative stabilization


of mineral waste heaps that have been and are being carried out


by U.S. Government, university, and industrial researchers, the


problem is still too complex to permit the formulation of


guaranteed revegetation procedures.  In practice each new


candidate site for vegetative cover must be treated as unique;


trial-and-error experimentation of test plots must precede any


large scale revegetation effort, using previous experience as a


general guideline.


     Cost comparisons have been made of the various methods


employed for stabilizing tailings (Table 12).  These costs are


based on the assumption that extensive chemical treatment is not


needed.


     Control/Treatment of Tailings Pond Water.  The major


problems associated with water pollution from overburden and


waste rock stockpiles and tailings are acid drainage through


pyritic waste material that is unprotected from percolating



                               148

-------
                               TABLE  12

           COST COMPARISON OF STABILIZATION  METHODS*
Type of
stabilization Effectiveness
PHYSICAL
Water sprinkling
Slag (9-in. depth)
By pumping
By trucking
Straw harrowing
Bark covering
Country gravel and
soil
4-in. depth
12-in. depth
CHEMICAL
Elastomeric polymer
Lignosulfonate

Fair
Good
Good
Fair
Good

Excellent
Excellent

Good
Good
Maintenance

Continual
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate
Moderate

Minimal
Minimal

Moderate
Moderate
Approximate
cost per acre (S)


350-
950-1
40-
900-1

250-
700-1

300-
250-


450
,050
75
,000

600
,700

750
600
VEGETATIVE

Revegetation
 4-in. soil cover
  and vegetationt

 12-in. soil cover
Excellent
Minimal
300-  650
and vegetation
Hydroseeding
Matting!
Chemical-vegetative
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Minimal
Minimal
Minimal
Minimal
750-1
600-
600-
100-
,750
750
750
250
     * ,Dean,  K.C.,  R.  Havens, and M.W. Glanly.   Methods  and costs

for stabilizing fine-sized mineral wastes.   Bureau of Mines Report

of Investigations  - RI  7896, 1974.

     i Generally used  on pond area rather than  on dikes.  Also,

not as effective as 12-in. soil cover when  tailings are

excessively acidic  or  saline.

     § Based on placing 3-ft-wide matting at 3-ft intervals over

the seeded area.

     Notes:   Based  on  average tailings,  costs could be

revised upward  for  acidic tailings requiring limestone or

other neutralizing  additives.

     Metric conversion table in front matter.


                                  149

-------
 surface and tailing waters,  surface runoff that contacts  these



 wastes, and direct discharge of polluted tailings waters.  Acid



 draingage from pyritic wastes and surface runoff of polluted



 waters can be prevented through previously discussed



 stabilization/control methods that isolate and/or protect these



 wastes from water contact.



     Substantial volumes of effluent contaminated with acidity,




 toxic heavy metals, and dissolved particles in tailings water can



 cause major damage to the receiving natural waters.  To achieve



 effective purification at an acceptable cost, it is important to



•control water flows as well as to provide chemical treatment.



 There are several routes of water ingress and egress at a tailings



 pond (Figure 21).  With the exception of incoming precipitation,



 the routes and volumes of each class of water can be controlled.



 It is always more feasible to prevent contamination of natural



 waters than to attempt purification afterwards.  Thus, if the



 volume of surface runoff is significant, interception ditches can



 be installed.   The quantities of water input from beneficiation



 can be lessened with thickeners.  This practice simplifies water



 reclamation while simultaneously lessening the storage volume



 required at the impoundment.



     Reclaiming of water from tailings impoundments is important



 for water pollution control and water conservation.  The ideal



 situation is to reclaim the total impoundment effluent, with only



 small volumes of fresh makeup water being added to compensate for



 evaporation losses,  seepage losses,  and water entrapped in the






                               150

-------
 DECANT/RECLAIM

EVAPORATION  "\ PRECIPITATION
                                    OVERFLOW
                                 PRECIPITATION
                             MILL
                             SLURRY
                                    AM WALL
                                RESURGENCE
                                BELUw~DA
     PERCOLATION TO  SUBSOIL
         AND GROUNDWATER
     Figure 21.   There  are various routes of water
gain and  loss at a tailings impoundment.

Source:   Down, C.G., and  J. Stocks.   Environmental
            problems of  tailings disposal.  Mining
            Magazine, 25-33, July 1977.
                      151

-------
tailings.  Many mining operations do achieve this, particularly

in the Missouri lead belt and the Southwest.  Some uranium

facilities recycle up to 75 percent of their water, and many

copper operations practice total recycle.  The entire phosphate
                                                27
industry recycles about 85 percent of its water.

     Reagents used in beneficiation are another potential source

of water pollution and have been the subject of much study.  Some

reagents are highly toxic to aquatic life; others are nontoxic.

Some are persistent; some degrade rapidly.  Thus they may or may

not appear in the tailings pond effluent or in leachate from the

tailings.  The following guidelines have been suggested for the

selection of reagents.

     (1)   When there is a choice, the least toxic compounds or
          toxic compounds that degrade rapidly to innocuous
          chemicals should be selected.

     (2)   Persistent chemicals should be avoided whenever possible.

     (3)   Reagents that are also nutrients should not be used.

     (4)   Reagents containing water-soluble metal salts should
          not be used.16

     The following are well-established methods of treating

tailings water before it is discharged to surface streams or

recycled:

     (1)   Sedimentation.  (This primary function of the tailings
          pond may be supplemented by other settling ponds,
          clarifiers,  or thickeners.)

     (2)   Flocculation.   (This involves the use of reagents to
          promote settling by altering the particle charges that
          prevent agglomeration.)

     (3)   Mechanical methods such as centrifugation,  hydrocyclones,
          and filtration.   (These, are only used in isolated
          cases.)

                               152

-------
(4)   Neutralization (or pH control)  by lime or some other
     alkali.   (This most common technique precipitates out
     heavy metals,  promotes flocculation, and lessens
     acidity.)   Limestone is seldom used in modern practice

(5)   Precipitation.   (This method,  primarily applied for
     radium removal,  uses sulfides  and other reagents to
     remove metals.)16
                         153

-------
                    REFERENCES FOR SECTION 4


 1.  Compiled from Bureau of Mines Statistics for 1975.

 2.  Williams, R.E.  Waste production and disposal in mining,
       milling, and metallurgical industries.  San Francisco,
       Miller Freeman Publication, Inc., 1975.  489 p.

 3.  Wahler, W.A., and Associates.  Analysis of coal refuse dam
       failure. . Contract Completion Report No. S0122084, U.S.
       Bureau of Mines, Department of the Interior, Washington,
       1973.

 4.  Personal communication.  R.E. Williams, professor of
       hydrogeology,  University of Idaho, to J. Greber, PEDCo
       Environmental, Inc., May 30, 1978.

 5.  Personal communication.  E.J. Johnson, Arizona Mining
       Association, to R. Amick, PEDCo Environmental, Inc.,
       May, 1978.

 6.  Midwest Research Institute.  A study of waste generation,
       treatment, and disposal in the metals mining industry,
       for Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste
       Management Division, Washington,  PB-261052, October 1976.

 7.  Personal communications during several visits to selected
       eastern coal mining areas.  Consolidated Coal Company
       operations in  Cadiz, Ohio (April  1975), southwestern
       Pennsylvania,  and northern West Virginia (March 1978),
       Ohio Power Company, Muskingum, Ohio (April 1975).

 8.  Personal communications with mine operating personnel during
       several visits in northwestern Idaho and northeastern
       Washington.  Star Morning Mine (lead, zinc, and silver)
       Hecla Mining Company; Midnight Mine (uranium)  Dawn Mining
       Company; Sherwood Mine (uranium)  Western Nuclear,  Inc.
       December 1978.

 9.  Skelly and Loy.   Proccesses, procedures, and methods to
       control pollution from mining activities.  Environmental
       Protection Agency Document 430/9-73-011, prepared  under
       Contract No. 68-01-1830,  U.S. Environmental Protection
       Agency, Office of Water Program Operations, Washington,
       1973.

10.  Personal communication.  J. Bowen,  Erie Mining Company,  to
       R.  Amick during PEDCo visit to Hoyt Lakes,  Minnesota,
       iron ore mining operations,  January 30, 1978.
                              154

-------
11.  Collins, R.J., and R.H. Miller.  Availability of mining
       wastes and their potential use as highway material,
       v. 1.  Classification and technical environmental analysis,
       prepared for Federal Highway Administrator Offices of
       Research and Development.  Report No. FHWA-RD-76 106 by
       Valley Forge Laboratories, May 1976.

12.  Spendlove, J.J.  Bureau of Mines research on resource recovery,
       reclamation, utilization, disposal, and stabilization.
       Information Circular 8750, 1977.

13.  Mead, W.E., and G.W. Condrat.  Groundwater Protection and
       Tailings Disposal.  Presented at National Convention of
       American Society of Civil Engineers, Denver, November 3-7,
       1975.

14.  Stewart, R.M.  Hydraulic backfilling.  Mining Engineering,
       v. 10, No.  4, 476-480, 1958.

15.  Kealy,  C.D.,  and R.E. Williams.  Flow through a tailings
       pond embankment.  Water Resources,  7(1), 143-154,
       July 1971.

16.  Down, C.G., and J. Stocks.  Environmental problems of
       tailings disposal.  Mining Magazine, 25-33, July 1977.

17.  Environmental design considerations for Ontario mining
       operations.  Ministry of the Environment, Ontario,  1976.

18.  Tailings disposal, recommendations for site solution.
       Ministry of the Environment, Pollution Control Branch,
       1976.  Ontario, 244 p.

19.  Engineering and Mining Journal, 173(2), 9(1972).

20.  Engineering and Mining Journal, 176(8), 151(1975).

21.  Demonstration of the utilization of waste products as highway
       construction and maintenance materials.  Project Prospectus
       No. 29, Region 15, Federal Highway Administration,  U.S.
       Department of Transportation, 1971.

22.  Michael Baker, Jr., Inc.  Investigation of mining-related
       pollution reduction activities and economic incentives in
       the Monongahela River Basin.  For the Appalachian Research
       Commission, Washington, April 1975.

23.  PEDCo Environmental, Inc.  Technical guidance for control
       of industrial process fugitive particulate emissions.
       Environmental Protection Agency Pub. No. 450/3-77-010,
       Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Waste
       Management, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
       March 1977.
                               155

-------
24.  Dean, K.C., R. Havens, and M.W. Glanly.  Methods and costs
       for stabilizing fine-sized mineral wastes.  Bureau of
       Mines Report of Investigations - RI 7896, 1974.

25.  Donovan, R.P., R.M. Felder, and H.H. Rogers.  Vegetative
       stabilization of mineral waste heaps.  EPA-600/2-76-087,
       Research Triangle Institute for Industrial Environmental
       Research Laboratory, Office of Energy, Minerals, and
       Industry, Environmental Protection Agency, Research
       Triangle Park,  North Carolina, April 1976.

26.  Dean, K.C., and R. Havens.  Comparative costs and methods
       for stabilization of tailings.  In Proceedings; Tailings
       Disposal Today, International Symposiums, Tucson, 1973.

27.  Personal communication.  J.R. Wallpole, Senior Counsel of
       the American Mining Congress, Washington, D.C. to D. O'bryan,
       Office of Research and Development, Environmental Protection
       Agency, July 20, 1978.
                               156

-------
                            SECTION 5



               ENVIRONMENTAL AND HEALTH ASSESSMENT






     This section is concerned both with the direct and resultant



 (or indirect) effects of solid waste from mining and beneficiation



activities on human health and the environment.  Emphasis is on



waste classified as hazardous.  According to criteria set forth




by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (P.L. 94-580),




Section 3001, a solid waste is considered hazardous if it is




flammable, corrosive, infectious, reactive, radioactive, or




toxic.  Although all solid wastes associated with the mining



industry do not meet these criteria, certain of those not



classified as hazardous may have a significant detrimental impact



on land use, aesthetics, flora and fauna, and other aspects of



the environment.  In addition, there are varying degrees of



toxicity.  The definition and interpretation of toxicity



ultimately must play a significant role in the designation of



hazardous wastes.



     Over and above its obvious effects on aesthetics and land



use,  mineral resource solid wastes can cause considerable



secondary pollution under certain circumstances.  In many



instances, such secondary pollution is effectively controlled by



practices in common use today, but problems still exist at



inactive or improperly controlled sites.   Some of the problems





                               157

-------
result from containment difficulties.  Tailings, waste rock, and



overburden that are properly impounded will impact only the



surfaces on which they are contained.  Because complete



containment of the volume of waste involved is not feasible, the



routes of environmental distribution and the resultant effects



must be known before the problem of secondary pollution can be



dealt with.




     Solid wastes from mining and beneficiation can be distributed



throughout the environment in ground and surface waters, the



atmosphere, and overland by gravity and eolian processes.  The



impact of this waste distribution on human health depends largely



on the distance between large mining operations and highly



populated areas.  Isolation of mining and beneficiation



facilities might be considered one of the most effective



environmental controls from the standpoint of human health.  This



section summarizes currently known environmental impacts of



mineral resource solid wastes.   Emphasis is on the routes and



effects of environmental distribution that ultimately determine



the effects on human populations.



                      Atmospheric Pollution



     Solid waste from mining and beneficiation processes can



produce atmospheric emissions.   Some components of these



emissions are hazardous.   With a few exceptions (such as the



radon gas emanating from the radium in concentrated uranium



tailings), available data indicate that mineral resource solid



wastes, as a whole,  do not appear to threaten human health.






                               158

-------
This conclusion is based partly on the fact that such wastes are


usually isolated from population centers.


     The extent of the fugitive dust emission problem created by


mineral resource solid wastes depends on geographic location and


the kind and size of the operation (Tables 13 and 14).'   In


general, fugitive dust presents the greatest problem in arid


regions such as the Great Plains or Rocky Mountains.


     At active sites, solid waste handling equipment (e.g.,


bulldozers and dump trucks) creates most fugitive dust emissions


while loading, unloading, and transporting the material over


roads.  The gasoline and diesel engines on this equipment also


contribute atmospheric pollution such as carbon monoxide, lead,

                 4
and hydrocarbons.   It should be noted, however, that RCRA may


regulate gaseous pollutants emitted from mineral resource wastes,


but not exhaust fumes.


     Other sources of fugitive dust are waste banks, overburden


storage piles, and dried tailings ponds or tailings piles.  Dust


from waste banks is generally assumed to be of the same


composition as the ore or overburden.   Some quarry operations,


particularly those for sand and gravel, process materials


containing silica.    The crushing process at these operations


produces a solid waste of undersized fines that also may contain


silica.    Monitoring of the particulate air quality at sand and


gravel operations has revealed silica concentrations in the


samples collected in excess of the Occupational Safety and Health


standard in the samples collected.
                               159

-------
                                       TABLE 13

                  FUGITIVE DUST EMISSIONS FROM SELECTED COAL
                            SURFACE MINING OPERATIONS*
Operation
Travel on haul roads (Ib/vehicle-mile) t
Watered
Unwatered
Shoveling/trucking of overburden (Ib/ton)
Trucking/dumping of overburden (Ib/ton)
Removal of topsoil (lb/yd3)
Scraping
Dumping
Location of mine
Northwest Southwest Southeast
Colorado Wyoming Montana
6.8 13.6 3.35
17.0

Central
No. Dakota
11.2
0.35
0.03

Northeast
Wyoming
4.3
0.0371
0.0025
     * Axetell, K.,  Jr.   Survey of fugitive dust from coal mines.   Environmental Protection

Agency,  Washington,  National Technical Information Service.  PB-262 176.   305 p.

     + Only vehicle-miles by haul trucks; travel by other vehicles on haul roads is incorporated

into these values.

     § These values could be considered atypical.  See referenced material.

     Note:  Metric conversion  table  in front matter.

-------
                                           TABLE  14

           SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED  EMISSIONS  FOR SOME  MINING  OPERATIONS*
     Operation
  No of
estimates
Range
Emission factors by industry  More data
 Coal Copper Rock  ?2O5 rock   Needed
Overburden removal           5


Shoveling/truck loading      5

Haul roads                  4

Truck dumping               3

Haste disposal              1

Reclamation                 1
           0.0008-0.45  Ib/ton  of ore            0.0008
           0.048-0.10  Ib/ton of overburden 0.05
           Neg-0.10  Ib/ton of ore

           0.8-2.2  Ib/VMTt

           0.00034-0.04  Ib/ton  of  ore

           Neg-14.4  ton/acre per year

           Use wind  erosion equation,
           ton/acre  per  year
                          0.05 0.05   0.05     NA

                          Depends on speeds and controls  x

                          0.02 0.02   0.04     NA



                          Depends on climate and soil     x
     NA = Not applicable.

     * PEDCo Environmental  Specialists,  Inc.  Evaluation of  fugitive  dust  emissions from mining,

Task 1 report:  identification  of  fugitive dust sources associated  with mining.   Environmental

Protection Agency No.  68-02-1321.  Cincinnati, 1976.   78 p.

     t VMT = vehicle miles  traveled.

     NOTE:  Metric conversion table  in  front matter.

-------
     Accidentally ignited waste banks at both active and inactive
                                g
coal mines also pollute the air.   The burning waste produces
emissions containing all the so-called criteria pollutants
(particulates, SO , NO , CO, and HC).  In 1964 more than 200 mine
                 ,X    J^
fires and nearly 500 waste bank fires were reported in the United
       8
States.   Data recorded from 1971 to 1973 indicate that coal
refuse fires were the largest source of hazardous benzo(a)pyrene
(BaP) emissions in the United States, averaging an estimated 310
tons (281 megagrams) per year (about 34.7 percent of total BaP
           9
emissions).   Because of stricter control practices, waste bank
fires are less common today, and a recent source estimates BaP
emissions from coal refuse fires are now less than 50 tons (45
         x           10
megagrams)  per year.
     At most mineral mines, fugitive dust from overburden storage
piles is not considered significantly hazardous because metal
concentrations are probably low.  At uranium and some central
Florida phosphate mines,  however,  dust from mineral resource
wastes may contain radioactive constituents.    The radioactive
materials associated with wastes from phosphate mining are found
in the layer of overburden directly above the ore matrix and/or
in the ore itself.   Because the fraction of the phosphate mine
waste that contains radioactive materials is usually placed at
the toe of the larger overburden pile,  it is subsequently buried
                          12
when the site is regraded.
     Radioactive constituents in fugitive dust that escapes
before this burial of phosphate mine wastes are not believed to

                                162

-------
constitute a significant hazard because the dust receives limited


                         12
atmospheric distribution.    In addition, recent monitoring



studies have shown that measured radioactivity from groundwaters



adjacent to tailings pond areas is less than the background



radiation in groundwaters of this area.  This condition is



thought to result from the fact that the radium is tied up



chemically with the phosphate that is removed as product;



consequently, wastewaters from processing the phosphate ore



(e.g., from fertilizer plants)  is probably more of a source of



radioactivity from radium.  '



     Waste rock from some mining operations (e.g., the few



asbestos mines) contains asbestos fibers.  Although exposure to



this material is unlikely due to the small number of operations



handling minerals containing asbestos, its inhalation is



considered hazardous.



     The fine particle size of most tailings renders them



particularly susceptible to wind erosion, especially in arid



regions of the West where most of the slurry water evaporates or



is recycled.   The quantification of such fugitive emissions is



generally poor, but a study made of a tailings pond in Rhodesia



indicates losses of 95 tons (86 megagrams)  of dust per day.



     Dusts from uranium or phosphate mine waste and beneficiation



tailings contain radioactive materials such as radium 226.     In



one radiation survey, uranium tailings dusts emitting gamma



radiation were detected as far as 0.4 mile (0.6 km)  from the



pile.    At one site direct gamma radiation of up to 3000 yR per
                               163

-------
hour was indicated near an inactive uranium tailings pile, and



radon gas concentration was also above normal background levels.



                         Water Pollution



     How significantly mine waste affects water pollution depends



on the composition of the material, its pyrite content, its



solubility, the likelihood of its being exposed to air and



water, and the climate and physiography of the location.  Another



factor that determines whether water pollution from mineral



resource solid wastes represents a hazard to human health is the



proximity of the source to populated areas.  Special consideration



should be given to solid waste disposal in areas where



precipitation and runoff are copious.



     The release of water from tailings impoundments can be a



serious problem.  Considerable quantities of effluent contaminated



with heavy metals, suspended solids, beneficiation reagents,



radionuclides, and acidity can escape from poorly designed



tailings ponds or piles (by seepage, percolation, or overflow)


                                                       17 18
and adversely affect receiving surface or groundwaters.  '



Seepage from a tailings pile in Ontario has been characterized



(Table 15).



     Although there is a large potential for discharge of



contaminated water at both active and inactive sites, modern,



properly designed impoundment facilities can eliminate this



potential.   Drainage ditches, canals, and retention basins are



used to provide control in areas where moderate to high levels of



precipitation create a threat of overflow.  In arid regions,
                               164

-------
                                         TABLE 15

       CHARACTERISTICS  OF  SEEPAGE WATER FROM A TAILINGS PILE  IN  ELLIOT LAKE,  ONTARIO*
                                      (ppm, except pH)
       Parameter
                         Concentration
Parameter
Concentration
o\
m
pH           _                2.0
Sulfate as 804            7,440.0
Acidity as CaC03         14,600.0
Ferric iron as Fe+3       1,450.0
Ferrous iron as Fe+2       1,750.0
Uranium                       7.2
Zinc                         11.4
Nickel                        3.2
Cobalt                        3.8
Copper                        3.6
Manganese                     5.6
Aluminum                    588.0
Lead                          0.67
Cadmium                       0.05
Lithium                       0.07
Vanadium                     20.0
Silver                        0.05
Titanium                     15.0
Magnesium                   106.0
Calcium                     416.0
Potassium                    69.5
Sodium                      920.0
Arsenic                       0.74
Phosphorus                    5.0
Chemical oxygen demand      270.0
                * Williams, R.E.  Waste production and disposal in mining,

           milling, and metallurgical industries.   San Francisco.  Miller

           Freeman Publications, Inc.,  1975.   489  p.

-------
where seepage is more of a problem than overflow, such seepage  is



minimized by segregating slimes.  In spite of these precautions,



most tailings ponds leak effluent into the soil or rock upon


                           18
which they are constructed.  .



     Many tailings ponds in the West are situated on unsaturated



soils some distance above the water table.  Seepage from a pond



must move through the unsaturated layer to reach the water table.



It then flows down gradient.  Gravity causes the downward flow



through this layer, and capillary forces cause some lateral



spreading.  Seepage through heterogeneous soil profiles with



layers of varying permeability is often circuitous.  The less



permeable strata slow or stop vertical motion and facilitate



horizontal movement of contaminated water.  In dry climates, the


                                        18
seepage may never reach the water table.



     Studies'of a site having piles of uranium tailings indicate



that radium leached to a depth of about 2 ft (0.6 m)  before it



reached the average background concentration of 1.5 pCi/g.  In



beneficiation areas, radium contamination reached a depth of 4 ft



(1.2 m)  in isolated locations.  The highest level of contamination



averaged 75 pCi/g and extended to a depth of 7.5 ft (2.3 m)



before cobbles and water prevented further measurements.



Whether permeability changes diverted movement to the horizontal



was not determined by these studies.   Only vertical measurements



were obtained directly beneath the tailings piles.



     Slimes from phosphate beneficiation operations in Florida



contain radium 226.  Concentrations of this material are
                               166

-------
apparently directly related to concentrations of suspended solids




in the slurry; fine clay slimes contain greater concentrations



than sands.



     Groundwater, soil, and rock may be capable of reacting with



and removing contaminants from seepage.  Such capabilities vary.



Fine-grained soils usually purify an effluent more effectively



than do coarse-grained soils or bedrock.  Concentration of



contaminants in seepage may be reduced by dilution with native



groundwater, buffering of pH, precipitation by reaction with



dissolved constituents in the existing groundwater or solids in



the aquifer, filtration, volatilization and loss as a gas,



biological degradation or assimilation, sorption, and radioactive



decay.  Some of these complex reactions in the subsurface are not


                18
well understood.



     Some mining operations dispose of tailings in existing



bodies of water.  '    The best example of this is the discharge



of taconite tailings into Lake Superior by Reserve Mining Company.



The tailings contain asbestos fibers, which have an undetermined



impact on water quality.



     As lower grade deposits of minerals are mined, the



production of solid waste during beneficiation increases, and



with it,  the potential for degradation of ground and surface



waters.



     Solid wastes from mining and beneficiating operations may


                                            16 21
have a significant impact on surface waters.  '    The problem of



acid drainage from waste heaps containing sulfur-bearing materials





                               167

-------
such as pyrite is well documented.  Such drainage may be



considered hazardous on the basis of its corrosive properties



when the pH is less than 3.  It has been estimated that some



SjjBOO miles of streams and 29,000 acres of impoundment and


                                                             8
reservoirs are seriously affected by surface coal operations.



Sources of acid and heavy metal pollution from mining operations



other than coal have also been investigated  (Table 16), and the



impact on surface waters has been estimated  (Table 17).



     The formation of acid drainage begins when pyrite (FeS-)



(found in many ores) contacts both water and air and oxidizes to


                                                 22
produce soluble ferrous sulfate and sulfuric acid  :



     2FeS0 + 2H.O + 70. -»• 2FeSO. + 2H-SO.
         22      2        424


The ferrous iron may oxidize further to form insoluble ferric



hydroxide and more acid:



     4FeSO. + 00 + lOH.O -»• 4Fe (OH) , + 4H_SO,
          42      2           324


Other reactions may form a complex sulfate or jarosite, thereby


                       22
adding additional acid.



     These reactions occur naturally when outcrops of pyrite



minerals are weathered.  If an outcrop is undisturbed, the



reactions take place slowly and the acid is quickly neutralized



by reaction with other minerals or with the natural alkalinity in



surface water.



     The weathering of mine and beneficiation waste at both



active and inactive sites is greatly accelerated by removing the



material from its natural environment,  increasing its surface



area by fracturing, and exposing it to a more rapidly oxidizing





                               168

-------
                             TABLE  16

SUMMARY  OF  SOURCES  (OTHER  THAN COAL)  OF ACID AND
                   HEAVY METAL  POLLUTION*
Number of
Casest
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Idaho
Missouri
Montana
Nevada
New Hampshire
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Tennessee
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
Wisconsin
Total
1
1
22


-------
                                  TABLE  17

SUMMARY OF TYPES OF POLLUTION AND  LENGTH OF STREAM AFFECTED
                      BY OTHER THAN COAL MINING*
Acid
State
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Idaho
Missouri
Montana
Nevada
New Hampshire
New York
North Carolina
Oregon
Tennessee
Vermont
Washington
Wisconsin
Total
Number
cases
1
1
22
12
2

9
1

1

5
1
3
1
1
60
Stream
affected
(miles)
t
§
54
286
65

45
§



23
22
8.7
8.7
6.2
518.6
Metals
Number
cases
1

16
13
7
3
3

1



2H
1

1
48
Stream
affected
(miles)
t

39
271
8311
60
26

3.1



22
3.7

6.2
514
Sediment
Number
cases
1
2
5
1
4
2
2



1
1
4§§
1
1

25
Stream
affected
(miles)
§
§
24
31
e
64
35



43tt
9.9
37
1.9
8.7

254.5
Total
Number
cases
3
3
26
14
15
4
15
2**
1
1
1
5
4
3
1
1
99

Stream
affected
(miles)
t
§
55
302
831
84
100
§
3.1

43S§
23
37
8.7
8.7
6.2
753.7
     • Martin and Mills, Water pollution caused by inactive ore and mineral mines.

     t Lake affected 50 acres.

     § No estimate made.

     11 Only four mining districts contributing to 78 miles of stream degradation.  Length of

polluted stream from other polluted areas unknown.
     @ No estimate available.

    ** One mine discharge causes an aesthetic problem because it is colored.

    tt Most of problem from active operations.

    5 § No data on length of stream.

    Note:  Metric conversion table in  front matter.
                                      170

-------
environment.  Moreover, tailings often contain a high



concentration of minerals not recovered in the mining operation;



economic feasibility dictates which minerals the operator will



extract from the gangue.  As sulfides of other metals  (more



stable than pyrite) become susceptible to oxidation at a low pH,


                                                                  21
they enter into solution and contribute more acid to the drainage.



This has been demonstrated in documented characteristics of



runoff from coal mine waste in Illinois (Table 18).



     When the pH drops below 6.5, conditions become favorable for



the growth of chemosynthetic bacteria such as Ferrobacillus



ferrooxidans, also called "thiobacillus."  These bacteria obtain



energy by oxidizing ferrous iron to ferric iron, and they act as



catalysts to speed up one of the slower steps of the oxidation



process.  As the pH of the water continues to drop, action of the



bacteria accelerates until it reaches the bacteria's preferred



level of 4.3.  At this degree of acidity,  sulfides can be readily


                                                         22
oxidized and many heavy elements can enter into solution.



     There is a relationship between pH and the solubility of



several metals in distilled water (Figure 22).   The linearity of



many of the relationships may be expected only in the pH range



shown and should not be extrapolated further.  Solubility,  or



more realistically, stability,  is also affected by temperature,



concentration of other dissolved ions, and the oxidation-reduction



(redox) potential of the solution.



     Alkalinity is the ability of water to neutralize acid.



Bicarbonate and carbonate are the principal sources of alkalinity





                               171

-------
                              TABLE  18

          CHARACTERISTICS OF  RUNOFF FROM COAL MINE WASTES
         IN  THE SHAWNEE NATIONAL FOREST,  SOUTHERN ILLINOIS*
Parameters
Acidity (as CaCO..)
pH
Total iron
Aluminum
Total manganese
Magnesium
Copper
Zinc
Calcium
+ 6
Chromium (Cr )
Total lead
Total cadmium
Sulfate
Average value in Palzo tract (ppm)
20,000
2.3
4,000
2,000
320
890
5.0
20.0
490

2.00
0.25
0.81
23,700
     * Williams, R.E.  Waste production and disposal in mining,

milling, and metallurgical industries.
                             172

-------
 &
 Q.
 108


 106


 104


 102


   1


10-6


10-4

10-2
                          pH
     Figure 22. Solubilities of  oxides  and
hydroxides of various metals are related  to
pH.

Source:  Martin and Mills.  Water pollution caused
           by  inactive  ores and  mineral mines.
                     173

-------
in most surface waters.  Alkalinity is probably released into



surface water by the dissolution of such minerals as limestone



and feldspar.  The buffer system in most natural waters results



from the degree of carbonation and the potential for reaction


                          21
with calcareous materials.



     When acid mine drainage combines with these waters, the



following reaction occurs   :



[2(H+) + (SO^)] +  [Ca++ + 2(HC03)~] + (Ca++ + SO^) + 2(^0) + 2(CC>2)



     If the added acidity is greater than the capacity of the



buffer system, the natural buffer system is destroyed and the pH


                                      21
will drop to a low steady-state value.



     Waters with low pH will eventually meet with inflowing



buffered waters, and in most cases, neutral conditions in the



stream will be restored.  The length of a stream exhibiting low



pH conditions depends on the amount of acid drainage reaching the



stream, the buffering capacity of upstream waters, and the



buffering capacity of waters later joining the stream.   Ores



containing pyrite are usually found in acid igneous deposits.



Calcareous minerals are rare in these deposits;  therefore the


                                            21
impacted length of stream may be quite long.



     When acid drainage is formed in the absence of calcareous



formations,  the potential for metal dissolution is great.   The



degree of acidity depends on the calcium carbonate content of the



rock stratum, the pH of the natural waters prior to mining


                                               21
activity,  and the physical state of the pyrite.     Besides having



a buffering action, carbonate and bicarbonate can also form




                               174

-------
complexes with trace metals and thereby reduce metal toxicity  in


               23
natural waters.



     The effect of waste heaps on water quality varies greatly.



At inactive sites, waste heaps may contain quantities of calcium



and aluminum-based minerals that decompose on weathering.  These



materials can neutralize the acids produced and reprecipitate



heavy metals in new and often complex crystalline structures.



Over a period of time, elements become rearranged into a more



stable combination of compounds that tends to resist further



weathering.  The extent of this stabilizing process is apparent



in that fresh spoils contain no sulfates, but a well weathered


                                                       22
spoil may contain as high as 5 percent calcium sulfate.



     Because all reactions do not take place at the same rate,



quantities of soluble heavy metal salts that have not recombined



into stable molecules may still be present years after deposition,



Stability in a body of oxidized heavy metals is relative.  Only



in arid regions are deposits of oxidized ores found at the


                     22
surface of the earth.



     The production of sediments and their introduction  into



receiving waters are natural and continuing processes,  which have



been accelerated by many of man's activities such as tilling the



soil,  construction, and mining.   Sources of sediment from mining



activities include erosion of mine waste heaps,  tailings piles,


                       21
dams,  and access roads.



     The potential for erosion of solid wastes from mining and



beneficiation depends on factors such as particle size





                                175

-------
distribution, slope, climate, and nature of the wastes.  Because



particle size ranges from large boulders to fine slimes, no



generalization can be made as to typical particle size in



overburden piles.  Tailings from a particular processing



technique, however, will exhibit characteristic particle sizes.



For example, gravity separation tailings average about 0.008 in.



(0.2 mm), and froth flotation tailings average about 0.002 in.



(0. 04 mm) .



     The mechanics of erosion and sedimentation for mine waste



are the same as those for natural sources.  The six basic sources



of erosion within a watershed are: (1) sheet and rill erosion,



(2) degradation of minor drainageways, (3) gully erosion, (4)



floodplain scour, (5) stream bed degradation, (6) stream bank



scour.  All of these methods of erosion may apply to tailings



except, possibly, floodplain scour and stream bed degradation.



     Sediment entering a stream is transported either as wash



load or bed load.  The entrained fine particles of the wash load



are relatively insensitive to flow parameters, whereas the larger



particles of the bed load depend on the energy of the stream for



transport.   Eroded tailings have a long-range impact on the



character of the wash load and a short-range impact on the bed



load.  At one time it was not uncommon to discharge processing



slurry directly into a stream, where it either washed downstream



or, if carelessly placed, formed a blockage and caused stream


                                                                21
diversion;  today tailings are placed by more controlled methods.
                               176

-------
     The presence of Fe(OH)   (ferric hydroxide) in acid mine
                           J  «

drainage usually increases turbidity and suspended solids in

receiving waters.  It also contributes to the formation of sludge

banks and a coating that covers stream beds and lake bottoms.

This coating can build up to  a thickness of an inch  (2.54 cm) or

more in slow moving streams,  or it can be scoured and create

turbidity in more rapid streams before eventually being deposited

downstream.

     Surfaces of freshly precipitated and disordered ferric

hydroxide and manganese dioxides are active sites for immobilizing

many dissolved ionic species by specific adsorption and

coprecipitation.  '   '    The ability of metal species to

associate with other dissolved and suspended components of an

aquatic system is of major importance.

     Runoff can affect surface waters in many ways.  Its
                       22
characteristics include  :

     0    Is strong in acidity; contains free sulfuric acid.
          Seepage from sulfide-containing tailings or spoil dumps
          is representative.

     0    Is high in turbidity; contains both settleable and
          colloidal insoluble inorganic material.

     0    Has high concentrations of heavy metal ions;  frequently
          contains toxic metals in concentrations  higher than
          allowed for discharge into public waters.

     0    Contains materials that have  a chemical  or a biochemical
          oxygen demand, some of which  may be toxic to animals or
          plants.

     0    Contains high concentrations  of metallic and nonmetallic
          ions that are not toxic in moderate concentrations.

     0    Is frequently high in sodium  and calcium.
                               177

-------
                     Effects On Physiography


     Improper disposal of mineral resource solid wastes can


significantly alter the physiography of a region.  Although most


of_ these physiographic effects are not caused by the hazardous


characteristics of solid waste, they are nevertheless important.


The effects range from aesthetic and land-use considerations to


erosion and contamination of aquifers.


     Extremes in pH, toxic constituents, improper grading, lack


of nutrients, and improper soil texture sometimes prevent


revegetation of areas covered with mineral resource solid wastes.


For example, waste materials from surface mining often have a pH


of 4.0 or less and cannot support vegetation.  One survey of


spoil banks at a variety of surface mines revealed that 1 percent


of those sampled had a pH of less than 3.0 and 47 percent had a

                              o
pH in the range of 3.0 to 5.0.   Although enough free acid might


be leached from spoil banks in 3 to 5 years to permit revegetation,


such leaching will not improve soil conditions if more pyrite is


exposed to the surface by erosion.  Effects on vegetation are


addressed further in the subsection on flora and fauna.


     The design of spoil banks, tailings ponds, waste heaps, and


impoundments plays an important role in determining the


environmental effect of such structures.  Downslope spoil piles

                                                     2 6
at contour surface mines pose a threat of landslides.    The


improper construction of tailings ponds can result in flooding or


collapse.
                               178

-------
     Currently, the design and construction of impoundments are


generally based on sound engineering principles, and they are


usually well maintained at active sites.  Design and construction


of impoundments at inactive sites and some older active sites,


however, are often poor, and they receive little, if any,


maintenance.


     Failure of a coal refuse bank can result in severe property


damage and loss of life.  In 1972 a failure at Buffalo Creek,  .


West Virginia, left 118 persons dead, 7 persons missing, and over


500 homes destroyed.  The disaster was apparently caused in part


by overtopping a coal mine refuse embankment that impounded a


settling pond in a small valley.  The pond had only 4 ft (1.2 m)


of freeboard and the embankments were constructed on slime layers


in other ponds.


     The Buffalo Creek failure was not an isolated incident;


another widely publicized diaster occurred in Aberfan, Wales, in

                                                    27
1966, resulting in the death of 144 school children.    A study


conducted by the Department of the Interior following the Buffalo


Creek incident concluded that coal refuse embankments have the


following problems in common:   (1) spillways are either lacking


or improperly designed, (2)  embankments are constructed


improperly, (3) sludge disposal method is improper,  (4)  freeboard


is inadequate, (5) burning occurs.  (Burning reduces the volume


of refuse material,  which, in turn, causes slumping or cracking


of the dam surface.)
                               179

-------
     Certain regions are particularly ill-suited for the disposal



of mineral resource solid wastes.  These environmentally



sensitive areas  (considered in Section 257.3 of the Resource



Conservation Recovery Act) include wetlands, floodplains,



permafrost areas, critical habitats of endangered species, and


                                       28
recharge zones of sole source aquifers.    Since most of these



areas are not normally used for disposal of mine and beneficiation



wastes, this section of the act is generally concerned with other



types of solid wastes;  however, some considerations do apply.



     Recharge zones for sole source aquifers are particularly



susceptible to contamination by leachate from mineral resource



wastes.  For example, central Colorado, which contains many



mining operations, has an average annual precipitation of 15 to



20 in. (38.1 to 50.8 cm), of which 1 to 10 in.  (2.54 to 25.4 cm)



is runoff.   The remainder presumably recharges groundwater



reservoirs, which account for 17 percent of the State's water



usage.  Arizona is another area of considerable mining activity



that relies heavily on groundwater.  Infiltration of heavy metals



and other harmful components of leachate must be carefully



avoided in these areas.



     Many consider the mere presence of waste heaps and tailings



impoundments to be an adverse environmental impact.   They are



viewed as obtrusive or conspicuous.    Containment areas also



require considerable amounts of land that may have other uses.



If reclamation is practiced, this land-use consideration may only



be temporary,  although reclaimed land often is not returned to





                               180

-------
its original use.  When viewed perspectively in relation to



other activities requiring large amounts of land  (e.g., airports



and parking lots), such land-use considerations become less



significant.



                   Effects on Flora and Fauna



     Flora and fauna are affected both directly and indirectly by



mineral resource solid wastes.  The most immediate direct effect



is the destruction of habitats by waste impoundment that covers


             Op o Q
a large area.  '    Noises and dust created by waste handling



equipment also affect certain species.  '



     Indirect effects are insidious and difficult to control.



The indirect effect on water is the most significant.  The



environmental impact of acid drainage on microorganisms in streams



can be far-reaching because these organisms are responsible for



the degradation of organic matter.   Acidity and trace metal



toxicity are the primary problems caused by indirect pollution.



Low pH is known to kill or impede most of the microbial



populations indigenous to streams,  leaving acidophilic bacteria



and fungi (particularly yeasts)  as the dominant flora, and trace


                                             24
metals can accumulate in aquatic food chains.



     A comparison of a lake polluted with acid mine drainage with



an unpolluted lake indicated a lack of vegetation and dissolved



oxygen in portions of the polluted lake, a general lowering of pH



and alkalinity, and an increase in sulfate.  A reduction in fish



populations and decreased abundance and diversity of planktonic



rotifers were also noted in the polluted lake.
                               181

-------
     The chemical and physical states of trace elements are of



considerable importance in ascertaining the impact the metals

                   *"") O 1 A

will have on biota.  '    Recent investigations show that



formation of inorganic or organic complexes sometimes reduces


                                                 23
metal toxicity to fish and aquatic invertebrates.    Chelated   :



copper, for example, is not easily metabolized and is therefore


                                       23
relatively nontoxic to aquatic species.    This complexing is not



likely to occur in waters with lower pH, but the possibility of



metals complexing increases as more alkaline waters join the



stream.



     The nature of runoff and drainage from mineral resource


                                                             24
waste suggests additional effects on aquatic flora and fauna.



The mechanical action of large amounts of sediment from eroded



waste piles can interfere with respiration in fish.  These



sediments may also contain trace elements that are sorbed onto



the particle surfaces.  Because aquatic invertebrates are, for



the most part,  filter feeders, sorbed metals may enter the food


                     24 25
chain in this manner.   '     Increased turbidity in receiving



waters can adversely affect the photosynthesis of aquatic flora



by reducing the penetration of sunlight; it can also accumulate



in quantities sufficient to destroy benthic organisms.  These



effects are in addition to the more direct and immediate effects



of lowered pH and increased sulfate.   Reduction of photosynthetic



activity can, in turn, result in a decrease of dissolved oxygen,


                                                 23
as evidenced in the lake study mentioned earlier.    The process



of acid formation also consumes dissolved oxygen.





                                182

-------
     The sulfuric acid in mine drainage or beneficiation effluent



is also toxic to fish.  Toxicity to fish has been recorded using



several sulfuric acid concentrations with varying water conditions



(Table 19).    When certain beneficiating reagents are leached



from tailings piles (e.g., cyanide), they also may have toxic



effects on aquatic biota.



     Heavy metals leached from tailings affect terrestrial plants



in various ways.  Because metal concentrations in plants and soil



associated with toxicity symptoms are unique for each combination


                                                             25
of plant-soil variables, they may be of little general value.



Thus the relative concentrations of various metals may be more



important than the absolute quantity of individual metals in


                               25
determining toxicity to plants.



     Various species differ decidedly in uptake and accumulation



of metals and also in sensitivity to the metals.  Ragweed has



been known to grow luxuriantly in soil with high zinc

                                                           25
concentrations, whereas surrounding vegetation was stunted.



     The chemical form of an element is an important factor in



plant uptake.  Lead oxide is readily absorbed, whereas lead



sulfide (galena) is not.  The presence or absence of essential



nutrients and soil pH also affect lead uptake.  In general, heavy



metal uptake by plants is greater at a soil pH of 5.5 than at


           25
6.5 to 7.0.    This would suggest that soil that has been



subjected to mine drainage of low pH and high metal concentration



would be a suitable substrate for metal uptake by plants.
                                183

-------
                            TABLE  19




            CONCENTRATIONS OF SULFURIC ACID THAT ARE




                          TOXIC TO FISH*
Concentration of Length of
Sulfuric acid (ppm) exposure
1.2
6.0 to 8.0
6.25
7.36
10.0
24.5
26.0
42
49
59.0
71.2
80.1
110 to 120
138
167

6 hours
24 hours
60 hours

24 hours
15 minutes
96-hour
TL t
m
48-hour
TL t
m
1 to 1.25
hours


6 hours
4 hours
48 hours
Type of Species of
water fish
Sunf ish
Distilled Minnow
Trout
Distilled Bluegill
Gamefish
Bluegill
Tap Minnow
Turbid Mosquito-fish
Tap, 20C Bluegill
Sunf ish
Soft, pH 3.2 Goldfish
Pickerel
Whitefish
Hard, 20C Minnow
Hard, pH 4 Goldfish
Fish
     * Hawley, J.R.  The use, characteristics, and toxicity of



mine-mill reagents in the Province of Ontario.  Toronto, Ontario



Ministry of the Environment, 1977.  255 p.
     t TL  = Median tolerance limit.
         m
                               184

-------
     Accumulation of trace metals in vegetation may have an



effect on herbivorous wildlife and, ultimately, on predators;



however, an effect on the food chain resulting from environmental



contamination by mining industry solid waste has yet to be



demonstrated.



               Impacts on Human Health and Welfare



     Exposure to hazardous constituents of mineral resource solid



wastes can occur in various ways, but the most significant medium



of exposure is water.  The long-term effects of acidity and



concomitant high metal concentration in acid drainage on



populations are unknown, as are the effects of low pH alone.



Drainage can contain high concentrations of ferric and ferrous



iron, manganese,  zinc, magnesium, aluminum, calcium, cadmium,



copper, or other metals (Tables 15 and 18).  Although the toxic



properties of individual metals in the effluent may be known, it



cannot be assumed that the effect of the stream as a whole is



simply the sum of the effects of the individual components.  Some



biologically essential elements such as calcium,  copper,



selenium, iron, and zinc seem to mitigate the adverse effects of



other metals such as cadmium or lead;  other combinations may



produce greater than additive effects.   Some essential trace



metals can also act as environmental hazards if the homeostatic



mechanisms maintaining them within normal physiological limits


                  32
become unbalanced.



     An assessment of the potential hazards of metallic elements



or compounds found in mineral resource wastes should consider the





                               185

-------
form of the element  (valence state), its chemical and physical



properties, rates of absorption and excretion, metabolic pathways,



target organs, and route of exposure.



     A considerable amount of data are available on the toxicology



of individual metals, from which a tentative classification of



the environmental and biological impacts has been derived



(Table 20).  Elements that accumulate in the body have the



greatest potential for causing disease, and even biologically



essential metals can adversely affect environmental toxicity.



Data have also been collected that compare typical human body



burdens with crustal abundances (Table 21).  These data show the



obvious accumulation of certain metals.



     Knowing which organs are susceptible to the action of



specific metals may aid in predicting the systemic effects of



combinations of metals (Table 22).  The U.S. Public Health



Service established tolerance levels for metals in drinking water



and compared the levels with the results of a sampling of



community water supplies (Table 23).   In some cases excess



quantities of metals are present in water supplies.  Carcinogenesis



and teratogenesis must be considered where long-term exposure to



excess quantities of certain metals is suspected (Tables 24 and



25).
     Toxicity of asbestos fibers in taconite tailings has not


                                               33
been established for the oral route of exposure  ;  however,



inhalation of asbestos has been linked with cancer.  '   '
                               186

-------
                                TABLE  20
        A  CLASSIFICATION OF  THE EFFECTS  OF  METALS*t
Moderate to Factors in
severe environmental Limited
Essential industrial nonoccupa t ional Accidental industrial
Metal for mammals hazard disease poisoning hazard
Aluminum x
Antimony x x
Arsenic x x x
Barium x
Beryllium x x
Bismuth x
Boranes
Cadmium x x x
Cesium x
Chromium (III) x
Chromium (VI ) x
Cobalt x x
Copper x xx
Gallium x
Germanium x
Gold x
Hafnium x
Indium x
Iridium x
Iron x xxx
Lanthanons x
Lead xxx
Magnesium x x
Manganese x x
Mercury xxx
Metal hydrides
and Car bony Is x
Molybdenum x x
Nickel x x
Niobium x
Palladium x
Platinum x
Rhenium x
Rubidium x
Selenium x x x
Silver x
Strontium x x
Tantalum x x
Tellurium x x
Thallium x
Tin (organic) x
Titanium x
Tungsten ?
Uranium x
Vanadium x x ?
Zinc x ? x
Zirconium x
Associated
with mine
drainage
x

x




X




X






X

X

X



X
X
X





X


X






X

    * Casarett, L.J., and J. Doull.  Toxicology, the basic science of poisons.  New York,
Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.,  1975.  768 p.
    t Martin and Mills.  Water  pollution caused by inactive ore and mineral mines.
                                   187

-------
                            TABLE 21

               BODY BURDEN, HUMAN DAILY INTAKE, AMD
       CONTENT IN THE EARTH'S CRUST OF SELECTED ELEMENTS*
Element
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Boron
Cadmi urn
Calcium
Cesium
Chromium
Cobalt
Copper
Germanium
Gold
Iron
Lead
Lithium
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Molybdenum
Nickel
Niobium
Potassium
Rubidium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Strontium
Tellurium
Tin
Titanium
Uranium
Vanadium
Zinc
Zirconium
Human body
burden
(mg/70 kg)
100
<90
<100
16
<10
30
1,050,000
<0.01
<6
1
100
trace
<1
4,100
120
trace
20,000
20
trace
9
<10
100
140,000
1,200
15
<1
105,000
140
600
30
<15
0.02
30
2,300
250
Daily
intake
(mg)
36.4

0.7
16
0.01-0.02
0.018-0.20


0.06
0.3
3.2
1.5

15
0.3
2
500
5
0.02
0.35
0.45
0.60

10
0.06-0.15


2
0.6
17
0.3

2.5
12
3.5
Earth's
crust
(ppm)
81 ,000
0.2
2
400
16
0.2
36,000
1
200
23
45
1
0.005
50,000
15
30
20,900
1,000
0.5
1
80
24
25,900
120
0.09
0.1
28,300
450
0.002
3
4,400
2
no
65
70
     * Casarett and Doull.  Toxicology, the basic
science of poisons.
                               188

-------
                                                TABLE   22
                                 TARGET  ORGANS   OF  METALS*
•total*
                   Gaatrointeitmal
                      tract
•apiratory
  tract      CNS
Cardiovaacular
   •y»t«TT        Liver   Skin   Blood   Kidney
                                                                                                        one   Endocrine
Alujr.inuir
Antiajony
Xraenic
Bumuth
ftoranes
Eor or,
Cadmiur
Chror.iur
Cobalt
Copper
Calliuir
Cermar.iujT,
Cold
Bafniu*
2 nd i uir.
Iron
Lanthanont
Lead
Lithiur
Magn*§iun
Hanqaneae
•tercury
Metal hydrides
Molybdenun
Nickel
Niobiur
Oaniuir.
Palladium
Platinum
Rhodiurr.
fcubidiuir
Silver
Strontium
Tantaluv
Tellurium
Thallium
Tin (organic)
Titanium
Tun? a ten
Uranium
Vanadiu*
Sine
Sirconiuai
     * Ca»*rett and Ooull.  Toaicology,  the baaic aci*DC« of
pole
                                                        189

-------
                                            TABLE  23

            TOLERANCE LEVELS  FOR  METALS IN DRINKING  WATER AND RESULTS OF
                     SAMPLING OF COMMUNITY  WATER SUPPLIES  IN  1969*t
Element
Arsenic
Barium
Boron
Cadmium
Chromium (Cr )
Copper
Iron
Lead
Manganese
Selenium
Silver
Uranium (Uranyl)
Zinc
* Casarett
t From U.S.
Limits
Mandatory
upper
0.05
1.0
5.0
0.01
0.05


0.05

0.01
0.05
**

(ppm)
Desirable
upper
0.01

1.0


1 .0
0.3

0.05


5.0
5 .0
Maximum
concentrations
found (ppm)
0. 10
1.55
3.28
3.94
0.7911
8.35
26.0
0.64
1.32
0.07
0.03
Not included
13.0
Number of
total of
Mandatory
5 .
. 2§
0
4
5


37

10
0


—_!_•__ ''.!_.•- 	 	 .._ •
samples of a
2595 exceeding
Desirable
10

20


42
223

211



8
and Doull. Toxicology, the basic science of poisons.
Public Health Service: Community Water
Supply Study: Analysis
of Nation
Survey Findings.
U.S.  Department of  Health,  Education, and Welfare, Washington, D.C.,  1970.
     § Not measured in all  samples.

     H Total Chromium measured.
    ** Proposed.

-------
VD
                                                TABLE  24




                         METAL CARCINOGENESIS  IN  EXPERIMENTAL  ANIMALS*
Metal
Beryl liu»
Cadaitio

ChromliM


Cobalt

Copper
Iron
Lead

nickel


Selentun
Zinc

I Han tun
AluBlnun
Sliver
Mercury
Compound
AnBeSIOj. BeO
BeO. BeS04. BeHPO,
CdS, CdO. CdCI2. CdS04
Cd porter
CdClj
Metallic Cr
Roasted chronlte ore
CaCr04. CrOj. Na2Cr?0;
Cr?0j
CaCr04
Metallic Co. Co pooder
CoO. CoS
CuS04
1 ron-carbonhydra te
completes
Pbj (P04)?. Pb (C2Hj02)2
Tetraettiyl lead
Pb (C2Hj02)2. ?Pb (OH)2
HI dust. HI (CO),
Nlckelocene. Nl dust
K'jSj dust. NIO dust
lit pellets
HljS2 discs
NH4KSe. grain vilh Se.
Ma2. SeO,. bls-4-acet-
aninophenyl Sehydroiide
I** Znd
4. ZnCI2
1 1 tanocene
Al foil
Ag (oil
Ag colloid
1 tqutd oercury
Species
Rabbits, mice, rats
Monkeys, rats
Rats, ntce
Chickens
Rabbits
Rats, ntce
Rats
Rats, rabbits

Chickens
Rats. nice, rabbits
Rats
Mice
Rats, mice
Guinea pigs, rats
Rats

Cats
Rats
Rats
Chickens

Rats, nice
Rats
Rats
Bats
Rats
Route
IV
Inhalat ton
SC. IM
Intratestlcular
Intraosseous
IN. IP. SC
Intrapleural
Intrabronchl- 1
SC. IM
Intraosseous
Intratestlcular
IM. SC
SC
SC
Dietary
Inhalation
IM. SC

Imptanation in nasal
sinuses
Dietary
Intratestlcular

IM
Implementation
Implementat ion
IV
IP
Type of tumor
Osteosarcomas
Pulmonary carcinomas
Sarcomas
Leydiqlomas
leratona
Sarcomas
Sarcomas
Squamous
Cell carcinomas
Squamous cell and adenocarctnomas
Sarcomas

Teratoma
Sarcomas
Renal adenomas and carcinomas
Lymphomas
Renal adenomas
Renal and testtcular carcinomas
Anaplastlc and adenocarctnomas
Squamous cell, anaplastic and adenocarctnows
Sarcomas

Squanous cell and adenocarcinomas
Hepatomas
Sarcomas
Thyroid adenomas
Leydtglomas. serniinoM
Teratomas
Fibrosarcomas. hepatonas
Lymphomas
Sarcomas
Fibrosarcomas
Tumors (?)
Spindle cell sarcomas
                        • Casarett and Ooull. To>lcolo]y. the basic science of poisons.

-------
                                                                             TABLE  25

                                                     EFFECTS  OF  METALS  ON  REPRODUCTION*
               Metal
                            .  Species
                                                                        Test
                                                                                                                          Results
VO
Arsenic


Cadmium




Cobalt

Copper

Indium

Lead




Lithium

Manganese

Mercury




Molybdenum



Nickel



Selenium




Tellurium

Titanium

Zinc
                             Mouse
                             Hamster, rat

                             Mouse
Hamster

Hamster

Hamster

Hamster

Mouse

Rat
Hamster

Mouse

Hamster

Human
Mouse, rat
Hamster


Mouse

Hamster

Rat

Hamster

Livestock
Hamster
Mouse


Rat

Rat

Hamster
Rat
                        5  ppm arsenite in drinking water,  three generations
                        Teratogenic parenteral

                        10 ppm  1n drinking water, three generations
Teratogenic parenteral

Teratogenic

Teratogenic

Teratogenic parenteral

25 ppm in drinking water, three generations

25 ppm In drinking water, three generations
Teratogenic parenteral

Teratogenic

Teratogenic

Epidemiologic
Teratogenic (methyl  mercury)
Teratogenic (mercuric acetate and  phenylmercurlc
 acetate)

10 ppm (molybdate)  in drinking  water,
 three generations
Teratogenic

5 ppm in drinking water, three  generations

Teratogenic parenteral

Epidemiologic
Teratoqenic
3 ppm (selenate) in drinking water,
 three generations

Teratogenic (dietary 500 to 3500  ppm)

5 ppm (titanate) 1n drinking water,
 three generations
Teratogenic parenteral
Dietary administration dam
Increased male to female ratio, reduced litter size
Head changes, exencephaly, urogenital abnormalities

Failure to reproduce three generations, congenital
 abnormality of the tail, runting. death before
 weaning
Abnormalities face and palate

Not teratogenlc

Not teratogenlc

Abnormalities of limb buds

Failure to reproduce three generations, runting, death
 before weaning
Death before weaning, runting
Malformation tail bud

Resorptlon, cleft palate

Not teratogenic, embryocldal

Mental retardation, neuromuscular effects
Behavior effects, changes In central nervous system
No clear-cut effects


Deaths before weaning, runting

Not teratogenlc embryocldal

Death before weaning, runting,  reduced  litter  size,
 reduced number of males  In  third generation
Embryotoxlc, few general malformations

Teratogenic
Not teratogenlc
Increased male to female  ratios, death  before
 weaning, runting

Hydrocephalus

Runting. death before weaning,  male  to  female
 ratio reduced
Mild  teratogentc effect
Increased hydrocephalus
                     * Casarett and  Doull.  Toxicology,  the basic science of poisons.

-------
     Impact on human health through atmospheric exposure results



primarily from particulate emissions but also from radon gas



emission in the case of uranium tailings.  Because most mining



operations are located in sparsely populated areas, human




exposure to such particulate emissions is probably minor.  A




possible exception is exposure to fugitive dust from some quarry




operations.  Most of this dust, which may contain silica, is




generated by the operations themselves, rather than from waste



heaps.5'6




     The hazard of fugitive dust from uranium tailings is also



slight; radon gas from tailings piles and the subsequent inhalation




of radon daughters account for most of the total dose to persons



living near the Slick Rock, Colorado, uranium mining/beneficiating



site.  Gamma radiation exposure from the piles is virtually zero



because few persons live or work within 0.2 mile (0.3 km) of



those piles whose gamma radiation is above background level.



     The significance of long-term radiation exposure to human



health has been studied extensively for many years.  Because the



diseases that usually result from long-term exposure to low-level



radiation (e.g.,  lung cancer and leukemia)  also have many other



causes, it is difficult to determine the specific cause and



effect in any given case.  Therefore, the projected health



impacts of low-level radiation exposures are usually based on



observed effects of high exposures,  on the premise that the




effects are linear.  Considerable information is available on the



high incidence of lung cancer in uranium miners exposed to radon






                               193

-------
and radon daughters in mine air.  This information provides a



basis for calculating the probable health effects of low-level



exposure to large populations, although such projections must be



recognized as highly uncertain.  The combined effect of radon



daughters with other carcinogens is one complicating factor.  For



example, the incidence of lung cancer among uranium miners who



smoke is far higher than can be explained on the basis of either



smoking or the radiation alone.



     Calculations based on measurements of radon concentrations



in excess of background values indicate that the average



radon-induced lung cancer risk due to waste piles in the area



within 0.5 mile (0.8 km) of the Slick Rock sites is 1.3 x 10



per person per year, or less than one-tenth the average cancer


                                                       -4  17
risk due to all causes for Colorado residents (1.8 x 10  ).



     The 25-year cumulative health effects of above-background



concentrations of radon have been calculated for two static



populations on the basis of current and increased mining



activity.    A comparison of pile-induced radium 222 with



background concentrations is shown below:



25-year Cumulative Health Effects 0 to 0.5 mile from Edge of Piles



Projected Population Growth  Pile-Induced RDC  Background RDC



  Static population (71)           0.02             0.12

  Static population (142)           0.05             0.24



Pile-induced radon daughter health effects are approximately 18



percent of the background radon daughter health effects.  The



exposure and consequent risk will continue as long as the



radiation source remains in its present location and condition.



                               194

-------
     Although the greatest percentage by weight of fugitive



particulate emissions from mineral resource solid wastes settles



within a short distance of the source, a large percentage of



particulates in the smaller size range are transported greater




distances.  This smaller size range represents the greatest



hazard to human health for two reasons.  First, only particles




smaller than 2 micrometers are likely to penetrate into the




deeper portions of the lung and deposit in the alveoli, and only




those smaller than 0.5 to 0.1 micrometers will be subject to




diffusion within the lung.  Second, these smaller particulates




exhibit greater surface area per unit weight and are more likely




to contain adsorbed polycyclic organic matter.  Although the



presence of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons  (PAH) in fugitive



dust from burning coal mine waste heaps could make exposure to



this dust hazardous to human health, this hazard is partially



mitigated by the isolation of most coal mines.



     Although BaP is a known carcinogen, its presence in emissions



from coal refuse fires must be considered a minor health hazard



when viewed in perspective.    Recent estimates indicate that 50



tons (45 Mg) per year of this compound is emitted from coal



refuse fires, compared with 500 tons (454 Mg)  per year from heat



and power generating sources and 300 to 500 tons (272 to 454 Mg)



per year from all refuse burning.  Moreover,  these other sources



are usually located nearer population centers.  The concentration



of BaP in cigarette smoke also presents a much more significant



hazard.





                               195

-------
     In summary, even though mineral resource solid wastes could



have adverse effects on human health, the significance of this



potential health hazard is lessened by the isolation of most



mining/beneficiating operations.  The nonhazardous impact of



waste appears to be greater.
                                196

-------
                    REFERENCES FOR SECTION 5


1.   Williams, R.E.  Waste production and disposal in mining,
       milling, and metallurgical industries.  San Francisco.
       Miller Freeman Publications, Inc., 1975.  489 p.

2.   PEDCo Environmental Specialists, Inc.  Evaluation of
       fugitive dust emissions from mining, Task 1 report:
       identification of fugitive dust sources associated with
       mining.  Environmental Protection Agency Contract No.
       68-02-1321.  Cincinnati, 1976.  78 p.

3.   Donovan, R.P., et al.  Vegetative stabilization of mineral
       waste heaps.  Environmental Protection Agency, Washington,
       National Technical Information Service.  PB-252 176.  1976.
       305 p.

4.   Axetell, K., Jr.  Survey of fugitive dust from coal mines.
       Environmental Protection Agency Contract No. 68-01-4489.
       Denver, 1978.  114 p.

5.   Midwest Research Institute.  A study of waste generation,
       treatment, and disposal in the metals mining industry.
       Environmental Protection Agency Contract No. 3952-D.
       Washington, 1976.  403 p.

6.   Chalekode, P.K., et al.  Source assessment document No. 30;
       crushed granite.   Environmental Protection Agency Contract
       No. 68-02-1874.   Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
       1975.

7.   Office of Water and Hazardous Materials.  Development document
       for interim final effluent guidelines and standards of
       performance mineral mining and processing industry.
       Washington, Environmental Protection Agency
       EPA 440/l-76/054a.  1976.  432 p.

8.   Strip and Surface Mine Study Policy Committee, U.S.  Department
       of the Interior.   Surface mining and our environment, a
       special report to the nation.   Washington,  U.S.  Government
       Printing Office,  1967.  125 p.

9.   Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.   Environmental
       Protection Agency, Preferred standards path report for
       polycyclic organic matter.   Durham, October 1974.

10.  Stern, A.C.   The effects of air pollution, H is air pollution,
       3d ed.  VII.  New York Academic Press, Inc., 1977.

11.  College  of Engineering, University of Florida.  Natural
       radiation exposure:   assessment,  summary.   Gainesville,
       Florida, University of Florida.  1976.

                               197

-------
12.  Personal communication.  R. S. Hearon, International
       Minerals and Chemical Corporation, to J. S. Greber,
       PEDCo Environmental, Inc., March 28, 1978.

13.  Personal communication.  Dr. J. E. Garlanger.  Ardaman and
       Associates, Inc., Orlando, Florida, to R. S. Amick, PEDCo
       Environmental, Inc., August 30, 1978.

14.  Personal communication.  Dr. W. E. Bolch, University of
       Florida, Gainesville, Florida, to R. S. Amick, PEDCo
       Environmental, Inc., September 14, 1978.

15.  Greber, J.S., et al.  Assessment of environmental impact of
       the mineral mining industry.  Cincinnati, Environmental
       Protection Agency Contract No. 68-03-2479.  1977.

16.  Down, C.G., and J. Stocks.  Environmental problems of tailings
       disposal.  Mining Magazine 137(1); 25-33, July 1977.

17.  Ford, Bacon, and Davis Utah, Inc.  A summary of the phase
       II - Title I engineering assessment of inactive uranium
       mill tailings Slick Rock sites, Slick Rock, Colorado.
       U.S. Department of Energy Contract No. E(05-1)-1658.
       Grand Junction, Colorado.  1977.

18.  Mead, W.E., and G.W. Condrat.  Groundwater protection and
       tailings disposal.  In American Society of Civil Engineers
       National Convention, Denver, November 3-7, 1975.  15 p.

19.  Toland, G.C., and R.E. Versaw.  Design of impoundment and
       evaporation ponds and embankments for cyanide and other
       toxic effluents.  Society of Mining Engineers of AIME
       Preprint No. 75-B-313.   Salt Lake City, 1975.  19 p.

20.  Oxbury, J.R., et al.  Potential toxicity of taconite tailings
       to aquatic life in Lake Superior.   Journal Water Pollution
       Control Federation,  February 1978.  pp. 240-251.

21.  Martin, H.W., and W.R. Mills, Jr.  Water pollution caused by
       inactive ore and mineral mines.  U.S.  Environmental
       Protection Agency, EPA-600/2-76-298.   Washington, U.S.
       Government Printing Office, 1976.   195 p.

22.  Corwin, T.K., et al.  Environmental assessment of the domestic
       primary copper, lead, and zinc industries.  Environmental
       Protection Agency Contract No.  68-02-1321 and 68-02-2535,
       Cincinnati, 1977.  390  p.

23.  Roder, R.M.  Public intervenor:   Base metal mining and
       processing.  A Report to Department of Justice,  State of
       Wisconsin contract,  Madison, 1977.


                                198

-------
 24.  Singer, P.C.  Trace metals and metal-organic  interactions  in
       natural water.  Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor Science Publishers,
       Inc., 1973.  380 p.

 25.  Oak Ridge National Laboratory.  Environmental, health, and
       control aspects of coal conversion:  an information
       overview.  Energy Research and Development  Administration
       Contract No. W-7405-eng-26.  1976.

 26.  Office of Water Planning and Standards.  Water quality
       management guidance for mine-related pollution sources
       (new, current, and abandoned).  Environmental Protection
       Agency, EPA 440/3-77-017, Washington, 1977.

 27.  Workshop report:  Research needs for mining and industrial
       solid waste disposal.  Colorado State University.  Fort
       Collins, Colorado, July 22-23, 1976.  National Technical
       Information Service.  PB-269 247.

 28.  Environmental Protection Agency.  Solid waste disposal
       facilities; proposed classification criteria.  Federal
       Register February 6, 1978, Part II.  Washington, U.S.
       Government Printing Office.

 29.  Bureau of Reclamation.  Final environmental statement; El
       Paso coal gasification project San Juan County, New Mexico
       VI.   Department of Interior FES77-03.  Washington,
       Department of Interior, 1977.

 30.  Bureau of Reclamation.  Final environmental statement; WESCO
       coal gasification project and expansion of Navajo Mine by
       Utah International,  Inc.   San Juan County, New Mexico.
       Department of Interior FES 76-2,  Washington, 1976.

 31.  Hawley, J.R.   The use, characteristics, and toxicity of
       mine-mill reagents in the Province of Ontario.   Toronto,
       Ontario Ministry of the Environment, 1977.  244 p.

 32.  Karaffa,  Mark A.,  J.K. Smith, and A.C. Worrell III.  Health
       effects assessment of the domestic primary nonferrous
       metals  industries.   Environmental Protection Agency
       Contract No.  68-02-1321.   Cincinnati, (Draft)  March 1977.

33.  Casarett,  L.J.,  and J. Doull.  Toxicology,  the basic science
       of poisons.  New York,  Macmillan  Publishing Co.,  Inc.,
       1975.  768  p.

34.  Rossiter,  C.E.,  et al.  Radiographic changes in chrysotile
       asbestos mine and mill workers in Quebec.   Archives of
       Environmental Health,  24(6)388-400, 1972.

35.  Corbett,  J.,  et al.   The health of  chrysotile asbestos mine
       and  mill workers of  Quebec.  Archives of  Environmental
       Health,  28(2)61-68,  1974.
                               199

-------
                            SECTION 6



                      LAWS AND REGULATIONS






     This section presents an overview of laws and regulations



affecting the mining industry in general and the production and



disposal of solid wastes from active and abandoned mines in



particular.  Because the regulatory setting in which the mining



industry operates includes several distinct and independent



environmental control programs on Federal, state, and local



levels, some opportunity exists for duplication  (and sometimes



emission)  of regulatory authority.  An attempt is made to



identify these areas of overlap or omission to determine if there



is a need for additional or revised regulations.  No recommendations



are made,  however, because the intent of this document is only to



assist EPA in making this determination.



     Mining laws that authorize and control prospecting, claim



procedures, leasing, development, and extraction of minerals on



public lands have existed for many years.  The cornerstone of the



Federal mineral leasing program is the U.S. Mining Law of 1872.



Prior to the enactment of this statute, the Federal Government



maintained a policy of benign neglect with regard to mineral



claims.  In subsequent years,  however, Congress passed a series



of acts that broadened and defined the power of the Federal



Government to control all types of mining operations on public






                               200

-------
lands.  Among these were the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, the




Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands, and the Materials Act of




1947.  Despite this continuing growth in the number of laws



governing mining operations in general, laws and regulations



dealing specifically with the environmental effects of mining




operations are of relatively recent origin.




     Regulations under the Federal mineral leasing program are




administered primarily under the authority of two agencies of the




Department of Interior, the Bureau of Land Management and the




Geological Survey.  Although these regulations deal specifically




with mining operations, they are broad in scope and treat the




environmental effects of mining only peripherally.



     The 1969 passage of the National Environmental Policy Act



(NEPA) placed new emphasis on the environmental effects of



mining on public lands, but the control of solid wastes from



mining operations on either public or private lands still



remained in the background.  Further, the national environmental



legislation over the last 10 years had no measurable effect on



the control of solid wastes.  The solid waste area has remained



almost exclusively under the purview of state government.  Such



Federal environmental legislation as the Clean Air Act and the



Federal Water Pollution Control Act has only indirectly affected



sources of solid wastes.  The more recently passed Surface Mining



Control and Reclamation Act and Resource Conservation and



Recovery Act (RCRA), however, provide the potential for making
                                201

-------
Federal laws a direct and uniform force within all areas of the
mining industry, including the control of solid wastes.
     Regulations governing the mining industry differ greatly
from state to state, both procedurally and in substance.  These
differences are being somewhat lessened by growing Federal
involvement, especially in areas of air and water pollution
control and mine safety.  They should be lessened even more as a
result of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act, which
places on the states the primary responsibility for developing,
issuing, and enforcing regulations that are consistent with a
Federally approved state plan.

                       Federal Regulations
     The responsibility for regulating disposal and management of
mineral resource wastes is spread among various departments and
agencies of the Federal government.   In some instances,
department or agency authority is unique to a particular area.
In many other cases, the responsibilities of several departments
or agencies are identical or similar.  The scope of Federal
activity is broad,  however, despite this lack of an
ail-encompassing Federal law providing organizational continuity
in the control of solid wastes from mining activities.
     The U.S. Mining Laws of 1872, as amended (30 U.S.C.§21-50),
apply to vacant and unappropriated public lands of the United
States and to national forests established on such lands.  This
law is concerned with the disposition of all minerals that are
not otherwise specifically covered by statute.  Very little of
                               202

-------
the statutory language in these laws provides for the Federal




Government either to control mining operations or to require the



restoration or treatment of land surfaces disturbed by



prospecting or mining.




     The U.S. Department of Agriculture, however, issued




regulations  (36 C.F.R. Parts 251, 252, 293) effective September




1, 1974, which require that exploration and mining activities on




National Forest Lands be conducted so as to minimize adverse




environmental impacts on the National Forest Systems.  If it is




determined that a proposed operation may cause significant



disturbance to surface resources, a plan of operation, including



a description of the environmental and reclamation procedures,



must be submitted to the Department.  Reclamation procedures



specifically include  (1)  control of erosion and landslides, (2)



control of water runoff,  (3) reshaping and revegetating of



disturbed areas where reasonably practicable.



     Regulations have also been issued for establishing



procedures to minimize adverse environmental impacts on the



surface of public lands from operations authorized under the U.S.



Mining Laws  (enforced principally by the Bureau of Land



Management).  These regulations are similar to those in 36 C.F.R.



Parts 251 and 252 covering National Forest Lands (described
                                       /


earlier), but they only cover actions that result in "significant



disturbance" to the surface.  Significant disturbance is defined



as "any disturbance to the environment other than casual use as



determined by the authorized officer."
                                203

-------
     When Federal lands are involved, a plan of operation must be



approved by the authorized officer before beginning mining



operations that will significantly disturb surface resources.



This plan of operation must include a description of



environmental protection measures.  In the interest of minimizing




environmental degradation during mining operations, the operator



must (1) comply with state and Federal standards covering air



quality, water quality, and disposal and treatment of solid



wastes; (2) harmonize mining operations with visual resources;



(3) minimize impact of mining operations on fisheries, wildlife,



and plant habitats; (4) avoid damage to cultural resources;  (5)



properly construct and reclaim access roads; (6) reclaim surface



as soon as practicable.  Reclamation is specifically defined to



include control of erosion and water runoff and control or



removal of toxic materials.



     The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 (30 U.S.C.§181 et. seq.)



provides for the disposition of minerals by means of leases and



permits issued by the Secretary of the Interior.  The act covers



deposits of coal, phosphate, sodium, potassium, oil, oil shale,



native asphalt, solid and semisolid bitumen, bituminous rock, and



gas in public lands and in National Forests established on public



lands.   The issuance of such leases and permits by the Secretary



is discretionary and may be denied if,  in his judgment,



exploitation of the mineral deposit would impair other important



uses of the land.  The act also gives the Secretary authority to
                                204

-------
impose requirements concerning mining operations and land




restoration following completion of these operations.




     Regulations issued under this act (43 C.F.R. Group 3500)




require that a "valuable deposit of mineral" be discovered before



a preference-right lease for coal, phosphate, potassium, sodium,




or sulfur can be obtained.  To obtain such a lease, an application




is submitted to an authorized officer of the Bureau of Land




Management who, with the assistance of the mining supervisor of




the Geological Survey, examines it technically and analyzes it



from the standpoint of the environment.  The analysis includes an



evaluation of the impacts of the proposed operations on land uses




or resources and on lands adjacent to the affected area.  Such



impacts are considered before issuing or denying a lease.



     The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 was amended by the Federal



Coal Leasing Amendments Act of 1976.  This legislation



substantially changed Federal procedures for leasing coal rights.



The amendments include a requirement that no lease be issued



unless the lands containing the coal deposits are included in a



comprehensive land-use plan.  Moreover, leases covering lands



under the surface management of any Federal agency other than the



Department of the Interior will be issued only with the consent



of that agency and subject to conditions stipulated by that



agency.  However, the act lacks a general provision for minimizing



environmental impacts.




     The Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands (30 U.S.C.§351-359)



extends the coverage of the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 to lands





                               205

-------
acquired by the United States  (with certain exceptions).  Again,
the Secretary of the Interior  is authorized to issue leases and
permits for deposits of minerals such as coal, phosphate, sodium,
potassium, and sulfur.  The conditions of the leasing provisions
of the 1920 act apply and the  Secretary's authority is
discretionary.  In addition, the head of the department, agency,
or instrumentality that has jurisdiction over lands containing
such mineral deposits may prescribe conditions that insure
adequate utilization of the lands for the primary purposes for
which they were acquired and are being administered.  Limited
application of this act has been exercised.
     The Materials Act of 1947  (30 U.S.C.§601, 602) authorizes
the Secretary of the Interior  to dispose of certain minerals
found in public lands, including common varieties of sand, stone,
gravel, pumice, pumicite, cinders, and clay, provided that
disposition is not detrimental to public interest.  The contracts
prescribed under this act bind purchasers to the observance of
good conservation practices.   Such contracts, entered into for
the duration of operation, also provide for land restoration.
Similar authority is conferred upon the Secretary of Agriculture
with respect to lands administered for national forest purposes.
Executive discretion inherent  in this act has resulted in
limited conservation or restoration practices.
     The acts and regulations discussed thus far encompass the
Federal mineral leasing program.  Two agencies of the Department
of the Interior,  the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the
                               206

-------
Geological Survey  (GS), have been delegated administrative and



management responsibilities for this program.  Secretary's Order



No. 2948, dated October 6, 1972, divides the administrative



responsibility between the two agencies.  The principal



objectives set forth in this order are to protect the environment



by assuring  (1) that mineral exploration and production are



conducted with maximum protection for the environment,  (2) that



precautions are taken to protect public health and safety, (3)



that operations are in full compliance with the spirit and



objectives of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969,



other Federal environmental legislation, and supporting Executive



orders and regulations.



     These agencies cooperate in formulating what is to be



incorporated in leases, permits, and licenses for the protection



of surface and nonmineral resources and for reclamation.  The BLM



is responsible for ensuring compliance with environmental



protection and rehabilitation requirements inside the operating



area.   Effectiveness has varied because official decisions are



sometimes inconsistent when applied to conditions in individual



cases.



     The original thrust of the Federal mineral leasing program



was to provide an orderly system for locating, removing, and



utilizing valuable mineral deposits on federally owned and



controlled lands.  Only recently has the Federal Government used



the broad enabling language of these laws to impose environmental



restrictions on mining operations.   The passage of the National






                                207

-------
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 provided the principal impetus



for this move.



     The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 was the first



major attempt by Congress to establish a broad and comprehensive



environmental policy while simultaneously extending its control




over activities affecting the environment beyond lands owned or



controlled by the government.  This act establishes a national



policy concerning the environment and declares that it is the



continuing policy and responsibility of the Federal Government to



use "all practicable means, consistent with other essential



considerations of national policy [and] to improve and



coordinate. . ." all Federal action to the end that certain



broad national objectives of environmental management may be



attained.  By its terms, this act applies to every agency and



instrumentality of the Federal Government and, in effect, tells



each of the various Federal agencies and instrumentalities to add



a new criterion—effect on the environment—to those against



which they have traditionally tested their actions.



     Section 102 of NEPA outlines several steps that Federal



agencies are required to take to assure attainment of the act's



broad environmental goals.  The most significant action-forcing



device created by this section is the environmental impact



statement.   Provisions of Section 102 (2) (c)  state that every



agency of the Federal Government must "include in every



recommendation or report on proposals for legislation or other



major Federal actions significantly affecting the quality of the






                              208

-------
human environment, a detailed statement.  . ."of the environmental



impact of such an action.  Only a clear conflict with existing



agency statutory obligations can alter the agency's duty to



comply with NEPA's mandate.



     The extent to which NEPA (particularly the requirement for



an environmental impact statement) affects the mining industry



depends initially on whether the proposed action is a "major



Federal action."  Section 1500.5 of the guidelines promulgated



under the act indicates that "covered actions" include:



     0    New and continuing Federal projects and program



          activities directly undertaken by Federal agencies or



          supported in any manner through Federal contracts,



          grants, loans, or other financial assistance, or



          involving a Federal lease, permit,  license certificate,



          or other entitlement for use.



     0    The promulgation or amendment of regulations, rules,



          procedures, and policies.



Exploration and mining operations under the Materials Act of



1947, as amended, and the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended,



specifically require such an environmental analysis.



     Before mining operations can be initiated under the mineral



leasing laws, an environmental analysis or an environmental



impact statement generally must be prepared by the surface



management agency, the Bureau of Land Management, and the



Geological Survey.  If the impact of the proposed operation is



expected to be small, an environmental analysis report (EAR) will






                                209

-------
suffice; if it is expected to be large, an environmental impact



statement must be prepared.



     The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (PL 93-205; 87 Stat. 884),



supplants the Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969 and



seeks to support worldwide conservation of flora and fauna.  The



law encompasses all species of the animal and plant kingdoms and



is enforced by the Fish and Wildlife Service of the U.S.




Department of the Interior.



     In practice, endangerment of the species must be involved.



The law establishes two categories of endangerment:  (1) those



species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant



portion of their range, i.e., Endangered Species; and (2) those



that are likely to become endangered within the foreseeable



future throughout all or a significant portion of their range,




i.e., Threatened Species.  Enforcement includes a permit system



allowing for such things as enhancement, propagation, or



survival;  zoological exhibition for educational purposes;



conservation management by states;  or special purposes consistent



with the act,  which largely aims at preventing harm to endangered



or threatened species.



     Issuing or withholding a Fish and Wildlife Service permit



(or preventing another Federal agency from taking such action



under its authority)  is based on an assessment of the potential



harm to the ecosystem caused by the infringement.  Mining activity



could conceivably constitute an infringement that might be



prevented or limited.   Placement of mineral resource solid wastes
                               210

-------
that might not violate regulations governing air or water



pollution could destroy a habitat or species.  Should such



infringing harm exist, the act provides for steps to be taken to



prevent or limit the action.



     The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the



Federal agency authorized to enforce or carry out certain actions



within its jurisdiction are mechanisms for preventing an action.



For example, the Corps of Engineers may refuse to issue a permit



to dredge for sand and gravel if the Fish and Wildlife Service



objects on grounds that endangered or threatened aquatic life may



be harmed.  Likewise, the Bureau of Land Management or the



Geological Survey may withhold mineral leasing permits for



"public domain lands" if they determine that an endangered or



threatened species may be harmed.  These agencies are the focus



of the mining leasing programs of the Federal Government and are



responsible for maintaining the objectives and spirit of NEPA in



administering these programs.  The situation would be the same if



mining operations were proposed on National Forest System lands



under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Forest Service (FS) or



National Park Service under its regulations.  Although it has the



potential of affecting the disposal of solid wastes, as a general



rule this act has not been applied specifically to solid waste



problems.



     The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (PL 89-655,



80 Stat. 915), formerly the Antiquities Act of 1906 (34 Stat.



1225), can impact proposed mining endeavors.  This act is





                                211

-------
intended to preserve cultural resources such as archaeological



and paleontological sites, and historical buildings and sites.



The act is normally enforced in two ways:   (1) if a proposed



mining site is known to have cultural resources, it is usually



explored, and artifacts (e.g., arrowheads, pottery) or specimen




(e.g., fossils) are collected, catalogued, and delivered to an



official repository (such as a nearby university);  (2) if such



items are discovered after mining activities have already begun,



the same procedure is followed.  Occasionally, a determination



may be made to give a site National Register status.  When this



occurs/ mining may be precluded on all or part of the area, or



special provisions may be made for preserving the site during



mining activities.  Historical buildings and sites  (e.g.,



battlefields)  also may be cited to the National Register, and



mining may be precluded or controlled.  In actual practice,



seldom have the proposed mining or other activity been completely



precluded.   The usual case recovers any artifacts unearthed or



isolates historic resources from the permitted mining area.



     Section 13 of the River and Harbor Act (30 Stat. 1152; 33



USC 407)  approved March 3, 1899, provides for controlling



discharge of refuse into navigable waters.  A permit to discharge



can be issued if it is determined that such discharge would not



be injurious to anchorage and navigation.  This section, known as



the Refuse Act, was originally enforced by the Army Corps of



Engineers.   This authority has since been superseded by the
                                212

-------
permit authority provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection




Agency under sections 402 and 405 of the Federal Water Pollution



Control Act.



     "Refuse" was broadly defined under permitting authority of




the Army Corps of Engineers and affected mining with regard to




oil and sediment discharges.  "Black water" from coal washing and




sand and gravel extraction were commonly controlled under this




section.  Because of a duplication in the authority to control




these discharges as well as dredge or fill material between



Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act and



Section 13 of the Refuse Act, the latter has remained unused in



recent years.  Section 404 is administered by the Army Corps of



Engineers, and waste disposal sites are selected in accordance



with guidelines developed by the U.S. EPA.



     The laws and regulations discussed thus far do not treat the



disposal of solid wastes from mining operations as a separate and



distinct problem.  Control of solid wastes is considered only an



incidental part of an overall environmental program.  The thrust



of NEPA is the protection of the environment regardless of the



kind of pollutant.  Regulations issued under the Federal mineral



leasing laws are slightly more specific only because they relate



to all pollutants discharged from mining operations.  In both



cases,  only lands owned or controlled by the Federal Government



are affected.



     The original purpose of Federal air and water pollution



control programs (unlike that of the Federal mineral leasing





                               213

-------
program) was .to establish nationwide standards for pollutants



that had been shown to have an adverse effect on public health



and welfare.  The discharge of pollutants from mining operations



is affected by these laws only insofar as such discharges affect



the overall quality of the air and water.  The Federal Water



Pollution Control Act, the Clean Air Act, and the Safe Drinking



Water Act are the principal air and water pollution control laws



that affect mining operations.



     Congress passed the Federal Water Pollution Control Act



Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92-500)  to create an orderly and



uniform program "to restore and maintain the chemical, physical,



and biological integrity of the Nation's waters" by eliminating



pollutant discharges into navigable water.  The implementation of



this policy affects the discharge of solid wastes from mines in



several ways.



     Section 208(b)(1) of the act requires that a plan be



prepared according to areawide waste treatment management



practices.   The plan must, include:



     "(G)  a process to (i)  identify, if appropriate, mine-related



     sources of pollution including new, current, and abandoned



     surface and underground mine runoff, and (ii)  set forth



     procedures and methods (including land use requirements)  to



     control to the extent feasible such sources[.]"



Waste treatment management plans and practices must provide for



the application of the best practicable waste treatment technology



and the control or treatment of waste from all point and nonpoint






                               214

-------
sources.  A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System



(NPDES) permit  (under section 402 of the act) will not be issued



if any point source is not so managed.




     Mine operators may also be subject to the provisions of




section 311 of the act if the discharges from the mining




operation contain substances classified as hazardous.  This could




have particular impact on tailings ponds, which sometimes .contain




toxic constituents.




     The major feature of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act



Amendments of 1972 that affects mining is the national permit



system for the control of discharges into navigable waters.  The



National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System requires that the



owner or operator of a point source of pollution obtain a Federal



permit before legally discharging pollutants into navigable



waters.  The EPA has taken the view that any concentrated,



pollutant-bearing flow that is caused by man is a point source,



regardless of whether the conveyance is man-made or the result of



natural water flow from the point at which the operator's



activities caused the water to collect and become contaminated.



It is generally presumed that a mining operation will have at



least one point source of pollutants.  Section 404 of the act



requires a different permit (issued by the Corps of Engineers)



for any discharge of dredged or fill material into navigable



waters at specified disposal sites.



     The Federal Water Pollution Control Act was amended in 1977



by the Clean Water Act (Public Law 95-217).  The impact of these



changes upon the mining industry is still uncertain.



                               215

-------
     The Clean Air Act  (42 U.S.C.§1857, et seq.) establishes



ambient air standards for particulate matter dispersed into the



air.  Most atmospheric emissions from mining operations are in



the form of dust.  Regulations issued under the Clean Air Act  (40



C.F.R. Part 51) specify the requirements for State Implementation



Plans  (SIP's).  These regulations recognize the adverse effects



of fugitive dust on air quality and set forth suggested



precautions calculated to provide control of these emissions by



reasonably available technology.  Such precautions include the



application of asphalt, oil, water, or suitable chemicals on



roads, materials, stockpiles, and other surfaces which can give



rise to airborne dust.  Regulations also set forth suggested



visible emission limitations, which may also affect the discharge



of particulate matter from mining operations.



     Specifically, with regard to fugitive dust from mining and



beneficiating areas, however, in its Prevention of Significant



Air Quality Deterioration Requirements for State Implementation



Plans (Federal Register, June 19, 1978), the EPA temporarily



excluded fugitive dust from any air quality impact assessment,



pending further development in modeling techniques for fugitive



dust.



     The Safe Drinking Water Act (P.L. 93-523)  establishes



guidelines for the protection of underground sources of drinking



water.  This act could have a profound effect on mining operations



that contaminate wells or other sources of drinking water with



wastes.  If such operations contribute significantly to the





                               216

-------
failure of a public water system's compliance with the national
primary drinking water regulations or otherwise adversely affect
human health, the mine operator may be required to prevent
percolation or seepage of contaminants from tailings ponds and

other operations into the surrounding sources of drinking water.

Primary enforcement authority under this act lies with the

states, subject to somewhat stringent requirements and limitations
established by the U.S. EPA.
     The Solid Waste Disposal and Resource Recovery Acts of 1965
and 1970 constituted the first major Federal effort in the solid
waste field.  These acts were not regulatory in nature, however,
and the role of the U.S. EPA was limited primarily to providing
technical and financial assistance to state and local agencies.
Recognizing the inadequacy of these acts and the need for
comprehensive solid waste control programs, Congress passed the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which was signed
into law on October 21, 1976.  This act establishes a national
regulatory framework to govern solid waste disposal and gives the
EPA new authority to establish standards and regulations to
complement its traditional financial and technical assistance
functions.
     Generally, RCRA prohibits future open dumping and requires
that present open dumps be upgraded to sanitary landfills.  It
also regulates treatment,  storage, transportation, and disposal
of hazardous wastes and provides guidelines for collection,
transportation, separation,  recovery, and disposal of solid
wastes.
                               217

-------
     Subtitle D of RCRA provides for the regulation of solid



waste disposal.  In determining the extent to which this



provision affects the mining industry, it must be established



whether the materials produced by the mining process are



considered solid wastes.




     The act defines solid wastes as "any garbage, refuse,



sludge. . . and other discarded material, including solid. . .



material resulting from industrial, commercial, mining, and



agricultural operations. . ."  Most mining wastes clearly fall



within this broad enabling definition.  Although there is some



support for the belief that overburden piles and wastewater



impoundments were not intended to be included as solid wastes,



the overriding concern of Congress in adopting RCRA was to



eliminate or control any emissions that might adversely affect



the health and environment, and any evaluation of what is included



as solid wastes must be based on this concern.



     The next question that arises is whether the piles of slag,



dumps of mine waste rock, tailings impoundments, and the like



created during mining operations are open dumps within the



meaning of the act.  An open dump is defined as a disposal site



that is not a sanitary landfill and a sanitary landfill is defined



as a disposal site where no reasonable probability of adverse



effects on health or the environment exists.  Detailed definitions



of these terms have not yet been offered.  Section 8002(f) of the



act, however, specifically requires the EPA to make a study to



determine the adverse environmental effects of solid wastes from





                                218

-------
active and abandoned surface and underground mines.  The study,



of which this section is a part, will include an analysis of  (1)



the source and yearly volume of discarded material generated by




mining,  (2) present disposal practices,  (3) potential dangers to




human health and the environment from surface runoff of leachate




and air pollution by dust, (4) alternatives to current disposal




methods, (5) the cost of those alternatives in terms of the




impact on the mine product costs, (6) potential for use of




discarded material as a secondary source of the mine product.




     Some wastes generated by mining operations may also be



classified as hazardous wastes.  The act defines hazardous wastes



as solid wastes that because of their quantity, concentration, or



physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics may "cause, or



significantly contribute to,  an increase in mortality or in



serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible illness; or



pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health



when improperly handled."  Whether or not particular wastes



generated by mining activities are considered hazardous will



depend on criteria, guidelines, and regulations promulgated by



the EPA.



     The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 is



the most recent attempt by Congress to control surface coal



mining and reclamation operations.  Recognizing the importance of



allowing each state to develop its own surface mining regulations,



Congress placed the primary responsibility for implementing the



provisions of the act with the states.  Nevertheless, the newly






                               219

-------
created Office of Surface Mine Reclamation and Enforcement
(Department of Interior) is developing guidelines for use by the
states and will review state programs prior to approval.
     The act establishes a two-phase program for enforcing
performance standards governing surface coal mine operations.
The regulatory program is initially carried out by the Federal
Government (during the interval between enactment and adoption of
a permanent state or Federal program).  The initial regulatory
program ends in a particular state and the permanent program
begins either when the state's regulatory program has been
approved by the Secretary of the Interior or when the Secretary
implements a full Federal program in that state because of the
state's failure to submit an acceptable program.
     The operator of a surface coal mine must meet eight
performance standard requirements during the initial program.
These include designing, maintaining, and removing all existing
and new waste piles used as dams or embankments and minimizing
disturbances of the hydrological balance.  The initial regulatory
program also establishes special performance standards for the
surface effects of underground coal mining, which broadens the
impact of this act to affect substantially all types of coal
mining.
     During the permanent program, the regulatory authority
issues permits requiring the operator to comply with all the
environmental performance standards of the act.  These standards
include (1) stabilizing all areas to control erosion, and air and

                               220

-------
water pollution,  (2) designing and constructing permanent water



impoundments to assure that the quality and quantity of water



will not be diminished to adjacent owners,  (3) stabilizing all



waste piles, (4) burying or otherwise treating all combustible



materials and acid-forming or toxic materials in a manner that



prevents contamination of waters and sustained combustion.  The



methods of enforcement may include cessation orders for failure




to comply with a notice of violation, suspension, or revocation



of permits.



     The act also creates an abandoned mine reclamation fund to



be used for reclamation of land and water affected by coal mining,



for filling voids and sealing tunnels, for acquisition of



unreclaimed land, and for research and demonstration projects on



reclamation of abandoned lands.



     Several other Federal agencies and instrumentalities may



have an indirect impact on the handling and disposal of solid



wastes.  As has been implied in descriptions of the various laws,



however, enforcement is subject to executive discretion and not



Congressional mandate.  Consequently, enforcement of solid waste



concerns has been piecemeal.  The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899



requires an individual to obtain authorization from the Army



Corps of Engineers for all structures and works in navigable



water.  Section 9 of the act directly governs the construction



and structural stability of dams and dikes.  This provision may



be applied to piles and dams used in creating tailings or



sedimentation ponds.  As noted earlier, the Corps is also





                               221

-------
directed to establish and apply criteria for the issuance of



permits under Section 404 of the Federal Water Pollution Control



Act for the discharge of dredged or fill material into navigable



waters at specified disposal sites.  Section 515 of the Surface



Mine Control and the Reclamation Act of 1977 require that the




Corps of Engineers concur in any regulations pertaining to coal



mine waste piles and dams promulgated under the act.



     The Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), formerly



MESA, exercises some indirect control over the disposal of



mineral resource solid wastes.  Section 30 C.F.R. Part 77



establishes certain requirements pertaining to the construction



of dams and dikes used for water, sediment, and slurry



impoundments at coal mines.  This authority somewhat overlaps the



jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers.  Coal refuse piles, which



are a major source of pollution runoff and leaching, are also



subject to control under these safety and health requirements.



All active refuse piles and impounding structures must be



certified each year by a registered engineer who assures the



stability of the structure.  These structures may be abandoned



according to an approved plan; if abandoned, no further stability



certifications are required.  This agency does not promulgate



guidelines or regulations, it merely provides advice to industry.



The absence of formal regulations restricts its effectiveness.



     The disposal of solid wastes containing radioactive



material is regulated under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as



amended,  Title II of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, and





                               222

-------
regulations, orders, and licenses thereunder.  The agency primarily



responsible for administering regulations under these acts is the



Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).  The NRC has established



strict limitations on the concentration of radioactive material



permitted in effluents released into unrestricted areas.  These



limitations extend to concentrations of radioactive materials



released to both air and water.   With regard to mining operations,




however, NRC regulations apply only to radioactive tailings.  The



control of radioactive wastes generated by mining activities has



been left to state authority in states that have agreements with



NRC  (e.g., Colorado, New Mexico), but controlled directly by NRC



in so-called nonagreement states (e.g., Wyoming).



     The proposed RCRA regulations (Federal Register, Dec. 18,



1978), cover only mine wastes generated by the uranium mining



industry.  The Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of



1978  (Federal Register, Nov. 8,  1978), authorizes EPA to set



health and environmental standards and the NRC to regulate



uranium tailings at both active and inactive sites.



                   State Laws and Regulations



     State laws and regulations directly affecting the disposal



of solid wastes from mining operations can generally be divided



into two major categories:   laws affecting solid wastes via laws



governing air and water pollution control, and laws governing



reclamation of solid wastes after mining operations cease.  Both



vary greatly from state to state with regard to stringency of



penalties, amount of detail, and flexibility of administration.





                                223

-------
Generally, air and water quality laws are administered by one



agency and reclamation law by another.  Appendix B lists the



state laws governing pollution abatement and indicates




legislative activity in this area.



     Solid waste disposal is indirectly, and to a limited extent,



affected by state mining laws.  Generally, one or more permits or



licenses similar to those required under the Federal mineral



leasing laws must be obtained from state agencies before mining



operations may be initiated.  The extent to which these laws may



be used to provide control over solid waste disposal varies.



Some states specifically set forth conditions under which mining



operations must be conducted, whereas other states give the



issuing officer authority to include terms and conditions in the



permit or license he deems necessary to protect the public




interest.



     Most air regulations adopted under approved State



Implementation Plans include a fugitive dust regulation, a



visible emission regulation, or both.  The regulations are



usually similar to the guidelines developed by the U.S. EPA and



do not apply specifically to mining operations.  Some states,



however,  have adopted fugitive dust regulations to include certain



mining activities.  Colorado, for example, specifies some



abatement and prevention measures for open mining activities and



requires a new permit before starting new mining operations.



Appendix C presents a summary of the state fugitive dust



regulations.   Some states specifically regulate activities such






                                224

-------
as coal handling; sand, gravel, and stone crushing operations;
and general quarrying and mining.
     Typical state water pollution control laws declare it
unlawful for any person to cause pollution of any surface waters
or to place, or cause to be placed, any wastes in a location
where they are likely to cause pollution of any waters within the
state.  It is also generally declared unlawful for any person to
discharge waste products into these waters without first securing
an NPDES permit from the state water pollution control agency or
the EPA specifying discharge limits.  These permit systems may be
operated solely under the authority of the state when EPA has
approved the state's plan and program.  If approval is not given
or is withdrawn, EPA operates the NPDES program directly.  The
Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 encourage
states to take over administration of the NPDES program with
regard to discharges located within the state; permit authority
is fully transferrable to state water quality agencies upon
approval of EPA.  Existing state permit programs do not preempt
the requirements of the NPDES program, however, unless approved
by the EPA.
     Groundwater regulations have also been promulgated in some
states, particularly in the West, where discharges onto or below
the surface of the ground have endangered domestic and
agricultural water supplies.  Although these regulations may not
be specific to any particular industry, they have some impact on
mining operations and the control of solid waste because of a
scarcity of enforcement resources.
                                225

-------
     With Federal support, most states have developed comprehensive



programs to deal with the ever-growing problem of solid waste



disposal.  Such programs are primarily concerned with the



collection and disposal of municipal and some industrial refuse.




Many laws were promulgated in response to the encouragement and



technical assistance of the Federal Government through the Solid



Waste Disposal Acts of 1965 and 1970.



     As part of their solid waste programs, some states have also



assumed regulatory authority over the disposal of solid wastes



containing radioactive materials.  The NRC has established



guidelines whereby states may assume the administrative and



enforcement obligations for sources of radioactive materials



within the state.  There are 25 of these so-called "agreement



states."  The procedures and regulations promulgated by the



states are usually similar to those issued by the NRC.



     The environmental impact analysis procedure is more severe,



however, in the nonagreement states.  Few states have extended



their authority over potentially hazardous mining operations.



Texas,  for example,  is developing regulations for the control of



radioactive materials in tails and mining wastes.  The regulations



will prohibit any industry from exposing the public to



radioactive hazards.  New Mexico has taken a similar regulatory



approach to cover wastes generated by mining that are not



controlled by another agency.



     Many state laws regarding reclamation of mined area are



relatively new and have not yet reaped any noticeable benefits.






                                226

-------
Reclamation of mined land is not a new concept.  Arizona, Oregon,



and Ohio have had statutory provisions for some form of



reclamation for more than 10 years.  The surface mining laws in



nine states have required some reclamation for more than 35



years.  Generally, these reclamation laws applied only to coal




mining operations.  In West Virginia, Indiana, and Illinois,



however, the laws cover all minerals.  Effectiveness of these



laws has varied, depending upon enforcement efforts.  Their



impact on solid waste disposal has not been consistent.



     Most states now have some type of a law covering reclamation



after mining.  All kinds of minerals are covered in approximately



half of these regulations.  Coal mining operations are



specifically covered in 37 states, and the mining of metals is



covered in 32.  Most state regulations, however, are not specific



about the degree of reclamation required, and inspection to



ensure compliance is limited.  Consequently,  reclamation goals



are often not achieved.



     Reclamation laws usually require the mine operator to



obtain a permit and submit a reclamation plan for approval.   The



reclamation plan must contain, for example, complete drainage



plans and proposed methods for disposing of wastes, including any



restoration measures to be taken after operations have ceased and



other such information the agency may require.



     New Federal requirements are often generated to supersede



those of the states because of a national concern regarding the



adequacy of state and local regulatory programs to protect the






                               227

-------
public.  This concern led to the enactment of legislation that



mandated Federal oversight of most mining industry activities,



and the creation of distinct state and Federal programs that has



led to administrative and regulatory duplication in some states,



particularly concerning air and water pollution and reclamation.




     Duplication problems occur primarily in four areas.  First,



duplication arises when more than one agency is responsible for



reviewing the same plan or application.  Second, duplication



results from more than one agency requiring a permit for the same



facility or for a single facet of an operation.  A third form of



duplication arises when compliance is required with the independent



regulations of more than one agency.  The fourth duplication




problem is the pyramiding effect of permits when the meeting of



one agency's regulation depends upon the compliance with the



regulations of another agency with overlapping jurisdiction.



     It is difficult to compare state regulations because the



actual number of approvals required depends on the design



characteristics (e.g., type and production capacity), location,



and scheduling of a specific facility.  The effluent sources of a



mine,  for example, may require separate permits for drainage



points, refuse pile discharges, and sediment basins.  It is



conceivable that approval of all water effluent or air emission



sources at a single facility could be obtained administratively



by a single permitting process; however, unless the state has



NPDES authority under the 1972 Federal Water Pollution Control



Act Amendments, the appropriate state water quality control





                               228

-------
agency may issue its own permit, which may be in addition to the



NPDES permit issued by the EPA.  This discontinuity in authority



would hinder administrative consolidation of the permitting



process.



     Recently, some states have attempted to reduce the number of



distinct permits required for a particular mine by streamlining



internal agency policies regarding multiple permit applications.




In Pennsylvania, for example, most functions regarding permits



are administered by the Department of Environmental Resources



(DER).  The DER has been granted complete authority over surface



and underground mining operations, as well as preparation plants.



As an administrative policy, DER has decided to issue all permits



applicable to a given mine.  Although the permit application must



still be approved by several different departments (such as the



Bureau of Air Quality and the Bureau of Water Quality Management),



this system relieves the mine operator of the responsibility of



obtaining separate permits from a number of different agencies.



In theory, this enables DER to foresee, and therefore fully



address, all potential environmental problems in a comprehensive



and timely fashion.



     Most states have divided the responsibility of overseeing



the mining industry.  Pennsylvania and Kentucky are typical



examples (Figures 23 and 24).  In Kentucky, most permit authority



involving environmental controls is vested in the Department of



Natural Resources and Environmental Protection (DNREP).  The



"divisionalized" permit process of DNREP, however, is one in
                                229

-------
COMPLIANCE K/LOWl
ZONII* AUNCf*

SURFACE KIM OPERATOR'S
LICENSE ISM-0TI(M)
  PIWIT BKW-DO
  PlW
    M QHC-Ml
                        •ATI8
     PIM >PPIO»L
    OWS-MI
Mllll« K.UI «
     HSMA
                                                    OAMJ AND
                                                     PC WITS
                                                   S(»AC,[ P((WIT (iPPBOHtD
                                                    I' LOCAL
                                                     COAL BffUS! PEWIT
                                                        BI.P-OCI
                                                    SOL 10 vASTE (TRASH)
                                                     PERMIT  M.P-OCI
       PlAPl APPROVAL
        EMOKC-OCK
     IIFUSE 01VOSAI SHI
              NSHA
                                                   «AT(B OISCHAIU PEWIT
    SECTION 10
      ANC.'OB SECTION 40A
      (oerotl DISPOSAL)


PEWITS FOR W«I&AI1E
•ATERS COC
,»l»l(« IT r.s)

dATER ILinCATIO*
IPPkOvAL IHTERSTATE
PUIt BASIo .INllSSIOli^





                                                                           MOIllTO*|liC MO
                                                                           EHFORCtWHT

                                                                             EM
                                                                             HSHA
                                                                             ISM
                                                                             IVQM \ OCR
                                                                             oati
                             ENFMCEMIIT

                             A  EPA
                             B. COE'
                             C. «SHA
                             C. But*
                             E  BAOJK
                             f  BLP
                             0. OOKS
                                                                                   OER
                                                   KMITCDIIK UU>
                                                   E»fMCEI«IIT

                                                   A. EPA
                                                   I  COC'
                                                     MSHA
                                                                            C
                                                                            0
                                                                            £
                                                                            F
                                                                            c  OOMS 3
                                                     s.w )
                                                     HP VOEB
                                                     BCVKTIQ
XOUIRCD Kf'EOUEHTlT . USfO OH SITE LOCATION.

PL» APPWyAl I«IST COHnT KITH LOCAL 111 DUAL, ITT
STAKOAROS APPtlCAKE OW.T KITHIII A MV UIIAII AIMS.
     AmovAis O»T RtauiRtO 'ot PIAICTS HITNII
Of SUSOUtNAMU AAB DUAHMt IKCR IASIK COMMISSICMS
MR • DEPAITMUT Of i«I llOHtEnTAi BtSOufiCES
ISM • luMAu or SuWAil DIM lEClAHATIM
IF . IUREAU Or rORESTIT
llO< • BbBEAU Or «ATER QUAI.ITT VHAMKUT
BIP - BUIUU OF LUC P«OT[CT10«
EUONC • BUREAU OF Alt OuAlITT AND (CISl COHTROL
OOXS - OFFICE nr MEP HIIIE SArET»
EPA - («>!ROW
-------
     C AND 0 PERMITS FOR
      SEWAGE TREATMENT
       PLANT DWO-DNREP
     (APPROVAL BY LOCAL
         GOVERNMENT)
     PLUMBING FACILITIES
      APPROVAL DP-DNREP
    SOLID (ORY MINE) UASTE
       DISPOSAL PERMIT
         DSW-DNREP
      AIR CONTAMINANTS
      PERMIT DAO-DNREP
COMPLIANCE W/LOCAL
ZONING AGENCY*


RECLAMATION PLAR



WATER WITHDRAWAL
PERMIT DWR DNREP

PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT
DWR-DNREP

DISCHARGE PERMIT




































UNDERGROUND MINE
LICENSE DMM


SECTION 10 (OBSTRUCTION)
AND/OR SECTION 404
(DREDGE DISPOSAL)
(REVIEW BY FWS)


WATER DISCHARGE PERMIT
(NPDES) EPA

MINE OPENING PERMITS
DM*

MINING PLAN APPROVAL
HSHA

















      CERTIFICATE OF
     COMPLIANCE KY DOL
     C AND 0 PERMITS FOR
       POTABLE WATER
        FACILITIES
        DSE-DNREP*
     COAL HAULAGE PERMIT
          KY DOT
                                                                                      MONITORING AND
                                                                                      ENFORCEMENT
                                                                                      A. EPA
                                                                                      B. HSHA
                                                                                      C. OR 1
                                                                                      D. OAO i DNREP
                                                                                      E. OWO \
                                                           SECTION 10 (OBSTRUCTION
                                                             AND/OR SECTION 404
                                                              (DREDGE DISPOSAL)
                                                            PERMITS FOR NAVIGABLE
                                                                HATERS  COE*
                                                               (REVIEW BY FWS)
                                                            WATER DISCHARGE PERMIT
                                                              (NPDES)   EPA
REFUSE DISPOSAL SITE
  APPROVAL MSHA
                                                               CERTIFICATE OF
                                                              COMPLIANCE KY DOL
                                                             COAL HAULAGE PERMIT
                                                                 KY  DOT
ABBREVIATIONS

DNREP - DEPARTMENT FOR NATURAL RESOURCES AND
      ENFORCEMENT PROTECTION
OR - DIVISION OF RECLAMATION
DHQ - DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
DWR - DIVISION OF HATER RESOURCES
DSW - DIVISION OF SOLID WASTE
DAQ - DIVISION OF AIR QUALITY
DP - DIVISION OF PLUMBING
DSE - DIVISION OF SANITARY ENGINEERING
OHM - DEPARTMENT OF MINF.S AND MINERALS
KY DOT - KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DY DOL - KENTUCKY DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
EPA - ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
HSHA - MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH
     ADMINISTRATION
COE - ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS (FEDERAL)
FWS - FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE (FEDERAL)
NPDES - NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION
      SYSTEM
C A«D 0 - CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION
                          MONITORING AND
                          ENFORCEMENT
                          A. EPA
                          B. COE*
                          C. HSHA
                          0. OWQ1
                          E. DWR I
                          F. DSW > DNREP
             ' REQUIRED INFREQUENTLY - BASED ON SITE LOCATION.

             • REGULATIONS FOR ENFORCEMENT STILL PENDING.

             i KRS SECTION 109 PROVIDES FOR LOCAL COLLECTION OR DISPOSAL
              DISTRICTS - EXIST MAINLY III URBAN AREAS.

             I REQUIRES PRIOR CERTIFICATION OF SEDIMENT'AND EROSION
              CONTROL PLAN AND POST-CERTIFICATION OF STRUCTURES BY
              REGISTERED ENGINEER.
          Figure  24.     In  Kentucky  the   responsibility  of  overseeing
the   coal  industry   is  divided  as   illustrated.

 Source:     Rosenberg,   J.E.,   et.  al.    Regulation  of   the
                      coal  mining  and  preparation   industry.

                                                 231

-------
which each division has significant autonomy.  Individual permits
are generally issued for specific activities without awaiting
concurrent approval of permits outstanding in other divisions.
                   Local Laws and Regulations
     The disposal of solid wastes from mining operations may also
be affected by local zoning ordinances.  Most states have laws
that authorize counties to regulate the use of land outside
incorporated areas and control the location of industry.  Some
states also permit villages, cities, and towns to enact zoning
ordinances governing the use of lands within their boundaries.
Mining operations could be regulated through such zoning
ordinances, unless specifically exempted by law or judicial
interpretation.
     The method of operating is one of the principal questions
counties and municipalities concern themselves with when enacting
zoning ordinances to regulate or restrict mining operations.
Operating methods generally fall into two categories:  operating
standards (i.e., measures to reduce dust and dirt and maintain
the appearance of the mining site) and reclamation standards
(i.e., operating drainage and preservation of topsoil).
     Local control of mining by counties and municipalities has
been and is a subject of concern in some areas of the United
States.   In highly populated metropolitan areas, there is
potential for conflict between using land for the extraction of
mineral deposits such as sand and gravel and using land to meet
ever-increasing housing, recreational, and educational needs.
                               232

-------
Such conflict can place pressure on zoning authorities to either



refuse or allow mining at a particular location.  It also puts



pressure on operators to provide effective pollution control in



those areas where mining is permitted.  Zoning seldom prohibits



mining entirely.



     Although most state governments administer their pollution



control programs, some states have chosen to delegate the




enforcement of these programs to local governments.  In Florida,



for example, approval to mine is required on the local level from



the County Planning and Zoning Commissions, County Departments of



Pollution Control, County Engineering Departments, and Boards of



County Commissioners.  These agencies have not significantly



prevented or delayed mining activities in Florida.  Similarly,



the State of California has delegated the regulatory powers of



its various pollution control statutes to local jurisdictions.



Because of this delegated authority, regulations governing mining



operations may vary from county to county, and district to



district.



     With regard to solid wastes in particular, most state laws



permit local governments to retain jurisdiction over the



development and implementation of collection and disposal programs,



     The potential also exists for local control of solid waste



disposal through common law action, but is not generally invoked.



For example, many states permit common law action against private



landowners for maintaining a nuisance.  Remedies include recovery



of damages and injunction against continuance or commission of






                                233

-------
 the nuisance.  As laws and regulations become firmly established



 and enforced, however, such nuisance cases will be rare.



     In the area of water quality control, as in other areas of



 nuisance laws, the law produces widely disparate and contradictory




 judgments and results.  One reason this common law remedy has not



 proven adequate in abating pollution is that most mine land is



 titled to private nonmining owners, and the courts have been



 historically unwilling to impose liability on private landowners



 other than miners.  Furthermore, the acreage is so vast and



 sources of pollution so numerous, that lawsuits involving



 individual parcels of land would present monumental proof problems



 and, even if successful, would have a seemingly insignificant



 impact on the total pollution problem.



     This section has described the relationship between the



mining industry and Federal,  state, and local regulations



governing mining operations,  with a particular emphasis on control



and disposal of solid wastes.   The regulatory framework within



which most mines must operate consists of a rather imposing and



sometimes cumbersome array of guidelines, criteria, and



regulations characterized by multiple permit requirements and



jurisdictional overlapping between and within governmental levels.



Environmental regulation, however,  tends to be related to air and



water quality rather than solid wastes.  The growing Federal



involvement in the regulation of mining operations, especially in



the area of pollution control,  has the potential for reducing
                               234

-------
these differences through administrative consolidation, thus



providing a more effective system for protecting the environment.



     Legislation with the potential of controlling solid waste




from mining operations varies, depending on whether the mine is




on public or private land and on the regulations promulgated by




each state and local authority.  On public land, the granting of




mining rights under the Federal mineral leasing program is




generally preceded by preparation of an environmental impact



statement.  Examination of necessary pollution control measures



should be part of the environmental impact of evaluation.  The



decision to grant or deny leases could be made after a thorough



evaluation of a proposed mining plant, stipulating that



environmental damage or change be minimized as a condition of the



lease.  On private land, solid waste disposal could be affected



by state and local regulatory agencies with authority to control



mining and beneficiating operations.  Effectiveness in controlling



solid wastes in each case would depend upon adequate guidelines



and enforcement efforts.  Federal air and water quality guidelines



have added new wastes (sludges) to the inventory of solid wastes



from private mining operations and also have indirectly affected



control of pollutants from solid wastes.  The passage of RCRA



and the Federal Surface Mining Act may cause Federal law to have



a significant direct impact on all phases of mining operations.



     The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act provides the



states with broad powers to develop and enforce regulations on



surface coal mining and reclamation operations.  This act not





                                235

-------
only gives the states the flexibility to develop regulations that



meet the particular needs of that state, it also provides a



mechanism for reclaiming land and water affected by coal mining.



Moreover, it covers both surface mining operations and surface



changes caused by underground mining operations.  Certain



reclamation measures can also indirectly control adverse impacts



from solid wastes.  The Surface Mining Control and Reclamation



Act applies only to coal mining operations, however, leaving the



surface mining of other minerals largely within the control of



the states.



     The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act mandates



regulation of the discharge and disposal of all types of solid



wastes.  It also provides for a detailed and comprehensive study



of the adverse environmental effects of solid wastes from active



and abandoned surface and underground mines.  The act provides



authority for regulating the prevention or mitigation of such



adverse effects as may exist, as determined by the EPA.
                               236

-------
                            SECTION 7

      IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL PROBLEM AREAS ASSOCIATED
                  WITH MINERAL RESOURCE WASTES


     The previous sections of this report have presented the

overall status of the generation and disposal of mineral resource

wastes and their impacts on the environment.  Quantities and

characteristics of wastes from major mining industries, applicable

environmental control technologies, and pertinent regulations

governing disposal and control have been discussed.  This section

presents potential problem areas associated with these mineral

resource wastes according to various criteria, including those

currently established in the proposed RCRA regulations.  The

potential problem areas are discussed under the following headings

     0    Acid-Forming Mineral Resource Wastes

     0    Mineral Resource Wastes Containing Radioactive
          Materials

     0    Other Potentially Toxic Mineral Resource Wastes

     0    Combining of Mineral Resource Wastes With Other
          Industrial Wastes

     0    Airborne Fugitive Emissions Generated From Mineral
          Resource Wastes

     Collectively, these problem areas encompass a wide range of

mineral industries; for the most part they do not represent a

problem mineral.   For example, the environmental problems

associated with acid-forming mineral resource wastes result
                               237

-------
primarily from the presence of pyrites in the orebody host rock.

Pyritic host rock occurs sporadically throughout the country in

combination with coal, copper, lead, zinc, iron, and many other

ores.  Also, many important environmental impact factors are not

industry-specific, such as the topography, geology, and climate

in the vicinity of a facility.  For these reasons, the main

environmental problems associated with mineral resource wastes

are assessed according to concept rather than specific industry.

              Acid-Forming Mineral Resource Wastes

     Acid water and acid slurries from acid-producing solids

constitute a major source of groundwater and surface water

contamination.  Mine water and tailings-pond water with a pH of 5

or less can be expected to have deleterious effects on surface

water and groundwater in most hydrogeologic environments.  This

is believed to be a significant source of contamination.

     The impact of acid water, which is almost always combined

with solid waste in the form of a low-viscosity slurry, is

compounded by the fact that low-pH^waste slurries increase the

solubility'of heavy metals.  The acid water not only increases
         , :. .P:  t:. ..' "        .. >••• •                •:.•:.-.
the., .rate-of the dissolution of soluble compounds. that, are,

ubiquitous in beneficiation processes, it also displaces heavy

metal cations that may be absorbed on the particulate matter in

the solid waste.  The acid contributes protons to ion exchange

sites, and the heavy metal cations replace the protons in

solution.  This not only results in acid water, but in acid water
                                238

-------
containing heavy metal cations, usually in excess of drinking
water standards and effluent guidelines established by the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES),  which
are now enforced under the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1977 and 1972.  In order to meet NPDES guidelines, low-pH mine
and beneficiation waste slurries must be treated by the best
established practicable control technology* which has been
identified to be lime neutralization and clarification for most
of the industries producing such waste slurries.
     Although applying the best practicable control technology
for neutralization of low-pH mine and benefication wastewaters
can satisfy the NPDES effluent guidelines for point-source
discharges, it does not alleviate the problem of groundwater and
surface water contamination due to seepage from tailings ponds or
other mineral resource disposal facilities.
     Such seepage is documented in the literature, even though an
extensive survey of the Nation's mineral waste disposal facilities
                      2
                 .made.
  The Surface Impoundment Assess.me.nt, a requirement of the  Safe
  Drinking Water Act of 1974, has been initiated but the results
  will not be available until mid-1980.  That study will provide

  degree of contamination resulting from acid
     This potentially contaminating acid water is produced largely
by the oxidation of the mineral pyrite.  In the presence of water
and air, pyrite is transformed to soluble iron and sulfuric acid and
                               239

-------
subsequently to precipitated solids according to the following



reactions:



     2FeS2 + 2H20 + 702 ->• 2FeS04 + 2H2S04



     4FeSO,. + 2H-SO, +
          4     24


     Fe~ (SO.) - + 6H00 •*
       243     2


     7Fe-(SO.), + FeS- + 8H.O -»• ISFeSO. + 8H_SO.
        ^43      2     2          4     24


     Pyrite oxidation and subsequent transport require only a



small amount of water and air.  The atmosphere in a mine or over



a refuse dump is adequate for the basic stoichiometric reaction.



Water then collects the reaction products (acid salts) and



transports them out of the mine or off the refuse pile along with



solid wastes.



     The equations shown clearly demonstrate that the production



of acid slurries by mine or beneficiation waste disposal



facilities can be completely independent of the mineral mined.



The critical factor is whether or not the pyrite occurs in the



host rock, which depends on whether,lrojn and sulfur existed in a



r%aucl%g"'erivi-rottment during the formation of the host rock.  This



explains the widespread occurrence of pyrite and acid wastes in



the coal beds of the eastern United States and the absence or



near absence of pyrite and acid wastes in the coal beds in the



western United States.  The coal beds in both locations were



deposited in a reducing environment, but the host rock of the



eastern United States was higher in iron and sulfur content



during deposition of the coal beds than was the host rock in the



western United States.  In the case of the so-called hard rock or
                                240

-------
metallic minerals, most of the ore-producing hydrothermal



solutions were injected into the rock much later in geologic



time than when the host rock was formed.  Because pyrite has



little to do with the origin of the ore mineral, it can be



associated with almost any ore.




     Specific examples of some mines where the ores contain



pyrite are the copper mines near Butte, Montana, some of the



lead-zinc mines in northern Idaho, a cobalt mine in central Idaho



(currently inactive), gold and silver mines in Nevada, and some



molybdenum mines in  Colorado.



     Current best available estimates indicate that 25 percent of



the hard rock or metallic mineral mining and beneficiating



industries generate  solid waste with sufficient pyrite to produce



acid water.   Data for providing a more accurate estimate of the



percentage of the U.S. mining industries producing acid-containing



waste slurries should be available in 1980, when the



Assessment program has been completed.



     Currently available control technologies for the prevention



of groundwater contamination from seepage and surface water



contamination by surface runoff from mine and beneficiation solid



wastes containing pyrites consist basically of preventing or



minimizing the initial production of acid water at the waste



source and preventing any acid waters that are formed from



reaching the surface waters and groundwaters.  These technologies



are summarized below.  No attempt has been made to identify the



best practicable control technologies.
                               241

-------
     Two mechanisms are available to prevent the formation of


acid slurries through oxidation of pyrite at the source.  The


first is to prevent water and/or air from reaching the pyrite.


This involves control of both groundwater and surface water


because of the interconnection between recharge areas, aquifers,


and discharge areas.  Pumping wells, drain wells, and horizontal


wells are used to divert groundwater and surface water before


they enter into the atmosphere of a mine, thus preventing their


contact with the pyrite.  Given sufficient hydrogeologic data, a


mine often can be planned so that such mechanisms are incorporated


into the development process, which minimizes the cost.  Another


method is to isolate the pyrite from the water by burying the


pyrite in materials whose permeability is low enough to reduce


the rate of exposure to air and water to the point that the rate


of acid production will produce acceptable environmental
     Control technologies for prevention or minimization of any


acid waters that are formed from reaching the surface waters and

                      j
groundwaters include the use of liners and seepage collection

                                                        2
devices, such as wells, drainage blankets, and trenches.   The


success of these various control techniques depends on the


saturated hydraulic conductivity (permeability)  of the liner


material.  These control technologies must be applied when the


site selected for the waste disposal facility is not located over


a thick horizontal stratum of permeability equal to or less than


10   cm/s.  Adequate separation of slimes and sands in tailings
                               242

-------
ponds can be expected to produce a saturated hydraulic conductivity


of 10   cm/s; however, this figure is based on the assumption


that the tailings pond is managed in such a way that the slimes


occupy the center of the pond and water is not allowed to back up


over the sand portion of the embankment.  It is estimated that


only 30 to 40 percent of the tailings ponds in the United States

                          2
are now managed this well.   Ordinarily the emphasis in tailings


pond management is to place the sand so as to achieve the highest


possible safety factor for the embankment.  This may or may not


mean maintaining the water at a level that iininimizes seepage


through the tailings pond.


     Sealing and flooding of eastern underground coal mines to


prevent the exposure of the pyrites to air and simultaneously


reduce the rate of escape of water from the mine are frequently


practiced and represent a combination of the two preventive


mechanisms described above.                         #


     The uranium industry is essentially the only mining industry


now using clay, treated clay, or synthetic liners in tailing


ponds.   Recent actions of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)


has guided the uranium industry toward the use of liners, which


are discussed in the subsection on radioactive mineral resource


wastes.


     The somewhat limited information now available on the problem


of the production of acid runoff from mineral resource disposal


piles containing pyrite rock will be augmented by information


currently being collected under the Regional Waste Management



                               243

-------
Plan Requirements of Section 208 of the Water Pollution Control


Act Amendments of 1972 and 1977.  Some information on this subject


was made available to the coal industry when it was addressed in


detail in the Preamble to the Surface Mining Control and


Reclamation Act of 1977.  It has also been addressed in the


regulations promulgated by the Office of Surface Mining,


Department of Interior.  The technology for preventing or


minimizing environmental degradation from this source of


contamination consists primarily of soil amelioration with lime


and subsequent fertilization and revegetation of the wastes.


    Mineral Resource Wastes Containing Radioactive Materials


     Historically, the uranium mining industry has been considered


to have the most potential for adverse environmental impact


because of the radioactivity of this mineral.  More recently,


however, studies have been made of the phosphate industry to

           •(•
ascertain the potential of water and air pollution due to


radioactivity.  Other selected mining industries being investigated


(by EPA's Office of Radiation Programs in Las Vegas) for potential


radiation problems are several copper companies whose smelters


are recovering uranium as a byproduct; selected iron mines; and


several much smaller industries, such as the mining of tungsten,

                       4
fluorspar, and bauxite..   The radiation from these industries


results primarily from the inherent characteristics of the host


rock,  rather than from the mineral being mined.


     The uranium industry appears to present the only .major


radiation problem, as a result of its impact on water (via radium



                               244

-------
226) and on air  (via radon gas).  Beneficiation tailings, where



radium is most concentrated, are the primary source of radiation.



Comparatively minor problems may occur from exposed radioactive



overburden that had previously been isolated from the environment



by overlaid soil layers; however, only limited information is



available concerning the potential of radioactivity problems from



this source.   The proposed RCRA regulations (Federal Register,



December 18, 1978) do not cover uranium beneficiation tailings;



these tailings will be regulated through PL 95-604, the Uranium



Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (Federal Register,



November 8, 1978), which authorizes the EPA to set health and



environmental standards and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to



regulate uranium tailings at both active and inactive sites.  An



overview of the current status of the potential environmental



impact of uranium tailings is nevertheless included in order to



provide a complete assessment of this industry.



     Uranium Mining and Beneficiation.  The uranium mining and



beneficiation industry annually generates 156 million tons (141



Gg)  of overburden and waste rock and 8 million tons (7.2 Gg) of



tailings.  Approximately 60 percent of the mines are surface



operations and 40 percent are underground.  In 1977 there were



64 producing mines in six states.  New Mexico and Wyoming led in



uranium production.  The annual production rate is increasing



rapidly,  primarily because of the increasing demand for it as a



nuclear fuel element in nuclear power plants.
                               245

-------
     Uranium is beneficiated from ores that usually contain from
0.05 to 0.30 percent uranium as U,0g.  Water (from mines, wells,
or streams) and chemicals are used in the beneficiation process
to produce a semirefined solid product called yellowcake.  Liquid
and solid wastes from this process are disposed of by impoundment
in large ponds.  Adverse environmental impacts are primarily
attributable to seepage from these ponds and to emissions of
radioactive gases and particulates from the impounded solids.
     Conventional beneficiation of uranium involves preparation
of the ore; leaching to bring the uranium values into solution;
separation of the pregnant solution; and precipitation of
yellowcake (U^Og).  Vanadium, molybdenum, and copper byproducts
also may be produced.  The ore is prepared by crushing and
grinding it to expose uranium-bearing particles.  Sulfuric acid
or sodium carbonate  (depending on the lime content of the ore) is
used in the leaching process.  Separation of liquids and solids
is accomplished by continuous countercurrent decantation,
filtration, or sand-slime separation.  Solvent extraction and/or
ion exchange may be used in the acid exchange.   The yellowcake is
precipitated from the concentrated solutions by raising the pH
with sodium hydroxide, ammonia, lime, magnesium oxide, or a
combination of these reagents.
     Pollutants in these wastes originate primarily from the ore
processed and from the reagents used in the beneficiating
operations.  Expected major wastewater constituents include, but
are not limited to, radioactive species (radium, uranium, and

                               246

-------
thorium); organic compounds  (such as phenol); inorganic ions



(sulfate, chloride, nitrate, and fluoride); light metals  (sodium,



calcium, aluminum, magnesium, and titanium); and heavy metals



(arsenic, selenium, chromium, molybdenum, vanadium, silver,




copper, iron, manganese, nickel, lead, and  zinc).  The wastewater



has a high dissolved and suspended solids content, a moderately



high chemical oxygen demand, and unless neutralized, is extremely



acidic or basic.  Generally, wastes from alkaline leach processes



contain a lower level of dissolved contaminants than wastes from



acid leach processes.



     The current practice of impounding liquid and solid wastes



from the beneficiation of uranium can result in contamination of



groundwater supplies because of uncontrolled seepage from the



tailings ponds.   Only a few new operations line these ponds to



mitigate seepage.  In most operations, disposal of wastewater by



evaporation is augmented by seepage from unlined ponds, which may



account for up to 50 percent of the loss of total effluent


          2
impounded.



     Lining of tailings ponds is a recent advance in



state-of-the-art technology for containment of tailings.  Clay



(treated or untreated)  or synthetic liners may be used, each



offering advantages depending on site-specific conditions and the



wastewater involved.  Clay liners are unsuitable if the acid-leach



process is used because the acid breaks down the clay.  Because



about 81 percent (17 of 21) of the current operations use the



acid-leach process and most planned operations are the acic-leach


                                                           2 6
type,  the trend is toward synthetic liners  (e.g., Hypalon). '


                                247

-------
     The tailings disposal area can emit significant amounts of

radioactive particulates and gases to the atmosphere.  Radon 222

gas, formed by radioactive decay of uranium, can be emitted in

large quantities from both active and inactive tailings

impoundments.  Dispersion of windblown tailings also can result

in potentially dangerous radioactive emissions.

     Disposal of these tailings below grade by backfilling them

into open pit mines and underground mines is attracting increased

attention as a long-term solution requiring little or no

maintenance.  Proper coverage of the surface of tailings

backfilled into open pit mines can effectively control both

groundwater and airborne radioactive contaminants.

     Based on a modeling study conducted by Oak Ridge National

Laboratory to analyze the slope stability at an open pit mine, it

is concluded that backfilling of uranium tailings in an open pit

mine is technically feasible assuming the following ' :

     0    A minimum 39 ft (12 m) thick liner and its protective
          shell.

     0    A maximum of 13 ft (4 m) freeboard.

     0    Special construction to prevent seepage through the
          highwall.

     The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has proposed the

following tailings-management performance objectives ' :

     0    Reduction of direct gamma radiation from the
          impoundment area to background level.

     0    Reduction of the radon emanation rate from the
          impoundment area to about twice that in the surrounding
          environs.
                               248

-------
     For backfilling below grade, the NRC proposed:

     0    Individual cells be excavated to a depth of 40 to 60 ft
          (12 to 15 m) below grade and sealed with synthetic
          liners.

     0    Sides be lined with 30 mil  (0.76 nun) reinforced Hypalon
          sheets and the bottom be covered with 30 mil  (0.76 mm)
          PVC.

     0    15 ft  (4.5 m) of overburden be placed on top.

     Cost of Hypalon liner with 3-ply construction and polyester

scrim ranges from 55 to 64 cents per square:foot, compared with

20 to 30 cents per square foot for untreated clay liners.  These

costs include site preparation and sterilization of the Hypalon
       2
liners.

     Battelle Northwest Laboratories is currently conducting a

demonstration project entitled "Evaluation of Groundwater

Transport of Uranium Mill Wastes" to evaluate the reliability of

using clay to line open pits that will be used for backfilling.

This evaluation for NRC involves a study of the interaction of

uranium acid leach wastes with clay minerals.

     Phosphate Mining and Beneficiation.  Recent investigations

of the extensive phosphate mining areas in central Florida

indicate that the potential radiation problem associated with the

active mining and beneficiation of phosphate is relatively

insignificant when compared with the radiation problem in the
                        8 9
uranium mining industry.  '   Monitoring for radium 226 in both

groundwaters and surface waters in areas where phosphate tailings

are disposed of revealed no increase in this pollutant; in most

cases,  the concentration of radium 226 was actually greater in
                                249

-------
                8 9
nonmining areas. '   This phenomenon may be explained by the fact



that most of the uranium associated with phosphate ore is



contained in the phosphate rock being beneficiated or recovered



from the ore, and since very little phosphate rock leaves the



beneficiation plant via the tailings, very little uranium ends



up in the tailings pond.  Because the process is not 100 percent



efficient, some phosphate rock does escape, the beneficiation



plant, allowing a small amount of uranium to end up in the



tailings.  This does not present a major environmental problem



however, because the uranium tied up in the phosphate rock is



practically insoluble at the high pH conditions that usually



prevail in the waste slurry.



     Excessive levels of radiation from radon gas have been



measured in studies conducted by the EPA Region IV Office of



Radiation   Programs and the Florida Department of Health and



Rehabilitative Services.    It was found that personal radiation



dosages in residences constructed in older reclaimed areas (in



which the current beneficiation and waste control practices were



not practiced)  exceeded the Maximum Permissible Dose Recommendation!



of the National Council on Radiation Protection.  Current



benef iciation methods concentrate the P2°5 an(* associated uranium


from both the phosphate:sands and fines (through flotation),



whereas previously only the* sands were processed and the



radioactive fines were left in the reclaimed areas.    Current



control methods include keeping the tailings wet and burying the



waste tailings sands and radioactive overburden under inert



overburden.10'12

                               250

-------
       Other Potentially Hazardous Mineral Resource Wastes



     This miscellaneous group of mineral resource wastes poses a



potential threat to human health and the environment because of



their chemical and/or physical characteristics.  The potentially



hazardous materials in these wastes result either from the



composition of the mineral being mined and beneficiated (i.e.,



some minerals contain hazardous levels of:constituents like



mercury, beryllium, or asbestos fibers) or from the addition of



hazardous substances as reagents during benefication operations



(e.g., sodium cyanide or copper sulfate).



     The potentially hazardous wastes in this category are not as



voluminous or as broadly distributed as the other hazardous



mineral resource wastes discussed in this section (e.g., pyritic



solid wastes from eastern coal mining activities).   The waste



problems addressed here involve relatively few operations within



several different mineral mining industries.



     Solid Wastes Containing Asbestos Fibers.  A particle is



generally defined as asbestos if it has an aspect ratio of



greater than 3 to 1 and if it is serpentine, chrysotile, or one



of the amphiboles in the generic classes—antophyllete,



treniolite-actinolite, crocidolite, and cummingtonite-grunerite



(amosite).



     Rock types in which asbestos minerals might be encountered



lie at or near the surface of about 30 to 40 percent of the



continental United States.   The type and amount of asbestos



fibers in these areas vary considerably.  Important mineral
                               251

-------
deposits are sometimes found in areas where asbestos materials



occur, and the recovery of these minerals presents a potential



for the release of asbestos fibers to the environment.



     On several occasions scientists and regulators have



exhibited concern about the release of asbestos fibers into the



environment as a result of mining and beneficiating activities.



Perhaps the best known case in the United States involves the



Reserve Mining Company's discharge of taconite tailings into Lake



Superior.  This taconite processing facility on the shores of



Lake Superior, in the Silver Bay area, has been discharging about



67,000 tons (61 Mg) of tailings into the lake daily for about 22


      14
years.    These tailings not only contain trace amounts of



several metals, but also billions of asbestos fibers.  The heavier



fibers sink to the bottom of the lake, but the prevailing current



carries the lighter, buoyant fibers to Duluth, Minnesota, and



Superior, Wisconsin, where they enter the drinking water supplies.



Several citizen groups in these areas became greatly concerned



about both air and water pollution problems associated with the



Reserve Mining Company operation, and numerous legal battles



resulted.  After several years, the Federal Appeals Court ordered



the Reserve Mining Company to take immediate steps to curb air



pollution- problems and'to convert to an on-land tailings disposal



system.  Since this order, .the company has agreed to modify its



beneficiating plant and to incorporate air pollution control



practices that will lower the level of asbestos fibers in the



ambient air.  The company has also started construction of a
                               252

-------
massive tailings pond near Lox Lake, at Milepost 7 along its




railroad spur.  The total cost of the pollution control project



is estimated to exceed $370,000,000.    About $75,000,000 has



already been spent, most of which has gone toward the completion




of the air pollution control system.  The remaining dollars will




be used to complete the on-land disposal system.




     Other mining and beneficiating operations that have received




attention due to the release of asbestos to the environment



include the direct mining of asbestos and selected operations




within the vermiculite, copper, gold, and talc mining industries.



The exact number of operations that pose potential asbestos-related



problems is not known, but it is estimated to be quite small, and




it is questionable if any of these really causes a significant



adverse environmental impact.  Some of the operations that have



been identified as potential generators of asbestos fibers are



(1) three asbestos operations, one each in Vermont, California,



and North Carolina; (2) one vermiculite operation in Montana;  (3)



one gold mine in South Dakota; (4) several copper operations in



Arizona; (5)  several talc operations in Vermont, Montana, and New



York.  Although other isolated mining and beneficiating operations



no doubt handle minerals containing asbestos, again it is doubtful



that they pose a significant adverse environmental impact.



     It is estimated that less than 5 million tons (4.5 Gg) of



mineral resource wastes are generated annually by those



industries that may be releasing potentially hazardous levels of
                                253

-------
asbestos fibers to the environment.*  This represents less than


0.3 percent of the total annual production of all mineral


resource wastes.


     A recently conducted survey involved the analysis of water


samples taken at or near six domestic mining and beneficiating


operations where asbestos-containing minerals are being handled.


The facilities included two asbestos operations and one operation


each involving the recovery of gold, copper, talc, and vermiculite,


The results indicated that asbestos was present in the streams


neighboring these operations, which is not surprising because the


streams are eroding and transporting materials from local


asbestos-bearing rock.  The study also indicated that asbestos


fibers were present in mine pumpout waters, surface runoff, and


tailings.  The greatest concentrations were usually detected in


the tailings.


     The concentrations of asbestos fibers in the different


sources tested ranged greatly.  At one site the final asbestos

                                                               9
effluent levels from the tailings pond were as high as 280 x 10
                      j

fibers per liter on one of the sampling days, but when the same


location was tested on another day it yielded samples with no


detectable asbestos.     This variation is probably due to several


factors, including the amount of precipitation and runoff during


and prior to sampling and the amount of material flowing through


the process.
     * PEDCo engineering estimate based on calculations made in

this study and literature values.



                               254

-------
     The main conclusion drawn from this survey is that asbestos


levels in streams near the sites sampled were highly dependent on


seasonal variations in precipitation and runoff, and in most


cases the stream levels of asbestos showed little increase due to


mining and beneficiating operations.  The results of the study


also show that although substantial amounts .of asbestos fibers


are sometimes found in tailings, they are .effectively contained


by the tailings pond, and the asbestos levels of discharges from


these ponds are within Federal and state regulatory effluent


limitations.
                                           i

     Although air monitoring has been somewhat limited at those


mining and beneficiating operations that handle asbestos-containing


minerals, it is generally accepted that environmental and health

problems related to the release of asbestos into the air are of


more concern than those associated with its release into surface


waters and groundwaters.


     Virtually every process step in the mining and beneficiation


of asbestos-containing minerals is a potential generator of


asbestos fibers.  Operators have tried to minimize the generation


of emissions by utilizing conventional fugitive dust control


methods as described in Section 4, such as wet drilling and wet


beneficiating techniques.   Haul roads and dried portions of


tailings ponds are also major sources of fugitive particulates


that can contain high concentrations of asbestos.  These sources


are generally controlled by watering (with and without wetting


agents),  but in some cases cohesives are used.



                               255

-------
     Individual process sources (e.g., drilling, crushing,



hauling) have received very little monitoring for asbestos



fibers, but the air quality in the general vicinity of asbestos



mining and beneficiating operations has been monitored on several



occasions.  The most detailed studies of an asbestos mining



community (the chrysotile mining areas of Quebec, Canada) were



begun in 1966 and are still in progress.  '    Similar studies on



a smaller scale have been conducted in the United States, the



U.S.S.R., and Italy.  The Quebec studies have shown that a



tremendous amount of ambient dust has been •, generated over the



years by mining and processing activities and by winds blowing



over dried tailings.  Even as late as 1974, after dust emission



controls had been improved over those of the earlier years as a



result of practices like wet drilling and watering of haul roads,



emissions of particles from chrysotile mining and beneficiating



operations in the Province of Quebec amounted to 154,000 tons



(140 Mg), of which about 4 percent 6,170 tons (5.6 Mg) was


              18
asbestos dust.



     Recently, concern has arisen about the possible health



hazards associated with the quarrying of serpentine rock at



Hunting Hill quarry near Rocksville, Maryland, and its use as a



surface material for roads, playgrounds, and parks.  Air samples



taken near the quarry site showed chrysotile mass concentrations



of from 0.02 to 64 ng/m3 or 2 x 10~6 to 5 x 10~3 "standard



fibers" per cm  of air.*  These concentrations are well below the
     * U.S. bureau of Mines, State of Maryland, and McCrone

Assoc., unpublished data.



                               256

-------
Federal limits for asbestos content in air  [2 fibers/cm   (OSHA)




and 5 fibers/cm   (MESA)], where a fiber is defined as longer than



5 ym, less than 5 ym wide, and having a length-to-width ratio of


               19
3:1 or greater.




     Based on both monitoring surveys such: as those described



above and a number of epidemiological studies, scientists have



concluded the following concerning health .risks from asbestos in



and around the mining and beneficiating activities:  (1) the



cancer incidence among those employed in mining and beneficiating




activities involving the handling of minerals associated with



asbestos does not appear to be excessive compared with that of




the national populace; (2) although a significant health risk has




been well documented for those who work in the commercial



asbestos trades (particularly for those workers who smoke), the



risk appears to be much lower for those employed in mining and



beneficiating activities and those residing in the areas of such



activities.  '



     Mineral Resource Wastes Containing Heavy Metals.  Heavy



metal constituents are of primary concern because of their



potentially toxic nature.   The combination of acid-forming



minerals (pyrite)  and heavy metals in a mineral deposit creates



undesirable and potentially hazardous conditions.  The acid



waters increase the solubility of the heavy metals in the wastes,



which often results in concentrations of heavy metal cations in



excess of state and Federal drinking water standards and



discharge standards.
                               257

-------
     The industries in which this problem can be of particular



concern are eastern coal mining and some nonferrous metal mining



operations such as copper, lead, zinc, and molybdenum.  Each of



these represents a major mining industry as measured by the



amount of ore mined, the quantity of solid wastes produced, and



geographic distribution.



     Other less significant industries that present a potential



hazard because of the presence of heavy metals are the mining and



beneficiating of beryllium and mercury.  Although these two



industries are quite small from the standpoint of solid waste



generation and geographic distribution, the potential for impact



on human health and the environment resulting from activities in



these industries needs to be identified and clarified.



     Beryllium Industry.  The domestic beryllium industry is



relatively small compared with other mineral mining and



beneficiating industries.  Beryllium ore is now mined on a large



scale at only one operation, which is in a very remote area in



the Spor Mountain district of Utah.  Beryllium ore is mined at



this operation by open-pit methods and the ore is hauled to the



beneficiating plant near Delta, Utah, where it is converted to



impure beryllium hydroxide.  In past years, some beryllium ores



were mined in Colorado and South Dakota by crude open-cut and



hand-picking methods.  These operations, which were small, have



not been active since 1972.



     Domestic beryllium production data and solid waste data are



withheld to avoid revealing individual company data.  Based on





                               258

-------
calculations made in this study, it is estimated that annual mine

and beneficiation wastes from the beryllium industry are less

than 2 million tons (1.8 Gg).*

     The environmental and health impacts associated with solid

wastes from the beryllium industry are minimal.  They are limited

primarily to the direct impact on the land on which the wastes

are disposed.  There is little problem with fugitive dust at the

mine because of the large particle size and high moisture content

of the mine wastes being handled.    Haul roads periodically

cause some dust problems, but these are minimized by watering.

Beneficiating operations generate some fugitive dust, but the

quantities are small because the processing operations are wet.

Tailings ponds do pose some threat to the environment because of

minor amounts of potentially hazardous materials contained in

the tailings.    The wastes could possibly contain some uranium,

since uranium is present in beryllium-containing ore.  The

uranium, as well as small amounts of beryllium that may be

present in tailings, could be hazardous if these particles

should become airborne.  The potential of this problem is being

minimized by keeping the waste in active portions of the pond

covered by water and applying vegetative stabilization to

abandoned portions of the tailings pond as they become inactive.

     The arid climate practically precludes surface water and

groundwater pollution problems at the mine.  Annual rainfall is
     * PEDCo engineering estimate based on calculations made in
this study and literature values.


                              259

-------
only 6 to 8 inches (15 to 20 cm), and the only potential source



of surface water or groundwater pollution in the beneficiating



operations is the tailings disposal area.  The tailings have a pH



of 8 to 10 and are exceptionally high in dissolved solids (18,380



mg per liter), consisting largely of sulfate (10,600 mg per



liter), fluoride (45 mg per liter), aluminum (552 mg per liter),



beryllium (36 mg per liter), and zinc (19 mg per liter).    The



presence of some of these constituents could cause this waste



stream to be considered potentially hazardous.   There is no



discharge from the tailings pond because evaporation greatly



exceeds precipitation in this arid area.  Some loss of pond water



could occur from seepage and percolation into the subsurface (the



pond is not lined), but it is not certain if this is a problem



because no monitoring has been done in the area.



     Mercury Industry.  The primary mercury industry in the



United States is very small.  Low prices and slackened demand


caused this industry to decline steadily during the early and



mid-1970"s.  During this same period, the environmental hazards


and extremely toxic nature of mercury came under public scrutiny.


     Thirty-seven U.S. mines were producing mercury ores in 1972,

                     22
down from 56 in 1971.:    The number dropped to 24 in 1973, and to


just 2 mines in 1974.'  During the last several years, however,


the mercury mining industry has experienced some growth, and 13

                                                         23
mining operations were producing refined mercury in 1977.    Most


of this mercury production was in Nevada, and the balance was in


California.  A single open-pit mine in Nevada,  opened in May
                               260

-------
1975, is currently responsible for about 70 percent of total


                                    23
domestic primary mercury production.    In the past, mercury was



recovered from ore in Arizona, Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and



Washington and as a byproduct from gold ore. in Nevada and zinc



ore in New York.  All of the operations in these states are now



closed because of low prices and inability to meet environmental



protection standards.  In the past, most mercury ores were



recovered from underground mines, but all the present mines are



open-pit.



     The total annual production of mineral resource wastes for



the mercury industry is estimated to be about 3,000,000 tons



(2.7 Gg) in 1977.*  This total consists of about 2,750,000 tons



(2.5 Gg) of mine wastes and 250,000 tons (227 Mg) of tailings.*



Currently all mine wastes are backfilled into the mine, used in



tailings dam construction, or dumped on land adjacent to the mine



site.    Mine wastes vary somewhat in composition, but they



usually contain chert (a mineral composed chiefly of silica), and



sometimes pyrite and sulfur.  Mine wastes from mercury mining are



generally not considered to present a significant threat to human



health and the environment because (1) any toxic metals present



are usually in low concentrations; (2) acid-forming minerals



present are usually in small enough concentrations to preclude



formation of acid waters; (3) runoff and percolation problems are



minimized because most mines are located in fairly dry areas.  In
     * PEDCo engineering estimate based on calculations made in

this study and literature values.




                               261

-------
addition, most of the mine wastes contain sufficient plant



nutrients to support vegetation on the surface of the waste



piles, which enhances both the time required and the degree to



which these materials stabilize.



     The type of beneficiation wastes generated at mercury



processing operations depends on the method used to concentrate



the ore.  Tailings are generated at facilities using froth



flotation, but a dry calcined waste is generated from the roasting



furnace and retort at facilities recovering mercury by heating.



Both types of wastes are disposed of on land near the processing



facility.  The calcined wastes do not contain any potentially


                    22
hazardous materials.    Tailings from flotation are likely to be



high in suspended solids, and some of the flotation reagents may



also be washed out with the tailings.  Although the total



dissolved solids loading may not be extremely high, a relatively



high concentration of dissolved heavy metals can result from the



beneficiating of highly mineralized ore.   Also, depending on



beneficiating conditions, the waste stream may have a high or low



pH.  This is of concern because it affects the solubility of the


                   21
waste constituents.



     Wastes Containing Potentially Toxic  Beneficiation Reagents.



This category of mineral resource wastes  includes those



beneficiation wastes that may adversely impact the environment



because they contain potentially toxic processing reagents.



Possible adverse environmental impacts from the use of toxic



reagents include contamination of surface and groundwaters and
                               262

-------
interference with vegetative stabilization of disposal areas.



Reagents are used for various functions during beneficiation



(e.g., collecting, activating, depressing), and some portion of



these reagents leave the process with the tailings and end up in



settling ponds.  Although all reagents do not pose a significant



threat to the environment (e.g., those associated with most of



the nonmetal industries), the toxic nature of certain ones may



have an adverse effect.  The reagents that have received the most



attention are sodium cyanide and copper sulfate, but there are



several organic flotation reagents used at some beneficiating



operations that may also present potential toxicity problems.



The matter of the toxicity of processing reagents is quite



uncertain and undefined, primarily because of the complex chemical



environment surrounding a typical discharge from beneficiating



plants using potentially toxic reagents.  Available data indicate


                                                     21
that only a broad range of tolerance values is known.    More



analytical testing and bioassay experiments are needed.



     No data are available from which to determine the quantity



of mineral resource solid wastes that contain potentially toxic



reagents.  To obtain this information, it would be necessary to



survey the industry to determine which operations are using the



reagents, after which field and laboratory sampling and analyses



would be required to determine how much waste actually contains



reagents.  The use of potentially toxic processing reagents is



generally limited to certain operations within the nonferrous



metals sector of the mining industry.  Organic agents are used at
                               263

-------
several nonferrous metals operations (e.g., lead, zinc, copper,



molybdenum).   Sodium cyanide is used primarily as gold and



silver recovery facilities.  Copper sulfate is used at a number



of operations involved in the recovery of copper, lead, zinc,



gold and silver.



     At facilities using potentially toxic reagents, the tailings



are adequately treated in retention ponds so that the final



discharge from the ponds meets NPDES permit standards; however,



monitoring data are lacking regarding the extent of the escape of



these reagents from the ponds via seepage and percolation.



     The most efficient way to abate potential environmental



problems would be to eliminate the use of the reagents.  A great



deal of research is being conducted by reagent suppliers, the



Bureau of Mines, and the mining industry to find suitable



substitutes for potentially toxic reagents.



              Combining of Mineral Resource Wastes



     Some large metal mining companies are partially or fully



integrated vertically.  These companies operate mining,



beneficiating, smelting, and refining operations in the same



general area.  Some integrated facilities also include operations



such as fertilizer and sulfur production plants.



     Most integrated facilities usually take great care to



segregate the waste streams"produced by each individual operation,



In some cases, however, the combined wastes are disposed of in a



common area.   A typical example of this practice is the discharge



of one or several wastes from smelting, refining, fertilizer






                               264

-------
production, and/or sulfur production into tailings ponds.  In

some cases these wastes are also combined with mine wastes, but

this practice is normally limited to situations where mine wastes

are used in the construction of tailings ponds.  Combined wastes

are of particular concern because they produce a unique waste

that is entirely different from that of ordinary mine or

beneficiation wastes.

     Although wastes are combined in several different mining

industries, it occurs most frequently in the copper, lead, and

zinc industries.  There are several large operations within each

of these industries where some combining of wastes occurs.  The

extent to which mine and beneficiation wastes are combined with

wastes from other processing operations is not known.  Although a

data base for this determination is not available, an estimated

annual production of 50 to 100 million tons (45 to 91 Gg)* of

mineral resource wastes appears reasonable.

     The facilities that combine wastes use the same control

techniques as those used at other mine and beneficiation sites.

Tailings ponds receiving combined wastes are not lined, and

efforts to control percolation, seepage, and runoff problems are

usually minimal.  A few sites have groundwater monitoring programs,

but they are neither extensive nor complete.

 Airborne Fugitive Emissions From Mine Wastes and Tailings Ponds

     Fugitive dust from mineral resource solid wastes is

generated primarily by windage of overburden storage piles and
     * PEDCo engineering estimate based on calculations made in
this study and literature values.

                               265

-------
dry, inactive tailings ponds.  Less significant fugitive dust

emissions result from the handling of dried tailings and

excavated overburden (e.g., the construction of tailings

embankments and the relocation of overburden during reclamation

operations).   These fugitive dust sources related to mineral

resource solid wastes are part of the many fugitive dust sources

associated with mining and beneficiating operations, including

scalping; overburden drilling, blasting, handling, and removal;

orebody drilling, blasting, removal, transport, and crushing;

mine-vehicle traffic over unpaved haul roads; orebody and

beneficiating product storage piles (from windage); and exposed

mine-area surfaces (from windage).   Unpaved roads and overburden

excavation are usually the major sources.

     During high winds, the fugitive dust emanating from dry,

inactive tailings ponds in the arid West and Southwest can have a

significant impact on the particulate air quality of the

immediate surrounding area.  The impact of the vast copper

tailings in these parts of the country is a good example.  This
                      I
is of particular importance in those relatively few situations

where these operations are proximate to population centers.

Overall, however, the contribution of fugitive emissions from

remotely located tailings ponds to the total suspended particulate

ambient concentration of an. encompassing area such as an Air

Quality Control Region (AQCR) is relatively insignificant when

compared with other common fugitive dust sources in these areas,

such as agricultural lands, unpaved public and private roads, and
                               266

-------
even the other mine-related fugitive dust sources.  For example,
estimated fugitive emissions from overburden, waste rock, and
tailings in the Denver, Colorado, AQCR amounts to approximately
2 percent of the total fugitive emissions in this area; unpaved
roads account for approximately 50 percent, and agricultural
sources for another 20 percent.
     Airborne emissions of hazardous materials, including
radionuclides from uranium tailings and solid wastes from the
mining and beneficiating of asbestos and, to a very limited
extent, minerals containing asbestos (vermiculite, copper, gold,
and talc), have been described and discussed earlier in this
section.  Emission factors for fugitive dust sources associated
with mine solid waste were summarized in Section 5.
     The control technology for fugitive dust from mineral
resource solid wastes is to apply physical, chemical, and
vegetative techniques, or combinations of these, to stabilize the
surface of the overburden and tailings and thus prevent airborne
emissions.  These stabilization and control techniques are
described and discussed in detail in Section 4.
Identification of Mineral Resource Solid Waste Problems by Industry
     A priorities-ranking system has been developed in an effort
to identify the mining industries that pose the greatest relative
impact to human health and the environment as a result of the
solid wastes they produce.  The priorities are based on five
criteria chosen to judge the potential adverse impacts associated
with the various industries covered in this study.  (Table 26;

                               267

-------
                       TABLE  26

   RANKING OF  POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL
                 IMPACT BY  MINERAL


1.



Criteria*
RCHA criteria
• a. Hatardous
b. Nonhaiardoua



0
0



20
10



(0
10



100
so
2.  Total quantity of mineral resource
   wastes
     Priority rating
     (Bated on million tons p«r year)*

3.  Number of domestic mints
     Priority rating
     (Baaed on total number of nunas)S

4.  Projected growth/decline of
   industry
     Priority rating
     (Based on percent of change
 0        10      20      40
1'5)      (ft-25)    (24-75)   >75
 0        10      20      40
(1-10)    (11-251   (24-100)   <>100>
 0         i      15      30

«0-5)     (6-15)    (16-50!   ( '501


Metals
Bauxite
Copper
Cold
Iron ore
Lead
Mercury
Molybdenum
Silver
Uraniuir.
Zinc
Other'
Mennetalt
Asbestos
Clays
Diatomite
Feldspar
Gypauir.
Mica (acrapl
Perlite
Phosphate roc*
Potassium salts
Pumice
Salt
Sand and gravel "
Sodium carbonate
Stone
Distension .
1 HI
• o
60
20
20
60
20
20
20
100
to
0

20
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Talc, loapstone. pyrophyllite
Other* :
Mineral Fuels
Coal (anthracite,1
bituminous, and lianite)
• fee Append i> D (or a
• Values based on dsts
1 Values bssed on data
0

to
Kb}
10
30
10
30
30
0
10
10
30
10
0

0
10
0
0

10
0
30
0
0
0
10
0
10
0
0
0

so
n explanation of the
contained
contained
9roup metals, rare earth metals, tin.
in Table
in Table
titanium.
2 3 ;
10 10
40 20
10 20
40 20
10 20
0 10
10 0
0 20
40 40
10 20
10 0

0 0
20 40
0 10
0 10
10 20
0 10
0 10
40 20
10 0
0 40
0 10
30 40
10 0
30 40
0 40
0 30
10 0

40 40
criteria uaed
7 of thia doctd
2 of this docui
4
0
30
30
30
IS
0
30
15
30
IS
30

30
30
30
IS
5
5
S
30
5
30
30
30
10
30
S
30
IS

IS
in this
cent.
sent.
ilmenite, tunqatan, va
a Abbraaives. aplite, barite, boron minerala. fluorspar.
•a t 11



araphite

Total score
30
ISO
90
14C
135
30
70
65
240
135
40

SO
100
40
35
35
25
15
140
15
70
40
120
40
100
45
SO
2S

205
table.

nun
nadium.
•
                            260

-------
see Appendix D for explanation of each criterion used to establish
priorities.)  Each criterion was weighted according to its
relative importance.  Criterion l(a) carries the most importance
and Criterion 4, the least.  Within each criterion four arbitrary
values are assigned to indicate the degree to which that criterion
applies to each industry.  For example, Criterion l(a) deals
with hazardous wastes from mining and beneficiation.  If a
specific industry generates an insignificant amount of hazardous
wastes, it receives a value of 0 for that criterion; if hazardous
wastes are a minor problem in the industry, the industry receives
a value of 20; if hazardous wastes are a major problem, it
receives a value of 100.
     After values have been assigned for each criterion, the
values for a particular industry are totaled.  Industry totals
can then be compared to determine which industries are likely to
have the greater impact on the environment.
     Despite the quantitative "total score" ranking of each
mineral industry, however, the end result is at best a qualitative
ranking of these industries.  Thus, the listing cannot be
interpreted to mean the adverse environmental impact from
uranium, for instance,  is six times greater than that from
diatomite.  In fact, rankings for minerals such as diatomite are
based exclusively on criteria that measure the size and extent of
an industry, i.e.,  RCRA criteria (impact from hazardous and
nonhazardous wastes) are not involved, and these industries are
actually considered environmentally insignificant on the whole.
                               269

-------
     Although this priority ranking of individual mineral



industries is arrived at by a seemingly somewhat arbitrary process,



it does reveal the major industries (e.g., uranium, coal, copper,



phosphate) that would be expected to have the greatest adverse



environmental and health impacts.



     This listing and the discussion in this section should



provide background information needed to develop a long-term



strategy regarding the role of the Federal Government in the



control of industrial solid wastes.
                               270

-------
                    REFERENCES FOR SECTION 7
 1.  Williams, R.E.  Waste production and disposal in mining,
       milling, and metallurgical industries.  San Francisco,
       Miller Freeman Publications, 1975.  489 p.
                                      i
 2.  Personal communication.  R.E. Williams, professor of
       hydrogeology, University of Idaho, to R.S. Amick, PEDCo
       Environmental, Inc., August 5, 1978.

 3.  Personal communication.  Selected experts in various state
       and Federal agencies, to Dr. R.E. Williams, professor of
       hydrogeology, University of Idaho.  August 1978.

 4.  Personal communication.  V.E. Andrews, Field Surveillance
       Branch, Office of Radiation Programs, to R.S. Amick,
       PEDCo Environmental, Inc., August 22, 1978.

 5.  Personal communication.  F.L. Galpin, Director of the
       Environmental Analysis Division, Office of Radiation
       Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, to
       Mr. R.S. Amick, PEDCo Environmental, Inc., October 20,
       1978.

 6.  Jackson, B.,  W. Coleman, C. Murray, and L. Sciute.  Draft
       executive summary report - Environmental study on uranium
       mills, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Effluent
       Guidelines Division, Washington, D.C. by TRW, Inc.,
       Redondo Beach, California.  December 1978.

 7.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Impacts of uranium
       mining and milling on surface and potable waters in the
       Grants Mineral Belt, New Mexico.  Environmental Protection
       Publication 330/9-75-001, National Enforcement
       Investigations Center, Denver, Colorado, September 1975.
       40 p.

 8.  Personal communication.  Dr. D.E. Garlander, Ardmann and
       Associates, to R.S.  Amick, PEDCo Environmental, Inc.,
       October 1978.

 9.  Personal communication.  Dr. W.E. Bolch, University of
       Florida, to R.S.  Amick,  PEDCo Environmental, Inc.,
       August 29,  1978.

10.  Personal communica-tion.  Mr. H.R. Payne, Chief of Environmental
       Radiation Section for Region 4, Environmental Protection
       Agency, to R.S. Amick, PEDCo Environmental, Inc., October
       15, 1978.
                               271

-------
11.  Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services,
       Radiological Health Services.  Study of radon daughter
       concentrations in structures in Polk and Hillsboro
       Counties.  January 1978.

12.  Personal communication.  S.T. Windham, Chief of Environmental
       Studies Branch, Environmental Protection Agency, Montgomery,
       Alabama, to R.S. Amick, PEDCo Environmental, Inc., August
       27, 1978.

13.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Asbestos fibers in
       discharges from selected mining and milling activities.
       Final report, part III.  Environmental Protection
       Publication 560/6-77-001.  Washington, U.S. Government
       Printing Office, 1977.

14.  Reserve mining:  An epic battle draws to a close.
       Environmental Science and Technology.  October 1977.

15.  Pollution control program for Reserve Mining will proceed
       despite unresolved tax problem.  Engineering and Mining
       Journal.  August 1978.

16.  McDonald, J.C., and M.R. Becklake.  Asbestos-related disease
       in Canada, Helte Unfallheilkunde^ 126,2.
       Deutsch-Osterreichisch-Schweizerische, Unfalltagung in
       Berlin, 1975, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 521-535.  1976.

17.  McDonald, J.C., M.R. Becklake, G.W. Gibbs, A.D. McDonald,
       and C.E. Rossiter.  The health of chrysotile asbestos
       mine and mill workers of Quebec, Arch. Environ. Health,
       28: 61-68, 1977.

18.  Brulotte, R.  Study of atmospheric pollution in the
       Thetford Mines area, cradle of Quebec's asbestos industry.
       Atmospheric Pollution, M.M. Benarie, ed.  Elsevier Sci.
       Pub., Amsterdam, 447-458.  1976.

19.  Malcolm, R.  The "asbestos" minerals:  definitions,
       description, modes of formation, physical and chemical
       properties, and health risks to the mining community.
       National Bureau of Standards Special Publication 506.
       Proceedings of the Workshop on Asbestos, Definitions and
       Measurement Methods; held at NBS, Gaithersburg, Maryland,
       July 18-20, 1977.  Issued November 1978.

20.  Personal communication.  K. Poulson, Brush Wellman, Inc.,
       Salt Lake City, Utah, to J. Greber, PEDCo Environmental, Inc.
       December 1976.
                               272

-------
21.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Development document
      •for interim final and proposed effluent limitations
       guidelines and New Source Performance Standards for the
       mineral mining and processing industry, point source
       category.  Environmental Protection Publication
       440/l-76/059a, Group II.  Washington, U.S. Government
       Printing Office, 1976.

22.  Midwest Research Institute.  A study of waste generation,
       treatment, and disposal in the metals mining industry,
       for Environmental Protection Agency, Solid Waste
       Management Division, Washington, PB-261052, October 1976.

23.  U.S. Bureau of Mines.   Mineral Commodity Summaries 1978.
       Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Offices.

24.  PEDCo Environmental, Inc.  Technical guidance for control
       of industrial process fugitive particulate emissions.
       Environmental -Protection Agency Publication No. 450/3-77-010
       Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Waste
       Management, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina,
       March 1977.
                                             /
25.  PEDCo-Environmental Specialists, Inc.  Investigation of
       fugitive dust - sources, emissions, and control.  Prepared
       for the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9,
       Contract No. 68-02-0044, Task Order No. 9, May 19,73.
                               273

-------
                           APPENDIX A


     The agencies and their personnel who met with PEDCo

personnel during the course of this study are listed below:

     U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C;

          Paul Marcus         Division of Environment
          Andy Corcoran       Division of Environment
          T.P. Flynn          Division of Environment
          Kenneth Higbie      Division of Solid Waste
          Monte Shirts        Division of Solid Waste
          John Morning        Division of Ferrous Metals

     U.S. Bureau of Mines Research Center,  Spokane

          Roy Soderberg
          Roger Bloomfield

     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Washington, D.C.

          Tim Fields          Office of Solid Waste
          Kurt Jakobsen       Office of Energy, Minerals and
                               Industry
          Don 0'Bryan         Office of Energy, Minerals and
                               Industry
          Jon Perry           Office of Solid Waste
          Bruce Weddle        Office of Solid Waste
          Al Galli    i        Effluent Guidelines
          Ron Kirby           Effluent Guidelines

     U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  Cincinnati

          Ron Hill            Industrial Environmental Research
                      ; .        Laboratory
          Gene Harris         Industrial Environmental Research
                               Laboratory

     Appalachian Regional Commission,  Washington, D.C.

          Dr. Dave Maneval

     U.S. Forest Service, Washington

          Edward Johnson

                              274

-------
     National Academy of Science, Washington, D.C.

          George White        Executive Secretary, Committee on
                               Chemistry of Coal Utilization

     Interstate Mining Compact, Lexington

          Kenes Bowling

     Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Atlanta

          Moses McCall        Chief, Land Protection Branch
          Sanford Darby       Program Manager, Surface Mined
                               Land Reclamation Program

     The government agencies and their personnel who were

contacted by letter or telephone during the course of this study

include:

     U.S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D.C.

          Tovio Johnson       Division of Ferrous Metals

     U.S. Bureau of Mines Research Center, Salt Lake City

          Parkmen Brooks

     U.S. Forest Service, Washington, D.C.

          James Neuman
          George Holmberg

     U.S. Forest Service, Ogden, Utah

          William Johnson

     Colorado Division of Radiation and Hazardous Waste Control

          Al Hazel

     New Mexico Environmental Improvement Agency, Santa Fe

          Al Top
                               275

-------
                                                              APPENDIX B

                                                               TABLE  27

                                          SUMMARY  OF  STATE  AMBIENT  AIR  QUALITY
                                       STANDARDS  AND FUGITIVE  DUST REGULATIONS*
          Jurisdiction
Primary Standard
Secondary Standard
                                                                                                Fugitive Duit and Dustfall
          Alabama
          Alaska
          Arizona
          Arkansas
                        Federal (75 ug/m  annual geometric
                        mean of 24-hr  concentration)
                        Federal
                        Federal secondary
                        Federal
                                 Federal (60 wg/m  annual geometric
                                 mean of 24-hr concentration)
                                                               Federal
                                 Air Quality Goal:  100  ug/m
                                 maximum 24-hr average
                                                              Federal
N)
          California
          Colorado
                        Nonvehlcular  standards and regula-
                        tions are set by counties
                        Federal
                                                              Federal
          Connecticut
                        Federal
                                                              Federal
              •  Afflick, R.S.,and  K.A. Axetell.   Evaluation of fugitive dust emissions  from mining.

         PEDCo Environmental,  Inc., Cincinnati,  under contract 68-02-1321.  Prepared  for U.S.

         Environmental Protection Agency, June  1976.

         (continued)
                                  No fugitive dust beyond property
                                  line.  Abatement: Reasonable pre-
                                  cautions, plus first three par-
                                  agraphs of Federal model.

                                  No visible dust past property line.
                                  Abatement: First three paragraphs of
                                  Federal model.

                                  Fugitive dust from hauling, handling,
                                  crushing,or conveying of materials
                                  must be controlled by reasonable
                                  means.

                                  May not exceed 75 ug/n  for any 24-
                                  hr period or  ISO ug/m  for any 30-
                                  minute period (measured on property
                                  and subtracting background).  Abate-
                                  ment: Reasonable precautions.  Dust
                                  fall: maximum IS tons/mile /month.
                                  Particles larger than 60 microns nay
                                  not exceed 120/cm /24 hrs.

                                  Fugitive dust regulations are devised
                                  by each county.  Those with appli-
                                  cable regulations call for "reason-
                                  able precautions."

                                  If emissions are judged by a panel to
                                  be "objectionable," may require use
                                  of "best practical method" of con-
                                  trol.  Controls must be applied dur-
                                  ing nonworking hours as required to
                                  control dust.  No visible emissions
                                  may cross property 'line.

                                  reasonable precautions, plus Federal
                                  model, except paving of roads not re-
                                  quired and agricultural operations
                                  nitaA not sunnreaa dust.  No discharge
                                  beyond property line if: 1) visible
                                  near ground, 2) impinges on building
                                  or structure.

-------
                                                 TABLE  27.    (continued)
            Jurisdiction
                   Primary Standard
                                                                 Secondary Standard
                                                                                       Fugitive Dust and Dustfall
M
            Delaware
            District of
            Columbia
            riorida
Georgia

Hawaii
            Idaho


            Illinois




            Indiana
              70 gg/m  annual geometric mean of 24-
              hr concentration.   200 ug/m  24-hr
              average concentration, not to be .ex-
              ceeded more than once per year.  500
              ug/m 1-hour average.

              Federal
Federal secondary, except in Dade,
Broward, and Palm Beach Counties,  -
where the following apply: SO ug/m
annual geometric mean.  180 ug/m3
maximum 24-hr concentration.

Federal

100 ug/m  during any 24 hrs.
55 pg/m3 annual arithmetic mean
during any 12-month period.
                                                                 Federal
                                                                 Federal
                                                                 Federal
                          Federal
              Federal, plus no degradation of
              regional air quality  permitted.
                          Federal
                                       Federal


                                       Federal





                                       Federal
Water, chemicals, or approved tech-
niques must be used to control dust
emissions during demolition, grad-
ing, land clearing, excavation, and
use of unpaved roadways.

Federal model, except that agricul-
tural operations receive no specific
mention.

Fugitive dust in excess of process
emissions rate is prohibited.  Rea-
sonable precautions to abate fugitive
dust are required.
Federal model

No visible dust past property line.
Ground level concentration at a point
selected by the Department may not
exceed 150 ug/m^ ab6ve background.
Dust fall may not exceed 3.0 grams
per square meter per 14 days.  Abate-
ment by Federal model, except that
Director may determine that "best
practical" measures are sufficient.

"All reasonable precautions" plus
Federal model.

No emissions larger than 40 microns
mean diameter.  No emissions beyond
property line visible when looking
toward zenith.  Not applicable in
winds greater than 25 mph.

No visible dust over property line.
May not exceed 166 percent of upwind
values, nor more than 50 nq/m3 at
ground level above background more
than 60 minutes.
            (continued)

-------
                                                TABLE  27.    (continued)
         Jurisdiction
                            Primary Standard
                                                     Secondary  Standard
                                        Fugitive Oust and Dustfall
         Iowa
         Kansas
         Kentucky
                       Federal
                       Federal
                       Federal
                                                             Federal
                                                             Federal
                                                             Federal
to
>J
CO
Louisiana
              Federal
                                                    Federal
        Maine
        Maryland
              100 gg/m  24-hr average,
              SO yg/ro' annual geometric mean
              of 24-hr averages.

              Primary: lowest concentrations
              attainable by reasonably  avail-
              able control methods,  but not
              to exceed concentrations  set
              forth as 'secondary standards."
Annual arithmetric average:
"More adverse":
Lower Limit Upper Limit Serious..
E3pg/m'    75 pg/mi    75 pg/m
daily average, once.per year:
140 tig/m-*160 pg/m    160 pg/m
               2 /m,-,
                                                        dustfal1,  mg/cm^/mo
                                                        0.35       0.50
                                        No fugitive dust  beyond  property
                                        line.   Federal  model  for abatement,
                                        except that no  mention is made of
                                        agricultural dust suppression or
                                        paving of  roads.

                                        Airborne particulates at ground level
                                        at property line  may  not equal 2.0 pg
                                        par cubic  meter,  above background,
                                        more than  10 min/hr.

                                        No fugitive dust  beyond  property
                                        line,  plus Federal model, except  (1)
                                        no requirement  that roads be paved,
                                        and (2)  agricultural  operations can
                                        create airborne dust  if  no  nuisance
                                        created.  Secondary dust fall stan-
                                        dard:  15 ton/mi2/month.

                                        Dust fall: 20 tons/square mile/month
                                        Coefficient of  haze:  0.6 con/1000
                                        lineal ft., annual geometric mean;
                                        0.75 coh/1000 lineal  ft., annual
                                        arithmetric mean;  1.50 coh/1000
                                        lineal ft., 24-hr, average.  Abate-
                                        ment by Federal model
                                                                                               Federal abatement model, except no
                                                                                               mention of agricultural operations.
                                                                               0.50
          (continued)

-------
                                                TABLE  27.    (continued)
          Jurisdiction
    Primary Standard
                                                              Secondary Standard
                                  Fugitive Dust and Dustfall
          Massachusetts
                        Federal
                                                              Federal
          Michigan


          Minnesota
Federal


Federal
Federal


Federal
to
^J
VO
          Mississippi
          Missouri
                        Federal
                                                              Federal
          Montana
                        Federal
                                                              Federal
Reasonable precautions required.
Fugitive dust from process indus-
tries, from transport or handling of
materials, or from construction  us*
and maintenance of roads may not
"contribute to a condition of air
pollution."

Treated as a nuisance.  Area of  cut
and fill open at one time is limited.

"Avoidable amounts" of dust must not
become airborne.  Director may order
reasonable measures to be taken, in-
cluding paving and frequent cleaning
of roads, application of dust-free
surfaces, use of water, and mainte-
nance of vegetative ground cover.

Fugitive particulate matter must not
become airborne as a result of han-
dling, storage, or transport of  any
material.  Dust fall may not exceed
background levels by 5.25 grams/m^/
month on adjacent property.

Reasonable precautions required.  No
fugitive dust or particles larger
than 40 microns permitted beyond
property line.  Concentrations at
property line:
Suspended particulates
 80 ug/m^ 6-month geometric mean
200 wg/m  2-hr arithmetic mean,  for
no fpwer than 5 samples per year.

Reasonable precautions must be taken;
no "controllable" particulate matter
may be emitted.  Specific measures
may be ordered by the Director.
          (continued)

-------
                                                        TABLE 27.     (continued)
         Jurisdiction
     Frlawry Standard
Secondary Standard
Fugitive Duck and Duetfall
        Mebraaka
        •evade
ro
O3
o
        •en Jereey
        •ew Mexico
        R*v fork
                       raderal
                                                              Federal
Federal
                       Federal Secondary
Ambient air quality rnuat be hlqheat
achievable at present atate of the
•rt,  but In no caee nay It be woree
than  the Federal primary standard.
Federal
                                                              Federal
     uq/m  74-hr averaqe
 110 uq/i«j  7-day averaqe
  90 wq/M.  JO-day averaqe
 •(0 wq/ai  annual geometric Mean

State Include*  four 'levela* froai
Level Ii  apnrae population, to
Level IVi Metropolitan.
Short-tuna  (all levela) averaqe 24-
hr concentration aha 11 not exceed
250 uq/m).   Lonq termi durlnq 12
montha,  SO  percent of 24-hr con-
centration' aiay not exceed i           -
Level 1 1  S% uq/n1  Level I til «5 pq/iaf
Level III tS wq/»)  Level  IV i 75 liq/n
and »4 percent  of 24-hr valuee aha 11
not exceed i      .
                   Level lilt 100 M9/m
                   Level  IV i 110 uq/m
                       Level  It  4) M9>,
                       Level  III IS wq/»
No vlalble 
-------
                                                  TABLE  27.     (continued)
             Jurisdiction
              North Caroline
              Horth Dakota
ro
00
Ohio


Oklahon


Oregon
              Pennsylvania
                                Primary Standard
                            Federal Secondary
                            Federal  Secondary
Federal  Secondary


Federal
                            Highest  and best technology must be
                            applied.  Standards measured at
                            'primary stations:" 60 ug/m3 annual
                            geometric meant 100 ug/m^ 24-hr con-
                            centration not to be exceeded by 15
                            percent  of monthly samplest  ISO
                              /n^ 24-hr concentration.

                            Federal
                                                                  Secondary Standard
                                                                  Federal
                                                                  Federal
                                                                                                   Fuqitive Oust and Oustfall
Asphalt plants must limit fugitive
dust to stack outlet.   Roads must
be treated around plant.   In road
construction, use of dust control on
haul roads and water sprays over
crushers for stone and aggregate
handling are required.

Dust fall: IS tons/ml /mo, maximum
3-month arithmetic mean in residen-
tial areas.  30 tons/miJ/tno, applies
to heavy industry areas.   0.4 co-
efficient of haze/1000 lineal feet.
maximum annual geometric mean.   "Rea-
sonable precautions" plus Federal
mode 1.

Reasonable precautions plus Federal
model.

Reasonable precautions to control
fugitive dust are mandatory.

Abatement by Federal model, less
mention of agricultural operations
of paving roads.  Stockpiles of
materials should be enclosed where
other means do not control dust.
                                                                                      Dust fall: annual average 0.8 mg/cn /
                                                                                      mo.   30-day average 1.5 mg/cm2/mo.
                                                                                      In all  roadwork and land clearing
                                                                                      fugitive dust must be confined to
                                                                                      property, and not exceed ISO par-
                                                                                      ticles  per cubic centimeter at
                                                                                      property line.  Abatement by Federal
                                                                                      model,  except no call for hoods,
                                                                                      fans), or covering of trucks.
              (continued)

-------
                                                     TABLE   27.    (continued)
Jurisdiction
to
00
to
               Puerto Rico
               Rhode  Island
               South
               Carolina
South Dakota

Tennessee
               Texas
 Otah

 Vermont
                                 Primary Standard
                             Federal
                             Federal
                60 wg/m  annual geometric me*
                SO ug/m3 24-hr average
250 ug/



Federal  Secondary

Federal
Federal

Emissions  from any source  may not
exceedi
100 ug/m3  average over 5 hra.
200 ug/m3  average over 3 hra.
400 ug/m3-  average over 1 hr.

Federal

 45 ug/m?  annual geometric average
125 ug/m  dally average
                                                    Secondary Standard
                                                                   Federal
                                                                   Federal
                                                                   Federal
                                                                   Federal
                                                                   Federal
                                                                                                     Fugitive Dust  and  Dustfall
No fugitive  dust  in visible quan-
tities may be  permitted to cross
property line.  Abatement by Federal
model.
No emissions to air from handling.
transportation or storage of
materials.   Abatement by reasonable
precautions  during construction.

Dust control measures must be used on
premises and roads of mining, quar-
rying and other unenclosed opera-
tions.
Visible dust emissions may not  pass
proper property line  more than  5 min/
hr or 20 min/day.   Abatement by
Federal model,  first  three paragraphs
only.

Materials-handling dust  must be con-
trolled by use  of  water  or chemicals,
use of hoods and fans, and covering
or wetting truck-bed  loads.  During
road construction, dust  suppression
is required on  all haul  roads.
                                                                                                      Reasonable precautions must be ex-
                                                                                                      ercised In road construction activ-
                                                                                                      ities.
               (continued)

-------
                                                                TABLE  27.   (continued)
               Jurisdiction
K)
00
Ul
              Virginia
              Virgin
              Islands
Washington

Wast Virginia

Wisconsin

Wy owing
                                  Primary Standard
               Federal, except In National Capital
               Air Quality Control Region, where
               Federal secondary standards must
               be met.

               Federal
Federal SecoMary

Federal

Federal

Federal Secondary

coh-0.4/1000  lineal ft. annual
geometric man
                                                     Secondary Standard
                                                    Federal
                                                    Federal
Federal

Federal
                                                                         Fugitive Dust and Dustfall
                                                                                                     Federal model, except control of
                                                                                                     agricultural emissions are not re-
                                                                                                     quired.
                                  All reasonable measures.  Including
                                  watering and coating of  roada, must
                                  be used during road construction.

                                  Reasonable precautions are  required.
                                                                                                     Abatement by Federal model.

                                                                                                     Oust  fall: 5 gm/m /mo for any 30-day
                                                                                                     period  in a residential area.  10 gn/
                                                                                                     m2/mo for any  30-day period in an
                                                                                                     industrial area.  Abatement by
                                                                                                     Federal model.

-------
                                                                        APPENDIX  C


                                                                          TABLE  28

                           SYNOPSIS  OF  LAWS  RELATIVE  TO  STATEWIDE  POLLUTION  ABATEMENT*
AIR
Alabama
A|r Pollution Control Act
Air Pollution Control Rules and Regulations
Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation Act
Air Pollution Control Regulations
Arizona
Air Pollution Control Laws
Rules and Regulations for Air Pollution Control
Arkansas
Water and Air Pollution Control Act
Atr Pollution Control Code
California
Air Pollution Control Laws
Environmental Quality Act of 197O
Air Pollution Control Regulations
Motor Vehicle Emissions Regulations
Colorado
Air Po'.lution Control Act of 197O
WATER
Water Pollution Control Act
Water Quality Criteria
Procedural Regulations
Department of Environmental
Conservation Act
Water Quality Standards
Wastewater Disposal Regulations
Oil Pollution Regulations
Water Pollution Control Law
Rules and Regulations for Sewerage
Systems and Waste Treatment Works
Water Quality Standards
Water and Air Pollution Control Act
Regulations Establishing Water Quality
Standards for Surface Waters
State Water Resources Control Uoard
Water Pollution Control Law*
Water Regulations
Water Quality Control Act
SOLID WASTL - LAND USE
Solid Waste Disposal Act
Solid Waste Financing Act
Solid Waste Management Regulations
Standards for Disposal of Solid Wastes
Surface Mining Act of 1969
Department of Environmental Conservation Act
Solid Waste Management Regulations
Solid Waste Rules
Solid Waste Management Act
Solid Waste Disposal Regulations
Solid Waste Management and Resource Recovery
Act of 1972
Co as In 1 Zone Conservation Act
Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities Law
K>
CO
               • Mint. J.O.. in* J.C. HuUhlns. Crlurli for optioning pollution tbtumt

           for (Mctln •ft* ibtMoMd mtnn.  Sktllj ind toy (nglnxn «nd Contulunti. Mirrltburi

           rtmiyl»»U. Pnptrttf for Offlc« of MUr «nd Hiiirdout NtMrlllt. U.S. CtMlroMnUI

           rrouctln Agency, under contrwt 440/9-75-008. *uo,iiit 1975.
            (continued)

-------
                                TABLE  28.   (continued)
AIR
Colorado (continued)
Air Quality Control Regulations
Existing Wigwam Burners Regulations
Existing Alfalfa Dehydration Plants Regulations
Stationary Sources Standards
Hydrocarbons Vapors Regulations
Connecticut
Environmental Protection Act
Air Pollution Control Laws
Environmental Policy Act
Rules of Practice
Air Pollution Control Regulations
Delaware
Air Pollution Control Laws
Regulation I - Definitions and Administra-
tive Principles
Regulation II - Registration and Permits
Regulation III - Ambient Air Quality Standards
Regulation IV to VII and XVIII - Particulates
Regulations VIII and IX - Sulfur Dioxides
Regulation XIII - Open Burning
Regulation XIV - Visible Emissions
Regulation XV - Air Pollution Alert and
Emergency Plan
Regulation XVI - Sources Having an Interstate
Air Potential
Regulation XVII - Source Monitoring, Record-
Keeping and Reporting
Regulation XIX - Control of Odorous Air
Contaml nants
District of Columbia
Air Pollution Control Act
WATER
Regulations for State Discharge Permit
System
Water Quality Standards
Clean Water Act
Water Quality Standards
Underwater Lands Laws
Water Quality Standards
Water Pollution Control Regulations
River Dasin Commission Regulations -
Water Quality
Water Pollution Control Law
SOLID WASTE - LAND USE
Solid Waste Regulations
Solid Waste Management Act
Solid Waste Management Services Act
f?e*}u!ation on Disposal of Refuse
Public Utility Environmental Standards Act
Environmental Control Laws
Solid VMste Disposal Regulations
Coastal ?:ones Act
Wetlands Act
Solid Waste Law
00
Ul
      (continued)

-------
                                TABLE  28.   (continued)
AIR
District of Columbia (Continued)
Air Quality Control Regulations
Diesel Exhaust Emissions Regulations
Florida
Air and Water Pollution Control Act
Environmental Protection Act of 1971
Administrative Procedures
Air Pollution Rules
Rules on Permits
Open Burning and Frost Protection Fires
Regulations
Rules on Alternate Enforcement Procedure
Pollution Control Tax Assessment Rules
Georgia
Air Quality Control Law
Vehicular Visible Emission Control Act
Air Quality Control Rules
Hawaii
Environ mental Quality Law
Environmental Quality Council Law
Environmental Quality Commission Law
Air Pollution Regulations
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Idaho
Environmental Protection and Health Act
of 1972
Air Pollution Control Regulations
Illinois
Environmental Protection Act
WATER
Water Pollution Control Regulations
Air and Water Pollution Control Act
Sewage Disposal Facilities Law
Pollutant Spill Prevention and Control
Act
Water Resources Act of 1972
Rules on Pollution of Waters
Rules on Sewage Works
Rules on Assessment of Damacier,
Water Quality Control Act
WntEr Quality Control Regulations
Water Classifications
Environmental Quality Law
Water Pollution Control Regulations
Water Pollution Control Law
Water Quality Standards and Waste-
water Treatment Requirements
environmental Protection Act
SOLID WASTE - LAND USE
Sol id Waste Regulations
Resource Recovery and Management Act
Gartiage and Rubbish Rules
Environmental Land and Water Management Act
of 1972
Coastal Construction Law
Solid Waste Management Act.
Solid Waste Management Rules
Coastal Mnrchlands Protection Act
Environmental Quality Law
Solirl Waste Law
Solid Waste Regulations and Standards
Environmental Protection Act
00
      (continued)

-------
                                                            TABLE  28.     (continued)
                             AIR
                                                                                                                         SOLID
                                                                                                                                   L'TIi - LAND USL~
             Illinois (Continued)

             General Air Pollution Regulations
             Stationary Sources Standards
             Air Quality Standards
             Episodes Regulations
             Open Hurning Regulations
             Asbestos, Spray Insulation, and F
             Regulations
             Mobile Sources Standards
             Odors Regulations
                                                      Water Pollution Control Rules
                                                      Pules and Regulations on c/.inides
                                                      Or Oynnorjon Compounds
                                                                                                   Solid Wan to Regulations
K)
GO
Indiana

Air Pollution Control Law
Environmental Management Act
Environmental Policy Law
Open Burning, Visible Emissions, and Indirect
 Heating Regulations
Process Operations, Existing Foundries, and
 Incinerators Regulations
Episode Alert Levels
Sulfur Dioxide Regulations
Ambient Air Quality
Hydrocarbons Regulation
Regulations or* Carbon Monoxide and Nitrogen
 Dioxide
Rarticulate Regulations Compliance Schedule
Permits Regulation
Fugitive Dust Regulation
Air Quality Basins Regulation
Stream Pollution Control Low
Phor.phate Ootergenl Law
Watercraft Sewmje Disposal Law
Water Quality Standards
NPUES Permit Regulations
Haznrdous  Substances Rciulalton
Refuse Dnno^al Act
Anti-l^tfr Law
Hi'jHw-Ty ,(u»'kynrrl (. '"•ntrol Act
AtmncJo'ifc) Vehicle Act
S'">li<.t Waste* Mtin.iqenieft Permit
Intfustrial Waste Hnuk'r rjer-n^tt '-""
             Iowa

             Department of Environmental Quality Act
             Rules and Regulations Relating to Air Pollution
                                                      Department of Environmental Quality Act
                                                      Water Quality Standards
                                                      Confined Feeding Operations Regulations
                                             Uermr-tr-te'it of I- nvironmental Quality Act
                                             5:ianiInry (Disposal t 'rojects Rules
                                             Surface Mtmr*-} Law
             (continued)

-------
                                                        TABLE  28.     (continued)
                          AIR
                                                                             WATER
                                                                                                                     SOLID WASTE - LAND USE
           Kansas
          Air Quality Control Act
          Air Pollution Emission Control Regulations
                                                    Water Pollution Control  Laws
                                                    Water Quality Criteria
                                                    Underground Storage Regulations
                                                    Permits,  Spills, and Grants Regulations
                                                    Agricultural Wastes Regulations
Solid Waste Management Act of 197O
Solid Waste Disposal Act
Solid Waste Management Standards and
 Regulations
fcO
00
Environmental Protection Law
General Provisions and Regulations
Open Burning Regulations
Particulate Emissions Regulations
Sulfur Compound Emissions Regulations
Hydrocarbon Emissions Regulations
Carbon Monoxide Regulations
Nitrogen Oxides  Regulations
Coal Refuse Regulations
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Rules of Practice
Review of Indirect  Sources
                                                              Environmental Protection Law
                                                              Water Quality Standards
                                                              Waste Discharge Permits Regulations
                                                              Public Hearings Regulations
                                                              Excessive Spills Discharges Regulations
Environmental Protection l_aw
Garbage and Refuse Disposal l_aw
Solid Waste Regulations
Strip Mining  Law
           Louisiana
          Air Control Law
          Council of Environmental Quality
          Air Pollution Control Regulations
                                                    Stream Control Commission Acts
                                                    Regulation on Reports of Industrial
                                                     Waste Discharges
                                                    Rules Relating  to Oil and Gas
                                                    Water Quality Criteria	
Solid Wa'.iu Laws
Solid Waste Regulations
          Maine
          Air Pollution Control Law
          Air Pollution Control Rules
          Hearings Regulations
                                                    Water Pollution Control Law
                                                    Oil Discharge Prevention and
                                                     Pollution Control Act
                                                    Oil Pollution Control  Regulations
Solid Waste Management Act
Solid Wnste Management Requisitions
Land Use  Low
Site Location and Development Law
(Coastal Wetlands and Zoning Law
            (continued)

-------
                                                       TABLE   28.     (continued)
                         AIR
                                                                           WATER
                                                                                                                   SOLID WASTE - LAND USE
          Maryland
         Air Quality Contf-ol Act
         Environmental Policy Act
         Alp Pollution Regulations
                                                    Water Pollution Control Laws
                                                    Water Resources Law
                                                    Environmental Service Act of 197O
                                                    Water Pollution Control Definitions
                                                    Water Pollution Control Regulations
                                                    Effluent Limitations
                                                    Regulation on Toxic Materials for
                                                    Aquatic Life Management
                                                    Oil Prevention Regulation
                                                    Discharge Permits'Regulatlon
                                                    Classification of State Waters
                                                    Wastewater Works Regulation
                                                    Water Pollution Control Principles
                                                    Receiving Water Quality Standards
                                                    Groundwater Quality Standards	
                                            Solid Waste Laws
                                            Solirt Waste Regulations
                                            Power Plant Siting Act
                                            Strip Mining Law
to
oo
10
          Massachusetts
Air Pollution Control Laws
Environmental Cause of Action Law
Environmental Protection.Law
Air Pollution Control Regulations
Air Quality Standards
Clean Waters Act
Rules for Adopting Administration Regu-
 lations for the Conduct of Adjudicatury
 Proceedings, and Administrative Rules
Rules for the Prevention and Control of
 Oil Pollution In the Waters of the
 Commonweal tn
Hazardous Waste  Regulations
Water Quality Standards
Solid Waste Disposal Law
Sanitary Landfill Regulations
         Air Pollution Laws
         Envtronmental Protection Act of 197O
         Administrative Rules for Air Pollution
          Control
                                                    Water Resources Commission Act
                                                    Liquid Industrial Waste Disposal Act
                                                    Cleaning Agents and Water Conditioners
                                                    Act
                                                    Watercrart Pollution Control Act
                                                    General Provisions and Procedures Regu-
                                                    lations
                                                    Wastewater Reporting and Surveillance
                                                    Fees Rules
                                             Solid Waste Disposal Act
                                             Solid Waste Regulations
                                             Shorelands Protection Act
          (continued)

-------
                                                       TABLE   28.     (continued)
                         AIR
                                                                           WATER
                                                                                                                   SOLID WASTE - LAND USE
          Michigan (Continued)
                                                             Hearings Regulations
                                                             Oil Spillage Regulations
                                                             Cleaning Agents Regulations
                                                             Wastewater Discharge Permits
                                                             Water Quality Standards
                                                             Water Temperature Standards
M
VO
O
          Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency Law...
Environmental Council Act
Envi ronrnental Rights Act
Environmental Policy Act
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Air Quality Definitions
Permits and Monitoring  Rules
Fuel Burning Rules
Particulate Matter Rules
Incinerator Rules
Open Burning Restrictions
Odor Control Rules
Visible Air Contaminants Rules
Gasoline Storage Rules
Acid and Alkaline Emissions Rules
Sulfuric Acid Plant Emissions Rules
Nitric Acid Rules
Emission Standards for  Asbestos and
 Inorganic Fibrous Material
Regulations for Permits for Indirect
 Sources
Water Pollution Control Laws
Statutes Pertaining to Marine Tiolets
Oil Storage Regulations
Criteria for Intrastate Waters
Criteria for Interstate Waters
Effluent Standards for Intrastate
 Waters
Classification of Intrastate Waters
Classification of Interstate Waters
NPDES Regulations
Criteria for watercrafl Sewage
 Retention Devices
                                                                                                         Solid wastes Recycling Law
                                                                                                         Solid Waste Disposal Regulations
                                                                                                         Critical Areas Act
          Mississippi
          Air and Water Pollution Control Act
          Air Quality Regulations
          Permit Regulations
          Emergency Episodes Regulations
                                                   Air and Water Pollution Control Act
                                                   water Quality Criteria
                                                   NI'PES Regulations
                                            Solid War.te Oispos.il Act of 1974
                                            Solid Wa-Me f-Je.julntions
                                            Sanitary Landfill Standards
           (continued)

-------
                                TABLE  28.   (continued)
AIR
Missouri
Air Conservations Law
Regulation 3-1, Auto Exhaust Emission Con-
trols
Regulation S-ll, Reporting of New Installations
Regulation S-lll, Open Burning Restriction;-,
Regulation S-IV, Incinerators
Regulation S-V, Restriction or Emission of
Particulate Matter from Industrial Processes
Regulation S-VI. Maximum Allowable Emissions
of Particulate Matter from Fuel-Burning
Eoulpment Used for Indirect Heating
Regulation S-VII, Restriction of Particulate
Matter from Becoming Airborne
Regulation S-VIII, Restriction of Visible Air
Contaminants
Regulation S-IXf Restriction of Emission of
Odors
Regulation S-Xf Restriction of Ernission of
Sulfur Compounds
Regulation S-XI, Rules for Controlling Emissions
During Periods of High Air Pollution Potential
Montana
Clean Air Act
Air-Quality Regulations






Nebraska
Environmental Protection Act
WAT LR

Clean Water Law
Waste Disposal Well Lav/
Definition Regulation
Discharge and NPDES Permits ,-vvl
Spills Regulations
Effluent Regulations
Miscellaneous Water Pollution Control
Regulations













Water Pollution Control Law
Water use Act
Environmental Policy Act
Water Quality Criteria
Regulation on Water Pollution from
Livestock F~eedinq
Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System

Environmental Protection Act
'-•OLID VVASTL - L/M-ID U'M-D

County Option Dur-npir->g Groun'J L-iw
JunkynrcJs L.1W
Solid WnrUe Low
l-'efi.r;e Disposal Regulations
S-jli'l'Wa-iU- Muleo an-i Regulations
















. Refuse Disposal C.ont'rol Law
Refuse Disposal Districts Law
Refuse Disposal Regulation






f^nvironn->ent,-ll ProttJCtinn Act
to
vo
       (continued)

-------
                                                     TABLE   28.     (continued)
                       AIR
                                                                          WATER
                                                                                                                  t.OLID WAST E - LAND USE
         Nebraska (Continued)
         Motor and Diesel-Powered Motor Vehicle Acl
         Rules of Practice and Procedure
         Air Pollution Control Regulations
Water Quality Standards
Domestic anil Industrial Liquid Wastes
 Disposal Mules
Livestock Waste Control Regulations
Disposal Wells Regulations
MPDES Regulations	
                                                                                               Solid Waste Disposal Sites Law
                                                                                               Solid Waste Control Rules
         Air Pollution Control Law
         Air Quality Regulations
Water Pollution Control  Laws
Water Pollution Control  Regulations
                                                                                               Solid Waste Disposal Law
                                                                                               Solid Waste Management Regulations
to
ID
         New Marnpshire
Air Pollution Control Law
Open Burning Regulations
Fluorides Regulation
Particulate Emissions Regulations
Sulfur Emissions Regulations
Incinerators Regulation
Waste Burners Regulation
Asphalt  Plants Emissions Regulation
Motor Vehicles Regulation
Ferrous Foundries Regulation
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Sand, Gravel, and Cement Industries
 Regulation
Nonferrous Foundries Regulation
Pulp and Paper Industry Regulation
Permit Regulation
Process, Manufacturing, Service, Miscel-
 laneous Industries Regulation
Record Keeping Regulation
Emergency Episode Regulation
Requirements for Indirect Sources
Water Pollution Control  L.TW
                                           Waste Disposal Laws
                                           Junkyard Control  Law
           (continued)

-------
                                                       TABLE   28.     (continued)
                           AIR
                                                                             WATER
                                                                                                                    SOLID WASTE - LAND USE
10
\D
U)
             New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection Act
 of 1970
Air Pollution Control Laws
Regulations on General Provisions and Open
 Burning
Regulations on Smoke from Combustion of Fuel
Regulations on Air Pollution from Manufacturing
 Processes
Regulations on Sulfur
Regulations on Permits and Certificates
Regulations on Incinerators
Regulations on Emergencies
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Regulations on Diesel-Powered Motor vehicles
Light-Duty Motor Vehicles Regulations
                                                                Department of Environmental Pro-
                                                                 tection Act of 197O
                                                                Water Pollution Control Laws
                                                                Water Quality Improvement Act of 1971
                                                                Clean Ocean Act
                                                                Wetlands Act of 1970
                                                                Environmental Rights Act
                                                                Point Source Discharge Regulations
                                                                Surface Water Quality Standards
Solid Waste Laws
Motor vehicle Junk Law
Waste Control Act
Solid Waste Management Regulations
Coastal Area Facility Review Act
            New Mexico
            Environmental Improvement Act
            Air Quality Control Act
            Air Quality Standards and Regulations
                                                   Water Quality Act
                                                   Water Quality Regulations
                                                   Water Quality Standards
                                                                                             Solid Waste Management Regulations
            New York
            Environmental Conservation Law
            Rules on General Provisions, Permits Stack
             Testing,  Emergency Control Measures, and
             General Prohibition
            Processes and Exhaust and/or Ventilation
             Systems
            Contaminant Emissions from Ferrous Jotting
             Foundries and Dy-Product Coke Batteries
            Rules on Open Fires
            Rules on Motor Vehicle Emissions
            Incinerator Rules
            Rules on Cement Plants and Asbestos
                                                   Environmental Conservation Law
                                                   Watercraft Sewage Disposal Law
                                                   Classifications and Standards
                                                   Criteria Governing Thermal Discharges
                                                   Rules on Use and Protection of Waters
Environmental Conservation Law
Refuse Disposal  Rules
Wetlands Law
            (continued)

-------
                                                        TABLE  28.     (continued)
                         AIR
                                                                            WATER
                                                                                                                   SOLID WASTE - LAND USE
           New York (Continued)
           Rules on Fuel Composition and Use
           Rules on Sulfurlc Acid and Nitric Acid Plants
           Rules on Indirect Sources of Air Contamination
           Ambient Air Quality Standards
           North Carolina
Water and Air Resources Acts
Motor Vehicle Emissions Laws
Rules and Regulations Governing the Control
 of Air Pollution
                                                               Water and Air Resources Acts
                                                               Environmental Policy Act of 1971
                                                               Oil Pollution Control Act of 1973
                                                               Rules,  Regulations, Classifications
                                                               and Water Quality Standards Applicable
                                                               to Surface Waters
                                                               Monitoring Regulation	
                                                                                               Solid Waste Disposal  Law
                                                                                               Solid Waste Disposal  Regulations
K>
VO
North Dakota

Air Pollution Control Act
Air Pollution Control Regulations
                                                               Water Pollution Control Act
                                                               Surface Water Quality Standards
                                                                                               Solid Waste Management Regulations
           Ohio

           Air Pollution Control Laws
           General Air Pollution Regulations
           Regulations for Suspended Particulates and
            Sulfur Oxides
           Regulations for Carbon Monoxide,  Hydro-
            carbons, and Photo-chemical Oxidant2
           Regulations for Oxides of Nitrogen
           Permits System  Regulations
           Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution
            Emergency Episodes
           Permit Fees Regulations
           Regulation on Air Permits to Operate and
            Variances
           Open Burning Regulation
                                                    Environmental Protection Agency
                                                    Water Pollution Control Act
                                                    Watencraft Sewage Disposal  Law
                                                    Criteria of Stream-Water Quality
                                                    Resolution on Discharge of Toxins
                                                    NPDES Permit Regulations
                                                    Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation
                                                    Commission Standards on Sewage
                                                    and Industrial Wastes
                                                                                               Solid Waste Disposal Law
                                                                                               Solid Waste Disposal Regulations
                                                                                               Power Plant Sitincj Commission Law
                                                                                               Reclamation l_aw
            (continued)

-------
                                  TABLE 28.   (continued)
AIR
Oklahoma
Clean Air Act
Pollution Control Coordinating Act of 1968
Regulation 1 - Open Burning
Regulation 2 - Motor Vehicle Pollution Control
Devices
Regulation 3 - Definitions
Regulation 4 - Air Contaminant Sources Regis-
tration
Regulation 5 - Incinerators
Regulation 6 - Particulate Matter Emission
front Fuel-Burning Equipment
Regulations 7, 8, 9, 19 - Smoke, Particulates,
Hazardous Contaminants
Regulations 11, 12, 13- Malfunction, Sampling,
and Monitoring
Regulation 14 - Permits
Regulation 15 - Organic Material
Regulation 16 - Sulfur Oxides
Regulations 17, 18 - Carbon Monoxide and Nitro-
gen Oxides
Air Pollution Control Laws
Air Pollution Control Regulations

Pennsylvania
Air Pollution Control Act
Air Pollution General Rules
Standards for Contaminants
Coal Refuse Disposal Rules
Air Pollution Sources Rules
Standards for Sources
Ambient Air Quality Standards
WATCH

Water Pollution Control Laws
Pollution Remedies Laws
Pollution Control Coordinating Act
of 1908
















Water Pollution Control Laws
Synthetic Cleaning Agent Act
Water Quality Control Regulations

Department of Environmental Resources
Clean Streams Law
Sewage Facilities Act
Sewage Facilities Regulations
Water Quality Criteria
Water Resources General Provisions
NPDES Permit Regulations
•jULIU WAST (I - LAND USE!

Solid Waste Management Act
Pollution Control Coordinating Act of 1968
Solid Waste Management Regulations

















Solid Waste Management Law
Solid Waste Regulations
Land Use Law

Solid Waste Management Act
Solid Waste Regulations
Surface Mining Conservation and Reclamation Act
IZrosion Cor-tro! Regulations



NJ
VO
       (continunrl)

-------
                       TABLE 28.   (continued)
AIR
Pennsylvania (Continued)
Local Air Pollution Control Agencies Rules
Sources Reporting Rules
Air Pollution Episodes Rules
Sampling-Testing Rules
Variances and Alternate Standards
Puerto Rico
Department of Natural Resources Act
Law on the Control of Air Pollution
Air Pollution Control Regulations
Rhode Island
Clean Air Act
Air Pollution Control Regulations
Sulfur Content of Fuels Regulation
Approval of Plans Regulation
Air Pollution Episode Regulations
Nitrogen Oxides Regulation
Incinerator Regulation
South Carolina
Pollution Control Acts
Air Pollution Control Regulations and
S tandards
South Dakota
Clean Air Act
Air Pollution Control Regulations
WATER
Waste Water Treatment Regulations
Industrial Wastes Regulations
Mine Drainage Permits
Sewage Facilities Grants
Water Pollution Control Law
Harmful Spills Law
Public Policy Environmental Act
Water Pollution Control Law
Water Quality Standards
Pollution Control Acts
Classification Standards
Water Pollution Law
Environmental Policy Act
Water Quality Standards
SOLID WASTE - L/\ND USE

(ISIONE)
Solid Waste Law
Coastal Resources Management Council
Solid Waste Management Corporation Act
Landfill Regulation
Industrial Solid Waste Disposal Site Regulation
Guidelines for Waste Disposal Permits
Sol id Waste Disposal Act
Solid Wnste Rules
(continued)

-------
                                TABLE 28.   (continued)
AIR
Tennessee
Atr Quality Act
Air Pollution Control Regulations

Texas
Clean Air Act
Air Control Board Regulations: General
Provisions
Regulation 1: Control of Air from Smoke,
Visible Emissions, and Partlculate Matter
Regulation III; Control of Air Pollution from
Toxic Materials
Regulation IV: Control of Air Pollution from
Motor Vehicles
Regulation V: Control of Air Pollution from
Volatile Carbon Compounds
Regulation VI: Control of Air Pollution by
Permits for New Construction or Modification
Regulation VII : Control of Air Pollution from
Nitrogen
Regulation VIII: Control of Air Pollution
Emergency Episodes
Regulation ||: Control of Air Pollution from
Sulfur Compounds
Exemptions from Permits Procedures
Permit System Procedures
Utah
Air Conservation Act
Air Conservation Regulations

Vermont
Atr Pollution Control Law
WATER

Stream Pollution Control Law
General Regulations
Water Quality Criteria

Water Quality Act
Water Quality Reouirements , General
Statement
Water Quality Rules
Water Quality Standards

















Water Pollution Control Act
Definitions and General Requirements
Water Quality Standards

Water Pollution Control Laws
SOLID WASTE - LAND USE

Solid Waste Disposal Act
Solid Waste Regulations
Surface Mining Law

Solid Waste Disposal Act
Refuse Dumping Law
Solid Waste Regulations
Regulation on Disposal of Industrial Solid Waste
















. .

Solid Waste Disposal Regulations



Solid Waste Law
to
        (continued)

-------
                                                          TABLE   28.     (continued)
                           AIR
                                                                            WATER
                                                                                                                    SQUID WASTE- LAND USE
              Vermont (Continued)

              Air Pollution Control Regulations
                                                 Water Classification and Quality
                                                  Regulations
                                                 Pollution Charges and Permit Fees Pules
                                                 NPDE5 Permit Program Regulations	
Solid Waste Regulations
Land Use Law
Land Capability and Development Plan Law
N>
to
CD
Air Pollution Control Laws
Council on the  Environment Law
Air Pollution Control DeflrUttons
Air Pollution Control Procedures
Air Quality Standards
Regulations on Open Burning, Smoke,
 and Visible Emissions
Partlculates Regulations
Gaseous Contaminants Regulation
Odor Regulations
Coal Refuse Disposal Regulation
Motor vehicle  Emissions Regulation
Air Pollution Emergency Regulation
                                                                State Water Control Law
                                                                Miscellaneous Laws Relating to Water
                                                                 Pollution
                                                                Environmental Impact Report Law
                                                                Water Pollution Control Regulations
                                                                Water Quality Standards
Solid Waste Disposal Law
Solid Waste Regulations
              Washington

              Environmental Quality Reorganization Act
               of 197O
              Clean Air Act
              State Environmental Policy Act of 1971
              General Air Pollution Regulations
              Emergency Episode Plan
              Open Burning Regulations
              Field Burning Regulations
              Regulations  on State Financial Aid
              Regulations  on Reporting by Thermal Power
               Plants, Aluminum Plants, and Chemical Wood
               Wood Pulp Mills
              Regulations  on Motor Vehicles
              Carbon Monoxide Standards
                                                 Water Pollution Qontrol Laws
                                                 Environmental Coordination Procedures
                                                  Act of 1973
                                                 Department of Ecology Organization
                                                 Waste Works Regulations
                                                 Wastes Discharge Permits
                                                 Water Pollution Control Planning
                                                  Regulations
                                                 Hearings Regulations
                                                 NPDES Permit Program Regulations
                                                 Water Quality Standards
Solid waste Management Law
Shoreline Management Act of 1971
Thermal Power Plant Siting Law
Shoreline Development Permit Regulations
               (continued)

-------
                                                         TABLE   28.      (continued)
                          AIR
                                                                           WAT EK
                                                                                                                    SOLID WASTE - LAND USE
            Washington (Continued)

            Regulations on Kraft Pulping Mills
            Sulflte Pulping Mills Regulations
            Suspended Particulate Standards
            Particle Fallout Regulations
            Protochemlcals f Hydrocarbons, Nitrogen
             Dioxide Regulations
            Fluoride Standards
            Regulations on Primary Aluminum Plants
            Sulfur Oxide Standards
            Procedures Regulations
            Ecological Commission Regulations
K)
VO
VO
West Virginia

Air Pollution Control Law
Regulations on Coal Refuse Disposal
Regulations on Combustion of Fuel in
 Indirect Heat Exchangers
Regulations on Hot Mix Asphalt Plants
Regulations on Odors
Regulations on Coal Preparation Plants
Regulations on Combustion of Refuse
Regulations on Manufacturing Process Operations
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Regulations on Sulfur Oxides
Regulations on Emergency Episodes
Regulations on Permits
                                                               Water Pollution Control Act
                                                               Water Quality Regulations
Solid Waste Laws
Solid Wa<;te Regulation
Surface Mining Act
            Wisconsin

            Atr Pollution Control Laws
            Environmental Impact Law
            Ambient Air Quality Standards
            Air Pollution Control Rules
                                                  Water Pollution Control Law
                                                  Discharge Permits Regulations
                                                  Public Participation Procedures
                                                  Interim Effluent Limitations for
                                                   Pollution Discharge Elimination
                                                   System
                                                 Water Quality Standards
Solid Waste Law
Environmental Quality Act
            Environmental Quality Act
            Air Quality Standards and Regulations
                                                 Protection of Public Water Supply Act
                                                 Environmental Quality Act
                                                 NPDES Permit Program Regulations
                                                 Water Quality Standards
Solid Waste Disposal Law
Solid Waste Management Rules

-------
                           APPENDIX D

            EXPLANATION OF CRITERIA USED TO ESTABLISH
            RANKING OF INDIVIDUAL MINERAL INDUSTRY BY
                SEVERITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT


     The criteria are arranged according to their relative

importance in the overall environmental impact from mineral

resource wastes (Table 26).  Values assigned to these criteria

and the individual mineral industries are, of necessity,

judgmentally arbitrary and are intended only as a rough means of

putting the problems associated with the individual mineral

industry into perspective.  The generation of hazardous waste by

any industry is the primary criterion because such wastes pose a

threat (lethal or sublethal)  to the environment if they are not

controlled.  The generation of nonhazardous wastes is another

less important criterion.  The disposal of these wastes in

environmentally sensitive areas is the primary concern in this

criterion.  Values applied to the potential impacts from

hazardous wastes are intentionally given a weighted score higher

than the scores used to measure the potential impact from

nonhazardous wastes.   :

     The other three criteria account for the impact of the size

of the mineral industries in terms of annual production of mineral

resource wastes, total number of mines, and the projected growth

of the industry.


                                300

-------
                            GLOSSARY
acid igneous deposits
bedrock
bench
benzo(a)pyrene


borrow pit
cobble
continuous mining
control technology or
 methods
crude ore
A natural formation of pyrite
containing rock formed by the
solidification of molten material.

Any solid rock exposed at the
surface of the earth or overlain by
unconsolidated material.

A ledge that forms a single level
of operation above which mineral or
waste materials are excavated from
a contiguous bank or bench face.  A
working road or base below a highwall
as in contour mining or one of the
concentric ledges of an open pit
mine.

A ubiquitous polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbon that is carcinogenic.

A surface excavation utilized to
obtain local construction materials
(sand, gravel, rock, etc.) or fill
material; usually consists of a
relatively small pit and waste
pile.

A rock fragment, usually rounded or
semirounded, having an average
diameter of from 3 to 12 inches.

An underground mining method in
which a machine (continuous miner)
cuts or rips coal from the face and
loads it in a continuous operation,
thus eliminating drilling and
shooting.  The machine progressively
moves forward as the coal is removed.

The systematic handling of mine solid
waste according to sound principles
and practices to mitigate adverse
environmental impacts.

The unconcentrated ore as it leaves
the mine.  It includes both mineral
commodity and waste, which are
separated during beneficiation.
                              301

-------
deposit
disposal
highwall
ore
ore complex
overburden
porphyry
pyrite
raise
A natural occurrence of a mineral
in sufficient extent and
concentration to allow economical
extraction and recovery.

The placement of mining or processing
wastes in a selected area or its
confinement.

The unexcavated face of exposed
overburden and coal or ore bordering
one side of an area strip mine or the
bank on the uphill side of a contour
strip mine excavation.

A natural compound of the elements
of which at least one is a metal.
A mineral of sufficient value as to
quality and quantity which may be
mined with profit.  Less commonly,
materials mined and worked for
nonmetals.

An ore that contains two or more
recoverable minerals, such as
lead-zinc-silver ores and gold-silver
ores.

Material of any nature, consolidated
or unconsolidated, that overlies a
deposit.  Also used to designate only
loose soil, sand, gravel, etc. that
lies above the bedrock.  Also called
burden, cover, drift, capping, and
mantle.

Any igneous rock with a porphyritic
(distinct crystals in a fine-grained
ground mass) texture.

A term applied to any of a number of
metallic-looking sulfides, of which
iron sulfides are the most common.
The oxidation of pyrites is the
predominant source of acid mine
damage.

A verticle or inclined opening driven
upward from an underground mining
operation.
                               302

-------
reclamation
skip
solid waste
stabilization
stope
stoping
submarginal
The return of mined land to a
condition and/or use equal to or
higher than that prior to mining.

A hoisting bucket that slides
between guides in a shaft
(skip shaft) and is used to raise
and lower men and equipment or ore.

Any discarded material, including
solid, liquid, semisolid, or
contained gaseous material,
resulting from mining operations.
Does not include discharges that
are point sources subject to permits
under Section 402 of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act or
source, special nuclear, or
by-product material as defined in
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended.

Activities conducted on mined land
or mine or beneficiation waste to
lessen adverse environmental impacts
(such as leaching and fugitive
emissions) and prepare the area for
further reclamation.  These
activities include redistribution
of materials, grading, providing
drainage and/or surface water
diversion, and the application of
chemicals or water for dust
suppression.

An excavation in an underground mine,
other than development workings, made
for the purpose of extracting ore.

The excavation of an ore, either above
or below a level, in a series of
horizontal, vertical, or inclined
workings in veins or large irregular
ore bodies or in rooms  (in flat
deposits).

Refers to an ore deposit or mineral
resource that would require a
substantially higher price or a major
cost-reducing advantage in technology
for the mineral to be economically
recovered.
                              303

-------
tailings                      The waste or gangue material  removed
                              from crude ore by beneficiating
                              operations.  Tailings may be  wet
                              or dry depending on  the type  of
                              beneficiation and the method  of
                              disposal.  Flotation and washing
                              are the major sources of tailings
                              at most operations.

waste rock                    Barren or submarginal rock or ore
                              that has been mined  but is not of
                              sufficient value to  warrant treatment
                              and is therefore removed ahead of
                              beneficiation.
                               304

-------