Risks Posed by Bevill Wastes
Environmental Protection Agency
April 1998
•Provides supplementary information and support for
the May 12,1997 Supplemental Proposed Rule, "Land
Disposal Restrictions Phase IV; Second Supplemental
Proposal on Treatment Standards for Metal Wastes and
Mineral Processing Wastes, Mineral Processing and
Bevill Exclusion Issues, and the Use of Hazardous Waste
Fill (62FR 26041)

-------
Risks Posed by Bevill Wastes
Environmental Protection Agency
April 1998

-------
This technical background document, Risks Posed by Bevill Wastes, was submitted for
public review to EPA's RCRA Docket # F-97-2P4P-FFFFF. It provides supplementary
information and support for the May 12, 1997 Supplemental Proposed Rule, Land Disposal
Restrictions Phase IV; Second Supplemental Proposal on Treatment Standards for Metal Wastes
and Mineral Processing Wastes, Mineral Processing and Bevill Exclusion Issues, and the Use of
Hazardous Waste as Fill (62 FR 26041). The Agency has received comments from the public on
this document and has listed these comments and Agency responses in the final section of the
document. The Agency finalizes this document as of April 1998 and submits it to RCRA Docket
# F-98-2P4F-FFFFF to provide supplementary information and support for the
April 1998 Final Rule, Land Disposal Restrictions Phase IV: Final Rule Promulgating Treatment
Standards for Metal Wastes and Mineral Processing Wastes; Mineral Processing Secondary
Materials and Bevill Exclusion Issues; Treatment Standards for Hazardous Soils, and Exclusion
of Recycled Wood Preserving Wastewaters.

-------
Introduction
Based upon information on potential and actual environmental threats and the availability
of new risk assessment techniques, the Agency sought comment on whether reexamination of
some Bevill waste is warranted. In this report, the Agency is providing the most current
information available on the environmental risks associated with mining and mineral processing
operations. The Agency is presenting additional information on risks posed by Bevill wastes and
is posing the question of whether some waste streams require additional study or regulatory
controls given the availability of new risk assessment techniques. Conversely, the Agency also
solicited comment on whether more protective environmental practices have been put in place
and, if so, whether future regulatory actions are necessary. The Agency is at this time not
addressing comments on this report related solely to the reevaluation of the Bevill exclusion.
This report is also being used to support the final rule regarding the nature and extent of
environmental damages caused by mineral processing wastes. The Agency has however addressed
comments related to the application of this report and referenced technical background documents
to support todays rule in the comment and response sections of those separate reports.
Background
When Congress excluded mining wastes from RCRA Subtitle C regulations (the Bevill
Amendment of 1980), it gave the Agency directions to study these wastes and determine which
ones should remain exempt from RCRA Subtitle C regulations. On December 31, 1985, EPA
published the required Report to Congress on Solid Wastes from Mineral Extraction and
Beneficiation1, and on July 3, 1986 (51 FR 24496) published a determination that regulation of
certain mining wastes under Subtitle C of RCRA was not warranted, primarily because traditional
hazardous waste controls applied to large volume mining wastes may be technically infeasible or
economically impractical. In making this determination, Congress required the Agency to
consider several factors, including mining waste disposal practices, potential danger to human
health and the environment, and the costs imposed by potential regulation of mining waste. See
Regulatory Determination, July 3, 1986, 51 FR 2449; RCRA §§ 3001(b)(3)(A)(ii), 8002(f), and
8002(p).
While the Agency determined that Subtitle C regulations were not warranted for
extraction and beneficiation wastes, it found that a significant quantity of mining wastes exhibited
hazardous characteristics and expressed concerns about environmental damage from mining.2
1	EPA No. 530-SW-85-033
2	51 FR 24496, July, 1986 1.3 to 2 billion metric tons of nonfuel mining waste were generated
annually. 755 million metric tons of mining waste had RCRA hazardous characteristics or were
potentially subject to RCRA. Mineral processing facilities generated approximately 500 million
metric tons annually. By comparison, in 1993 large quantity generators (industries subject to
3

-------
Further, the Agency expressed concerns about other hazardous properties of mining wastes such
as, radioactivity, asbestos, cyanide, or acid generation potential, that is not identified by the
current RCRA characteristics. 51 FR 2449.
The Agency similarly studied mineral processing wastes, exempted 20 large volume
special wastes, and likewise expressed concern about actual and threatened environmental
damages caused by some of these wastes3. For at least two of the 20 special wastes, the Agency
went so far as to recommend potentially pursuing a regulatory program under the Toxic
Substances Control Program and the option of revisiting Subtitle C controls. 56 FR at 27214-16.
The Agency found that current phosphogypsum process wastewater management practices are
often not adequate to limit releases and associated risks.4 The Agency pursued further studies and
regulatory options and found areas where the toxicity of phosphogypsum wastes could be
reduced. However, the costs involved were believed to be prohibitive and the Agency pursued no
further regulatory action. (See Phosphoric Acid Waste Dialogue Draft Report on Activities and
Recommendations, April 1995).
After studying beneficiation wastes, the Agency expressed concerns about the
environmental threats from mining and stated that the Administration will work with Congress to
develop expanded Subtitle D authority (i.e., Federal oversight and enforcement) to support an
effective State-implemented program for mining waste and use RCRA section 7003 and CERCLA
sections 104 and 106 to protect against substantial threats and imminent hazards in the interim.
51 FR 24496. At that time, the Agency believed if it were unable to develop an effective mining
waste program under Subtitle D, the Agency may find it necessary to use Subtitle C authority in
the future. 51 FR 24496.
As a result of this decision, EPA began to develop a series of alternative mine waste
management approaches—so called Strawman I and II released in 1988 and 1990, respectively
( Strawman I, USEPA, Office of Solid Waste, May, 1988, and Strawman II, USEPA, Office of
Solid Waste, May, 1990). These documents were staff-level products. Strawman II was based
primarily on approaches developed by the Western Governors' Association Mine Waste
Taskforce. These approaches embraced the idea of a mine waste program tailored to the unique
aspects of each state's situation, considering the distinct climatic, geological, and ecological
characteristics of each mine. While the Agency received valuable comments on these drafts, it
became clear that the level of disagreement was considerable and that face-to-face interaction
among the interested parties would be helpful.
In 1991, the states, industry, and the environmental community approached EPA and
Subtitle C regulations) produced 258 million tons of hazardous wastes.
3	Special Wastes from Mineral Processing Final Regulatory Determination and Final Rule, 56
FR 27300, June 13, 1991.
4	The Agency studied 16 of these phosphoric acid facilities and found that 13 appear to have
caused groundwater contamination and 12 have contaminants above primary drinking water
standards that have migrated or are likely to migrate beyond the facilities boundaries. 56 FR at
27315.
4

-------
requested that EPA create a forum to further discuss mine waste issues. In 1991, EPA chartered
the Policy Dialogue Committee (PDC) on Mining under the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(FACA). The PDC had representatives from the states, the mining industry, the environmental
community as well as from the major federal agencies (i.e., Department of the Interior (DOI) and
the Department of Agriculture (DOA) and EPA). The purpose of the PDC was to inform the
various parties of each others positions and further the debate on development of a national mine
waste program. The PDC met seven times and ended in 1992. While the level of disagreement
among the parties has narrowed, it has not been mitigated. (A summary of the PDC activities can
be found in the PDC White Paper this rule's docket).
Since the 1986 Determination to exclude certain mining wastes, the Agency has been
developing various technical documents on improving the management of mining wastes and has
given grants to several states to improve existing state mining programs. Despite these activities,
the Agency has not established a Subtitle D or any federally enforceable regulatory program for
mining or mineral processing wastes excluded by the 1980 Bevill Amendment.
Environmental Damages and Releases from Bevill Exempt Wastes
The Agency continues to believe that mining waste poses a broad range of environmental
risk. Some types of mines and waste management practices pose very little risks while others
pose significant environmental problems and threats to human health. In contrast to EPA's
assertions, mining industry commentors indicate that: most environmental damage cases are
representative of past mining practice no longer used; mining and mineral processing poses little,
if any, environmental threat, and that state programs adequately regulate modern mines.
The Agency has found that some mining practices are no longer used. However, the
Agency's studies also indicate that some currently operating Bevill mining and mineral processing
wastes continue to contaminate groundwater and surface water, often through leaking surface
impoundments, runoff from piles, wind blown dust, contaminated soil, and failure of dams.
Further, the environmental consequences of mining and mineral processing may not be realized
until long after cessation of operations. Currently, there are over 60 NPL sites where the source
of contamination is primarily caused by practices that continue today. (See Mine and Mineral
Processing Sites on the NPL, EPA, 1997). For example, some tailing ponds and waste rock piles
from both historic and currently operating mines are causing environmental damage from acid
mine drainage. Further, of the 60 sites on the NPL, more than one-half have been active at some
point since 1985, indicating that at least some of the problems are attributable to modern
practices. The approximate cost of remediating mining sites currently on the NPL is $20 billion.
Based on studies conducted by the Western Governors Association, EPA believes that there are
approximately 200,000 abandoned mines in the U.S. It is probable that ten percent of those sites
(20,000 abandoned mines) are causing some degree of environmental harm, according to studies
performed by the National Park Service. There are no accurate cost estimates for remediating
abandoned mines which are currently causing serious environmental harm. However, the Agency
and the U.S. Forest Service have determined that mining practices caused contamination of over
10,000 miles of streams throughout the US.
The Agency has also had to take action at an additional 72 mines and mineral processing
5

-------
sites where contamination posed an imminent threat to human health and the environment.
Section 106 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of
1980 (CERCLA) provides for abatement action by a State, local government, or the President,
when there exists an "imminent and substantial endangerment to the public health or welfare or
the environment because of an actual or threatened release of a hazardous substance." In
addition, Section 106 contains penalties for noncompliance, forcing potentially responsible parties
to clean up a site, or pay as much as $25,000 a day. These orders are one of EPA's enforcement
tools, which achieve cleanup at sites posing significant threat to human health and the
environment where negotiations over Superfiind cleanups have failed.
Review of these imminent threats cases indicate that mining and mineral processing
activities continue to pose significant threats not only while operating but long after the cessation
of operations. This may occur to failure of dams or impoundments, accumulation of wind blown
dust, movement of contaminated soil, generation of acid through weathering, and periodic
releases of toxic chemicals. At many of the sites, the greatest area of concern is direct human
exposure, ingestion, or inhalation of contaminants. (EPA studied hazardous substances present in
dust at mines sites in a report titled "Summary of NIOSH Bulk Dust Metals Data, 1991.") Many
of the site actions are time critical, meaning that action had to be taken before site conditions
became worse. Also, many practices that gave rise to the actions, such as storage of toxic
chemicals and wastes, are similar to practices that occur at operating mines. This information is
presented in the technical background document "CERCLA Imminent Hazard - Mining and
Mineral Processing Facilities, EPA, 1997."
In addition, there are many more documented cases from operating mines and mineral
processing sites that have either actual or threatened groundwater, surface water, or soil
contamination. A number of environmental damages from mining were identified in the Agency's
1985 Report to Congress. EPA continued to study environmental damages from mining and in
1994 published a report "Mining Waste Releases and Environmental Effects Summaries for Idaho,
South Dakota, New Mexico, South Carolina, Nevada, Montana, Colorado, Arizona, and
California, EPA, March 1994". This 1994 report collected environmental release information on
operating mines found in publicly available files maintained by state agencies. The report was
based on data collected from 1986 to 1991. The Agency found that operating mines were
releasing cyanide, acids, tailings, dusts, and other materials containing hazardous substances into
the environment.
EPA continued to collect additional environmental release information on operating mines
for the period 1990 to present (See Damage Cases and Environmental Releases, EPA, 1997).
The mining industry, in comments on the January 25,1996 proposal, contend that earlier
environmental release information did not accurately reflect activities at modern operating mines.
However, in addition to EPA's earlier studies, the 1997 report has also found that operating
mines are releasing into the environment the same types of contaminants (cyanide, acids, dusts,
radioactivity, and tailings) that the Agency first identified as environmental concerns in its 1985
Report to Congress. The 1997 report also confirmed that environmental releases noted in the
Agency's 1994 environmental release state reports are continuing at operating mines. Based on
these reports, the Agency concludes that modern mining practices continue to release
contaminants and other hazardous substances into the environment.
6

-------
In the prior Bevill rulemakings, EPA expressed concern about wastes that may not
necessarily exhibit a toxicity characteristic under RCRA yet may pose other types of risks. These
include cyanide used in gold mining, acid generating wastes from copper and gold mining, and
naturally occurring radioactivity. Since that time the Agency has documented numerous incidents
of damage involving these wastes, including modern and operating mines being placed on the
National Priorities List and requiring other response and remedial actions. One recent damage
case involves the Summitville mine where cyanide and acid rock drainage caused severe
environmental damage to nearby streams and rivers (see USGS Report on Summitville). The
Summitville mine was built in the 1980's and operated into the early 1990's using waste
management practices that are typical of modern gold mining. Additionally, the Agency is
concerned about the rising cleanup costs from mines and mineral processing sites. As previously
mentioned, EPA estimates the cost of remediation for mines and mineral processing sites
proposed and on the NPL to exceed $20 billion. In the above example, the Summitville site cost
the Federal government over $140 million in remedial and emergency actions and additional costs
are mounting.
In the 1986 Regulatory Determination, EPA expressed concern about the hazards posed
by naturally occurring radioactivity materials (NORM) in mining wastes. The Agency conducted
a study of waste management practices in the copper industry in 1994 (See Technical Resource
Document-Copper, Office of Solid Waste, USEPA, 1994) which noted that several copper mines
located in Arizona produced uranium yellowcake by processing copper ore in the 1950's. Agency
review of the chemical composition of copper ore indicates that uranium is often found in and
around copper deposits. Recent studies indicate that some copper leaching operations may
mobilize and concentrate NORM in various wastes streams and process solutions, potentially
causing groundwater and surface water contamination. (See Technical Report on Naturally
Occurring Radioactive Materials in the Southwestern Copper Belt of Arizona, EPA, 1996).
The 1985 Report to Congress also found that phosphate mining activities (mainly located
in Florida) generated wastes which contained radon at levels exceeding 10 picocuries. EPA's
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air also recognized the radiation risks associated with the disposal
of phosphogypsum. In 1989, EPA issued a National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air
Pollutants (NESHAP) applicable to radon emissions from phosphogypsum stacks (See 54 FR
51654, December 15, 1989). This rule required that all phosphogysum be disposed in stacks
thereby permitting control and measurement of gaseous radon-222 which is emitted when radium
present in phosphogysum decays.
The Agency again studied wastes generated from the production of phosphoric acid in the
1990 Report to Congress on Wastes from Mineral Processing and found that phosphogypsum
wastes were causing groundwater contamination and that these wastes contained high levels of
radon. In June, 1991 EPA issued its Regulatory Determination (see 56 FR 27300) which
indicated that the Agency would review possible regulatory actions under the Toxic Substances
Control Act to determine if TSCA could more effectively regulate phosphogypsum and process
waste waters. The Agency chartered the Phosphoric Acid Waste Dialogue Committee under the
Federal Advisory Committee Act in 1992 to determine if TSCA could effectively regulate
phosphate wastes. This group met six times from 1992 to 1994 (See Phosphoric Acid Waste
Dialogue Draft Report on Activities and Recommendations, April 1995). The Committee did not
7

-------
identify any affordable, technologically feasible in-plant process changes that would significantly
reduce the volume and/or toxicity of phosphogypsum or phosphoric acid process wastewater.
The Agency found therefore that since TSCA regulation would not be possible, the Agency would
revisit the 1991 Regulatoiy Determination and determine whether RCRA Subtitle C regulation of
phosphoric acid special wastes remains inappropriate.
As a follow-up to the conclusion of the Phosphoric Acid Waste Dialogue Committee, in
1992 the Agency evaluated the environmental risks posed by the disposal of phosphogypsum at
13 phosphoric acid production facilities in Florida by applying the RCRA National Corrective
Action Prioritization System to each site. The results show that all 13 facilities would qualify as
"high priority" under the National guidelines by either the composite score or a high individual
groundwater or surface water pathway score. This evaluation also noted that there was
groundwater contamination at all of the 13 sites.
Phosphate mining also presents other environmental risks associated with failures of clay
ponds. When mining phosphate, the overburden is removed, and the phosphate ore is dug up and
placed in small pits were it is broken up with water cannons and slurried to the mill. At the mill
the phosphate slurry is crushed sized and washed. This process is used to separate the sand and
clay from the phosphate ore. The sands are slurried to sand settling basins or it is pumped back
into mine cuts. The clays are slurried to clay settling ponds, which often cover hundreds of acres.
These ponds are unlined and often use earthen dams to retain water.
In 1971 there was a major failure of a clay pond at the City Services mine. That spill
dumped more than 1 billion gallons of clay slimes and wastewater into the Peace River. In 1972
the state mandated that all new dams must be built to tougher engineering standards. The state
however failed to require existing dams be closed by a fixed date. Therefore the mining
companies continue to use their older ponds. IMC-Agrico alone has 17 of the old dams in
operation.
Since 1990, there have been five major failures of clay pond dams: 1990 at Gardinier
spilled 250,000 gallons into a tributary of the Peace River, 1991 US Agri-Chemicals spilled 175
million gallons into a tributary of the Peace River, 1993 Mobil Mining spilled 2 million gallons
into the North prong of the Ajafia River, June, 1994 Imc-Agrico 1.7 billion gallons spill, October
2,1994 IMC-Agrico spilled 127 million gallons into a tributary of the Peace River, and on
October 31, 1994 Cargill Fertilizer spilled 20 million gallons into a tributary of the Peace River.
The most recent spill occurred when a clay pond dam burst at the IMC Agrico Hopewell
phosphate mine and dumped up to 500 million gallons of clay slime and water.
As noted earlier, the Agency first indicated its concern about environmental contamination
from cyanide in the 1985 Report to Congress. In 1994, the Agency found that gold mining using
cyanide solutions were causing releases into the environment (See Technical Resource Document-
Gold, USEPA, 1994). Superfund cleanup activities at the Summitville gold mine indicated that
cyanide solution leaked into the environment and contaminated the Alamosa River and as much as
10 feet of soil per year. The cost of clean-up at Summitville is estimated at $150 million. The
Brewer gold mine in South Carolina experienced a major cyanide spill in 1987 when 10-12 million
gallons of cyanide solution flowed into a nearby river. The Agency's most recent review of
mining waste releases into the environment (See Damage Cases and Environmental Releases,
EPA, 1997) again show that gold mines are releasing cyanide into the environment. For example,
8

-------
the Bald Mountain mine released 8,000 gallons of cyanide solution in 1993 and 1994. The Battle
Mountain mine released 5,000 gallons if cyanide solution in 1995, while the Barrick Goldstrike
mine released 2,200 gallons of cyanide solutions in 1996.
The 1985 Report to Congress also noted concern over the environmental effects of acid
rock drainage from mining wastes on streams and rivers. The Agency is aware that acid rock
drainage problems do exist throughout the United States and do exist in the western part of the
US. In 1994 the Agency decided to reevaluate data regarding acid rock drainage (See Acid Rock
Drainage Prediction, US EPA, 1994). This report concluded that acid rock drainage was an
environmental concern at currently operating mines. The report identified three mines where acid
rock drainage had occurred, the Newmont Rain gold mine in Nevada, the Cyprus Thompson
Creek mine in Montana, and the LTV iron ore mine in Minnesota. The Newmont Rain mine
identified acid rock drainage in a waste rock pile. This drainage was remediated and the company
redesigned its waste rock pile to isolate sulfur bearing waste rock. Acid rock drainage was
forming in the tailings pond at the Cyprus Thompson Creek mine in Montana. The LTV iron ore
mine had acid rock drainage forming in the Dunka pit due to exposure of a sulfur bearing
formation not found in any other portion of the mine. That drainage was being collected and
treated.
The Agency remains concerned that mines are not routinely required to test waste rock
and tailings for acid rock drainage potential throughout the life of a mine. Once acid rock
drainage begins, the chemical phenomena continues for extremely long periods of time. Some of
the most problematic mine sites on Superfund's National Priorities List (NPL) are sites where acid
rock drainage has taken place (Summitville, California Gulch, Clear Creek, Iron Mountain, and
Silver Bow/Butte). (See Mine and Mineral Processing Sites on the NPL, EPA, 1997). Acid rock
drainage problems have also been identified at non-NPL sites, for example at the Blackbird and
Stibnite mines in Idaho (see CERCLA Imminent Hazard - Mining and Mineral Processing
Facilities, EPA, 1997).
As previously noted, the Agency has taken emergency action at 72 mine sites. (See
CERCLA Imminent Hazard - Mining and Mineral Processing Facilities, EPA, 1997). The Agency
cost estimate for removals at 22 of the 72 sites is $208 million, with the unweighted average cost
of removal of $9.5 million per site. Agency evaluation of 9 additional non-NPL removal actions
shows that the average cost of removal exceeded $800,000 per site. Removal costs at the
Blackbird mine were not included in the calculation of average non-NPL removal costs since this
action is one of the most expensive (estimated at $24 million) and the data would skew the
average. One significant source of contamination at the non-NPL sites was water becoming
contaminated through contact with tailings and waste rock.
The Agency has also studied the cost of remediation at mine sites. These costs are related
to cleaning up a wide range of contamination, but these costs are not related to CERCLA actions.
The Agency collected clean-up costs at 24 modern (post 1980) operating mines to determine the
nature and cost of remediation (See Costs of Remediation at Mine Sites, USEPA, January, 1997).
The total cost of remediation at the 24 mines was estimated at $85 million, with the unweighted
average per site cost of remediation estimated at $3.5 million. Mines were required to clean up a
wide range of environmental problems including the collection and treatment of acid rock
drainage, the management of unauthorized discharges to streams, leakage of cyanide solutions,
9

-------
and nitrate contamination of groundwater.
These mounting costs have given rise to a study by EPA's Inspector General, who found
critical gaps in some federal and state statutory and regulatory authorities to require adequate
financial assurances at hardrock mines. According to the Inspector General, this lack of adequate
financial assurances could result in EPA having to assume responsibility for remediation of some
hardrock mine sites in the future. The report further finds that EPA had not effectively
implemented its existing statutory authorities or used non-regulatory tools, such as partnerships,
to minimize the environmental impacts of hardrock mining and help federal and state agencies
eliminate financial assurance gaps. (See EPA Inspector General Report: EPA Can Do More to
Help Minimize Hardrock Mining Liabilities, 1997)
Summary: Mineral Processing Damages and Releases-1996
Since 1989 the Agency has placed considerable amounts of data which detail the scope of
environmental damages caused by mineral processing wastes (see RCRA dockets supporting 54
FR 36592 and 55 FR 2322, and the 1990 Report to Congress on Wastes from Mineral
Processing). In response to these comments the Agency has reevaluated each case involving
mineral processing wastes and presents below brief summaries of a number of the 24 mineral
processing specific damage cases in this report. Each of these 24 cases involve damages caused
by the improper management of mineral processing wastes. More complete descriptions of the
nature of environmental damages are found in Chapter 2 of the report entitled Human Health and
Environmental Damages from Mining and Mineral Processing Wastes. It should be noted, that
in many cases the companies involved did take actions to remediate environmental releases and
damages. Never the less, these cases provide important insight into the types and range of
environmental damages caused by mineral processing wastes. Based on this reevaluation of data,
the Agency continues to conclude that the improper management of mineral processing wastes
has led to environmental damages.
The Asarco Ray case dealt with groundwater contamination caused by the placement of
mineral processing waste waters in 17 surface impoundments. At US Borax there were releases
to ground water from impoundments. Groundwater was found to have 4,000 mg/1 arsenic. These
ponds were ultimately removed from service by the company. At Asarco-Glover mineral
processing waste piles and sedimentation ponds lead to ground water contamination. Ground
water was found contaminated with lead and zinc. The Arcadian phosphoric acid facility
contaminated groundwater from process waste water ponds placed on phosphogypsum stacks.
Ground water exceeded water quality standards from phosphorus and fluorine. At the Nu-West
facility ground water was contaminated from unlined ponds. Groundwater was contaminated
with cadmium and fluoride. The Anaconda NPL site has arsenic soil and ground water
contamination caused by flue dust piles at the site. This historic material is important to note
since mineral processing wastes were placed on the land, in some cases more than 50 years ago,
and these wastes continue to contaminate the environment. The Asarco East Helena facility
caused ground water contamination from seepage from its process fluid ponds. Ground water
was contaminated with arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead and zinc. The Great Plains coal
10

-------
gasification facility placed gasifier ash and other mixed processing wastes in an onsite landfill
which caused ground water contamination. Ground water was found to has a pH of 12.7 to 13.7
and arsenic was found at 13.8 mg/1 to 22 mg/1. Great Plains did discontinue this practice.
Summary : Mineral Processing Damage and Releases-1997
The Agency further evaluated the environmental damages and releases caused by mineral
processing in its report entitled Damage Cases and Environmental Releases from Mines and
Mineral Processing Sites. This effort also documented 42 releases from mineral processing
operations. Many of the incidents involved process and wastewater systems, equipment and/or
operator failure, and releases from tanks, piles, and surface impoundments. In addition to the
cases presented in this report, EPA reviewed environmental data collected at the Kennecott
Copper facility in Utah. Because the site was proposed to be placed on the National Priorities
List and is currently undertaking remedial actions under an agreement with EPA, a significant
amount of information regarding contamination from secondary materials is available. For
example, secondary materials from electrolytic refining, smelter and furnace flue dusts, acid plant
blowdown, and process water all stored in surface impoundments or piles have contributed to
groundwater contamination.5 EPA has developed an extensive administrative record indicating
that the source of groundwater contamination may not be from the massive tailings ponds, which
are wastes from beneficiation activities, but rather the contamination may originate from mineral
processing land-based units from the electrolytic refinery and smelter.
In some cases, the value of secondary materials is questionable, and further, land
placement of products, byproducts, in-process materials, and intermediates can result in
environmental problems. For example, some secondary material is sold as a byproduct for other
uses. In Louisiana-Pacific v Asarco. 24 F.3d 1565 a smelter sold copper slag, a hazardous
byproduct of the smelting process, to logging companies for use as gravel ballast in their log
yards. The placement of the slag on the ground resulted in environmental damage. The Court
held that the slag was a "byproduct with nominal commercial value, "which the smelter wanted to
get rid of' whether it could sell the slag or not. Id at 1575. In other cases, in-process,
intermediates, and commercial products stored in land based units have contributed to
environmental problems. For example, copper concentrate was disposed of in a surface
impoundment at the Kennecott smelter; lead concentrate was found disposed of at a site in
Missouri (see Case Files, Kennecott and Burlington Northern, respectively). Flue dusts, a
secondary mineral processing material commonly recycled, have been found to be a source of
contamination not only at Kennecott, an operating smelter, but also at historic mineral processing
NPL sites such as Bunker Hill and the Anaconda Smelter. It is not known why some flue dusts
and spilled metal concentrates are fully recycled at some facilities but not at others.
The typical management practice used for storage or disposal of mineral processing secondary
materials and wastes was found to have created or exacerbated ground water contamination in the
5Site Background Document, Kennecott Bingham Canyon Area, January 26, 1996, EPA
Region VIII.
11

-------
immediate area. Finally, in a limited number of cases, contamination occurred through episodic
or continuing mismanagement of hazardous and other solid wastes (e.g., commercial chemical
spills).
The following is a short description of the mineral processing cases found in more detail
later in this report. BHP (formerly Magma) site experienced a non-process wastewater leak
which appears to have caused heavy metal contamination of surface waters. The BHP San
Manual smelter site was found to have several areas of contaminated soils. The estimated
quantities of excavated soils to be stabilized at four of the sites are as follows: Smelter bunker:
300 tons, Acid plant: 170 tons, Truck shop: 80 tons, and Paint shop: 30 tons. It is unclear to
the Agency if truck shop and paint shop wastes are uniquely associated with mining and mineral
processing.
Not all releases and damages from mineral processing took place west of the Mississippi.
The Florida Solite light weight aggregate site appears to have contaminated soil and ground water
with heavy metals from storage of kiln scrubber waters. This report identifies a number of
releases into the environment from phosphoric acid production facilities located in Florida. For
example, there was probable contamination of groundwater with radioactivity, acids, and fluorides
at the CF industries Bartow and at the Mulberry Phosphate sites. The source of the
contamination may be leakage of process wastewaters stored on or adjacent to phosphogypsum
stacks. The SCM plant in Maryland appears to have caused cadmium, and zinc contamination of
surface waters due to releases of process wastewaters. Process wastewaters have also been
released into the environment in Tennessee. For example, the Chemetals plant may have
contaminated surface waters with manganese due to releases from an impoundment. The DuPont
titanium plant in Tennessee appears to have contaminated groundwater via seepage from a
process water sedimentation pond. The Asarco El Paso plant has experienced several releases
including lead and cadmium contamination of soils. In conclusion, mineral processing facilities
are releasing a wide range of contaminants into the environment. The Agency acknowledges that
some of these cases did not causes long term environmental harm, however these cases do
illustrate the types and range of contaminants being released from mineral processing facilities.
Today's rule will assure that mineral processing wastes destined for recycling are stored in an
environmentally acceptable fashion.
Natural Resource Damages
Under Section 107(a)(4)(C) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (CERCLA), persons are liable for damages
for injury to, destruction of, or loss of publicly owned or managed natural resources, and the
reasonable costs of assessing such injury. The term "natural resources" is defined by CERCLA
Section 101(16) to include: land, fish, wildlife, biota, air, water, ground water, drinking water
supplies, and other such resources belonging to, managed by, held in trust by, appertaining to, or
otherwise controlled by the United States (including the resources of the fishery conservation
zone established by the Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976), any State or local
12

-------
government, any foreign government, any Indian tribe, or if such resources are subject to a trust
restriction on alienation, any member of an Indian tribe.
Section 301 of CERCLA requires the President to promulgate two types of regulations for
the assessment of natural resource damages, Type A regulations, which are the standard
procedure for simplified assessments in coastal and marine environments, using the Natural
Resource Model for Coastal and Marine Environments (NRDAM/CME), and Type B regulations,
which are the general procedures for conducting natural resource damage assessments, and the
alternative methodologies for conducting assessments in individual cases. The President
delegated the responsibility for issuing these regulations to the Department of Interior (DOI).6
The DOI has codified its natural resource damage regulations in 43 CFR part 11.
There have been a number of natural resource claims at mine sites. (See Availability of
Natural Resource Damage Assessment Modeling, US EPA, December, 1996 and Preliminary
Identification of Approaches Used in Valuating Natural Resources, EPA, 1990). It should be
noted that these claims are among the largest in dollar amounts and have long litigation histories.
Among the first natural resource claims at mining and mineral processing sites was the claim filed
by the State of Idaho against Bunker Hill (see Idaho v. Bunker Hill, 635 F. Supp. 665, 675-676
(D. Idaho 1986). This claim involves natural resource damages to surface water, ground water,
and biota at the Bunker Hill Superfimd site. The estimated costs of natural resource damage at
this site were estimated to exceed $10 million. Natural resource damage claims were recently
settled at the Blackbird Mine in Idaho for approximately $60 million. Natural resource claims
were filed at the Iron Mountain Superfund site. The estimated costs of natural resource damage
at this site are not available, however this site may require perpetual care to treat acid rock
drainage.
One of the most extensive natural resource claims at a mine was filed by Montana against
the Atlantic Richfield Company at the Clarks Fork Superfund site (see Civil Action No. CV 83-
317-HLN-CCL). Based on assessment studies conducted by Montana (see Appendix -
Preassessment Screen:Clark Fork River Basin, Montana , October, 1991), the costs of natural
resource damages at the Clark Fork have been estimated to exceed $600 million.
In 1992, United States District Court ruled that Utah had failed to adequately assess
natural resource damages at the Kennecott Corporation's operations in the Bingham Mining
District, near Salt Lake City, Utah. The Court's ruling is important since it directly summarizes
the nature and extent of damages at the site. This record indicates that natural resource damages
at the site may exceed $200 million dollars. According to KUCC, under a Consent Decree
between EPA and KUCC, KUCC paid $9 million in NRD damages to the State Trustee and set
aside another $28 million in a trust fund, which can be utilized in whole or in part to implement a
CERCLA remedy if appropriate conditions are met. KUCC objected to the cost estimate of $200
million. The Agency acknowedges that the final cost of NRD claims at the site may be lower than
originally cited.
Currently, the Coeur d'Alene Tribe and the Departments of the Interior and Agriculture
are undertaking a Natural Resource Damage Assessment in the Coeur d'Alene Basin of northern
Idaho. The study area covers approximately 1500 acres and the main cause of damage is from
6 Executive order No. 12316. 46 Fed Reg 42237 (Aug. 14, 1981)
13

-------
historic mining and mineral processing. The assessment process began in 1991 and is ongoing.
As of 1995, Idaho has settled its portion of the claim for $4 million. A description of the nature
and extent of environmental damages in the Coeur d'Alene Basin can be found in the Coeur
d'Alene Natural Resource Damage Assessment Public Information Updates dated September
1995, and March 1996. The estimated total costs of natural resource damage at this site were
estimated at $600 million to $1.3 billion.
The Government Accounting Office (GAO) issued a report entitled, Superfund-Outlook
for and Experience with Natural Resource Damage Settlements. April 1996 (GAO/RCED-96-71),
which noted that there are approximately 60 sites on federal lands which may have natural
resource damage claims exceeding $5 million. Not all of these sites are mine sites. Of the 98
natural resource damage cases settled as of April, 1995, six of those sites were mine or mineral
processing sites with damage costs of $35 million.7 The GAO testimony indicates that when
natural resource damage claims are finalized at mine sites, they are quite costly, involve years of
evaluation, and require complicated restoration and recovery approaches.
Population Studies
EPA has collected new population information on both mines and mineral processing sites.
EPA expressed beliefs in 1985 Report to Congress and 1986 Regulatory Determination that
mining occurred in sparsely populated areas. EPA's new information indicates that there are
significant populations within close proximity to hardrock mines and mineral processing sites.
(See Population Studies of Mines and Mineral Processing Sites, EPA, 1997) This study analyzed
the demographic characteristics of people living near operating mines and mineral processing
sites. The Agency utilized data from the 1990 Census of Population. As a preliminary indicator
of population, EPA determined the population found within one mile and five miles of 306
operating hardrock mines. EPA believes that there are approximately 1,000 operating hardrock
mines in the US. Therefore, the population estimates should be viewed as conservative and the
actual total population located near mines is larger than this report indicates.
Extraction/Beneficiation
Agency study of the 306 mines represent mining in the gold, silver, copper, lead/zinc, iron,
and phosphate sectors. EPA has concluded the following:
Mine Sites -Populations Within 1 Mile:
7 Testimony of Peter Guerro, director, Environmental Protection Issues, GAO, for
Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, House Committee on transportation and
Infrastructure Hearing (July 11, 1995).
14

-------
228,145 persons, 58,996 families, and 89,335 households live within 1 mile of 309
hardrock mines.
106,353 children under the age of 19 within one mile of mine sites, of which
55,374 people are under the age of 4.
•	27,938 people over the age of 65 live within one mile of mine sites.
•	A total of 64,871 non-white people live within one mile of mine sites, of which
9,938 are classified Black, 5,452 are classified Native American, and 33,159
people are classified as Hispanic.1
Mine Site -Populations Within 5 Miles:
•	There are 3,458,612 persons, 871,805 families and 1,307,055 households located
within 5 miles of mine sites.
•	1,047,095 children under the age of 19, of which 269,039 are under the age of 4.
•	395,342 people over the age of 65 live within 5 miles of the mines.
A total of 1,025,531 non-white people live within five miles of the mines, of which
235,310 are classified as Black, 50,694 are classified as Native American, and
500,263 are classified as Hispanic.
•	63,014 children under the age of 19 live within 5 miles of lead mines, of which
17,172 are under the age of 4.
EPA notes the percentage of children living within mines and mineral processing sites.
Some of these facilities have the potential to discharge quantities of lead, and other
pollutants for which children may be especially susceptible. For example there are 63,014
children under the age of 19 located within 5 miles of lead mines, of which 17,172 are
under the age of 4.
Most mine facilities (83%) have little or no populations within one mile, however, about
10 percent have populations greater than 2,000 within one mile, and 35 percent have
populations greater 2,000 within 5 miles.
Mineral Processing
Agency studied the demographic characteristics of the population located around
112 mineral processing sites. This analyses concluded:
Mineral Processing Sites -Populations Within 1 Mile:
•	289,315 persons, 68,817 families, and 107,190 households live within one mile of
112 mineral processing sites.
•	83,516 children under the age of 19 live within one mile, of which 21,210 people
are under the age of 4.
•	36,314 people over the age of 65 live within one mile of the mineral processing
sites.
15

-------
92,094 non-white people live within one mile of mineral processing sites, of which
41,002 are classified Black, 1,997 are classified Native American, and 42,917
people are classified as Hispanic.
Mineral Processing Sites -Populations Within 5 Miles:
•	There are 5,299,553 persons, 1,330,853 families and 2,020,853 households located
within five miles of the 112 mineral processing sites.
•	Environmentally sensitive populations located within five miles include 1,487,768
children under the age of 19, of which 392,718 are under the age of 4.
•	There are 691,224 people over the age of 65 that live within five miles of mineral
processing sites.
•	There are a total of 1,797,240 non-white people living within five miles of mineral
processing, of which 921,697 are classified as Black, 31,128 are classified as
Native American, and 508,918 are classified as Hispanic.
Over 40 percent of mineral processing sites have population within one mile and over 60
percent have populations within five miles.
Agency evaluation of the demographic characteristics of population located within
one and five miles of mineral processing facilities indicates that significant numbers of
people are living close to these facilities, and that environmentally sensitive groups within
the population (children and the elderly) are also found in large numbers around these
sites.
This evaluation of population correctly found that mining and mineral processing
sites do in fact have the potential to affect large numbers of people living nearby. It is
acknowledged that few people live within one mile of mines.
Changes in Mining Technology
The technologies used to mine ore have changed significantly since the 1985-1990
Bevill studies. The Agency recognizes that the vast majority of gold mining in the US now
relies on the use of cyanide heap and vat/tank leaching. This significant expansion of this
form of chemical extraction presents a range of environmental risks was not well understood
in 1985. The gold mining sector is now one of the largest industrial consumers of cyanide.
The environmental contamination found at the Summitville NPL site clearly shows how a
relatively small gold cyanide mine can cause long term environmental damage. The
introduction of cyanide heap leach designs which originated in Nevada into dissimilar climates
and geologies, also presents different type of risks. For example, the contamination from
cyanide process and waste waters from the South Carolina Brewer gold mine was the result
of hurricane rainfall. Gold mines are being proposed in settings where cyanide mining has
never occurred, and there may not be adequate experience with siting factors to adequately
16

-------
control such issues as snow melt, freeze thaw cycles, and avalanche and seismic threats.
Gold rrfining using cyanide has been conducted in Nevada for at least twenty years.
Over the last five years, a number of gold mines have expanded open pits and will become
some of the largest open pit operations in the U.S. This type of mining will require large scale
dewatering of the regional aquifer. The Agency does not have adequate information to
determine if any long term impacts of dewatering will occur. There is also concern that
exposure of minerals in the pit walls may generate acids and mobilize metals which in turn
would contaminate water in filling the pits at the conclusion of mining. The Agency also does
not have adequate information to assess if a risk exists.
Phosphate mining and mineral processing in Florida is one of the largest consumers
of sulfuric acid. The resultant phosphogypsum wastes not only contains residual phosphoric
and sulfuric acids, but it also contains radioactive constituents. These piles and the
management of waste acids presents a unique environmental concern given the karst geology
of the state. The recent sink holes where millions of gallons of acid and contaminated wastes
were discharged to groundwater is of particular concern to EPA.
ln-situ mining of copper has been in existence for many years. The pumping of acids
into mineral formations si a complex process and a certain amount of fluid is usually lost. The
Agency is concerned that it's introduction at sites with complex hydrogeology may threaten
surface and groundwater. For example, in-situ mining of copper has been proposed in
Michigan at White Pine, located adjacent to Lake Superior.
The Agency is also see mining proposed in environments which are not in remote or
arid sites. Gold mining has been proposed in Maine, Oregon, and Washington, there are
several copper mines proposed in Michigan and Wisconsin, and large scale cyanide mining
is operating or proposed in Alaska. Mining can be conducted in sensitive environments where
there is a positive water balance, but care must be taken to address the specific risks these
sites pose.
The Agency has also seen a resurgence of new mines in mineral sectors like uranium.
There are over a dozen uranium mines currently proposed. Most will utilize in-situ recovery,
and many are located on or near tribal lands.
Changes in technologies and mining methods such as in-situ mining, roasting of
refractory ores, pressure oxidation, bacteriological leaching, and massive water diversion
projects are not well understood by the Agency. The environmental risks associated with
these technologies are similarly not well understood and regulatory changes may be
warranted.
Changes in Mining Waste Management
The Agency has seen a trend for more mining wastes to be managed in protective
impoundments utilizing synthetic liners and in tanks. EPA has conducted a series of studies
to determine the feasibility of lining hard rock tailings ponds. In addition, EPA also
performed studies comparing the requirements for uranium mill tailings against the
management practices of gold cyanide mines and phosphoric acid facilities. Some new
uranium mines are complying with the containment standards equivalent to Subtitle C
17

-------
regulations, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (See NRC File). EPA believes
that many metal mines and phosphate gypstacks and cooling ponds are comparable in size to
uranium mill tailings, yet do not meet Subtitle C standards.
The Agency conducted a series of studies evaluating the design and operation of
tailings ponds (See Technical Feasibility of Lining Tailings Ponds, US EPA, January, 1997)
This report summarizes Agency study on the design and operation of tailings ponds. Agency
evaluation of environmental releases indicate that tailings ponds are a source of surface and
ground water contamination. Since the mid-1980's many mining companies have addressed
this risk by designing tailings ponds with liners composed of clay, compacted soils, and
synthetic liners. The Agency's 1997 report concludes that there does not appear to be
significant engineering reasons why tailings ponds can not be effectively lined with synthetic
liners.
The Agency has found that synthetic liners have been routinely installed at hard rock
mines since the late 1980's. In 1991, The Western Governors Association prepared a report
on gold mining permitting which showed that some gold mines were installing 20-80 mil
synthetic liners at tailings ponds (See Abstracts of Selected Precious Metal Mine Permits,
Western Governors Association, December, 1991). EPA conducted a series of site visits to
operating mines in 1991 and 1992. The purpose of these visits was to gain a better
understanding of waste management practices at operating hard rock mines. These visits
confirmed that many hard rock mines were installing synthetic liners in 100-400 acre tailings
ponds. These reports also noted that in tailings ponds which did not use synthetic liners, most
of those units either used compacted soil, clay, or slimed liners. (See Technical Resource
Document, Gold and Copper, US EPA, 1994). EPA visited the Stillwater mine in Montana
in 1992 since this mine is often referred to regarding the design of its tailings ponds. The
Stillwater platinum mine is located in an alpine environment in Montana. The first tailings
pond was installed in 1986 and utilized a 100 mil synthetic liner. The company indicated at
the time of the visit, that the liner performed well at the site. The Stillwater Mine is currently
seeking approval to develop a second tailings ponds which also will be installed with a 100
mil synthetic liner. In 1994, EPA conducted a review of the literature on the design and
operation of tailings ponds to determine if there were any engineering constraints to the
installation of liners in large waste management units like tailings ponds (See Design and
Evaluation of Tailings Dams, US EPA, 1994). This report also concluded that there were no
engineering reasons why tailings ponds could not be routinely lined.
The Agency conducted a study to compare the design and operating standards for
uranium mill tailings with those established by Florida for phosphogypsum stacks. (See
Feasibility Analysis: A Comparison of Phosphogypsum and Uranium Mill Tailing Waste Unit
Design, USEPA 1997). The design standards established under the Uranium Mill Tailings
Reclamation Act (40 CFR 192) were designed to protect groundwater from disposal units
holding uranium mill tailings. These tailings are similar in size and density to tailings
generated in hardrock mining. These standards have also been in place since 1983. During
this study the Agency determined that four phosphogypsum stacks (New Wales, Ft. Meade,
Plant City, and Nichols) were either built or in the design phase which represented new
approaches to managing this type of wastes.
18

-------
The 1993 Florida Phosphogypsum Management regulations are less stringent than the
uranium mill tailings standards defined in 40 CFR 192 Subpart D in several important
respects. First, the uranium tailings standards require a double composite liner with two
geomembranes and an underlying layer of 3 feet of compacted soil with minimum hydraulic
conductivity of 1x10'7 cm/sec. The gypsum standards require only one geomembrane and 2
feet of compacted gypsum with minimum hydraulic conductivity of lxlO'4 cm/sec (or an
underlying 18-inch layer of compacted soil with maximum hydraulic conductivity of lxlO"7
cm/sec, which has not been used in any of the four cases analyzed in Section 4). Second, the
uranium tailings standards require a leachate collection system that is also used as detection
system. If the measured volume of liquids recovered exceeds a pre-determined action leakage
rate, a response action plan is set in motion to mitigate or stop any leaks. In the gypsum case,
leakage through the liner is expected and it is actually calculated in the technical reports
presented in the permitting process.
All four gypsum stacks constructed or proposed since the enactment of the 1993
Florida Phosphogypsum Management regulations have followed or exceeded the Florida
standards but none of the designs approach the protectiveness of the uranium mill tailings
standards. This report shows that phosphogysum stacks can be lined in units with average
sizes exceeding 150 acres. Liner design usually involves the use of a 24 inch layer of
compacted gypsum followed by a 60 mil geomembrane and the use of concentric underdrains.
All of the four lined stacks will have extensive groundwater monitoring systems.
The Agency conducted a study to evaluate current State of Nevada gold cyanide mill
tailings facility design, operation, and closure regulations, and compare them to the uranium
mill tailings design and operating regulations promulgated at 40 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) 192. (See Nevada GoldCyanide Mill Tailings Regulation, US EPA, February, 1997).
This report also evaluated the tailings pond designs used at three gold cyanide mill facilities
in the State of Nevada. Nevada was selected for the comparison because it is the nation's
largest producer of gold, has the largest number of gold cyanide mill facilities, and has
promulgated the most advanced cyanide mill tailings facility regulatory framework.
The State of Nevada minimum design criteria for tailings impoundments include a 12
inch thick soil liner with a coefficient of permeability of 10"6 cm/sec, or equivalent. The
design criteria for tailings impoundments under 192 requires three layers of solution
containment - two of flexible geomembrane and a bottom liner of 3 feet of compacted soil
with a coefficient of permeability no greater than 10'7 cm/sec, with geotextile leak detection
collection system between the liners. Nevada regulations require review of dam design,
construction and maintenance requirements prior to issuing a dam permit, 40 CFR 192 does
not specify requirements for the dam associated with a tailings impoundment. Nevada State
regulations are written and enforced to prevent degradation to the waters of the state, where
the regulations are written to prevent any release to the groundwater. Because of this
difference the Nevada regulations require identification of all drinking water sources,
groundwater and surface water sources and quality. Nevada closure requirements are focus
on preventing degradation of the waters of the state, and converting the land to a post-mining
use. Also due to the low precipitation and high evaporation rates, typically state wide, final
covers are designed to hold precipitation for subsequent evaporation. Nevada regulations for
19

-------
post closure monitoring are established on a facility basis, but is no longer than 30 years. The
192 regulations require monitoring of no less than 30 years.
Review of the liner designs at the Newmont Rain, Barrick Bullfrog, and Echo Bay
McCoy mines indicate that all were successfully constructed using either 12 inches of
amended soil liners or synthetic liners in conjunction with compacted clay liners. It is
important to note that while there are differences in regulatory approach between UMTRCA
and Nevada, EPA's information indicates that tailings ponds in Nevada are being lined and
that there does not appear to be technological barriers to such installation.
Risk Analysis
The Agency believes that modern risk modeling techniques may provide a more
accurate characterization of human health and environmental risks from Bevill-exempt wastes.
In the 1985 Report to Congress on Extraction and Beneficiation wastes, the Agency generally
characterized environmental damages but did not provide a quantitative estimate releases,
exposures, or risks associated with mining waste disposal practices. In the 1990 Report to
Congress on Mineral Processing, the Agency similarly characterized environmental damages
from mineral processing wastes and went further in providing limited risk modeling by
examining contamination through the groundwater pathway.
The Agency's qualitative review of damage cases indicate that the risks posed by
disposal of Bevill waste is similar to risks from other industrial hazardous wastes. However,
the Agency has not performed any type of quantitative risk modeling using information and
data gathered since the initial Bevill studies. Further, the Agency has not modeled or
analyzed risks associated other environmental pathways, such as air, soils, surface water, or
food chain ingestion. In the case of mining and mineral processing, the air and soils pathways
were significant factors in placing several sites on the National Priorities List8. However, the
release of contaminants through these pathways was not evaluated by the Agency in its
decision not to apply more stringent RCRA regulatory controls.
The Agency first identified concern over the health and environmental effects of
metallic dusts in the 1985 Report to Congress. In 1991, EPA determined that National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) had collected dust samples inside
mining and mineral processing facilities. This information is summarized in an April, 1991
report form the Agency's consultant (See Summary of NIOSH Bulk Dust Metals Data, from
SAIC to S. Hoffman, EPA, April, 1991). NIOSH data provided the Agency with information
on the metallic content of dusts found within mining operations, which indicate dusts routinely
contain lead, arsenic, chrome, and nickel. This data can not be used to forecast risk since
NIOSH did not sample at the site boundary. This data is useful as long as it is used as a
surrogate for the types of dusts likely to be found at mining and mineral processing sites.
Agency study of mine and mineral processing sites on the NPL has indicated that
metallic dusts have the potential for adversely affecting human health. Recent study of lead
8 Examples include Atlas Asbestos, Johns-Mansville Asbestos, Anaconda Smelter, Denver
Radium, East Helena, Bunker Hill,
20

-------
bearing dusts at the Tri-State NPL lead site indicated that lead dusts from abandoned lead
slag piles were potentially affecting nearby residents. Metal bearing dusts have been identified
as a source of contamination at the Bunker Hill NPL site. The Agency for Toxic Substances
and Disease Registry (ATSDR) recently completed a Preliminary Public Assessment for Big
River Mine Tailings Desloge, 1996. This report concluded that the site located in Missouri
is considered a public health hazard due to exposure to windblown lead bearing dusts. (See
Memorandum from S. Hoffman to RCRA Docket, Review of Preliminary Public assessment
for Big River Mine Tailings). Of particular interest to the Agency is that while the lead
tailings found at the Big River site had been abandoned for many years, they were still
threatening public health twenty five years after disposal.
Since the 1985 and 1990 Bevill studies, the Agency has developed much more
sophisticated release, fate, and transport modeling methodology. This methodology was
recently used to quantify risk for cement kiln dust (CKD), a mineral processing operation
similar to many of the operations studied in the 1985 and 1990 Reports to Congress,
especially the calcining, elemental phosphorous, and lightweight aggregate mineral sectors.
The CKD risk modeling analysis used the MMSOILS model, a screening-level multimedia
contaminant release, fate, and transport model, to estimate ambient concentrations of
constituents of concern in ground water, air, surface water, soils, and the food chain.
MMSOILS was developed by EPA's Office of Research and Development to simulate the
release of hazardous constituents from a wide variety of waste management scenarios and
their subsequent multimedia transport through key environmental pathways.9 MMSOILS also
simulates numerous cross-media transfers of contaminants (e.g., atmospheric deposition to
soil and ground water discharge to streams). As a screening-level model, MMSOILS was
designed to provide rough order-of-magnitude exposure estimates in relatively simple
environmental settings.
With respect to the groundwater pathway, new advanced risk modeling is similarly
available. The risk methodology called the Composite Model for Leachate Migration with
Transformation Products (CMTP) is being used by the Agency to predict groundwater
exposure in domestic drinking water receptors. The risks posed by some mining and mineral
processing wastes, especially those with high levels of lead and arsenic found at many NPL
sites, may be more accurately characterized by application of these or other more modern
modeling techniques. The Agency solicits comments on the efficacy of applying these types
of modeling methodologies to mining and mineral processing wastes.
It should be noted that the Agency conducted a variation of multi-pathway risk
analysis of mining to determine if the mining sector should be added to the Toxic Release
Inventory (TRI) (See 61 FR 33588, June 27, 1996). The docket for this proposed rule
includes evaluations where the Agency conducted risk screening using the Permit Compliance
System, the Biennial Report System, the Aerometric Information Retrieval System, and the
Facility Index system to assess the likely pollutant loadings caused by mining. Based on this
9 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, MMSOILS:
Multimedia Contaminant Fate. Transport, and Exposure Model. Documentation and User's
Manual. September 1992 (updated in April 1993).
21

-------
analysis, the Agency proposed to add the mining sector to the TRI.
22

-------
EPA Response to Public Comment on Risks Posed bv Bevill Wastes (Risks
Report)
Comment: A number of commenters questioned the validity of the Risks Report as an
independent support document for the LDR Phase IV rulemaking.
Response: During the creation of the technical background documents for this
rulemaking, the Agency came to feel it was both useful and necessary, because of the large
number of both complicated issues and background documents involved, to issue a document
which summarized the major issues of concern and provided citations to pertinent documents.
This document should therefore be read as only a general guide to the many issues examined
in the overall rulemaking. Only material related to mineral processing is being used to support
todays ruling. The Agency will address concerns related to the reevaluation of Bevill at a
later date.
Comment: Many commenters voiced strong opposition to both the data used in this
report, challenged data in other technical background documents related to the reevaluation
of the Bevill exclusion. (Comm 1089, 1096, 1042, 1043, 1048, and 1038)
Response: In the May 12, 1997 Second Supplemental Proposal (62 FR 26041) the
Agency posed the question of whether certain wastes currently excluded from Subtitle C
regulation under the Bevill exclusion warrant further study or regulatory controls. Public
comments on this question will be summarized and presented to the public by the Agency at
a future date. Because the purpose of this question was to solicit information only, the
Agency has taken no regulatory action on the issue in today's final rule. Todays rule
therefore, does not change the Bevill status of exempt extraction/beneficiation or exempt
mineral processing wastes as noted at 40 CFR 261.4(b)(7).
Comment: One commenter stated that the Risks Report does not detail the role of the
Federal Government in certain NPL proceedings. The commentor gave two examples: that
the Federal Government is believed to have both constructed and, initially, operated the Tex-
Tin facility and additionally, that the Federal Government is believed largely responsible for,
and has assumed clean-up liability for, at least one site discussed in the NPL document, the
St. Louis Airport Site (Comm 1048).
Response: The role of the federal government at a site(if any) is not relevant to the use of the
NPL site summaries to illustrate the types of contamination caused by mining and mineral
processing facilities.
Comment: One commenter believed the use in footnote 2 on page 2 of the Risks
document of the information from the Report to Congress on Solid Wastes from Mineral
Extraction and Beneficiation and the Regulatory Determination claiming an annual generation
of "755 million metric tons of mining waste" that "had RCRA characteristics or were
23

-------
potentially subject to RCRA" is misleading. The commenter believed this figure includes
significant quantities of "in process" materials which are not wastes and are therefore not
subject to RCRA, e.g. copper leach solution (Comm 1043).
Response: The quantities of extraction/benefciation and mineral processing wastes generated
on an annual basis are estimates the Agency has utilized since 1985 and updated in 1990 fro
mineral processing. Whether a material is in-process or not needs to be determined on a site
specific basis.
Comment: The commenter suggested EP A's overstates the extent of environmental risks
from the mining industry in the Risks document, making claims unsubstantiated by the other
background documents. The commenter believed past practices (including old but in many
cases still operating units) are the cause of many of the environmental problems, and that the
ability of the current RCRA Subtitle C program to address the problems is limited or
nonexistent (Comm 1043).
Response: the Agency will address comments on the reevaluation of Bevill at a later date.
The Agency believes it has established an adequate record of the environmental damages
caused by mineral processing wastes.
Comment: The commenter believed EPA' s statement that past practices are not the major
cause of environmental problems at mine sites, purportedly based on data indicating that some
currently operating Bevill mining and mineral processing sites continue to contaminate
groundwater and surface water, fails to consider that, given the long operating life of many
mining and mineral processing facilities, many currently active waste management units were
constructed decades ago. For this reason, they reflect design and construction practices that
pre-date the period of environmental awareness and regulation. The commenter believed
facilities built to current standards will not present the same risks as facilities constructed a
century ago. The commenter believed past practices at historic mining operations represent
a large portion of EPA's data base. The commenter pointed out that of the damage cases
from three background documents (Damage Cases and Environmental Releasesfrom Mining
and Mineral Processing Facilities, Mining and Mineral Processing Sites on the NPL, and
CERCLA Imminent Hazard—Mining and Mineral Processing Facilities) cited in support of
the Risks document, 8%, or 9 total, initiated activity after 1970, and the remaining 92%, or
107 total, started operations before that year. (Comm 1043)
Response: Comments on mining impacts will be addressed at a later date as part of the
reevaluation of the Bevill exclusion.
Comment: One commenter believed the Agency's claim in the Risks document that there
are risks not associated with RCRA characteristics at mine sites, e.g. cyanide used in gold
mining, acid generating wastes from copper and gold mining, and naturally occurring
radioactivity, is flawed. The commenter claimed the Damage Cases cited in support of this
24

-------
statement and involving cyanide are primarily due to releases of in process solution, not
waste. The commenter claimed the Agency fails to consider the existence of state regulatory
programs that address the impacts of acid rock drainage to waterways through other than
waste management programs e.g. Clean Water Act requirements. The commenter also
claimed that the Technical Report on Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials (NORM)
in the Southwestern Copper Belt of Arizona demonstrates the sites occur in areas of elevated
NORM, not that the copper operations there mobilize or concentrate NORM (Comm 1043).
Response: Comments on mining impacts will be addressed at a later date as part of the
reevaluation of the Bevill exclusion.
Comment: One commenter believed the Risk Report's claim that the Agency's damage
case collection indicates that the risks posed by disposal of Bevill waste is similar to risks
from other industrial hazardous wastes is flawed. The commenter claimed that the damage
cases fail to identify Bevill wastes as hazardous, that they are composed primarily of historic
sites, process solution releases and violations ofNPDES permits. The commenter questioned
the use of historic sites to perform risk modeling at facilities subject to modern environmental
regulations. The commenter also questioned Agency use of the MMOILS model to estimate
ambient concentrations of constituents of concern in ground water, air, surface water, soils
and the food chain. The commenter believed the Agency has been unable to even present data
demonstrating the hazardousness of Bevill wastes and believes "[n]o modeling exercise could
be more convincing than the lack of real data showing impacts and risks from mines designed
and constructed to meet modern standards and regulatory requirements" (Comm 1043).
Response: Comments on mining impacts will be addressed at a later date as part of the
reevaluation of the Bevill exclusion.
Comment: One commenter suggested that because the statements in the Risks
background document contain factual errors and flawed logic, the credibility of EPA's claims
should be questioned. The commenter also argued that the Risks Report is faulty because it
relies on data that indicates that "at least some of the problems are attributable to modern
practices." The commenter further argued that it is unacceptable "to base rules on mere
indications rather than reliable facts" (Comm 1054).
Response: This report only supports issues related to mineral processing wastes. Issues
raised in comment related to the reevaluation of Bevill exempt wastes will be addressed at a
later date.
Comment: One commenter stated that EPA asserts in Risks Posed By Bevill Wastes that
many of the environmental damages caused by mining wastes result from contemporary
operating practices. The evidence in the record, EPA believes, the commenter stated, refutes
the oft-repeated position of the mining industry that environmental impacts caused by mining
wastes have resulted from once common but now outdated management practices (Comm
25

-------
1093).
Response: Comments on mining impacts will be addressed at a later date as part of the
reevaluation of the Bevill exclusion.
Comment: One commenter stated that EPA asserts in Risks Posed By Bevill Wastes that
many of the environmental damages caused by mining wastes result from contemporary
operating practices. The evidence in the record, EPA believes, refutes the oft-repeated
position of the mining industry that environmental impacts caused by mining wastes have
resulted from once common but now outdated management practices. In truth, contended
the commenter, the background materials in the record support the mining industry's position.
In CERCL4 Imminent Hazard Mining and mineral Processing Facilities, EPA provides a list
of 72 abatement actions that have taken place at mining sites pursuant to orders issued by
EPA under Section 106 of CERCLA. Actually, argued the commenter, the document
contains 41 case summaries, some of which involved multiple abatement orders. Of the 41
operations addressed in EPA's document, the commenter stated, 34 are sites where mining
started as long as 120 years ago, using outmoded practices that were common and widely
accepted then but would be irresponsible and illegal today.
The commenter stated that only seven of the case summaries address sites where
damages can fairly be said to have been caused principally by modern practices. Actually, the
commenter argued, this is a conservative interpretation, which includes as "modern" mining
operations any mines that started after about 1950. The commenter stated that 1950 was 19
years before enactment of the Clean Air Act, 22 years before enactment of the Clean Water
Act and 25-30 years before enactment of the major state environmental and reclamation laws.
Of those seven "modem" operations, the commenter argued, three- Captain Jack, Herold
Blackhawk and Bluewater -definitely did not involve Bevill wastes. The process details of
two others- Leeds and Yttrium - are too vague to determine whether Bevill wastes were at
issue in the cleanup, the commenter contended. That leaves EPA with only two examples -
Summitville and Cimmaron - that even arguably support its proposal, the commenter argued
(Comm 1093).
Response: Comments on mining impacts will be addressed at a later date as part of the
reevaluation of the Bevill exclusion
Comment: One commenter stated that its review of this proposal, as well as its
predecessor proposal of January 25,1996 (61 Fed. Reg. 2338), leads to the conclusion that
the regulatory proposals designed to establish the Phase IV Land Disposal Restrictions that
address wastes exempt from hazardous waste regulation either as the result of an exemption
or an application of the mixture rule are limited to those specific wastes studied in the report
developed in support of this proposed rulemaking entitled, Risks Posed by Bevill Mining
Wastes, EPA 1997. The commenter stated that the Phase IV rulemaking is clearly a very
precise and finited proposal directed toward the management of "actual and potential
environmental threats caused by mining and mineral processing wastes."(62 FR 26054)
26

-------
(Comm 1096).
Response: Todays rule only applies to newly identified mineral processing wastes. Todays
rule does not affect the regulatory status of Bevill exempt wastes noted at 40 CFR
261.4(b)(7).
Comment: In the Risks Report, one commenter quoted the EPA as stating "the Agency
is providing the most current information available on the environmental risks associated with
mining and mineral processing operations." The commenter argued to the contrary, that at
least in some instances the report conveniently fails to include the "most current information,"
even when EPA was previously directed to that information in comments to the 1996 Phase
IV proposed rulemaking. The commenter stated that this is true for statements made by EPA
concerning the natural resource damages (NRD) case filed by the State of Utah against
KUCC.
Specifically, the commenter contended, EPA discusses NRD cases as a means of
proclaiming that extensive damages are caused by mining wastes. In trying to make these
damage cases appear as large as possible, argued the commenter, EPA relies on outdated
information concerning the NRD claim filed by the State of Utah against Kennecott Utah
Copper Corporation. The commenter quoted the EPA as stating "In 1992, the United States
District Court ruled that Utah had failed to adequately assess natural resource damages at the
Kennecott Corporation's operations in Bingham Mining District, near Salt Lake City, Utah.
The Court's ruling is important since it directly summarizes the nature and extent of damages
at the site. This record indicates that natural resources damages at the site may exceed $200
million dollars." The commenter stated that KUCC pointed out in its comments to the 1996
Phase IV rulemaking proposal that the NRD lawsuit filed in 1986, had been settled and a
Consent Decree had been entered by the court on August 21, 1995, Civil Action No. 86C-
0902G. The commenter contended that had EPA really tried to obtain the "most current
information" concerning these cases it could have obtained a copy of the consent decree from
KUCC, the State of Utah, EPA Region VIII or the Court itself.
The commenter stated that a copy of the consent decree was attached as Exhibit 9 to their
comments. The commenter contended that it establishes that the NRD settlement was far
below the $200 million number EPA cites in the Risks Report. Under the Consent Decree,
stated the commenter, KUCC paid $9 million in NRD damages to the State Trustee and set
aside another $28 million in a trust fund, which can be utilized in whole or in part to
implement a CERCLA remedy if appropriate conditions are met.
Using inflated NRD claims against the mining industry to document "significant" damages
caused by Bevill mining wastes is illusory, contended the commenter. Damages sought by
Trustees in NRD cases typically reflect inflated claims that are not limited to damages for
compensating for the injury, the commenter stated. Rather, they contended, such claims
typically include damages for historic lost uses (the value of individual recreational
opportunities lost in the past), non-use values (the value of the "pleasure of knowing that the
resource exists), based on unreliable valuation methodologies, and the costs associated with
assessing the damages.
27

-------
For example, stated the commenter, EPA references the Coeur d'Alene Basin NRD
damage assessment in the Risks Report stating that the costs of natural resource damage at
this site were estimated at between $600 million to $ 1.3 billion. The commenter stated that
EPA does not explain that an NRD claim has been filed where over 50% of the claimed
damages is based on lost use and non-use values, including 14% ($200 million) of claimed
damages attributable to lost tribal cultural and spiritual values. Similarly, the commenter
contended, over half the NRD damage claims at the Clarks Fork Superfund site are based on
non-use and lost use values.
The commenter stated that while Kennecott is not suggesting that the management of
wastes from historic mining operations has never caused any environmental problems, this
information is not new. Moreover, the commenter contended, to the extent that such
problems are the result of historic operational practices, EPA is not justified in attempting to
change its regulation of these wastes without any consideration of current practices, and how
those practices are already regulated by other environmental laws at the federal, state and
local levels (Comm 1054).
Response: The Agency cited the natural resource claim dollar amounts to illustrate the
extensive costs needed to restore natural resources damaged by mining and mineral
processing. The report has been amended to reflect the company's position that the estimate
of damages is lower than the report indicated.
Comment: One commenter stated that in addition to the 1997 Damage Cases Report, EPA
relies on two other reports in support of claims that wastes and other materials from mining
and mineral processing present a threat or cause damages to the environment. These reports,
"Risks Posed by Bevill Wastes," EPA 1997 and the "CERCLA Imminent Hazard Mining and
Mineral Processing Facilities" EPA, February 1997, both contain factual errors, misleading
information and flawed logic according to the commenter.
The commenter stated that like the Damage Cases Report, both the CERCLA Report and
the Risks Report spotlight cases where contamination results from primarily historic mining
practices. However, the commenter contends EPA skirts this critical point by constructing
its own story and ignoring basic facts. The commenter argues that EPA tries to claim in the
Risks Report that because some of this contamination is found at NPL or other CERCLA
sites that have been actively operating since 1985, there is an "indication" that "at least some
of the problems are attributable to modem practices." The commenter stated that rulemakings
should be based upon facts — not unverified "indications." Moreover, the commenter argued,
even if EPA's faulty logic were found to be supported in fact, the effects of other state and
federal regulation of mining practices must be fully considered in any effort to eliminate the
Bevill amendment or draft new regulations dictating the management of mining and mineral
processing materials and/or wastes (Comm 1054).
Response: Comments on mining impacts will be addressed at a later date as part of the
reevaluation of the Bevill exclusion
28

-------
Comment: One commenter stated that according to the Risks Report, EPA also found that
the "air and soils pathways were significant factors in listing several sites on the National
Priorities List (NPL)" under Superfiind. The commenter stated that the air pathway is of
particular concern. The commenter stated that a recent study of lead bearing dusts at the Tri-
State NPL site indicated the dusts were potentially affecting nearby residents, and metal-
bearing dusts are a source of contamination at the Bunker Hill NPL site. The windblown lead
bearing dusts at the Big River Mine Tailings Site is a "public health hazard", according to an
ATSDR Preliminary Public Assessment, stated the commenter.
The commenter also stated that, furthermore, EPA found that many of the practices that
caused these damage incidents are still in use today. The commenter quoted the Agency as
stating in the Risks Report" [T]he Agency's studies also indicate that some currently operating
Bevill mining and mineral processing wastes continue to contaminate groundwater and
surface water, often through leaking surface impoundments, runoff from piles, wind blown
dust, contaminated soil, and failure of dams."
Many people are potentially at risk from non-groundwater pile and surface impoundment
releases. EPA estimates over 200,000 people in over 100,000 households live within one mile
of the 112 mineral processing facilities affected by the instant rulemaking. Over five million
people in over two million households live within 5 miles of the mineral processing facilities,
including over 1.5 million children. [FN 47: Id at 11.] Thousands of people live within a
mile of the lead production facilities, including one residence located 21 yards from the facility
fenceline, and lead production wastewater treatment sludges are one category of wastes
potentially eligible for the land-based unit exemption. [FN 48: EPA 1995 Waste Description,
Exhibit 33-1.]
Consequently, as discussed in the 1996 EDF Comments, overland releases via runoff or
releases of windblown dust into neighborhoods where humans can be-exposed directly
through inhalation or dermal exposure, or indirectly through food chain exposures, are both
actual and potential exposure scenarios. The fact that EPA or other regulatory agencies are
often compelled to address these exposure pathways through imminent hazard enforcement
authorities and other cleanup programs demonstrates the relative importance of these
pathways to human health and environmental protection (Comm 1042).
Response: Todays rule does not allow the storage of mineral processing secondary materials
on the land (except on approved pads). The Agency agrees with the commenter that the
damage cases fro mineral processing do indicate that the placement on the ground has caused
a range of environmental damages. To assure that these damages will not continue, the
Agency adopted a no land placement approach in todays rule which directly addresses
concerns noted by the commenter regarding contamination from windblown dusts and run
on/runoff.
29

-------