IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF COMMUNITY
IN VOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES IN ABANDONED MINE LAND

COMMUNITIES

U.S. EPA Abandoned Mine Lands Team
U.S. EPA Superfund Community Involvement and Outreach Branch

September 11, 2007
FINAL

Prepared by:
SRA International, Inc.
Contract No. 68 W 01 058

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Table of Contents

1.	Introduction to Community Involvement and Abandoned Mine Lands (AML)	1

2.	Site Selection and Interview Process	2

3.	Community Involvement Activities at Selected AML Sites	2

3.1	Overview of Identified AML Community Involvement Challenges	2

3.1.1	Challenge: Due to the large geographic scale of many AML sites, several communities may be

impacted by cleanup activities	2

3.1.2	Challenge: Local economic pressures influence how communities view cleanup and

respond to EPA	3

Communities may be cautious about cleanup because mining is the main economic engine for the

community	3

Communities have a strong allegiance to the potentially responsible party (PRP) because it is the
main employer in town	4

3.1.3	Challenge: There is an increased focus on maintaining historical aspects of mines	4

3.2	Successful Solutions Used at AML Sites	5

3.2.1	Reaching Out to Every Stakeholder	5

Utilize Local Information Centers	5

Maintain Toll-Free Hotlines	5

Develop Relationships with Local Officials and Politicians	6

Broaden the Distribution of Materials	6

Develop a Rapport with the Media	6

Seek Alternatives to Public Meetings	6

Showcase Projects through Public Exhibits	7

Utilize Resources outside the Superfund Program	7

Recognize the Role of Demographics	7

3.2.2	Managing Conflict	7

Listen First	7

Set Site-Specific Goals to Focus Attention	7

Utilize Facilitation and Mediation Resources	8

Collaborate with Partnering Agencies and Clarify Agency Roles	8

3.2.3	Encouraging Community Advisory Groups (CAGs) and Technical Assistance Grants (TAGs)	8

3.2.4	Maintaining Interest in the Process	9

Work Toward a Goal	9

Maintain a Consistent Staff, if Possible	9

Publicize Accomplishments	9

3.2.5	Developing Innovative Partnerships	10

4.	Conclusion: Using Lessons Learned from the Selected AML Sites	10

FINAL	i

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Appendix A: Inventory of Selected AML Sites with Community Involvement Activities	11

Appendix B: Community Involvement Resources	15

Appendix C: Interview Materials	18

FINAL	ii

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

1. Introduction to Community
Involvement and Abandoned Mine
Lands	

Small company towns developed as mining
operations attracted people, industry, and
businesses to rural areas of the United States.
However, as mining companies closed or
abandoned operations, communities were left with
large, vacant parcels of scarred lands and
dilapidated buildings. The environmental and public
safety hazards of abandoned mining sites are an
unfortunate legacy of mining operations. These
abandoned sites are scattered across the country
and pose daunting cleanup and reuse challenges.

Through a variety of regulatory and non-regulatory
approaches, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Abandoned Mine Lands (AML) Team
identifies ways to protect the public and the
environment by setting priorities for the evaluation,
cleanup, and redevelopment of abandoned mine
sites. The AML Team works with several EPA
offices, including the Office of Superfund
Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI),
Office of Solid Waste, Office of Air and Radiation,
Office of Research and Development, Office of
Water, EPA Regions, and other government
agencies and programs to address challenges and
opportunities associated with AML sites.

The EPA AML Team defines abandoned mine
lands as, "those lands, waters, and surrounding
watersheds contaminated or scarred by extraction,
beneficiation or processing of ores and minerals,
including phosphate but not coal. Abandoned mine
lands include areas where mining or processing
activity is temporarily inactive." AML sites involve
complex environmental, technical, political, and
economic issues, including the often remote
location, magnitude and scale of contamination,
economic transition, and mixed public and private
land ownership. Meaningful community participation
is critical in addressing these challenges.

Community involvement activities ensure that all
stakeholders are informed of site cleanup activities
and have the opportunity to influence mine cleanup
and reuse decisions.

The Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA),
the federal statute that governs all Superfund sites,
requires specific community involvement activities,
such as public meetings, comment periods, and
notification of site activities. EPA's Community
Involvement and Outreach Branch developed the
Community Involvement Handbook to serve as an

extensive resource on community involvement in
the Superfund process, including the legal and
policy requirements for Superfund community
involvement. EPA's community involvement
activities are not limited to those required by
CERCLA. Rather, EPA has the flexibility to promote
public participation throughout the entire site
cleanup process.

The purposes of this report are to identify
community involvement challenges that are typical
to AML sites and to provide examples of how these
challenges have been successfully addressed. The
community involvement challenges and solutions
identified in this report are based on interviews with
individuals who have either led or participated in
community involvement activities at a sample of
AML sites across the country. It is expected that the
information in this report will assist EPA staff at
AML sites to anticipate and address common
community involvement challenges. Because each
AML site has its own unique challenges, there is no
one-size-fits-all approach to community
involvement. The community involvement activities
at each site should respond to the specifics of the
site and its communities and stakeholders.

Appendix A lists the AML sites researched for this
report. These sites serve as a non-statistically valid
sample of AML sites with community involvement
activities focused on cleanup and reuse. While most
of the sites used for this report are listed on the
National Priorities List (NPL), some sites are
outside the scope of Superfund and were included
as a supplement to the Superfund process.

In addition, Appendix B provides a compilation of
available community involvement tools and
resources from groups and agencies. The appendix
provides links to the materials on the Web and a
brief description of the best use of these materials.
Finally, Appendix C furnishes a list of sample
questions prepared for EPA representatives.

FINAL

1

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

2. Site Selection and Interview
Process	

Of the many AML hardrock mining sites, this report
compiles information on a select few that conduct
community involvement activities. Sites were
identified by EPA staff, existing communication
materials associated with community involvement,
contractor knowledge of sites, and a
Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Information System
(CERCLIS) query for sites currently in use, with
Acres Ready for Reuse, or currently not being used.
This information was compiled into an initial list and
scaled down based on the level of known
community involvement activities at the site and
regional distribution of sites. The initial list
contained 88 AML Superfund NPL sites, plus
additional sites outside of the Superfund program
that were known to have a history of community
involvement activities. In an effort to have a
manageable number of sites to research, a final list
of 29 sites was selected. Based on resources, time,
and responses, 20 sites were researched and form
the basis of this report.

Initial research on the selected 20 sites was
conducted through CERCLIS, public Web sites,
EPA Web pages, and other documents for site
background, best management practices, and
examples of community involvement. This
information was used to understand site
background information, gather any publicized
community involvement activities, and compile a
history of the site prior to interviews. This process
included interviewing 36 EPA representatives
(some representatives were interviewed for more
than one site) and three public stakeholders. Once
initial site information was compiled, selected
community members (three community members)
and EPA staff—including 17 Remedial Project
Managers (RPMs), one On-Scene Coordinator
(OSC), 19 Community Involvement Coordinators
(CICs), and others (two other EPA staff
representatives)—were contacted to discuss the
site, project work, and community involvement
activities. At least one EPA representative was
interviewed for each site included in this report and
some EPA representatives were interviewed for
more than one site. For six of the sites, only one
person was interviewed for the site due to time
constraints, resources, and availability. All EPA
representatives were asked a core group of
questions (Appendix C) in order to help develop
baseline information for analysis. Information
sought included details on community involvement
activities, length of involvement at the site,
milestones, challenges, and project partners.

3. Community Involvement
Activities at Selected AML Sites

3.1 Overview of Identified AML

Community Involvement Challenges

Upon review and analysis of interview responses,
general themes began to emerge that set AML sites
apart from other Superfund and cleanup sites.

Many EPA staff from the sites described the large
geographic scale of mining sites as an obstacle to
effective community involvement. Likewise,
numerous EPA interviewees described challenges
in working with a community that is cautious about
cleanup because mining is the backbone of the
local economy. Another theme identified from the
interviews is the impact that the Potentially
Responsible Party (PRP) has on community
involvement. This impact includes fueling
community frustrations toward EPA or causing
hostility between community groups with different
interests. Finally, many individuals described the
importance of working with each community to
preserve the mining town's heritage and identity.
Each of these themes is described in greater detail
below and examples are provided to demonstrate
the hurdles EPA and mining communities have
overcome.

While the following challenges may occur at other
Superfund sites, many AML sites will likely face
most, if not all, of the general challenges described
in this report. In recognizing some of the general
challenges that they may face, EPA RPMs and
CICs can have the edge in formulating a successful
community involvement approach. The interviews
revealed that some of the most successful
community involvement activities arise when RPMs
and CICs become familiar with the community and
appreciate the distinct needs of that community.

3.1.1 Challenge: Due to the large geographic scale of
many AML sites, several communities may be
impacted by cleanup activities
As with many large Superfund sites, EPA staff at
AML sites face many challenges due to the large
geographic scale. The large area affected by most
AML sites usually equates to a significant number
of stakeholders spread over great distances. Due to
the complex nature of contamination and the
extensive size of many mining sites and mine-
affected watersheds, it can take up to a dozen or
more years before a remedy is finalized. In turn,
communities often grow frustrated with EPA and the
cleanup process long before cleanup ever begins.

FINAL

2

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

The large geographic scale of many AML sites
poses a challenge for EPA to engage all of the
stakeholders in effective community involvement
activities. A large AML site can encompass
numerous rural areas, towns, and cities. As an
example, the Tar Creek Superfund site in
Oklahoma includes five mining cities. Over 19,000
people, including nine tribal nations, call the Tar
Creek Superfund site home. Community
involvement is a challenge when multiple
communities are affected at sites.

Similarly, the Bunker Hill site includes land in both
Washington and Idaho, and spans 60 miles by
highway, making it very difficult to get to know the
affected communities. Recognizing a need to reach
all the communities involved, EPA tried a new
public meeting format for the latest Five-Year
Review. In place of the traditional large public
meeting EPA held five smaller open houses in
different locations in Washington and Idaho.
Attendance was lower at these open houses than at
previous public meetings. EPA speculated that
attendance was low because the open houses were
held in June when the community members'
attention was focused on other summer activities.
Regardless of attendance, the new format gave
some local residents a chance to ask questions
they would not normally have asked during a public
meeting. This community involvement activity
demonstrates the need to try a new approach to
reach stakeholders across large sites.

Additionally, due to the large scale and complexity
of contamination at AML sites, it may appear to the
community that EPA is making minimal cleanup
progress. Of the 20 sites interviewed for this report,
11 are "megasites," meaning that cleanup costs will
exceed $50 million. Some sites have up to 13
operable units (OU). Even though EPA is making
progress on cleaning up each OU, it may appear to
the community that EPA is making little headway
toward completing the entire site. The Cherokee
County site in Kansas is part of a larger area called
the Tri-State Mining District, which encompasses
four Superfund sites within the district. EPA has
divided this megasite into seven subsites with
general mining locations. A total of five Records of
Decision (ROD) have been released for various
OUs in Cherokee County. Multiple remediation
activities are occurring at the same time. While
remedial actions are underway across the site, local
stakeholders often want their particular concern
addressed immediately. Community involvement
activities must address progress across the site to
help demonstrate to the community that regardless
of the perception associated with their specific site
concern, issues are being addressed site wide.

3.1.2 Challenge: Local economic pressures influence
how communities view cleanup and respond to EPA

Communities may be cautious about cleanup because
mining is the main economic engine for the community

At AML sites, mining activities are often the
backbone of a community's economy. Mining
communities tend to be cautious when EPA
commences cleanup activities as they fear losing
current jobs and future mining opportunities. Many
of the communities included in this report were still
economically tied to the mining industry and
continued to show loyalty toward these companies.

Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, Montana

The Palmerton Zinc Pile Superfund site overcame
fierce resistance from the smelting company and
the local community before the site could be
cleaned up. Established in 1898 by the New Jersey
Zinc Corporation, Palmerton, Pennsylvania grew
around the zinc smelters and became a company
town, with thousands of local citizens employed by
the zinc industry. In addition to serving as the main
employer in town, the company also provided
valuable money and resources for local schools and
other critical infrastructure. EPA became involved at
the site in the early 1980s, prompting concerns from
local residents that their pensions were going to be
threatened by the cleanup. Despite the vast amount
of contamination across the site, EPA had to
overcome community loyalty to the zinc company
before effective community involvement could
proceed.

in the Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area, Montana, some
community members indicated that they would
prefer to have contaminated property and continue
mining copper rather than clean up the site.
Considering the Butte area will likely not run out of
copper until long into the future, mining makes
economic sense for the community.

FINAL

3

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

It is often difficult to establish a new economic
engine in these communities after mining ceases. In
an effort to redevelop the area and ease economic
concerns, the Old Works golf course was
developed in Montana. The community was
optimistic about the tourism possibilities and began
to focus on updating the downtown. However, when
a hotel development project failed, it became
apparent that the golf course would not answer all
of the town's economic concerns. Despite this, the
community continues to actively seek ways to
diversify their economy to attract new businesses
and tourism opportunities

Communities have a strong allegiance to the PRP
because it is the main employer in town

When asked about the role PRPs play in
community involvement activities, EPA
representatives indicated that community
involvement activities were significantly impacted
when the PRP was the main employer in town. EPA
staff also noted that local residents depend on
mining companies for leadership and are heavily
influenced by their opinions.

In Anaconda, Montana, the PRP, the Atlantic
Richfield Company (ARCO) historically had a strong
leadership role in the community and made most
planning decisions that were usually made by local
governments. In recent years, however, as ARCO's
presence decreased, the county government
became more active, and in many cases has had
differing opinions on Superfund issues. Some
residents continue to support ARCO's cleanup
plans, while others oppose them and feel that they
should be contributing more to the cleanup. EPA
played mediator in this community to ensure that all
of the opinions, though often disparate, are heard.

In general, regulatory actions in company towns
can result in hostile relations between community
groups holding opposing views about environmental
cleanup. At the Palmerton Zinc site, in Palmerton,
Pennsylvania, the community was divided over
Superfund cleanup. One community group, backed
with funding from the mining company, was
opposed to EPA's work at the site. Another group,
which received the Technical Assistance Grant
(TAG) through EPA, was a strong proponent of the
cleanup. These groups were fiercely opposed to
one another, with isolated incidents resulting in
court battles and police involvement. Hostile
relations ensued between the two groups, coming
to a close when the PRP was bought by a new
company. In addition to meeting with each
community group individually in private homes, EPA
held large public meetings during the public
comment periods, which allowed the groups to

come together and voice their opinions. EPA staff
did not limit their activities to normal business
hours; they were available at all hours to provide a
forum for both groups to voice concerns. The
Palmerton site exhibits the importance of listening
to opinions from all sides of an issue, even when
community members disagree with EPA and each
other.

3.1.3 Challenge: There is an increased focus on
maintaining historical aspects of mines
Often at AML sites, EPA's mission is to clean up or
remove the very pieces of the landscape that give
mining towns their character and define their mining
heritage. Life-long residents of these communities
become attached to the symbols of mining left in
the town, such as mine waste piles and other
mining artifacts. When a town is defined by a mine,
EPA must recognize this connection and work to
maintain the integrity of the town's mining history.
Community involvement activities may need to
focus on ways to involve the community in
decisions potentially impacting symbols of the
town's history and identity.

Anaconda Co. Smelter, Montana

in some communities, cleanup of mine waste is
perceived as a threat to the historical preservation
of the town. At the Central City, Clear Creek
Superfund site in Colorado, the community voiced
concern that EPA and site cleanup would have a
negative impact on the historic character of the
town. The community felt that the mine wastes
contributed to the rich mining heritage. To
accommodate the request of the community and
ensure that human health remained protected, EPA
left the waste in place and used institutional
controls to shield the public from any negative
impacts from the remaining tailings piles. When
waste is left in place, EPA must work closely with
local officials to maintain the institutional controls
and ensure that the remedy is not compromised.

FINAL

4

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Furthermore, mine waste and mining artifacts have
also been successfully integrated into
redevelopment projects at many mining sites
around the country. For example, a bike trail
weaves through historic mining structures at the
California Gulch site. As part of the remedy, EPA
and the local community were able to turn an
abandoned mine district into a popular tourist
attraction. EPA and the community undertook a
similar effort to preserve the mining heritage at
Elizabeth Mine in Strafford, Vermont. By listening to
community concerns during public meetings and
general discussions, EPA understood the
importance of preserving the historical features of
this mine area. EPA chose an alternative remedy
that included capping around one of the town's
historical resources—the stone foundation of an old
mine—in order to protect an important historical
community resource. In a related example, the Old
Works Golf Course in Anaconda, Montana
demonstrates a successful redevelopment project
that integrates historic mining artifacts. With
bunkers made of slag and fairways that weave
around old smelting ladles, flues, and smelting
ovens, Anaconda demonstrates an innovative
approach to historic preservation.

3.2 Successful Solutions Used at AML
Sites

Every AML site presents a unique set of challenges
to EPA staff working at the site. EPA cannot apply a
uniform set of activities across mining sites to
address site-specific community involvement
challenges. The unique circumstances of each site
means a solution for one site might be the source of
tension at another. Solutions such as reaching out
to stakeholders, diffusing conflict, encouraging
Community Advisory Groups (CAGs) and TAGs,
maintaining interest throughout the process, and
creating innovative partnerships were successful for
the sites interviewed for this report. However, many
times these successes were due to years of trial
and error with other ideas and solutions that
preceded them.

3.2.1 Reaching Out to Every Stakeholder
The effects of AML sites can be felt by a vast and
widely dispersed population. Reaching stakeholders
sometimes involves taking steps above and beyond
the CERCLA requirements. While there always will
be some stakeholders who make themselves
known upfront, and others that would rather not get
involved with the project at all, engaging all
stakeholders can lead to greater success at mining
sites. The following activities were used at mining
sites to successfully target various stakeholders.

Utilize Local Information Centers

As noted in several interviews, availability of EPA
staff to address mining community questions and
concerns is important for successful community
involvement. Local information centers are one way
to address this issue. In order to be more available
to the residents, RPMs and CICs at the Palmerton
Zinc Pile site worked with the PRP to staff a local
information center. The office was open several
days a week while residential yard sampling was
conducted at the site. Community members were
encouraged to stop by the office to ask questions,
pick up information, or share their concerns with
EPA and sampling contractors. Initially, the
community was hesitant to allow their yards to be
sampled. The EPA interviewees felt that opening
this local office influenced a number of people who
eventually had their properties sampled. In the end,
the local presence and consistent availability of
EPA staff seemed to lead to greater participation in
the sampling process. At the Herculaneum Lead
Smelter Site in Missouri, technical experts staffed
an onsite trailer that provided the community
members with the opportunity to discuss concerns
in-person with EPA personnel. Likewise, the local
information center in Libby, Montana was identified
by EPA staff as one of the most effective
community involvement tools at the site. These
examples demonstrate how face-time with
community members can lead to increased trust,
participation, and success.

Maintain Toll-Free Hotlines

As EPA staff at two sites in Region 7 discovered, a
toll-free hotline is also an effective way of listening
to stakeholder concerns and connecting with
communities. At the Cherokee County site in
Kansas, EPA has a 24-hour return call policy to
answer extensive questions that cannot be
addressed immediately. Both the hotline and the
return call policy have helped build trust between
EPA and the community members. Many residents
recognize and use the toll-free number as a reliable
resource for project-related information. Similarly,
EPA staff at the Madison County Mine site in
Missouri interact with residents not only through a
toll-free number, but through daily interaction
because an EPA employee lives within the site
boundaries and serves as an active member of the
community. These toll-free numbers and onsite
employees help to reach out to those stakeholders
who prefer to have their questions or concerns
addressed by someone directly on a one-on-one
basis, rather through questions in fact sheets or by
attending a public meeting.

FINAL

5

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Develop Relationships with Local Officials and
Politicians

Working closely with local officials and politicians is
beneficial at any Superfund site because these
individuals represent numerous constituents and
can pass information along through different
avenues. Building relationships with these civic
representatives can help broaden the distribution of
information, build community confidence in EPA
staff, and can lead to a greater understanding of
public sentiment. CERCLA regulations require that
the public be allowed to comment on Five-Year
Reviews. For the most recent Five-Year Review at
the Bunker Hill site, the CICs contacted all the
mayors in the area and asked if they had any
comments. While some mayors were uninterested,
others thanked EPA for calling, and provided
suggestions. Instead of assuming that the mayors
would read advertisements in local newspapers
about the available public comment period, the
CICs took the extra step of reaching out to the
mayors. By doing so, EPA staff accomplished two
things: they reassured the mayors that their input
was valued, and they ensured that their final report
had the approval of these representative community
leaders.

Broaden the Distribution of Materials

EPA staff expressed the importance of providing
information to stakeholders through written
materials. Developing a comprehensive mailing list,
with both email and home addresses, is an
important step in being able to send out these
materials. However, for those citizens not included
on site distribution lists, making documents
available in public places (in addition to the
CERCLA-required information repositories) can
also increase citizen awareness of site activities.
This approach was used by RPMs and CICs at the
Tar Creek site. EPA staff worked with local stores
and gas stations to have informational materials
available at the storefront. Likewise, copies of
project-related publications about the Bunker Hill
Mining and Metallurgical site in Idaho are placed in
local library branches. These additional methods of
distribution are especially important for community
members in rural areas who may not have Internet
access or who prefer hard copy materials.

Develop a Rapport with the Media

As noted in many interviews, utilization of local
media outlets, such as newspapers, radio stations,
and local TV news stations is an effective way to
reach a wide range of stakeholders. Having a good
rapport with local media associations can increase
opportunities to spread project-related news, as
these organizations have a larger distribution than

the typical AML site contact list. Announcing
upcoming community involvement events in the
newspaper, on the radio, or on television may
broaden awareness and lead to increased
participation rates. Media coverage during activities
also creates a way to reach community members
who cannot attend the events in person. In Libby,
Montana, EPA placed weekly "Frequently Asked
Questions" ads in three local newspapers. This
gave EPA a platform to share information on a
variety of topics, such as sampling, cleanup, public
health issues, and community advisory group
meetings, all the while, helping to keep the
community updated and informed. Conversely, EPA
staff from other sites noted that poor relations with
media groups led to strained community relations
and, in extreme cases, threatening remarks. They
indicated that had there been a more amiable
relationship between EPA and the press, a lot of
stress and tension could have been avoided. Not
only do these examples point to the beneficial use
of the media as another means of distributing
information, but they also highlight the negative
impacts that can result when a relationship with the
press is lacking.

Seek Alternatives to Public Meetings

RPMs and CICs interviewed for this report noted
that engaging community stakeholders may
sometimes mean seeking out other forums, besides
the traditional public meeting format, to share
information and listen to community concerns.
Parent Teacher Association (PTA) meetings proved
to be a useful forum for providing information,
answering questions, and having personal contact
with residents from the Questa, New Mexico
community regarding the Molycorp, Inc. site. In this
way, parents in the community who otherwise did
not have time to attend a public meeting about the
site were able to keep up-to-date on site progress.
At the Copper Basin site in Tennessee, EPA holds
tours of the site every year on Independence Day
so that community members can see the progress
that has been made and learn about activities that
are underway. This annual event has been a great
way to highlight successes in a fun and consistent
way. The central library in Silverton, Colorado was
turned into a classroom once a month for the
Animas River Corridor site Library Series. These
educational seminars provided training on
Superfund-related issues to enable citizens to gain
a better understanding of how decisions were
made. All of these events demonstrate successful
ways that EPA has gone above and beyond
CERCLA meeting requirements to engage a
broader range of stakeholders in interesting and
appealing ways.

FINAL

6

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Showcase Projects through Public Exhibits

Educational displays in public spaces can be a
great way to reach the local population of an AML
site, as well as other visitors passing through the
area. EPA and PRP staff from the Central City,
Clear Creek Superfund site set up an exhibit in the
Idaho Springs Visitor's Center. The exhibit,
showcasing site-specific activities and the
Superfund program, was well received by the
community. It successfully increased awareness of
the site in a unique way and allowed EPA and the
PRP to market their collaborative efforts. Exhibits
can also help dispel some of the fears linked to
these Superfund projects by demystifying the
program and highlighting site cleanup
accomplishments.

Utilize Resources outside the Superfund Program

As noted in several interviews, using resources
available outside of the Superfund program can be
an effective way to engage stakeholders and
address community concerns. Within all of EPA,
numerous outreach and educational resources are
available. By using materials produced by other
EPA programs and offices, EPA Superfund staff
can address community concerns about specific
issues, such as the health effects of certain
contaminants or broader environmental topics,
without having to fund the development of these
resources at the expense of the community or the
Superfund Program. At the Palmerton Zinc Pile site
in Pennsylvania, the community was concerned
about the effects of the lead dispersed throughout
the community from the nearby smelting operations,
as well as the effects of lead-based paint in their
homes. The RPM and CIC distributed existing lead
publications available through the Office of
Prevention, Pesticides, and Toxic Substances to
community members.

Recognize the Role of Demographics

Recognizing site-specific demographics is an
important aspect of engaging community
stakeholders. If necessary, documents and other
materials should be translated into multiple
languages. For example, at the Molycorp, Inc. site
in New Mexico, project-related publications were
produced in both Spanish and English. Community
members deserve to be kept informed on site
progress, no matter what language they speak.

3.2.2 Managing Conflict

In many interviews, individuals stated that one of
the most effective ways to keep communities
engaged and involved was to create a neutral,
productive, and tension-free working environment.
Throughout the Superfund process, some conflicts

and difficulties may arise, but a few techniques
were identified that helped set the stage for
dynamic, constructive conversations and
interactions at selected AML sites.

Listen First

The goal of community involvement at any
Superfund site is to not only inform the public about
site activities, but also to engage them in the
process and incorporate their suggestions and
concerns into the cleanup plan to the greatest
extent possible. The Superfund process
incorporates public comment periods and public
meetings so that every stakeholder that wishes to
participate can be heard. For AML communities,
there is no easy way to learn that the daily
operations of their local mining industry have
resulted in contamination of their back yards and
community. To address the emotions and concerns
that come with this and any Superfund-related
information, numerous EPA interviewees indicated
it is most important to listen before reacting. Difficult
conversations are bound to arise throughout the
cleanup process and one of the best ways to
handle these discussions is to allow individuals to
share their frustrations and understand where they
are coming from, without reacting on a personal
level. Once individuals feel that they are being
understood and listened to, they are more likely to
be attentive to other information that needs to be
shared or other plans that need to be fleshed out.
As was discussed in previous sections of this
report, being present in the community can go a
long way toward developing a rapport with and
earning the trust of the local citizens. Several site
RPMs and CICs noted that getting to know
community members on an individual basis can
lead to greater productivity when a larger group of
citizens get together.

Set Site-Specific Goals to Focus Attention

Conflicts may often arise at AML sites between
EPA and stakeholders when project-specific goals
and outcomes are not clear. As an example, during
one period in the history of the California Gulch site,
tensions were high between EPA and the
community. To alleviate conflict, the community
worked out specific goals to document cleanup
progress at the site. By deciding that water quality
and the return of wildlife to rivers and streams were
top priorities, conversations between EPA and
stakeholders focused on reaching these important
milestones. An activity like this brainstorming
session can help set a common goal and lead to a
collaborative spirit between EPA and community
members. Additionally, it informs EPA staff about
the community's cleanup goals so that they can
take the necessary steps to reach those goals.

FINAL

7

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Utilize Facilitation and Mediation Resources

Many individuals stated that neutral third parties
can provide valuable community involvement
assistance to EPA staff. This assistance can take
many forms, including conducting situation
assessments, designing community involvement
processes, planning and facilitating dialogues or
meetings, or mediating disputes. Use of a neutral
third party typically frees EPA staff from the burden
of managing the community involvement process or
event so they can focus on the substantive issues.
EPA has a number of resources available to
provide support for community involvement
activities, such as Just In Time dispute prevention
and resolution services. The Community
Involvement and Outreach Branch has funding to
provide neutral third party assistance for projects of
short-term duration. At both the Elizabeth Mine in
Vermont and Herculaneum in Missouri, the Just In
Time resource was used to provide community
involvement assistance. A third party facilitator
worked with the Elizabeth Mine Community
Advisory Group (EMCAG) to create subcommittees
to focus on technical, historical, and human health
issues and facilitate EMCAG and subcommittee
meetings. Similarly, a neutral third party conducted
a conflict assessment in the Herculaneum
community and was instrumental in rebuilding trust
in the community and convening a Citizens
Advisory Committee to address revitalization
issues.

Collaborate with Partnering Agencies and Clarify
Agency Roles

AML sites can cover vast expanses of land and
typically have a combination of landowners—both
public and private. When multiple agencies are
involved with various portions of the site cleanup,
communities can end up with a muddled
understanding of all the different regulations and
processes operating at the site, which can lead to
frustration or conflict.

At the Copper Basin site in Tennessee, multiple
activities were being conducted in the area by
federal and state programs. With multiple projects
occurring simultaneously in the community, citizens
were confused about what questions each different
agency could answer. EPA Superfund staff
collaborated with EPA Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act (RCRA), Air, and Water offices, the
Forest Service, and the state Superfund program to
set up a joint meeting with representatives from all
the groups. This crossover meeting was beneficial
in that the public received answers to all of its
questions in one single setting, and the agencies
gained a better understanding of each program's
role in the area.

Similarly, many agencies are involved with the
cleanup at the Kennecott Mining site in Salt Lake
City, Utah. In an effort to organize cleanup work
performed by the various agencies at the site, the
RPM at Kennecott formed two Technical Review
Committees. The committees consisted of
representatives from two Utah state agencies, two
non-EPA federal agencies, EPA, the Kennecott
Utah Copper Corporation, citizen groups, local
officials, and academics. Together, the committees
served as advisors to EPA and helped work through
complex issues. It was a success from everyone's
perspective: the represented groups were able to
provide their input and EPA received the assistance
it required to address complicated topics.

The Animas River Stakeholders Group in Colorado
coordinated the support of a wide-range of federal,
state, and local agencies, as well as private and
university partners. By working in a coordinated
manner, the group leveraged significant resources;
a result not as likely if each partner had worked on
the project separately.

These three site examples show that clarifying roles
and responsibilities of all the different stakeholders
at a site is essential and beneficial for good
community involvement. Developing and
maintaining partnerships with federal, state, and
local programs and agencies is as important as
forming partnerships with the community.

3.2.3 Encouraging CAGs and TAGs
CAGs and TAGs were both mentioned by EPA staff
as being potentially useful ways to involve
communities in Superfund site activities. A CAG is
made up of representatives of diverse community
interests. Its purpose is to provide a public forum for
community members to present and discuss their
needs and concerns related to the Superfund
decision-making process. A TAG is available to any

Animas River Corridor, Colorado

FINAL

8

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

qualified community group that seeks technical
assistance to interpret and help the community
understand technical information about its site. As
with any stakeholder group, EPA interviewees
stated that the key to communicating with CAGs
and TAG groups is to operate under the principle of
transparency.

For communities like the one around the Standard
Mine site in Crested Butte, Colorado, a CAG is a
useful tool. On average, CAG meetings draw
approximately 20 community members who actively
participate in the process. This community is
interested in being involved in as much of the EPA
process as possible. Meetings are held monthly, if
not more often, and the CAG has a strong
relationship with associated state programs and
EPA staff. This community also applied for a TAG.

The CAG at the Elizabeth Mine comprises 10
community groups and meets regularly with EPA
and state officials. The EMCAG works in
conjunction with the TAG advisors to ensure
effective communication flow. The EMCAG has
been effective at communicating with EPA and
ensuring that information is exchanged clearly and
effectively between the two groups. The TAG has
provided invaluable information in reviewing
technical documents for the group and helping the
stakeholders make decisions and communicate
with EPA.

3.2.4 Maintaining Interest in the Process
Developing a cleanup plan for a mining site can
take many years. Once the plan has been put into
place, it can take several more years for the remedy
to run its full course. Many CICs and RPMs noted in
the interviews that meeting fatigue and community
burnout can lead to decreased community
participation. A few ideas were identified to help
maintain a community's attention throughout the
Superfund process.

Work Toward a Goal

While community involvement often wanes after
many years of site activity, engaging citizens in the
process of setting site goals can help to maintain
strong community involvement. EPA's initial
involvement with the Milltown site in Montana took
place in the early 1980s. Over 20 years later,
members of the community are still dynamically
involved with site activities. EPA worked with the
Missoula County Commissioners and the
Department of the Interior's Rivers and Trails
Conservation Assistance Program to launch a
public process to develop a redevelopment plan.
Part of this process included creating the Milltown
Superfund Site Citizen Redevelopment Working

Group, which brought together diverse interests and
expertise from local and neighboring communities.
Through this collaborative process, the group has
helped create a redevelopment plan for the Milltown
area that is reflective of local preference and
compatible with work occurring at the site. Working
groups like this one, where there is discussion
about plans and definitive goals for the future, can
help to keep community members motivated and
interested.

Maintain a Consistent Staff, if Possible

Cleanup of mining sites may take decades to
complete. Through the duration of the cleanup
process, communities rely on consistent EPA staff
for answers. Building relationships with
stakeholders takes time and effort. Sustaining these
partnerships is more easily accomplished with
consistent faces and a shared history. While
staffing changes are common and necessary at
times, when interviewed, numerous individuals
indicated that whenever possible, consistency in
site personnel is beneficial at AML sites.

Publicize Accomplishments

As site cleanup progresses, it is important for EPA
to market its own successes. For example, EPA
should publicize achievements, such as a decrease
in blood lead levels in children, increases in fish
populations in local rivers and streams, and
completion of residential yard sampling. Some
successes during the cleanup process at mine sites
will be apparent. However, it is important to keep in
mind that minor or less visible ones are equally
worthy of being shared with the community. While it
is routine practice for EPA staff to interview
community members as part of its community
involvement activities, EPA staff at the Bunker Hill
Mining and Metallurgical site took the unique
approach of conducting interviews with community
members to revise its community involvement plan
for the site. That is, they sought community input
into the community involvement planning process.
As a mature site, CICs were interested in learning
how to maintain community interest and
involvement at the site. Many residents stated that
EPA should market its successes and talk about
how cleanup benefits the community.

FINAL

9

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Bunker Hill Mining & Metallurgical Complex, Idaho

Similarly, EPA staff from Central City, Clear Creek
indicated that the community in Idaho Springs
responded positively to publicized accomplishments
at the site. EPA noted that it took the community a
long time to trust EPA and its intentions. Once
removal actions and other visible cleanup work
started at the site, there was a noticeable increase
in the level of public participation and trust of EPA
staff. Community members want to see that EPA is
not only present at the site, but actively working to
protect human health and the environment.

Paradoxically, other RPMs and CICs recognized
that a decrease in interest levels at their sites was
partially due to a sense of accomplishment and
completeness that often accompanies cleanup
progress. Working on a site cleanup plan takes a
significant amount of cooperation, communication,
and discussion. Once the remedy has been
selected and the controversial decisions have been
made, community members may feel that they can
take a break from site activities. When complacency
sets in, it is important for EPA to continue to engage
community members in site decisions and share
project-related information. This will also help
address community turnover and will ensure that
new residents to the area are informed of site
progress and do not disrupt the relationship
established between EPA and the community.

3.2.5 Developing Innovative Partnerships

Many RPMs and CICs noted that making use of
local resources and established organizations led to
greater success at their AML sites. In addition to
helping to complete necessary cleanup work,
partnerships with colleges and universities also
assisted in the education of future scientists and
environmentalists.

A partnership between EPA staff at the California
Gulch site and the Colorado Mountain College
enables classes and professors at the college to
conduct field work at the site, which includes

sampling, revegetation, trail development, and
restoration projects. Similarly, the Central City,

Clear Creek site joined forces with nearby Colorado
School of Mines. The university is researching
water quality at the site and helping to develop pilot
projects to study heavy metal water contamination.
In doing so, it is able to provide vital monitoring
statistics to EPA staff, while simultaneously gaining
valuable experience collecting data and writing
reports. Similarly, at some AML sites, specifically in
Region 8, TAG advisors have also been associated
with universities. Through innovative partnerships
with local colleges and universities, EPA is
developing vital community relationships and
encouraging public participation.

4. Conclusion: Using Lessons
Learned from the Selected AML
Sites	

Based on the general themes and site-specific
challenges described, it is evident that no single
community involvement approach wiii work across
all AML sites, instead, each community involvement
strategy will differ based on the unique set of
circumstances at the site, involving such factors as
an active mine or smelter, an active PRP, a large
geographic scale, or a community concerned with
historic preservation of the area's mining history.
Furthermore, community involvement is a process,
not just a fact sheet, public meeting, or workgroup;
it is the combination and interaction of all of these
parts.

This report describes general themes, lessons
learned, and best practices at a range of AML sites.
RPMs and CICs can combine and tailor these
examples and solutions to match the needs of their
project communities. By sharing lessons learned
and best practices across AML site projects, EPA's
community involvement activities will continue to
improve, thereby furthering the AML Team's
priorities of evaluation, cleanup, and redevelopment
of mining sites.

FINAL

10

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Appendix A: Inventory of Selected AML Sites with Community Involvement Activities

The following tables include a list of the sites interviewed for this report and links to background information on the project and site.

REGION I

Elizabeth Mine

Location

Strafford, Vermont

Site Type

Former Copper Mine

NPL Status - Listing Date

Final -6/14/2001

http
httD

Additional Information

//www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar1612.htm

//vosemite.eDa.aov/r1/nDl Dad.nsf/f52fa5c31fa8f5c885256adc0050b631/2281487131782426852569E400719BBE?ODenDocument

http

//www.eDa.aov/ne/suDerfund/sites/elizmine/251654.Ddf





Ely Copper Mine

Location

Vershire, Vermont

Site Type

Former Copper Mine

NPL Status - Listing Date

Final-9/13/2001

Additional Information

httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar1641.htm

httD://vosemite.eDa.aov/r1/nDl Dad.nsf/f52fa5c31fa8f5c885256adc0050b631/1BB22E27742B914785256ACA00529857?C>DenDocument



REGION III

Palmerton Zinc Pile

Location

Palmerton, Pennsylvania

Site Type

Former Zinc Smelter

NPL Status - Listing Date

Final-9/8/1983

Additional Information

httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar302.htm
httD://www.eDa.aov/rea3hwmd/suDer/sites/PAD002395887/index.htm

REGION IV

Copper Basin Mining District

Location



Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Ducktown, Tennessee



Historic Copper Mines

Non-NPL(MOU Agreements, 1991)

httD://www.eDa.aov/reaion4/waste/coDDer/coDdoctn.htm

Additional Information



FINAL

11

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

REGION VI

Molycorp, Inc.

Location



Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Questa, New Mexico



Active Molybdenum Mine

Proposed -5/11/2000





Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar1599.htm
www.eDa.aov/earth1r6/6sf/Ddffiles/0600806.Ddf





Tar Creek

Location



Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Ottawa County, Oklahoma



Former Zinc and Lead Mines

Final-9/8/1983





Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar771.htm
www.eDa.aov/earth1r6/6sf/Ddffiles/0601269.Ddf





REGION VII

Cherokee County

Location

Cherokee County, Kansas

Site Type

Former Lead and Zinc Mines

NPL Status - Listing Date

Final-9/8/1983

Additional Information

httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar823.htm
httD://www.eDa.aov/reaion7/cleanuD/nDl files/ksd980741862.Ddf

Herculaneum Lead Smelter

Location

Herculaneum, Missouri

Site Type

Active Lead Smelter

NPL Status - Listing Date

N/A - active smelter

Additional Information

httD://www.eDa.aov/reaion7/cleanuD/suDerfund/suDerfund herculaneum lead smelter mo.htm



www.eDa.aov/reaion7/news events/factsheets/fs herculaneum lead smelter site herculaneum mo.Ddf



Madison County Mines

Location

Madison County, Missouri

Site Type

Former Lead, CoDDer, Cobalt, Nickel, Iron, Zinc, Silver and Pyrite Mines

NPL Status - Listing Date

Final - 9/29/2003

Additional Information

httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar1679.htm

www.eDa.aov/reaion7/news events/factsheets/fs madison countv mines harmonvlake ou1 fredericktown mo.Ddf





FINAL

12

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

REGION VIII

Anaconda Co. Smelter

Location

Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Anaconda, Montana

Historic Copper Smelter

Final - 12/30/1982



Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar868.htm
httD://www.eDa.aov/reaion8/suDerfund/mt/anaconda/



Animas River Corridor Watershed Project

Location

Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

San Juan County, Colorado

Former Mining Area

Non-NPL (Mine Scarred Lands
Initiative)



Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/Droarams/aml/revital/msl/Ddfs/animwkshD.Ddf



California Gulch

Location

Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Leadville, Colorado

Former Gold, Silver, Lead and Zinc Mines; Mineral Processing; Smelter

Final-9/8/1983



Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar853.htm
httD://www.eDa.aov/reaion8/suDerfund/co/calqulch/



Central City/Clear Creek

Location

Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Idaho Springs, Colorado

Former Gold Mines

Final-9/8/1983



Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar854.htm
httD://www.eDa.aov/reaion8/suDerfund/co/ccclearcreek/



Kennecott South

Location

Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Copperton, Utah

Active Open Pit Mining

Proposed -1/18/1994



Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar1428.htm
httD://www.eDa.aov/reaion8/suDerfund/ut/kennecottsouth/



Libby Asbestos Site

Location

Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Libby, Montana

Former Vermiculite Mine

Final - 10/24/2002



Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar1661.htm
httD://www.eDa.aov/reaion8/suDerfund/libbv/



FINAL

13

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

REGION VIII (con't)

Milltown Reservoir Sediments

Location

Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Butte, Montana

Historic Mining and Smelter Site

Final - 12/30/1982



Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar870.htm
httD://www.eDa.aov/reaion08/suDerfund/sites/mt/milltowncfr/home.html



Silver Bow Creek/Butte Area

Location

Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Butte, Montana

Historic Mining and Smelter Site

Final - 12/30/1982



Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar871.htm
httD://www.eDa.aov/reaion08/sf/sites/mt/butte/index.html



Standard Mine

Location

Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Gunnison, Colorado

Former Zinc, Lead, Silver, Gold and Copper Mine

Final-9/14/2005



Additional Information



htt d 7/vvww. e Da. a ov/rea io n 8/sf/co/sta n d a rd/



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/npl/nar1740.htm





REGION X

Bunker Hill Mining and Metallurgical Complex

Location

Site Type

NPL Status - Listing Date

Smelterville, Idaho

Active and Former Lead, Zinc, and Silver Mines; Smelter

Final-9/ 8/1983



Additional Information



httD://www.eDa.aov/suDerfund/sites/nDl/nar981.htm
httD://vosemite.eDa.aov/r10/cleanuD.nsf/sites/cda



FINAL

14

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Appendix B: Community Involvement Resources

The following resources provide examples of community involvement tools and resources. These are only a
sample of the tools and resources available on the topic. Additional resources can be located from these
sources and a general Web search.

Federal Government Agencies and Committees

Community Involvement Plan: Siskon Mine CERCLA Removal Action and Reclamation Project- 2002-
2003, Six Rivers National Forest, Siskiyou County, California
USDA Forest Service

www.fs.fed.us/r5/klamath/publications/pdfs/siskonmine/involveplan.pdf

This resource is an example of a Community Involvement Plan developed for a cleanup site. The plan was
developed during CERCLA Removal Action planning and identifies community concerns about the mine. The
plan outlines opportunities for the public to be informed of and participate in the cleanup activities being planned
at the site. Section 3 describes the community profile and section 4 describes possible community involvement
activities.

Community Toolbox

NPS, Northeast Region - Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) Program
http://www.nps.qov/phso/rtcatoolbox/

This resource outlines successful public participation methods that RTCA has learned during its outreach
projects. Tools include information on decision making; events; graphic displays; organization; outreach;
facilitation; and others.

Cranberry Creek Gateway Park Project Community Engagement Plan

U.S. EPA - Brownfields Federal Partnership Mine-Scarred Lands Initiative
www. e pa. a ov/s u pe rfu nd/proa ra ms/a m l/re vita l/ms l/pdfs/cra n ce p. pdf

This is an example of a Community Engagement Plan developed for a non-Superfund site and community. This
plan outlines steps for identifying key community members, conducting outreach and communications, obtaining
and using community input, and analyzing and evaluating the process. This resource provides information on
specific communication vehicles and outreach tools.

Getting In Step: Engaging and Involving Stakeholders in Your Watershed
U.S. EPA

http://www.epa.gov/owow/watershed/outreach/documents/stakeholderguide.pdf

This report provides the tools needed to effectively identify, engage, and involve stakeholders throughout a
watershed project. It includes case studies that demonstrate successes and challenges, as well as tools that
communities could implement. The document describes the stakeholder process and communication and
outreach tools for effective community involvement.

Mine Site Cleanup for Brownfields Redevelopment: A Three-Part Primer

U.S. EPA-The Brownfields and Land Revitalization Technology Support Center
www.brownfieldstsc.org/pdfs/mining.pdf

This report provides information on the economic, social, and environmental issues that communities face when
redeveloping or cleaning up mine sites. Part Three of this report is on hardrock mines. The report discusses
public safety and interests in redevelopment.

Redevelopment Planning

U.S. EPA, Superfund Program
http://www.epa.gov/superfund/tools/pdfs/47redev.pdf

This document provides an overview of EPA's role in identifying and integrating long-term community needs into
the reuse plans for a site. By considering a community's vision of future land uses for Superfund sites, EPA
often can tailor cleanup options to accommodate community goals. The document provides general tips, related
tools/resources from the Community Involvement Toolkit, and two redevelopment planning success stories.

FINAL

15

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Reference Notebook

U.S. EPA Abandoned Mine Lands Team
http://epa.gov/aml/tech/refntbk.htm

This notebook describes the extent, range, and contamination problems of abandoned mine lands, and how the
AML Team will address these problems. The notebook provides a good overview of AML issues across the U.S.
It does not directly discuss community involvement issues, but it does list sites where the community has been
involved in the remediation or cleanup process. There is a section on public safety and how AML sites affect the
public.

SMARTe - The Revitalization Decision Support Tool
U.S. EPA

http://www.smarte.org/smarte/home/index.xml

This resource is a Web-based decision support system for developing and evaluating future reuse scenarios for
potentially contaminated land. SMARTe contains guidance and analysis tools for all aspects of the revitalization
process, including planning, environmental, economic, and social concerns. There is a section devoted to
community involvement and includes a public participation tool, which helps the user find approaches to public
involvement that meet selected criteria.

Superfund Community Involvement Toolkit

U.S. EPA

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/tools/index.htm

This resource is a practical tool for conducting successful community involvement activities. While it is
specifically designed for the Superfund process, it provides tools relevant to all communities with a clean up site.
Some tools listed include: community involvement plans, community visioning, community groups, and
redevelopment planning. There are 47 separate resources listed in this toolkit.

Tools for Public Involvement

U.S. EPA

http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/involvework.htm

This Web site provides a list of manuals and tools for planning and conducting effective public involvement
activities. This list provides several resources not listed in this report that would provide useful information for
community involvement.

Private Institutions and Organizations

Community Involvement in Brownfield Redevelopment

Northeast-Midwest Institute
www.nemw.org/Communitvlnvolve.pdf

This report describes components of effective citizen participation and describes its benefits for both
communities and developers. This report specifically identifies questions for working with the community, factors
in shaping community strategies, communication mechanisms, questions frequently asked by community
members, and community involvement through each phase of redevelopment.

The Grassroot's Guide to Abandoned Mine Cleanup

Trout Unlimited

http://www.tu. org/site/apps/lk/content2.aspx?c=7dJEKTNuFmG&b=478363

By telling the story of residents in a mining community, this online resource guides users through a six-step
process aimed at identifying mine-related problems, organizing community members, and working to improve
water quality and wildlife habitat. This guide serves as a blueprint for others to follow.

Innovative Administrative, Technical, and Public Involvement Approaches to Environmental Restoration
at an Inactive Lead-Zinc Mining and Milling Complex near Pecos, New Mexico

Southwest Research and Information Center, Mining Program
http://sric.org/mining/docs/Pecos.html

This paper summarizes innovative regulatory, technical, and public involvement activities associated with the
investigation and remediation of mining and milling waste sites near Pecos, New Mexico. The administrative
framework and reclamation technology at the mill and tailings portion of the site is reviewed. The administrative

FINAL

16

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

process includes strong stakeholder involvement initiatives, such as technical assistance and community
relations contractors to enhance and focus affected community participation.

University and Academic Organizations

Cleaning Up Abandoned Hardrock Mines in the West: Prospecting for a Better Future

University of Colorado at Boulder, Center of the American West - Patricia Nelson Limerick, Joseph N. Ryan,

Timothy R. Brown, T. Allan Comp

http://www.centerwest.org/publications/pdf/mines.pdf

This report provides practical information and guidance on abandoned mine land concerns. In addition, it
explores the need to form broad, cooperative coalitions of interested parties (broad community involvement).
The document also discusses the Pennsylvania Good Samaritan legislation as it relates to mine cleanup and
the issues that affect community involvement and cleanup of abandoned mine sites in Western communities.

International Agencies and Organizations

international Association for Public Participation Toolbox

International Association for Public Participation (IAP2)
http://www.iap2.ora/associations/4748/files/toolbox.pdf

This guide lists the advantages and disadvantages of using various techniques to share information with the
public. It lists common techniques including, but not limited to: fact sheets, newsletters, technical reports, Web
sites, and interviews.

International Brownfields Redevelopment: Chapter VI Community Involvement and Institutional Capacity

International Economic Development Council
http://www.iedconline.org/Downloads/BRM Chapter 6.pdf

This report describes and compares approaches to redeveloping contaminated land in Canada, the United
Kingdom, the Netherlands and Germany. Chapter VI reviews community involvement, institutional capacity, and
potential local strategies for brownfields redevelopment. This chapter includes information on approaches to
community involvement, conflict resolution, and how to assess and bring together community strengths and
skills for redevelopment.

Lessons Learned on Community Involvement in the Remediation of Orphaned and Abandoned Mines:
Case Studies and Analysis

National Orphaned/Abandoned Mines Initiative (NOAMI) (Canada)
www.abandoned-mines.org/ci e.htm

This report provides three Canadian mine site community involvement case studies, including lessons learned.
The document discusses the benefits and barriers to community involvement at contaminated sites in the United
States and Canada.

FINAL

17

-------
Identification and Evaluation of Community Involvement Activities in Abandoned Mine Land Communities

Appendix C: Interview Materials

The following questions were asked of EPA representatives to help evaluate themes and common challenges at
several AML sites. Some of the questions may have been used for interviewing non-EPA stakeholders, but were
not circulated among these individuals as a survey nor were all questions asked of each stakeholder. This
process included interviewing approximately 36 EPA representatives and three public stakeholders.

Sample Interview' Questions for AML Site Revresentatives

~	When did EPA involvement in the project begin? Community involvement activities?

~	What was EPA's role in the community?

~	What are the issues/concerns surrounding the site?

~	Do you only work on AML sites or do you have experience at other Superfund sites?

~	Do you think there is an inherent difference in AML communities and other Superfund sites? What makes working
in a mining community different, if at all?

~	Are there stakeholders involved in the project unique to the mining communities?

~	Are there stakeholders not involved in the process that would be helpful to have in the process?

~	What activities did EPA conduct or participate in?

¦ What other community involvement activities have been conducted? Which were successful? Which were not?

~	What was done to create opportunities for the community to provide information to EPA?

~	What were the issues that the community provided input on and what methods were used? How effective were
they?

~	Do you feel that community involvement influenced EPA decisions? If yes, how so? If no, why not?

~	What were specific community involvement challenges at this site?

~	How was EPA received in the community initially? How is EPA received now?

~	Are there any active partners in the project? Any community organizations develop around the site?

~	Do you think there is a project champion?

~	Is there any grant money or organization lending support to the project?

~	Did any political representatives become involved in the site?

~	What was your overall impression with the community involvement process? Do you think this is a successful
model for community involvement? If so, what was the key to success?

~	Are there plans for redevelopment or revitalization of the area?

~	Are there particular EPA resources/materials that were helpful to you for community involvement? (e.g., Cleanup
Manual)

FINAL

18

-------