« UNITED SRTES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
I®. v
soud was re auo
twtHGEMCv maipotm
NOW the
OFF ICE Of (..AMD AND
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
Ml M< H\ \MH M
SUBJECT: Planning lor Response Actions at Abandoned Mine* v. ith I mleriiiotmd
Workings; Best Practices for Preventing Sudden. I'ncomroil a: < uui Mir.i.
Waste Releases Reference Document
FROM: U- Janes I-. Woollord. DirccioPt#" ^
Office of'Superfund Rentediatfen and Technoiogv Innovation
Reggie Cheatham. Director '
< Mice of I-mergene) Management
TO; l-.l'A SuperJiuui National I'roiiram Mimneers. Regions l-X
PI'RI'OSK
I :i . rr:(11;!>;tfu11"I'unntn:' mi Re- pthi-... \eUi<;: , :i \h mooned Miae^ «>. el1
i nderen nnul \\ orkinuv Be >4 i'Meitcc- loi l'ic\enlnv,« SuJilen. I ne«unrolled 1 luid Mmine
W n>ic Re!c»oe'-,"~ ;t tcvhtnuii Metetuv Joeunen! idenufvin;.' Iv*-* pnatee-. to :ni:»:n.! 111 >j J 111 I: iv' ;! -k .1 a t es U ! i »• I I >, i !i\ i: > ttlOK'H"..!!
i'uueciion \gene> I f I'\ i site m\es!i;j;iuon,» :ind response aeMi.n-,. I Iv t H'lVe o! Saperiund
Uemedi,i":>wi .sr.d 1 eel'm«t>"ev |me il.ew iw< piae'iee*. as .inpn»p«uv. when eaif \ mv: i .n; I I' Vtcad
acmitie-* under the • 'i •ntpiehensnc Ht\ rruinnviua! Re>p>'*"->e. • oinjvii-jiit>;e and ! \.o
ft I K< I \ s e.: ii.irdfoe!, nnriii'.1 and toneon rone^-ar;" -et„- ¦. n: i Diider l'o imv nine '.'.oiki'ii -¦
pithing actual ot potential lliud. selea.se iu/ai'J.s.
H \( K(, 1<< >1 Mi
The August 2015 Gold King Mine (CiKM) release drew widespread intention to die potential lor
sudden, uncontrolled fluid mine waste releases. Both I-PA and the I ,S. Department of the
lllllllllllllllllllll
11-176382
-------
Interior's (IM )11 Bureau of Reclamation conducted posM ik\! incident rc\ lew - recommending
the application ofbesi practices to help pre\en! future re leu sex 1 o dial end. I-1\\ dc\ eloped the
attached reference document to support siic-spccilie decision-making at sites with underground
workings where mine influenced water I MIWl ma\ he pooled. I PA intends for the document to
inform practitioners and their managers about best practices to help reduce die risk and
uncertainty of MIW -related blow outs. It is important to note that site-specific conditions ma\
warrant the application of technologies ami approaches urn described in this report.
I he report's best practices emanate from: i I i existing technical resources and publications, i 2 i
lessons learned from rcle\ant incidents, and 13) technical contributions from professionals with
mine waste characterization and mitigation expertise. Information from the^e souiees draw % upon
1 ederal and state go\ernmenia! agencies. Internationa! organizations and academic experts in
pooled MIW blowout assessment and pre\cntion.
I he document underwent a number of rev iens including those conducted b\: !)t " Bureau of
I and Management and < >fliee of Surface Mining Reclamation and hnfotxement. the I ,S,
Department of Agriculture's forest Service, the 1 kS. Department of 1 Jelense's \ .S. Arm) ( orps
of f ngineers. the Association ol State and I cnitorial Solid Waste Management < M'ficials. and
I P \ mining expert v Vlditionalh. independent peer ie\iew w a- conducted b\ expert- tiom the
I >cpariment ol' Interior's C.S. (leological Sur\e>. die West \ irgmia Department of
I m iromitental Protection, the I'ennsx Ivania Department of fin irontnental Protection, the
( i dorado School of Mines, the 1 'ni\crMi\ of \e\ ada Reno (on behal I of an en\ ironmental
interest group). \< > V \( HJl D Resources ion behalf of the American 1 xploration and Mining
Association) and a tribal consultant.
IMPid Mi 'MAI 1Q\
Regions engaging in site activ ities related to remo\al or remedial characterization. in\estimation,
or cleanup with underground mine workings should re\ iew ami implement the best practices and
approaches outlined in the attached document, as applicable. \\ e ako want to emphasize the
importance of documenting how these best practices were considered in the site consultation
packages submitted for headquarters' tv\ icw as required in the I PA < Hiice of hand and
I mergence Management's \pril 4. 2
-------
< (>\{ It SION
11" you have any questions, please contact Shabkl Mahmud of my staff at (703) 603-8789 or by
email at niahimui.slndndy/.'cpa.uov.
Attachment
cc: Barry Breen. Acting Assistant Administrator, OLEM
Nigel Simon, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator. OLEM
Patrick Davis, Deputy Assistant Administrator. OLEM
Barnes Johnson. ORCR
Dana Stalcup, OSRTI
Charlotte Bert rand. FPRRO
Cvndv Mackey, OECA/OSRE
Kartn Leff, OECA/FFEO
Gilberto Irizarry. OEM
Ronnie Ctosslancl OSRTI
Schaizi Fit?,-James. OSRTI
Shahid Mahmud. OSRTI
3
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Land and
Emergency Management
OLEM 9200.3-118
July 2017
Superfund
Planning for Response Actions at
1 Abandoned Mines with Underground
Workings:
Best Practices for Preventing
Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid
Mining Waste Releases
www.epa.gov/abQutepa/about-office-land-and-emerqencv-manaqement
www.epa.gov/superfund/abandoned-mine-lands
-------
NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
This report provides topical information rather than guidance and does not impose legally binding
requirements, nor does it confer legal rights, impose legal obligations, implement any statutory or
regulatoiy provisions, or change or substitute for any statutory or regulatory provisions. Users are
referred to applicable regulations, policies, and guidance documents. Selected references and additional
resources are provided herein.
This report compiles and presents best practices and approaches for reducing the risk of sudden,
uncontrolled releases of fluid mine waste prior to conducting response actions at abandoned mine sites
with underground workings under the jurisdiction of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA], The best practices presented in this report were selected based
on research conducted by, and the practical experience of, Tetra Tech, Inc. and serves as a technical
resource to guide response actions at abandoned mine sites with underground workings. Mention of
specific products in this report does not constitute promotion of that product.
This best practices report was prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc. for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA] under EPA Superfund Technical Assistance and Response Team (START] contract EP-S5-13-01.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
EPA would like to acknowledge and thank the following organizations and individuals who contributed to the
development and review of this report:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
• Shahid Mahmud, National Mining Team Leader
• Kirby Biggs, Contracting Officer's Representative, National Optimization Coordinator
• Patrick Kelly, Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery
• Ed Hathaway, Remedial Project Manager, Region 1
• Bonnie Gross, Associate Director, Region 3
• Gary Baumgarten, Remedial Project Manager, Region 6
• Joy Jenkins, Remedial Project Manager, Region 8
• James Hanley, Remedial Project Manager, Region 8
• John Hillenbrand, Regional Mining Coordinator, Region 9
• Dan Shane, On-Scene Coordinator, Region 9
• Ken Marcy, Regional Mining Coordinator, Region 10
• Ed Moreen, Remedial Project Manager, Region 10
• Beth Sheldrake, Remedial Project Manager, Region 10
Tetra Tech, Inc.
• Kenyon A. Larsen, PMP, Project Manager and Lead Author
• Jody Edwards, P.G., Contributing Author and Senior Technical Reviewer
• Stephen Hoffman, Contributing Author and Senior Technical Reviewer
• William Balaz, P.E., P. Eng., Contributing Author and Senior Technical Reviewer
• Tom Gray, P.E., Contributing Author
• Eric Perry, Ph.D., Contributing Author
• Colin McCoy, P.E., Technical Reviewer
• Michelle Nolte, Technical Research and Reviewer Comment Support
• Carla Buriks, Quality Control Reviewer
• Kristen Jenkins, Production Specialist
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
-------
Technical Reviewers
• Jay Hawkins, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
• John Craynon, National Academy of Sciences, Virginia Tech
• Anne Marie Palmieri, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
• Paul Krabacher, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management
• Scott Ludwig, U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service
• John Stanton, Retired, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Nashville District
• John Hartley, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Omaha District
• Cory Kroger, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District
Independent Peer Reviewers
• Richard Beam, P.G., Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (Reviewed as an independent
consultant)
• Jim Kuipers, P.E., Mining Engineer, Kuipers & Associates, LLC
• Dr. Glenn C. Miller, Ph.D., Professor, University of Nevada Reno (Reviewed on behalf of Earthworks)
• Dr. Michael A. Mooney, Ph.D., Director of the Center for Underground Construction and Tunneling and
Professor, Colorado School of Mines
• Ronald C. Rimelman, Vice President, NOVAGOLD Resources, Inc. and Board of American Exploration &
Mining Association (AEMA) (reviewed on behalf of AEMA)
• Andrew Nicholas Schaer, Lead Geologist, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection
• Dr. Robert R. Seal II, Geologist, U.S. Geological Survey
Environmental Management Support, Inc.
Independent Peer Review Coordination Contractor
• Jen Rando, Peer Review Coordinator
• Diane Dopkin, Project Manager
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS iiv
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Report Purpose 2
1.2 Background 2
1.3 Primary Resources 3
1.4 Report Organization 3
2.0 BEST PRACTICES AND APPROACHES OVERVIEW 5
3.0 CONDUCT INITIAL SCREENING 6
3.1 Review Available Documents and Data 6
3.2 Conduct a Site Visit 7
3.3 Potential Outcomes 8
4.0 DEVELOP MIW CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL 8
4.1 Visualize and Assess Mine Workings 9
4.2 Evaluate Geotechnical, Hydrogeologic, Hydrologic and Hydraulic, and Geochemical Attributes
of the MIW Pooling 10
4.2.1 Develop an Initial Water Balance 13
4.2.2 Conduct Additional Site Visits 14
4.2.3 Conduct Minimally Invasive Measurements 14
4.2.4 Conduct Invasive Measurement Activities: Drilling 18
4.2.5 Conduct Failure Modes and Effects Analysis 21
4.2.6 Plan for Invasive Measurement Activities: Contingency, Notification, and
Emergency Action Planning 24
4.2.7 Use Monitoring Well Data to Determine Mine Pool Elevation 25
4.2.8 Hydraulic Head Prediction Modeling 26
4.2.9 Detailed Water Balance 27
4.3 Evaluate Data, Report Findings, and Determine Next Steps 27
5.0 MITIGATE POOLED MIW UNDER PRESSURE 29
5.1 Evaluate, Select and Implement Mitigation Options for Pressurized MIW Pools 29
6.0 QUALIFICATIONS OF THE TECHNICAL TEAM 31
7.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY 32
APPENDIX A. BEST PRACTICES CHECKLIST TOOL A-l
APPENDIX B. GENERAL INFORMATION ON GROUNDWATER MODELS B-l
APPENDIX C. ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL INFORMATION C-l
APPENDIX D. REFERENCE MATERIALS MATRIX D-l
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
-------
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
3DVA 3-Dimensional Data Visualization and
Analysis
AML Abandoned Mine Lands
ASTM American Society for Testing and
Materials
BOP Blowout Preventer
BOPE Blowout Prevention Equipment
BOR Bureau of Reclamation
CBI Confidential business information
CDMRS Colorado Division of Mining
Reclamation and Safety
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act
CSoM Colorado School of Mines
COC Contaminants of Concern
CSM Conceptual Site Model
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DO Dissolved Oxygen
DOE U.S. Department of Energy
DOI U.S. Department of the Interior
DOL U.S. Department of Labor
DOT U.S. Department of Transportation
DPT Direct Push Technologies
EC Engineering Control
EM Electromagnetics
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ERI Electrical Resistivity Imaging
ETA Event Tree Analysis
FEMA Federal Emergency Management
Agency
FHWA Federal Highways Administration
FMEA Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
FSP Field Sampling Plan
GKM Gold King Mine
GMS Groundwater Modeling System
gpd Gallons Per Day
GPR Ground Penetrating Radar
GPS Global Positioning System
HASP Health and Safety Plan
HDD Horizontal Directional Drilling
HEM Helicopter Electromagnetic
HP Heat Pulse
HSA Hollow Stem Auger
ICMM International Council on Mining and
Metals
IP Induced Polarization
LIDAR Light Imaging, Detection and Radar
LLD Linear Leak Detection
MALM Mise-a-la-Masse
MIW Mining Influenced Water
MSHA Mine Safety and Health Administration
NCP National Oil and Hazardous Substances
Pollution Contingency Plan
NMMR National Mine Map Repository
ORCR Office of Resource Conservation and
Recovery
ORP Oxidation/Reduction Potential
OSRTI Office of Superfund Remediation and
Technology Innovation
OSMRE Office of Surface Mining Reclamation
and Enforcement
PE Professional Engineer
PG Professional Geologist
QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan
RAB Rotary Air Blast
RC Reverse Circulation
SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan
SC Specific Conductance
SP Spontaneous Potential
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific
and Cultural Organization
UNEP United Nations Environment Program
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFS U.S. Forest Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey
VLF Very Low Frequency
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
iv
-------
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA], the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA] may perform remedial and removal (known together as
"response"] actions, including removal, pre-remedial and remedial activities at abandoned mine land
(AML] sites where the potential exists for sudden, uncontrolled releases (commonly known as "blowouts"]
of fluid mine wastes, such as impounded or "pooled" mining-influenced water (MIW] in underground mine
workings. This report compiles, analyzes, and summarizes common best practices and approaches used or
researched nationally and internationally by federal and state agencies, industry, and academic
institutions to assess, reduce the risk of, or mitigate blowouts at AML sites as a result of response actions
at mining sites with underground mine workings.
The critical activities for assessing, reducing the risk of, and mitigating such releases include:
• Conducting an initial site screening;
• Developing a conceptual site model (CSM] of mine workings and pooled MIW risks;
• Collecting data by non-invasive, minimally invasive, and invasive1 (drilling] methods;
• Performing a Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA] of proposed work activities;
• Developing or revising plans for contingency, notifications, and emergency action; and
• Mitigating identified pooled MIW risks.
The best practices laid out in this report do not constitute guidance, rather they are best professional
judgment on a range of approaches that can be applied on a site-specific basis to reduce the risks and
uncertainty of sudden, uncontrolled releases of MIW. However, risk and uncertainty of MIW releases
cannot be completely eliminated from many mine sites, particularly for those sites that have not been
maintained or inspected for decades or longer, and given the often complex conditions that exist in
underground mine workings with MIW pooling. Furthermore, the report does not provide best practices
for conducting MIW remediation activities. Such actions are highly diverse and site-specific, and they are
addressed in later project phases through existing EPA, state, and other agency guidance. Remediation
activities require detailed planning and execution, the best practices for which are beyond the scope and
intent of the report.
The term "fluid mine waste" is used in this report to describe one or a combination of MIW, sludge, and
other fluidized or liquefiable mine wastes in mine workings that may be suddenly released during MIW
pool blowouts.
The CERCLA response process is an established regulatory structure with major steps, and the best
practices described in this document can be integrated into them. The best practices for preventing
uncontrolled MIW releases can be applied at any phase of the CERCLA response process when planning is
necessary to perform activities that may disturb pooled MIW in underground mine workings. Nothing in
this report replaces or circumvents the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan
(NCP] or any CERCLA guidance.
1 Non-invasive - work that does not disturb the subsurface, such as site reconnaissance, topographic surveys, and sampling,
sonar imaging, and tracer dye testing of directly accessible MIW and surface water bodies.
Minimally invasive - work that minimally disturbs the subsurface, such as measurement or sampling using existing wells,
boreholes, or other safely accessible surface openings; water elevation measurement and sampling; downhole assessment
and monitoring using technologies such as video, downhole 3-dimensional laser mapping, pressure transducers, flow
meters and surface geophysical surveys.
Invasive - work that disturbs the subsurface, such as drilling; probing; excavating; blasting; grading; and dewatering that
may be conducted to assess or mitigate MIW pooling and discharge.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
1
-------
1.1 Report Purpose
This report provides EPA Regions and others with additional information to support site-specific
decisions in addressing underground workings that may have pooled MIW. The goal of this report is to
minimize the potential for sudden, uncontrolled releases of fluid mine waste from underground mine
workings as a result of an EPA or other state or federal land management agencies' response action. It is
intended to inform practitioners and their managers on best practices to reduce the risk and uncertainty
of blowouts of MIW from underground mine workings. It is important to note that application of these
best practices depends on site-specific conditions that in limited cases may warrant the application of
alternative technologies and approaches to those described in this report.
1.2 Background
On August 5, 2015, removal assessment activities being conducted by EPA triggered a sudden,
uncontrolled release of approximately 3 million gallons of MIW from the Gold King Mine (GKM] into
tributaries of the Animas River, located upstream of Silverton, Colorado. This incident drew widespread
attention to the potential for sudden, uncontrolled releases of fluid mine wastes at other mine sites with
underground workings.
EPA and the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI] Bureau of Reclamation (BOR] both conducted reviews
after the GKM incident, and produced the following reports:
1. Summary Report: EPA Internal Review of the August 5,2015, Gold King Mine Blowout (EPA 2015a];
and
2. Technical Evaluation of the Gold King Mine Incident report (BOR 2015],
Both reports recommended applying best practices to help prevent future releases (EPA 2015a and BOR
2015], This best practices report was developed primarily in response to the following recommendations
made in the two reports reviewing the GKM release incident:
The EPA report states:
"EPA should develop guidance to outline the steps that should be undertaken to minimize the
risk of an adit blowout associated with investigation or cleanup activities.
"Even though the chance of encountering pressurized mine water was investigated in many
ways at the Gold King Mine, the Gold King Mine blowout suggests that EPA should develop a
toolbox of additional investigative tools such as remote sensing or drilling into the mine pool
from the top or side that should be more seriously considered at similar sites. It's important
to recognize that underground mines may be extremely complex, making characterization of
the internal hydraulic conditions and flow paths challenging. Adding to this complexity is
that older mine workings are often not well mapped and that some underground mines may
also be structurally unstable and prone to cave-ins and internal plugging making them very
difficult to assess. The toolbox should identify techniques which could be used to minimize
uncertainties associated with these types of mines. Site specific conditions may make certain
investigative tools prohibitive or extremely challenging and costly. In the end, while
additional information gathering may reduce the uncertainty, a complete understanding of
the underground conditions may not be attainable." (EPA 2015a]
The BOR report states:
"The standards of practice for reopening and remediating flooded inactive and abandoned
mines are inconsistent from one agency to another. Various guidelines exist for this type of
work, but there is little in actual written requirements that government agencies are
required to follow when reopening an abandoned mine." (BOR 2015]
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
-------
This report incorporates many of the standards of practice referenced in the EPA and BOR reports. As
noted previously, this report is not intended to be a guidance document but rather a toolbox which lays
out techniques and approaches which can minimize MlW-related uncertainties associated with these
types of mines. Exhibits 1 and 2 provide the complete recommendations from the EPA and BOR GKM
review reports.
1.3 Primary Resources
The best practices and approaches presented in this report were developed from a variety of resources,
including (1] review of existing technical resources and publications, (2] compilation of lessons learned
from similar incidents, and (3] technical contributions from expert professionals with relevant experience
in mine waste characterization and mitigation. In developing this report, EPA's contractor conducted
interviews with, or received material contributions from, federal and state government agencies,
international organizations, and academic experts in MIW pool blowout assessment and prevention.
The following federal agencies were consulted or contributed materials to the development of this report:
• Department of the Interior:
o Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE];
o U.S. Geological Survey (USGS]; and
o Bureau of Reclamation.
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
• Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA],
• Federal Highways Administration, Interstate (FHWA] Technical Group on Abandoned
Underground Mines.
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
• Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA],
• U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA], U.S. Forest Service (USFS],
The Agency's contractor also consulted with the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM], the
National Academy of Sciences Committee on Subsurface Characterization, the University of Nevada Reno,
the West Virginia University and Virginia Tech, and the Colorado Division of Mining Reclamation and
Safety (CDMRS],
1.4 Report Organization
This report is organized into six sections, a bibliography and four appendices, as follows:
Section 1: introduces this report.
Section 2: provides an overview of the best practices and approaches presented in this report.
Section 3: describes the initial site screening.
Section 4: describes the CSM of mine workings and pooled MIW risks, including planning and
execution of data collection to develop a more comprehensive CSM.
Section 5: describes mitigation measures for pooled MIW.
Section 6: describes the qualifications of individuals on the technical team.
Bibliography: provides references for material used in the development of this report as well as
additional resources available for referral; where applicable, web site addresses (URLs] are
provided for additional resources available on the Internet.
Appendix A: provides a checklist tool for applying the best practices described in this report.
Appendix B: presents general resources and information on groundwater modeling.
Appendix C: presents additional resources for developing an MIW CSM.
Appendix D: is a topical matrix associating bibliographic sources with report topics.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
-------
Exhibit 1
Recommendations Summarized from EPA's Internal Review of GKM Incident (EPA 2015a)
1. EPA should develop guidance to outline the steps that should be undertaken to minimize the risk of an
adit blowout associated with investigation or cleanup activities. The guidance, at a minimum, should:
a Identify a tiered approach that requires increased detail regarding the proposed action based on the
complexity of the site conditions or the potential nature of any release,
b Provide criteria to identify whether a proposed investigation or cleanup action presents a low,
moderate, or high risk with respect to the potential for an adit blowout and significant release of
acid mine drainage or mine waste,
c Require that a management review meeting(s), including the key state (and other federal agencies
when appropriate) be held to determine whether sufficient information exists to meet the criteria
established in the guidance or whether additional information is necessary before undertaking the
investigation or cleanup activity,
d Outline the outreach activities to inform the local community and stakeholders,
e Identify the contingency planning that may be appropriate based upon the risk of blowout and the
nature of the potential release.
2. Even though the chance of encountering pressurized mine water was investigated in many ways at the
Gold King Mine, the Gold King Mine blowout suggests that EPA should develop a toolbox of additional
investigative tools such as remote sensing or drilling into the mine pool from the top or side that should
be more seriously considered at similar sites. It's important to recognize that underground mines may be
extremely complex, making characterization of the internal hydraulic conditions and flow paths
challenging. Adding to this complexity is that older mine workings are often not well mapped and that
some underground mines may also be structurally unstable and prone to cave-ins and internal plugging
making them very difficult to assess. The toolbox should identify techniques which could be used to
minimize uncertainties associated with these types of mines. Site specific conditions may make certain
investigative tools prohibitive or extremely challenging and costly. In the end, while additional
information gathering may reduce the uncertainty, a complete understanding of the underground
conditions may not be attainable.
3. Emergency Action Plans should include protocols should a blowout occur at those mine sites where there
is a potential for such an event to occur.
4. Information and rationale developed by a site team in anticipation of an investigation or cleanup action
for sites where an adit blowout could be a concern (e.g., available pressure information, a reasonable
estimate of the volume of water within the mine workings, or adit drainage flow rate data) should be
critically reviewed by a qualified and experienced Regional Mining engineer and or Mining
Hydrologist/Geologist. The Region may want to consider getting assistance from qualified outside parties
such as other federal agencies, state agencies, or outside consultants in conducting this critical review.
5. The Team also recommends that subsequent reviews of the Gold King Mine Adit Blowout by an
Independent External Review Group or the Office of Inspector General consider the possibility of
assembling a panel of experts consisting of mining industry experts, other federal and state mining
experts, academia, consultants, non-governmental organizations and tribal governments to further
analyze the situation encountered at this site and come up with recommendations on additional
safeguard measures to reduce the risk and minimize the consequences of such incidents in the future.
Exhibit 2
Recommendations from the BOR Technical Evaluation of the GKM Incident (BOR 2015)
1. "Because of the complexity of reopening a flooded abandoned mine, a potential failure modes analysis
should be incorporated into project planning.
2. Before opening an abandoned mine adit, review mine maps, production records, dump size, and local
history about the mine to evaluate the potential volume of mine workings. If the volume is large, consider
what would happen if there were an accidental release and what could be done to protect against it. A
downstream-consequences analysis should be a part of every complex mine remediation.
3. Water conditions within the mine should be directly measured prior to opening a blocked mine. Indirect
evidence is insufficient if the potential for a blowout exists.
4. Where significant consequences of failure are possible, independent expertise should be obtained to
review project plans and designs prior to implementation."
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
4
-------
2.0 BEST PRACTICES AND APPROACHES OVERVIEW
Underground workings of abandoned mines experience infilling by groundwater, surface water, and by
communication with interconnected underground mine workings, including continuous "mine pools."
MIW can subsequently discharge from the mine workings via openings to the ground surface, including
but not limited to, adit and tunnel portals, open shafts, air vents, bedrock fractures, bore holes, and springs
or seeps. When mine workings are blocked or drainage is impeded, mine pools can form and undergo
increasing pressurization as water levels increase. MIW pooling can form as a result of natural and
anthropogenic conditions. Example causes of mine pooling include:
• Structural geologic conditions dictating mine void shape (for example, doubly plunging synclinal
basins];
• Natural blockages or man-made seals (for example, seismic events, collapses, subsidence events,
clogged pipes, bulkheads, and coffer dams];
• Down dip direction horizontal openings;
• Opening locations below the water table or surface drainage; and
• Changes in subsurface hydraulic conductivity.
The presence and extent of mine pools can be difficult to identify and evaluate because of limited physical
and visual access. Seasonal variations in precipitation, runoff, and snow melt, as well as remote locations,
limit worker and equipment access for field investigations. Sudden, uncontrolled releases of MIW pools
can occur as a result of changing conditions in the mine caused by natural or anthropogenic mechanisms.
A range of investigation and remediation activities undertaken during CERCLA response actions at mine
sites could impair the stability of MIW pooling. Example activities include, but are not limited to, drilling
earth work, mine workings
stabilization, debris removal,
backfilling, flow-through
bulkhead installation,
plugging, and road
construction/maintenance.
An overarching best practice
is not to initiate such
"invasive" activities at
underground mine sites
unless sufficient information
is available or collected to
determine whether MIW
pooling exists, is likely to
exist, or may be caused by
activities. If MIW pooling is
confirmed or suspected, a
better understanding of the
cause and extent of MIW
pooling should be developed before undertaking such site activities. See Exhibit 3 for a site-specific best
practice example.
This report presents best practices and approaches compiled from, (1] lessons learned from past MIW
pool releases, and (2] best practices used in similar industries (for example, coal mining], where MIW in
underground workings is present under atmospheric or confined pressure (and may discharge as a result
of sudden, uncontrolled releases]. While this report uses the terms "MIW pool" and "MIW pooling"
generally to describe water or fluids accumulating within mine workings, conditions in underground
Exhibit 3
Best Practice Example:
Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Risk Assessment
The DOI BOR performed a risk assessment for the Leadville Mine
Drainage Tunnel in Colorado atEPA's request. The Leadville risk
assessment evaluated the likelihood of mine tunnel failures and
potential water buildup. A key feature at the Leadville site is that the
workings had a higher degree of physical access than typically exists
at many abandoned mine sites. For less accessible workings, risk
assessment must rely more on data derived from invasive
investigations and best professional judgement. While the Leadville
risk assessment provides a number of best practices that apply to AML
sites, this best practices report also includes considerations to address
MIW pooling in sites with limited physical access.
Source: BOR 2008. The full Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Risk
Assessment can be found at:
https://www.usbr.gov/gp/ecao/leadville/combined_risk_assessment.pdf
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
5
-------
workings can result in multiple MIW pools within the same workings. Separate pools are commonly
hydraulically connected and thus behave as a unified pool similar to groundwater aquifers; however,
hydraulically separate MIW pool conditions can also occur. The overall objective of this document is to
provide site teams with a broad range of information and techniques to support site specific planning to
prevent the sudden, uncontrolled releases of fluids from MIW pools as a result of site activities.
3.0 CONDUCT INITIAL SCREENING
Before any invasive activities associated with the underground workings of an AML site are undertaken,
an initial screening should generally be performed to document whether potential exists for MIW pooling
and how the MIW pooling relates to planned activities. The initial screening typically involves collection
and review of existing site information, a site visit or visits, interviewing individuals familiar with the site,
and an initial determination of the potential for MIW pooling.
The initial screening includes a review of available site information and a site visit by a qualified technical
team to assess whether or not MIW pooling exists. If pooling is known or suspected to be present, the
initial screening also considers the possibility of conditions that pose risk of a blowout. If MIW pooling is
confirmed not to be present within the hydraulically connected area of proposed response activities, there
likely will be no potential to cause a blowout. Similarly, if MIW pooling is present but stable, and diligent
assessment indicates no activities threaten this stability, then proposed response activities will likely have
little potential to cause a blowout.
When the results of an initial screening indicate that there is limited potential for a blowout, an informed
decision to proceed with the CERCLA response action can be made. Further evaluations are warranted if
any uncertainty regarding the existence of MIW pooling or the potential for a sudden, uncontrolled release
is identified. Table 1 shows
the focus area and potential
outcomes associated with an
initial screening.
3.1 Review Available
Documents and
Data
The technical team should
review pertinent site
documentation including but
not limited to, reports on
operational history; past
investigation and remediation
efforts; mine working maps
and drawings; and historical
MIW discharge information
and lists of local mine experts.
It is recommended that former
site workers and nearby land
owners be interviewed during
a site visit. The technical team
should also consider
consulting with applicable
state and federal agencies to
3.
Understanding underground and
above ground mine workings
(including interconnection with
other mine workings and
hydrogeologic conditions
connected with, but potentially
distant from the mine)
Gathering information on
hydrology and hydrogeology
(including a geologic and surface
hydrology assessments to
determine inter-connections
between the mine workings,
surface water, surface openings
and groundwater)
Understanding proposed
response actions and their
potential to impact the subsurface
Evaluating downstream surface
water bodies and their uses (for
example, public water supply),
considering loss of human life,
infrastructure disruption,
environmental and ecological
damage, and economic loss
Finding of Limited Potential for
Release (analysis and
documentation of the absence
of pooled MIW or that MIW
pooling is present but stable
and that any proposed actions
will not adversely affect the
mine pooling) OR
Finding of Uncertainty or
Potential for Release (data
indicate a potential exists for a
mine pool blowout or data gaps
that leave uncertainty about
the MIW pool and the risk for a
blowout). Best practices for
further study are warranted.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
6
-------
determine if any studies were conducted at the site or for other sites in the area that can provide insight
into site conditions related to MIW pooling and discharge.
After reviewing available site-specific information, the technical team should identify data gaps and collect
additional information, as needed. Gathering information that is as location-specific as possible will
improve the understanding of site MIW pooling. However, regional information can provide important
supporting perspectives. For example, it may be useful to review USGS maps of the site with overlays
generated using satellite imagery, such as Google Maps. OSMRE also operates the National Mine Map
Repository (NMMR], which collects and maintains mine map information and images for the entire
country (including data and maps of hardrock mines in the west]. Searching the NMMR's Mine Map Index
could identify workings maps for sites. NMMR has more than 180,000 maps of closed or abandoned mines
ffattp:: //mmr.osmre.gov/MultiPub.aspxl. Caution should be used when reviewing historical mine maps, as
they may not be accurate, current, or complete; thus, information on mine conditions key to formation of
MIW pooling may be absent in site documents or missing from site files.
Historical aerial photography and overlays from on-line databases at the USGS and USDA can provide
useful information on mine workings and conditions. Stereo-paired aerial photography dating back to the
late 1930s is typically available at 10-year intervals. Often, surface features (such as shafts, drifts, slope
entries, waste piles, seeps, and discharges] are visible on these photos that may no longer be recognizable
or present at the site.
After collecting and reviewing desktop information, it is recommended that the technical team consult
with site experts and others with general site knowledge, including:
• Nearby land owners, local miners, mine operators, experts, and historians;
• Local government personnel;
• Local document repositories (libraries, municipal records departments, non-profit organizations];
• State experts, including geologists, state engineers, mining offices, geological surveys, and AML
programs;
• DOI's BOR, USGS, and BLM State Office experts; and
• Regional USFS experts.
This initial screening step ensures that the available information about an AML site is identified for the
assessment of geotechnical, hydrogeologic, hydrologic, hydraulic, and geochemical attributes as early in
the review process as possible. This information can be used to focus the site visit on areas of interest such
as potential MIW pools or to resolve related data gaps. See Appendix D for examples of additional sources
of information.
3.2 Conduct a Site Visit
The purpose of the site visit is to further familiarize the technical team with the mine workings and other
important features of the site, to evaluate current conditions, and to resolve data gaps identified during
document and data review. The site visit should generally include, but not be limited to:
• Identifying relevant features in the area of interest;
• Documenting all impounded water, both natural and man-made;
• Noting differing conditions from reviewed information, such as collapsed workings, recent
vegetation die-off/stress, or changed MIW discharge conditions;
• Measuring MIW discharge rates;
• Collecting non-invasive field measurements (for example, pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen];
• Photo-documenting key features and conditions;
• Taking global positioning system (GPS] coordinates for all salient features;
• Inspecting easily and safely accessible open portions of mine workings;
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases 7
-------
• Identifying any time-sensitive conditions posing potential risk; and
• Identifying conditions that might impede access or future work.
The site visit is conducted to assess site conditions for the locations of the proposed activities relative to
mine features, with a focus on identifying and locating features that are commonly associated with
blockages and MIW pooling. Observe site conditions, such as seeps or springs with cloudy or low pH
water, or discharges from mine openings that may indicate the presence of internal blockages that are not
visible during surface inspection. The site visit should include viewing maps of adjacent mine site
workings with known or potential interconnections. Consider participation of key federal, local, and state
experts and reviews of local file repositories as part of the site visit.
3.3 Potential Outcomes
The technical team evaluates the available documents and data to determine if the proposed activity poses
no blowout risk (for example, no MIW pooling, or stable MIW pooling that the response action will not
impact]. The team also evaluates whether further study is needed to make this determination (for
example, unknown potential for MIW pooling; or potential that MIW is not stable; or that response actions
can make the MIW pool unstable]. The quality of the data is evaluated to assess its usability for making
these determinations. If further study is needed, the technical team develops a CSM of the pooled MIW
risks (see Section 4.0] and identifies additional data needs.
The certainty of any decision to proceed with a proposed response action must be based on sound
scientific data and analysis informed by current conditions, and made by qualified personnel. Therefore,
initial screenings are advised to be performed by qualified mining engineers, civil/environmental
engineers, geologists, hydrogeologists, and geochemists with experience in assessing and addressing MIW
pooling (see Section 6.0],
4.0 DEVELOP MIW CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
Updating the existing CSM with data and information specific to the MIW pool, or creating an MIW CSM if a
CSM has not been developed, is a best practice for integrating site information and identifying key data
gaps. This section presents the common best practices for developing an MIW CSM to identify and assess
risks and uncertainty regarding the potential for MIW blowout. It is critical that this CSM focus on the
physical structure of mine workings, regional and local structural geology, regional and local meteorology
and hydrology, and defining the nature and the extent of MIW pooling, including known and suspected
blockages and conditions for future potential workings collapse and blockage. It is recommended that the
technical team develop graphical depictions of the CSM (for example, maps of workings, cross-sections
and 3-dimensional visualizations] that show the physical structure, areal extent, cross-sectional area, and
condition of mine workings and related features. The MIW CSM supplements the environmentally focused
site CSM prepared for the site cleanup.
The MIW CSM integrates geotechnical data about the mine workings with hydrogeologic, hydrologic,
hydraulic, and geochemical data to assess the risk of a sudden, uncontrolled release in relation to planned
response actions. Given the specialized focus of these assessments on MIW pooling, the use of
"geotechnical, hydrogeologic, hydrologic, hydraulic and geochemical assessment" in this report is not
intended to equate with any traditional site assessment, remedial investigation, or other characterization
stage in the CERCLA pipeline.
The stated "problem" for which the MIW CSM is developed is:
What is the nature and extent of MIW pooling and what are the
potential failure modes for an MIW blowout?
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
8
-------
A variety of references support the best practices for performing an FMEA are described in this report.
The BOR's Risk Assessment of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel (BOR 2008] contains many best practices
for conducting geotechnical assessments and FMEA. Appendix A of the EPA and Hardrock Mining: A Source
Book for Industry in the Northwest and Alaska (EPA2003] addresses geologic, hydrogeologic, hydrologic,
and geochemical assessment practices, which are necessary to quantify the nature and extent of mine
pooling and develop a water balance. The USDA, USFS Investigative Methods for Controlling Groundwater
Flow to Underground Mine Workings provides another resource for developing the hydrogeologic elements
of the MIW pool CSM (USFS 2006], These and other important references are provided in the bibliography
at the end of this report. Appendix D comprises a Reference Materials Matrix that maps specific best
practice topics to references listed in the bibliography.
MIW CSM development begins by defining the area of interest and the watershed/aquifer boundary of that
area. Boundary conditions may include definitions of flow or hydraulic conditions across the boundary.
The subsequent steps are described in the following subsections. The MIW CSM should generally be
updated or developed, as applicable, in conjunction with the performance of a FMEA on proposed or
potential actions, to identify potential failure modes that could affect MIW pooling (BOR 2008], The
discussion below includes common components of a CSM for MIW pooling.
4.1 Visualize and Assess Mine Workings
A critical element of visualizing and assessing the CSM for MIW pooling is understanding the extent,
features, and geospatial orientations of the mine workings. This element should include any mine
openings or surface expressions and any known or suspected blockages or collapses. This step is best
performed through a comprehensive assessment of available mineral exploration planning and final
development maps, geologic maps, cross-sections, reports, models, and other information that illustrate
the historical evolution and operation of the mine workings. Similar information should be collected for
other mines near the mine site of concern, particularly where there are known or suspected
interconnections between mines. Any information or reports on known or suspected locations of
blockages, zones of known collapse, or zones of potential instability are also important. The MIW CSM
should clearly indicate where information is generated from direct observations, the level of uncertainty,
and where assumptions have been made, to clarify for other users the level the information being relied
on in assessing the potential for fluid hazards. Attributes of mine workings to consider as a part of
developing the CSM of MIW are discussed in Section 4.2. Figure 1 provides an example CSM visualization
of mine workings and adit flows, with notes on MIW flow direction and uncertainties.
Active interest in re-starting operations for some mines for additional mineral extraction may have
resulted in consolidation of information on past mine workings and collection of additional data. These
efforts may provide the best and most current information on mine workings and should generally be
identified and reviewed. However, because these data are frequently considered confidential business
information (CBI], they may not be readily available. It is recommended that technical teams specifically
inquire about such information and recognize that gaining access to this information may require
confidentiality or may not be possible.
Mine workings information is best synthesized using current off-the-shelf 3-dimensional data
visualization and analysis (3DVA] software, which include those designed for use as active mine planning
tools and those adapted to support environmental evaluations. The resulting visualizations can serve as
the basis for a project life cycle CSM (EPA 2011], wherein the CSM is updated as new data are generated
from overall site assessment, investigation, and response actions.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
9
-------
Figure 1. Example CSM visualization: Standard Mine adit levels and underground workings. Note: The angle of view
exaggerates the apparent dip of the adits beyond their actual 1 percent grade. (EPA 2015f)
Pr.
Mine Wa ste Repository
[0.3 miles]
Proposed Bypass
Adit Cross Cut
Station 3+50
(Approximate)
Pooled Mining
Influenced Water
(Observed)
Proposed Bulkhead
Con stru ct on A rea
Stations 5+00to 7+00
(Approximate)
Explored areas1
= Unexplored areas
Known Blockage
® Removed Blockage
;Artss expired by DRMS(2007,Rg.% 2QQ5, 2
arvd du-rv» 2012 Lwf 1 ports rehabStatton jEPA 20i2a|
| Boreholes
^=3 Adit
E Shaft
Pooled Mining
Influenced Water
(Observed)
Not to Scale
0'
Infiltration of snowmeli and surface runoff
Mine Waste Pile
Remediated Mine Waste Pile
^ Snowmelt and surface runoff
^ teaching mine waste piles
1
jj Water Row through mine workings, becoming contaminated
Groundwater flows m!o rrane via fractures and fault
To the maximum extent practicable, representations of the mine workings should be as geospatially
accurate in three dimensions as possible. Geo-referencing the underground mine workings to the surface
(vertically and horizontally] is essential, as well as ensuring that the volumetric measurements of the
workings dimensions are reasonable, given the general uncertainty commonly associated with mine
development maps and measurements. Estimates of MIW volume within workings are dependent on the
accuracy of these maps and measurements. The vertical dimension is also particularly important because
elevation differences are critical to determining hydrostatic connectivity and MIW conditions. Achieving
this accuracy may require focused topographic surveys to locate reference points during additional site
visits.
4.2 Evaluate Geotechnical, Hydrogeologic, Hydrologic and Hydraulic, and
Geochemical Attributes of the MIW Pooling
Understanding MIW pooling requires evaluating the geotechnical, hydrogeologic, hydrologic, hydraulic,
and geochemical attributes of the mine, evidence of MIW pooling, and underground workings and adjacent
surroundings. Specifically, the team should generally evaluate:
1. The geotechnical conditions of the mine workings, including attributes that influence collapses,
blockages, releases, or potential slope instability;
2. The hydrogeologic conditions that create inflow into, and outflow (discharge) from the workings;
3. Hydrologic and hydraulic conditions of the MIW pooling and the surface water features (including
water management infrastructures) that receive or influence MIW; and
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
10
-------
4. The geochemical characteristics of the MIW quality and acid generating/neutralizing
characteristics of the ore zones and adjacent rock.
These attributes inform the risk assessment and contingency planning. The information available for each
site will vary and the data collection should be related to the proposed specific site activity. Below are
some of the mine workings and MIW pooling attributes to consider in assessing MIW pool blowout risks.
Geotechnical Attributes
Geotechnical attributes evaluated as a common best practice in assessing MIW pooling risks include, but
are not limited to (BOR 2008, EPA 2000, EPA 2003, EPA 2015f, USFS 2006]:
• Dimensions and extent of mine workings, including adits, drifts, cross-cuts, haulage routes, shafts,
raises, winzes, man ways, air vents;
• Types and conditions of support/rehabilitation structures such as timbering, beams, cribbing,
square sets, ribs, pillars, crossbars, steel beams, pinning, bolts, concrete;
• Workings storage - volume of mine workings above and below mine potential blockage locations
to estimate MIW pooling volume;
• Mine working openings at the surface that serve or could potentially serve as MIW inflow or
outflow locations, as well as air inflow locations, key contributors to MIW acidification;
• Portal or other mine opening stability assessment;
• Known or suspected mine workings interconnections between mines;
• Presence of faults, joints, folding or other geologic features that could affect mine stability;
• Thickness and integrity of overburden cover above the mine workings (for example, fracturing is
typically more prevalent and fractures have wider aperture at shallower depths];
• Types, strengths, and competency of bedrock and other strata;
• Location, composition, and dimensions of known or suspected flow blockages, and the forces
acting on the blockages;
• Surface expressions of underground workings such as structure failure subsidence and slope
collapses;
• Potential for liquefaction of soils near mine openings or comprising blockages; and
• Slope stability: physical, mechanical, and seismic properties (for possible naturally occurring slope
failure or failure as a result of drilling and/or construction equipment],
Hydrogeologic Attributes
Hydrogeologic attributes evaluated as a common best practice in assessing MIW pooling risks include, but
are not limited to (BOR 2008, EPA 2000, EPA 2003, EPA 2015f, USFS 2006]:
• Types and nature of hydrogeologic units (unconsolidated deposits, bedrock];
• Hydraulic properties of hydrogeologic units (hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, storability,
porosity, dispersity];
• Thickness and areal extent of hydrogeologic units;
• Type of porosity (primary, such as intergranular pore space in unconsolidated deposits or porous
bedrock matrices; or secondary, such as bedrock discontinuities, fractures, or solution cavities];
• Groundwater flow through faults, joint fractures, mineral veins;
• Presence or absence of confining or semi-confining lithologic units;
• Depth to water table and seasonal variation, thickness of vadose zone, potentiometric surface, and
confined, unconfined, or leaky confined conditions;
• Groundwater flow directions (hydraulic gradients, both horizontal and vertical], volumes (specific
discharge], rate (average linear velocity];
• Catchment area and groundwater recharge zones;
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
11
-------
• Groundwater/surface water interactions, areas of groundwater discharge to surface water
(gaining], and surface water recharge of groundwater (losing]; and
• Seasonal variations in groundwater conditions.
Hydrologic and Hydraulic Attributes
Hydrologic and hydraulic attributes evaluated as a common best practice in assessing MIW pooling risks
include, but are not limited to (BOR 2008, EPA 2000, EPA 2003, EPA 2015f, Triad Engineering, Inc. 2013,
USFS2006]:
• Site topography, watersheds, drainage basins, and associated natural surface water bodies;
including lakes, ponds, rivers, active and temporal streams, and constructed drainage systems.
• Surface and subsurface man-made impounded water bodies;
• Workings inflow - groundwater/surface water inflow rate, including precipitation and infiltration;
• Workings outflow - MIW outflow, discharge rates, seasonal variations (maximum and minimum];
• Location, nature, and condition of MIW management systems in workings such as bulkheads
(including type, material and thickness], pressure grouting, coffer dams, discharge piping, floor
channels, and sumps;
• Confirmation that no MIW pooling is present, where initial evidence indicates no pooling;
• Direction and rate of MIW flow through workings;
• MIW discharge locations, flow and receiving surface water bodies or infrastructure, including
potential downstream receptors that may be impacted by a release (for emergency planning];
• Pressure conditions of MIW within mine workings (confined, unconfined, or leaky confined] such
as pool elevation, hydraulic head, and hydrostatic pressure;
• Presence of springs or seeps (aerial photography of vegetative growth can be an indicator];
• Climatic conditions as related to precipitation, snow melt, evaporation, infiltration and runoff;
• Vegetative cover and seasonal transpiration rates; and
• Hydraulic interconnections with other mines.
Geochemical Attributes
Geochemical attributes evaluated as a common best practice when completing assessments of MIW
pooling risks include, but are not limited to (BOR 2008, EPA 2000, EPA 2003, EPA 2015f, USFS 2006]:
• MIW geochemistry data such as physical and chemical water quality data in oxygenated and
reduced conditions, anion/cation chemistry, bioassay;
• Background water quality data from other mine seeps and springs for comparison with MIW, and
to conduct anion/cation chemistry, if necessary for geochemical modeling/charge balance;
• Geochemical material characteristics that contribute to MIW water quality;
• Baseline characterization of water quality, sediment quality, and macroinvertebrates population
metrics of downstream water bodies for comparison if a release occurs;
• Location of MIW acidification/neutralization sources within the mine such as high sulfide areas,
ore piles, chemically oxidized zones, or exposed mineralized material;
• Location and types of potential MIW monitoring points such as monitoring wells, weirs, boreholes,
and ventilation raises;
• Location and type of existing MIW monitoring devices such as pressure gauges, transducers, and
sondes;
• Isotopic MIW analysis may provide information on MIW residence time to indicate groundwater
recharge (longer] or precipitation infiltration (shorter];
• Anticipated effects of MIW chemistry on downstream receptors for consequence analysis;
• Existence of MIW containment and treatment systems such as run-on/runoff control, ponds,
biotreatment, and water treatment plants;
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
12
-------
• Chemical and physical characteristics of natural water bodies upgradient of MIW discharge points;
• Presence, nature, and extent of sedimentation within workings; and
• Presence and type of biological activity within workings such as algae, bacteria, molds, or mosses.
Many AML sites lack adequate monitoring data to characterize these attributes; therefore, a best practice
for mining sites with discharging MIW is to institute a regular monitoring program and review the
resulting data for a year or more to understand seasonal fluctuations. MIW pool monitoring may require
conducting invasive activities (for example, drilling wells into the mine workings] that could trigger a
blowout. Conducting invasive activities is described in Section 4.2.3.
4.2.1 Develop an Initial Water Balance
Developing a water balance (sometimes referred to as a water budget] supports the determination of
whether MIW pooling is occurring and helps define mine pooling characteristics that aid in assessing the
potential and likelihood of MIW release. The primary purpose of an initial water balance is to estimate
whether there is a net gain or loss of water entering into and discharging from mine workings, and not to
determine the specific, steady state quantity of water. Therefore, its use is limited, but helpful, in
determining whether MIW pooling is occurring and whether it is more likely to occur during certain times
of the year.
The following equation summarizes the basic elements of an initial water balance:
S = I-0
Where: S = Storage Rate (Volume/Time]; I = Inflow Rate (Volume/Time]; and 0 = Outflow Rate
(Volume/Time]
To initiate the evaluation, determine the potential pooled MIW volume of the mine based on current
knowledge of the mine workings. Next, calculate the percentage of that pooled MIW volume that would be
filled at the estimated daily storage rate since the MIW started to accumulate, assuming a constant storage
rate. Finally, determine whether the calculated stored water volume is reasonable given the available
pooled MIW volume of workings and losses, such as potential seep areas.
When "S" is a positive number, a mine receives more inflow than it discharges as outflow, and MIW is
likely accumulating in the mine workings. If "S" is a negative number, then the outflows exceed the inflows
and the works are likely draining faster than MIW is accumulating. If the "time" measure is constant (such
as days or years], then the storage, inflow, and outflow are simply the total volume for the time period.
Table 2 presents a simplified example of an initial water balance showing an increase in pooled MIW
volume per day (indicating potential MIW pooling exists].
Origin Description
Groundwater Infiltration into workings
Drainage from connected workings
Surface Water Precipitation infiltration
Intermittent stream entering Portal B
Discharge Collapsed Adit A
Seep B
Air Evaporation/Transpiration
Subtotal
Estimated Water Balance
GPD = Gallons Per Day
Inflow (GPD)
150,000
80,000
90,000
50,000
+370,000
+155,000 GPD
Outflow (GPDJ
20,000
120,000
25,000
50,000
-215,000
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
-------
In developing a water balance, consider water level and discharge rate response to precipitation events or
snow melt. Recharge rates and lag times factor strongly into the hydrology of the mine workings.
Substantial mine water elevation increases in response to recharge events need to be accounted for in
terms of commensurate increases in discharge and hydrostatic pressures on blockages or bulkheads.
The USGS has prepared many water balances for estimating water budgets in coal mine regions. An
example of a regional water budget is Water Budgets and Groundwater Volumes for Abandoned
Underground Mines in the Western Middle Anthracite Coalfield, Schuylkill, Columbia and Northumberland
Counties, Pennsylvania - Estimates with Identification of Data Needs. USGS Report 2010-5261 (USGS 2011c],
An example water balance for a specific mine tunnel is the Water Balance for the Jeddo Tunnel Basin,
Luzerne County, Pennsylvania (Ballaron 1999],
4.2.2 Conduct Additional Site Visits
After reviewing available site information, the technical team may benefit from one or more additional site
visits to address any remaining data gaps, or to support planning of additional field data collection efforts
to support the CSM and MIW pooling risk assessment. Examples of activities that might be conducted
during follow-up site visits are listed below.
1. Determining how adit flow monitoring should be conducted through modifications to a current
monitoring program (considering how measurements were taken previously] or through new
program development.
2. Collecting samples and measurements from boreholes, shafts, vents, or other surface openings to
assess potential for surface water inflows.
3. Monitoring springs and seeps around the site to provide supplemental data on the physical and
chemical parameters of outflows.
4. Verifying specific information on site conditions noted in prior site studies, and identifying any
changes to those conditions.
5. Identifying changes in potential downstream receptors and impacts for use in contingency,
notifications and emergency action planning, as well as any environmental or safety issues not
previously identified.
6. Conducting geophysical studies to evaluate stability of materials for conducting invasive activities.
7. Assessing locations and conditions for conducting invasive measurement activities.
8. Identifying areas that can be used for mine dewatering or for emergency storage/solids settling
for contingent storage capacity planning.
9. Employing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV] equipped with light imaging, detection and radar
(LIDAR] or other imaging tools to improve terrain modeling by identifying or clarifying the extent
of past surface disturbance and mine opening locations.
4.2.3 Conduct Minimally Invasive Measurements
Based on the state of site knowledge, it may be beneficial or necessary to collect minimally invasive
measurements to better characterize site conditions related to MIW pooling and discharge. The purpose of
minimally invasive measurements is to collect data from existing, accessible locations using field methods
which pose no risk of causing an MIW blowout. Findings of minimally invasive measurements that show
no or minimal MIW risks, may reduce the need to perform (or the scope of] an FMEA. Minimally invasive
measurements may include activities such as surface water sampling, use of existing access points for
groundwater or mine pool sample collection, and remote technological measurement such as
electromagnetics and radar.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
14
-------
Any monitoring or water quality sampling activities need to follow EPA or appropriate guidance to ensure
proper sample collection, handling, and analysis, including: development of a sampling and analysis plan
(SAP]; a quality assurance project plan (QAPP]; a health and safety plan (HASP]; and a field sampling plan
(FSP], if necessary (EPA 2006], Contingency, notifications, and emergency action planning is discussed in
more detail in Section 4.2.6.
Provided workings can be accessed safely, samples and data should generally be collected from open
shafts, boreholes, and other openings identified to the mine workings, using downhole measurement
technologies and sampling techniques that produce useful and valid results. Consistent methods and
techniques should be used so that each new set of results can be compared with prior results to support
trend and pattern analysis of MIW characteristics. Both proven and emerging technologies for open
subsurface and downhole sampling through existing boreholes and monitoring wells should be
considered. Exhibit 4 provides examples of parameters that should generally be considered when
conducting minimally invasive measurement and sampling of an MIW pool.
The depth of a mine pool and the elevation of the groundwater potentiometric surface are significant data
points to determine the hydrostatic state and quantity of pooled MIW. Physical and chemical parameters
(such as turbidity, pH, specific conductance, total dissolved solids, dissolved oxygen, and
oxidation/reduction potential] can also be important to compare to measurements from other locations
where MIW is discharged, to help determine whether mine pools are connected (SME 2014], However,
caution should be exercised when comparing physical and chemical water parameters since these
parameters may vary significantly, even within connected mine pools. In some cases, water quality can
vary spatially, both horizontally and vertically, over short distances within a single mine pool.
Measurements of MIW discharge flow from mine openings, seeps, springs and other discharge points are
important for determining current MIW pooling conditions. When compared with past measurements,
these data may indicate and help confirm changes in MIW pooling over time. MIW discharges are often
found on hillsides, in gullies, existing streams or discharging through unstable substrates; which in certain
circumstances can make installation of calibrated gages with permanent weirs or flumes impracticable.
Where weirs and flumes (or other more accurate means of flow measurement] are installed, past
measurement techniques should be compared with the
current approaches so that new data can be compared and
calibrated with past flow measurements.
Best practices for conducting flow measurement of
discharge from mine openings, seeps or other locations are
provided in EPA's Quality Flow Measurements at Mine Sites
guidebook (EPA 2001], While the technologies for
conducting these measurements have evolved since 2001,
the general principles for using such technologies remain a
best practice. USGS has also developed best practices in
measuring stream flow, which while primarily for
measuring flow in streams and other natural water bodies,
can be applied in measuring MIW discharge in ditches and
culverts (Buchanan and Somers 1969, USGS 1982a, USGS
1982b],
Geophysical Studies
Geophysical surveys can be performed on land, on water,
from the air, and within boreholes. The use of geophysics to
survey underground MIW pooling can be limited by highly
Exhibit 4
Examples of Minimally Invasive
Measurements through Open Bore
Holes or Existing Mine Openings
• Mine pool depth
- Useful for determining pool volume
and seasonal variability
• Mine pool hydraulic head
- Useful for determining hydrostatic
pressure of the mine pool
• Measures of MIW discharge flow rates
- Useful for determining the rate of
outflow of MIW
• MIW discharge chemical/physical
parameters
- Useful in determining permanence of
pool seasonally and indicators of ore
zones and blockage material
characteristics
Source: EPA 2003, EPA 2013
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
15
-------
mineralized soils, extensive tree cover, and accessibility, but certain techniques may be important to
identify buried mine openings, near-surface mine workings, and optimal drilling locations. Geophysical
tools may be of limited utility in highly metals-mineralized areas and where access is limited or steeply
sloped, or by the inherent capabilities and limitations of the geophysical method.
Underground mine workings have been mapped from the surface using multi-phase surface and cross-
borehole geophysical techniques. For example, time-domain dipole-dipole resistivity and frequency
domain Mise-a-la-Masse (MALM] surveys were conducted at the Captain Jack Mill mine site located near
Ward, Colorado. Using a flooded mine adit as a transmitting electrode, the MALM survey technique was
able to image the mine workings' approximate position up to 2,000 feet into the mountainside, at depths
of up to 500 feet (Pendrigh 2012], The effectiveness of using mine workings as electrical transmitters may
depend on the presence and seasonal variations in MIW levels. Given optimal seasonal conditions and
continuity of infrastructure features (for example, rails] and water, the MALM in-tunnel electrode
techniques can be used to estimate the extent of MIW pooling (Pendrigh 2012],
Some downhole geophysical survey techniques such as borehole radar surveys or cross-hole seismic
tomography require the existence, or drilling of one or more boreholes to install the subsurface
transmitters and receivers necessary to map the location of subsurface voids, such as mine workings. Such
techniques may be of limited value in locating underground workings because of the cost of drilling
through rock and other limitations, but may have some use in finding underground workings when
boreholes miss their targeted mine tunnel (CSoM 2007],
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT] FHWAhas
implemented more recent research and identified best
practices for assessing underground abandoned mine
tunnels, voids, and sinkholes. FHWA maintains an Interstate
Technical Group on Abandoned Underground Mines, which
is responsible for developing methods to identify and
prevent collapses of underground mines beneath
transportation facilities (FHWA 2016], FHWA actively
researches emerging geophysical methods to detect
abandoned mines and other subsurface voids in karst
bedrock (which may be at risk of collapsing and forming
sinkholes]. Exhibit 5 identifies common geophysical
methods that FHWA uses to identify abandoned mines and
underground voids as part of transportation planning.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE] has evaluated the use
of helicopter electromagnetic (HEM] surveys to detect and
map pools of acidic water impounded in underground
mines. HEM can locate pools of water in underground
mines if: (1] the water is conductive (acid mine drainage is
conductive]; (2] the overburden is electrically resistive; and
(3] the depth to the workings is not more than 150 feet
(Hammack et al. 2007, Hammack 2016, Love et al. 2005],
The USGS has conducted a wide range of studies assessing the viability of various geophysical tools to
evaluate MIW pooling. USGS maintains a Geophysical Technology Transfer clearinghouse with information
on traditional and emerging geophysical technologies and their applications (see
http: IIwater.usgs. gov /ogw/bgas /g2t.html]. EPA conducted some of the early work on using geophysics to
Exhibit 5
Common Geophysical Methods
• Gravity/Micro gravity*
• Electromagnetics (EM]
• Radio Detection
• Magnetics
• Very Low Frequency EM (VLF]
• Ground Penetrating Radar fGPRl
• Electrical Resistivity Imaging (ERIl
• ER Hydraulic Tomography
• Induced Polarization (IP]
• Spontaneous Potential (SP]
• Liner Leak Detection (LLD]
• Seismic Refraction/Reflection/Cross-
Hole Tomography
• Surface Wave Methods
• Side-Scan Sonar
Underlined methods represent
commonly used methods for
underground mine detection.
Source: Davis 2015
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
16
-------
detect abandoned mines [see Detection of Abandoned Underground Coal Mines by Geophysical Methods
(EPA 1971]].
Other Minimally Invasive Measurement Methods
Various tools and technologies used for mine exploration and management can be adapted to make
measurements and gather data to assess MIW pooling. Some of the measuring and monitoring devices
described in this section require an existing borehole, monitoring well, or other direct, unobstructed
access to the mine workings. Long-term use of downhole monitoring tools is possible in acidic conditions
when tool materials are compatible with corrosive water, and regular cleaning, calibration, and data
download schedule are maintained. Drilling and coring, which are considered invasive activities that could
cause a sudden, uncontrolled MIW release, are discussed in Section 4.2.4.
A summary of other minimally invasive measurement techniques and technologies, with descriptions of
possible uses is provided below:
• Tracer Techniques: Tracer testing of MIW in mine workings can help assess MIW pooling. Several
types of materials can be used as tracers, but the most common are optical (fluorescent] dyes and
chemical (ionic] tracers. Tracer studies may be used to further characterize known or suspected mine
pools, or to characterize hydraulic connections between adits and mine pools (for example, flow rates
and flow paths through workings, discharge points, connections between mine pools, inflow points
and interconnections between different mine workings]. Tracer studies have been performed with
various degrees of success in flooded mine workings. For example, a dye-tracer study was performed
at the Leadville, Colorado site with only limited success. Therefore, it is important to adequately plan
the tracer studies. Consideration should be given to anticipating possible or unlikely flow paths; time
ranges for travel; the ability to detect the tracer in target water; researching possible tracer
interferences; and the need for quantitative tracer detection or simply a positive/negative response.
Potential problems with tracer tests include degradation of dye in mining water conditions, false
negative results, and misinterpretation of positive results (OSMRE 2013a], Adsorption of the tracer by
clays, iron hydroxide, and organic materials; pH interferences; and matrix interference can prevent
detection of optical tracers, which can produce false negative results. For this reason, chemical or ionic
tracers are recommended for degraded water. Existing background concentration of the tracer (ionic]
can produce false positive results. Any tracer has to be introduced at a concentration that will be
clearly detectable at the anticipated outfall. Therefore, some level of mine pool volume calculation (for
example, dilution ratio] needs to be performed before a tracer can be introduced. Additionally,
baseline samples need to be analyzed for the tracer at the target location prior to the running the test.
• 3-Dimensional Mapping: A number of firms offer technologies that use laser scanning technologies
to generate detailed 3-dimensional underground mine workings maps. Some of these technologies are
deployable down boreholes, while others require deployment within workings. Each use laser
scanning to safely and quickly scan inaccessible underground workings. Associated software typically
provides modeling, manipulation, and export capabilities, including data on the size of workings,
collapse locations, water levels, and accurate volume and distance measurements. Because laser
measurements can be made only within the line-of-sight, mine workings with numerous directional
shifts or blockages might be difficult to survey fully or effectively using this approach. Another
potential limitation is that the majority of the 3-D mapping equipment is intended for unflooded mine
workings. A flooded mine may reduce the effectiveness of this type of data collection. While
subaqueous 3-D equipment is available, the quality of the data can be degraded by the lack water
clarity.
• Downhole Video: Small gauge video cameras lowered down boreholes to provide visual information
about the mine workings and mine pooling can be an effective way to confirm MIW pooling presence
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
17
-------
and depth. Visual evidence of precipitate water marks on the walls and roofs of mine workings can
also provide evidence of seasonal or known historical events-based variation in mine pool water
levels. Limited light can reduce downhole video effectiveness since camera lighting reduces with
distance, particularly under water.
• Physical or Visual Measurement: If the blockage that creates mine pooling is accessible or visible
from within the mine workings, direct measurements of the open portion of the mine tunnel and of the
blockage can provide confirmation of the blockage location and useful data on its dimensions and the
material properties of the exposed rock debris.
• Downhole Pressure Transducers: Submersible pressure transducers have been used in
groundwater investigations for more than 4 decades. These pressure-sensing devices, typically
installed at a fixed depth in a well, sense the change in pressure against a membrane. Pressure changes
occur in response to changes in the height, and thus in the weight of the water column in the well
above the transducer. Substantial improvements in design, operation, and accuracy of pressure
transducers and data recording systems have led to a significant increase in their use in recent years.
Many are equipped with temperature sensors, which can provide valuable data about surface
infiltration (such as snow melt]. Small-scale, battery-powered transducer technologies can be
deployed to capture data for months and require only a USB data storage key to download data.
• Downhole Flow Meters: There are three main types of borehole flowmeters: impeller (also known
as a spinner flow meter]; heat pulse (HP] and electromagnetic (EM], Impeller and electromagnetic
types of flow meters can be used in either trolling (moving vertically up or down the well bore] or in
stationary mode. The heat pulse flow meter can only be used in stationary mode. In trolling, the flow
meter is advanced up or down the borehole at a constant speed while measurements are made. In
stationary mode, the flow meter is stopped at a series of depths within the borehole and
measurements are made while the device is stationary. The impeller flow meters cannot resolve flow
rates as low as the EM and HP types. All flow meters require boreholes or cased wells that fully
penetrate the target horizon of the flow system of interest. Doppler flow meters can also be used, but
require particulates or bubbles in the water to be effective. More information is available at
http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/bgas/flowmeter/.
Note: Before any electrical equipment is deployed into mine workings, determine whether the equipment
complies with intrinsic safety requirements and whether the mine workings atmosphere contains any
combustible or explosive levels of gases or materials.
4.2.4 Conduct Invasive Measurement Activities: Drilling
Before remedial response actions can be undertaken at mine sites, it is a best practice to confirm the
hydrostatic conditions of known or suspected MIW pooling in the underground workings. In the absence
of other confirming data, the inaccessibility of pooled MIW in underground workings typically requires
collection of hydrostatic conditions data using invasive measurements technologies. The primary
approach to conducting invasive measurement is by drilling from the ground surface either above,
horizontally, or from an intermediate lateral location into targeted sections of mine workings, followed by
deploying downhole measurement technologies through the drilled boreholes. This section provides
information on commonly used drilling methods to consider.
Drilling is conducted to: (1] confirm the presence, depth, and hydraulic head of MIW pooling; (2]
determine water quality and flow characteristics; and (3] confirm the location of blockages and extent of
pooling. These data can be used to determine the water levels; the hydraulic head pressure; whether MIW
pooling is under atmospheric or confining conditions; and if confined, to what degree. As applicable,
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
18
-------
boreholes may also be used as access points to pump MIW out of the mine under subsequent mitigation
measures.
When planning a drilling program for MIW assessment, it is critical to carefully plan drilling locations and
directions because underground mine workings generally are limited in width. Careful surveying and an
understanding of the local structural geology and lithology enhance the likelihood that drilling will
intersect the target workings. Driller experience and knowledge of local geology and drilling conditions
also increase the likelihood of intersecting the target workings. Notwithstanding recommendations for
release prevention, the borehole should generally be sized for planned and possible future uses such as
insertion of exploratory tooling water sampling, or installing a pump for dewatering.
As drilling is an invasive activity, it is critical that an
FMEA be performed before drilling plans are
completed and field mobilization. The FMEA should
generally evaluate the drilling plan for each borehole
location for the potential to result in a sudden,
uncontrolled release of MIW. FMEA results should
be provided to responsible personnel in each
organization that will be involved in drilling
activities to ensure each of the organizations is fully
aware of risks and consequences identified, and
work collaboratively to develop and implement
plans to mitigate and manage those risks. Exhibit 6
provides examples of failure modes from drilling
that may cause blowouts of MIW pooling.
The drilling approach will vary by site and a combination of drilling techniques may be required to
characterize the mine workings. Many small drill rigs can now be deployed on tracks and adjustable
platforms to work on the side of steep slopes. Drilling is most commonly performed via traditional auger
drilling, sonic (vibratory], percussive action, or air and hydraulic rotary methods. Common drilling
methods for hardrock mineral exploration, AML investigations, or mine workings studies include:
• Hollow Stem Auger (HSA) Drilling: HSA drilling is fast, especially in shallow applications, in soft
unconsolidated material, or in weak weathered bedrock. HSA is effective for collecting samples to
characterizing overburden, waste rock, and tailings at mine sites. A conventional and cost-
effective drilling method, HSA uses a hollow stem auger to penetrate the subsurface. As the auger
rotates, cuttings are conveyed to the surface via auger flights. Grab samples can be obtained from
cuttings or sampling tools deployed inside the hollow augers. The large openings allow access to
the bottom of the borehole after the pilot bit is removed without withdrawing the auger drill
string. The auger acts as a temporary casing during drilling to facilitate sampling soils and
unconsolidated material and installing monitoring wells.
• Sonic (Vibration) Drilling: This method uses varying high frequency vibrations through the drill
string to the bit or core barrel to match site geology or harmonic frequency of the drill string.
Sonic provides relatively easy and fast drilling through most formations. Sonic drilling is more cost
effective for rock drilling. It can produce high quality rock cores and provides very straight
borings. Sonic drill rigs are available in small, track-mounted designs that can be used to drill on
slopes and in difficult access areas where conventional drill rig size and weight might preclude
their use.
• Percussion Rotary Air Blast (RAB) Drilling: RAB is commonly used for mineral exploration,
water bore drilling, and blast-hole drilling in mines. RAB provides fairly rapid advancement, but
Exhibit 6
Examples of Drilling-Related Failure Modes
for Possible Blowouts of MIW Pooling
• Drilling vibration liquefying soil or other
material workings blockages
• Collapses or cave-ins within workings
• Artesian releases through drilled boreholes
• Failure of soil or rock material under drilling
equipment
• Piping of pressurized water around drill
steel/augers in unconsolidated material
• Rapid hydraulic head pressure changes
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
19
-------
produces poor bedrock sample material and can be limiting if groundwater is encountered
because cuttings will clog the outside of the hole with debris. RAB employs downhole technology,
which is basically a mini-hammer that screws on the bottom of a drill string and crushes hard rock
into small flakes, with the resulting dust drawn by the air exhaust to the surface.
• Reverse Circulation (RC) Drilling: RC drilling uses a pneumatic reciprocating piston called the
"hammer" which drives a tungsten-steel drill bit. RC drilling typically requires larger rigs and,
therefore, may be less versatile in remote or steep areas. RC drilling can achieve depths of more
than 1,500 feet. RC drilling produces dry rock pieces and dust, as large air compressors dry the
rock out ahead of the advancing drill bit. RC drilling is slower and costlier than RAB. However, it is
less expensive than diamond coring and is thus preferred for most mineral exploration work.
• Diamond Core Drilling: This technology uses a circular, diamond-fitted drill bit attached to a
hollow core cylinder to produce solid rock cores. Water is used for cooling and removing cuttings
instead of air. It is slower and more expensive than RAB or RC drilling, but can be advanced to
greater depths and provide additional information about the subsurface rock formations (for
example, dip/strike, porosity, and degree and orientation of fracturing], which are useful data for
characterizing the sources of MIW pooling. Rock strength testing on the recovered core provides
data on the geotechnical characteristics of mine roof when the mine workings are intersected.
• Hydraulic Rotary Drilling: This method is commonly used in the mining industiy to drill blast
holes in open pit mine and surface mines. It is used in the oil and gas industry because no
continuous sample is returned or needed. The technology can use a variety of drill bit types (for
example, diamond-impregnated, carbide, or tri-cone roller] and uses mud/bentonite to cool and
clean the bit and capture cuttings. The technology can be advanced to depths exceeding 1 mile.
• Air Rotary Drilling: This method is used to drill deep boreholes in rock formations. It is used for
drilling in igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary rock. The mining industry uses rotary drilling
to drill ore body test boreholes and pilot boreholes for guiding larger shaft borings. The rotary
drilling method requires the use of a rock cutting or crushing drill bit, typically a mill tooth tri-
cone roller cone bit. This type of drill bit uses more of a crushing action to advance the bit in the
rock. Impact energy is supplied to the drill bit from either an aboveground impact or a downhole
impact hammer.
Decisions about drilling technologies should consider drilling program goals, access, rock type, joints and
faults, dip of strata, surface slope stability, and factors such as drill rig capability, cost per foot, and
availability and experience of driller. Slope, ground stability, and physical accessibility commonly limit the
size and type of the drill rig that can be deployed. These issues may also prevent vertical drilling from
directly over the mine workings. Under these circumstances, other drilling methods such as horizontal or
directional drilling can be considered.
Directional drilling controls the direction and deviation of a wellbore from the point of surface entry to a
predetermined underground target or location. This technology may be used when a suitable drilling
location is not accessible directly above the desired mine workings. Directional drilling is commonly used
in the oil and gas industry and involves gradual redirection of the borehole, frequently requiring hundreds
of feet to perform a turn. Its use in drilling to access mine workings, however, is not common and may be
limited when workings are within approximately 100 feet of the surface. Directional drilling should not be
confused with Horizontal Directional Drilling (HDD], or angular drilling, which is a steerable, trenchless
method of installing underground pipe, conduit, or cable in a shallow arc along a prescribed bore path
through soils (not rock].
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
20
-------
Similarly, HDD should not be confused with simple horizontal drilling, the method of drilling horizontally
from one within one mine working to another or drilling horizontally from the surface into mine workings.
Horizontal drilling can be an effective method of drilling from one working to another when there is
adequate space within a nearby working to deploy a drill rig or rock drill. Directional drilling is completed
from the surface at a direction other than vertical. Early applications of horizontal drilling included
exploration and workings ventilation.
Directional control of some drilling technologies can be less accurate in complex geological settings. A drill
bit can be deflected in unpredictable directions by changes in geologic properties, potentially causing the
drill string to miss the target mine workings. (EPA 2003, ASTM 2014],
Originally developed to support environmental investigation drilling and sampling, direct push technology
(DPT] is a drilling method that can be used to conduct a wide variety of invasive measurements activities,
including sonic drilling and coring of bedrock.
Prevention of MIW Releases when Drilling into Mine Pools
Mine pools in mine workings may have a hydraulic head pressure that is capable of producing a direct
pressurized release within a horizontal boring into flooded workings; or an artesian rise within the drill
tooling when workings that are under confined conditions are intercepted. In these cases, significant
groundwater may not be detected until the mine workings void is encountered, at which point the water
will either directly release from a horizontal boring or rise up into a vertical boring to the potentiometric
water level of the mine pool. To prevent MIW releases during drilling, the following precautions should
generally be undertaken: (1] use small-diameter borehole bits and drill rods; (2] drill into workings
through competent rock; and (3] use blowout preventer technologies.
A variety of equipment is used during drilling to control pressure from fluids encountered during drilling.
Most of the equipment is routinely used in the oil/gas and geothermal industries to prevent "blow outs"
from gases, oil, or pressurized water while drilling. These types of equipment can be used during mine
sites drilling to reduce the possibility of encountering a pressurized mine pool; their use has been
demonstrated to reduce the threat of a sudden release up the well bore. The apparatus that controls
outflow at the wellhead is called the blowout preventer (BOP] or blowout prevention equipment (BOPE],
The BOP stack comprises five types of devices to shut off the wellbore and prevent fluid flow out of it:
rotating heads, annular preventers, pipe rams, blind rams, and shear rams. The basic function of each is to
prevent artesian pressurized water from escaping a newly drilled borehole (DOE 2010],
States establish blowout prevention guidance for oil/gas and geothermal wells. A best practices is to
consult with the state office regulating oil/gas or geothermal drilling, as well as drilling services
companies, to discuss the specific blowout equipment that can be used during drilling into potentially
pressurized mine pools.
4.2.5 Conduct Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
An FMEA identifies potential failure modes, triggering events, likelihood of occurrence, severity of
consequences, and receptors associated with an MIW blowout. Mitigation measures are identified to
manage risk of failure and impacts by reducing the likelihood of occurrence or the severity of the
consequence or both. The scope of the FMEA is defined by an FMEA team and includes delineating the
primary purposes, establishing the scope of the evaluation, and establishing the level of detail for review
— for example, a site-wide, a specific plan, or a specific plan component or task to be performed. Examples
of FMEA scope include review of contingency, notifications and emergency action plans, and planned
activities for constructing a flow-through bulkhead; in situ MIW treatment; and advancing or
rehabilitating underground entries.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
21
-------
An FMEA is typically conducted to identify where and how a planned action might fail and to assess the
relative impact of different failures, such as drilling into mine workings or opening a blocked adit portal.
An FMEA may also be conducted to evaluate the failure mode and effects of natural events or conditions
that may lead to a failure event, such as flooding or seismic activity. Unexpected failure modes may also
include anthropogenic activities such as road construction, well drilling, or human error.
To conduct an FMEA, a multi-discipline team is assembled with diverse knowledge of mining and civil
engineering; mine geochemistry; environmental site investigation and remediation; geology,
hydrogeology, and mine site construction and remediation; MIW control, capture, and treatment;
emergency action planning and response; general mine site safety; and other expertise as relevant to the
site activity to be evaluated. For complex site conditions or planned activities, it is a best practice to have
the FMEA developed using a facilitator who leads the multi-disciplined team in evaluating the mine
structures, hydrogeology, and MIW pooling conditions (BOR 2008],
A worksheet is used to guide and document the FMEA and typically contains:
• Identifying and numbering of task and components;
• Identifying potential modes of failure;
• Identifying triggering events;
• Identifying potential failure consequences and assigning a severity rating from negligible to high.
The consequences of failure can be economic (such as property damage], environmental (such as
erosion and entrainment of waste rock or tailings; impacts to aquatic life], or health-related (such
as drinking water impacts or even loss of life]. They range from no significant economic impact at
the low end of the spectrum to loss of life at the high end of the spectrum (BOR 2008];
• Identifying the likelihood of failure and assigning a rating from unlikely to high;
• Assessing the confidence in the risk analysis as low, medium, or high. The confidence level of the
failure risk analysis can indicate whether additional evaluation is needed to predict both the risk
and mitigation measures to reduce risk. For instance, a low confidence level for a high-risk site
indicates that additional evaluation is needed; and
• Identifying mitigation measures, including additional site investigation, water quality testing, plan
revisions, or remedy design changes. The effectiveness of the mitigations can be assessed by
performing another FMEA (or updating the FMEA] using new data derived from these activities to
see if the severity of consequence has been reduced, the likelihood of occurrence has lessened, and
the confidence level in the risk analysis has increased.
FMEA provides a hierarchy of risks posed by each potential failure mode. A risk matrix is typically used to
present the likelihood of failure occurring with the consequences of the failure to identify the highest-
priority tasks or components requiring mitigations. Figure 2 provides an example of an FMEA risk
categorization matrix, which can be modified for project and stakeholder needs, as warranted.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
22
-------
Figure 2. Example FMEA Risk Categorization Matrix
Source: BOR 2008
Failure Likelihood
Unlikely
Low
Moderate
High
High
onsequences of Failure
Medium
Low
u
Negligible
L
The colors indicate the hierarchy of risk as follows:
• Red - Extreme risk
• Orange - High risk
• Yellow - Moderate risk
• Green - Tolerable risk
• Blue - Well within tolerable limits. Risk reduction continues as good operating practice.
Activities that present a high or moderate failure likelihood of an uncontrolled release of MIW should not
be undertaken, unless there is certainty that the consequences are negligible or can be controlled through
effective contingency measures. Mitigation actions are developed based on level of risk starting with high
(red] and working down to unlikely (green or blue]. Site-specific conditions should be used to adjust the
ranking of risk determinations, because in some cases the severity of consequences may make even a
negligible likelihood of consequences unacceptable. Uncertainty will be associated with missing
information, measurement inaccuracy, and human error used to assess failure mode risks. An appropriate
level of conservatism should generally be applied based on the level of uncertainty for each failure mode
analysis.
The FMEA can either be qualitative or quantitative, depending on the FMEA team preference or potential
consequences. The methodology described in this report is a qualitative measure of risk to inform the
contingency, notification, and emergency action planning. FMEAs that produce a quantitative risk measure
are more applicable to infrastructure construction or other construction where activities are more
uniform and procedures are able to provide quantifiable outputs. However, quantitative likelihood
probabilities and consequence costs may warrant such a quantitative FMEA for potentially high
consequence scenarios.
While it is a best practice, FMEA is not the only method of failure, reliability, or dependability risk analysis.
Other risk analysis methods include, but are not limited to (1] preliminary hazard analysis and functional
failure analysis, which may be effective for identifying possible failure modes; (2] common cause analysis,
which allows evaluation of risks posed by multiple, concurrent failure modes; and (3] event tree analysis
(ETA], which can be used to identify all sequences including assessing probabilities and consequences of
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
23
-------
outcomes that follow an initiating event. ETA can also be used to test the failure modes for specific actions
or events potentially affecting an MIW pool system (Kaplan, et al. 2005],
4.2.6 Plan for Invasive Measurement Activities: Contingency, Notification, and
Emergency Action Planning
Any invasive activity conducted in support of investigation or remediation at a mine site should generally
be conducted in accordance with careful contingency, notifications, and emergency action planning. A plan
(or plans] is recommended be developed to serve a critical function as the central document for
comprehensive contingency, notifications, and emergency action planning for potential major site
emergencies. A best practice is to have all other site documents that address related topics defer to and
reference the plan (for example, site work plans such as the FSP and the QAPP, remedial designs; technical
specifications for construction; monitoring plans, project management plans, and HASPs], Development or
modifications to the plan should be directly supported by the results of the FMEA performed to identify
and manage risks associated with planned activities. Conditions at the time of the FMEA should be
confirmed when conducting contingency and emergency action planning and again when response actions
are being initiated. The FMEA process is discussed in Section 4.2.5.
Adaptive management planning principles are a best practice to apply when developing contingency,
notification, and emergency action plans. Comprehensive monitoring and data collection help field
managers adapt their knowledge of site conditions in an iterative learning process, while enhancing their
understanding of the risks. To ensure that adaptive management principles are applied across the project,
all site personnel should be familiar with contingency, notification, and emergency action planning
materials prior to initiating work.
Contingency Planning
Contingency plans typically focus on the types of emergencies that could occur, potential impacts, and the
engineering controls (EC] in place and other actions that should generally be implemented in case of such
an emergency. ECs typically address the mitigation of MIW release, abatement of water pollution, erosion
protection, and sedimentation control.
While this report identifies some best practices for containing releases, it does not provide an exhaustive
treatment of this topic. Contingency planning for invasive activities to be conducted at mine sites are
presented below.
• Planning and documenting approaches to mitigate an uncontrolled release of MIW pooling, if
present, including:
o Calculating the maximum potential MIW blowout volume (with a 10 percent margin of safety,
or more if uncertainty is high];
o Evaluating the current site infrastructure's ability to contain and treat the maximum potential
MIW blowout volume;
o Considering safeguards to implement should a blowout occur (for example, geotextiles,
channelization, or other stability safeguards];
o Evaluating the suitability of the site's footprint and topography for increasing containment
capacity; and
o Recommending solutions for containment capacity increases (for example, expansion of
existing containment ponds or augmenting storage through the temporary use of large,
portable bladder bags or permanent storage tanks to provide the site with capacity in excess
of the maximum potential release volume],
• Planning and documenting contingencies to control and mitigate minor uncontrolled releases of
MIW that do not pose significant risk to human health or the environment.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
24
-------
• Monitoring changes in MIW discharge rates and water quality at the site and at receiving water
bodies before, during, and after actions.
• Using the FMEA to mitigate risk and as the basis for developing instructions related to
contingencies and emergency action requirements and procedures.
• Providing a list of training or qualifications needed or required for personnel responsible for
leading and supporting notifications and emergency action efforts.
Notifications
It is a best practice to develop a comprehensive notification plan during activities at a mine site with
known or potential MIW blowout risks. Notifications vary depending on the type of emergency at the site.
It is critical that notification planning for blowouts include notifications of downstream receptors,
including names and contact information. Site personnel should be familiar with the notifications plans
and procedures and have reliable telecommunications capabilities to support immediate notifications (for
example, satellite phones in remote areas without cell phone coverage].
Emergency Action Planning
Emergency action plans for mine sites may include, but are not limited to the following content.
• Specification of emergency actions to be performed in the event of a blowout, including
responsible personnel, resources, and equipment needed to perform the emergency actions.
• Use and regular update of existing maps, or development of new maps, that depict site roads,
features, infrastructure, and areas of sensitive and hazardous or dangerous environments;
including, but not limited to, protected areas, erosion controls and steep, heavily forested
topography.
• Procedures for storing caustic or acidic treatment chemicals, such as those used for making pH
adjustments.
• Inspection forms, plan views and associated details, including corrective and maintenance action
procedures, for pertinent features such as detention ponds.
• Procedures to (1] ensure that off-site first responders tour a site before high-risk work is started
to increase their preparedness to respond in the event of a serious incident; and (2] provide them
advance notice of such high-risk work activities.
• A list of internal experts or services vendors for specialty technologies to be used for high-risk
activities, and notification procedures to ensure that such vendors are on call or on site (as
applicable] to assist with their technologies during such high-risk activities.
4.2.7 Use Monitoring Well Data to Determine Mine Pool Elevation
When direct measurement of mine pooling is necessary, borings, monitoring wells, or other surface
openings to mine workings can be used to measure water levels. EPA's Superfund program has conducted
many groundwater studies and developed procedures to measure water levels within boreholes and wells.
Such procedures are closely related to establishing mine pool water levels under atmospheric pressure
conditions. When a bedrock aquifer is hydraulically interconnected with the mine workings, the water
level in a static (little to no flow] mine pool under atmospheric pressure conditions will equilibrate with
the surrounding groundwater level under unconfined conditions. Collecting water level measurements
from nearby wells or boreholes can help to define mine pool water levels for workings known to be in
equilibrium with groundwater. However, the mine tunnel system may not be in equilibrium with water
encountered in a fracture zone with fracture flow conditions that are typical athardrock mine sites. Water
in the mine pool or in the fractures may be confined and under pressure. These situations require
additional caution, and direct measurements of the potentiometric surface (or hydraulic pressure or head]
will add to an understanding of the degree of MIW pooling present.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
25
-------
Water levels can be directly measured by drilling into the mine workings and collecting data on the MIW
pool conditions. An FMEA provides input for the contingency, notification, and emergency action plans,
including contingency measures for invasive activities such as drilling into mine workings. An FMEA
process will reduce the chances of a sudden, uncontrolled release during drilling with careful planning. An
example best practice for measuring groundwater levels in existing wells or boreholes at mine sites can be
found in the Monitoring Well Water Measurement Standard Operating Procedure that EPA prepared for the
Yerrington Mine in Nevada (EPA 2007],
Water level measurement is intended to answer important questions about the MIW pooling, such as:
• What is the volume of MIW in the workings?
• What are MIW pool elevation fluctuations after a recharge event?
• Is the recharge response fast indicating a direct recharge path or slow, indicating a longer flow
path?
• How does the pool level relate to the surrounding water table outside of the mine?
• Is the MIW pooling level higher than the surrounding water table, indicating the potential for
blockage and pressurized conditions with an upgradient recharge?
4.2.8 Hydraulic Head Prediction Modeling
Understanding the inflows and outflows of an MIW pool can be improved by analyzing hydrogeologic,
mining, climatic, and geologic data. Modeling groundwater flow and storage in MIW pools can initially be
approached with basic data and analytical solutions. In many instances, the first level approach is
sufficient to characterize the mine pool system and assess the risk of uncontrolled outflow. Key data needs
for basic analysis include:
• Mine maps showing the extent, elevation, and orientation of mine workings, location of mine seals
and blockages, entries, shafts and other openings;
• Hydraulic head and MIW pool elevation measurements for at least a year;
• Climatic data, in particular, precipitation and snow pack;
• Geologic mapping including fractures and faults;
• MIW pool discharge data; and
• CSM visualizations.
These data are used to: (1] estimate the extent of MIW pooling; (2] estimate storage volume and storage
changes; (3] identify potential outflows; (4] estimate hydrostatic head; (5] estimate flow between sections
of MIW pool complexes; and (6] estimate outflow to surrounding rock. Flooding extent and flow within the
MIW pool can also serve as a basis for inferring general geochemical conditions within the pool (for
example, oxidizing [aerobic] or reducing [anaerobic] conditions],
Hardrock mines have relatively unique 3-dimensional mine layout and geometry as determined by the ore
body and past mining operations. Thus, specifics of outflow/seepage analysis will vary from site to site.
The level of data typically present for a MIW pool assessment lends itself to a "spreadsheet" analysis as a
first step.
As a second step, numeric groundwater flow modeling using software based on USGS's MODFLOW model
may provide additional value for MIW pool assessments when more data are available. Underground
mines contain large voids that create conduit-type flow. These features are poorly simulated in
conventional MODFLOW models. Additional packages and modifications are used to simulate the
properties of underground mines. These include simulating mine voids as drains or as modified conduits
similar to flow in a karst aquifer, or using unstructured grids. Numeric modeling includes construction of a
grid, assigning properties and boundary conditions, calibration, and sensitivity analysis. This second level
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
26
-------
analysis is characteristically
more data intensive. Figure 3
illustrates one application of
MODFLOW outputs to
present a 2-dimensional
illustration of underground
workings at a coal mine. A
limited number of numeric
modeling studies of MIW
pools are available in the
bibliography. MODFLOW
provides a software platform
that is capable of quantitative
water balance modeling to
estimate MIW pool volumes.
Without an adequate
understanding of the mine
workings, multiple water
level data points, and flow
data, modeling hydraulic head
of limited value.
Figure 3. Example of MODFLOW grid overlaid on mine outlines with various
properties assigned.
Source: Unpublished Tetra Tech project for a coal mine in Pennsylvania,
of MIW pools using MODFLOW or other quantitative models is likely to be
4,2.9 Detailed Water Balance
Should the initial water balance be inadequate for assessing the MIW release risk, it is recommended that
a detailed water balance be performed to determine or verify estimated MIW pool volumes. A detailed
water balance may be necessary for complex hydrogeology with varied conductivities and fracture-
controlled flow; extensive workings with multiple pools and blockages; or potentially high consequence
scenarios.
The detailed water balance should update the initial water balance (see Section 4.2.1} to account for
additional data collected as part of the MIW CSM development. The groundwater system is conceptualized
as a 3-dimensional aquifer recharged by uniform infiltration of precipitation and approximated loss from
seepage of streamflow in losing stream reaches. Initially, steady-state recharge, movement, and discharge
of groundwater should guide development of the corresponding numerical groundwater-flow model of
the study area. Transient changes caused by seasonal variations in recharge or changes in discharge can
be simulated separately. Automatic parameter estimation and 3-dimensional simulations of the MIW pool
can be developed using MODFLOW with manual adjustments to constrain parameter values to realistic
ranges. USGS (2011c) provides a bestpractice example for performing quantitative water balance
modeling of abandoned underground MIW pools. Information about other groundwater modeling
approaches can be found in Appendix B. Assumptions used in many groundwater model calculations, such
as uniform infiltration or Darcian flow, can lead to inaccurate results for fractured rock and MIW pools,
particularly when the site scale is relatively small.
4.3 Evaluate Data, Report Findings, and Determine Next Steps
It is recommended that a report or other comprehensive documentation be produced to present the
results of the geotechnical, hydrogeologic, hydrologic and hydraulic (including water balance], and
geochemical assessments and the FMEA to support the assessment of MIW pooling. Findings and
conclusions drawn from the results should clearly articulate the need for action to reduce MIW pooling
and the proposed mitigation measures. Independent review of the report is a best practice to ensure that
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
27
-------
findings are reproducible and recommendations are objective and reasonable. If the MIW CSM assessment
identifies a potential risk for a sudden, uncontrolled release of the mine pool, then appropriate mitigation
measures should be taken before any further site investigation or remediation work continues. A separate
report may not be necessaiy when the results of the assessments and FMEA are incorporated into a report
prepared under CERCLA, such as a Remedial Investigation or an Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis.
Data from non-invasive and invasive methods, as well as other information gathered throughout the
previous data collection steps, should be reviewed and analyzed to understand relative elevations of MIW
encountered in boreholes and to determine the presence and nature of MIW pooling within mine
workings. This information is used to update the MIW CSM and supporting visualizations, which become a
part of the information used to make mitigation decisions. Data from drilling to investigate MIW pooling
will typically result in one of the following scenarios:
• Scenario 1 - MIW pooling present in one location under atmospheric pressure - A boring
intercepts mine workings with MIW, and the water level is below the elevation of the roof of the
workings. The greater the depth of the water, the greater the hydrostatic head pressure on the
blockage. If the boring is one of a number of borings known to be intercepting connected workings
but the others reveal no MIW, then the extent of MIW pooling may be limited.
• Scenario 2 - MIW pooling present in one location under pressure - A boring intercepts mine
workings with MIW, and the water level inside the boring rises up to an elevation higher than the
elevation of the roof of the workings. The greater the elevation differential, the greater the degree
of hydraulic confinement and pressurization. It is possible for MIW to discharge from the top of
the boring as artesian flow if the MIW head elevation rises above the boring opening elevation.
Under extreme pressure conditions, abatement of artesian flow during and after drilling is
addressed through the use of release prevention and capping technologies. If the boring is one of a
number of borings known to be intercepting connected workings but the others reveal no MIW or
lower pressure MIW, then the extent of MIW pooling may be limited or the extent of confined
conditions might be limited, indicating potentially unique conditions within the workings, such as
multiple blockages or high rates of MIW inflow from the surface.
• Scenario 3 - MIW pooling present under atmospheric pressure in multiple locations - A
distributed set of borings intercepts mine workings at various depths and orientations and the
water levels are below the elevations of the roofs of the workings at each location. If the water
level elevations in all boreholes are at equal elevations, MIW may be present in a single pool
whose inflow/outflow rate is relatively stable or low. If the water level elevations are different but
trend linearly in a given direction, then MIW may be present in a single pool with a relatively high
inflow/outflow rate. If the water level elevations are significantly different and seemingly
randomly distributed, then separate MIW pooling is likely present in multiple locations and the
degree of hydraulic interconnectivity requires additional corroborating data to confirm.
Depending on the information value of other collaborative data, determining the extent of pooling
may require the advancement of additional boreholes.
• Scenario 4 - MIW pooling present in multiple locations with equivalent water level
elevations - A distributed set of borings intercepts mine workings at various depths and
orientations and the water levels are above the elevations of the roofs of the workings at each
location. If the water level elevations in all boreholes are at or near equivalent elevations, then the
MIW may be present in a single pool caused by a significant blockage with constant inflow. The
higher the water level elevations, the higher the rate and volume of inflow or the larger the
differential in hydraulic head between the MIW sourcing area and the blockage. If the water level
elevations are different but linearly trend in a given direction, then the MIW may be present in a
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
28
-------
singular pool that may or may not be interconnected with other workings. The higher the water
level elevations within the workings, the more extensive the pooling is also likely to be. Depending
on the information value of other collaborative data, delineating the extent of pooling may require
the advancement of additional boreholes.
• Scenario 5 - MIW pooling present in multiple locations with variable water level elevations
- A distributed set of borings intercepts mine workings at various depths and orientations and the
water levels are at various elevations within the workings at each location. If the water level
elevations are significantly different and seemingly randomly distributed, then separate MIW
pooling is likely present in multiple locations resulting from multiple blockages, and the nature
and degree of hydraulic interconnectivity require additional data to confirm. Depending on the
information value of other collaborative data, determining the extent of pooling may require
advancement of additional boreholes.
5.0 MITIGATE POOLED MIW UNDER PRESSURE
This section addresses mitigation measures that can be applied as best practices when MIW pooling has
been characterized and response actions may pose the potential for a sudden, uncontrolled release of
MIW. As indicated previously, this report does not provide best practices for conducting removal or
remediation activities, as might be undertaken after dewatering or stabilization of MIW pooling. Such
actions are highly diverse and site-specific and require detailed planning and execution, and the related
best practices are beyond the scope and intent of the report. Stabilization of a mine pool may be necessary
if site management issues necessitate leaving the conditions for pooled MIW in place.
5.1 Evaluate, Select, and Implement Mitigation Options for Pressurized MIW Pools
In most cases, mitigation of pressurized MIW pools will require dewatering the mine pool before
conducting response activities. Depending on the condition of the mine workings and their accessibility,
various best practices exist for dewatering MIW pools. A dewatering plan may require modifying or
supplementing site plans, including updating contingency, notifications and emergency action plans to
address dewatering failure risks and effects. Once a proposed mitigation plan is developed, it is
recommended that the selected dewatering option undergo an FMEA (see Section 4.2.5] to characterize
risk associated with potential failure modes. Physical site conditions will dictate many aspects of
mitigation plans.
The risk of a blowout in pressurized MIW pools can be reduced by controlled dewatering to lower the
hydrostatic pressure and reduce the MIW pool volume. Dewatering (partial to complete] may be
accomplished through existing adits, boreholes, and shafts, or through new boreholes located and
installed for the express purpose of mitigating and managing the MIW pool. Dewatering of MIW pool to
lower hydrostatic pressure and volume includes the steps below.
1. Identifying a target range and maximum not-to-exceed potentiometric water level is the foundation of
the mitigation plan.
2. Determining the volume of MIW to be removed based on mine geometry, adit elevation, water balance,
and water level information. Dewatering volume may be seasonally adjusted based on seasonal inflow
and outflow variability and site access considerations. For example, spring snow melt typically
provides inflows into the mine, and snow pack may limit or preclude site access for portions of the
year.
3. Developing a dewatering plan and schedule that is based on the maximum capacity of the site facilities
to capture, treat, store, or convey mine water. For sites with adequate area and amenable topography,
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
29
-------
contingent capacity can potentially be augmented through the use of temporary or permanent storage
systems. Dewatering may be planned as a one-time activity or as part of an ongoing mine-pool
management program, as determined by project objectives. If the objective is to open a blocked adit or
tunnel, the mitigation plan should consider long-term management of the MIW discharge from the
adit. The dewatering plan should also take into consideration destabilizing effects of dewatering (for
example, rapid drawdown] on the structural and geotechnical stability of the mine workings caused
by the alteration of the long-term, steady state, saturated condition of the pool. Consideration should
also be given to changes in MIW geochemistry created by dewatering (see Exhibit 7],
4. Implementing a dewatering system to achieve
and maintain the target mine-pool elevation.
Dewatering systems may include: (1]
dewatering pumps; (2] flow-through bulkhead;
(3] boreholes that decant or discharge at a
specified pool elevation; and (4] discharge
through a pipe and valve system installed
through competent bedrock into workings
behind blockages. Vertical lift or pumped
discharges require an available power source,
but are a best practice when pressurized
conditions complicate gravity discharges.
Sites in remote locations may lack access to adequate and consistent, year-round electric power. Remote
sites generally require on-site power generation if pumping is part of the mitigation plan. Pump capacity
will be dictated by the discharge rate limitations and vertical lift. Mine waters are commonly acidic or
otherwise corrosive, and use of pump hardware suited to the expected operating conditions is advised.
Three general options are commonly used in the hardrock and coal mining industries to manage water
removed from a pressurized MIW pool:
• Collecting and treating mine water at, or in proximity to, the dewatering location;
• Collecting and conveying mine pool water to a centralized facility, where it may be treated and
managed with other mine waters; and
• Temporary storage in another MIW pool or nearby facilities.
The first of these options is the most likely for most abandoned hardrock mines. Temporary storage (for
example, ponds or storage tanks/bladders] at or near the dewatering location can be utilized on
immediate or urgent dewatering actions, when time or on-site capacity does not permit long-term MIW
management prior to the need to take action. Collection, storage, and treatment of mine water at, or in
proximity to, the mine requires sufficient space, conveyance infrastructure, and suitable topography.
Severe weather can adversely affect the performance of collection, storage, and treatment systems.
Collecting and conveying multiple mine water sources to a central water treatment facility may be an
option for managing discharges within a mining district watershed. While the capacity of existing storage
and treatment facilities can be a limiting factor, one-time dewatering of a mine pool should be evaluated
for applicability. Feasibility should consider site conditions, project objectives, and pumping operations
around water treatment plant capacity and project needs. While treatment of contaminated MIW is a
critical aspect of any response action, and should be incorporated into the mitigation plan, this best
practices report does not directly address contamination remediation best practices.
MIW pool stabilization may be an alternative to dewatering. Mine pool stabilization may include such
actions as:
Exhibit 7
Geochemical Changes in MIW Caused by
Draining an MIW Pool
In saturated mine workings, acid generation is
limited by low oxygen in the water, while
drained mine workings expose reactive
sulfide minerals to atmospheric oxygen. As
with any remedial or removal action, careful
consideration should be given to the impacts
of draining mine workings of MIW before
draining the MIW.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
30
-------
• Installing flow-through bulkheads downgradient of mine pool blockages to control MIW discharge
and hydrostatic pressure. This action may be feasible only when the blockage is farther back in the
workings from a mine opening so that the bulkhead can be installed in competent bedrock; and
• Controlling mine pool pressure via changes in drainage rates through existing MIW management
systems, such as a flow-through bulkhead located in hydraulically connected mine workings.
An MIW pool or MIW flow control structures should generally be monitored through wells or mine
openings to check MIW pool elevation and identify excessive pressure on the blockage. If wells or mine
openings do not exist, the site team should consider installing monitoring wells before stabilization
actions are implemented. Mine pool stabilization efforts requiring such invasive activities should generally
be evaluated using FMEA or similar risk analysis.
6.0 QUALIFICATIONS OF THE TECHNICAL TEAM
Abandoned mines are very different from other sites. Conditions associated with underground workings
require specialized knowledge, training, and experience. To conduct the investigations and reviews of
MIW pooling conditions described in this best practices report, specific qualifications of the technical team
should be considered. State-specific qualifications for conducting hydrogeological investigations or
geotechnical evaluations may be required by law for permitting or other certification purposes. The
following are common expertise requirements for the technical team.
• Mining Geologist, with more than 10 years of specific experience in mining district studies, mine
workings, and bedrock geology. Professional Geologist license in the state of study is typically
required.
• Hydrogeologist, with more than 10 years of specific experience with bedrock hydrogeology and
water balance. Professional Geologist (PG] license in the state of study is typically required.
• Mining/Civil Engineer, with more than 10 years of field experience in underground mines design,
operation and reclamation/closure. Professional Engineer (PE] license in the state of study is
typically required.
• Geotechnical Engineer, with a PE license in the state of study and more than 10 years of
experience in underground mine hydraulic structures, stability design, reclamation, and closure.
• Geochemist, with more than 10 years of mine water geochemistry and treatment experience.
Experience in conducting tracer studies is preferred.
When an FMEA is necessaiy, it is recommended that at least one member of the technical team have
experience in performing FMEAs related to MIW pools and blowouts.
Conducting studies of mine pools at abandoned mines will likely require the use of contractors for a wide
range of activities, including drilling and heavy equipment operation. These contractors should meet
appropriate federal, state, or local training and licensing requirements, have specific and relevant
experience operating at abandoned mines, and operate in compliance with the site contingency,
notification, and emergency action plans. Experience with on-site contractor oversight during site work is
also preferred.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
31
-------
7.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM] International. 2007. Standard Test Method for
Particle-Size Analysis of Soils. ASTM D422. htip:: //www, astm.or g/Stanciards/D422
ASTM. 2010. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture] Content of Soil
and Rock by Mass. ASTM D2216. http: //www.astm.org/Standards/D2216.htm
ASTM. 2011. Standard Test Method for Direct Shear Test of Soils Under Consolidated Drained Conditions.
ASTM D3080. http://www.astm.org/Standards/D3080.htm
ASTM. 2012. Standard Test Method for Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of
Soils. ASTM D5778-07. February.
ASTM. 2014. Standard Practice for Rock Core Drilling and Sampling of Rock for Site Exploration. ASTM
D2113. www.astm.org/Standards/D2113.htm
ASTM. 2015. Standard Guide for Direct Push Soil Sampling for Environmental Site Characterizations. ASTM
D6282M. http://www.astm.org/Standards/D6282.htm
ASTM. 2016a. New Test Method for Pocket Penetrometer Test - Under Development. ASTM WK27337.
http://www.astm.org/DATABASE.CART/WORKITEMS/WK27337.htm
ASTM. 2016b. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Miniature Vane Shear Test for Saturated Fine-
Grained Clayey Soil. ASTM D2216. http://www.astm.org/Standards/D2216.htm
Anderson, N., Ismail, A. 2016. A Generalized Protocol for Selecting Appropriate Geophysical Techniques.
Federal Highways Administration, Interstate Technical Group on Abandoned Underground Mines
- An Interactive Forum. University of Missouri-Rolla. Accessed February 2016.
www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/geotech/hazards/mine/workshops/ktwkshp/kv0307.cfm
Auroralights. Land Use. Accessed January 2016.
http://auroralights.org/map project/theme.php?theme=crm&article=l
Ballaron, Paula B. 1999. Water Balance for the Jeddo Tunnel Basin, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.
Susquehanna River Basin Commission. Publication No. 208. August.
www.srbc.net/pubinfo/docs/ieddowaterbalance.pdf
Barrick Australia Limited. 2013. Final Hydrogeological Assessment, Cowal Gold Mine, Extension
Modification. September, www.evolutionmining.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2015/08/Appendix-A-Hydrogeological-Assessmentpdf
Bridge, Cas F., Bizzell, Karson R., and Ramachandran K. 2015. Mapping Acid Mine Drainage atan
Abandoned Mine Site in Ottawa County, Oklahoma Using 3D Electrical Resistivity Tomography.
March. http://www.earthdoc.org/publication/publicationdetails/?publication=83052
Briggs, David F. 2015. Gold King Mine - A Case of Russian Roulette With an Inevitable Outcome. Arizona
Daily Independent. September 3. https://arizonadailyindependentcom/2015/09/03/gold~king~
mine-a-case-of-russian-roulette-with-an-inevitable-outcome/
Bryant, G., Opekiska. 2016. Pool Study - Monongahela River. USEPA Region III. Accessed January 2016.
www.netl.doe.gov/publications/proceedings/99/99apprvr/ar7-4.pdf
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
-------
Buchanan, T.J., and Somers, W.P. 1969. Discharge measurements at gaging stations: U.S. Geological Survey
Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations. Book 3, Chap A8.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/twri/twri3a8/
Caine, J.S. Johnson, R.H., and Wild, E.C. 2011. Review and Interpretation of Previous Work and New Data on
the Hydrogeology of the Schwartzwalder Uranium Mine and Vicinity, Jefferson County. USGS Open
File Report 2011-1092. https://pubs.usgs.gOv/c 92/pdf/OFt. 1-1092.pdf
California Department of Conservation, Office of Mine Reclamation. 1994. Application of Geophysics to
Acid Mine Drainage Investigations. September.
http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/2000DHEY.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&[nd
exEl995±Thni±199g^DocsE&QugDgM!imeE&£ndIimeE&SeaixhMetflQdElM!QcRegtnc^nM!oc
=&TocEntry=&OField=&OFieldYear=&OFieldMonth=&OFieldDay=&[ntOFieldOp=0&ExtOFieldQp=
0&XmlQuerv=&File=D%3A%5Czvfiles%5C[ndex%20Data%5C95thru99%5CTxt%5C00000002%
SC201 1'HI t i ,i&User=AN0NYM0US&Password=anonvmous&SortMethod=h' <
&MaximumDocuments=l&Fuzzy,Degree=0&tmageOiiality=r75g8/r75g6/xl50yl50gl6/i425&Dis
MaMEB%7CSM)e^^
age&MaximumPages=l&ZvEntrv=l&SeekPage=x&ZvPURL
California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control (CA DTSC], 1998.
Abandoned Mine Lands Preliminary Assessment Handbook. January.
https://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/Brownfields/upload/aml handbook,pdf
CA DTSC. 2012. Guidelines for Planning and Implementing Groundwater Characterization of Contaminated
Sites. June.
https://www.dtsc.ca.gov/PublicationsForms/upload/Guidelines for Planning and Implementing
GW Characterization of-Contam Sites.pdf
CA DTSC. 2014. Well Design and Construction for Monitoring Groundwater at Contaminated Sites. June.
https://www.dtsc.ca.gov/PublicationsForms/upload/Well Design Constr for Monitoring GWCon
tam_Sjteslgdf
Cavazza, E.E., Beam, R.L. 2007. Management and Control of Abandoned Mine Pool Discharges-
Pennsylvania Case Studies Workshop. 29th Annual National Association of Abandoned Mine Land
Programs (NAAMLP] Conference. October.
http://files.dep.state.pa.us/Mining/Abandoned%20Mine%20Reclamation/AbandonedMinePortal
Files/Publications/AMLRelatedTechnicalPapers/Mine Pool Workshop-2007.pdf
Cecil, C.B., Tewalt, S.J. 2016. Coal Extraction—Environmental Prediction. Fact Sheet 073-02. U.S. Geological
Survey. Accessed January 2016. http: //pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs073-02 /fs073-02.html
Coffey Geotechnics. 2013. Final Hydrogeological Assessment Cowal Gold Mine Extension Modification.
September, www.evolutionmining.com.au/wp-content/uploads 12015/ >endix-A-
Hydrogeological-Assessmentpdf
Colorado Division of Mineral and Geology. 2002. Best Practices in Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation.
http://mining.state.co.us/SiteCollectionDocuments/AMLbmp.pdf
Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining. 2004. Summary of Minutes, Mined Land Reclamation Board
Meeting. November. http://mining.state.co.us/SiteCollectionDocuments/nov04sum.pdf
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
-------
Colorado School of Mines (CSoM], 2007. Void Detection Demonstrations at the CSM Edgar Experimental
Mine. Prepared for the Department of Labor Mine Safety and Health Administration, January.
http://arlweb.msha.gov/VoidDetection/CSM-Seismic/CSM Void Detection Final.pdf
Conservation Authorities Geoscience Group. 2013. Hydrogeological Assessment Submissions,
Conservation Authority Guidelines to Support Development Applications. June.
fattp ://cloca.ca/devreview/HvdroAssessmentGuidelines-2 013 0610- Ft NAL2 .pdf
Davis, Robert, Brent Waters. Golder Associates. 2015. Keys to Successfully Using Geophysics to Detect
Mine Voids and Covered Sinkholes. Presentation Session 2B: Geophysical 1. Geotechnical,
Geophysical, Geoenvironmental Engineering Technology Transfer Conference. April.
Eastern Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation. 2016. Mine Pool Mapping Initiative.
Accessed January 2016. http://epcamr.org/home/current-initiatives/mine-pool-mapping-
initiative/
EPA Victoria, Australia (AUEPA], 2006. Environmental Auditing, Hydrogeological Assessment
(Groundwater Quality] Guidelines. September.
www.epa.vic.gov.au/~/media/Publications/668.pdf
Gordon Geotechniques. 2015. Subsidence Prediction Report for the Hail Creek Transition Project. May.
www.riotinto.com/documents/ Energy/Appendix%20A.pdf
Hammack, R., James Sams, Garret Veloski, and Terry Ackman. 2007. Airborne Surveys Identify
Environmental Problems on Mined Lands. U.S. DOE NETL.
www.netl.doe.gov/File%20Librarv/Research/Coal/ewr/water/Airborne-Survevs.pdf
Hammack, R.W. 2016. Using Helicopter Electromagnetic Surveys to Identify Flooded Workings in
Underground Coal Mines. Interstate Technical Group on Abandoned Underground Mines - An
Interactive Forum. U.S. DOE NETL. Accessed January 2016.
www.fh wa.dotgov/engineering/geotech/hazards/mine/workshops/ktwkshp/ky0315.cfm
Hawkins, Jay. 2008. Report of Investigation of an Underground Mine Blowout near Delbarton, West
Virginia and Possible More Widespread Ramifications. Office of Surface Mining. Appalachian
Region. Pittsburg, Pennsylvania. October 20. https://www.arcc.osmre.gov/resources/pubs/2008-
[Hawkins-UndergroundMineBlowoutWV.pdf
Hefford, S.W., Smith, R.S., and Samson, C., 2006. Quantifying the Effects That Changes in Transmitter-
Receiver Geometry Have on the Capability of an Airborne Electromagnetic Survey System to
Detect Good Conductors. Exploration and Mining Geology, Vol 15, Nos 1-2, pp 43-52.
http://emg.geoscienceworld.org/conter
HRB-Singer, Incorporated. 1971. Detection of Abandoned Underground Coal Mines By Geophysical
Methods. April.
https://www.goo gle.com/url?sa=t&rct=i&a=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=l&cad=ria&uact=8&ved=
0ahUKEwivocfE4qTKAhUCLyYKHSlcDpA0Pgg!MAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnepis.epa.gov%2FExe
%2FZyPURL.cgi%3FDockev%3D910QGXD8.TXT&iisg=AFOiCNGmTpHoiKOskO2rHUvc7eOKHrfsY
Hughes, R., Hewitt, M., 2010. Mine Pool Work - Eastern PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation.
State of the Susquehanna.
www.srbc.net/stateofsusa2( :uments /E PCA1M RMinePoolWorkFeatureArticle. PD F
Hydrometrics, Inc. 2010. Data Compilation Report For The Black Pine Mine, Granite County, Montana.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases 34
-------
International Council of Mining & Metals (ICMM]. A practical guide to catchment-based water
management for the mining and metals industry, www.icmm.com/document/8329
ICMM. Planning for Integrated Mine Closure: Toolkit, www.icmm.com /document /310
Johnson, William J. 2003. Applications of the Electrical Resistivity Method for Detection of Underground
Mine Workings. Geophysical Technologies for Detecting Underground Coal Mine Voids Workshop.
July.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/geotech/hazards/mine/workshops/ktwkshp/ky0311.pd
f
Kaplan, Stan, et al. 2005. New Tools for Failure and Risk Analysis: Anticipatory Failure Determination®
(AFD] and the Theory of Scenario Structuring. Published by Idea International, Inc.
Kohli, K.K., Block, F. 2007. Guidance to Plan, Design, Evaluate and Inspect Above-Drainage Coalmines
Outcrop Barriers to Prevent Blowouts. www.arcc.osmre.gov/resources/pubs/2007-KKohli-
OutcropBarrier.pdf
Korp, M.C. 2001. The Conowingo Tunnel and the Anthracite Mine Flood-Control Project. August.
http://files.dep.state.pa.us/Mining/Abandoned%20Mine%20Reclamation/AbandonedMinePortal
F'lles/F ubhcatioms/LR.olcit.od I oc^fa fliCjcil I" cip01 s/C^onovvin^o I unnel'~2 01.1.»pdf
Lawrence, C. 2014. Mine blowout on Boone-Lincoln line. MetroNews.
http://wvmetronews.com/2014/02/20/mine-blowout-on-boone-lincoln-line/
Love, E., Hammack, R., Harbert, W., Sams, J., Veloski, G., and Ackman, T. 2005. Using airborne thermal
infrared imagery and helicopter EM conductivity to locate mine pools and discharges in the Kettle
Creek Watershed, North-Central Pennsylvania. Geophysics v. 70, no. 6 (Nov-Dec, 2005], p. B73-
B81.
Luo, Y., Peng, S. 1989. CISPM - A subsidence prediction model. January.
httPs://www.researchgate.net/publication/23982(| "¦ 1 ISPM ' .nbsidence prediction model
Mabie, J.S., 2003. Geophysical Investigation of the T and T Mine Complex, Preston County, West Virginia.
http://pages.geo.wvu.edu/~wilson/theses/mabie.pdf
Maxim Technologies, Inc. 2002. Technical Memorandum: Reopening of the Portals of the Lower Spaulding
Adit and the McLaren Adit or Winter Tunnel.
www.fs.usda.gov/rnternet/FSE DOCIJMENTS/stelprdb5401.504.pdf
National Groundwater Association. Industry Best Suggested Practices. www.ngwa.org/Professional-
Resources/bsp/Pages/defaultaspx
Newman, D., Agioutantis, Z., Karmis, M. 2001. SDPS for Windows: An Integrated Approach to Ground
Deformation Prediction. 20th International Conference on Ground Control in Mining.
https://www.energv.vt.edu/Publications/2001 WVU SDPS,pdf
Nobis Engineering, Inc. 2009. Conceptual Site Model - Technical Memorandum, Ely Copper Mine
Superfund Site, Vershire, Vermont. July, www3.epa.gov/regionl/superfund/sites/elv/473839.pdf
Pendrigh, Nicole, Phil Sirles, Paul Ivancie, and Douglas LaBracque. 2012. Electrical Geophysics for Deep
Tunnel Detection at a Gold Mine Remediation Site. Abstract Only. 25th Symposium on the
Application of Geophpysics to Engineering & Environmental Problems. Environmental &
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
35
-------
Engineering Geophysical Society. March 25.
www.earthdoc.org/publication/publicationdetails/?publication=65887
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP], 1998. Coal Mine Drainage Prediction and
Pollution Prevention in Pennsylvania.
http://files.dep.state.pa.us/Mining/BureauOfMiningPrograms/BMPPortalFiles/Coal Mine Draina
Perry, E. 2001. Modelling rock-water interactions in flooded underground coal mines, Northern
Appalachian Basin. Geochemistry - Exploration, Environment, Analysis. February.
http://geea.geoscienceworld.org/contei ibstract#cited-bv
Robertsen GeoConsultants, Inc., BGC Engineering Inc. 2006. Report No. 097003 Geotechnical Risk
Assessment For Galore Creek (FMEA], March.
fattps < 1 1¦gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/documents/1> "'.11"¦111111.111.1"¦ 11.1 a0424fc071d
946d I41.a9.pdf
Robertson, P.K. 2013. The James K. Mitchel Lecture: Interpretation of In-Situ Tests - Some Insights.
Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization 4.
ftp://ftp.ingv.it/pub/sara.amoroso/Liquefazione%20-
%2 OAvezzano /Papers /Liciuefazione%2 0da%2 OSD MT/Roberson%2 02 012 .pdf
Skousen, J., A. Rose, G. Geidel, J. Foreman, R. Evans, W. Hellier. 1998. Handbook of Technologies for
Avoidance and Remediation of Acid Mine Drainage. Acid Drainage Technology Initiative (ADTI],
Published by The National Mine Land Reclamation Center. June 1.
http://www.osmre.gov/resources/librarv/ghm/hbtechavoid.pdf
Smith, P.A. 2002. Characterization of an Acid Mine Drainage Site in Southern Illinois.
www.asmr.us/Publications/Conference%20Proceedings/2002/0472%20Smith.pdf
Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration Inc. (SME], 2014. Management Technologies for Metal
Mining Influenced Water. Sampling and Monitoring for the Mine Life Cycle (Volume 6], Edited by
Virginia T. McLemore, Kathleen S. Smith, and Carol C. Russell.
Stoertz, M.W., Parameswar, S., McCament, B., Bowman, J.S. 2004. Hydrology of the Abandoned
Underground Corning Coal Mine, Perry County, Ohio.
www.asmr.us/Publications/Conference%20Proceedings/2004/1831-Stoertz%20QH.pdf
Stringer, A.C., Tallman, A., Klepfer, E. 2013. Modeling Effects of Underground Mine Depressurization on
Water Resources for the Proposed Montanore Mine, Lincoln and Sanders Counties, Montana.
www.mtech.edu/mwtp/conference/2013 presentations/Cam%20Stringer.pdf
Tetra Tech, Inc. 2011. Hydraulic Adit Plug Closure, World's Fair Mine, Patagonia, Arizona. Mine Design,
Operations & Closure Conference. May.
www.mtech.edu/mwtp/conference/2011%20Presentations/Wednesdav/Allan%20Kirk.pdf
The Express. 2010. Abandoned Kettle Creek mine stabilization done, will prevent future acid mine
'blowout'. February, www.lockhaven.com/page/contentdetail/id/5161 andoned-Kettle-
CrreJfcMtnfeiStoM
The International Network for Acid Prevention (INAP], 2009. Global Acid Rock Drainage Guide (GARD
Guide], www.gardguide.com.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
38
-------
Toran, L., Bradbury, K.R. 1988. Ground-Water Flow Model of Drawdown and Recovery Near an
Underground Mine. Ground Water. Vol. 26. No. 6. http://info.ngwa.org/gwol/pdf/882946790.PDF
Triad Engineering, Inc. 2013. Subsurface Investigation Big Branch Slurry Impoundment, Martin County,
Kentucky. Triad Project No. C00553. Submitted to the U.S. Department of Labor, Mine Safety and
Health Administration. March, https: //arlweb.msha.gov/impoundments/martincounty/triad.pdf
United Kingdom Environment Agency. 2012. Prioritization of Abandoned Non-coal Mine Impacts on the
Environment. March.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/svstem/uploads/attachment data/file/290872/schol
United Nations Environment Program (UNEP], ICMM. 2005. Good practice in emergency preparedness
and response. September, www.icmm.com/document/8
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO], 1982. Ground-water models.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0004/000489/048909eo.pdf
University of Kentucky - Kentucky Geological Survey. Underground Mine Blowout.
http://kgs.uky.edu/kgsweb/download/terrain/ekypdfs/EasternCoalField%2046.pdf
URS. 2012. Field Activities Report: Mine Adit Entry, Red and Bonita Mine Site, Silverton, San Juan County,
Colorado. January.
www.geomineinfo.com/ESW/Files/RedandBonita Adit Field Activities Reportpdf
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE], 2012. Environmental Quality: Conceptual Site Models. Publication
No. EM 200-1-12. December 28. www.itrcweb.org/ism-l/references/EM 200-l-12.pdf
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA] Agricultural Research Service, USEPA, University of Arizona, and
University of Wyoming. Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment (AGWA]: A GIS-Based
Hydrologic Modeling Tool for Watershed Management and Landscape Assessment.
http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/46226/PDF/
USDA Forest Service (USFS], 2006. Investigative Methods for Controlling Groundwater Flow to
Underground Mine Workings. August, www.fs.fed.us/t-
bs/htmlpubs/htm03712801/index.htm
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE], National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL], 2007. Draft Final
Report - Evaluation of Airborne Geophysical Surveys for Large-Scale Mapping of Contaminated
Mine Pools, www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/938586-eb4v\
DOE. 2010. Handbook of Best Practices for Geothermal Drilling. Prepared by John Finger and Doug
Blankenship. Sandia Sandia National Laboratories. Report #SAND2010-6048. December.
https://energv.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/1 nghandbook.pdf
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (BOR], 2008. Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel
Combined Risk Assessment Includes: Results of Geotechnical and Structural Analysis and
Potential Failure Modes and Effects Analysis. November.
https://www.usbr.gov/gp/ecao/leadville/combined risk assessmentpdf
BOR. 2015. Technical Evaluation of the Gold King Mine Incident, San Juan County, Colorado. October.
www.usbr.gov/docs/goldkingminereportpdf
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
-------
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey (USGS]. 1982a. Measurement and computation of
Streamflow: Volume 1. Measurement of Stage and Discharge. Water-Supply Paper 2175. By S. E.
Rantz and others. Pages 1-284. https://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/wsp2175/pdf/WSP2175 volla.pdf
USGS. 1982b. Measurement and computation of Streamflow: Volume 2. Computation of Discharge. Water-
Supply Paper 2175. By S. E. Rantz and others. Pages 285-631.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/wsp/wsc >df/WSP2175 vol2a.pdf
USGS. 2004. Use of Submersible Pressure Transducers in Water-Resources Investigations. Techniques of
Water-Resources Investigations 8-A3. http://pubs.usgs.gov/twri/twri8a3/pdf/twri8-a3.pdf
USGS. 2006. Geochemical Characterization of Mine Waste, Mine Drainage, and Stream Sediments at the
Pike Hill Copper Mine Superfund Site, Orange County, Vermont.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2008/5303/pcif/sir20085303 PrintOnly.pdf
USGS. 2010. Preliminary estimates with identification of data needs: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific
Investigations Report 2010-5261, 54 p. http:://pubs,usgs,gov/sir 12010/526l/support/sir2010-
5261.pdf
USGS. 2011a. Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011-1092, 55 p.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2011/109/ 32.pdf
USGS. 2011b. Hydrogeologic Setting and Simulation of Groundwater Flow near the Canterbury and
Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnels, Leadville Colorado.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2011/5085/pdf/sir2011-5085.pdf
USGS. 2011c. Water Budgets and Groundwater Volumes for Abandoned Underground Mines in the
Western Middle Anthracite Coalfield, Schuylkill, Columbia and Northumberland Counties,
Pennsylvania - Estimates with Identification of Data Needs. USGS Report 2010-5261.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5261/support/sir2010-5261.pdf
USGS. 2016a. FY2004 Advanced Geophysical Methods Development. Accessed January 2016.
http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/bgas/toxics/FY04-advanced/
USGS. 2016b. Bibliography of Geophysical Methods for Characterizing Mine Waste. Accessed January 2016.
http://crustal.usgs.gov/proiects/minewaste/geophysics mine pubs,html
USGS. 2016c. Geophysical Technology Transfer (G2T], Accessed January 2016.
http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/bgas/g2thtml
U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE]. 2004.
Quantitative and Qualitative Aspects of Underground Mine Pools.
www.osmre.gov/resources/librarv/proceedings/2004HtW-Sessionl-UndergroundMinePool.pdf
OSMRE. 2007. Guidance Manual: Outcrop Barrier Design for Above Drainage Coal Mines. January.
www.arcc.osmre.gov/resources/pubs/2007-KKohli-OutcropBarrier-GuidanceManual.pdf
OSMRE. 2007. Mine Pool Workshop. March.
wwwIgoogleImm/ud2saEt&ix^i&flE&£sixEs&smiixeEweb&cdE3&£adEmMaE^8MedEQahUKE
wiHi8CM KLKAhWG7vYKHbAiB6wOFggqMAf&url=http%3A%2F%2 Fwww.osmre.gov%2 Fresour
ces%2Flibiaiy%2FBmceMings%2F2M7MinePoQlWQHcshogapdf&usggAEUiCNEEREXVDI06d8Qh_
akNVuvTHhbCSA
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
38
-------
OSMRE. 2013a. Guide to Using Tracers in Coal Mining Situations. April 22.
www.arc&osmre.gov/about/techDisciplines/hydrology/docs/techGuidance/20t3/tsd~wggb~
Guide to using Tracers.pdf
OSMRE. 2013b. North Branch Potomac River Mine Pool Assessment Study. November.
www.google.com/url7sa =t&rct=i&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=l&cad=ria&uact=8&ved=0ahUKE
wilflZvRiaPKMiYENSYKHMJIFSGF^^
utl)2Ffe?MlgcM^
OSMRE. 2014a. Final Report Fairmont, West Virginia Mine-pool. March
wwwj[oofJ&mffl/ttr|ZM5tfe
wiuroiSiaPKAhXGyyYKHeTwA7UOFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arcc.osmre.gov%2Fabo
ut%2FtediDiscipJines%2FminePools%2F2M4JainnQntMinePQQjLWV:
FinalReportpdf&usg=AF0iCNHElMLqiPBCaAYneb43 KKJ9AOUBw
OSMRE. 2014b. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Releases Studies of Mine Pools
Near the North Branch of the Potomac River and Monongahela River. November.
www.osmre.gov/resources/newsroom/News/2
OSMRE. 2014c. OSMRE releases two technical studies: Mine Pool Hydrologic Characterization Studies.
http://www3.epa.gov/reg3wapd/npdes/npdesminingmeeting: resentations/DavThreePres
^Itetions/OSMJdineBQoL^eports,^
OSMRE. 2016a. National Mine Map Repository. Accessed January 2016.
http://mmr.osmre.gov/MultiPub.aspx
OSMRE. 2016b. Hydrology Equipment. Accessed January 2016.
www.arcc.osmre.gov/about/techDisciplines/hydrology/eauipmentshtm
OSMRE. 2016c. National and Regional Technology Transfer Teams. Accessed January 2016.
www.osmre.gov/programs/tdt/teams.shtm
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT], Federal Highways Administration (FHWA], 2003. Public Roads:
Avoiding Voids. Volume 66, No. 6. May/June.
https://www.fh wa.dotgov/publications/publicroads/03mav/01.cfm
FHWA. 2016. Abandoned Underground Mines Program. Bridges and Structures; Geotechnical Hazards.
Accessed January 2016. www.fhwa.dotgov/engineering/geotech/hazards/mine/
U.S. House of Representatives. 2016. EPA, The Department of the Interior, and the Gold King Mine
Disaster. Committee on Natural Resources, February 11.
http://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/house committee on natural resources gold ki
n Ljm ]i n cl* ]f cl* ^ f£«* 13. 1.1. C31. ^3. 13 ^11. f
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA], 1971. Detection of Abandoned Underground Coal Mines by
Geophysical Methods.
http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/9100GXD8.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&tnde
x=Pj:1 Q€SEMjueDg&TimeE&£ndT|meE&SMI^hMetfiC!dEl^QdRestrictEn&TocE&T
ocEntrv=&0 Field=&0 FieldY ear=&.0 FieldMonth=&0 FieldDav=&[ntO FieldOp=Q&ExtO FieldOp=Q&X
m]Duery=&FiJe=P%3A%5Czyfiles%5C[ndex%20Date%5C70.thruZ5%5CTxt%5C00000012%5C91
OOQCDS^bttMisei^ANONYMOliS&PaggwoMEMlQnyDIQUs&SortMetiiodEMliZCi
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases 39
-------
Ma3EB%7CSM)eJM
age&MaximumPages=l&ZyEntry=l&SeekPage=x&ZyPURL
EPA. 1988. Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA.
October, http ;.ornl.gov/documents/GU1'DANCE.PDF
EPA. 1991. Handbook of Suggested Practices for the Design and Installation of Ground-Water Monitoring
Wells. March, www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/fieldsamp-
wellshandbook.pdf
EPA. 1992a. Ground Water Forum: Monitoring Well Development Guidelines for Superfund Project
Managers, www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/welldevelp O.pdf
EPA. 1992b. RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring: Draft Technical Guidance. November.
www3.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/correctiveaction/resources/guidance/sitechar/gwmonitr/rcra
EPA. 1993. Subsurface Characterization and Monitoring Techniques: A Desk Reference Guide. May.
http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/30004L8E.txt?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&[ndex
M33fflJiM}2M994M)ots^
&Toc=&TocEntrv=&0 Field=&0 FieldY ear=&.0 FieldMonth=&0 FieldDav=&UseO Field=&l ntO FieldOp
=0&ExtQ Field Qp=0&XmlQuerv=&File=D%3A%5CZYF[[,ES%5C[NDEX%2 OP ATA%5C91.THRIJ94%
01 X_j—k ^ C/) 0,^J /q C^3_0 0 04L 8 L. txt^^JL J s fc-1 ^VNONYNlOUS^jj/ asswoid anoriymo.us^^Sc^i tNlfc-thc)
d=h%7C-
&MaximumDocuments=l&FuzzyDegree=0&tmageOuality=r75g8/r75g8/xl50yl5Qgl6/i425&Dis
ageMdMimimiEagesEl&ZyEntrjEM
EPA. 2000. Abandoned Mine Site Characterization and Cleanup Handbook. August
http://vosemite.epa.gOv/Rl.0/CLEANIJP.NSF/9f3c21.896330b4898825687b007a0f33/f4724fl.0c
c d c 2 f4 d 882 5 699 a 0 0 78 61 d d / $ F f I. E / A M S C C H. d d f
EPA. 2001. Performing Quality Flow Measurements at Mine Sites. September.
www.earthwardconsulting.com/librarv/600r01043complete.pdf
EPA. 2002. Ground-Water Sampling Guidelines for Superfund and RCRA Project Managers. May.
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/gw sampling guide.pdf
EPA. 2003. EPA and Hardrock Mining: A Source Book for Industry in the Northwest and Alaska. January.
http://vosemite.epa.gov/R10/WATER.NSF/840a5de5d0a8 2 5 6 5 0 fO 0 715 a 2 7 / e4 ba 15 715 e
EPA. 2005. Groundwater Sampling and Monitoring with Pirect Push Technologies. Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response. August.
http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/20017GL0.TXT?ZyActionD=ZyDocument&Client=EPA&lnde
XElPlIfe/rhrMl015Mo£S5&^
&TocEntrv=&0 Field=&0 FieldY ear=&.0 FieldMonth=&0 FieldDay=&lntO FieldOp=Q&ExtO FieldOp=Q
&XmlOuerv=&File=D%3A%5Czvfiles%5C[ndex%20Data%5C00thru05%5CTxt%5C0000001Q%5
£20.0 1 ¦. I! xtMisei^ANONYMOjiS&PasswoMEanQimilQus&SortMethodEilSli' <
&MaximumDocuments=l&FuzzyDegree=0&tmageOuality=r75g8/r75g8/xl50yl5Qgl6/i425&Dis
.MiyEB%7CIf&PeJSeekPageEE.x&Seaii:M|acl£EZgA(:tionL&Bacl£EZYA(:ti
age&MaximumPages=l&ZvEntrv=l&SeekPage=x&ZvPURL
gw.pdf
for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
40
-------
EPA. 2006. Guidance on Systematic Planning Using the Data Quality Objectives Process. Office of
Environmental Information. February.
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/documents/guidance systematic planning cicio process.pdf
EPA. 2007. Monitoring Well Water Level Measurement. SOP-16, Yerrington Mine Site. February 1.
http://vosemite.epa.gov/r9/sfund/r9sfdocw.nsf/3dc283e6c5d6056f8825742600' 3 £26
eMd420d8b882575el006899aeyi.F[LE./SOP-
16]^%20MQnitoi^i20We!i2iii20Watei^i20Leyd2iii20Measurementcdf
EPA. 2011. Environmental Cleanup Best Management Practices: Effective Use of the Project Life Cycle
Conceptual Site Model. Quick Reference Fact Sheet. Office of Superfund Remediation and
Technology Innovation. July, www.clu-in.org/download/remed/csm-life-cycle-fact-sheet-final.pdf
EPA. 2012. Formosa Mine Superfund Site - Final 0U1 Remedial Investigation Report.
www3.epa.gov/regioinlO/pcif/sites/forirnosairnine/final Formosa mine superfund 1 RI re
port textpdf
EPA. 2013. Groundwater Sampling Operating Procedure. Region 4 Science and Ecosystem Support
Division. March. www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/Groundwater-
Sampling.pdf
EPA. 2014. Reference Guide to Treatment Technologies for Mining-Influenced Water. EPA 542-R-14-001.
March, www.clu-
in.org/download/issues/mining/Reference Guide to Treatment Technologies for Ml'W.pdf
EPA. 2015a. Red and Bonita/Gold King Operational Plan - Draft 5/22/2015. May.
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/1573798.pdf
EPA. 2015b. Memorandum: Transmittal of EPA Internal Gold King Mine Review Report. August.
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-
08/documents/new gold king mine memodated redacted,pdf
EPA. 2015c. Memorandum: Interim Guidance for Continuation of Work and Development of
Comprehensive List of Superfund Mining and Mineral Processing Sites. September.
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-
09 /documents/interimguidanceforworkatminesitei f
EPA. 2015d. Memorandum: Review of Regional and Area Contingency Plans for Downstream Notifications.
September, www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-
09 /documents/reviewofdownstreamnotificationplans9 4 2015.pdf
EPA. 2015e. Post-Gold King Mine Release Incident: Conceptual Monitoring Plan for Surface Water, EPA
Draft, Sediments, and Biology. September, www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-
09/documents/post-gkm draft conceptual monitoring pla
EPA. 2015f. Focused Technical Review of Probe Hole Dewatering Characterization Plan and 30-60 Percent
Draft Design Plans for Level 1 Adit Rehabilitation, Standard Mine, Gunnison National Forest,
Colorado, Technical Memorandum. October.
EPA. 2016a. Guideline Template for Hydrogeological Review/Technical Assessment Report. Accessed
January 2016.
www.epa.ie/pubs/reports/enforcement/templates/Guideline%20Template%20Report%20for%
20reporting%20compliance%20with%20the%20EQ%20fGroundwater)%20Regulations%20201
O.pdf
! " "> ces for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases 41
-------
EPA. 2016b. Field Sampling Procedures for Region 9. Accessed January 2016. www.epa.gov/qualitv/field-
sampling-procedures-region-9
Weston Solutions. 2015. Draft Technical Memorandum, Gold King Mine Investigation and Blowout Event.
August, www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-10/documents/1574032.pdf
West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey. 2012. West Virginia Mine Pool Atlas, Final Project Report
for the project period January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2011. May.
www.dep.wv.gov/WWE/wateruse/Documents/MinePoolAtlas.pdf
Wildemeersrch, S., Brouyere, S., Orban, Ph., Couturier, J., Dingelstadt, C., Dassargues, A., Application of the
Hybrid Finite Element Mixing Cell Method To An Abandoned Coalfield in Belgium.
http://orbi.ulg.ac.be/bitstream/2268/69485/l/HYDROL9216 Accepted Manuscriptpdf
Winters, W.R., Capo, R.C., 2004. Ground Water Flow Parameterization of an Appalachian Coal mine
Complex. Ground Water. Vol. 42, No.5. https://info.ngwa.org/GWOL/pdf/042579845.pdf
Wireman, M., Gertson, J., Williams, M., 2006. Hydrogeologic Characterization of Ground Waters, Mine Pools
and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, Leadville, Colorado.
https://imwa.info/docs/imwa 2006/2439-Wireman-CQ.pdf
Wolkersdorfer, Christian. 2006. Water Management at Abandoned Flooded Underground Mines,
Fundamentals, Tracer Tests, Modelling, Water Treatment. September.
faBBs;//i»^ [2&jggEPA272&dflE3bandoned±un
derground+mine+pool&source=bl&ots= OLWOtTz8R&sig=g[MVNivabp953X29CfFdh 31Mbfo&.fal=
en&saEX&AffidEQCB0Q6AEwADgUahUKEMI4£HyytHHAhVBMMKHU4EAEE#yEQnepage&flEaband
Zapata Engineering. 2006. Geophysical Void Detection Demonstrations. 6th Biennial ITGAUM Workshop.
June.
www.dotnv.gov/conferences/itgaum/repositorv/3D Hanna Geophvsical%20Void%20Demonstr
ation.pdf
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
42
-------
APPENDIX A. BEST PRACTICES CHECKLIST TOOL
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases Page A-1
-------
Checklist Tool for Developing a Conceptual Site Model for Assessing Risks
Associated with Pooling of Mining-Influenced Water
Item
Activity Description
Completed?*
#
(Yes / No / NA)
1. CONDUCT INITIAL SITE SCREENING
la
Identify, obtain and review site documents and data
lb
Assess structure of mine workings using available information
lc
Identify data gaps
Id
Conduct site visit
le
Make initial screening determination
~ No MIW pool dlstable MIW pool GlUnknown EHUnstable MIW pool
2. DEVELOP MIW CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
2a
Develop MIW CSM visualization(s) of mine workings and MIW conditions
3. EVALUATE HYDROGEOLOGIC, HYDROLOGIC, GEOCHEMICAL AND GEOTECHNICAL ATTRIBUTES OF MIW
POOLING
3a
Evaluate geotechnical attributes
3b
Evaluate hydrogeologic attributes
3c
Evaluate hydrologic attributes
3d
Evaluate geochemical attributes
3e
Develop initial water balance
4. PLAN AND CONDUCT MINIMALLY INVASIVE MEASUREMENTS
4a
Conduct geophysical surveys
4b
Measure groundwater/MIW pooling water levels
4c
Measure surface water flows
4d
Measure surface water quality
4e
Identify possible drilling locations
4f
Develop detailed water balance, calculate or estimate hydrostatic conditions
5. PLAN AND CONDUCT INVASIVE MEASUREMENTS VIA DRILLING OR OTHER METHODS
5a
Develop investigation work plans
5b
Perform failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA)
5c
Develop or refine contingency, notification and emergency action plans
5d
Mobilize and execute invasive measurements work plan
5e
Review and analyze invasive measurements data
6. COLLECT AND EVALUATE DATA, REPORT FINDINGS, AND DETERMINE NEXT STEPS
6a
Install and monitor pressure transducers
6b
Install and monitor MIW discharge flow measuring devices
6c
Install and monitor MIW pool and discharge water quality measuring devices
6d
Collect mine pooling monitoring data for approximately one calendar year
6e
Correlate MIW pool water levels with the elevation of MIW discharge location
6f
Update detailed water balance; calculate hydrostatic conditions
6g
Update MIW CSM and visualization(s)
7. MITIGATE POOLED MIW
7a
Select mitigation approach and develop mitigation work plan
7b
Perform FMEA
7c
Update contingency, notification and emergency action planning
7d
Mobilize and implement mitigation work plan
*No and NA answers should be explained; Yes answers should be accompanied by documentation and references.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page A-1
-------
Instructions
The following instructions provide information and considerations for each row in the checklist.
1. CONDUCT INITIAL SITE SCREENING
la. Identify, obtain, and review site documents and data to develop overall understanding of site
history; site topography and features; site mineralogy and geology; mine workings; MIW discharges; known
or potential MIW pooling; and environmental condition from prior site investigation and remediation
efforts. Interview nearby landowners, local mining experts and government agencies, and representatives
of responsible state and federal agencies.
lb. Assess structure of mine workings to understand the extent, features and geospatial orientations of
the mine workings and any known or suspected blockages. Review available mineral exploitation planning
and development maps; historical and recent maps, cross-sections and 3-dimensional representations from
site investigation and remediation; and other information that illustrate the historical evolution and
operation of the mine workings. Additional data may include mine maps from EPA, Office of Surface Mining,
Reclamation and Enforcement [OSMRE] National Mine Repository, USGS National Geochemical Survey
Database for geochemistry of stream sediments and soils, aerial photogrammetry; and fracture trace
analysis (fracture zones and other linear geologic and geomorphologic features).
lc. Identify data gaps as the basis for design of the initial site visit, data gaps in desktop information
should be identified and data quality and reliability should be evaluated.
Id. Conduct site visit to evaluate or confirm whether proposed response actions could potentially result in
a sudden, uncontrolled release of MIW. Perform site walk-through and photo-documentation of mine and
locations of proposed response actions to identify the presence and location of features commonly
associated with MIW pooling. Note features not previously known to exist or not shown in the correct
locations on site maps; and document location coordinates using global positioning system (GPS). Assess
site for areas to contain, treat, or store MIW as release contingency and for dewatering efforts. Confirm
downstream surface water bodies, uses and potential receptors. View adjacent mine sites with known or
potential interconnections. Meet with former site workers, local mining experts, and nearby land owners to
increase understanding of site history. Review of local file repositories to increase overall site knowledge.
le. Make initial screening determination: check box that is appropriate. Determine if the response
action does not pose a risk (no MIW pool or stable MIW pool that the response action will not affect) or if
further study is needed to make this determination (unknown potential for MIW pool, or potential that
MIW is not stable, or that response action can make the MIW pool unstable). If further study is needed, the
technical team will develop a conceptual site model (CSM) to assess pooled MIW risks.
2. DEVELOP MIW CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL
2a. Develop CSM visualizations based on available data, including, but not limited to surface topography;
important surface features (boreholes, adit portals, shafts, vents, subsidence features); mine workings
configuration; geologic structures, including contacts, strike, and dip; key subsurface features (sump areas,
interconnections to adjacent mines, collapse areas, surface water / snow melt inflow areas); and any other
salient features needed to characterize MIW pooling. The most effective initial MIW CSM format may be
figures, maps, tables, and text. If appropriate and adequate data are available, consider developing spatially
accurate visualizations using geographic information system (GIS) or 3-dimensional data visualization and
analysis (3DVA) software.
3. EVALUATE GEOTECHNICAL, HYDROGEOLOGIC, HYDROLOGIC, AND GEOCHEMICAL ATTRIBUTES OF MIW
POOLING
3a. Evaluate geotechnical attributes as indicated to understand the geotechnical conditions of the mine
workings that create blockages. Consider evaluating the following:
• Dimensions and extent of mine workings, including adits, drifts, cross-cuts, haulage routes, shafts,
raises, winzes, manways, air vents;
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page A-2
-------
• Types and conditions of support/rehabilitation structures such as timbering, beams, cribbing, square
sets, ribs, pillars, crossbars, steel beams, pinning, bolts, concrete;
• Workings storage - volume of mine workings above and below mine potential blockage locations to
estimate MIW pooling volume;
• Mine working openings at the surface that serve or could potentially serve as MIW inflow or outflow
locations, as well as air inflow locations, key contributors to MIW acidification;
• Portal or other mine opening stability assessment;
• Known or suspected mine workings interconnections between mines;
• Presence of faults, joints, folding or other geologic features that could affect mine stability;
• Thickness and integrity of overburden cover above the mine workings (for example, fracturing is
typically more prevalent and fractures have wider aperture at shallower depths);
• Types, strengths, and competency of bedrock and other strata;
• Location, composition, and dimensions of known or suspected flow blockages, and the forces acting on
the blockages;
• Surface expressions of underground workings such as structure failure subsidence and slope collapses;
• Potential for liquefaction of soils near mine openings or comprising blockages; and
• Slope stability: physical, mechanical, and seismic properties (for possible naturally occurring slope
failure or failure as a result of drilling and/or construction equipment).
3b. Evaluate hydrogeologic attributes as indicated to understand the hydrogeologic conditions that
provide inflow to, and outflow from, the mine workings. Consider evaluating the following:
• Types and nature of hydrogeologic units (unconsolidated deposits, bedrock);
• Hydraulic properties of hydrogeologic units (hydraulic conductivity, transmissivity, storability,
porosity, dispersity);
• Thickness and ar eal extent of hydrogeologic units;
• Type of porosity (primary, such as intergranular pore space in unconsolidated deposits or porous
bedrock matrices; or secondary, such as bedrock discontinuities, fractures, or solution cavities);
• Groundwater flow through faults, joint fractures, mineral veins;
• Presence or absence of confining or semi-confining lithologic units;
• Depth to water table and seasonal variation, thickness of vadose zone, potentiometric surface, and
confined, unconfined, or leaky confined conditions;
• Groundwater flow directions (hydraulic gradients, both horizontal and vertical), volumes (specific
discharge), rate (average linear velocity);
• Catchment area and groundwater recharge zones;
• Groundwater/surface water interactions, areas of groundwater discharge to surface water (gaining),
and surface water recharge of groundwater (losing); and
• Seasonal variations in groundwater conditions.
3 c. Evaluate hydrologic and hydraulic attributes as indicated to understand the hydrologic and
hydraulic conditions at the surface that provide inflow to the workings. Consider evaluating the following:
• Site topography, watersheds, drainage basins, and associated natural surface water bodies; including
lakes, ponds, rivers, active and temporal streams, and constructed drainage systems.
• Surface and subsurface man-made impounded water bodies;
• Workings inflow - groundwater/surface water inflow rate, including precipitation and infiltration;
• Workings outflow - MIW outflow, discharge rates, seasonal variations (maximum and minimum);
• Location, nature, and condition of MIW management systems in workings such as bulkheads (including
type, material and thickness), pressure grouting, coffer dams, discharge piping, floor channels, and
sumps;
• Confirmation that no MIW pooling is present, where initial evidence indicates no pooling;
• Direction and rate of MIW flow through workings;
• MIW discharge locations, flow and receiving surface water bodies or infrastructure, including potential
downstream receptors that may be impacted by a release (for emergency planning);
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page A-3
-------
• Pressure conditions of MIW within mine workings (confined, unconfined, or leaky confined) such as
pool elevation, hydraulic head, and hydrostatic pressure;
• Presence of springs or seeps (aerial photography of vegetative growth can be an indicator);
• Climatic conditions as related to precipitation, snow melt, evaporation, infiltration and runoff;
• Vegetative cover and seasonal transpiration rates; and
• Hydraulic interconnections with other mines.
3d. Evaluate geochemical attributes as indicated to understand the geochemical characteristics that add
to the complexity of the mine blockages. Consider evaluating the following:
• MIW geochemistry data such as physical and chemical water quality data in oxygenated and reduced
conditions, anion/cation chemistry, bioassay;
• Background water quality data from other mine seeps and springs for comparison with MIW, and to
conduct anion/cation chemistry, if necessary for geochemical modeling/charge balance;
• Geochemical material characteristics that contribute to MIW water quality;
• Baseline characterization of water quality, sediment quality, and macroinvertebrates population
metrics of downstream water bodies for comparison if a release occurs;
• Location of MIW acidification/neutralization sources within the mine such as high sulfide areas, ore
piles, chemically oxidized zones, or exposed mineralized material;
• Location and types of potential MIW monitoring points such as monitoring wells, weirs, boreholes, and
ventilation raises;
• Location and type of existing MIW monitoring devices such as pressure gauges, transducers, and
sondes;
• Isotopic MIW analysis may provide information on MIW residence time to indicate groundwater
recharge (longer) or precipitation infiltration (shorter);
• Anticipated effects of MIW chemistry on downstream receptors for consequence analysis;
• Existence of MIW containment and treatment systems such as run-on/runoff control, ponds,
biotreatment, and water treatment plants;
• Chemical and physical characteristics of natural water bodies upgradient of MIW discharge points;
• Presence, nature, and extent of sedimentation within workings; and
• Presence and type of biological activity within workings such as algae, bacteria, molds, or mosses.
3e. Develop initial water balance. The following equation summarizes the basic elements of a water
balance:
S = I-0
Where: S = Storage; I = Inflows; and 0 = Outflows
When "S" is a positive number, a mine receives more inflow than it discharges as outflow and MIW is likely
accumulating in the mine workings. If "S" is a negative number, then the outflows exceed the inflows and
the works are likely draining faster than MIW is accumulating.
4. PLAN AND CONDUCT MINIMALLY INVASIVE MEASUREMENTS
4a. Geophysical surveys to identify mine workings and features.
4b. Measure groundwater/MIW pooling water levels in existing monitoring wells, boreholes, and via
safely accessible shafts, vents and other surface openings. Is the MIW pool fluctuating or is it stable, and
does the fluctuation provide data on the size of the MIW pool? Is there an eventual drop in pool level after
the recharge event indicating a drain from the mine or does the pool level increase? How does the pool
level relate to the surrounding water table outside of the mine? If the water level in the mine is higher, it
would indicate the potential for blockage and pressurized conditions with upgradient recharge or
connection with an upgradient mine.
4c. Measure surface water flows (flume, weir) and dimensions of channel (depth, cross sectional area).
4d. Measure surface water quality such as contaminants of concern (COCs), plus complete water
chemistry, including pH, specific conductance (SC), cations and anions (including alkalinity), dissolved and
total metals, other metals related to the study (for example, iron, manganese, aluminum), total dissolved
solids (TDS) dissolved oxygen (DO), oxidation/reduction potential (ORP), turbidity and temperature.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page A-4
-------
4e. Identify possible drilling locations to confirm rig accessibility, ground stability, and no risk of the
collapse of underground mine workings.
4f. Develop detailed water balance to determine whether inflows, outflows and estimated storage in the
mine workings indicate the existence of MIW pooling. To the extent possible, calculate or estimate
hydrostatic conditions. If pooling is indicated or remains uncertain, drilling may be required to confirm.
5. PLAN AND CONDUCT INVASIVE MEASUREMENTS VIA DRILLING
5a. Develop investigation work plans for field drilling program to advance boreholes into the mine
workings for direct assessment of MIW pooling, groundwater flow and inspection of mine workings using
visual technologies.
5b. Performance of failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) on proposed drilling activities and
modification of work plan and conduct contingency, notification and emergency action planning.
5c. Conduct or refine contingency, notification and emergency action planning including
comprehensive contingency planning to address potential MIW releases during drilling program.
Contingency, notifications and emergency action plans should also be developed or modified.
5d. Mobilization and execution of invasive measurements work plan to assess groundwater and MIW
pooling.
5e. Review and analyze invasive measurements data to understand relative elevations of MIW
encountered in boreholes (for drilling) and determine the presence and nature of MIW pooling within mine
workings, based on one or more of the following scenarios:
• Scenario 1 - MIW pooling present in one location under atmospheric pressure - A boring
intercepts mine workings with MIW, and the water level is below the elevation of the roof of the
workings. The greater the depth of the water, the greater the hydrostatic head pressure on the
blockage. If the boring is one of a number of borings known to be intercepting connected workings but
the others reveal no MIW, then the extent of MIW pooling may be limited.
• Scenario 2 - MIW pooling present in one location under pressure - A boring intercepts mine
workings with MIW and the water level inside the boring rises up to an elevation higher than the
elevation of the roof of the workings. The greater the elevation differential, the greater the degree of
hydraulic confinement and pressurization. It is possible for MIW to discharge from the top of the boring
as artesian flow if the MIW head elevation rises above the boring opening elevation. Under extreme
pressure conditions, abatement of artesian flow during and after drilling is addressed through the use
of release prevention and capping technologies, respectively. If the boring is one of a number of borings
known to be intercepting connected workings but the others reveal no MIW or lower pressure MIW,
then the extent of MIW pooling may be limited or the extent of confined conditions might be limited,
indicating potentially unique conditions within the workings such as multiple blockages or high rates
of MIW inflow from the surface.
• Scenario 3 - MIW pooling present under atmospheric pressure in multiple locations - A
distributed set of borings intercepts mine workings at various depths and orientations and the water
levels are below the elevations of the roofs of the workings at each location. If the water level
elevations in all boreholes are at equal elevations, MIW may be present in a single pool whose
inflow/outflow rate is relatively stable or low. If the water level elevations are different but trend
linearly in a given direction, then MIW may be present in a single pool with a relatively high
inflow/outflow rate. If the water level elevations are significantly different and seemingly randomly
distributed, then separate MIW pooling is likely present in multiple locations and the degree of
hydraulic interconnectivity requires additional corroborating data to confirm. Depending on the
information value of other collaborative data, determining the extent of pooling may require the
advancement of additional boreholes.
• Scenario 4 - MIW pooling present in multiple locations with equivalent water level elevations -
A distributed set of borings intercepts mine workings at various depths and orientations and the water
levels are above the elevations of the roofs of the workings at each location. If the water level elevations
in all boreholes are at or near equivalent elevations, then the MIW may be present in a single pool
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page A-5
-------
caused by a significant blockage with constant inflow. The higher the water level elevations, the higher
the rate and volume of inflow and the larger the differential in hydraulic head between the MIW
sourcing area and the blockage. If the water level elevations are different but linearly trend in a given
direction, then the MIW may be present in a single pool that may or may not be interconnected with
other workings. The higher the water level elevations within the workings, the more extensive the
pooling is also likely to be. Depending on the information value of other collaborative data, determining
the extent of pooling may require advancement of additional boreholes.
• Scenario 5 - MIW pooling present in multiple locations with variable water level elevations - A
distributed set of borings intercepts mine workings at various depths and orientations and the water
levels are at various elevations within the workings at each location. If the water level elevations are
significantly different and seemingly randomly distributed, then separate MIW pooling is likely present
in multiple locations resulting from multiple blockages and the nature and degree of hydraulic
interconnectivity requires additional data to confirm. Depending on the information value of other
collaborative data, determining the extent of pooling may require advancement of additional boreholes.
6. COLLECT AND EVALUATE DATA, REPORT FINDINGS, AND DETERMINE NEXT STEPS
6a. Install and monitor pressure transducers with integral data loggers to monitor MIW pools in select
monitoring wells or other access points to identify MIW pooling. Correlate monitoring well water levels and
mine pool elevations with basin precipitation events to understand MIW pool recharge and discharge. Do
fluctuations in the various measurements correlate and are there lag times indicating flow distance
between recharge location and monitoring point, or do water level trends indicate faster inflow to the mine
relative to outflow?
6b. Install and monitor MIW discharge flow measuring devices (for example, weirs, flumes, calibrated
pipes) with level monitoring devices and data loggers to capture flow rates consistently over time. These
data loggers are best if synchronized with those of the monitoring well pressure transducers.
6c. Install and monitor MIW pool and discharge water quality measuring devices (sondes, probes)
with data loggers may be warranted depending on data gaps in water chemistry.
6d. Collect mine pooling monitoring data for approximately one calendar year to assess influences on
MIW pooling via installation of monitoring systems. If the year is deemed to be overly wet or dry, continued
monitoring may be warranted until normal high and low flows and water quality of MIW can be
determined.
6e. Correlate MIW pooling water levels with the elevation of the MIW discharge location and with
basin precipitation events to understand how water enters, migrates through, pools within, and discharges
from the mine workings, based on one of the following scenarios:
• Scenario 1 - Water level elevations in the workings are higher than the MIW discharge
location - the discharge could be coming from any of the described conditions. If the water level
elevations in the workings are higher than the elevation of the MIW discharge location, either MIW at
depth is under significantly confined conditions and MIW discharge is artesian, or the MIW is coming
from another source location.
• Scenario 2 - Differential in elevation between measured water levels and the MIW discharge
location is large - the MWI discharge flow rate should be relatively high and constant. If the
differential in elevation between the measured water levels and the MIW discharge location is large,
but the MWI discharge flow rate is low or intermittent, the flow may be impinged at some locations
prior to discharge. In this case, MIW pooing could be under significant excess pressure whose cause
and location may require additional corroborating data to determine.
6f. Update detailed water balance to refine estimates of inflows, outflows and estimated storage of MIW
pooling based on newly collected drilling and monitoring data. Calculate or estimate hydrostatic conditions.
6g. Update MIW CSM and visualizations to refine the MIW CSM parameters on newly collected non-
invasive measurements, drilling and monitoring data. Update the MIW CSM visualizations to inform
mitigation measures.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page A-6
-------
7. MITIGATE POOLED MIW UNDER PRESSURE
7a. Develop mitigation work plans. Develop a work plan to ensure appropriate implementation of
selected mitigation measures.
7b. Perform FMEA on proposed mitigation activities. Once a proposed mitigation plan is developed, it is
recommended that the selected mitigation measures undergo an FMEA to determine potential failure
modes and adverse effects that could occur. Local conditions will dictate many aspects of mitigation plans.
7c. Update contingency, notification and emergency action planning including comprehensive
emergency action and contingency plans for addressing potential MIW releases during mitigation efforts.
FMEA results may require modifying or supplementing the contingency, notifications and emergency plans
to address mitigation-related failure risks and effects.
7d. Mobilize and implement mitigation plan to address MIW release potential. Sites in remote locations
may lack access to consistent, year-round electric power. Some sites may require on-site power generation
if pumping is part of the mitigation plan. Pump capacity will be determined by the discharge rate
limitations and vertical lift. Some mine waters are acidic or otherwise corrosive and pump hardware suited
to the expected operating conditions is advised. Three general options are commonly used in the hardrock
and coal mining industries for management of water removed from a pressurized MIW pool:
• Collecting and treating mine water at, or in proximity to, the dewatering location;
• Collecting and conveying mine pool water to a centralized facility where it may be treated and managed
with other mine waters; and
• Temporary storage in another MIW pool or nearby facilities.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page A-7
-------
APPENDIX B. GENERAL INFORMATION ON GROUNDWATER MODELS
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases Page B-1
-------
Groundwater models are used to represent groundwater flow in unconsolidated deposit formations and
fractured, porous bedrock aquifers. Models can be used to predict the effects of hydrological changes
(such as groundwater recharge or discharge into a void] on the behavior of the aquifer. Some models can
accommodate manual inputs that allow modeling of karst conditions, which are the closest natural aquifer
analog to a mining-influenced water (MIW] pool in underground mine workings. Below are examples of
groundwater models that may be useful for MIW pool modeling and water balancing.
Specific Features and Limitations of Groundwater Modeling Applications in lines
Mathematical modeling of groundwater flow in a rock massif disturbed by deep mining exploitation can be
very complicated. The reasons being that, in a massif with large open mine voids, groundwater flow is
often turbulent and, in the case of backfilling, mine workings represent preferential flow pathways with
variable and difficult-to-estimate hydraulic properties. Moreover, deep mines are typically situated in hard
rocks where the existence of fractures with important hydraulic function is common.
The modeling approach depends on the scale of the modeling application. A strategy for modeling
groundwater rebound in abandoned mine systems in relation to the scale of observation was described by
Adams and Younger (2 0 01]. At the very largest scales, water balance calculations are probably as useful as
any other technique, for example standard porous media continuum approach models. For local scale
systems, a physically-based modeling approach has been developed (Adams and Younger, 2001], in which
3-dimensional (3-D] pipe networks (representing major mine roadways.] are routed through a variably
saturated, porous medium. Alternatively, for systems extending from 100 to 3,000 km2, a semi-distributed
model (groundwater rebound in abandoned mine-workings or GRAM] has been developed in the United
Kingdom (Adams and Younger, 2001], This model conceptualizes extensively interconnected volumes of
workings as ponds, which are connected to other ponds only at discrete overflow points, such as major
roadways, through which flow can be efficiently modelled using the Prandtl-Nikuradse pipe-flow
formulation.
Routinely applied groundwater flow models (for example MODFLOW] do not enable the correct
simulation of dual porosity flow with preferential flow along fractures and leakage through the rock
matrix. The application of fracture flow and transport models (for example FEFLOW, FRAC3DVS,
FRACTRAN, NETFLO, SWIFT] to mining projects has been very limited, in part due to the complexity of the
models and the lack of adequate input.
Modular Finite-Difference Groundwater Flow Model (MODFLOW)
The Modular Finite-Difference Groundwater Flow Model (MODFLOW] developed by McDonald and
Harbaugh (1988] for the United States Geological Survey (USGS] can be used to simulate groundwater
flow in mines. MODFLOW is a groundwater flow simulator that has been accepted by regulatory agencies
and used extensively for a variety of applications. It allows the simulation of steady state and transient
flow regimes in both two and three dimensions. A detailed description of MODFLOW is provided in the
software package manual (McDonald and Harbaugh, 1988; Harbaugh and McDonald, 1996; Harbaugh et
al., 2000. Although MODFLOW was primarily developed to simulate flow in porous media it is often used
for groundwater flow modeling in fractured rocks if they behave as equivalent porous media at the scale of
study.
An example of mine pool evaluation is described in the USGS report on an abandoned uranium mine in
Colorado. This study reflects USGS's approach to evaluating mine pools:
http://pubs.usgs.gov/of> ?2.pdf
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page B-2
-------
3-D Finite-Element Flow Modeling
A common modeling approach is to develop a 3-D finite-element flow model of the abandoned mine. The
first step in developing a 3-D model is analysis of available hydrogeologic data and incorporation of these
data into a conceptual hydrogeologic model of the mine area. Based on this conceptual hydrogeologic
model, a finite-element groundwater flow model of the mine is constructed. The hydrogeologic units
incorporated into the model may include unconsolidated deposits, weathered bedrock, and unweathered
bedrock.
Many models rely on pumping test data analysis to better understand the primary (rock matrix] and
secondary (fractures] porosities of bedrock. Fault and shear zones can be simulated in a model's
sensitivity analysis. A steady-state simulation of the groundwater flow model is then calibrated to the
observed water levels in the mine area. Modeling examples are presented below:
Hybrid Finite-Element Mixing Cell (HFEMC) method
The HFEMC method couples groups of mixing cells for the mine workings with finite elements for the
unmined zone. The interactions between the mined zones and the unmined zone are considered using
internal boundary conditions which are defined at the interfaces between the groups of mixing cells and
the finite element mesh. Another feature of this technique lies in its ability to simulate by-pass flows
between mine workings using first order transfer equations between the groups of mixing cells. The
HFEMC method is particularly useful to simulate mine groundwater problems such as groundwater
rebound.
An example of the HFEMC model is available at:
See: http://orbi.ulg.ac.be/bitstream/2268/694 :cepted Manuscriptpdf
Other Modeling Information Sources
Colorado School of Mines
As indicated on their website, "The Colorado School of Mines operates the Integrated Groundwater Modeling
Center (IGWMC) which posts free model software. IGWMC is an internationally oriented information,
education and research center for groundwater modeling. IGWMC advises on groundwater modeling
problems, distributes groundwater modeling software, organizes short courses, workshops and conferences,
conducts research in practical, applied areas of groundwater hydrology and modeling, and provides technical
assistance on problems related to groundwater modeling. As a focal point for groundwater professionals, the
Center supports and advances the appropriate use of quality-assured models in groundwater resources
protection and management."
See: http://igwmc.mines.edu/software/freeware listhtirnl
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement
DOI's OSMRE has developed a groundwater model to simulate flow through underground coal mines. This
model may have merit in modeling flows through abandoned hardrock mines,
OSMRE's Groundwater Modeling System (GMS] software is noted at:
www.tips.osmre.gov/Software/Hydro/gms.shtml
As indicated on their website, "The OSMRE Groundwater model design system converts map data into
MODFLOW, MODPATH, and MT3D grid data for running groundwater flow and solute transport simulations.
GMS is a comprehensive groundwater modeling package supported by three dimensional visualization tools.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page B-3
-------
Users can create a complete groundwater simulation including site characterization, model development,
post-processing, calibration, and visualization. Users can construct a conceptual ground water model directly
on top of a scanned map of a site using GIS objects. Boundary conditions and parameter values can be
assigned directly to the GIS objects. GMS gives the user the option of finite-difference modeling using
MODFLOW and related packages, or finite-element modeling techniques."
A list of OSMRE's technical staff dealing with hydrology is:
www.tips.osmre.gov/Software/hvdro/Members.shtml
USGS Groundwater Modeling
USGS web site for groundwater modeling:
http://water.usgs.gov/software/lists/groundwater/
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page B-4
-------
APPENDIX C. ADDITIONAL SOURCES OF
CONCEPTUAL SITE MODEL INFORMATION
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page C-1
-------
line laps and line History
A best practice in identifying the presence of underground workings is to review mine maps, mine
histories, and published reports about the mine site.
An important source of abandoned mine maps is the National Mine Map Repository (NMMR] maintained
by the DOI's Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE] in Pittsburgh, PA. Point of
Contact at the time of document publication is Paul Coyle fpcovle@osmre.gov1. This repository holds old
mine maps of hardrock and coal mines and has national coverage. Sites can be searched by mine name.
Maps are not digital, thus physical copies must be requested. For more information see
http://mmr.osmre.gov.
Mine history is important to identify since some records often discuss dewatering the mine or include
hydrogeologic information. Some sources of mine history include: historical societies, historical
newspaper archives, stock company histories, Masters and Doctoral theses. Resources can also be located
via internet search using the mine site or mining district name. State tax archives sometimes can lead to
old mining reports as can the State Land Office where mining claims may have been filed.
Another source of historical information including mine maps is the Anaconda Geological Documents
Collection in the American Heritage Center at the University of Wyoming. The collection has been indexed
and the database is available as a free, searchable online database, although access to the actual
documents is not available online, documents can be ordered from the University. The maps and
documents in the collection date from the 1890s to 1986. For further information see:
http://www.uwvo.edu/ahc/collections/anaconda/
Geologic Information
Another important source of Abandoned Mine Lands (AML] site data is found in each State Geologist
Office. A convenient way to access State Geologist files is via the Association of American State Geologists'
ffattp:: //stategeologists.orgl. web site, which has links to each State Geologist web site.
For example, the Colorado State Geologists office has a section devoted to AML that includes descriptions
of each historical mining district in the state (see http://coloradogeologicalsurvey.org/mineral-
resources/abandoned-mine-lands/1. The Colorado State Geologist site also includes descriptions and
maps of the geology of the state, as well as, geologic maps of the state.
Another example of mine data maintained by states is information available from the California
Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology (DMG]. The DMG's publications, library,
unpublished files, and property reports contain descriptions of specific mining operations, processing
techniques, locations and characteristics of ore deposits, mineral resource potential, and mineralogy.
Some information dates back to 1880. The DMG has many published and unpublished maps of geology, ore
deposits, and individual mines. It also maintains a library of photographs of mining operations, many
taken in the late 1800s. Information is maintained in Sacramento.
U.S. Geological Survey National Geologic Map Database
The USGS maintains the National Geologic Map Database. This database contains current digitized geologic
maps of most of the U.S. It can be accessed at no cost at http: //ngmdb.usgs.gov/maps/MapView.
USGS publications are easily searchable and digitized, and cover virtually all mining districts. It is
recommended to first contact the USGS office that covers the site area of concern.
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page C-2
-------
The USGS also provides instruction on how to develop water budgets at abandoned mines, which is
focused on coal mines, but relevant to hardrock mines. The information is available in USGS Report 2010-
5261 Water Budgets and Groundwater Volumes for Abandoned Underground Mines, available at
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir
U.S. Bureau of lines Publications
The former U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM] was the principal federal agency responsible for gathering
information on production and consumption of mineral resources from 1910 through 1995. The USBM
was abolished in 1996 and certain mineral information functions were transferred to the USGS. In
addition to results of analysis and research in the fields of mineral economics, minerals utilization, mining
engineering, ore processing, and mine safety, many of the USBM reports contain site-specific mine
information that covers all aspects of mining, processing, and recovery. Formal report series include
Reports of Investigations (RI series], Information Circulars (IC Series], Bulletins, and Mineral Yearbooks.
Informal reports include Open-file Reports, Mineral Commodity Reports, Mineral Land Assessment
Reports, and various special publications.
U.S. Defense Minerals Exploration Administration (DMEA) Reports
From 1952 to 1974, the Federal Government funded two minerals exploration units, the Defense Minerals
Exploration Administration and the Office of Minerals Exploration (OME], to make loans to individuals and
corporations for exploration and development of strategic minerals. All pertinent information, including
proposals, exploration agreements, property survey data, geologic data, results of physical exploration,
summaries of assay results, owner's progress reports and reports of program officers, including results of
field examinations, are included in a docket file for each property. Obtaining information from these files is
difficult because much is confidential, and ownership changes subsequent to program involvement are not
tracked. Also, some materials in the files are difficult and expensive to reproduce, and program files are no
longer maintained regionally, but have been consolidated into archives at only a few locations. The USGS is
the custodian of these files, and inquiries should first be made in the same manner as for unpublished
USGS material.
Water Management at Abandoned Flooded Underground Mines
A basic primer on understanding the wide range of issues related to characterizing mine pools at
abandoned mines is Water Management at Abandoned Flooded Underground Mines. C. Wolkerdorfer, 2008.
The Wolkerdorker book also includes discussions on how to characterize mine pools and case studies of
mine pools. This source can be accessed at:
www.wolkersdorfer.info/publication/pdf/MineAbandonmentpdf
EPA CLU-IN Mine Pool Information
EPA's Superfund program has been documenting research studies on abandoned mine pools on its CLU-IN
website. This resource provides remedial project managers (RPMs] and on-scene coordinators (OSCs]
with easy access to four groups of data: a] Characterization and Remediation of Mine Pools, b] Case
Studies of Mine Pools, c] Data collected at Mine Pools, and d] References. This information can be accessed
at:
https://clu4in.org/issues/ciefault.focus/sec/Characterizatioin. Cleanup, and Revitalization of Mining
Sites /cat/Resou irces /
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page C-3
-------
APPENDIX D. REFERENCE MATERIALS MATRIX
Final Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases Page D-1
-------
Document Title
Date
CSM
MIW Pooling
Case Studies
Full Reference
Internet URL
Information
Resou rces
Assessment
Management
& Mitigation
Failure
Mode and
Effects
Analysis
Emergency
Action
Planning
MIW Release
A Generalized Protocol for Selecting Appropriate Geophysical Techniques.
2016
¦
¦
Anderson, N., Ismail, A. A Generalized Protocol for Selecting Appropriate Geophysical Techniques. Federal Highways Administration, Interstate Technical
Group on Abandoned Underground Mines - An Interactive Forum. University of Missouri-Rolla. Accessed February 2016.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/geotech/hazards/mine/workshoDs/ktwkshD/kv0307.cfm
Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils
2007
¦
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) International. 2007. Standard Test Method for Particle-Size Analysis of Soils. ASTM D422.
httD://www. astm.org/Standards/D422
Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content
of Soil and Rock by Mass
2010
¦
ASTM. 2010. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Determination of Water (Moisture) Content of Soil and Rock by Mass. ASTM D2216.
http://www.astm.org/Standards/D2216. htm
Standard Test Method for Direct Shear Test of Soils Under Consolidated Drained
Conditions
2011
¦
ASTM. 2011. Standard Test Method for Direct Shear Test of Soils Under Consolidated Drained Conditions. ASTM D3080.
htto://www.astm.org/Standards/D3080. htm
Standard Test Method for Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration
Testing of Soils
2012
¦
ASTM. 2012. Standard Test Method for Electronic Friction Cone and Piezocone Penetration Testing of Soils. ASTM D5778-07. February.
NA
Standard Practice for Rock Core Drilling and Sampling of Rock for Site Exploration
2014
¦
ASTM International. 2014. Standard Practice for Rock Core Drilling and Sampling of Rock for Site Exploration. ASTM D2113.
httD://www.astm.org/Standards/D2113.htm
Standard Guide for Direct Push Soil Sampling for Environmental Site
Characterizations.
2015
¦
ASTM. 2015. Standard Guide for Direct Push Soil Sampling for Environmental Site Characterizations. ASTM D6282M.
http://www.astm.org/Standards/D6282.htm
New Test Method for Pocket Penetrometer Test - Under Developmen
2016
¦
ASTM. 2016a, New Test Method for Pocket Penetrometer Test-Under Development. ASTM WK27337.
http://www.astm,org/DATABASE,CART/WORKITEMS/WK27337.htm
Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Miniature Vane Shear Test for Saturated
Fine-Grained Clayey Soil
2016
¦
ASTM. 2016b. Standard Test Methods for Laboratory Miniature Vane Shear Test for Saturated Fine-Grained Clayey Soil. ASTM D2216.
http://www.astm.org/Standards/D2216. htm
Land Use
2016
¦
Auroralights, Land Use. Accessed January 2016.
http://auroralights.org/map proiect/theme.php?theme=crm&article=l
Water Balance for the Jeddo Tunnel Basin, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania
1999
¦
Ballaron, Paula B. 1999. Water Balance for the Jeddo Tunnel Basin, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania. Susquehanna River Basin Commission. Publication No.
208. August.
http://www.srbc.net/pubinfo/docs/ieddowaterbalance.Ddf
Final Hydrogeological Assessment, Cowal Gold Mine, Extension Modification
2013
¦
Barrick Australia Limited. 2013. Final Hydrogeo logical Assessment, Cowal Gold Mine, Extension Modification. September.
www.evolutionmining.com.au/wD-content/uDloads/2015/08/ADDendix-A-Hvdrogeological-Assessment. odf
Mapping Acid Mine Drainage at an Abandoned Mine Site in Ottawa County,
Oklahoma Using 3D Electrical Resistivity Tomography
2015
¦
Bridge, Cas F., Bizzell, Karson R., and Ramachandran K., 2015. Mapping Acid Mine Drainage at an Abandoned Mine Site in Ottawa County, Oklahoma Using
3D Electrical Resistivity Tomography. March.
NA
Gold King Mine - A Case of Russian Roulette With an Inevitable Outcome. Arizona
Daily Independent
2015
¦
Briggs, David F. 2015. Gold King Mine - A Case of Russian Roulette With an Inevitable Outcome. Arizona Daily Independent. September 3.
httDs://arizonadailyindeDendent.com/2015/09/03/gold-king-mine-a-case-of-russian-roulette-with-an-
inevitable-outcome/
Opekiska Pool Study - Monongahela River
NA
¦
¦
Bryant, G., Opekiska Pool Study - Monongahela River. USEPA Region III.
httD://www. netl.doe.gov/Dublications/Droceedings/99/99aDDrvr/ar7-4. odf
Review and interpretation of previous work and new data on the hydrogeology of
the Schwartzwaider Uranium Mine and vicinity, Jefferson County
2011
¦
¦
Caine, J.S. Johnson, R.H., and Wild, E.C., 2011, Review and interpretation of previous work and new data on the hydrogeology of the Schwa rtzwaider
Uranium Mine and vicinity, Jefferson County.
NA
Application of Geophysics to Acid Mine Drainage Investigations
1994
¦
¦
¦
California Department of Conservations, Office of Mine Reclamation. 1994. Application of Geophysics to Acid Mine Drainage Investigations. September.
httD://neDis.eDa. gov/ Exe/ZyNET.exe/2000DH EY.TXT? ZyActi o n D=Zy Doc u m e nt&CI ie nt= E PA& 1n d ex=1995+Th r
u+1999& D ocs=&Qu e ry= &Ti m e=& E n dTi m e=&Se a rc h M eth od=l&Toc Re str ict= n &Toc= &TocE nt ry=&QF ie Id=&
QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&lntQFieldOD=0&ExtQFieldOD=0&XmlQuery=&File=D%3A%5Czyfil
es%5Clndex%20Data%5C95thru99%5CTxt%5C00000002%5C2000DHEY.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=
anonymous&SortMethod=h%7C-
&MaximumDocuments=l&FuzzyDegree=0&lmageQuality=r75g8/r75g8/xl50yl50gl6/i425&DisDlay=D%7Cf
& DefSee kPa ge=x&Sea rch Ba ck=ZyAct io n L& Ba c k= ZyActi o n S& Ba ck De sc= Re s u lts%20 Da ge& M a x i m u m Pa ge s=1
&Zy E ntry= l&See kPa ge=x&Zy P U R L
Abandoned Mine Lands Preliminary Assessment Handbook
1998
¦
California Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). 1998. Abandoned Mine Lands Preliminary Assessment
Handbook. January.
httDs://www.dtsc.ca.gov/SiteCleanuo/Brownfields/uDload/aml handbook.pdf
Guidelines for Planning and Implementing Groundwater Characterization of
Contaminated Sites
2012
¦
CA DTSC. 2012. Guidelines for Planning and Implementing Groundwater Characterization of Contaminated Sites. June.
httDs://www.dtsc.ca.gov/PublicationsForms/uDload/Guidelines for Planning and Imolementing GW Char
acterization of-Contam Sites.pdf
Well Design and Construction for Monitoring Groundwater at Contaminated Sites
2014
¦
CA DTSC. 2014. Well Design and Construction for Monitoring Groundwater at Contaminated Sites. June.
httDs://www.dtsc.ca.gov/PublicationsForms/uDload/Well Design Constr for Monitoring GWContam Sites
l.Ddf
Management and Control of Abandoned Mine Pool Discharges-Pennsylvania Case
Studies Workshop. 29th Annual NAAMLP Conference
2007
¦
Cavazza, E.E., Beam, R. L. 2007. Management and Control of Abandoned Mine Pool Discharges-Pennsylvania Case Studies Workshop. 29th Annual NAAMLP
Conference. October.
httD://files.deD.state.Da,us/Mining/Abandoned%20Mine%20Reclamation/AbandonedMinePortalFiles/Public
ations/AMLRelatedTechnicalPaoers/Mine Pool Workshop-2007.pdf
Coal Extraction—Environmental Prediction. Fact Sheet 073-02
NA
¦
Cecil, C.B., Tewalt, S.J. Coal Extraction—Environmental Prediction. Fact Sheet 073-02. U.S. Geological Survey.
httD://Dubs,usgs.gov/fs/fs073-02/fs073-02.html
Final Hydrogeo logical Assessment Cowal Gold Mine Extension Modification
2013
¦
¦
Coffey Geotechnics. 2013. Final Hydrogeo logical Assessment Cowal Gold Mine Extension Modification. September.
httD-//www.evolutionmining.com.au/wD-content/uDloads/2015/08/ADDendix-A-Hvdrogeological-
Assessment.pdf
Best Practices in Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation
2002
¦
¦
Colorado Division of Mineral and Geology. 2002, Best Practices in Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation.
httD://mining,state.co.us/SiteCollectionDocuments/AMLbmD.Ddf
Summary of Minutes, Mined Land Reclamation Board Meeting
2004
¦
Colorado Division of Reclamation Mining. 2004. Summary of Minutes, Mined Land Reclamation Board Meeting. November.
httD://mining.state.co. us/SiteCollectionDocuments/nov04sum.Ddf
Void Detection Demonstrations at the CSM Edgar Experimental Mine
2007
¦
Colorado School of Mines (CSoM). 2007. Void Detection Demonstrations at the CSM Edgar Experimental Mine. Prepared for the Department of Labor Mine
Safety and Health Administration, January.
httD://arlweb.msha.gov/VoidDetection/CSM-Seismic/CSM Void Detection Final.pdf
Hydrogeo logical Assessment Submissions, Conservation Authority Guidelines to
Support Development Applications
2013
¦
Conservation Authorities Geoscience Group. 2013. Hydrogeo logical Assessment Submissions, Conservation Authority Guidelines to Support Development
Applications. June.
httD-//cloca.ca/devreview/HvdroAssessmentGuidelines-20130610-FINAL2.Ddf
Keys to Successfully Using Geophysics to Detect Mine Voids and Covered Sinkholes
2015
¦
Davis, Robert, Brent Waters. Golder Associates. 2015. Keys to Successfully Using Geophysics to Detect Mine Voids and Covered Sinkholes. Presentation
Session 2B: Geophysical 1. Geotechnical, Geophysical, Geoenvironmental Engineering Technology Transfer Conference. April.
NA
Mine Pool Mapping Initiative
NA
¦
Eastern Pennsylvania Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation. Mine Pool Mapping Initiative.
httD://eDcamr.org/home/current-initiatives/mine-Dool-maDDing-initiative/
Prioritization of abandoned non-coal mine impacts on the environment
2012
¦
United Kingdon Environment Agency. 2012. Prioritization of abandoned non-coal mine impacts on the environment. March.
httDs://www.gov.uk/government/uDloads/svstem/uDloads/attachment data/file/290872/schollllbuvi-e-
e.pdf
Environmental Auditing, Hydrogeo logical Assessment (Groundwater Quality)
Guidelines
2006
¦
¦
EPA Victoria, Australia (AUEPA). 2006. Environmental Auditing, Hydrogeological Assessment (Groundwater Quality) Guidelines. September.
httD-7/www.eDa,vic.gov.au/'v/media/Publications/668. Ddf
Water budgets and groundwater volumes for abandoned underground mines in the
Western Middle Anthracite Coalfield, Schuylkill, Columbia, and Northumberland
Counties, Pennsylvania-Preliminary Estimates with Identification of Data Needs
2010
¦
¦
¦
Goode, D.J., Cravotta, C.A., III, Hornberger, R.J., Hewitt, M.A., Hughes, R.E., Koury., D.J., and Eicholtz, L.W. 2010, Water budgets and groundwater volumes
for abandoned underground mines in the Western Middle Anthracite Coalfield, Schuylkill, Columbia, and Northumberland Counties, Pennsylvania-
Preliminary Estimates with Identification of Data Needs.
httD://Dubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5261/suDDort/sir2010-5261.pdf
Subsidence Prediction Report for the Hail Creek Transition Project
2015
¦
Gordon Geotechniques. 2015. Subsidence Prediction Report for the Hail Creek Transition Project. May.
httD://www,riotinto.com/documents/ Energv/ADDendix%20A.odf
Mine Pool Work-Eastern PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation. State of
the Susquehanna
2010
¦
Hughes, R,, Hewitt, M.,2010. Mine Pool Work-Eastern PA Coalition for Abandoned Mine Reclamation. State of the Susquehanna.
httD-//www.srbc.net/stateofsusa2010/documents/EPCAM RMinePoolWorkFeatureArticle.PDF
Data Compilation Report For The Black Pine Mine, Granite County, Montana
2010
¦
¦
Hydrometrics, Inc., 2010. Data Compilation Report For The Black Pine Mine, Granite County, Montana.
NA
Airborne Surveys Identify Environmental Problems on Mined Lands
2007
¦
Hammack, R., James Sams, Garret Veloski, and Terry Ackman. 2007. Airborne Surveys Identify Environmental Problems on Mined Lands. U.S. DOE NETL.
httD-V/www.netl.doe, gov/ File%20Library/Research/Coal/ewr/water/Airborne-Survevs.Ddf
Using Helicopter Electromagnetic Surveys to Identify Flooded Workings in
Underground Coal Mines
2016
¦
Hammack, R.W. 2016. Using Helicopter Electromagnetic Surveys to Identify Flooded Workings in Underground Coal Mines. Interstate Technical Group on
Abandoned Underground Mines-An Interactive Forum. U.S. DOE NETL. Accessed January 2016.
htto://www.fhwa.dot.gov/enginee ring/geotech/hazards/mine/workshoDs/ktwkshD/kv0315.cfm
Quantifying the Effects That Changes in Transmitter-Receiver Geometry Have on
the Capability of an Airborne Electromagnetic Survey System to Detect Good
Conductors
2006
¦
Hefford, S.W., Smith, R.S., and Samson, C., 2006. Quantifying the Effects That Changes in Transmitter-Receiver Geometry Have on the Capability of an
Airborne Electromagnetic Survey System to Detect Good Conductors. Exploration and Mining Geology, Vol 15, Nos 1-2, pp 43-52.
httD.//emg.geoscienceworld.org/content/15/l-2/43
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page D-2
-------
Document Title
Date
CSM
MIW Pooling
Case Studies
Full Reference
Internet URL
Information
Resou rces
Assessment
Management
& Mitigation
Failure
Mode and
Effects
Analysis
Emergency
Action
Planning
MIW Release
Detection of Abandoned Underground Coal Mines By Geophysical Methods
1971
¦
HRB-Singer, Incorporated. 1971. Detection of Abandoned Underground Coal Mines By Geophysical Methods. April.
https://www.google.eom/u rl?sa=t&rct=i&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=l&cad=ria&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiv
ocfE4aTKAhUCLvYKHSlcDpAQFggiMAA&url=httP%3A%2F%2Fnepis.epa.gov%2FExe%2FZvPURL.cgi%3FDock
ev%3D9100GXD8,TXT&usg=AFQiCNGmTpHoiKQskQ2rHUvc7eQKHrlsYA
A practical guide to catchment-based water management for the mining and
metals industry
NA
International Council of Mining & Metals (ICMM). A practical guide to catchment-based water management for the mining and metals industry.
http://www. icm m .com/docu ment/8329
Planning for Integrated Mine Closure: Toolkit
NA
¦
ICMM. Planning for Integrated Mine Closure: Toolkit.
http://www.icmm.com/document/310
Applications of the Electrical Resistivity Method for Detection of Underground Mine
Workings
2003
¦
¦
Johnson, William J. 2003. Applications of the Electrical Resistivity Method for Detection of Underground Mine Workings. Geophysical Technologies for
Detecting Underground Coal Mine Voids Workshop. July.
httDs://www.fhwa.dot.gov/enginee ring/geotech/hazards/mine/workshoDs/ktwkshD/kv0311.Ddf
Guidance to Plan, Design, Evaluate and Inspect Above-Drainage Coalmines Outcrop
Barriers to Prevent Blowouts
2007
¦
¦
Kohli, K.K,, Block, F. 2007. Guidance to Plan, Design, Evaluate and Inspect Above-Drainage Coalmines Outcrop Barriers to Prevent Blowouts.
http://www.arcc.osmre.gov/resources/Dubs/2007-KKohli-OutcroDBarrier.pdf
The Conowingo Tunnel and the Anthracite Mine Flood-Control Project
2001
¦
Korp, M.C. 2001. The Conowingo Tunnel and the Anthracite Mine Flood-Control Project. August.
httD://files.deD.state.Da,us/Mining/Abandoned%20Mine%20Reclamation/AbandonedMinePortalFiles/Public
ations/AMLRelatedTechnicalPapers/Conowingo Tunnel-2011.pdf
Mine blowout on Boone-Lincoln line
2014
¦
Lawrence, C. 2014. Mine blowout on Boone-Lincoln line. MetroNews.
http://wvmetronews.com/2014/02/20/mine-blowout~on-boone-lincoln-line/
Using airborne thermal infrared imagery and helicopter EM conductivity to locate
mine pools and discharges in the Kettle Creek Watershed, North-Central
Pennsylvania
2005
¦
Love, E., Hammack, R., Harbert, W., Sams, J., Veloski, G., and Ackman, T. 2005. Using airborne thermal infrared imagery and helicopter EM conductivity to
locate mine pools and discharges in the Kettle Creek Watershed, North-Central Pennsylvania. Geophysics v. 70, no. 6 (Nov-Dec, 2005), p. B73-B81.
NA
CISPM - A subsidence prediction model
1989
¦
Luo, Y., Peng, S. 1989. CISPM - A subsidence prediction model. January.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239820225 CISPM - A subsidence prediction model
Geophysical Investigation of the T and T Mine Complex, Preston County, West
Virginia
2003
¦
¦
Mabie, J.S., 2003. Geophysical Investigation of the T and TMine Complex, Preston County, West Virginia.
http://pages.geo.wvu.edu/~wilson/theses/mabie.pdf
Technical Memorandum: Reopening of the Portals of the Lower Spaulding Adit and
the McLaren Adit or Winter Tunnel
2002
¦
Maxim Technologies, Inc. 2002. Technical Memorandum: Reopening of the Portals of the Lower Spaulding Adit and the McLaren Adit or Winter Tunnel.
http://www.fs.usda.gov/lnternet/FSE DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5401504.pdf
Industry best suggested practices
NA
¦
National Groundwater Association. Industry best suggested practices.
http://www.ngwa.org/Professional-Resources/bsp/Pages/default.aspx
SDPS for Windows: An Integrated Approach to Ground Deformation Prediction
2001
¦
Newman, D., Agioutantis, Z., Karmis, M. 2001. SDPS for Windows: An Integrated Approach to Ground Deformation Prediction. 20th International
Conference on Ground Control in Mining.
https://www.energv.vt.edu/Publications/2001 WVU SDPS.pdf
Conceptual Site Model -Technical Memorandum, Ely Copper mine Superfund Site,
Vershire, Vermont
2009
¦
¦
Nobis Engineering, Inc. 2009. Conceptual Site Model - Technical Memorandum, Ely Copper mine Superfund Site, Vershire, Vermont. July.
http://www3.epa.gov/regionl/superfund/sites/ely/473839.pdf
Electrical Geophysics for Deep Tunnel Detection at a Gold Mine Remediation Site.
Abstract Only
2012
¦
Pendrigh, Nicole, Phil Sirles, Paul Ivancie, and Douglas LaBracque. 2012. Electrical Geophysics for Deep Tunnel Detection at a Gold Mine Remediation Site.
Abstract Only. 25th Symposium on the Application of Geophpysics to Engineering & Environmental Problems. Environmental & Engineering Geophysical
Society. March 25.
http://www,earthdoc.org/publication/publicationdetails/?publication=65887
Coal Mine Drainage Prediction and Pollution Prevention in Pennsylvania
1998
¦
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PDEP). 1998. Coal Mine Drainage Prediction and Pollution Prevention in Pennsylvania.
http://files.dep.state.pa.us/Mining/BureauOfMiningPrograms/BMPPortalFiles/Coal Mine Drainage Predict
ion and Pollution Prevention in Pennsylvania.pdf
Modelling rock-water interactions in flooded underground coal mines, Northern
Appalachian Basin. Geochemistry-Exploration, Environment, Analysis
2001
¦
¦
Perry, E. 2001. Modelling rock-water interactions in flooded underground coal mines, Northern Appalachian Basin. Geochemistry-Exploration,
Environment, Analysis. February.
http://geea.geoscienceworld.org/content/l/l/61.abstract#cjtecMDY
Preliminary estimates with identification of data needs: U.S. Geological Survey
Scientific Investisations Reoort 2010-5261
2010
¦
¦
Preliminary estimates with identification of data needs: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2010-5261,54 p.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2010/5261/support/sir2010-5261.pdf
Report No. 097003 Geotechnical Risk Assessment For Galore Creek (FMEA)
2006
¦
¦
¦
Robertsen GeoConsultants, Inc., BGC Engineering Inc. 2006. Report No. 097003 Geotechnical Risk Assessment For Galore Creek (FMEA). March.
https://al00.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/epic/documents/p239/d21955/1151519351908 a0424fc071d946d0bf57el
b255ad41a9.pdf
The James K. Mitchel Lecture: Interpretation of In-Situ Tests - Some Insights
2013
¦
Robertson, P.K. 2013. The James K. Mitchel Lecture: Interpretation of In-Situ Tests-Some Insights. Geotechnical and Geophysical Site Characterization 4.
ftp://ftp.ingv.it/pub/sara.amoroso/Liquefazione%20-
%20Avezzano/Papers/Liquefazione%20da%20SDMT/Roberson%202012.pdf
Handbook of Technologies for Avoidance and Remediation of Acid Mine Drainage
1998
¦
Skousen, J., A. Rose, G. Geidel,J. Foreman, R. Evans, W. Hellier. 1998. Handbook of Technologies for Avoidance and Remediation of Acid Mine Drainage.
Acid Drainage Technology Initiative (ADTI), Published by The National Mine Land Reclamation Center. June 1.
http://www.osmre.gov/resources/librarv/ghm/hbtechavoid.pdf
Characterization of an Acid Mine Drainage Site in Southern Illinois
2002
¦
¦
Smith, P,A, 2002, Characterization of an Acid Mine Drainage Site in Southern Illinois.
http://www.asmr.us/Publications/Conference%20Proceedings/2002/0472%20Smith.pdf
Management Technologies for Metal Mining Influenced Water. Sampling and
Monitoring for the Mine Life Cycle (Volume 6)
2014
¦
Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration Inc. (SME). 2014. Management Technologies for Metal Mining Influenced Water. Sampling and Monitoring
for the Mine Life Cycle (Volume 6). Edited by Virginia T. McLemore, Kathleen S. Smith, and Carol C. Russell.
NA
Hydrology of the Abandoned Underground Corning Coal Mine, Perry County, Ohio
2004
¦
¦
Stoertz, M.W., Parameswar, S., McCament, B., Bowman, J.S. 2004. Hydrology of the Abandoned Underground Corning Coal Mine, Perry County, Ohio.
http://www.asmr.us/Publications/Conference%20Proceedings/2004/1831-Stoertz%200H.pdf
Modeling Effects of Underground Mine Depressurization on Water Resources for
the Proposed Montanore Mine, Lincoln and Sanders Counties, Montana
2013
¦
¦
Stringer, A.C., Tallman, A., Klepfer, E. 2013. Modeling Effects of Underground Mine Depressurization on Water Resources for the Proposed Montanore
Mine, Lincoln and Sanders Counties, Montana.
http://www.mtech.edu/mwtp/conference/2013 presentations/Cam%20Stringer.pdf
Hydraulic Adit Plug Closure, World's Fair Mine, Patagonia, Arizona
2011
¦
Tetra Tech, Inc. 2011. Hydraulic Adit Plug Closure, World's Fair Mine, Patagonia, Arizona. Mine Design, Operations & Closure Conference. May.
http://www.mtech.edu/mwtR/conference/2011%20Presentations/Wednesdav/Allan%20Kirk. pdf
Abandoned Kettle Creek mine stabilization done, will prevent future acid mine
'blowout'
2010
¦
¦
The Express. 2010. Abandoned Kettle Creek mine stabilization done, will prevent future acid mine 'blowout'. February.
http://www.lockhaven.com/page/content.detail/id/516048/Abandoned-Kettle-Creek-mine-stabilization-
done—will-prevent-future~acid~mine-blowout-.html
Global Acid Rock Drainage Guide (GARD Guide)
2009
¦
The International Network for Acid Prevention (INAP). 2009. Global Acid Rock Drainage Guide (GARD Guide).
http://www.gardguide.com
Ground-Water Flow Model of Drawdown and Recovery Near an Underground Mine
1988
¦
¦
Toran, L., Bradbury, K.R. 1988. Ground-Water Flow Model of Drawdown and Recovery Near an Underground Mine. Ground Water. Vol. 26. No. 6.
http://info.ngwa.org/gwol/pdf/882946790.PDF
Good practice in emergency preparedness and response
2005
¦
UNEP. ICMM, 2005, Good practice in emergency preparedness and response. September.
http://www.icmm.eom/document/8
Ground-water models
1982
¦
¦
UNESCO. 1982. Ground-water models.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0004/000489/048909eo.pdf
Underground Mine Blowout
NA
¦
University of Kentucky-Kentucky Geological Survey. Underground Mine Blowout.
http://kgs.ukv.edu/kgsweb/download/terrain/ekvodfs/EasternCoalField%2046. pdf
Field Activities Report: Mine Adit Entry, Red and Bonita Mine Site, Silverton, San
Juan County, Colorado
2012
¦
URS. 2012. Field Activities Report: Mine Adit Entry, Red and Bonita Mine Site, Silverton, San Juan County, Colorado. January.
http://www.geomineinfo.com/ESW/Files/RedandBonita Adit Field Activities Report.pdf
Environmental Quality: Conceptual Site Models
2012
¦
¦
USACE, 2012. Environmental Quality: Conceptual Site Models. Publication No. EM 200-1-12. December 28.
http://www.itrcweb.org/ism-l/references/EM 200-l-12.pdf
Automated Geospatial Watershed Assessment (AGWA): A GIS-Based Hydrologic
Modeling Tool for Watershed Management and Landscape Assessment
NA
¦
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Agricultural Research Service, USEPA, University of Arizona, and University of Wyoming. Automated Geospatial
Watershed Assessment (AGWA): A GIS-Based Hydrologic Modeling Tool for Watershed Management and Landscape Assessment.
http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/46226/PDF/
Investigative Methods for Controlling Groundwater Flow to Underground Mine
Workings
2006
¦
¦
USDA Forest Service (USFS). 2006. Investigative Methods for Controlling Groundwater Flow to Underground Mine Workings. August.
http://www.fs.fed.us/t-d/pubs/htmlpubs/htm03712801/index.htm
Draft Final Report - Evaluation of Airborne Geophysical Surveys for Large-Scale
Mapping of Contaminated Mine Pools
2007
¦
¦
U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). 2007. Draft Final Report - Evaluation of Airborne Geophysical Surveys for Large-
Scale Mapping of Contaminated Mine Pools.
http://www.osti.gov/scitech/biblio/938586-eb4wxb/
Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Combined Risk Assessment. Includes: Results of
Geotechnical and Structural Analysis and Potential Failure Modes and Effects
Analysis
2008
¦
¦
¦
U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). 2008. Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Combined Risk Assessment. Includes: Results of
Geotechnical and Structural Analysis and Potential Failure Modes and Effects Analysis. November.
https://www.usbr.gov/gp/ecao/leadville/combined risk assessment.pdf
Technical Evaluation of the Gold King Mine Incident, San Juan County, Colorado
2015
¦
BOR. 2015. Technical Evaluation of the Gold King Mine Incident, San Juan County, Colorado. October.
http://www.usbr.gov/docs/goldkingminereport. pdf
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page D-3
-------
Document Title
Date
CSM
MIW Pooling
Case Studies
Full Reference
Internet URL
Information
Resou rces
Assessment
Management
& Mitigation
Failure
Mode and
Effects
Analysis
Emergency
Action
Planning
MIW Release
Use of Submersible Pressure Transducers in Water-Resources Investigations
2004
¦
U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey (USGS). 2004. Use of Submersible Pressure Transducers in Water-Resources Investigations. Techniques
of Water-Resources Investigations 8-A3.
http://pubs. usgs.gov/twri/twri8a3/Ddf/twri8-a3.Ddf
Geochemical Characterization of Mine Waste, Mine Drainage, and Stream
Sediments at the Pike Hill Copper Mine Superfund Site, Orange County, Vermont
2006
¦
¦
¦
USGS. 2006. Geochemical Characterization of Mine Waste, Mine Drainage, and Stream Sediments at the Pike Hill Copper Mine Superfund Site, Orange
County, Vermont.
httD://Dubs,usgs.gov/sir/2006/5303/Ddf/sir20065303 PrintOnlv.odf
Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011-1092
2011
¦
¦
USGS. 2011a. Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2011-1092,55 p.
httD://Dubs,usgs.gov/of/2011/1092/pdf/0 Fll-1092.pdf
Hydrogeologic Setting and Simulation of Groundwater Flow near the Canterbury
and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnels, Leadville Colorado
2011
¦
¦
USGS. 2011b. Hydrogeologic Setting and Simulation of Groundwater Flow near the Canterbury and Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnels, Leadville Colorado.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2011/5085/pdf/sir2011-5085.pdf
Water Budgets and Groundwater Volumes for Abandoned Underground Mines in
the Western Middle Anthracite Coalfield, Schuylkill, Columbia and Northumberland
Counties, Pennsylvania - Estimates with Identification of Data Needs
2011
¦
¦
USGS. 2011c. Water Budgets and Groundwater Volumes for Abandoned Underground Mines in the Western Middle Anthracite Coalfield, Schuylkill,
Columbia and Northumberland Counties, Pennsylvania - Estimates with Identification of Data Needs. USGS Report 2010-5261.
http://pubs,usgs.gov/sir/2010/5261/support/sir2010-5261.pdf
FY2004 Advanced Geophysical Methods Development
2016
¦
USGS. 2016a. FY2004 Advanced Geophysical Methods Development. Accessed January 2016.
http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/bgas/toxics/FY04-advanced/
Bibliography of Geophysical Methods for Characterizing Mine Waste
2016
¦
USGS. 2016b. Bibliography of Geophysical Methods for Characterizing Mine Waste. Accessed January 2016.
http://crustal.usgs.gov/proiects/minewaste/geophvsics mine pubs.html
Geophysical Technology Transfer (G2T)
2016
¦
¦
USGS. 2016c. Geophysical Technology Transfer (G2T), Accessed January 2016.
http://water.usgs.gov/ogw/bgas/g2t.html
Quantitative and Qualitative Aspects of Underground Mine Pools
2004
¦
¦
U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE). 2004. Quantitative and Qualitative Aspects of
Underground Mine Pools.
http://www.osmre.gov/resources/librarv/proceedings/2004HIW-Sessionl-UndergroundMinePool.pdf
Guidance Manual: Outcrop Barrier Design for Above Drainage Coal Mines
2007
¦
OSMRE, 2007, Guidance Manual: Outcrop Barrier Design for Above Drainage Coal Mines. January.
http://www.arcc. osmre,gov/resources/pubs/2007-KKohli-OutcropBarrier-GuidanceManual.pdf
Mine Pool Workshop
2007
¦
¦
OSMRE. 2007. Mine Pool Workshop. March.
https://www. google. com/url?sa=t&rct=i&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=ria&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi
Hi8CM KLKAhWG7vYKHbAiB6wQFggaMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.osmre.gov%2Fresources%2Flibrarv%
2F proceed ings%2F2007MinePoolWorkshop.pdf&usg=AFQiCNFPRFXVDJ06d8oh akNVuvTHhbCSA
Guide to Using Tracers in Coal Mining Situations
2013
¦
¦
OSMRE. 2013a. Guide to Using Tracers in Coal Mining Situations. April 22.
http://www.arcc.osmre.gov/about/techDisciplines/hvdrologv/docs/techGuidance/2013/tsd-wggb-
Guide to using Tracers.pdf
North Branch Potomac River Mine Pool Assessment Study
2013
¦
OSMRE. 2013b. North Branch Potomac River Mine Pool Assessment Study. November.
https.//www. google. com/url?sa=t&rct=i&a=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=l&cad=ria&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwil
qZvRiaPKAhVENSYKHWi BF8QFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arcc.osmre.gov%2Fabout%2FtechDiscip
lines%2FminePools%2F2013-NorthBranchPotomacRiverMinePool-
FinalReport, pdf&usg=AFQiCNHrT22YarpemB4QdZ6v2hDtv4825Q
Final Report Fairmont, West Virginia Mine-pool
2014
¦
OSMRE. 2014a. Final Report Fairmont, West Virginia Mine-pool. March
https.//www. google. com/url?sa=t&rct=i&a=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=l&cad=ria&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiu
ro i Si a P K Ah XG wYK H eTw A7U QF ggcM AA&u rl=http%3 A%2 F%2 F w w w. a rcc. os m re. gov%2 F a bo ut%2 Ftec h D i sci p 1
ines%2FminePools%2F2014-FairmontMinePool-WV-
FinalReport,pdf&usg=AFQiCNHEIklLqiPBCaAYneb43KKJ9AOUBw
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Releases Studies of Mine
Pools Near the North Branch of the Potomac River and Monongahela River
2014
¦
OSMRE. 2014b. Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Releases Studies of Mine Pools Near the North Branch of the Potomac River and
Monongahela River. November.
http://www.osmre.gov/resources/newsroom/News/2014/111914. pdf
OSMRE releases two technical studies: Mine Pool Hydrologic Characterization
Studies
2014
¦
¦
OSMRE. 2014c. OSMRE releases two technical studies: Mine Pool Hydrologic Characterization Studies.
http://www3,epa,gov/reg3wa pd/npdes/npdesminingmeeting2014/presentations/DavThreePresentations/O
SM Minepool Reports.pdf
National Mine Map Repository
2016
¦
OSMRE. 2016a, National Mine Map Repository. Accessed January 2016.
http://mmr.osmre.gov/MultiPub.aspx
Hydrology Equipment
2016
¦
OSMRE. 2016b. Hydrology Equipment. Accessed January 2016.
NA
National and Regional Technology Transfer Teams
2016
¦
OSMRE. 2016c. National and Regional Technology Transfer Teams. Accessed January 2016.
http://www.osmre.gov/programs/tdt/teams.shtm
Public Roads: Avoiding Voids
2003
¦
U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Highways Administration (FHWA). 2003. Public Roads: Avoiding Voids. Volume 66, No. 6. May/June.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/publicroads/03mav/01.cfm
Abandoned Underground Mines Program. Bridges and Structures; Geotechnical
Hazards
2016
¦
FH WA. 2016. Abandoned Underground Mines Program. Bridges and Structures; Geotechnical Hazards. Accessed January 2016.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/geotech/hazards/mine/
EPA, The Department of the Interior, and the Gold King Mine Disaster
2016
¦
U.S. House of Representatives. 2016. EPA, The Department of the Interior, and the Gold King Mine Disaster. Committee on Natural Resources, February 11.
http://naturalresources.house.gov/uploadedfiles/house committee on natural resources gold king mine
report feb. 11 2016.pdf
Detection of Abandoned Underground Coal Mines by Geophysical Methods
1971
¦
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1971. Detection of Abandoned Underground Coal Mines by Geophysical Methods.
http://nepis.epa, gov/ Exe/ZvNET.exe/9100GXD8 .TXT? ZvActi o n D=Zv Doc u m e nt&CI ie nt= E PA& 1 n d ex= P ri o r+to+
1976&Docs=&Querv=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=l&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntrv=&QField=&QFi
eldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDav=&lntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuerv=&File=D%3A%5Czvfiles%
5Clndex%20Data%5C70thru75%5CTxt%5C00000012%5C9100GXD8.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=ano
nvmous&SortMethod=h%7C-
&MaximumDocuments=l&FuzzvDegree=0&lmageQualitv=r75g8/r75g8/xl50vl50gl6/i425&Displav=P%7Cf
&DefSeekPage=x&SearchBack=ZvActionL&Back=ZvActionS&BackDesc=Results%20page&MaximumPages=l
&Zv E ntrv= l&See kPa ge=x&Zy P U R L
Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under
CERCLA
1988
¦
¦
EPA. 1988. Guidance for Conducting Remedial Investigations and Feasibility Studies Under CERCLA. October.
https://rais.ornl.gov/documents/GUIDANCE.PDF
Handbook of Suggested Practices for the Design and Installation of Ground-Water
Monitoring Wells
1991
¦
EPA. 1991, Handbook of Suggested Practices for the Design and Installation of Ground-Water Monitoring Wells. March.
http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/fieldsamp-wellshandbook. pdf
Ground Water Forum: Monitoring Well Development Guidelines for Superfund
Project Managers
1992
¦
EPA. 1992a. Ground Water Forum: Monitoring Well Development Guidelines for Superfund Project Managers.
http://www.epa,gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/welldevelp O.pdf
RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring: Draft Technical Guidance
1992
¦
EPA. 1992b. RCRA Ground-Water Monitoring: Draft Technical Guidance. November.
http://www3.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/correctiveaction/resources/guidance/sitechar/gwmonitr/rcra gw.p
df
Subsurface Characterization and Monitoring Techniques: A Desk Reference Guide
1993
¦
EPA. 1993. Subsurface Characterization and Monitoring Techniques: A Desk Reference Guide. May.
https://nepis.epa. gov/ Exe/ZvNET,exe/30004L8E.txt PZvAct io n D=ZvD ocu m e nt&C 1 i e nt=E PA& 1 n d e x=1991%2 OT
h r u %201994& D ocs=&Q u e rv= &Ti m e=& E n d Ti m e=&Se a rc h M eth od=l&Toc Re str ict= n &Toc= &TocE nt rv=&QF ie 1
d=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDav=&UseQField=&lntQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOp=0&XmlQuerv=&Fil
e-D%3A%5CZYFI LES%5CINDEX%20DAT A%5 C91TH RU94%5CTXT%5C00000009%5C30004L8E.txt&User=ANO
NYMOUS&Password=anonvmous&SortMethod=h%7C-
&Maxi m u m Docu ments=l&FuzzvDegree=0&l mageQualitv=r75g8/r75g8/xl50vl50gl6/i425&Displav=p%7Cf
& DefSee kPa ge=x&Sea rch Ba ck=ZvAct io n L& Ba c k= ZvActi o n S& Ba ck De sc= Re s u lts%20 pa ge& M a x i m u m Pa ge s=1
&ZvEntrv=6#
Abandoned Mine Site Characterization and Cleanup Handbook
2000
¦
¦
EPA. 2000. Abandoned Mine Site Characterization and Cleanup Handbook. August.
http://vosemite.epa.gov/R10/CLEANUP.NSF/9f3c21896330b4898825687b007a0f33/f4724fl0ccdc2f4d88256
99a007861dd/$FILE/AMSCCH,pdf
Performing Quality Flow Measurements at Mine Sites
2001
¦
EPA, 2001. Performing Quality Flow Measurements at Mine Sites. September.
http://www.ea rthwa rdconsulting.com/librarv/600r01043complete. pdf
Ground-Water Sampling Guidelines for Superfund and RCRA Project Managers
2002
¦
EPA. 2002. Ground-Water Sampling Guidelines for Superfund and RCRA Project Managers. May.
http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-06/documents/gw sampling guide.pdf
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page D-4
-------
Document Title
Date
CSM
MIW Pooling
Case Studies
Full Reference
Internet URL
Information
Resou rces
Assessment
Management
& Mitigation
Failure
Mode and
Effects
Analysis
Emergency
Action
Planning
MIW Release
EPA and Hardrock Mining: A Source Book for Industry in the Northwest and Alaska
2003
¦
EPA. 2003. EPA and Flardrock Mining: A Source Book for Industry in the Northwest and Alaska. January.
h tt d ://vose m ite. e oa. gov/R 10/WAT ER.NSF/840a5de5d0a8dl41882565Of00715a27/e4bal5715e97 ef2188256
d2c00783a8e/$FILE/Maintext.Ddf
Groundwater Sampling and Monitoring with Direct Push Technologies
2005
¦
EPA. 2005. Groundwater Sampling and Monitoring with Direct Push Technologies. Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. August
http://neDis.eDa. gov/ Exe/ZvNET,exe/20017GL0. TXTPZvAct io n D=ZvD ocu m e nt&C 1 i e nt=E PA& 1 n d e x=2000+Th r
u+20Q5&Docs=&Querv=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=l&TocRestrict=n&Toc=&TocEntrv=&QField=&
QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDav=&lntQFieldOD=0&ExtQFieldOD=0&XmlQuerv=&File=D%3A%5Czvfil
es%5Clndex%20Data%5C00thru05%5CTxt%5C00000010%5C20017GL0.txt&User=ANONYMOUS&Password=
anonvmous&SortMethod=h%7C-
&Maxi m u m Docu ments=l&FuzzvDegree=0&l mageQualitv=r75g8/r75g8/xl50vl50gl6/i425&DisDlav=D%7Cf
& DefSee kPa ge=x&Sea rch Ba ck=ZvAct io n L& Ba c k= ZvActi o n S& Ba ck De sc= Re s u lts%20 Da ge& M a x i m u m Pa ge s=1
&ZvEntrv= l&See kPage=x&ZvPU R L
Guidance on Systematic Planning Using the Data Quality Objectives Process. Office
of Environmental Information
2006
¦
¦
EPA. 2006. Guidance on Systematic Planning Using the Data Quality Objectives Process. Office of Environmental Information. February.
httD://www,eDa.gov/sites/Droduction/files/documents/guidanee systematic Dlanning dqo Drocess.Ddf
Monitoring Well Water Level Measurement. SOP-16, Yerrington Mine Site
2007
¦
EPA. 2007. Monitoring Well Water Level Measurement. SOP-16, Yerrington Mine Site. February 1.
httD://vosemite.eDa.gov/r9/sfund/r9sfdocw.nsf/3dc283e6c5d6056f88257426007417a2/l 20f2 6eb0d420d8b
882575el006899ae/$FILE/SOP-16rO%20Monitor°/o20Well%20Water%20Level°/o20Measurement.Ddf
Environmental Cleanup Best Management Practices: Effective Use of the Project
Life Cycle Conceptual Site Model
2011
¦
¦
EPA. 2011. Environmental Cleanup Best Management Practices: Effective Use of the Project Life Cycle Conceptual Site Model. Quick Reference Fact Sheet.
Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation. July.
httDs://clu-in,org/download/remed/csm-life-cvcle-fact-sheet-final,Ddf
Formosa Mine Superfund Site - Final OU1 Remedial Investigation Report
2012
¦
EPA. 2012. Formosa Mine Superfund Site - Final OU1 Remedial Investigation Report.
httD://www3.eDa.gov/regionlO/Ddf/sites/formosamine/final formosa mine suoerfund site OU1 Rl reoor
t text.Ddf
Groundwater Sampling Operating Procedure
2013
¦
EPA. 2013. Groundwater Sampling Operating Procedure. Region 4 Science and Ecosystem Support Division. March.
httD://www.eDa.gov/sites/Droduction/files/2015-06/documents/Groundwater-SamDling.Ddf
Reference Guide to Treatment Technologies for Mining-Influenced Water
2014
¦
EPA. 2014. Reference Guide to Treatment Technologies for Mining-Influenced Water. EPA 542-R-l4-001. March.
httDs://clu-in,org/download/issues/mining/Reference Guide to Treatment Technologies for MlW.odf
Red and Bonita/Gold King Operational Plan - Draft 5/22/2015
2015
¦
EPA. 2015a. Red and Bonita/Gold King Operational Plan - Draft 5/22/2015. May.
httD://www.eDa.gov/sites/Droduction/files/2015-10/documents/1573798. Ddf
Memorandum: Transmittal of EPA Internal Gold King Mine Review Report
2015
¦
EPA. 2015b. Memorandum: Transmittal of EPA Internal Gold King Mine Review Report. August.
htto.7/www, eDa.gov/sites/Droduction/files/2015-
08/documents/new gold king mine memodated redacted.Ddf
Memorandum: Interim Guidance for Continuation of Work and Development of
Comprehensive List of Superfund Mining and Mineral Processing Sites
2015
¦
EPA. 2015c. Memorandum: Interim Guidance for Continuation of Work and Development of Comprehensive List of Superfund Mining and Mineral
Processing Sites. September.
htto.7/www, eDa.gov/sites/Droduction/files/2015-
09/documents/interimguidanceforworkatminesites 9 4 15.Ddf
Memorandum: Review of Regional and Area Contingency Plans for Downstream
Notifications
2015
¦
EPA. 2015d. Memorandum: Review of Regional and Area Contingency Plans for Downstream Notifications. September.
httD://www, eDa.gov/sites/Droduction/files/2015-
09/documents/reviewofdownstreamnotificationDlans9 4 2015.pdf
Post-Gold King Mine Release Incident: Conceptual Monitoring Plan for Surface
Water, EPA Draft, Sediments, and Biology
2015
¦
¦
¦
EPA. 2015e. Post-Gold King Mine Release Incident: Conceptual Monitoring Plan for Surface Water, EPA Draft, Sediments, and Biology. September.
httD.//www, eDa.gov/sites/Droduction/files/2015-09/documents/Dost-
gkm draft conceDtual monitoring Dian 9 17 2015.Ddf
Focused Technical Review of Probe Hole Dewatering Characterization Plan and 30-
60 Percent Draft Design Plans for Level 1 Adit Rehabilitation, Standard Mine,
Gunnison National Forest, Colorado, Technical Memorandum
2015
¦
¦
¦
¦
EPA. 2015f. Focused Technical Review of Probe Hole Dewatering Characterization Plan and 30-60 Percent Draft Design Plans for Level 1 Adit Rehabilitation,
Standard Mine, Gunnison National Forest, Colorado, Technical Memorandum. October.
NA
Guideline Template for Hydrogeological Review/Technical Assessment Report
2016
¦
EPA. 2016a. Guideline Template for Hydrogeological Review/Technical Assessment Report. Accessed January 2016.
httD://www.eDa.ie/Dubs/reDorts/enforcement/temDlates/Guideline%20TemDlate%20ReDort%20for%20reD
orting%20comDliance%20with%20the%20EO%20(Groundwater)%20Regulations%202010.Ddf
Field Sampling Procedures for Region 9.
2016
¦
EPA, 2016b. Field Sampling Procedures for Region 9. Accessed January 2016.
httD://www, eDa.gov/aualitv/field-samDling-Drocedures-region-9
Draft Technical Memorandum, Gold King Mine Investigation and Blowout Event
2015
¦
Weston Solutions. 2015. Draft Technical Memorandum, Gold King Mine Investigation and Blowout Event. August.
httD://www,eDa.gov/sites/Droduction/files/2015-10/documents/1574032.Ddf
West Virginia Mine Pool Atlas, Final Project Report for the project period January 1,
2010 through December 31,2011
2012
¦
¦
West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey. 2012. West Virginia Mine Pool Atlas, Final Project Report for the project period January 1,2010 through
December 31,2011, May.
httD://www.deD.wv.gov/WWE/wateruse/Documents/MinePoolAtlas.Ddf
Application of the Hybrid Finite Element Mixing Cell Method To An Abandoned
Coalfield in Belgium
NA
Wildemeersrch, S., Brouyere, S., Orban, Ph., Couturier, J., Dingelstadt, C.,...Dassargues, A., Application of the Hybrid Finite Element Mixing Cell Method To
An Abandoned Coalfield in Belgium.
httD://orbi,ulg,ac.be/bitstream/2268/69485/l/HYDROL9216 Acceoted ManuscriDt.odf
Ground Water Flow Parameterization of an Appalachian Coal mine Complex
2004
¦
Winters, W.R., Capo, R.C., 2004, Ground Water Flow Parameterization of an Appalachian Coal mine Complex. Ground Water. Vol. 42, No.5.
httDS://info, ngwa.org/GWOL/Ddf/042579845.odf
Hydrogeologic Characterization of Ground Waters, Mine Pools and the Leadville
Mine Drainage Tunnel, Leadville, Colorado
2006
¦
Wireman, M., Gertson, J., Williams, M.,2006. Hydrogeologic Characterization of Ground Waters, Mine Pools and the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel,
Leadville, Colorado.
httDs://imwa.info/docs/imwa 2006/2439-Wireman-CO.Ddf
Water Management at Abandoned Flooded Underground Mines, Fundamentals,
Tracer Tests, Modelling, Water Treatment
2006
¦
Wolkersdorfer, Christian. 2006. Water Management at Abandoned Flooded Underground Mines, Fundamentals, Tracer Tests, Modelling, Water Treatment.
September.
httDs://books.google.com/books?id=tHuu7QtUurwC&Dg=PA272&lDg=PA272&da=abandoned+underground
+mine+DOol&source=bl&ots= OLWOtTz8R&sig=glMVNivqbD953X29QFdh 3Mbfo&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB0Q
6AEwADgUahUKEwiJ4eFlwtFIFIAhVBWi4KFIU4EAFE#v=oneDage&a=abandoned%20underground%20mine%2
0Dool&f=false
Geophysical Void Detection Demonstrations. 6th Biennial ITGAUM Workshop
2006
¦
Zapata Engineering. 2006. Geophysical Void Detection Demonstrations. 6th Biennial ITGAUM Workshop. June.
httDs://www.dot.nv.gov/conferences/itgaum/reoositorv/3D Hanna GeoDhvsical%20Void%20Demonstratio
n.pdf
Best Practices for Preventing Sudden, Uncontrolled Fluid Mining Waste Releases
Page D-5
------- |