wman conference 2005
Post on 23-Jan-2016
49 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
WMAN Conference 2005WMAN Conference 2005
COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND ACTUAL WATER QUALITY
In Environmental Impact Statements for major hardrock mines in the U.S.
James Kuipers, Kuipers and Associates, Butte, MTAnn Maest, Buka Environmental, Boulder, CO
Kimberley MacHardy, Kuipers and Associates, Butte, MTGreg Lawson, Buka Environmental, Boulder, CO
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 22
Project BackgroundProject Background• Performed by Kuipers and Associates and
Buka Environmental• Study of this type/magnitude never performed
before• Project funded by Earthworks/MPC with grant
from Wilburforce Foundation• 24-month data collection and analysis effort• Preliminary results presented at SME with
final results available October 2005– www.kuipersassoc.com
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 33
Project TasksProject Tasks• Define and identify “major” hardrock mines in the U.S.• Identify NEPA eligibility of major hardrock mines• Identify and gather NEPA documentation for major
mines• Identify and compile water quality predictions information
from NEPA documents• Identify other water quality predictions information• Conduct case studies analysis of NEPA process,
predictions results, and actual water quality history• Analyze NEPA predictions and water quality information
on a comparative basis and in subgroups
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 44
Project DatabaseProject Database• Location• Ownership• Commodity• Operation Type • Operation Status• Disturbance and Financial Assurance • NEPA Documentation • Record of NEPA document requests and retention• NPDES Information
Data provided in Excel database form and statistically evaluated in appendices to report
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 55
Major Mines IdentificationMajor Mines Identification• Major Mines Criteria
– disturbance area of over 100 acres, and– financial assurance amount of over $250,000, or– having a production history (1975 to current) of
greater than 100,000 oz’s Au, 100,000,000 #’s copper, or equivalent in other metal
– In operation 1975 to present
• Sources– Kuipers, Randol, USGS, Infomine
• 182 major mines identified in U.S.
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 66
Mine Information Statistical EvaluationMine Information Statistical Evaluation
0
1
2
3
4
5
Figure XXXX ALASKA MAJOR MINES BY COMMODITY
Number 5 1 2 0 0 0 2 0
% 62.5% 12.5% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0%
Primary Gold
Primary Silver
Gold and
CopperCopper
and Moly
Lead and Zinc
Platinum Group
Figure XXXX ALASKA MAJOR MINES BY OPERATION (MINING METHOD)
Underground, 4, 49%Open Pit, 3, 38%
Underground + Open Pit, 1, 13%
FIGURE XXXX ALASKA MAJOR MINES BY OPERATION (PROCESS) TYPE
Flotation and Gravity, 4, 57%
Dump Leach (SX/EW), 0, 0%
Vat Leach, 2, 29%Heap Leach, 1, 14%
Heap Leach and Vat Leach, 0,
0%
FIGURE XXXX ALASKA MAJOR MINES BY CURRENT STATUS
62.5%
0.0%
12.5% 12.5% 12.5%
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
Current Status
% o
f T
ota
l M
ines
Status 62.5% 0.0% 12.5% 12.5% 12.5%
Operating ClosedIn
ConstructionPermitting Withdraw n
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 77
NEPA Mines IdentificationNEPA Mines IdentificationNEPA RequirementsNEPA Requirements
• Location on Forest Service lands• Location on Bureau of Land Management lands• Requirement for NPDES permit from EPA• Requirement for COE 404 wetlands permit• Location on BIA-administered Indian Lands• State mandated NEPA equivalent process
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 88
NEPA MinesNEPA Mines• 136 current era NEPA eligible major hardrock mines
# (% of total)
– BLM lands 93 (68%)
– Forest Service lands 35 (26%)
– BLM and Forest Service lands 9 (7%)
– COE 404 Wetlands Permits 5 (4%)
– EPA issued NPDES permits 3 (2%)
– BIA administered Indian Lands 2 (2%)
– States requiring NEPA 33 (24%) • CA, MT, WA, WI
– NEPA for both federal and state 22 (16%)
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 99
NEPA Documents CollectionNEPA Documents Collection• Goal: to obtain and review statistically significant total of
documents for the 136 current era NEPA-eligible hardrock mines identified
• EIS’s reviewed 64 mines• EA’s reviewed 6 mines• Total 70 mines
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 1010
NEPA/EIS NEPA/EIS Water Quality Predictions InformationWater Quality Predictions Information
• Classifications Established/ Reviews for:– Mineralization/Ore Associations– Climate– Hydrology– Geochemical Characterization– Predictive Models Used– Acid Drainage and Contaminant Leaching Potential– Groundwater, Surface Water and Pit Water Impact
Potential– Mitigations– Predicted Water Quality Impacts– Discharge Information
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 1111
% of total mines reviewed
Dry/Arid Low and Middle
Latitude Deserts20%
Dry/Semi-Arid Middle Latitude
Climates36%
Humid Tropical4%
Marine West Coast
4%
Boreal Forest29%
Continental3%
Sub Arctic4%
ClimateClimate(Modified Koppen System)(Modified Koppen System)
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 1212
Surface Water HydrologySurface Water Hydrology
% of total mines reviewed
No information7%
Intermittent/ ephemeral
streams on site - perennial
streams >1 mile away26%
Intermittent/ ephemeral
streams on site - perennial
streams <1 mile away23%
Perennial streams on site
44%
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 1313
Groundwater HydrologyGroundwater Hydrology
% of total mines reviewed
No information12%
Depth to groundwater
>200 feet16%
Depth to groundwater <200 but >50
feet13%
Depth to groundwater 0
to 50 ft or springs on site w ith no other
info59%
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 1414
Acid Drainage PotentialAcid Drainage Potential
% of total mines reviewed
No information available
9%
Low acid drainage potential
59%
Moderate acid drainage potential
26%
High acid drainage potential
6%
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 1515
Contaminant Leaching PotentialContaminant Leaching Potential
% of total mines reviewed
No information available
22%
Low contaminant leaching potential (leachate does not
exceed water quality standards)
32%
Moderate potential for elevated contaminant
concentrations (Leachate exceeds
water quality standards by 1-10
times.)30%
High potential for elevated
contaminant concentrations
(Leachate exceeds water quality
standards by over 10 times.)
16%
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 1616
Case Study PrioritiesCase Study Priorities
• Long histories of NEPA documentation
• Information on pre-mining water quality
• Representative of a variety of locations; commodities; different proximities to water resources; different characterization and modeling efforts; different potentials to generate acid and leach contaminants
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 1717
Case Study MinesCase Study MinesName State
Greens Creek AK
Pogo AK
Bagdad AZ
Ray AZ
Safford AZ
Jamestown CA
McLaughlin CA
Royal Mountain King CA
Grouse Creek ID
Thompson Creek ID
Beal Mountain MT
Black Pine MT
Name State
Golden Sunlight MT
Mineral Hill MT
Stillwater MT
Zortman and Landusky MT
Florida Canyon NV
Jerritt Canyon NV
Lone Tree NV
Rochester NV
Round Mountain NV
Ruby Hill NV
Twin Creeks NV
Flambeau WI
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 1818
Other Mines with Some Operational Other Mines with Some Operational WQ InformationWQ Information
• American Girl, CA
• Castle Mountain, CA
• Mesquite, CA
• Cortez Pipeline, NV
• Gold Quarry, NV
• 29 mines total with operational WQ info
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 1919
FindingsFindings
• This study identifies the primary modes by which the predictions have failed in terms of actual water quality impacts.– inadequate geochemical characterization– lack of effective mitigation– mitigation does not perform– other causes
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 2020
FindingsFindings
Failure Mode
• Inadequate Geochemical Characterization– Failure to recognize acid drainage or other
contaminant potential– Root Causes
• Failure to collect representative samples• Failure to conduct proper tests• Interpretation failure• Modeling failure
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 2121
FindingsFindings
Failure Mode
• Lack of Effective Mitigation– unlined tailings impoundment, springs on site
not identified, contaminant not identified– most commonly caused by inadequate
geochemical or hydrological information– assumption of low potential for impacts results
in application of inferior mitigation approach (CA)
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 2222
FindingsFindings
Failure Mode
• Mitigation Does Not Perform– Liner leak, tailings impoundment rupture,
pond or pipeline spill, storm event– May be due to one or more variables
• Performance Standard• Engineering Design• Installation• Operation
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 2323
FindingsFindings
Failure Mode• Other Failure Modes
– inadequate baseline water quality information• Recommend minimum 2 years data
– hydrological characterization failures• accurate identification or existence of shallow
groundwater (springs or perched water)• failure to predict greater quantities of water as
mining expands• failure to recognize groundwater/surface water flow
paths.
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 2424
Increased Risk Factors forIncreased Risk Factors forWater Quality ImpactsWater Quality Impacts
• Primary Risk Factors Identified:– Geology and mineralization– Proximity to water resources and climate– Acid generation potential– Contaminant leaching potential.
• Significant discrepancies exist between identified mineralization and acid drainage potential
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 2525
Increased Risk Factors for Increased Risk Factors for Water Quality ImpactsWater Quality Impacts
• Delayed impacts to groundwater at mine sites are being ignored in most NEPA evaluations.
• All mines reviewed in detail that had shallow depth to groundwater and moderate/high potential for groundwater quality impacts had groundwater quality impacts
• All but one mine reviewed in detail that were close to surface water and had moderate/high AGP had some impact to surface water
Kuipers & AssociatesKuipers & Associates 2626
Uses by Activists of Both StudiesUses by Activists of Both Studies
• EIS reviews or challenges of new and expanding mines– Characterization methods– Modeling methods– Mitigation methods– Water quality failures/successes of similar
mines– Red light/green light – inherent factors
top related