The Evolution of Mining Reclamation and Regulation in the San Juan

Mountains

Mark WalkerTechnical Assistance to Brownfields (TAB) Program

May 29, 2015

Technical Assistance to Brownfield (TAB)

• A national program• Funded by EPA • Free to communities• K-State assists

communities in EPA Regions 5, 6, 7 and 8

2

The Early Years of Mining Reclamation1980 -1990

Superfund & the NPL

• Clear authority for sites where there is an imminent threat to people

• Must score 28.5 on the HRS

3

Cleanup Approach

• Usually very large sites, complex cleanups

• Water treatment (often) at the end of the tunnel

• NPDES Permitting

4

Problems with the NPL Approach

• “Superfund” not so “super”

• Eco Threat Sites vs. People threats

• Too many widely dispersed small contributors to constitute a single site

• Abandoned sites• Sites scoring less than 28.5

• Future property transactions

• Scares potential good samaritans

5

Local ExampleIdarado

• Not a “true NPL site”• $20 M• Direct Revegetation• Performance Goals– Coverage– Diversity– Water quality

6

The Next Generation of Regulation1990 - Present

Voluntary Cleanup Programs• Great Mechanism for taking charge on a site and

deflecting NPL/EPA

• How to keep EPA out? MOA– Some CERCLA relief provided (no CERCLA Good Sam before 2007)– No CWA relief– NPL Caliber not eligible

• Risk based cleanups

7

Cleanup Approach

• Contour• Cap • Revegetate• Divert Adit Drainage

around piles• Risk-based cleanups

Columbia TailingsRico, CO

Local Example;Silver Bell Tailing Pile (Ophir)

Before After

9

Shortcomings of VCP

Inability to address large sites

Enforcement authority??

No Good Samaritan Clause

10

The Next Generation of Regulation1990 – Present

Community Based Stakeholder GroupsMotivated citizens and PRP’s and agencies collaborate to prevent NPL listing of the site

11

Cleanup Approach

• Study and coordinate cleanup effort• Seek funding for cost-effective solutions using

existing programs/authority• Limited to actions that do not result in the

discharge of pollutants or release of haz waste• Collaboration

12

Local Example;Animas River Stakeholders

Silverton

13

Limitations for Community Based Stakeholder Efforts

Voluntary Effort– Needs willing participants (both members &

responsible parties)

Funding, Funding, Funding– Implementation– O&M

Large Water sites (No Good Sam)

Long Term Staying Power?

14

The Current Generation of Mining Reclamation; 2005 - Present

Collaboration and Innovative Uses of Regulatory Authority

• Targeted Listings

• Non Time Critical Removals– OSC’s & CERCLA Authority

• Collaboration– Public-Private Partnerships– Interagency

15

Cleanup Approach;Tools Used

• Segregating dirty from clean water

• Environmental covenants

16

Problems

• Good Samaritans still not motivated to participate…liability fears

• Citizen suits under the Clean Water Act

17

Local Case ExampleCaribbeau Tails, Ute-Ulay, Nelson Tunnel

• Caribbeau: Non time critical removal planned for 2015

• Ute Ulay: Non time critical removal done in 2014

• Nelson Tunnel: ongoing targeted listing

18

What is Next?2015 and Beyond

• True Good Samaritan Act

• True walk-away technologies that better mimic natural processes

19

20

QUESTIONS?