Arguments
for
redefining
the
scope
of
the
chat
rule
to
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
01_
31_
2006
1
Memorandum
Subject:
Arguments
for
redefining
the
scope
of
the
proposed
chat
rule
to
encompass
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
of
Oklahoma,
Kansasa
and
Missouri
To:
Docket
From:
Alexander
Livnat
Date:
1/
31/
2006
The
purpose
of
this
memo
is
to
present
the
basis
the
Agency
used
to
define
the
areal
scope
of
the
proposed
chat
rule.
It
is
the
Agency's
opinion
that
the
term
"
Tar
Creek,

Oklahoma
Mining
District"
is
not
a
recognizable
geological
area.
This
memo
provides
background
supporting
the
Agency's
position
regarding
scope.

Introduction
Title
VI,
Section
6006
of
the
Safe,
Accountable,
Flexible,
and
Efficient
Transportation
Equity
Act
of
2005,
Use
of
Granular
Mine
Tailings,
states:

"
1.
`(
a)
Mine
Tailings­

`(
1)
IN
GENERAL­
 
establish
criteria .
for
the
safe
and
environmentally
protective
use
of
granular
mine
tailings
from
the
Tar
Creek,
Oklahoma
Mining
District,
known
as
`
chat',
for 

`(
A)
cement
or
concrete
projects;
and
`(
B)
transportation
construction
projects 
that
are
carried
out,
in
whole
or
in
part,
using
Federal
funds.

`(
2)
REQUIREMENTS
 
in
establishing
criteria
under
paragraph
(
1),
the
Administrator
shall
consider 
`(
A)
the
current
and
previous
uses
of
granular
mine
tailings
as
an
aggregate
for
asphalt;
and
`(
B)
any
environmental
and
public
health
risks
and
benefits
derived
from
the
removal,
transportation,
and
use
in
transportation
projects
of
granular
mine
tailings".

Based
on
conversations
we
have
had
with
the
geological
survey
departments
in
Oklahoma,
Kansas
and
Missouri,
and
in
reference
to
regional
geologic
studies
(
see
footnote
citations),
Tar
Creek,
Oklahoma,
while
a
clearly
defined
Superfund
site,
is
not
recognized
as
a
mining
district.
Instead,
it
is
hereby
proposed
that
the
scope
of
the
Arguments
for
redefining
the
scope
of
the
chat
rule
to
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
01_
31_
2006
2
proposed
rulemaking
should
address
chat,
a
mine
milling
by­
product
associated
with
the
geographically,
geologically
and
historically
coherent
lead­
zinc
Tri­
State
Mining
District
in
Oklahoma,
Kansas
and
Missouri.
In
addition
to
Ottawa
County
in
Oklahoma,
this
district
also
includes
Cherokee
County
in
southeastern
Kansas,
and
Jasper,
Newton,
Lawrence,
and
Barry
Counties
in
southwestern
Missouri1.
The
dimensions
of
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
are
about
100
miles
(
east
to
west)
x
30
miles
(
north
to
south),
and
it
extends
from
east
of
Springfield,
Missouri,
to
slightly
west
of
the
Picher
Field
of
Kansas
and
Oklahoma2.

Between
1850
and
1964,
several
years
prior
to
the
closing
of
the
last
active
mine,
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
produced
2.8
million
tons
of
lead
and
11.6
million
tons
of
zinc,
with
a
total
value
of
$
1.48
billion3,
making
it
into
the
source
of
most
of
all
the
lead
and
zinc
ever
mined
in
the
United
States.
The
lion
share
of
this
production
took
place
in
the
Picher
Field
in
the
Oklahoma
and
Kansas
portions
of
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District4.

Arguments
in
support
of
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
as
coherent
scope
for
the
proposed
rule
The
arguments
justifying
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
as
a
coherent
scope
for
the
chat
rulemaking
are
as
follows:

1.
The
Tri­
State
Mining
District
is
a
product
of
similar
mineralization
processes,
confined
to
a
well
defined
stratigraphic
interval,
and
characterized
by
wall­
rock
alteration
properties
that
set
it
apart
from
related
lead­
zinc
mineralization
districts
elsewhere
in
the
United
States.
Specifically,
unlike
other
so
called
Mississippi
Valley­
Type
lead­
zinc
deposits
in
the
United
States
which
occur
in
Cambrian
and
Ordovician
limestones
and
dolomites,
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
ores
occur
in
Mississippian
limestones
containing
a
pervasive
wall
rock
alteration
of
dolomite
and
microcrystalline
silica
(
chert)
5.
Actually,
the
term
chat
is
derived
from
the
silicified
(
cherty)
wallrock6.
In
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District,
zinc
is
characteristically
five
to
six
times
more
abundant
than
lead.

1
National
Priorities
List
sites
in
Oklahoma:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
supefund/
sites/
npl/
ok.
htm;
National
Priorities
List
sites
in
Kansas:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
supefund/
sites/
npl/
ks.
htm;
and
National
Priorities
List
sites
in
Missouri:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
supefund/
sites/
npl/
mo.
htm;
sites
accessed
on
9/
12/
2005.
Mineral
Resources
and
Industry
Map
of
Missouri,
1988,
Missouri
Department
of
Natural
Resources,
Division
of
Geology
and
Land
Survey,
Ardell
W.
Rueff.
2
Brockie,
D.
C.,
Hare
Jr.,
E.
H,
and
Paul
R.
Dingess,
The
Geology
and
Ore
Deposits
of
the
Tri­
State
District
of
Missouri,
Kansas,
and
Oklahoma,
in:
Ore
Deposits
of
the
United
States,
1933­
1967,
The
Graton­
Sales
Volume,
Volume
I,
J.
D.
Ridge,
Editor,
The
America
Institute
of
Mining,
Metallurgical,
and
Petroluem
Engineers,
New
York,
1968.
3
D.
C.
Brockie
et
al.,
Table
1.
4
McKnight,
E.
T.
and
Richard
P.
Fischer,
Geology
and
Ore
Deposits
of
the
Picher
Field
Oklahoma
and
Kansas,
United
States
Geologic
Survey
Professional
Paper
588,
1970,
Table
4.
5
D.
C.
Brockie
et
al.,
page
401.
6
David
L.
Leach
et
al.,
Mississippi
Valley­
Type
Pb­
Zn
Deposits,
in
Edward
A.
du
Bray,
Editor,
Preliminary
Compilation
of
Descriptive
Geoenvironmental
Mineral
Deposit
Models,
U.
S.
Geological
Survey
Open­
File
Report
95­
831,
Version
1.0:
http://
pubs.
usgs.
gov/
of/
1995/
ofr­
95­
0831,
accessed
on
9/
12/
2005.
Arguments
for
redefining
the
scope
of
the
chat
rule
to
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
01_
31_
2006
3
In
terms
of
mineralogical
and
metal
associations,
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
shares
the
following
common
characteristics7:
(
a)
Major
metals:
Zn,
Pb
(
b)
Minor
and
trace
metals:
Fe,
Cu,
Cd,
Ba,
Ag,
Ge,
Ga,
Co,
Ni,
In,
Sb,
Bi
(
c)
Dominant
Fe
sulfide:
Pyrite
(
d)
Major
ore
sulfides:
Sphalerite,
galena
(
e)
Minor
sulfides:
Chalcopyrite,
marcasite,
bravoite
(
f)
Primary
sulfate:
Barite
(
g)
Major
carbonate:
Dolomite
(
h)
Minor
carbonate:
Calcite
(
i)
Secondary
oxides,
arsenates,
sulfates,
oxyhydroxides
etc.:
None.

2.
Due
to
the
geological
and
mineralogical
similarities
and
common
mining
history,
chat
has
been
associated
with
similar
ore
milling
operations
across
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District,
as
they
evolved
with
time8.
According
to
several
sources,
there
are
currently
between
50­
70
million
cubic
yards
of
chat
stockpiled
on
the
surface
of
the
Tar
Creek
Superfund
site,
Ottawa
County,
Oklahoma9.
In
Missouri,
there
are
approximately
23
million
cubic
yards
remaining
out
of
an
original
total
of
close
to
400
million
cubic
yards10.
In
Kansas
there
are
estimated
5.3
million
cubic
yards
of
chat11.
Both
surface
piles
of
chat,
as
well
as
underground
mining
areas
extend
uninterrupted
across
the
Oklahoma­
Kansas
state
line;
they
are
part
of
the
well­
defined
Picher
Mining
District
that
straddles
Oklahoma
and
Kansas.
The
fact
that
the
mining
piles
of
the
Tar
Creek
Superfund
site
straddle
the
Kansas
line
means
that
air­
and
water­
borne
chat
and
finer
tailings
are
amenable
for
dispersion
across
the
adjacent
areas
of
both
states12.

According
to
the
Geological
Survey
of
Kansas
Final
Report
on
mining
impacts
associated
with
the
zinc­
lead
mining
in
southeastern
Kansas13,
the
environmental
and
health
impacts
of
this
area
as
straddling
state
lines
were
recognized
already
in
the
late
1970s:

7
Nora
K.
Foley
et
al.,
Environmental
Geochemistry
of
Platform
Carbonate­
Hosted
Sulfide
Deposits;
Chapter
E,
in
Progress
on
Geoenvironmental
Models
for
Selected
Mineral
Deposit
Types,
Robert
R.
Seal
II
and
Nora
K.
Foley,
Editors,
U.
S.
Geological
Survey
Open­
File
Report
02­
195,
Online
Version
1.0:
http://
pubs.
usgs.
gov/
of/
2002/
of02­
195,
accessed
on
9/
12/
2005.
8
For
instance,
flotation
was
commercially
introduced
in
the
mid­
1920s.
9
E.
g.,
Nazimuddin
M.
Wasiuddin
et
al.,
A
Laboratory
Study
to
Optimize
the
Use
of
Raw
Chat
in
Hot
Mix
Asphalt
for
Pavement
Application:
Final
Report.
University
of
Oklahoma
School
of
Engineering
and
Environmental
Science,
August
2005.
10
EPA
Region
VII
Action
Memo
from
Mark
Doolan
to
Michael
Sanderson,
9/
26/
2000,
addressing
OU1
of
the
Orongo­
Duenweg
Mining
Belt
Site,
Jasper
County,
Missouri;
units
converted
from
tons
to
cubic
yards
using
an
approximate
specific
density
of
2.6
tons/
cubic
yard.
11
Dames
&
Moore
1993,
p.
2­
20.
2
For
an
illustrative
satellite
photo,
see
http://
maps.
google.
com/
maps?
ll=
36.995149,­
94.835014&
spn=
0.040377,0.076321&
t=
h&
hl=
en
13
J.
R.
McCauley,
L.
L.
Brady
and
F.
W.
Wilson,
Study
of
Stability
Problems
and
Hazard
Evaluation
of
the
Kansas
Portion
of
the
Tri­
State
Mining
Area;
Originally
prepared
in
January
1983
as
Kansas
Geological
Survey
Open­
file
Report
83­
2.
http://
www.
kgs.
ku.
edu/
Publications/
OFR/
1983/
83­
2/
03_
intro.
html,
accessed
9/
15/
2005.
Arguments
for
redefining
the
scope
of
the
chat
rule
to
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
01_
31_
2006
4
" 
in
1979,
congressmen
Whittaker
of
Kansas,
Taylor
of
Missouri,
and
Synar
of
Oklahoma
expressed
the
concerns
of
their
constituents
in
Washington,
D.
C.,
and
requested
the
recommendations
of
the
U.
S.
Bureau
of
Mines.
Before
taking
corrective
action,
the
Bureau
of
Mines
proposed
a
thorough
study
of
the
Tri­
State
mining
district
to
identify
all
mined
areas
and
mine­
related
hazards
and
to
make
recommendations
for
remedial
action.
The
Bureau
of
Mines
chose
cooperative
agreements
between
itself
and
the
state
geological
surveys
of
Kansas,
Missouri,
and
Oklahoma
to
accomplish
this
task"(
emphasis
added).

3.
The
Tri­
State
Mining
District
hosts
a
couple
of
watersheds
 
those
of
the
Spring
River
and
Tar
Creek.
The
Spring
River
that
discharges
into
the
Neosho
River
in
northeastern
Oklahoma
after
crossing
into
Oklahoma
southeast
of
the
town
of
Baxter
Springs
is
fed
by
tributaries
originating
in
Cherokee
Lowlands
of
southeast
Kansas
and
in
the
Ozark
Plateau
in
southwest
Missouri.
Tar
Creek
emerges
from
southeast
Kansas,
crosses
into
Oklahoma
west
of
the
town
of
Picher,
Oklahoma
and
ultimately
discharges
into
the
Neosho
River
in
northeastern
Oklahoma.
Consequently,
any
water­
dispersed
pollution
of
toxic
metals
related
to
the
mining
legacy
of
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District
that
originates
in
an
upper
watershed
state(
s)
is
prone
to
impact
its
down­
watershed
neighbors
as
well.

Conclusion
The
term
`
Tar
Creek
Mining
District'
as
defined
in
Section
6006
of
the
Transportation
Equity
Act
of
2005
is
not
a
recognized
physical
entity.
Instead,
the
most
logical
scope
to
address
the
beneficial
use
of
chat
is
that
of
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District,
a
geologically,
geographically
and
historically
well­
defined
area.
In
the
Tri­
State
Mining
District,
zinc
and
lead
ores
were
mined
for
over
120
years
from
a
silicified,
Mississippian­
age
carbonate
host
rock
possessing
common
mineralogical
characteristics
that
are
distinguishable
from
other
lead­
zinc
mining
districts
in
the
United
States.
The
Tri­
State
Mining
District
encompasses
Ottawa
County
in
northeastern
Oklahoma
(
where
the
Tar
Creek
Superfund
site
is
located),
as
well
as
Cherokee
County
in
southeastern
Kansas,
and
Jasper,
Newton,
Lawrence,
and
Barry
counties
in
southwestern
Missouri.
The
ore­
processing
chat
piles
left
across
the
Tri­
State
area
as
the
legacy
of
the
single
largest
zinc­
lead
mining
district
in
the
United
States
are
also
a
common
source
for
hazardous
pollution
via
air­
and
water
dispersion
through
shared
watersheds,
as
recognized
already
in
the
late
1970s
by
congressional
delegates
from
the
three
states
and
by
the
US
Bureau
of
Mines.
