What was the 2015 Gold King Mine waste water spill?

The 2015 Gold King Mine waste water spill was an environmental disaster that occurred near Silverton, Colorado, on August 5, 2015. It involved the accidental release of toxic mine wastewater and tailings into the Animas River watershed, primarily caused by the actions of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) personnel and their contractors.

What was the immediate cause of the Gold King Mine waste water spill?

The spill was caused by EPA personnel and contractors who were attempting to drain ponded water near the entrance of the Gold King Mine. While excavating the mine entrance, they accidentally breached a tailings dam, releasing approximately three million US gallons of wastewater and mine tailings.

What types of toxic substances were released into the Animas River watershed?

The released wastewater contained significant amounts of heavy metals and other toxic elements. These included cadmium, lead, arsenic, beryllium, zinc, iron, and copper, which contaminated Cement Creek, a tributary of the Animas River.

Which waterways were directly affected by the Gold King Mine waste water spill?

The primary waterway directly affected was Cement Creek, which flows into the Animas River. The contamination then spread downstream through the Animas River and into the San Juan River, ultimately impacting the Colorado River watershed.

Which states and tribal nations were impacted by the spill?

The spill affected waterways in Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah. The Navajo Nation, which relies heavily on these water sources, was also significantly impacted by the contamination.

What was the date of the Gold King Mine waste water spill?

The Gold King Mine waste water spill occurred on August 5, 2015.

Where is the Gold King Mine located?

The Gold King Mine is located near Silverton, Colorado, in the United States.

Which government agency was involved in the incident at the Gold King Mine?

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was involved, as their personnel and contractors were conducting work at the mine when the spill occurred.

What were the immediate outcomes of the spill?

The immediate outcomes included the closure of the Animas River to recreation for several weeks, warnings issued to residents about water usage, and ongoing issues with water supply and irrigation. The Silverton Board of Trustees and San Juan County Commission also passed a resolution seeking Superfund money for cleanup.

How did the Animas River appear after the spill?

After the spill, the Animas River turned a distinct yellow color. This discoloration was due to the oxidation of dissolved iron in the escaped wastewater, leading one journalist to describe it as looking like 'Tang that has been maybe mixed too thickly'.

What warnings were given to residents and communities downstream from the spill?

Residents living along the Animas and San Juan rivers were advised to have their water tested before using it for drinking, cooking, or bathing. They were also warned to avoid contact with the river water, including pets, and to prevent farmed animals from drinking it. People were also advised against fishing in the river.

What actions did the Navajo Nation take in response to the spill?

The Navajo Nation Commission on Emergency Management issued a state of emergency declaration. They also advised farmers and ranchers against signing release forms from the EPA and, initially, voted to refrain from using water from the Animas River for irrigation for one year due to safety concerns.

What was the EPA's stance on paying for damages caused by the spill?

The EPA took responsibility for the incident but initially refused to pay for damages claims, citing sovereign immunity. They stated that payment would require special authorization from Congress or refiling of lawsuits in federal court.

What is acid mine drainage, and how does it relate to the Gold King Mine spill?

Acid mine drainage (AMD) is a process where subsurface mining exposes metal sulfide minerals, like pyrite, to water and air. This creates acidic water that can leach heavy metals. The Gold King Mine, like many abandoned mines, suffered from AMD, and the spill released this contaminated water into the river system.

What was the history of gold mining in the Gold King Mine region?

Gold mining was the primary economic driver in the hills around Silverton until 1991, when the last mine closed. The Gold King Mine itself was abandoned in 1923, but its legacy of potential environmental contamination persisted.

Why had the Animas River basin been considered for Superfund cleanup prior to the spill?

Sections of the Animas River had been nominated by the EPA as a Superfund site due to pollutants from the Gold King Mine and other mining operations. However, a lack of community support prevented its listing at that time.

What were the local concerns about designating the Animas River area as a Superfund site?

Locals feared that a Superfund designation would negatively impact tourism, which had become the region's main source of income after the closure of the metal mines. They were concerned about the potential economic consequences of being labeled a contaminated area.

What efforts were made to reclaim or manage the Gold King Mine prior to the 2015 spill?

In 1996, the American Tunnel, which had previously drained the mine, was sealed. By 2002, contaminated water began discharging from the Gold King Level 7 adit, and this flow increased after a nearby mine was sealed in 2003. In 2009, the Colorado DRMS plugged the mine portals and installed drainage pipes, though concerns about the system's sufficiency were noted.

What critical misjudgment occurred during the EPA's attempt to drain the mine?

The EPA team misjudged the water level behind the plug in the mine tunnel. They believed the tunnel was only partially filled, but it was actually full of pressurized water. Their excavation efforts breached the plug, leading to the uncontrolled release of wastewater.

What preventative measure could have revealed the true water level and potentially averted the disaster?

The EPA could have drilled into the mine from above to measure the water level directly, a practice required for operating mines since 1895 and used at nearby mines in 2011. This would have shown the actual water level and allowed for a different, safer plan.

How quickly did the toxic plume from the spill travel downstream?

By August 7, the waste reached Aztec, New Mexico. The following day, it reached Farmington, New Mexico. By August 10, it had reached the San Juan River in New Mexico and Shiprock, part of the Navajo Nation. It reached Lake Powell on August 14.

What were the reported levels of certain heavy metals in the Animas River after the spill?

On August 10, 2015, the EPA reported that levels of lead were found at 100 times the allowed limit, iron at 326 times the limit, and arsenic and cadmium were also above limits. These measurements were taken 15 miles upstream from Durango.

What did a 2018 report suggest about the impact of the spill on aquatic life?

A report by Knight Piésold consultants suggested that while the spill further limited aquatic life, the impacts would have been more adverse without actions taken by Sunnyside Gold Corporation. The report also noted that significant natural metals loading in the Animas River already limited aquatic life before the spill.

What did EPA files obtained via FOIA reveal about the agency's prior knowledge of risks?

FOIA requests revealed EPA files indicating that U.S. government officials were aware of the 'blowout' risk associated with the tainted water at the mine. A June 2014 work order specifically mentioned the potential for a blowout releasing large volumes of contaminated water and sediment.

What was the timeline of the EPA's notification to state and local authorities about the spill?

The EPA was criticized for not warning Colorado and New Mexico about the operation until the day after the spill occurred. Press releases informing the state were not issued until around midnight on the day of the spill, and residents were not directly alerted until 24 hours after the incident.

What was the EPA employee in charge of the Gold King Mine's assessment of the water blockage?

Hays Griswold, the EPA employee in charge, stated in an email that he personally knew the blockage 'could be holding back a lot of water and I believe the others in the group knew as well.' This contradicted his earlier public statements claiming that nobody expected the water level to be that high.

What actions did state governors take following the spill?

Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper declared the affected area a disaster zone on August 8, 2015. New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez also declared a state of emergency on August 11 and indicated her administration was prepared to seek legal action against the EPA.

What was the Navajo Nation's concern regarding EPA forms presented to farmers and ranchers?

Navajo Nation President Russell Begaye warned his people against signing forms from the EPA that would release the agency from responsibility for damages to crops and livestock, indicating a lack of trust in the EPA's commitment to compensation.

What decision did the local governments of Silverton and San Juan County make regarding remediation?

Following the spill, the local governments of Silverton and San Juan County decided to accept Superfund money to fully remediate the Gold King Mine, reversing their previous stance driven by tourism concerns.

What was the cost and effectiveness of the EPA's water treatment plant built after the spill?

A $1.5 million water treatment plant built by the EPA began operation in October 2015. However, in April 2018, allegations surfaced that the plant was operating at a fraction of its capacity, with over 350 million gallons of contaminated water flowing around it into a tributary since its operation began.

What allegations did Sunnyside Gold Corp. make against the EPA regarding water pollution?

In April 2018, Sunnyside Gold Corp. alleged that the EPA was running its treatment plant at a fraction of its capacity. They claimed that a significantly larger volume of water than the Gold King spill itself had flowed around the plant into a tributary of the Animas River since October 2015.

How long did it take for the water to be considered safe for human consumption after the spill?

It took weeks after the spill for the water to be considered clean enough for human consumption, indicating the prolonged impact of the contamination on the Animas River and its tributaries.

What happened in a secondary spill incident involving waste water from the Gold King Mine area?

In July 2018, a truck carrying waste water from a temporary treatment plant crashed near the mine, spilling approximately 9 cubic yards (7 cubic meters) of sludge back into the environment near Silverton, Colorado.

What compensation has the Navajo Nation received from the EPA, and what are the estimated costs?

As of April 2016, the Navajo Nation had received $150,000 from the EPA, which President Begaye stated was only 8% of their incurred costs. Senator John McCain estimated the total costs to the Navajo Nation could reach up to $335 million.

What compensation are New Mexico, Utah, and the Navajo Nation seeking through lawsuits?

New Mexico is seeking $130 million, Utah is seeking $1.9 billion, and the Navajo Nation is seeking $130 million in compensation through lawsuits filed against the EPA following the spill.

What defense has the EPA used to try and dismiss lawsuits related to the spill?

The EPA moved to dismiss lawsuits in 2018, arguing they have immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act. They also stated that the $29 million spent on cleanup efforts should suffice as compensation.

What was the original discovery date and owner of the Gold King Mine?

The Gold King Mine was originally discovered in 1887 by Olaf Nelson, often referred to as the "Mighty Swede." Nelson died before he could develop the mine, and his widow sold it in 1894.

What was the condition of the Animas River's aquatic life before the spill?

Prior to the 2015 spill, the Upper Animas water basin had already become devoid of fish due to the adverse environmental impacts of regional mines, including the Gold King Mine, which released contaminants into the water system. Other plant and animal species were also adversely affected.

What is the significance of the coordinates listed for the Gold King Mine?

The coordinates (37°53′40″N 107°38′18″W) pinpoint the precise geographic location of the Gold King Mine near Silverton, Colorado, allowing for mapping and spatial understanding of the spill site.

What role did the Sunnyside Mine's American Tunnel play in the Gold King Mine's drainage history?

The American Tunnel, part of the Sunnyside Mine, had historically drained the Gold King Mine's adits. When the American Tunnel was sealed in 1996 after the Sunnyside Mine closed, it led to the accumulation of water in the Gold King Mine, eventually causing contaminated discharges.

What was the estimated rate of acidic water discharge during the initial remediation efforts?

During the initial remediation efforts after the spill, acidic water was estimated to be discharging at a rate of 500 to 700 US gallons per minute (approximately 1.9 to 2.6 cubic meters per minute).

What did the EPA's 'Technical Evaluation of the Gold King Mine Incident' report conclude about the blowout?

The report indicated that the EPA team misjudged the water level in the tunnel. They planned to excavate from the top down to the perceived water level, but the tunnel was actually full of pressurized water. This miscalculation led to the blowout when excavation began.

What is the significance of the image showing the Animas River between Silverton and Durango after the spill?

The image captures the Animas River within 24 hours of the spill, visibly demonstrating the environmental impact. The river's yellow color, caused by the oxidation of dissolved iron from the escaped wastewater, serves as a stark visual representation of the contamination.

What does the map of the San Juan River watershed illustrate in relation to the spill?

The map shows the San Juan River watershed, highlighting the northern tributary of the Animas River. This visual context helps understand how the pollution from the Gold King Mine spill spread through the interconnected river systems.

What was the purpose of the EPA's work at the Gold King Mine prior to the spill?

The EPA was working at the Gold King Mine to stem the flow of leaking mine water into Cement Creek. Their objective was to manage the accumulating water and treat it before it could cause further environmental harm, but their actions inadvertently triggered the larger spill.

How did the EPA's communication delays impact the response to the spill?

The EPA's delay in notifying state and local officials, as well as residents, hindered the immediate response and preparedness efforts. This lack of timely information meant that communities and individuals were unaware of the contamination risks for a critical period, potentially exposing them to hazardous substances.

What is the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) and how does it relate to the EPA's defense against lawsuits?

The Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) is a U.S. federal statute that permits private parties to sue the United States in a federal trial court for torts committed by individuals employed by the federal government. The EPA cited this act as a basis for their claim of immunity against paying further compensation for the spill damages.

What was the nature of the 'secondary spill' that occurred in July 2018?

The secondary spill involved a truck accident near the Gold King Mine. The truck was transporting waste water from a temporary treatment plant and overturned, spilling sludge into Cement Creek, further contaminating the area.

What did the EPA propose in June 2018 for interim cleanup, and what criticism did it face?

In June 2018, the EPA proposed a $10 million interim cleanup plan. However, this plan faced criticism for allegedly showing no actual benefit and for potentially prioritizing Superfund cleanup speed over local political interests, according to the Animas River Stakeholders Group.

What is the significance of the 'Authority control' section at the end of the article?

The 'Authority control' section provides links to external databases (like the Library of Congress and Yale LUX) that contain standardized information about the Gold King Mine spill. This helps ensure consistency and provides researchers with reliable sources for further information.

2015 Gold King Mine Waste Water Spill Wiki: The Animas River Catastrophe: Unpacking the Gold King Mine Spill

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!

When you are ready...
🎮 Play the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge Game🎮

Event Overview

Date and Location

The 2015 Gold King Mine waste water spill commenced on August 5, 2015, originating from the Gold King Mine situated near Silverton, Colorado. This incident marked a significant environmental event in the region.

Cause of Release

The disaster was triggered by an accidental breach of a tailings dam. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) personnel, in conjunction with contractors from Environmental Restoration LLC, inadvertently caused the release while attempting to drain impounded water near the mine's entrance.^[3]

Nature of the Discharge

Approximately three million US gallons (eleven thousand cubic meters) of mine waste water and tailings were released. This discharge contained substantial quantities of heavy metals, including cadmium, lead, arsenic, beryllium, zinc, iron, and copper, along with other toxic elements.^[5]

Affected Waterways and Regions

The spill contaminated Cement Creek, a tributary of the Animas River, subsequently impacting the Animas River watershed, the San Juan River, and the broader Colorado River basin. The affected states included Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah, with the Navajo Nation experiencing particularly severe consequences.^[6]

Historical Context

Mining Legacy

The region surrounding Silverton was historically reliant on gold mining, with operations ceasing in 1991. The Gold King Mine itself was abandoned in 1923.^[12]^[13]

Pre-existing Environmental Conditions

Prior to the spill, the Upper Animas water basin was already significantly degraded due to acid mine drainage from numerous regional mines, including the Gold King Mine. This contamination had rendered the water devoid of fish and adversely affected other riparian flora and fauna.^[12]

EPA's Role and Superfund Opposition

The EPA had previously identified many abandoned mines in Colorado, including Gold King, as sources of acid mine drainage requiring careful management. Although the EPA had the authority to conduct only minor mitigation efforts, they had also considered the mine a potential Superfund site. However, local opposition, driven by concerns that a Superfund designation would negatively impact tourism—the region's primary economic driver—prevented this classification.^[15]^[16]

Mine Operations and The Blowout

Historical Operations

The Gold King Mine was discovered in 1887 by Olaf Nelson. Its adits remained dry for many years due to drainage from the Sunnyside Mine's American Tunnel. However, after the tunnel's sealing in 1996, water began accumulating and discharging from the Gold King Level 7 adit, with contamination levels increasing after the Mogul Mine was sealed in 2003.^[17]^[19]

Prior Mitigation Efforts

By 2009, the Gold King Mine was recognized as a severe acid mine drainage site. The Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (DRMS) plugged the mine portals and installed drainage pipes. However, partial tunnel collapse complicated these efforts, and it was noted that the drainage system might be insufficient to prevent a future blowout.^[20]

The Incident Unfolds

In the lead-up to the spill, the EPA planned to excavate the mine entrance to drain accumulated water. Despite discussions with DRMS, the team misjudged the water level and pressure within the mine. On August 5, 2015, as excavation commenced, a spurt of water from a fracture indicated the tunnel was full of pressurized water. This led to the catastrophic failure of the plug, releasing the toxic wastewater torrent into Cement Creek within minutes.^{[note 1]}^[20]

Procedural Oversight

Critically, the EPA did not undertake direct water level measurement from within the mine before commencing excavation, a standard safety protocol for operating mines since the late 19th century. Had this been done, the true water level and pressure would have been discovered, likely averting the disaster.^[20]

Environmental and Social Repercussions

Visual and Immediate Effects

The spill dramatically altered the Animas River's appearance, with one observer describing the water as resembling thick "Tang."^[21] The river was closed to recreational activities until August 14, with warnings issued to residents regarding potential contamination of well water and avoidance of contact with river water for both humans and animals.^[23]

Water Quality Degradation

By August 10, EPA reports indicated that levels of six key metals, including lead and iron, significantly exceeded permissible limits for domestic water supplies, even 15 miles upstream from Durango.^[5] While initial reports found no immediate wildlife die-offs, the long-term effects of heavy metal contamination and altered water chemistry remained a concern.

Geographic Spread and Dilution

The toxic plume progressed downstream, reaching Aztec, New Mexico, by August 7, Farmington, New Mexico, by August 8, and the San Juan River near Shiprock (Navajo Nation) by August 10. It eventually reached Lake Powell on August 14. While sedimentation and dilution were expected to mitigate some immediate effects, the overall long-term impact on the watershed's ecosystem and water quality persisted.^[6]

Impact on Navajo Nation

The Navajo Nation declared a state of emergency due to the spill's devastating effects. Farmers and ranchers faced severe disruptions, with irrigation canals closed and concerns raised about crop damage and livestock health. The Nation's EPA conducted its own water testing, leading to continued caution among its residents.^[24]^[43]

Governmental and Agency Actions

Initial Response and Criticism

The EPA acknowledged responsibility for the incident. However, criticism arose regarding a significant delay—up to 24 hours—in notifying state and local authorities and residents about the spill. Internal EPA communications revealed that personnel involved were aware of the potential for a "blowout" risk prior to the event, contradicting initial public statements.^[7]^[36]

State of Emergency Declarations

In response to the escalating crisis, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper declared a disaster on August 8, 2015. This was followed by similar declarations from Navajo Nation President Russell Begaye and New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez, who also indicated her administration's readiness to pursue legal action against the EPA.^[5]^[40]^[41]

Remediation and Treatment Efforts

A temporary water treatment plant, constructed by the EPA, commenced operations in October 2015 to address acid mine drainage from the Gold King Mine. However, subsequent reports and allegations suggested that this plant operated at a reduced capacity, allowing significant volumes of untreated water to bypass the system.^[44]

Superfund and FEMA Involvement

Local governments in Silverton and San Juan County ultimately accepted Superfund funding for comprehensive mine remediation. Concurrently, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) denied a request from the Navajo Nation for a dedicated disaster-recovery coordinator.^[4]

Financial and Economic Ramifications

Navajo Nation Damages

The spill inflicted considerable damage on the Navajo Nation's agricultural sector, affecting crops, home gardens, and livestock. An estimated 2,000 Navajo farmers and ranchers were impacted by the closure of irrigation canals. While some received water deliveries, others faced significant crop losses due to lack of assistance.^[53]^[54]

Compensation Disputes

As of April 2016, the EPA had provided the Navajo Nation with $150,000, which represented only a small fraction of the Nation's estimated incurred costs. Projections by Senator John McCain suggested potential costs for the Navajo Nation could reach $335 million.^[54] The EPA and the Navajo Nation continue to negotiate fair compensation for the damages.

Legal Actions and Liability

Lawsuits Filed

Multiple lawsuits were initiated against the EPA following the spill. New Mexico sought $130 million in compensation, Utah requested $1.9 billion, and the Navajo Nation also filed a claim for $130 million.^[55]

EPA's Defense and Dismissal Attempts

In January 2017, the EPA rescinded its earlier recommendation for affected parties to file claims. By 2018, the agency moved to dismiss all pending lawsuits, asserting that the $29 million spent on cleanup efforts was sufficient. The EPA cited sovereign immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act as grounds for refusing further compensation.^[55]

Teacher's Corner

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

Edit and Print Materials from this study in the wiki2web studio

Click here to open the "2015 Gold King Mine Waste Water Spill" Wiki2Web Studio curriculum kit

Use the free Wiki2web Studio to generate printable flashcards, worksheets, exams, and export your materials as a web page or an interactive game.

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Learn about 2015_gold_king_mine_waste_water_spill while playing the wiki2web Clarity Challenge game.

Unlock the mystery image and prove your knowledge by earning trophies. This simple game is addictively fun and is a great way to learn!

Play now

Explore More Topics

Discover other topics to study!

packet clearing house

operation paperclip

yulin yuyang airport

labasa airport

batting average baseball

arrest of a suspect in sarajevo

References

SGC "Reclamation", Sunnyside Gold Corporation. Retrieved April 6, 2018.

"EPA: Pollution from mine spill much worse than feared", USA Today, August 10, 2015

"Navajo Nation feels brunt of Colorado mine leak", NY Post, 12 August 2015

"Damage to Navajo Nation water goes beyond money", CNN, 13 August 2015

Elliott, Dan "Mine company says EPA is worsening Colorado water pollution", APNews, Associated Press, April 11, 2018. Retrieved October 24, 2018.

A full list of references for this article are available at the 2015 Gold King Mine waste water spill Wikipedia page

Feedback & Support

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer

Important Considerations

This document was generated by an AI and is intended for educational and informational purposes only. The content is derived from publicly available data and may not represent the most current or complete information regarding the Gold King Mine spill or its aftermath.

This is not legal or environmental advice. The information provided herein should not substitute professional consultation with environmental scientists, legal experts, or regulatory bodies. Always refer to official reports and consult qualified professionals for specific assessments and guidance related to environmental incidents and legal matters.

The creators of this content are not liable for any inaccuracies, omissions, or actions taken based on the information presented.

The Animas River Catastrophe

💡 Dive in with Flashcard Learning! 💡

Event Overview ℹ️

🗓️ Date and Location

💥 Cause of Release

🧪 Nature of the Discharge

🌊 Affected Waterways and Regions

Historical Context 📜

⛏️ Mining Legacy

☣️ Pre-existing Environmental Conditions

🏛️ EPA's Role and Superfund Opposition

Mine Operations and The Blowout ⚙️

📜 Historical Operations

🚧 Prior Mitigation Efforts

⚠️ The Incident Unfolds

🔬 Procedural Oversight

Environmental and Social Repercussions 🌍

🎨 Visual and Immediate Effects

📉 Water Quality Degradation

🏞️ Geographic Spread and Dilution

🧑‍🌾 Impact on Navajo Nation

Governmental and Agency Actions 🏛️

🗣️ Initial Response and Criticism

🚨 State of Emergency Declarations

🛠️ Remediation and Treatment Efforts

❓ Superfund and FEMA Involvement

Financial and Economic Ramifications 💰

🌾 Navajo Nation Damages

⚖️ Compensation Disputes

Legal Actions and Liability ⚖️

🏛️ Lawsuits Filed

🚫 EPA's Defense and Dismissal Attempts

Teacher's Corner 🧑‍🏫

Edit and Print this course in the Wiki2Web Teacher Studio

True or False? 🤔

❓ Test Your Knowledge! ❓

Gamer's Corner 🎮

Are you ready for the Wiki2Web Clarity Challenge?

Explore More Topics

📜 Discover other topics to study!

References

📜 References

Feedback & Support 👍

To report an issue with this page, or to find out ways to support the mission, please click here.

Disclaimer ⚠️

📜 Important Considerations

Dive in with Flashcard Learning!

Event Overview

Date and Location

Cause of Release

Nature of the Discharge

Affected Waterways and Regions

Historical Context

Mining Legacy

Pre-existing Environmental Conditions

EPA's Role and Superfund Opposition

Mine Operations and The Blowout

Historical Operations

Prior Mitigation Efforts

The Incident Unfolds

Procedural Oversight

Environmental and Social Repercussions

Visual and Immediate Effects

Water Quality Degradation

Geographic Spread and Dilution

Impact on Navajo Nation

Governmental and Agency Actions

Initial Response and Criticism

State of Emergency Declarations

Remediation and Treatment Efforts

Superfund and FEMA Involvement

Financial and Economic Ramifications

Navajo Nation Damages

Compensation Disputes

Legal Actions and Liability

Lawsuits Filed

EPA's Defense and Dismissal Attempts

Teacher's Corner

True or False?

Test Your Knowledge!

Gamer's Corner

Discover other topics to study!

References

Feedback & Support

Disclaimer

Important Considerations