Export your learner materials as an interactive game, a webpage, or FAQ style cheatsheet.
Unsaved Work Found!
It looks like you have unsaved work from a previous session. Would you like to restore it?
Total Categories: 5
The 2015 Gold King Mine wastewater spill occurred on August 5, 2015, near Silverton, Colorado.
Answer: True
The Gold King Mine wastewater spill, an environmental disaster involving the accidental release of toxic mine wastewater and tailings, took place near Silverton, Colorado, on August 5, 2015.
Approximately three million US gallons of toxic wastewater and tailings were released during the Gold King Mine spill.
Answer: True
The Gold King Mine spill resulted in the release of approximately three million US gallons (equivalent to eleven thousand cubic meters) of mine wastewater and tailings.
The coordinates provided for the Gold King Mine are irrelevant to understanding the spill site's location.
Answer: False
The coordinates (37°53′40″N 107°38′18″W) are crucial for precisely locating the Gold King Mine, enabling accurate mapping and understanding of the spill site and its geographical context.
The Gold King Mine spill released approximately eleven million cubic meters of wastewater.
Answer: False
The spill released approximately three million US gallons, which is equivalent to about eleven thousand cubic meters, not eleven million.
What was the immediate catalyst for the Gold King Mine wastewater spill on August 5, 2015?
Answer: EPA personnel accidentally breaching a tailings dam while attempting to drain the mine.
The spill occurred when EPA personnel and contractors, while attempting to excavate the mine entrance to drain accumulated water, inadvertently breached a blockage, releasing approximately three million gallons of toxic wastewater and tailings.
What was the approximate volume of wastewater and tailings released during the spill?
Answer: 3 million US gallons
The Gold King Mine spill resulted in the release of approximately three million US gallons of toxic wastewater and mine tailings into Cement Creek.
The Gold King Mine spill was primarily caused by natural geological shifts within the mine, unrelated to human activity.
Answer: False
The spill was primarily caused by the actions of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) personnel and their contractors who were attempting to drain accumulated water in the mine, inadvertently breaching a blockage.
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was the government agency involved in the operation that led to the spill.
Answer: True
The EPA, along with its contractors, was conducting work at the Gold King Mine to investigate and potentially drain accumulated water when the incident occurred, leading to the wastewater spill.
Acid mine drainage (AMD) is unrelated to the Gold King Mine spill, as it involves natural acid production.
Answer: False
Acid mine drainage (AMD) is directly related to the spill; the Gold King Mine suffered from AMD, and the breach released this acidic, metal-laden water into the river system.
The Gold King Mine was actively operating until 1991, contributing directly to the spill.
Answer: False
The Gold King Mine was abandoned in 1923. While mining operations in the region continued until 1991, the spill was caused by the breach of an abandoned mine section.
Sealing the American Tunnel in 1996 contributed to water accumulation in the Gold King Mine.
Answer: True
The American Tunnel had historically served as a drainage outlet for the Gold King Mine. When it was sealed in 1996 after the Sunnyside Mine closed, water began to accumulate within the Gold King Mine, eventually leading to discharges.
Drilling into the mine from above was a preventative measure that could have revealed the true water level and potentially averted the disaster.
Answer: True
Drilling from above to measure water levels was a standard practice for operating mines and could have provided the EPA team with accurate information about the water pressure and volume, potentially allowing them to avoid the catastrophic breach.
EPA files obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests indicated prior awareness of the 'blowout' risk associated with the mine.
Answer: True
FOIA requests revealed internal EPA documents from June 2014 that explicitly mentioned the risk of a 'blowout' releasing contaminated water and sediment from the Gold King Mine.
The sealing of the American Tunnel did not affect the water levels within the Gold King Mine.
Answer: False
Sealing the American Tunnel in 1996 prevented water from draining out of the Gold King Mine, leading to significant water accumulation and increased pressure within the mine workings.
The EPA's work at the Gold King Mine prior to the spill was intended to increase the flow of mine water into Cement Creek.
Answer: False
The EPA's objective was to stem the flow of leaking mine water and treat it, not to increase its flow into Cement Creek. Their actions, however, inadvertently led to a massive release.
The Gold King Mine was abandoned in 1923, shortly after its discovery.
Answer: False
The Gold King Mine was discovered in 1887 and abandoned in 1923, meaning it was operational for over three decades before abandonment, not shortly after discovery.
Acid mine drainage (AMD) is directly related to the Gold King Mine spill because:
Answer: The Gold King Mine suffered from AMD, releasing contaminated water when breached.
Acid mine drainage (AMD) is a process where mining exposes sulfide minerals, creating acidic water that leaches heavy metals. The Gold King Mine was affected by AMD, and the breach released this highly contaminated water into the river system.
The sealing of the American Tunnel in 1996 had what effect on the Gold King Mine?
Answer: It led to the accumulation of water, eventually causing discharges.
By sealing the American Tunnel, a historical drainage pathway for the Gold King Mine, water was prevented from escaping, leading to its accumulation and eventual buildup of pressure within the mine.
According to EPA files obtained via FOIA, what did U.S. government officials know before the spill?
Answer: That there was a risk of a 'blowout' releasing contaminated water.
Internal EPA documents obtained through FOIA requests revealed that U.S. government officials were aware of the potential for a 'blowout' at the Gold King Mine, which could release large volumes of contaminated water and sediment.
The Gold King Mine was originally discovered in 1887 by whom?
Answer: A local miner named Olaf Nelson
The Gold King Mine was first discovered in 1887 by Olaf Nelson, a prospector often referred to as the 'Mighty Swede'.
The EPA's work at the Gold King Mine prior to the spill was primarily intended to:
Answer: Stem the flow of leaking mine water and treat it.
The EPA's objective at the Gold King Mine was to manage and treat the accumulating mine water that was discharging into Cement Creek, aiming to mitigate ongoing environmental pollution.
Cement Creek was the only waterway directly affected by the Gold King Mine spill.
Answer: False
While Cement Creek was the primary waterway directly affected, the contamination subsequently spread downstream into the Animas River and then into the San Juan River, impacting multiple states and tribal lands.
The spill's contamination was confined entirely to the state of Colorado.
Answer: False
The contamination from the Gold King Mine spill extended beyond Colorado, affecting waterways in New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah, and significantly impacting the Navajo Nation.
Following the spill, the Animas River remained open for recreation without any interruption.
Answer: False
The Animas River was closed to recreation for several weeks following the spill due to the contamination, impacting local communities and businesses.
The Animas River turned a distinct yellow color after the spill due to the oxidation of dissolved iron.
Answer: True
The escaped wastewater contained high levels of iron, which oxidized upon contact with air, giving the Animas River a striking yellow hue in the immediate aftermath of the spill.
Residents downstream were advised that their water was safe for drinking and cooking immediately following the spill.
Answer: False
Residents downstream were advised to have their water tested before use for drinking, cooking, or bathing, and to avoid contact with the river water, indicating it was not immediately safe.
The Navajo Nation declared a state of emergency and advised farmers against signing EPA release forms.
Answer: True
The Navajo Nation declared a state of emergency and its president cautioned farmers and ranchers against signing release forms from the EPA that could waive the agency's liability for damages.
The toxic plume reached Lake Powell approximately one week after the spill occurred on August 5, 2015.
Answer: False
The toxic plume reached Lake Powell on August 14, 2015, which was more than one week after the spill on August 5, 2015.
The Navajo Nation President warned against signing EPA forms that would release the agency from liability for damages.
Answer: True
Navajo Nation President Russell Begaye advised tribal members against signing EPA release forms, expressing concern that these documents would absolve the agency of responsibility for the damages caused by the spill.
It took less than a week for the Animas River water to be considered safe for human consumption after the spill.
Answer: False
It took several weeks after the spill for the Animas River water to be deemed safe enough for human consumption, highlighting the prolonged duration of the contamination's impact.
The image of the Animas River after the spill primarily shows its normal, clear water conditions.
Answer: False
Images of the Animas River following the spill clearly show a distinct yellow discoloration, a visual indicator of the heavy metal contamination, rather than its normal clear state.
The map of the San Juan River watershed is irrelevant to understanding the spread of pollution from the spill.
Answer: False
The map of the San Juan River watershed is relevant as it illustrates the interconnected river systems through which the pollution spread from the Gold King Mine spill.
Which heavy metals were identified as major contaminants released into the Animas River watershed?
Answer: Cadmium, Lead, and Arsenic
The wastewater released contained significant concentrations of heavy metals, including cadmium, lead, and arsenic, which are highly toxic and posed a severe threat to the Animas River ecosystem.
Besides Colorado, which other states were directly impacted by the Gold King Mine spill?
Answer: New Mexico, Arizona, Utah
The contamination plume from the Gold King Mine spill flowed downstream through the Animas River into the San Juan River, impacting waterways and communities in New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah.
How did the Animas River appear visually in the immediate aftermath of the spill?
Answer: It took on a distinct yellow hue.
The wastewater contained high levels of iron, which oxidized upon exposure to air, causing the Animas River to turn a striking yellow color, a visible sign of the extensive contamination.
What immediate action was taken regarding the Animas River following the spill?
Answer: It was closed to recreation for several weeks.
Due to the toxic contamination, the Animas River was closed to all recreational activities for several weeks following the spill to prevent public exposure to hazardous substances.
What concern did the Navajo Nation President Russell Begaye raise about EPA forms presented to farmers and ranchers?
Answer: The forms released the EPA from responsibility for damages.
Navajo Nation President Russell Begaye warned tribal members against signing EPA forms that would release the agency from liability for damages, expressing concern over the potential loss of recourse for affected parties.
How long did it take for the Animas River water to be considered safe for human consumption after the spill?
Answer: Several weeks
The contamination from the Gold King Mine spill persisted in the Animas River for an extended period, requiring several weeks before the water was deemed safe for human consumption.
What does the map of the San Juan River watershed illustrate in the context of the spill?
Answer: How pollution spread through interconnected river systems.
The map of the San Juan River watershed visually demonstrates the interconnectedness of the river systems, illustrating how the toxic plume from the Gold King Mine spill propagated downstream and affected a wide geographical area.
The EPA readily accepted responsibility and agreed to pay all damages claims immediately after the spill.
Answer: False
While the EPA acknowledged the incident, it initially refused to pay damages claims, citing sovereign immunity and requiring special authorization or federal court action for compensation.
The EPA team correctly assessed the volume and pressure of the water behind the mine blockage before excavation began.
Answer: False
The EPA team misjudged the water level, believing the tunnel was only partially filled. In reality, it was full of pressurized water, and their excavation efforts breached the blockage, causing the blowout.
The EPA immediately notified state and local authorities about the spill on the day it happened.
Answer: False
The EPA faced criticism for delaying notification; state and local authorities were not informed until the day after the spill, and residents were not directly alerted until 24 hours after the incident.
Hays Griswold, the EPA employee overseeing the operation, publicly claimed nobody expected the high water level, contradicting his private emails.
Answer: True
Hays Griswold, the EPA employee in charge, admitted in private communications that he and others knew the blockage could be holding back a significant amount of water, contradicting his public statements that the high water level was unexpected.
New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez took no significant action following the spill.
Answer: False
New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez declared a state of emergency and indicated her administration was prepared to pursue legal action against the EPA following the spill.
A water treatment plant built by the EPA after the spill was immediately effective and operated at full capacity.
Answer: False
Allegations surfaced that the EPA's $1.5 million water treatment plant, operational since October 2015, was functioning at a fraction of its capacity, allowing significant volumes of contaminated water to bypass it.
Sunnyside Gold Corp. alleged in 2018 that the EPA's treatment plant allowed significant volumes of contaminated water to bypass it.
Answer: True
In 2018, Sunnyside Gold Corp. claimed that the EPA's water treatment plant was operating below capacity, allowing substantial amounts of contaminated water to flow past it into a tributary of the Animas River.
A secondary spill incident occurred in July 2018 when a truck carrying waste water crashed near the mine.
Answer: True
In July 2018, a truck transporting wastewater from a temporary treatment plant overturned near the Gold King Mine, resulting in a secondary spill of sludge into Cement Creek.
The Navajo Nation received over $10 million from the EPA by April 2016 for incurred costs related to the spill.
Answer: False
By April 2016, the Navajo Nation had received $150,000 from the EPA, which was stated to be only a small fraction of their incurred costs.
New Mexico is seeking $1.9 billion in compensation from the EPA for damages related to the spill.
Answer: False
New Mexico is seeking $130 million in compensation. Utah is the state seeking $1.9 billion for damages related to the spill.
The EPA has argued for immunity against lawsuits using the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA).
Answer: True
The EPA has invoked the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) as a basis for arguing sovereign immunity against lawsuits seeking compensation for damages resulting from the Gold King Mine spill.
The EPA's 'Technical Evaluation of the Gold King Mine Incident' report concluded that the EPA team accurately predicted the water pressure behind the blockage.
Answer: False
The EPA's own evaluation report indicated that the team misjudged the water level and pressure behind the blockage, leading to the uncontrolled release of wastewater.
Delays in EPA communication significantly hindered the immediate response and preparedness efforts for the spill.
Answer: True
The delayed notification by the EPA to state and local authorities, as well as to residents, impeded timely response and preparedness, leaving communities unaware of the contamination risks for a critical period.
The secondary spill in July 2018 involved a natural landslide near the mine.
Answer: False
The secondary spill in July 2018 was caused by a truck accident that overturned while carrying wastewater from a temporary treatment plant near the mine.
The Animas River Stakeholders Group supported the EPA's proposed interim cleanup plan in June 2018.
Answer: False
The Animas River Stakeholders Group criticized the EPA's proposed interim cleanup plan in June 2018, suggesting it offered little actual benefit and potentially prioritized speed over local interests.
The EPA's initial remediation efforts involved treating acidic water discharging at a rate of up to 700 gallons per minute.
Answer: True
Initial remediation efforts focused on treating the acidic water discharging from the mine, which was estimated to be flowing at rates between 500 and 700 US gallons per minute.
What was the EPA's initial response regarding compensation for damages caused by the spill?
Answer: They cited sovereign immunity and initially refused to pay claims.
The EPA acknowledged responsibility for the incident but initially invoked sovereign immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) to avoid paying damages claims directly, suggesting claimants would need to pursue legal action.
What critical error did the EPA team make during their excavation attempt at the mine entrance?
Answer: They misjudged the water level, unaware it was full and pressurized.
The EPA team incorrectly assessed the water level behind the blockage in the mine tunnel, believing it to be only partially filled. This miscalculation led to the breach of the plug and the uncontrolled release of pressurized wastewater.
How was the EPA criticized regarding their notification process after the spill?
Answer: They failed to notify state and local authorities until the day after the spill.
The EPA faced significant criticism for its delayed communication, failing to inform state and local authorities about the spill until the day after it occurred, which hampered immediate response efforts.
What did Hays Griswold, the EPA employee in charge, admit about the water blockage?
Answer: He admitted he knew the blockage could be holding back a lot of water.
Hays Griswold, the EPA employee overseeing the operation, acknowledged in private communications that he and others were aware the blockage might be holding back a substantial volume of water, contradicting public statements that the water level was unexpected.
In response to the spill, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper took which action?
Answer: He declared the affected area a disaster zone.
Following the Gold King Mine spill, Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper declared the affected areas a disaster zone on August 8, 2015, mobilizing state resources for response.
What issue arose concerning the EPA's $1.5 million water treatment plant built after the spill?
Answer: It operated at a fraction of its capacity, allowing water to bypass it.
The EPA's water treatment plant, constructed after the spill, faced allegations of operating significantly below its intended capacity, resulting in large volumes of contaminated water flowing around it and into the river system.
Sunnyside Gold Corp. alleged in 2018 that the EPA's treatment plant was:
Answer: Operating significantly below its intended capacity.
Sunnyside Gold Corp. asserted in 2018 that the EPA's water treatment facility was not operating efficiently, allowing substantial quantities of contaminated water to bypass the plant and enter the river.
What compensation amount did the Navajo Nation receive from the EPA by April 2016, according to the source?
Answer: $150,000
By April 2016, the Navajo Nation had received $150,000 from the EPA, which was noted as being significantly less than the estimated costs incurred due to the spill.
Which state is seeking the largest amount of compensation ($1.9 billion) through lawsuits against the EPA related to the spill?
Answer: Utah
Utah is seeking the largest sum in compensation, requesting $1.9 billion from the EPA for damages sustained as a result of the Gold King Mine spill.
The EPA's defense against lawsuits related to the spill primarily relies on which legal principle?
Answer: Sovereign immunity under the Federal Tort Claims Act
The EPA has argued for immunity from lawsuits by citing the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), a statute that allows private parties to sue the U.S. government for torts committed by federal employees.
The Animas River basin had previously been considered for Superfund cleanup due to pollution from mining operations.
Answer: True
Prior to the 2015 spill, parts of the Animas River basin had been nominated as a potential Superfund site due to historical pollution from mining activities, though community opposition had prevented its listing.
Local communities strongly supported the Superfund designation for the Animas River area before the spill, prioritizing cleanup over tourism.
Answer: False
Local communities initially opposed the Superfund designation primarily due to fears that it would negatively impact the region's vital tourism industry, which had become the main economic driver after mining declined.
Following the spill, the local governments of Silverton and San Juan County continued to refuse all offers of Superfund money for remediation.
Answer: False
After the spill, the local governments of Silverton and San Juan County reversed their previous stance and decided to accept Superfund money to fully remediate the Gold King Mine.
The Upper Animas water basin was thriving with fish populations prior to the 2015 spill.
Answer: False
Prior to the 2015 spill, the Upper Animas water basin had already experienced significant environmental degradation due to mining pollution, leading to a lack of healthy fish populations.
The 'Authority control' section provides detailed eyewitness accounts of the spill.
Answer: False
The 'Authority control' section typically links to standardized databases for cataloging information and does not contain eyewitness accounts of the spill.
Why had the Animas River basin previously been considered for Superfund cleanup before the 2015 spill?
Answer: Because of pollution from the Gold King Mine and other mining operations.
Sections of the Animas River basin had been identified by the EPA as potential Superfund sites due to long-standing pollution from historical mining activities, including the Gold King Mine.
What was the main reason local communities initially opposed the Superfund designation for the Animas River area?
Answer: They feared negative impacts on the vital tourism industry.
Local communities, particularly in areas like Silverton, had become reliant on tourism following the decline of mining. They feared that a Superfund designation would stigmatize the area and deter visitors, thus harming their economy.
What decision did the local governments of Silverton and San Juan County make regarding remediation *after* the spill?
Answer: They decided to accept Superfund money to remediate the mine.
Following the significant environmental impact of the spill, the local governments of Silverton and San Juan County reversed their prior opposition and accepted Superfund funding for the comprehensive remediation of the Gold King Mine.
What was the condition of the Animas River's aquatic life before the 2015 spill?
Answer: It was already devoid of fish due to prior mining impacts.
The Animas River basin had suffered from decades of mining pollution prior to the 2015 spill, which had already severely impacted its aquatic ecosystems, leading to a lack of healthy fish populations.