Search USGS⌕ Search
Home/Archive/USGS

USGS · sir20255068

Earth Mapping Resources Initiative protocols—Sampling hard-rock mine waste and perpetual mine water sources

Kate M. Campbell·Robert R. Seal·Nadine M. Piatak·Jaime S. Azain·Jean M. Morrison·Sarah Jane White·Andrew H. Manning·Katherine Walton-Day·JoAnn M. Holloway·Bronwen Wang
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Supporting the overarching goal to evaluate critical minerals nationwide, the mine waste characterization effort in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Earth Mapping Resources Initiative has created a series of protocols to standardize sampling carried out under this effort by the participating State geological surveys and their cooperators. The protocols are based on published, reviewed methods that can be deployed in the field. The protocols include (1) collecting and processing composite samples of mine and mill waste, including tailings, waste rock, gangue, heap leach piles, ore stockpiles, slag, or other mineralized and processed materials and (2) collecting and preserving water samples from perpetual or long-term mine water sources. The protocols also specify information to document on field sheets and detail the collection of geospatial data. The analytical methods used by the USGS and USGS contract laboratories are described in this report, including the data delivery pathway for USGS-derived data.

Explore related subjects

Scientific Investigations ReportReport

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Kate M. Campbell, Robert R. Seal, Nadine M. Piatak, Jaime S. Azain, Jean M. Morrison, Sarah Jane White, Andrew H. Manning, Katherine Walton-Day, JoAnn M. Holloway, Bronwen Wang. 2025-09-22. Earth Mapping Resources Initiative protocols—Sampling hard-rock mine waste and perpetual mine water sources. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20255068

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

Discover connections

Report subjectScientific Investigations Report subject

Connections use source metadata and explicit phrase matches, not verified experimental comparisons.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

USGS2026

Methodology for quantitative spatial sensitivity analysis of volcanic geodetic networks

Introduction This report introduces a methodology for assessing the state of the U.S. Geological Survey Volcano Observatories’ geodetic monitoring networks that measure how volcanoes deform or change shape. This new method uses a model-based approach that considers the uniqueness of the instrument environments at each volcano. This report focuses on simplified volcanic sources, is independent of the shape or size of the volcano, or the network geometry, and thus highlights the strengths and potential vulnerabilities of each volcano’s geodetic network in an actionable visual format. This analysis can help observatories to make informed decisions about whether volcanoes have an adequate level of geodetic monitoring and indicate where improvements are needed.

Lassen Peak, Mount Shasta↗
USGS2025

2023 Earthquake Ground-Motion Workshop for the Central and Eastern United States, with a focus on the Gulf and Atlantic Coastal Plains—Agenda and abstracts

The U.S. Geological Survey held a virtual workshop December 7–8, 2023, to share research and ideas about earthquake ground motions in the Central and Eastern United States, with a focus on the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains. The workshop was organized to learn about potential regionalization of ground-motion characteristics (source, path, and site), consider new explanatory variables for site response, and hear and discuss updates on ground-motion research on the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plains. The workshop was organized into a series of contributed presentations and three panel discussions held during 2 days. This report documents the agenda, contributed abstracts, and panel summaries.

Scientific Investigations Report↗
USGS2025

A model uncertainty quantification protocol for evaluating the value of observation data

The history-matching approach to parameter estimation with models enables a powerful offshoot analysis of data worth—using the uncertainty of a model forecast as a metric for the worth of data. Adding observation data will either have no impact on forecast uncertainty or will reduce it. Removing existing data will either have no impact on forecast uncertainty or will increase it. The history-matching framework makes it possible to perform this quantitative analysis leveraging the connections among observations, model parameters, and model forecasts. We show this behavior on a specific groundwater flow model of the Mississippi Alluvial Plain and show where the analysis can be informative for considering the potential design of an observation network based on existing or potential observations.

Scientific Investigations Report↗