This section provides information on the four primary stages of hardrock mining operations, the organizational structure of BLM and the Forest Service, and the agencies’ five-step process for reviewing mine plans. Hardrock mining operations consist of four primary stages—exploration, development, production, and reclamation. Some of these stages can take place simultaneously, depending on the characteristics of the operation. Exploration involves staking a mining claim, prospecting, and other steps, such as drilling, to locate and define the extent and value of mineral deposits. The development stage entails completing the mine plan approval process by investigating how mining will impact the environment, determining how to mitigate the risks associated with mineral extraction, and obtaining permits and authorizations associated with the entire life cycle of the mine from federal, state, local, and regulatory entities. After obtaining permits and authorizations, the mine operator constructs the mine infrastructure, such as the necessary buildings, roads, and facilities that will facilitate production. The production stage generally entails drilling, blasting, and hauling ore from mining areas to processing areas. During production, operators crush or grind the ore and apply chemical treatments to extract the minerals of value. The material left after the minerals are extracted—waste rock or tailings (a combination of fluid and rock particles)—is then disposed of, often in a nearby pile or tailings pond. In addition, some operators use a leaching process to recover microscopic hardrock minerals from heaps of crushed ore by percolating solvent (such as cyanide for gold and sulfuric acid for copper) through the heap of ore. Through this heap-leaching process, the minerals adhere to the solvent as it runs through the leach heap and into a collection pond. The mineral-laced solution is then taken from the collection pond to the processing facility, where the valuable minerals are separated from the solution for further refinement. Reclamation activities can include reshaping and revegetating disturbed areas; measures to control erosion; and measures to isolate, remove, or control toxic materials. BLM manages and oversees hardrock mining on public land through its headquarters office, 12 state offices, 49 district offices, and 126 field offices. Within headquarters, the Energy, Minerals, and Realty Management Directorate is responsible for administering the mining laws and establishing hardrock mining operations policies. The state offices manage BLM programs and land in the geographic areas that generally conform to the boundary of one or more states. Each state office is headed by a state director who reports to the Director of BLM in headquarters, and oversees the implementation of the hardrock mining program by the district and field offices. The district and field offices are responsible for the day-to-day implementation of the hardrock mining program, including reviewing proposed mine plans and inspecting approved mine operations to ensure they comply with laws and regulations. Figure 1 shows BLM-managed land and the location of BLM’s headquarters and state offices. The Forest Service oversees hardrock mining operations on the lands it manages through its headquarters office, 9 geographic regions, 174 national forests and grasslands, and its over 600 ranger districts. Within its headquarters office, the Director of Minerals and Geology Management advises the Chief of the Forest Service on issues related to the extraction of minerals from Forest Service managed lands and conducts reviews of the regions’ mineral extraction programs, including their hardrock mineral programs. The Director of Minerals and Geology Management also manages a program known as the Locatable Mineral Administrators program. This program is designed to ensure that the Forest Service employees located in various forest and ranger district offices who are responsible for the day-to-day implementation of the hardrock mineral program have sufficient training and expertise to achieve consistency and quality administering the hardrock minerals program. Under this program, Forest Service employees are to demonstrate an understanding of hardrock mining laws, regulations, and processes to be a certified Locatable Minerals Administrator. Furthermore, only employees who have been certified through this program may implement the hardrock minerals program, for example, by reviewing proposed mine plans and inspecting approved mines to ensure they comply with applicable laws and regulations. Figure 2 shows the location of Forest Service-managed lands and the Forest Service headquarters and regions. BLM and the Forest Service generally follow similar five-step processes for reviewing hardrock mine plans: (1) reviewing the completeness of the proposed plan; (2) conducting an analysis under NEPA of potential impacts to the environment, human health, and cultural and historical resources; (3) approving of the mine plan; (4) establishing a reclamation bond; and (5) authorizing mine operations. Under each agency’s regulations, before BLM and the Forest Service can perform a substantive evaluation of a mine plan, they must first determine whether the mine plan is complete and has the information specified in the regulations. To do this, the agencies review the mine plan to help determine if it meets regulatory requirements, which call for information on the operator, the proposed mine site, the proposed mine operations, and a description of the existing and proposed means of accessing the mine, among other things. BLM and the Forest Service analyze the potential impact of the proposed mine on the environment, human health, and cultural resources by conducting an analysis under NEPA. In particular, under NEPA agencies must prepare either an EA or an EIS depending on whether the proposed mine operations are expected to have a potentially significant environmental impact. The agencies are to prepare an EA to determine whether the proposed project is expected to have a potentially significant environmental impact. According to regulations implementing NEPA, an EA is intended to be a concise public document that, among other things, provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an EIS or a finding of no significant impact. It is to include brief discussions of the need for the project, alternatives, the environmental impacts of the proposed project and alternatives, and a listing of individuals and agencies consulted. The agencies are to prepare an EIS if they determine the proposed project may have significant environmental impacts. An EIS is more detailed than an EA, and NEPA regulations specify that the agency must request comments from the public on the draft EIS. An EIS must, among other things, (1) describe the environment that will be affected, (2) identify alternatives to the proposed project and identify the agency’s preferred alternative, and (3) present the environmental impacts of the proposed project and alternatives. According to BLM and Forest Service officials, while the agencies occasionally develop and produce NEPA documents, they also rely on contractors to complete the EA or EIS. Per NEPA regulations, the agencies are responsible for the content and scope of the NEPA document. For EISs, BLM regulations state that the operator must pay for BLM’s internal costs to process a mine plan that requires the preparation of an EIS. These regulations do not require operators to pay for the review of a mine plan that only requires the preparation of an EA. The Forest Service’s regulations do not require operators to pay for a review of a mine plan. Instead, the costs associated with conducting the mine plan review must be covered by the Forest Service, unless the mine operator voluntarily choses to do so. After completing the environmental review, the agency issues a decision on the mine plan. The decision document indicates whether the plan is approved as submitted, approved subject to changes or conditions, or disapproved. However, BLM and Forest Service officials told us that operators generally agree to the agencies’ changes to the mine plan that are required to meet all applicable laws and regulations. Consequently, these officials said that they were unaware of an instance where an agency had disapproved a mine plan based on the results of an environmental analysis. Before a plan may be approved, agency policies require the operator to estimate the costs associated with reclaiming the mine site once the operations have ceased. The operator typically cannot estimate this cost until the mine plan review has sufficiently progressed to determine the size and scope of the mining operations. Once the operator provides the estimate, the agency determines whether it is adequate to fully cover anticipated reclamation costs. If the agency determines that the bond is not adequate, it directs the operator to furnish a new estimate. After the reclamation cost estimate is approved, the operator must furnish the bond prior to commencing operations. Once the agency has approved the mine plan and the operator furnishes the bond, the agency authorizes operations under its jurisdiction. However, an operator may need to obtain additional permits or authorizations from other federal, state, local, and regulatory entities in order to actually begin operations. For example, operators may need to obtain a permit under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for the discharge of dredged or fill material, such as soil from mine excavations into certain waters. From fiscal years 2010 through 2014, BLM approved 66 mine plans, and the Forest Service approved 2 mine plans for hardrock mines that varied by mineral type, mine size, and location. The length of time it took for the agencies to reach the third step of the five-step mine plan review process—the step in which the mine plan is approved—ranged from about 1 month to over 11 years and averaged approximately 2 years. Nineteen percent (13 of 68) of the approved mines are not operating as of November 2015 due to various factors. BLM and the Forest Service’s tracking of the mine plan review process is hindered by limitations with their data systems; as a result, BLM does not have adequate information, and the Forest Service does not have complete information, necessary to track the length of time to complete the mine plan review process. From fiscal years 2010 through 2014, BLM approved 66 plans for hardrock mines of various commodity types, sizes, and locations, and the Forest Service approved 2. Commodity types.