Letter From Picher-Carden Residents to
Click On The Twister'
Letter Of Resignation From Sonya Harris to
Oklahoma Legislators Concerning Voluntary Buyout
Click On The Twister'
1) Tribune newspaper office, Picher—behind office, major underground rock fall goes back to the ball field; west
edge of ball field there is a shaft that was filled with wood ties only, then filled with dirt.
2) Black Hawk—pillars shot away in later years. Pull drift leading west to R. Harrell park under which there is an
unsupported cavern that the Astrodome would fit into.
3) Center field area of old Tristate Miners ball park—large underground rock fall, roof height 100 feet plus.
4) John Beaver-Crystal-Ritz-up to Velie Lion-all these workings mined to very high roof, sheet ground (shale)
unstable plus lower strata made unstable by tar seams.
5) Syndicate—north of pits toward Treece, east of Tar Creek—very bad ground with very thin or no upper
limestone supporting strata.
6) Piokee and later Dew Drop mine shaft-removed pillars in later years; a cave-in of east side of Piokee.
7) Lucky Bill to Rialto #1 and #2—pillars removed and totally mined out. Especially around shafts for a 200 foot
radius. The roof gets higher toward the Admiralty mine where it was necessary to drill from 75-foot-high tower
to reach the mine working face.
8) Humble gravel plant—area under chat pile which includes the Rialto mill shaft lacks support due to absence of
supporting limestone, and was mined up to the shale in many areas. Reported early years cave-in south side of
chat pile close to old Hwy 69 which filled itself with chat from the tailings pile.
9) Admiralty #1 and #3—unusual geological feature: Miami fault line and anticline visible in the mine; faults
known to be prone to slippage.
10 & 11) Beck, southward across east A Street to Hudson mine; cave-in on north side of road, connected underground
to location where A Street caved-in to the East.
12) West of Blue Goose #2—caved-in through chat pile years ago, workings unstable and had many roof slab falls
during operating years.
13) Goodeagle—although not connected underground to other workings, was mined out on multiple levels to a very
high roof.
14) Bendalari and Cherokee—these are in Kansas and had very unstable workings. Former shaft was recribbed 5
times due to poor stability. Typical of mines in the Treece, KS area.
15) Federal Lucky-West of Syndicate—same comments as Syndicate.
16) Howe—West side of tar creek and west of Piokee; had very thin upper strata of limestone, poses threat to Tar
Creek if it subsides.
17) New ball park, east edge of street; improperly filled shaft over cavernous area unsupported by pillars.
18) Davis Big Chief & Davis White (later Otis White)—this workings northward and to the southwest was unstable
due to tar seams and deposits all the way up to the “E” bed of the Boone Formation.
19) Emma Gordon—mining in commerce area was in very narrow drifts due to nature of ore deposits and lack of
good rock overhead for roof support. Room and pillar method less used here.
20) Cactus to Jones & Goldberg—there is a shaft between these two mines not shown on map, right on the
section line. Mined area quite shallow and not in stable rock formations probably accounting for present caveins.
Click On The Twister'
TABLE 4.1
Case Number Shaft Related Collapse
1) Sooner tailings pile shaft No. 5-Dec. 2001. S16 T29N R23E.
2) Velie Lion shaft No. 37-Between 1982 and 2000. Elliptical collapse-approx. 60 x 80 feet x
35 feet deep. S19 T29N R23E.
3) Harrisburg shaft No. 44-Dec. 2002. Circular collapse expanded to approx. 80 feet in
diameter x 70 feet deep. Collapse remains active. S19 T29N R23E.
January 2006 Picher Mining Field Subsidence Report ? Page 4-3
TABLE 4.1 (Continued)
Case Number Shaft Related Collapse
4) Craig Lease Shaft No. 20- Dec 2003. Circular collapse 12 feet in diameter x 4 feet deep.
S33 T29N R23E.
5) Craig Lease shaft No.15- Partial collapse 2002-12 feet in diameter x 4 feet deep (North side
of lease in pasture adjacent to E40 Rd.). S33 T29N R23E.
6) Warner Fee (Commerce) Shaft No.1-January 2005. Circular collapse 10 feet in diameter. S6
T28N R22E.
7) Beck shaft No. 16-partial collapse beginning in 2001- 10 feet diameter x 8 feet deep. The
shaft has continued to deepen. S29 T29N R23E.
8) Lucky Jenny shaft No. 11 (Hockerville)-late 2004 or early 2005. Circular collapse 50 feet
diameter x 40 feet deep. S14 T29N R23E.
9) Mahutska Lease shaft No. 10 in the tailings pile-between 1982 and 2004. Circular collapse in
tailings pile approx. 60 feet in diameter. S21 T29N R23E.
10) Partial collapse of Shaft No. 31 on the Barbara J Lease adjacent to Hwy 69-Occurred in
2001. Circular collapse 10 feet in diameter x 6 feet deep. S29 T29N R23E.
11 Shaft No. 34 fill material collapsed on the Beck Lease adjacent to ‘A’ Street. Concrete collar
intact. Date unknown. S15 T29N R23E.
12) Shaft No.17 on the Missouri Mule Lease-Occurred around 2000. Circular collapse 20 feet in
diameter. Water level 10 feet from surface. S28 T29N R23E.
13) SHAFT No. 10 on the New Chicago No. 2 Lease-Occurred in 2002. Circular collapse 20 feet
in diameter x 15 feet deep. S28 T29N R23E.
14) Shaft No. 19 on the Ritz Lease in the road on Ash Street, south of Cardin Road, one block
south of the old Eagle-Picher Office/Shop site. Occurred 1982. Approx. 40 feet in diameter x
30 feet deep. S30 T29N R24E.
15) Unnumbered shaft adjacent to Hwy 137 in Quapaw. Occurred in 2003. Approx. 15 feet in
diameter x 30 feet deep. S35 T29N R23E.
TABLE 4.2
RELATED COLLAPSES IN THE VICINITY OF PICHER-CARDIN-HOCKERVILLE SINCE 1982
1) Scammon Hill- Near shaft No.12- small elliptical collapse adjacent to collapsed shaft.
Approx. 20 feet In diameter x 8 feet deep. S36 T29N R22E.
2) Scammon Hill- Near shaft No. 8-small circular collapse near shaft. Approx. 30 feet in
diameter x 15 feet deep. S36 T29N R22E.
3) Massel Lease-two small collapse features adjacent to mill concrete pillars. Approx. 20
feet in diameter x 15 feet deep. S23 T29N R23E.
4) Scott Lease-Circular collapse 20 feet diameter x 10 feet deep. Water level at 10 feet-
Jan. 2003. S13 T29N 23E.
5) Howe tailings pile-circular recollapsed around 1997. Expanded to 42 feet in diameter by
2001. S17 T29N R23E.
6) Drill hole collapsed in James Cruzan’s yard in Picher-2004. Approx. 6 feet x 8 feet S17
T29N R23E.
7) Collapsed drill hole on the Ruth Goodeagle lease approx. 100 yards. SE from shaft No.
3. Occurred in 2003. Approx. 2 feet x 8 feet S34 T29N R23E.
8) Elliptical collapse in the pasture 100 yards. east of S590 Road. Occurred in 2003. 12
feet x 15 feet by 10 feet deep. Collapse continues to increase in size. Also a drill hole
collapse 100 feet NW of the elliptical collapse. S34 T29N R23E.
9) Martha B Mine, State Line Road-8 feet collapse 4 feet deep-January 29, 2005. Large
depression 25 feet in diameter x 2 feet deep adjacent to the collapse. May be karst
feature? S17 T29N R24E.
January 2006 Picher Mining Field Subsidence Report ? Page 4-4
TABLE 4.2 (Continued)
Case Number Non-Shaft Related Collapse
10) Small collapse in S590 Road on the Dardene Lease between Sections 21/22 T29N
R23E. Approx. 4 feet in diameter x 8 feet deep-2004. Collapse filled with boulders by
the County road crew.
11) Collapse 1531 on the Consolidated Lease west of Commerce. Filled after 1982. In a
state of major collapse in 2005. S1 T29N R22E.
12) Circular collapse 100 yds. Northeast of Velie Lion mill site-70ft in diameter x 30 feet
deep. S19 T29N R23E
13) Collapse on the J. E. McGuirk Lease on the north side of E40 Road (Blue Hole Road) –
Occurred Approx. 1982. Approx. 30 feet in diameter by 15 feet deep. Rural water
system had to be permanently rerouted around the opening. S30 T29N R24E.
14) Large collapse 300 feet west of police station in Commerce-50 feet wide x 70 feet long
x 140 feet deep. 1994-1995. S1 T29N R22E.
15) North side of ‘A’ Street 1.5 miles east of Picher-1992. Size unknown.
16) Small circular collapse on the Alice Greenback Lease adjacent to Hwy 69A NE of
Quapaw. Approx. 4 feet diameter x 6 feet deep. Hole collapsed 3 times in 2004. S26
T29N R23E.
17) Old Hwy 66 in Commerce at the intersection of current Main Street and “C” Street-Drill
hole in the center of the road 6 feet wide x 22 feet deep 1994. S1 T29N R22E.
18) Small circular collapse on the Skelton Lease adjacent to Hwy 69 on the east side, south
of Picher- March 2005. Approx. 12 feet in diameter x 6 feet deep. S28 T29N R23E.
19) Circular collapse in S ½ of SE ¼ of Section 20 T29N R23E-5/8/83. Approx. 60 feet in
diameter x 30 feet deep.
20) Circular collapse in the Ritz chat pile on the Ritz Lease, July 2005. Approx. 12 feet in
diameter x 20 feet deep. S30 T29 R23E.
Click On The Twister'
The following recommendations are intended to provide guidance to federal, state, and local officials in addressing
the safety, environmental, and land use issues associated with potential subsidence events. The options provide a
menu or a series of methods that can be applied to assist in the prediction, detection, and mitigation of subsidence.
These recommendations are presented in two separate categories: general recommendations, and site-specific
recommendations.
General recommendations developed by the Subsidence Evaluation Team are:
• Establish an advisory committee composed of federal, state, and local representatives to assist
with the implementation of recommendations contained in this report and to serve as a technical
and/or management resource for policy makers and elected officials.
• Establish a long-term program to locate, map, and record future subsidence events as they occur in
the Picher Mining Field. Both shaft related and non-shaft related subsidence events should be
included in the program.
• Establish a fund to address emergency subsidence events in the Picher Mining Field. The fund
should provide for emergency evaluation of subsidence features as they occur and provide an
immediate funding source for corrective measures. Existing funding mechanisms do not provide
the ability to respond quickly to emergencies. The fund would be replenished as it is drawn down.
• Continue the current mine-shaft closure program to remove the immediate hazards associated with
open shafts, further reduce the potential for additional shaft failures, and minimize the
environmental impacts from surface water drainage and unauthorized dumping. Focus mine-shaft
closure efforts first on open mine shafts within city limits and near occupied structures.
• Develop and implement a subsidence training program for workers from Picher, Quapaw,
Commerce, Ottawa County District 1, and Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT)
maintenance staff. The program should be designed to teach workers to recognize and report
subsidence events and how to take appropriate action to address the subsidence events as they
occur. A similar program has been in place in Joplin, MO for several years and has worked
effectively.
• Identify and inspect all shaft related and non-shaft related subsidence features being used as dump
sites for commercial and household refuse to reduce the environmental impacts of open
subsidence features. A priority ranking based on the potential environmental impact should be
developed and additional funding provided to eliminate surface runoff into the sites and, in some
instances, close the sites not currently addressed.
Governmental regulatory agencies, cities, and
Ottawa County should work together to strengthen the regulations, enforcement, and penalties for
unauthorized dumping and develop legal alternatives for trash disposal.
• Federal and State agencies involved in remediation and reclamation of lands at Tar Creek should
reevaluate existing assumptions and approaches used to address hazards in the mining field. The
information contained in this report (potential subsidence and mine shaft failure, underground
mine workings) should be factored into existing projects, plans, and decisions.
A process for
evaluating current and future land use plans against existing hazards and the estimated cost for
remediation and reclamation should be developed. A plan for restoration and/or final disposition
of mined properties, including identification and mitigation of known hazards, should be a product
of the effort.
Ottawa County and impacted cities should establish a county-city land use planning
process to evaluate current land use and develop future land use recommendations in the study
area. Ottawa County should adopt building standards and land use guidelines for the mined lands.
January 2006 Picher Mining Field Subsidence Report ?Page 9-2
• HUD regulations related to existing housing and future construction in the mining field should be
reviewed to determine the applicability and impact.
• Identify a state agency responsible for maintaining and building upon the GIS developed from this
project. The GIS information should be made available over the Internet or by some other
electronic media.
• Complete subsidence evaluation for the remainder of the Picher Mining Field outside the study
area and:
The following site-specific measures are presented based on four categories of land use:
public use areas, residential/commercial areas, major transportation corridors, and rural agricultural and
undeveloped areas.
The no-action option is available for all undermined areas and may be the most appropriate for specific sites. This
option will not be discussed any further in this report. Backfilling of mine workings is also an option for all
categories; but due to extensive mine workings, the cost is prohibitive in all but very-high-value facilities.
Specific situations where backfilling may be feasible are discussed below.
9.2.1 Public Use Facilities—Areas Where People Congregate Having a Maximum
Estimated Subsidence of Five Feet or Greater
• Three options are available: close/relocate the facility, conduct a site-specific evaluation followed
by either a geotechnical evaluation, or perform regular monitoring using visual or geotechnical
methods. The costs of the evaluation, and possible long-term monitoring should be determined.
The benefits of continuing to use these facilities should be evaluated against the risk and overall
costs of closure/relocation, the geotechnical evaluation, and long term-monitoring.
• Locations in Picher where residents were previously evicted by the Eagle-Picher Mining &
Smelting Company and public use was restricted by Eagle-Picher and BIA because of the
potential for subsidence should be further evaluated prior to development of public use facilities or
expansion of residential areas.
The grade school playground (location 139), the youth soccer field
(location 141), Reunion Park (location 140), Picher Little League Park (old baseball field in Picher
on South Main between 5th and 6th Streets), between 1st and A Streets and north of D Street
between Netta and Picher Streets, as described in Section 1.1.3, and other areas of high public use
should be evaluated to determine if continued use is safe for residents.
• Mineshafts in Residential, Commercial or Public Use Areas: City and county workers should
be trained to recognize the signs of potential mineshaft failure and periodically inspect all
mineshafts located in the community. These areas should be zoned to restrict future residential,
commercial, or public land use. The mine shafts should be investigated to determine if they are
filled with durable material. If it is not, the shaft should be backfilled or plugged with concrete at
the rock interface.
• Mineshafts Beneath Structures: If a structure is located immediately over a shaft, the structure
should be relocated or demolished, or if cost effective, an angle drilling program should be
conducted to determine if the shaft is completely backfilled.
If drilling determines that the shaft is
not completely backfilled or otherwise adequately plugged, the shaft should be backfilled or the
structure should be relocated or demolished. After relocation or demolition of the structure, the
shaft should be plugged at the rock interface or backfilled with nondegradable material.
The cost
of backfilling a shaft under a structure using angle drilling and grouting methods can be
substantially greater than backfilling or plugging the same shaft without the structure.
This entails drilling to determine the presence of mine voids and their depth and height, along with rock
mechanics properties of the formation.
• Maximum Subsidence Five Feet or Greater: When a structure or structures overlies, or is within
150 feet of such an area, one of three options should be undertaken: perform exploratory drilling
to determine the actual subsurface conditions, relocate the structure or structures, or demolish the
structure or structures.
Exploratory drilling may validate the original prediction, may show that
the maximum estimated subsidence is either greater or less, and/or may reveal different
information about the site such as the progression of mine roof collapse upward.
If drilling shows that the site is not safe for continued occupation or use and mitigation isn’t a sensible option, then
relocation or demolition should be conducted. Any demolition must be followed by restrictions on
future land uses. It is recommended that no new construction or relocation of residential housing,
commercial buildings, infrastructure, or transportation systems be allowed immediately above or
within 150 feet of undermined lands until the area is evaluated for potential subsidence.
• Residential Areas of Quapaw: Based on the small number of mine shafts identified in Quapaw,
the mine workings are most likely not extensive or located near the surface. Competent limestone
is found near the surface in other mines near Quapaw indicating a competent mine roof structure.
The cost to perform a geotechnical evaluation to identify the extent of the mine workings, the
height of the workings and the stability of the roof structure would be very expensive and
disruptive to the community.
Based on the absence of non-shaft related subsidence in the past,
city workers should be trained to recognize and report any indications of subsidence or shaft
failure.
9.2.3 Major Transportation Corridors
Even small collapses on transportation corridors have the potential to cause serious accidents. For all transportation
corridors that have an estimated maximum subsidence of 0 to 2 feet, under or within 150 feet of the road, establish
and implement a routine survey grade monitoring procedure, the results of which are reviewed by a qualified
engineer on a prescribed schedule.
For all transportation corridors that have an estimated maximum subsidence of 2 feet or greater, under or within 150
feet of the road, or where a mine shaft is located under the road right of way, immediate recommendations are:
• Inform transportation and utility managers of potential risk
• Consider imposing weight restrictions and speed limits on vehicles
• Establish alternate routes for school buses
Long-term recommendations are:
• Establish a systematic, continuous monitoring and reporting program including, at a minimum, a
survey grade network along effected areas
• Ensure that a qualified engineer or geologist reviews the monitoring data at regular intervals as a
check on the quality control for the monitoring system.
• Conduct a geotechnical investigation to determine the stability of the roadbed surface and right-ofway
• A qualified engineer or geologist should review the results at regular intervals to ensure stability
where a monitoring program is implemented
• Train city, county, and state transportation workers to recognize the signs of subsidence or shaft
failure and to provide a reporting mechanism to expedite response to any suspected problem.
• Establish a standard protocol for all city, county, and state officials to use whenever they suspect
that a shaft failure or subsidence may be occurring in or adjacent to a road. This should include
notification procedures, road closure procedures, warning sign procedures, etc.
• Consider mitigation if cost effective
Several residential streets in Picher, Cardin, and Hockerville have the potential for subsidence beneath or adjacent to
the streets, (Table 7.2). Several streets in these towns have been built over mine workings; however, not all streets
built over mine workings were identified as having a potential for subsidence.
Federal, state, and local officials
should assess the need for evaluating the streets having a potential for subsidence and other streets that overlie mine
workings.
For residential streets having an estimated maximum subsidence greater than 2 feet (Section 7.4.1),
immediate recommendations are:
• Consider imposing weight restrictions and speed limits on vehicles
• Establish alternate routes for school buses
Long-term recommendations are:
• Establish a systematic, continuous monitoring and reporting program including, at a minimum, a
survey grade network along effected areas
• Ensure that a qualified engineer or geologist reviews the monitoring data at regular intervals as a
check on the quality control for the monitoring system.
• Conduct a geotechnical investigation to determine the stability of the roadbed surface and right-ofway
• A qualified engineer or geologist should review the results at regular intervals to ensure stability
where a monitoring program is implemented
• Train city, county, and state transportation workers to recognize the signs of subsidence or shaft
failure and to provide a reporting mechanism to expedite response to any suspected problem.
• Establish a standard protocol for all city, county, and state officials to use whenever they suspect
that a shaft failure or subsidence may be occurring in or adjacent to a road. This should include
notification procedures, road closure procedures, warning sign procedures, etc.
• Consider mitigation if cost effective
9.2.5 Rural, Agricultural and Undeveloped Areas
Areas used for pasture, hay, or row crops, and undeveloped areas used for hunting, off-road vehicle use, or hiking
expose fewer people to dangers associated with subsidence than do roads or residential areas; yet, dangers to public
safety and property still exist. Undeveloped and lightly developed portions of towns are likely locations for new
construction or relocation of existing structures from other areas.
It is recommended that no new construction or
relocation of residential housing, commercial buildings, infrastructure, or transportation systems be allowed
immediately above or within 150 feet of undermined lands until the area is evaluated for potential subsidence.
January 2006 Picher Mining Field Subsidence Report ?Page 9-5
Options are also provided for addressing subsidence hazards associated with existing mine workings. Table 9.1,
presented and discussed in Section 9.8 of this report, is a generalized matrix for decision-makers to evaluate options
presented in this report. The options are divided into the following four categories:
• Management approaches that may be used to address subsidence
• Instrumentation that could be installed for early detection of potential subsidence
• Mine geometry characterization to better understand the parameters contributing to potential
subsidence
• Hazard mitigation options (hazard abatement) associated with subsidence
9.4 MANAGEMENT APPROACH OPTIONS
9.4.1 Observational Method
The Observational Method essentially permits the development and use of a simple model to represent a complex
process with subsequent observations of the process results, updating and refinement of the model based on the
observed performance, and continued use of the model to predict process performance and manage the problem at
hand.
The empirical methodology used for subsidence potential evaluation in this study is based on an analysis of
actual mine subsidence events using data and information derived from archived mine maps and drill-hole data
retrieved from pre-mining exploration logs.
While the derived model is believed to be conservative (i.e., it is
expected to over predict subsidence potential), its actual performance has not yet been confirmed. The observational
method would therefore be focused on validating the empirical approach along with refining both the model and
approach as indicated.
Physical observation, exploration and instrumentation would be the primary observational method tools that can be
applied in the Picher Mining Field. Continuing expansion of the case-study data set and further proofing and
analysis of the overall case-study data set may also be appropriate.
9.4.2 Adaptive Management
In general, adaptive management is an iterative, learning-oriented methodology for managing complex systems that
are characterized by high levels of uncertainty. It is an iterative (cyclical) process of adapting management solutions
to complex problems based on applying assumptions followed by observation and then re-applying new assumptions
based on those observations to achieve a better management solution to the problem
Adaptive management is well suited to be used in conjunction with the observational method and implemented for
the Picher Mining Field project for the following reasons:
• The Picher Mining Field area is part of a complex system.
• The Picher Mining Field area is constantly changing.
• Land uses may change and evolve. For example, undeveloped land may be developed by
commercial or private parties. This would change the associated potential effect if underground
workings were to potentially subside in the area.
• Immediate action is required because of potential severe consequences to people living in the area
currently and in the near future.
• There is uncertainty in the data set used to evaluate the Picher Mining Field system. Although
there is a large amount of historical data associated with the mining activities that have occurred,
there is much information that has been lost or destroyed. In addition, the physical and engineering properties of the soil and rock in the study area have not been characterized with
respect to subsidence.
• The management system for the Picher Mining Field must be adaptable to new data, policies, land
uses, and other factors.
January 2006 Picher Mining Field Subsidence Report ?Page 9-6
Click On The Twister'
Oklahoma Legislators Concerning Voluntary Buyout
To Go Back To Top
To Go Back To Top
Picher Mining Field, NE OK Subsidence Evaluation Report
Jan. 06, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Tulsa District, by Subsidence Evaluation Team
To Go Back To Top
Picher Mining Field, NE OK Subsidence Evaluation Report
Jan. 06, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Tulsa District, by Subsidence Evaluation Team
PARTIAL LIST OF SHAFT-RELATED COLLAPSES
IN THE VICINITY OF PICHER-CARDIN-HOCKERVILLE SINCE 1982
T/Tar Creek/Report/Compliance Report Version/Text/Final/ Picher Subsidence Report Rev 14
1/16/06 slw
PARTIAL LIST OF SHAFT-RELATED COLLAPSES
IN THE VICINITY OF PICHER-CARDIN-HOCKERVILLE SINCE 1982
PARTIAL LIST OF NON-SHAFT
Case Number Non-Shaft Related Collapse
T/Tar Creek/Report/Compliance Report Version/Text/Final/ Picher Subsidence Report Rev 14
1/16/06 slw
PARTIAL LIST OF NON-SHAFT
RELATED COLLAPSES IN THE VICINITY OF PICHER-CARDIN-HOCKERVILLE SINCE 1982
To Go Back To Top
Oklahoma Plan for Tar Creek, Multi-agency Committee.
This is not the Governor's Task Force.
9. RECOMMENDATION AND OPTIONS
9.1 GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
T/Tar Creek/Report/Compliance Report Version/Text/Final/ Picher Subsidence Report Rev 14
1/16/06 slw
- Further refine the subsidence evaluation model
- Evaluate the effects of mine water on the stability of mine workings
- Develop a better understanding of structural geology and physical and engineering properties of rock
in the area
- Incorporate additional mine maps and borehole data in the GIS
- Evaluate failure mechanisms for recent smaller, non-shaft subsidence areas
9.2 SITE-SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
Given the results and conclusions of this study, site-specific measures are required to mitigate the potential impacts
on public safety. A cost-benefit analysis should be performed to determine the most appropriate approach. Areas
with higher probabilities and greater maximum estimated subsidence should be given priority with regard to
evaluation and mitigation.
9.2.2 Residential/Commercial Areas
January 2006 Picher Mining Field Subsidence Report ?Page 9-3
T/Tar Creek/Report/Compliance Report Version/Text/Final/ Picher Subsidence Report Rev 14
1/16/06 slw
January 2006 Picher Mining Field Subsidence Report ?Page 9-4
T/Tar Creek/Report/Compliance Report Version/Text/Final/ Picher Subsidence Report Rev 14
1/16/06 slw
9.2.4 Residential Streets
T/Tar Creek/Report/Compliance Report Version/Text/Final/ Picher Subsidence Report Rev 14
1/16/06 slw
9.3 OPTIONS
T/Tar Creek/Report/Compliance Report Version/Text/Final/ Picher Subsidence Report Rev 14
1/16/06 slw
To Go Back To Top
Picher Quick-Links 