New Rules

Mining companies operating in Canada need to develop a clear understanding of the implications of the April 2009 legal decision to expand the reach of the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) program to cover onsite storage of waste rock and tailings. The June 2010 deadline for reporting may seem far in the future, but it may take some time to compile the necessary data, particularly as the information filed must go back to 2006.

By way of background, the NPRI was introduced in 1993 to provide an annual, publicly available inventory of industrial and commercial pollutants released into the Canadian environment, as governed by the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). Information gathered is made available to the public, with reports provided on a community level about the sources of pollutants in their immediate area.

Pollutants released from the processing of mined materials have always been reportable, and mining companies have become familiar with NPRI requirements as they pertain to the processing of ore and their other industrial activities (see www.ec.gc.ca/inrp-npri).

Since 2006, NPRI reporting has also been required for mining extraction activities. While Environment Canada (EC) has always required the reporting of NPRI substances pertaining to tailings and waste rock that leave the facility property, this has never been required for controlled movements of, or emissions from tailings or waste rock within the facility boundary (i. e. to Tailings Impound Areas (TIAs) or Waste Rock Storage Areas (WRSAs)).

An application for a judicial review of this matter was recently filed by two nongovernmental agencies. These applicants were, according to the judgment documentation, “seeking a declaration that the Minister has erred in interpreting CEPA by not providing such pollutant release information to the public through the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) in 2006 and subsequent years” as it relates to onsite TIAs and WRSAs.

The judgment document notes that waste rock and tailings may contain aluminum, arsenic, cadmium, copper, mercury, nickel and selenium, all of which are pollutants listed under the NPRI system, adding that most mining in Canada occurs in rock with high sulphur content. When sulphur comes in contact with water it generates sulphuric acid, which is also a pollutant listed under the NPRI.

The Court found in its April 2009 ruling that the Minister had erred in his interpretation of CEPA as not requiring pollutant release information to the public through the NPRI in relation to releases and transfers to onsite tailings and waste rock disposal areas at mining facilities in 2006 and subsequent years.

Pushing facilities over the line

Some mining companies will find that when they add the onsite releases from their tailings and waste rock facilities into their facility-wide inventories, releases that were under threshold levels for some pollutants may now be above reporting thresholds and artificially resulting in a false significant increase in reported emissions.

Even if some contaminants are present at low concentrations, the sheer volume of rock and tailings involved over the course of the year means that the facility as a whole may show a significant release of pollutants -and for many companies, processing large volumes of materials that are high in metals content is an indication that they are meeting their business objectives.

In some cases, this new legislative requirement means that in the lists that EC publishes of facilities that are releasing significant volumes of pollutants, mining companies will rank higher than before. Given the public nature of the reporting process, the new NPRI submissions may also raise the profile of facilities that have not had to report in the past.

Complying with the legislation

This leaves many mining companies asking how they can comply with the new expectations being placed upon them?

Our conversations with EC personnel indicate that the government does not expect mining companies to undergo major data-collection efforts and onerous calculations to comply with the now-longer arm of the NPRI. In many cases, mining companies can compile the information they need from existing records.

This may include records of the amount of material hoisted, assays made as part of the operational process and the amount of metal produced. Conducting assays of waste rock piles and tailings is relatively straightforward and may even be being done already.

Calculating fugitive emissions (i. e. through wind erosion or evaporation from TIAs/WRSAs) may be more of a challenge, but reasonable estimates based on defensible assumptions are acceptable.

In our work helping companies meet NPRI requirements, we have found that in many cases companies prefer to keep much

of the data-gathering in-house rather than outsourcing it. This is partly because inhouse staff has a better understanding of the process, and can collect the necessary data as part of their regular duties.

The consultant can then be helpful in making sure that assumptions that are used to build estimates meet current scientific understanding as well as industry practice. Consultants may also be a good resource for processing the information into a form acceptable for NPRI purposes.

A consultant should be able to provide a mining company client with a data request or other such document indicating what information will be needed to

prepare an NPRI submission. This way, the mining company has a work plan for preparing the necessary information by the time the deadline -June 1, 2010 -rolls around and can prepare for the additional exposure that may result from the expanded submissions.

Natalie Hamilton, P. Eng., is an Air Quality

Specialist with Golder Associates Ltd., based in the Sudbury ON office; tel. 705.524.6861; nhamilton@golder.com.

Rachel Wyles, M. Eng., is an Air Quality Specialist with Golder Associates Ltd.,

based in the Burnaby BC office, tel. 604.296.2826; rwyles@golder.com.

---