MEND Project 4.2.1
September 1993

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Jacques Whitford Environment Limited (GEL) was selected by the Mine Environment Neutral Drainage (MEND) program to conduct a review of Canadian and United States legislation relevant to decommissioning acid mine drainage (AMD) sites. The purpose of the review was to provide government agencies, industry representatives and other organizations and individuals with an overview of the existing Canadian and United States regulatory framework relevant to decommissioning AMD sites, and to summarize the criteria used by Canadian and United States regulatory agencies to assess the performance of a decommissioning, AMD site.

This report is the result of two separate reviews financially supported by different groups. The review of Canadian legislation was sponsored by the Ontario Ministry of Environment & Energy and Homestake Canada Inc. The review of United States legislation was sponsored by Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company. The findings of both reviews are combined in this report for completeness.

Canada is actively involved in research on the prediction and control of AMD, particularly with respect to metal mining operations. Much of this research is fostered by the national Mine Environment Neutral Drainage (MEND) program in which the provinces of British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick participate. Research on AMD from coal mining operations is likely further advanced in the United States.

In general, regulatory strategies specifically geared towards decommissioning sites with AMD are still in the development stage in both Canada and the United States. Overall, environmental legislation is more prescriptive in the United States than in Canada. Some of the criteria that would typically be used in assessing the success of an AMD site decommissioning are effluent quality leaving the mine site and groundwater and surface water quality downgradient from the mine site. Effluent limitations, drinking water standards and surface water quality criteria have all been developed at a federal level by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, they are all enforceable at either the federal or state level, depending on whether a particular state has a federally approved regulatory program in place.

In Canada, on the other hand, non-enforceable water quality guidelines or objectives are the norm. However, site-specific enforceable parameters, based on water quality guidelines or objectives, may be incorporated in mine operation permits or licenses.

Seven states were contacted as part of this review. Idaho and Nevada have no regulations, guidelines or policies tailored specifically for licensing or decommissioning mines with AMD, or the potential for AMD. California and Montana do not have clear-cut legislation to address AMD specifically, but do seem to have some general policies for the approach (i.e. site-specific) to be used in decommissioning AMD sites. Legislation in Colorado makes reference to AMD by stating that "acid-forming material" at operating mine sites should be handled in a manner that will protect downgradient water bodies.

Only two of the states contacted, Pennsylvania and West Virginia, have a regulatory strategy that addresses AMD directly. In both states, predictive testing for acid generation potential is mandatory prior to approval. In Pennsylvania, if a proposed mine site is shown to have the potential for AMD, it is not licensed. West Virginia requires that control technologies be adequate to meet effluent and water quality criteria. However, in neither state is there a systematic approach for decommissioning abandoned mines with AMD.

All the provinces and territories were contacted as part of this review. Two of the provinces do not have a significant AMD problem (Prince Edward Island, Alberta). The remaining provinces and the territories are at different stages of developing regulatory strategies for addressing AMD. In most jurisdictions, there are now provisions for proposed mines to complete some type of environmental impact statement. However, depending on which jurisdiction, the discretion granted to the "minister", and/or the size of the proposed mine, the complexity of the statement will vary.

Several provinces, including British Columbia, Ontario and Saskatchewan, have guidelines in place that require predictive testing to determine the acid generation potential of rock units at a proposed mine. Nova Scotia has gone a step further and requires monitoring, and sometimes predictive testing, at any development on shale of the Halifax Formation.

With respect to effluent limitations, most provinces use the federal Metal Mining Liquid Effluent Regulations, although some provinces such as British Columbia, Saskatchewan and Quebec have developed their own. Ontario is currently in the process of developing comprehensive effluent regulations for various industries, including mining, under the Municipal Industrial Strategy for Abatement (MISA) program

For water quality criteria, many provinces use the federal Canadian Water Quality Guidelines, although provinces such as British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Ontario and Quebec have developed, or are developing, their own criteria for surface water and/or groundwater quality. Both British Columbia and Manitoba seem to be taking a different approach from the other provinces. For example, with time, surface water bodies in Manitoba will be classified according to present and potential use and water quality criteria set

accordingly. This approach is similar to that taken in the United States. British Columbia sets water quality objectives on a site-specific basis, taking into account such factors as water quality and water uses. This approach potentially has the flexibility to address the anomalous background water chemistry sometimes encountered at mine sites.

Last Modified: 2003-11-26		Important Notices

Français | Contact Us | Help | Search | Canada Site
Home | What's New | CANMET-MMSL | MMS Site | NRCan Site