Govt, mining bodies in CERCLA row - Mining Journal (subscription)

The National Mining Association has expressed alarm over the US Environmental Protection Agency’s new “financial responsibility requirements” for hard-rock miners in the country, claiming the rules have been hurriedly pushed into the public consultation arena by the outgoing Obama administration despite “serious flaws raised by industry experts and financial institutions”.

The NMA said the “duplicative” Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) rule was “unnecessary, redundant and poorly constructed, and exemplifies all the problems of rushed rule-making from an outgoing administration”.

But the EPA said its consultations with relevant stakeholders had been extensive, the proposal was a result of “many years of incremental steps since the agency identified hard rock mining as the first sector” for development of the regulations, and the new requirements would complement existing financial responsibility obligations.

It needed to take “action to protect American taxpayers by proposing financial responsibility requirements for the hard-rock mining industry” because the agency had spent considerable resources cleaning up contamination from hard-rock mines since the 1980s. The most recent analysis, from 2010 to 2014, showed the agency spent “nearly US$1.1 billion on response and clean-up actions on hard-rock mining and mineral processing sites”.

“Far too often the American people bear the costs of expensive environmental clean-ups stemming from hard-rock mining and mineral processing,” the assistant administrator for the agency’s Office of Land and Emergency Management, Mathy Stanislaus said.

“This proposed rule, once finalised, would move the financial burden from taxpayers, and ensure that industry assumes responsibility for these clean-ups. The proposed rule would also give companies an economic incentive to use environmentally protective practices that can help prevent future releases.”

CERCLA would require that owners and operators of certain classes of hard-rock mines and mineral processing facilities showed financial capacity to address risks from hazardous substances.

But the Washington, DC, based NMA maintained the EPA process had been “continuously and needlessly rushed”, and the agency had offered a “woefully inadequate 60-day comment period on an entirely brand new federal program, despite significant concerns voiced by states, Congress and industry, as well as repeated requests to thoughtfully consider the economic ramifications of the rule”.

“Current programs already address the risks of mining and mineral processing sites, and prevent these sites from becoming a Superfund liability, rendering this rule unnecessary,” said NMA boss Hal Quinn.

According to the NMA, the EPA had developed CERCLA with “little to no consultation with actual experts from the mining sector or financial institutions”.

“EPA has also truncated key rulemaking milestones, as evidenced by its lacklustre consultation with the states on pre-emption of existing state programs.

“The predictable result is a faulty rule that overstates potential risks and liabilities of modern mining facilities, and duplicates successful state and federal regulatory programs, leaving an exorbitant price tag on an already comprehensively regulated industry.”