Imperial Metals Faces Scrutiny over Other Mines' Safety (in News)

Corner-cutting, cost savings a 'pattern of behaviour,' mining consultant alleges.

Fly-over view of aftermath of tailings pond breach at Mount Polley mine. The same owner, Imperial metals, owns Red Chris mine, where same contractor built tailings pond. Source: Cariboo Regional District.

Imperial Metals Corporation is facing fresh scrutiny of its other major mines across British Columbia in the wake of the Mount Polley dam breach.

Last Monday, the impoundment dam near Likely, B.C. collapsed, dumping 14.5 million cubic metres of tailings into the watershed. Reports have since revealed the firm was warned about dam safety and dangerous tailings levels by employees, their blockade near the Red Chris site near Iskut, B.C. (roughly 500 kilometres northwest of Smithers) by members of Tahltan nation launched on Aug. 8.

The Red Chris impoundment is contained by an earthen dam reportedly similar to the one at Mount Polley, and is designed by the same United Kingdom-based company, AMEC, which took over engineering at the Mount Polley site in 2011 before the tailings dam was raised in height to accommodate rising levels of waste.

One mining consultant familiar with the design and plans for the company's Red Chris project said that the problems weren't just at the Mount Polley site, but asked that his identity not be published due to fears it could hurt his chances of being employed in the industry.

At Red Chris mine, he alleged, the company resisted calls to install a protective lining material across the bottom of the tailings pond or some other measure to reduce tailings leaching from the pond, as recommended by local First Nations, and said the company has not done many of the tests recommended in a 2013 report on the risk of leaks. In addition, he alleged the company has tried to cut costs when it comes to modeling software around impoundment leaks, leading to inadequate data.

He alleged there is pattern that boils down to a lack of "proven contingencies" at Red Chris, a term denoting the actions taken triggered by "undesirable outcomes at the mine site."

"These are what would appear were missing at Mount Polley too," he said. "They don't want them because once you have a proven contingency, then you have a trigger, once you have a trigger then you need monitoring. It all costs them a lot of money."

In addition, the consultant argued, "There's a pattern of behaviour around trying to achieve the least-cost monitoring... They want to get the least onerous monitoring conditions in their permit as possible."

Follow this link:
Imperial Metals Faces Scrutiny over Other Mines' Safety (in News)