Amendments to the Mine Development and Closure Regulation (O. Reg. 240/00)

We are proposing to amend O. Reg 240/00 under the Mining Act (the “Regulation”) to update references to two third-party guidance documents and correct an inappropriate chemical test for monitoring programs.

Schedule 1 (the “Mine Rehabilitation Code” or the “Code”) of the Regulation outlines the minimum rehabilitation standards required for advanced exploration and mining production projects and provides details regarding the required content of closure plans and closure plans amendments.

References under Section 57(2) of the Code pertaining to reference documents for metal leaching and acid rock drainage would be updated to reflect the most recent versions of nationally recognized guidance and standards documents for mine closure. Guidance documents would be referenced on a rolling basis so that the Code remains up to date with current standards.

The proposed amendment would update the Code to require proponents to test for ammonia, instead of ammonium, which is the appropriate chemical test. Having proponents monitoring water quality for ammonia will demonstrate their compliance with the Provincial Water Quality Objectives and other acceptable receiving water-based criteria.  

Currently, the references to these outdated documents in the Code create confusion between proponents and the Ministry.  The proposed changes will reduce the length of time for the ministry to review closure plans and amendments while upholding its regulatory mandate (helping the ministry meet its statutory requirement to complete reviews of closure plans and closure plan amendments within 45 days).

Consequential amendments are also required to remove the reference to O. Reg 560/94 (Effluent Monitoring and Effluent Limits –Metal Mining Sector) under s. 39(1)(b) as that regulation was revoked on July 1, 2021.

Amending the Regulation to refer to the correct chemical test and correct the references to outdated guidance documents will provide more clarity to proponents. The proposed amendments will reduce the frequent back-and-forth discussions about the interpretation of the Code between Ministry specialists, proponents and their consultants during the technical review process of closure plans and closure plan amendments, which ties up resources and slows down processes. This will ultimately reduce red tape.  

There are no anticipated costs, or cost-savings, to proponents or the ministry to implement this amendment.