Panel Report

9.1 Jurisdictional Ambiguity

The administration of occupational health and safety in uranium mines comes under federal jurisdiction by virtue of provisions in the Atomic Energy Control Act. The enabling legislation for radiological protection is the Uranium and Thorium Mining Regulations (1988), soon to be revised under the proposed Canadian Nuclear Safety Act. This legislation is implemented by the Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB). Conventional occupational health and safety is governed by the Canada Labour Code, and its regulations under Part II of the Code. The responsibility for its implementation lies with the Labour component of Human Resources Development Canada.

In practice, however, radiological protection is monitored by both federal and provincial regulators, whereas conventional worker health and safety is monitored only by Saskatchewan Labour. The provincial government acquires its authority through requirements attached to the surface lease agreements negotiated with each uranium mine. Specifically, the Saskatchewan Occupational Health and Safety Act, 1993, and The Radiation Health and Safety Act, 1985, and their attendant regulations, are the legislative instruments applied at the uranium mines.⁵⁴

It is apparent that the provincial Mines and Radiation Safety Branch is the government body most active in providing conventional occupational health and safety inspections at uranium mine sites. Accordingly, this organization should be provided with the authority for initiating prosecution to enforce compliance of regulations. There should be a formal clarification of jurisdictional accountability for conventional health and safety in uranium mines. The Province of Saskatchewan should be given the legislated authority and responsibility for the regulation and enforcement of conventional occupational health and safety standards in the province’s uranium mines.

Employment at uranium mines carries an additional risk beyond the conventional health and safety concerns of other mines - the possibility of exposure of workers to radiation. The Atomic Energy Control Board performs compliance and audit inspections to ensure implementation of acceptable measures for protection from radiation exposures.

The AECB practises a multiphase strategy to ensure compliance: a review of the proponent’s plans, modelling assessment, hazard analysis, site inspections, and audits for all proposed and operating uranium mines are included in its activities. The AECB sets public and occupational radiation dose limits, based upon recommendations of the International Commission for Radiological Protection (ICRP).

The province is also involved in the regulation of radiation health risks through the Mines and Radiation Safety Branch of Saskatchewan Labour. The legislation regarding radiation is The Radiation Health and Safety Act, 1985 and its regulations. Although the Act and regulations do not have provisions which apply specifically to uranium mine workers, the province imposes dose limits by specifying them in the surface lease agreements.⁵⁵

By virtue of federal and provincial legislation, both levels of government have a responsibility to monitor radiation risks at uranium mine sites. This suggests an ideal opportunity for cooperation between the regulators, to share information and avoid duplication. However, presentations to the panel at public hearings indicated that the federal and provincial regulators were not capitalizing on these opportunities.⁵⁶ This lack of cooperation is worrisome, not only for the inefficiencies it represents, but also for its potential to compromise the health and safety of workers. A formal arrangement should be established between the AECB and the provincial regulators to share information and work-site observations on radiation monitoring, with the objectives of strengthening worker protection, and reducing duplication in testing and reporting activities.

9.2 Radiation Health Risks and Protection

There are certain radiological protection challenges that must be addressed in the mining and milling of the high grade McArthur River ore. The mining methods (Section 6.1) have been designed specifically to prevent direct exposure of the miners to the ore. Worker safety would be dependent on the successful containment of the ore during mining, during crushing and grinding, during pumping of the ore slurry to surface, during transport of the ore to the mill, during the blending of McArthur River ore with Key Lake special waste, during milling, and during deposition of the tailings. The EIS predicts that maximum mine worker exposure (for an underground boring operator) would approximate 29% of the proposed new annual exposure limits.

Despite the protection offered by mine design and processes, the AECB has identified several areas of mine operation where special care must be taken to avoid radiation problems. These include ventilation control, the ground water containment system, and ore-handling upset conditions. These are concerns that cannot be dealt with during an environmental review; for entirely practical reasons, they should be monitored and controlled by the regulators through the licensing procedures.

We... believe that the technical challenges of mining the high grade ore at McArthur River can be overcome.

J. Parr, Government of Saskatchewan, Transcript of the McArthur River Public Hearings, Regina, Saskatchewan, September 5, 1996, p. 92.

The AECB reported that it is satisfied that the proponents have adequately assessed worker risks from exposure to radiation during mining and have planned appropriate monitoring and mitigation measures to control source releases.⁵⁷ Saskatchewan Labour reached similar conclusions.

In addition to complying with regulatory limits, the proponent is required to comply with the “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA) principle. It is not permissible to use a particular approach if a comparable, but safer, approach exists. Unnecessary exposure is unacceptable, even if regulatory limits are not exceeded. ALARA is an important concept and it is essential that it be complied with as scrupulously as any of the regulations.

So how the geologists and their drillers, their helpers, samplers and those guys who are still handling with their bare hands extremely high grade ore which you will never find in the world, what is the enhanced protection today within such an environment? I still wonder.

Dr. G. Strnad, Transcript of McArthur River Public Hearings, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, September 11, 1996, p. 92.

---

...to say that the workers cannot be protected, I would say, is a misleading statement. We have, as mentioned, drilled 10,000 metres, handled radioactive cores which, at times, were 40 percent in grade, and we monitor all the people, when they drill, when they carry the cores, when they examine the cores; and all these monitoring has shown that the safety standards which we are to meet are completely met. So that is my answer. We have experience that shows that it works.

Bernard Michel, President, Cameco Corporation, Transcript of McArthur River Public Hearings, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, September 11, 1996, p. 93.

McArthur River ore would be milled at the Key Lake mill, with tailings deposition taking place in the Deilmann Tailings Management Facility (DTMF). The EIS predicts that maximum worker exposures, stated as percentages of the newly proposed, more stringent radiological exposure limits, would be within acceptable regulatory limits: 36%, for mill maintenance workers; 37%, for the DTMF workers during subaerial tailings deposition operations; and 10%, for similar DTMF workers during subaqueous tailings deposition operations. Since these predictions represent significant fractions of the allowable limit, careful monitoring using state-of-the-art technology will be required to ensure that workers do not receive unacceptable exposures.

The Key Lake mill has a history of acceptably low worker radiological exposures. This indicates that appropriate health and safety controls are in force. In addition, the worker radiation training program, workplace monitoring and emergency spill response protocols are well developed at this site, creating confidence that workers will be appropriately protected.

However, the blended McArthur River ore will be more radioactive than ore previously milled at Key Lake and there will be no room for complacency based on past accomplishments when the new process begins.

In order to better assess radiological health and safety impacts to workers, the AECB, uranium mining companies and the Government of Saskatchewan have undertaken jointly to complete a cohort mortality study of Saskatchewan uranium miners.⁵⁸ The panel strongly endorses this epidemiological study which will last for approximately thirty-five years. It should be given priority status, and appropriate funding should be made available to permit its long-term research goals to be achieved. See Sections 11.5 and 11.6.

The public voiced concern about continuing uncertainty in the assessment of radiological risks and the selection of appropriate, conservative standards for dose limits. The AECB sets public and occupational radiation dose limits, based upon recommendations of the ICRP. Existing federal standards, based on the 1977 ICRP-26 recommendations, are under revision, with the proposed AECB Radiation Protection Regulations calling for a considerable reduction in dose limits. The current AECB limit for workers is 50 mSv per year and, for the public, 5 mSv per year. The new occupational dose proposed by the AECB (based on ICRP-60) is 20 mSv per year averaged over a defined period of 5 years, with an additional proviso that the effective dose should not exceed 50 mSv in any single year. The dose limit proposed for the public is 1 mSv per year.

Current Saskatchewan radiation dose standards are also based upon ICRP-26, although the province plans to incorporate ICRP-60 radiation protection standards into future surface lease agreements with uranium mines.⁵⁹

Much of the public concern seems to be related to the time it has taken for the recommendations of ICRP-60 and later revisions to be accepted and implemented. Both governments should move expeditiously to adopt the intent of ICRP-60 and ICRP-65, and should be prepared to review and amend dose limits quickly, in line with any future recommendations by the commission.

...it was about three years ago that your Panel recommended that the province move towards adopting the ICRP-60 exposure limits. It appears that not much progress has been made...

Ann Coxworth, Transcript of MeArthur River Public Hearings, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, September 9, 1996, p. 25.

9.3 Conventional Health and Safety

Saskatchewan updated The Occupational Health and Safety Act in 1993, and began a three-year review of The Occupational Health and Safety Regulations in the same year. The revised regulations were expected to come into effect before the completion of this review.⁶⁰ Mining regulations, however, were last revised in 1978, with no plans for their review until after the enactment of the health and safety regulations. The continued reliance on outdated mining regulations is of concern.

Since 1978, the mining environment has changed dramatically. New developments in automated mining technology, communications systems, computerized process control and worker safety monitoring require corresponding changes in the legislation and regulations. For example, a new mining code should include regulated worker-to-worker and worker-to-surface communications systems to enhance emergency response capabilities. Underground lighting standards should be upgraded, using recent developments in highefficiency portable lighting sources, and all regulations should be reviewed to ensure that they make the best use of available technologies. Saskatchewan Labour should upgrade its Mines Regulations to reflect current mining procedures and the use of modern technologies.

9.4 Conclusions and Recommendations

Mine workers, particularly those in underground developments, depend on mine regulators to ensure safe workplaces. It is therefore essential that legislation and regulations provide adequate protection for contract and non-contract workers; that mine sites be inspected frequently; and that due care be exercised to ensure that safe work practices are being followed.

The panel is satisfied that the proponents have adequately assessed worker radiological risks and have planned appropriate monitoring and mitigation measures to control source releases. However, the proponent is reminded of the importance of the ALARA concept, and Cameco is urged to observe ALARA in all activities and phases of the project as scrupulously as its legislated and regulated standards. In addition, it is recommended that both federal and provincial governments move expeditiously to adopt the intent of ICRP-60 and ICRP-65.

Jurisdictional overlap and ambiguities between the federal and provincial governments have the potential to decrease the level of worker protection as well as introducing certain inefficiencies into the system. Because the province plays the pre-eminent role in performing workplace inspections and monitoring, it is recommended that Saskatchewan be given the legislated authority and responsibility for conventional health and safety at uranium mines. For radiological health protection, it is recommended that a formal arrangement be established between the AECB and the provincial regulators to share information and site-inspection observations, with the objectives of strengthening worker protection and reducing duplication.

It is also recommended that Saskatchewan Labour expeditiously complete reviews and revisions of The Health and Safety Regulations and the Mines Regulations, to ensure that they reflect current mining procedures and the use of modern technologies.

⁵⁴ Government of Saskatchewan, Opening Presentation to the McArthur River Public Hearings, Regina, Saskatchewan, September 5, 1996, pp. 19-21.

⁵⁵ Ibid, p. 19.

⁵⁶ R. McCabe, Transcript of Public Hearings, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, September 9, 1996, p. 31.

⁵⁷ Atomic Energy Control Board, Radiological Assessment of the Mining Methods at the McArthur River Project, Submission to the McArthur River Public Hearings, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, September 11, 1996, p. 4.

⁵⁸ Atomic Energy Control Board, Submission to the McArthur River Public Public Hearings, Regina, Saskatchewan, September 6, 1996, p.5.

⁵⁹ Government of Saskatchewan, Opening presentation to the Cigar Lake Pubic Hearings, Regina, Saskatchewan, September 4, 1996, p. 33.

⁶⁰ J. Parr, Transcript of Public Hearings, Regina, Saskatchewan, September 5, 1996, p. 05.