Legal Aspects Of Site Assessment And Operational Audits

Most mining companies today perform site assessments and operational or compliance audits regularly. The purpose of these audits is to review company facilities and operations to determine whether they comply with applicable federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations. Why Audit? Companies adopt assessment and audit programs for legal and business reasons. The business reasons include: (1) ensuring efficient and cost-effective compliance through early problem identification and resolution; (2) planning and implementing business transactions such as real estate conveyances, loans, mergers and acquisitions, and waste disposal service contracts; and (3) employee training and relations. Legal reasons for audits include: (1) avoiding enforcement actions and penalties; (2) meeting environmental permit certification requirements; (3) avoiding corporate officer liability; and (4) meeting Security and Exchange Commission disclosure requirements. The Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") encourages environmental auditing by regulated entities. The EPA Environmental Auditing Policy Statement was published in the Federal Register on July 9, 1986 (51 Fed Reg 25,004). Although the existence of an auditing program does not create a defense to or otherwise limit a company's regulatory responsibilities, EPA considers compliance programs in setting inspection and enforcement priorities. If a company makes an honest effort to identify and correct its own problems, EPA's enforcement approach is influenced, especially if violations are promptly reported. Perhaps more significant to many executives, the U.S. Department of Justice issued guidelines last year on when it will pursue criminal prosecution for environmental violations. See Department of Justice, "Factors and Decisions on Criminal Prosecutions for Environmental Violations in the Context of Significant Voluntary Compliance or Disclosure Efforts by the Violator," (July 1, 1991). It is now commonplace to read about major companies pleading guilty to criminal violations and paying millions of dollars in penalties. For example ALCOA recently agreed to pay criminal fines and civil penalties totaling $7.5 million for unauthorized excavation of PCB-contaminated soil and improper dumping of spent caustic solution. No executive wants to explain to the Board of Directors or shareholders why the company was criminally indicted. The Department of Justice considers factors such as voluntary disclosure, preventive measures and compliance programs, such as a regular compliance auditing program, the effectiveness of the disciplinary system for employees who violate the company's environmental policies, and subsequent compliance efforts by companies to remedy ongoing noncompliance. The Department of Justice looks closely at whether audit recommendations were implemented in a timely way and whether environmental compliance was a standard by which employees were judged. The Lawyer's Role. The role of the lawyer in an audit team deserves special attention. When enforcement action or litigation has begun or is contemplated or a government agency has asked for information, attorneys always should be directly involved in environmental audits. In most situations, however, environmental audits are management tools, and the attorney's role should be to advise the team. The attorney can help make sure the team understands the laws and regulations the facility must