PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND PRACTICES - COLUMN 178 Continued from p. 37


cussed the reuse of former mining prop- erties, that his firm was involved with converting former water-filled quarries into solar farms by covering the pond surface with solar panel arrays. Figure 1 on page 35 is one of the pictures from my presentation. It shows a series of former sand and gravel quarries located along


“


soils, sinkholes, and seawater intrusion. Mitigation of these challenges through the use of proper and enforced impact analysis, zoning, land-use restrictions, and sound architectural and engineering codes and designs based on adequate mapping, sampling, testing, risk assess- ments, probability analyses is needed. Such measures all fall within the pro- tection of the public’s health, safety,


securities authorities are not thrilled by this fact, but it happens. I recommended that the report clearly state whether or not the report was to be filed in Canada. I also pointed out the importance of a site visit in current internationally accepted standards for reporting on estimated mineral resources and mineral reserves. If a site visit was not to be part of the project, it should probably be declined.


I withdrew from the project this morning due to familiarity w/ fluorite, no site visit & lack of transparency. ... Hated to lose the $$, but my ethics got in the way.”


the South Platte River in the northeast Denver metro area that have been con- verted to water storage ponds. These and similar quarry ponds are providing water storage for those parts of the metro Denver area whose water supply was previously and exclusively dependent on rapidly depleting aquifers.


One of the problems with these stor- age ponds is their relatively shallow depth and resulting evapotranspiration water losses. Pirkle’s suggestion that these ponds be covered with solar pan- els solves several problems. The first is the evapotranspiration loss is reduced. The second is that the solar panels can be easily oriented to take advantage of day-long sunlight, something that a significant number of building roofs are not able to do. Third, one of the problems with solar panel farms is that they commonly occupy land that could be used for agriculture or housing develop- ment. Also, solar farms have negative environmental impacts on the ground underneath them. What can grow there? What animal life can be sustained? Quarry ponds covered with solar panels do not have these problems. Such use of former quarries should be encouraged.


Geohazards in Haiti and their potential solutions present ethical questions


Barney Popkin’s article, “Haiti’s rock and soil engineering challenges and potential solutions,” in this issue of the TPG presents some interesting ethical questions. As Popkin points out, 90% of Haiti’s very poor population lives and works within high risk geohazard areas stemming from high winds and humid- ity, hurricanes, floods and droughts, active faults and earthquakes, steep slopes, deforestation, inappropriate farming, mountain erosion and hill- side creep, liquefaction, landslides and debris flows, expansive and swelling


www.aipg.org


and welfare, our fundamental ethical principle. However, proper delineation and mitigation of these geohazards costs a lot of money, which neither the people nor the government of Haiti have. What are the ethically appropriate ways of addressing these issues given the lack of money? Obtaining public support is needed for successful implementation of the various recommended mitigation strategies. Obtaining such public sup- port is a social licensing exercise like that currently required for new mining and other projects. Please contribute your thoughts and suggestions.


Ethics question about potential project


A CPG who is a mining geologist asked me about a potential ethical issues with a possible project he was considering accepting. He had been asked to prepare an NI 43-101 report on a fluorspar prop- erty in SW Mongolia on which 17 holes had been drilled. Most of the exploration records are old stuff in Russian that is barely legible due to repeated photo- copying. The CPG noted that he has no Mongolian or fluorite expertise. He could only comment on a “decently written” report completed by another geologist. He also noted the NI 43-101 applies only to companies registered or planning to register on a Canadian exchange and that one of the NI 43-101 requirements was a site visit by the Qualified Person and that the CPG was not able to conduct a site visit. The potential client said they would contract with a local consultant to do the ground truthing. The CPG was uncomfortable with various aspects of the proposed project and contacted me.


I pointed out that while NI 43-101 only applies to Canadian registered mining companies, many firms are asking for NI 43-101-format reports because it is a rec- ognized reporting standard. Canadian


A competently prepared NI 43-101- style report begins with a discussion of the way in which the mineral rights to the property in question are obtained and maintained. Knowledge of the Mongolian regulations of mineral rights would be a requirement for a report on this property. While a reliable third-par- ty report on this subject could be used for this part of the report, the new SEC Reg. S-K 1300 rules specify that such third- party reports must be provided by the registrant if the Competent/Qualified Person wishes to avoid legal liability for the contents of the third-party report. Lack of knowledge about Mongolian regulations can be another reason for declining the proposed project.


Lack of familiarity with fluorite depos- its is another important point. Fluorite is an industrial mineral with a variety of uses including as a metallurgical flux and as a source of fluorine. Details about the chemical and physical properties of the fluorite on the property will be important information for the estima- tion of possible fluorite resources on the property. Competent evaluation of the deposit would require knowledge about the market for and price of fluorite in Mongolia. Absence of such information would preclude an estimate of fluorite resources. However, a report on a prop- erty can be done using the known infor- mation and pointing out the additional information that is needed in order to make a resource estimate.


The CPG withdrew from the proposed assignment due the issues addressed above and other considerations. The CPG’s concluding e-mail to me stated, “I withdrew from the project this morning due to familiarity w/ fluorite, no site visit & lack of transparency. They failed to respond re Canadian connection, if any. They were paying up front, sight unseen. Not happy about that either. Hated to lose the $$, but my ethics got in the way.”


Jul.Aug.Sep 2021 • TPG 39


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64