Barrick permit objectives changed temporarily while environmental appeal waits

An agreement between Barrick Gold Inc. and British Columbia’s environmental regulator has produced a temporary change to the company’s effluent permit, with the revised terms applying to enforcement as well as notification obligations.

The Environmental Appeal Board’s October 20, 2026 consent order in Barrick Gold Inc. v. Director, Environmental Management Act, 2026 BCEAB 45, puts the permit appeal on hold while giving a revised appendix legal effect. It does not finally decide Barrick’s challenge to the concentrations previously specified by the director.

Six concentrations revised

The dispute concerns Permit 7613 for effluent from a gold mine and mill operation at Nickel Plate Mountain. The permit authorizes discharge to a tailings storage facility and to the environment. That description of the authorization does not establish the operation’s current activity or compliance.

On January 19, 2026, the director added an appendix setting site performance objectives at two monitoring stations: CAHILL-2 at Cahill Creek and REDTOP at Redtop Gulch. Barrick appealed a month later, on February 18, primarily disputing the specific values in that appendix.

The consent order incorporates a replacement table containing 14 concentration entries. Six are marked as changed: cyanide, selenium and sulphate at CAHILL-2, and cobalt, nitrate and selenium at REDTOP. The order does not reproduce the earlier concentrations, so it does not provide a basis for describing those changes as increases or reductions.

The revised objectives form part of the permit for the duration of the order and apply for all regulatory purposes, expressly including enforcement and notification. They are therefore more than proposals awaiting a final decision on the appeal.

Consultation and an interim arrangement

The order records that the director needs time to take the necessary steps to consider the revised appendix, including First Nations consultations. It does not say those consultations have been completed or that First Nations have agreed to the changes.

The arrangement has no fixed expiry date. It ends when the director amends the permit to revise the appendix or when Barrick discontinues the appeal, whichever happens first. The appeal remains in abeyance for the same period under the terms of the order.

If the director makes that permit amendment, the board must be notified within three business days. The order does not establish whether either event ending the arrangement has subsequently occurred.

Source: Barrick Gold Inc. v. Director, Environmental Management Act, 2026 BCEAB 45, consent order dated October 20, 2026.