ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS (EN)
Management Approach

We recognize that mining is a temporary use of land which impacts the surrounding environment. As such, our vision of Zero Harm encompasses a commitment to protect the environment. Before commencing any new mining development, we carry out an environmental and social impact assessment to ensure that the site and region are characterized and understood, and the impact of any future mining activities is minimized. Each of our operations has an Environmental Management System (EMS) in place to ensure regulations and best practices are met on an ongoing basis.

IAMGOLD discloses environmental aspects through the Towards Sustainable Mining (TSM) and Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) programs. Both programs provide an annual assessment of how IAMGOLD is doing on environmental issues as a company. We annually complete the CDP Climate Change questionnaire and the TSM Protocol on Energy Use and GHG Emissions.

ASPECT: MATERIALS
Disclosure of Management Approach Many materials are required at different stages of the gold production process. We monitor materials deemed to be significant, which include the explosives, tires and energy used for mining and the reagents used for mineral processing. These materials are considered to be significant because they are critical inputs to the final product and have the potential to cause environmental impacts. An accidental spill can be hazardous to our employees and other stakeholders, and can also contaminate the environment if not responded to quickly and effectively.

We aim to prevent material spills. All of our sites have rigorous procedures in place for the safe transport, storage, handling and disposal of cyanide and other hazardous substances. Additionally, we have spill response procedures to respond appropriately and minimize any environmental impacts. Further, continuous improvement programs have been implemented to increase efficiency in the use of explosives and fuels.

The other materials used are not considered to be significant as they present less risk and are generally used in smaller quantities. As IAMGOLD is a producer of primary raw materials (gold), we do not produce a product that consists of raw materials or semi-manufactured goods. Additionally, packaging is non-material as our products are transported in bulk.
G4-EN1 Materials used by weight or volume DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Total weight or volume of non-renewable materials (listed below) used during the reporting period:
i. Cyanide Tonnes 4,994 6,496 323
ii. Acid Tonnes 2,630 747 1
iii. Flocculant Tonnes 187 270 12
iv. Caustic soda Tonnes 711 1,192 40
v. Lime Tonnes 11,570 12,724 4,649
vi. Explosives Tonnes 13,926 13,740 1,140
vii. Other Tonnes N/A N/A Sulfur dioxide: 567
Total weight or volume of any renewable materials used during the reporting period (specify type of renewable materials if any): Tonnes N/A Cyanide: 910 N/A
What is the total weight or volume of associated process materials used (i.e., materials that are needed for the manufacturing process but are not part of the final product, such as lubricants for manufacturing machinery)? Tonnes (or appropriate unit) Diesel fuel: 44,725 (55,906,906 @ 0.8kg/L)
Kluber fluid: 5.250 (5,413 L @ 0.97 kg/L)
Engine oil: 312 (354,275 L @ 0.88 kg/L)
Hydraulic oil: 617 (709,020 L @ 0.87 kg/L)
Transmission oil: 156 (179,574 L @ 0.87 kg/L)
Motor/drill oil: 45 (51,667 L @ 0.87 kg/L)
Grease: 21 (24,508 L @ 0.87 kg/L)
Grease: 1,153 kg
Oil: 1,611,697 L
N/A
What is the total weight or volume of semi-manufactured goods or parts used, including all forms of materials and components other than raw materials that are part of the final product? N/A – IAMGOLD is a producer of primary raw materials (gold) and therefore does not produce a product that consists of raw materials or semi-manufactured goods. N/A N/A N/A
What is the total weight or volume of materials used for packaging purposes? N/A – Packaging is not a material issue as our products are transported in bulk. N/A N/A N/A
ASPECT: ENERGY
Disclosure of Management Approach Energy use contributes to greenhouse gas (GHG) production and is also a significant operating cost. As per our Energy and Greenhouse Gases Policy, we recognize that efficient management of energy is required to achieve our business strategy and provide benefits to stakeholders. Further, effective energy management will directly contribute to operational cost improvements and control of environmental impacts. Our key energy management objectives are to continuously improve our energy performance, and support the introduction of clean and renewable energy.
G4-EN3 Energy consumption within the organization DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood 2015 Exploration
Total fuel consumption from non-renewable sources (listed below) during the reporting period:
i. Diesel GJ (or appropriate unit) 2,031,923 1,333,238 97,487 Brazil: 7,220 L
Burkina Faso: 135,000 L
Mali: 12,803 GJ
Peru: 3,059 gallons
Quebec: $100,000
Senegal: 6,962 GJ
Suriname: $54,302 US
ii. Gasoline GJ (or appropriate unit) 1,204 804 2,756 Brazil: 2,289 L
Colombia: $12,800
Peru: 1,099 gallons
Quebec: $21,600
Suriname: $3,609 US
iii. Propane GJ (or appropriate unit) 5,263 Colombia: $1,950
iv. Natural gas GJ (or appropriate unit) 98,274 Colombia: $60
Quebec: $1,150
v. Fuel oil GJ (or appropriate unit) 2,579,388 Suriname: $5,585 US
vi. Acetylene GJ 155 162 68
vii. Kerosene GJ 5,751
viii. Other GJ
ix. Total GJ (or appropriate unit) 2,038,545 3,919,343 198,585 Brazil: 9,609 L
Burkina Faso: 135,000 L
Colombia: $14,810
Mali: 12,803 GJ
Peru: 4,158 gallons
Quebec: $122,750
Total fuel consumption from renewable sources (listed below) during the reporting period:
i. Solar GJ 25,885 N/A N/A
What is the total electricity consumption? GJ 850,689 3,672 489,240 Brazil: 62,014 kWh
Burkina Faso: 51,470 kWh
Mali: 147 GJ
Peru: 48,636 KW
Quebec: $1,200
Senegal: 6,992 GJ
Suriname: 113,880 kWh
Was any of the electricity generated sold? Yes/No No No No Brazil: No
Burkina Faso: No
Mali: No
Peru: No
Quebec: No
Senegal: No
Suriname: No
What is the total energy consumption? GJ 2,889,234 3,923,015 687,825 Colombia: $2,465
Mali: 12,950 GJ
Quebec: $123,950
Senegal: 6,962 GJ
G4-EN6 Reduction of energy consumption DETAILS +
2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane

The following energy-related initiatives have been designed and engineered, and the project cost feasibilities were done in 2015: automatic water flow controls for high and low pressure gland water systems; continuing cleaning and replacement of process water piping that was severely obstructed by calcium and iron build-up; commissioning of the PowerFlex drive for the SAG mill motor, which will power the motor more efficiently than the obsolete LCI drive; revised sump pumping system in the mill basement to eliminate unnecessary rehandling of water; CIL Variable Speed Drive project using premium efficiency motors/stocked; installing LED lighting in Paramaribo office and at Rosebel; construction of remote fuel farms (approximately $6 million US saved); and commissioning of the solar power plant (7,190,280 kWh generated).

The reduction of energy consumption (quantity of HFO/kWh) at the power plant helped to save 968,746 litres of HFO in 2015 compared to 2014 for a similar production level.
ASPECT: WATER
Disclosure of Management Approach Water is a key resource for both the gold extraction process and our host communities. As a result, we have to be responsible water stewards in our operations.

As per our Water Management Standard, we recognize the importance of environmentally sustainable and socially equitable water use. We are dedicated to employing efficient water management and water conservation practices to ensure access to clean water for all users, now and in the future. Water management strategies will address all aspects of the operation, including closure planning, reclamation, tailings management, discharge water quality, potable water and groundwater quality.

Water Management Standard
G4-EN8 Total water withdrawal by source DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Total volume of water withdrawn from the following sources:
i. Surface water m3 6,833,688 277,648
ii. Groundwater m3 198,019 636,005 544,753
iii. Rain water m3
iv. Waste water from another organization m3
v. Municipal water supplies and other water utilities m3
vi. Other water utilities m3 6,064,597
vii. Total water withdrawn (sum of i. to vi.) m3 198,019 13,534,290 822,401
Standards, methodologies and assumptions used Description Calculations are based on groundwater well readings. Water is measured using readings from the flow meter on pipes, water level above spillway, and rain gauges. Flow meter
G4-EN10 Percentage and total volume of water recycled and reused DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Total volume of water recycled/reused by the organization m3 8,900,000 6,064,597 383,065
Total volume of water recycled/reused as a percentage of the total water withdrawal reported under indicator EN8 % 4,494.52% 44.81% 46.58%
Report standards, methodologies and assumptions used Description

Calculations are based on tailings pond summary calculations.

Note: The total water recycled is higher than the total water withdrawn because Rosebel retains a certain amount of water in the system on an ongoing basis to maintain production and drive the mill.

Tailings thickening plants are used. Flow meter
ASPECT: BIODIVERSITY
Disclosure of Management Approach IAMGOLD recognizes that protecting biodiversity and sustaining healthy ecosystems are fundamental for the responsible environmental management of our mining projects. Our Sustainability Policy and Biodiversity Policy state that we are committed to integrating biodiversity management and conservation at all stages of our activities, from exploration to mine closure, using the resources and skills necessary to minimize impacts on biodiversity from our activities while ensuring the restoration of disrupted ecosystem functions.

Impacts to aquatic and terrestrial species and measures to avoid or reduce impacts are considered early in the project planning process. Recent environmental assessment reports, such as the EA report for the Côté Gold Project, are available on our website for review.

Sustainability Policy
Biodiversity Policy
G4-EN11 Operational sites owned, leased or managed in, or adjacent to, protected areas and areas of high biodiversity value outside protected areas DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Is the site owned, leased or managed in, or adjacent to, any protected areas or areas of high biodiversity value outside protected areas? Y/N Yes Yes No
If yes, provide the following information:
i. Geographic location Description Brokopondo District Northeastern Burkina Faso N/A
ii. Subsurface and underground land that may be owned, leased or managed by the organization Description 170 km2 100 km2 N/A
iii. Position in relation to the protected area (in the area, adjacent to, or containing portions of the protected area) or the high biodiversity value area outside protected areas Description The Brinckheuvel Nature Reserve is located 3 km west of the concession, across the Mindrineti River on the west bank. The Brownsberg Nature Reserve is located approximately 10 to 15 km southeast of the concession area. The mining concession is located inside the 1,600,000-hectare Sahel Partial Faunal Reserve. Mining is permitted in this area. It is a designated zone primarily because of temporary lakes (Mare d’Oursi, Mare de Yomboli, Mare de Kissi) which are of importance for migratory birds. The Mare d’Oursi Wetlands are located 67 km from site. N/A
iv. Type of operation (office, manufacturing or production, or extractive) Description Extractive Extractive N/A
v. Size of operational site in km2 (total disturbance) km2 32.2 16.6 N/A
vi. Biodiversity value characterized by:
– The attribute of the protected area or high biodiversity value area outside the protected area (terrestrial, freshwater or maritime ecosystem)
Description The ecosystem found on and near the Rosebel Gold Mine (RGM) is part of the savannahs of Suriname and Guyana, which are a widespread ecosystem in the region. Globally, this is a relatively unique ecosystem and one of high biodiversity. A wildlife survey was started in 2011 and continued in the first quarter of 2012. The next Wildlife Survey was conducted in 2014, and another is planned for 2017. Wildlife survey data confirmed that Rosebel areas have a richer mammal fauna as compared to nearby nature reserves. The preliminary report emphasized that the RGM area harbours good populations of several species that are internationally considered as vulnerable or near threatened. With the process of desertification and human activities (e.g., gold mining) that affect the Sahel, several species of trees, shrubs and grasses are declining in the region. Forests, steppes and bushes located along the Gorouol and Feildegasse rivers are an important habitat for migrating mammals and reptiles. N/A
vii. Biodiversity value characterized by:
– Listing of protected status (such as IUCN Protected Area Management Categories (67), Ramsar Convention (78), national legislation)
Description

IUCN Red List species on or around the site: Vulnerable: Giant Anteater (Myrmecophaga tridactyla), Lowland Tapir (Tapirus terrestris), White-lipped Peccary (Tayassu pecari), Yellow-footed Tortoise (Geochelone denticulata).

Near Threatened: Bush Dog (Speothos venaticus), Margay (Leopardus wiedii), Jaguar (Panthera onca). A total of 117 bird species were recorded in 2014. All the observed bird species are of “Least Concern” status according to the IUCN Red List.

IUCN Red List species on or around the site: [VU] White-headed Vulture (Trigonoceps occipitalis); [NT] Rüppell’s Vulture (Gyps rueppellii); [NT] Bateleur (Terathopius ecaudatus) N/A
G4-EN13 Habitats protected or restored DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Size and location of habitat protected areas or restored areas km2 and location N/A La Mare d’Oursi, a 450 km2 Ramsar site and designated ornithological sanctuary, is 67 km from the Essakane site. N/A
Total land rehabilitated (including previous years) Hectares/km2 Up to 2014, a total area of 64.9 hectares was re-vegetated. In 2015, no reclamation activities occurred. 2.94 (includes village forests and a school grove) N/A
a. Was or is the success of restorative measures approved by independent external professionals? Yes/No No Yes N/A
b. Do partnerships exist with third parties to protect or restore habitat areas distinct from where the organization has overseen and implemented restoration or protection measures? Yes/No No Yes N/A
c. What is the status of each area based on its condition at the close of the reporting period? Description N/A Active N/A
d. Report standards, methodologies and assumptions used. Description Hydroseeding and hand planting Inventory and success rate tracked by species and location N/A
G4-EN14 Total number of IUCN Red List species and national conservation list species with habitats in areas affected by operations, by level of extinction risk DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Critically endangered (CR) Number
Endangered (EN) Number
Vulnerable (VU) Number 4 1
Near threatened (NT) Number 3 2
Least concern (LC) Number 131
MM1 Amount of land (owned or leased, and managed for production activities or extractive use) disturbed or rehabilitated DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Total land disturbed and not yet rehabilitated (in hectares) Hectares 3,292 1,661 935
Total amount of land newly disturbed within the reporting period Hectares 385 187
Total amount of land newly rehabilitated within the reporting period to the agreed end use Hectares
Total land disturbed and not yet rehabilitated Hectares 3,677 1,848 935
MM2 The number and percentage of total sites identified as requiring biodiversity management plans according to stated criteria, and the number (percentage) of those sites with plans in place DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Has a biodiversity management plan been put in place? Yes/No Yes Yes

At the Essakane site, IAMGOLD uses the landscape function analysis (LFA) tool. The tool addresses how the landscape works as a system, and looks to place a given site on a continuum between highly functional and highly dysfunctional. LFA also determines how well ecological diversity is represented in protected areas and proposed protected areas.

LFA is a monitoring procedure using simple indicators, which can be applied to a wide variety of landscape types and land uses. The depth of knowledge that such a tool adds to the understanding of how ecosystems function is profound and can have a significant impact on planning, construction, operations and rehabilitation efforts.

Yes
Percentage of total sites with plans in place % 100% of our operational sites have biodiversity management plans in place, as required through our company-wide Biodiversity Strategy.
ASPECT: EMISSIONS
Disclosure of Management Approach We recognize that efficient management of energy is required to achieve our business strategy and provide benefits to our stakeholders. Further, effective energy management will directly contribute to operational cost improvements and control of environmental impacts by reducing the overall amount of greenhouse gases produced.

Consistent with our Energy and Greenhouse Gases Policy, one of our key management objectives is to reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases and resulting impacts on the environment. Projects within Canada are typically subject to provincial air quality guidelines and approvals which seek to protect local receivers that surround the project.
G4-EN15 Direct greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Scope 1) DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood 2015 Corporate
a. Total direct emissions of greenhouse gases (in metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent) from: Tonnes of CO2e 159,645 308,306 13,378 Toronto: –
Longueuil: –
Waste Tonnes of CO2e 1,222 362 452 N/A
Energy – Power plant Tonnes of CO2e N/A 201,729 N/A
Energy – Treatment plant Tonnes of CO2e 3,091 4,760 362 N/A
Energy – Extraction Tonnes of CO2e 149,186 81,224 12,381 N/A
Energy – Support activities Tonnes of CO2e 314 4,777 N/A
Company-owned vehicles – Operations Tonnes of CO2e 5,833 15,453 183 N/A
b. Gases included in the calculation (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6, NF3, or all) List CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, R404A, R407C, R410A CO2, CH4, N2O N/A
c. Indicate chosen base year, rationale for choosing the base year, emissions in the base year, and the context for any significant changes in emissions that triggered recalculations of base year emissions. Year, rationale, tonnes of CO2e In 2013, we began using Ecometrica software. N/A
d. Standards, methodologies and assumptions used Description Ecometrica N/A
e. Report the source of the emission factors used and the global warming potential (GWP) rates used or a reference to the GWP source. Description CO2: 1
CH4: 25
N2O: 298
HFC-134a: 1,430
HFC-404a: 3,922
HFC-407c: 1,774
HFC-410a: 2,088

IPCC (2007). IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

The GWP values listed are over 100 years.
N/A
f. Report the chosen consolidation approach for emissions (equity share, financial control, operational control). Description Operational control Operational control Operational control Operational control
G4-EN16 Energy indirect greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (Scope 2) DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood 2015 Corporate
a. Indirect emissions of greenhouse gases (in metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent) from the generation of the electricity, heating, cooling and steam which was purchased from other organizations Tonnes of CO2e Toronto: 50
Longueuil: 2
b. Gases included in the calculation (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6, NF3, or all) List N/A N/A N/A CO2, CH4, N2O
c. Indicate chosen base year, rationale for choosing the base year, emissions in the base year, and the context for any significant changes in emissions that triggered recalculations of base year emissions. Year, rationale, tonnes of CO2e In 2013, we began using Ecometrica software.
d. Standards, methodologies and assumptions used Description N/A N/A N/A Ecometrica
e. Report the source of the emission factors used and the global warming potential (GWP) rates used or a reference to the GWP source. Description N/A N/A N/A Hydro from provincial grid (Toronto Hydro, Hydro-Québec)
f. Report the chosen consolidation approach for emissions (equity share, financial control, operational control). Description Operational control Operational control Operational control Operational control
G4-EN18 Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
GHG intensity ratio See ii and iii below. See ii and iii below. See ii and iii below.
i. Total GHG emissions Tonnes of CO2e 161,142 319,542 13,388
ii. GHG intensity (mill) kg CO2e/tonne milled 0.251 17.6 8.61
iii. GHG intensity (mine) kg CO2e/tonne moved 2.16 1.52 1.96
Does the total include Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions? If not, explain. Yes/No with Description Does not include Scope 3. Does not include Scope 3. Does not include Scope 3.
Gases included in the calculation List CO2, CH4, N2O, HFC-134a Gases of cooling machines (R134A, R404A, R407C, R22, R410A) CO2, CH4, N2O
G4-EN19 Reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
a. Amount of GHG emissions reductions achieved as a direct result of initiatives to reduce emissions in metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent Tonnes of CO2e No quantifiable reduction in GHG emissions

We optimized our use of Wärtsilä Central, which allowed us to minimize the operation of the plant SDMO, thus reducing the number of operating engines.

Studies are underway for the installation of a solar power plant with photovoltaic technology with a capacity of 14.3 MW.

General education of department heads was conducted. No quantifiable reduction in GHG emissions.
b. Report gases included in the calculation (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, SF6, NF3, or all). List N/A CO2, HFCs N/A
c. Report the chosen base year or baseline and the rationale for choosing it. Base year, rationale In 2013, we began using Ecometrica.
d. Report standards, methodologies and assumptions used. Description Ecometrica
e. Report whether the reductions in GHG emissions occurred in direct (Scope 1), energy indirect (Scope 2), or other indirect (Scope 3) emissions. Description N/A Direct:
The reduction of specific consumption (quantity of HFO/kWh) at the power plant helped to save 3,013 tonnes of CO2e in 2015 compared to 2014 for similar production.
N/A
ASPECT: EFFLUENTS AND WASTE
Disclosure of Management Approach Guided by our vision of Zero Harm, we closely monitor the waste and tailings produced as well as the quality of final effluent during mining operations and post-closure. A mining deposit is a finite resource and operations will ultimately come to an end. At closure, some components remain on the landscape, namely the tailings management facilities and mine rock piles. Reclamation efforts are guided towards a suitable end land use as per agreed-upon closure criteria.

As per our tailings management standard, we locate, design, construct, operate and close tailings facilities in compliance with the Mining Association of Canada’s environmental policy, and with our commitment to stakeholders in mind. We ensure that all structures are stable, and all solids and water are managed within their designated areas.
G4-EN22 Total water discharge by quality and destination DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
a. Total volume of planned and unplanned water discharges in m3 per year. Also indicate the following details: m3/year 1,999,690 Zero discharge site 3,432,067
i. Destination of water discharges Description Mindrineti River The domestic waste water is discharged into a field to be evaporated where trees are planted. The industrial waste water from the mill is recycled in the mill or sent to the tailings storage facility. As Essakane is a zero discharge site, no industrial water is discharged to the environment. Industrial waste water from the garage is discharged in the contaminated materials pond. Water in the pit is accumulated in a temporary pond and is used as process water. Bousquet River
ii. Treatment method for water discharge Description Effluent treatment plant

Domestic waste water: Four sewage plants for waste water treatment by activated sludge are in operation.

Waste water from the garage: We use an oil–water separator and have an anti-pollution pond for water storage. The water from the contaminated materials pond is reused in the plant.

Lime treatment
iii. Was the water discharge reused by another organization? Yes/No with Description No No No
Report standards, methodologies and assumptions used. Description IFC limits for the discharge of process waste water to surface water (WB, IFC Guidelines 2007) and end-of-pipe target discharge objectives set by RGM for ammonia and total cyanide

Tailings thickening plants

Sewage plant of waste water treated by activated sludge

Flow meter
G4-EN23 Total weight of waste by type and disposal method DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Total amount of hazardous waste (as defined by national legislation at the point of generation) kg or tonnes (or appropriate unit) Hazardous waste: Empty chemical bags + pallets (lime, caustic, carbon, ammonium nitrate, flocculant, microspheres) + empty boxes (cyanide) = 443 tonnes
Waste oil: 922,500 L
Scrap batteries: 28 tonnes (1,013 pieces)
Medical waste: 93 kg
Waste oil: 531 m3
HFO sludge: 630 m3
Medical waste: 0.46 tonnes
Contaminated waste: 21 tonnes
192 tonnes
Total amount of non-hazardous waste (all other forms of solid or liquid waste excluding waste water) kg or tonnes Non-hazardous waste (kitchen, food, camp and office waste, scrap wood): 1,209 tonnes 1,151 tonnes 1,493 tonnes
i. Reuse a. kg or tonnes

b. How disposal method was determined
a. 1,104 tonnes

b. Waste disposal contractor
ii. Recycling a. kg or tonnes

b. How disposal method was determined
a. Drums (steel + plastic): 8 tonnes (498 pieces)
Waste oil: 922,500 L
Scrap steel: 1,179 tonnes
Equipment batteries: 27 tonnes (1,013 pieces)
PET bottles: 25 tonnes (843,100 bottles)

b. Organizational defaults of the waste disposal contractor
a. 316,855 kg

b. Disposed directly by a waste disposal contractor
a. 42.5 tonnes

b. Waste disposal contractor
iii. Composting a. kg or tonnes

b. How disposal method was determined
Seeking data for 2016 report Seeking data for 2016 report
iv. Recovery, including energy recovery a. kg or tonnes

b. How disposal method was determined
Seeking data for 2016 report Seeking data for 2016 report
v. Incineration (mass burn) a. kg or tonnes

b. How disposal method was determined
Seeking data for 2016 report a. Biomedical waste: 463 kg
Packaging explosive: 1,638 kg

b. Disposed directly by IAMGOLD
Seeking data for 2016 report
vi. Deep well injection a. kg or tonnes

b. How disposal method was determined
Seeking data for 2016 report Seeking data for 2016 report
vii. Landfill a. kg or tonnes

b. How disposal method was determined
Seeking data for 2016 report a. 361 tonnes

b. Buried in the dumps in waste rock
Seeking data for 2016 report
viii. On-site storage a. kg or tonnes

b. How disposal method was determined
Seeking data for 2016 report Seeking data for 2016 report
MM3 Total amounts of overburden, rock, tailings, and sludges and their associated risks DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Total amount of overburden (waste rock) generated during the year Tonnes 49,432,312 35,689,701 660,471
Describe the risks associated with overburden. Description There is no acid rock drainage issue. Procedures are in place for the tailings storage facility and waste rock dumps. Due to the implementation of mitigation measures, the risks have decreased to acceptable levels (not significant). No acid rock drainage issue, sedimentation and erosion, metal leaching in waste rock

The Doyon tailings facilities and waste rock piles are acid generating. IAMGOLD manages this challenge by minimizing the possibility of sulphide oxidation by the use of water covers for the tailings facilities, and appropriate environmental protection systems have been developed.

At our Westwood Project in Quebec in 2012, we received regulatory approval to use the former Doyon open pit to dispose of Westwood waste rock and tailings, rather than building a new tailings facility. The pit acts like a hydraulic trap. This reduces the risk significantly with no tailings facility and waste rock dumps.

Total amount of tailings (including sludges) generated during the year Tonnes 12,290,725 11,716,000 354,829
Describe the risks associated with tailings. Description There is no acid rock drainage issue. Procedures are in place for the tailings storage facility and waste rock dumps. Due to the implementation of mitigation measures, the risks have decreased to acceptable levels (not significant). Pollution of the soil or water (surface and ground), erosion, dam failure, fauna cyanide intoxication (e.g., poisoning of birds through ingestion of or contact with tailings water)

The Doyon tailings facilities and waste rock piles are acid generating. IAMGOLD manages this challenge by minimizing the possibility of sulphide oxidation by the use of water covers for the tailings facilities, and appropriate environmental protection systems have been developed.

At our Westwood Project in Quebec in 2012, we received regulatory approval to use the former Doyon open pit to dispose of Westwood waste rock and tailings, rather than building a new tailings facility. The pit acts like a hydraulic trap. This reduces the risk significantly with no tailings facility and waste rock dumps.

G4-EN24 Total number and volume of significant spills DETAILS +
Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Number and m3
ASPECT: COMPLIANCE
Disclosure of Management Approach This is a general indicator of environmental performance and commitment. Fines mean we’ve failed and must learn from our mistakes.

As per our Sustainability Policy, we are committed to establishing site operating standards that meet or exceed relevant laws and regulations, IAMGOLD’s environmental and social impact statements, environmental and social management and closure plans, and international protocols of which IAMGOLD is a signatory.

As IAMGOLD maintains a strong track record of compliance across all its operations, there is little data to evaluate at this time. IAMGOLD will be reviewing this indicator in the coming year to assess its applicability to our operations and performance.

Sustainability Policy
G4-EN29 Monetary value of significant fines and total number of non-monetary sanctions for non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Were there non-compliance events? If yes, describe the events. Description No Yes, quality of domestic waste water does not comply with standards for discharge in surface water for the following: fecal coliforms, fecal streptococci, BOD5, COD.

NOx emissions at the power plant exceed the Burkina Faso discharge standard (330 ppm).
No
What was the total monetary value of significant fines? USD
What was the number of non-monetary sanctions? Number
Were there cases brought through dispute resolution mechanisms? If yes, describe. Yes/No with Description No No No
ASPECT: OVERALL
Disclosure of Management Approach We are committed to avoiding and/or minimizing, to an extent that is technically feasible and fiscally reasonable, any negative impacts from our mining activities.

As per our Sustainability Policy, we are committed to developing appropriately funded reclamation plans and progressive reclamation strategies for all operations from exploration through to closure.
G4-EN31 Total environmental protection expenditures and investments by type DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
Provide the total expenditures for the following:
i. Waste disposal (tailings) USD $6,706,111 (includes costs for tailings pumping upgrade, tailings pond sustaining, Tailings Pond Expansion Project, tailings dam common wall, TSF consulting fees) $1,490,000 $990,000
ii. Emissions treatment (filters, agents, oxidizers, flaring equipment, etc.) USD
iii. Depreciation of related equipment USD $53,790
iv. Maintenance, operating materials and services, and related personnel costs USD $9,067 $770,190 $1,000,000
v. Personnel employed for education and training USD $37,040 Included above
vi. External services for environmental management and external certification of management systems USD $74,037 ($7,095 for legal audit, $21,430 for aquatic survey, $7,202 for SGS Surveillance Audit Dec, $38,310 for Golder ICMI gap analysis audit) $17,327 $10,000
vii. Personnel for general environmental management activities USD $235,316 (salary for monthly and hourly personnel) $482,133 $440,000
viii. Research and development USD $110,000
ix. Extra expenditures to install cleaner technologies (e.g., additional cost beyond standard technologies) USD $183,493 (amount of premium efficiency motors used) $450,000 (Mintek, optimization of cyanide consumption)
x. Other environmental management costs USD $127,004 (environmental monitoring)
$22,687 (waste management)
$450,000
Grand total expenditures USD $7,425,858 $3,209,650 $3,000,000
ASPECT: ENVIRONMENTAL GRIEVANCE MECHANISMS
Disclosure of Management Approach It is essential to address concerns in an accessible and timely manner in order to continuously improve. As stated in our Sustainability Policy, we are committed to practising good corporate governance, transparency, fair dealing and reporting annually on our performance. This commitment is complemented by our tailings management standard, which states that consultations with communities of interest are organized to take into account their concerns relating to tailings facility management.
G4-EN34 Number of grievances about environmental impacts filed, addressed and resolved through formal grievance mechanisms DETAILS +
Disclosure Required Unit 2015 Rosebel 2015 Essakane 2015 Westwood
a. Total number of grievances about environmental impacts filed through formal grievance mechanisms during the reporting period Number
b. Of the total number of identified grievances, how many were addressed during the reporting period? Number N/A N/A N/A
b. Of the total number of identified grievances, how many were resolved during the reporting period? Number N/A N/A N/A
c. Total number of grievances that were filed prior to the reporting period that were resolved during the reporting period Number N/A N/A N/A