GRI Indicators
Standard Disclosures
^GRI guidelines application level
^We self-declare this report to GRI application level B.
Strategy and Analysis
^Statement from senior decision maker
1.2Key impacts, risks and opportunities
Organizational profile
^Name
Cameco Corporation
2.2Primary products or services
You'll find detailed information about our operations and development projects and our products and services in our Annual information form, or you can read an overview in Our Operations section of this report
2.3Operating structure
You'll find detailed information about our operations and development projects and our products and services in our Annual information form, or you can read an overview in Our Operations section of this report
2.4Head office
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan (Canada)
2.5Locations
2.6Ownership
2.7Customers and markets
2.8Scale of operations
2.9Significant changes during the reporting period (size, structure or ownership)
2.10Awards during the reporting period
2011
Exceptional Engineering/Geoscience Award – Cigar Lake recovery (Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of Saskatchewan)
Supply chain excellence award – Aboriginal and northern integration (Purchasing Management Association of Canada)
2010-11
Gold-level recognition – Progressive Aboriginal Relations (Canadian Council for Aboriginal Business) – 2010
Top 10 Company to work for in Canada (The Financial Post)
Top Employer for Canadians over 40 (Canada's Top 100 Employers)
Top 100 Employer, Top Diversity Employer (The Globe and Mail)
Report parameters
^Reporting period
1 Jan 2010 – 31 Dec 2011
We have provided three years of trend information for all indicator data (2009-2011).
3.2Date of most recent report
October 2010
3.3Reporting cycle
Once every two years
3.4Contact
Questions or feedback can be sent to sustainabledevelopment@cameco.com
3.5Defining content (materiality, topics, stakeholders)
Materiality and stakeholder interests
3.6Boundary
3.7Limitations on scope or boundary
3.8Basis for reporting on joint ventures, subsidiaries, etc. that may affect comparability
We have not included information about the performance of associated companies or non-operated joint ventures in this report.
3.9Data measurement techniques and assumptions
Collecting and verifying our data
3.10Restatements from previous reports
There are no restatements of data in this reporting period.
3.11Significant changes in scope, boundary or measurement methods from previous reporting periods
We have begun reporting against 31 GRI indicators with this report. We are continuing to report on four corporate indicators.
In our last report (2010), we provided data on 23 corporate indicators.
3.12Standard disclosures
Approach: Economic
Cameco contributes to the sustainability of economic systems where we operate through direct and indirect employment, payments to governments, investments in infrastructure, local procurement and capacity building. Our operations have a significant, positive economic impact. You can read more about our financial performance in our Annual report.
Outstanding Financial Performance and Governance
Approach: Environmental
Cameco is committed to continually improving environmental performance and pursuing environmental leadership throughout the lifecycles of our operations.
Approach: Workplace
Cameco is committed to offering a safe, healthy and rewarding workplace that reflects the diversity of the communities where we operate. We are proud to be a top employer in Canada, overall and for diversity.
Safe, Healthy and Rewarding Workplace
Approach: Human rights
Cameco respects the human rights of employees, contractors and community members, including freedom of association and freedom from harassment and discrimination. We respect and accommodate the culture, heritage, values, beliefs and rights of Indigenous peoples.
Approach: Society
Cameco is committed to conducting business ethically and to building lasting, respectful relationships with communities by aligning community development needs with business objectives.
Approach: Product responsibility
Cameco is committed to ensuring that our uranium is used only for peaceful purposes. We make sure our products are handled, stored, and transported safely, in compliance with all regulations and laws that apply where we operate.
3.13External assurance
This report is not externally assured.
Governance, commitments and engagement
^Governance structure (including board committees)
4.2Board independence – Chair
4.3Board independence – Directors
4.4Shareholder resolutions
Shareholders can provide input to our board through formal resolutions at our annual meeting of shareholders and through advisory votes on specific issues, like say on pay.
4.5Performance based compensation
4.6Conflicts of interest
4.7Director qualifications (economic, environmental and social strategy and oversight)
The nominating, corporate governance and risk committee of our board is responsible for assessing the size and composition of our board, and recommending candidates based on their skills, experience, character, integrity, judgment, record of achievement, diversity and any other qualities or qualifications that would enhance the board's decision-making process and overall oversight of Cameco's business and affairs.
4.8Mission, values, codes of conduct and related principles
4.9Board oversight (economic, environmental and social performance)
You can read about board oversight in detail in our Management proxy circular or you can learn about our approach to managing our responsibilities in the Governance section of this report
4.10Board evaluations
4.11Precautionary principle
In order to prevent unreasonable risk Cameco is guided by the ALARA principle. In an environmental context this requires all operational aspects be managed to ensure the risk to the environment is kept as low as reasonably achievable. This principle forms part of our environmental policy and is implemented through our environmental management systems, which identifies significant environmental aspects and aids in setting environmental objectives and targets to continually improve our overall environmental performance.
4.12External principles and initiatives (economic, environmental and social)
Cameco is a member of the World Nuclear Association, and we comply with their Code of Ethics. We have reported to the Carbon Disclosure Project since 2007. We continue to evaluate other initiatives and principles that may add value to our business and advance our sustainable development program.
4.13Industry association and advocacy organization memberships
Relationships and Partnerships
4.14Stakeholders
4.15Stakeholder identification
Finding what's material for Cameco
4.16Stakeholder engagement
4.17Stakeholder concerns and organizational responses
Cameco encourages feedback on our business and programs everywhere we operate, through formal and informal means. We strive to respond to concerns and address feedback in a timely way.
Economic
^EC1 – Direct economic value
^Outstanding Financial Performance and Governance
This indicator provides information about Cameco's annual revenues, operating costs, employee wages and benefits, payments to shareholders, payments to governments, community investments, and economic value retained.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenues | 2,314,985 | 2,123,655 | 2,384,404 |
| Operating Costs | 937,411 | 1,024,461 | 1,216,268 |
| Employee Wages and Benefits | 590,000 | 599,731 | 654,293 |
| Payments to Providers of Capital | 144,648 | 173,084 | 207,936 |
| Payments to Government | 57,093 | 74,827 | 60,744 |
| Community Investments | 4,794 | 4,794 | 5,294 |
| Economic Value Retained | 581,039 | 246,758 | 239,869 |
2009 employee wages and benefits have been estimated (not tracked separately at that time).
All figures in Canadian dollars (1000s).
What it means
Revenues
Consolidated revenues increased 12% from 2010 to 2011 because of increased sales volumes.
Operating costs
Operating costs increased by 19% from 2010 to 2011 because of increased sales volumes.
Payments to shareholders (providers of capital)
Payments to shareholders increased 14% from 2010 to 2011 mainly due to higher dividend payments.
Payments to governments (taxes)
Tax payments decreased from 2010 to 2011 due to reduced earnings before taxes overall, and the difference in income between jurisdictions as compared to 2010.
Community investments
We donated approximately $4.8M to communities in both 2009 and 2010. In 2011, our community investments increased approximately 10% to $5.3M.
EC6 – Local spending
^This indicator shows the total dollar amount of services procured from local suppliers at Cameco's operating sites in northern Saskatchewan, Kazakhstan, and Ontario each year from 2009 to 2011.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| N. Saskatchewan | |||
| Total Services | $309,428,098 | $381,599,332 | $533,877,071 |
| Local Service Procurement | $219,373,260 | $296,268,979 | $393,191,740 |
| % Local Procurement for Services | 71% | 78% | 73.65% |
| Kazakhstan | |||
| Total Services | not available | $41,091,338 | $14,022,608 |
| Local Service Procurement | not available | $38,686,805 | $12,848,565 |
| % Local Procurement for Services | not available | 94.15% | 91.63% |
| Ontario | |||
| Total Services | not available | not available | $95,153,000 |
| Local Service Procurement | not available | not available | $60,780,000 |
| % Local Procurement for Services | not available | not available | 63.88% |
What it means
Cameco has helped to establish a strong base of local suppliers to provide services at our operating sites. In 2011 alone, Cameco procured over $450 million dollars in services for our operations from local businesses in northern Saskatchewan, Kazakhstan, and Ontario.
Looking ahead
Cameco will continue to work with local suppliers to increase their capacity and ensure we are able to continue to purchase as many of our services locally as possible. We will begin tracking local spending at our US operations in 2012.
Definitions
Local
This term differs from country to country and region to region. In northern Saskatchewan, our surface leases mandate the entire Northern Administrative District (an area that makes up one-half of the province) as local for our operations in Saskatchewan. In Ontario, communities within the provincial borders are local while in Kazakhstan, the country itself is considered local.
Local supplier
Under the northern preferred supplier program in northern Saskatchewan, a local supplier is defined as a company or joint venture that is at least 51% owned by people or communities from the Northern Administration District that also has local people in management positions. In Ontario, a local supplier is one from within the provincial borders, while in Kazakhstan any Kazakhstani business is considered a local supplier.
Note
2011 totals for Ontario include both goods and services.
EC7 – Local hiring
^This indicator provides information about the number of local employees at our operations in northern Saskatchewan, and the number of senior managers from those local communities.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Local Employees / Total | 669/1,337 | 703/1,410 | 761/1,505 |
| % Of Employees from Local Community | 50.00% | 49.90% | 50.60% |
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Senior Management from Local Community / Total Senior Management | 2 of 37 | 1 of 38 | 1 of 33 |
| % Of Senior Management from Local Community | 5.40% | 2.60% | 3.03% |
What it means
Our corporate social responsibility policy includes a commitment to encourage local employment wherever we operate. Through this policy, Cameco continues to build capacity by hiring qualified local residents whenever possible.
Looking ahead
Cameco is working toward increasing the number of senior managers from northern Saskatchewan at our mining operations by providing career development opportunities to high-potential candidates.
Definitions
Senior manager
A manager or superintendent level employee.
Local employee
To be considered a local employee in northern Saskatchewan, you must be registered as a Resident of Saskatchewan's North (a designation defined and managed by the Saskatchewan government).
EC8 – Infrastructure and service investments
^This indicator provides an overview of Cameco's investments in infrastructure and services for local communities in Canada, the US and Kazakhstan.
a – Needs assessments
We have not completed formal infrastructure needs assessments in our local communities.
b – Current (or expected) impact of infrastructure and service investments
From 2009-2011, Cameco invested nearly $4.4 million in support of infrastructure improvement projects in local communities. Some of our more significant infrastructure investments include:
Highlights
| Community | Region | Amount | Infrastructure/Service | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | Saskatoon | Saskatchewan | $500,000 | St. Mary's Wellness and Education Centre |
| 2010 | Saskatoon | Saskatchewan | $500,000 | Friendship Inn Expansion |
| 2009 | Taikonur | Kazakhstan | $484,317 | Construction of Medical Aid Facility |
| 2010 | Saskatoon | Saskatchewan | $365,000 | Royal Vital Care |
| 2011 | Black Lake | Northern Saskatchewan | $300,000 | Elizabeth Falls Hydro Project |
| 2009 - 2011 | Fond du Lac | Northern Saskatchewan | $300,000 | Community Arena |
| 2010 | Saskatoon | Saskatchewan | $250,000 | Meewasin Skating Rink |
| 2011 | Saskatoon | Saskatchewan | $239,550 | Childrens Hospital Foundation |
| 2010 - 2011 | Cobourg | Ontario | $150,000 | Community Center |
| 2009 | La Ronge/Air Ronge | Northern Saskatchewan | $100,000 | Churchill Community High School |
| 2010 | Southend | Northern Saskatchewan | $100,000 | Cell Tower |
| 2010 | Wollaston/Hatchet Lake | Northern Saskatchewan | $100,000 | Wollaston Lake Store |
Northern Saskatchewan
- Between 2009 and 2011 we helped the Fond du Lac Denesuline Nation build their community rink. This facility and its programs target both youth and the broader community, encouraging everyone to become healthier and more active.
- In 2011, we made a large donation to Black Lake Denesuline Nation in support of a planned community development project (the Elizabeth Falls Hydro Project) that has the potential to provide significant economic development and jobs to the community.
Saskatoon
- In 2009 and 2010, we made significant donations to two inner-city projects aimed at improving access to health and food services for community residents. One involved the rebuilding of an elementary school that will include a paediatric wellness clinic. The other supported redesigning and rebuilding the Saskatoon Friendship Inn, a soup kitchen providing 500 meals a day to families and individuals in need.
- In 2011, Cameco matched funds raised for the Saskatoon Children's Hospital, a regional maternal and paediatric treatment centre that, when built, will serve sick children from across the province, including northern communities.
Ontario
- In 2010, Cameco committed to donate $250,000 to the Cobourg Community Center ($150,000 provided in 2010 and 2011) which provides social and recreational opportunities for residents of Cobourg. The centre includes a twin-pad arena, gymnasium, multi-purpose program and meeting space, indoor track and dedicated space for seniors and youth.
What it means
Although Cameco does not specifically target infrastructure investments, we receive many requests for investments from local communities to support infrastructure projects because many of these communities have infrastructure deficits.
Currently, we target four areas for support from our community investment fund:
- youth
- health and wellness
- education and literacy
- community development
Looking ahead
Cameco will continue to provide investments toward infrastructure projects in local communities on a case by case basis. We will also consider opportunities to conduct formal community needs assessments in the future.
About this indicator
The community investments measured and reported on in this indicator are also included in the community investment total in EC1.
For this indicator, we have not included any infrastructure that was built primarily for business purposes (i.e. roads) but that local communities may also benefit from.
EC9 – Indirect economic impact
^This indicator provides information about our economic impact on particular geographic areas, including the secondary or indirect impact of Cameco's operations.
Cameco has completed economic impact assessments in:
- Northern Saskatchewan – The Economic Impact of Cameco Corporation on Saskatchewan with Emphasis on the North. By Eric Howe, Department of Economics, University of Saskatchewan. Feb, 2009.
- Port Hope and Northumberland County, Ontario – Economic and Financial Impact Analysis of Cameco in Port Hope and Northumberland County. By Harry Kitchen, Department of Economics, Trent University. Nov, 2010.
- Wyoming – The Economic Impact of Cameco on Wyoming: Existing Uranium Operations and Planned Expansion. By David T. Taylor and Thomas Foulke, University of Wyoming, Sept, 2010.
- Nebraska – The Economic Impact of Cameco Resources' Uranium Production on the Nebraska Economy. David T. Taylor and Thomas Foulke, University of Wyoming, Sept, 2010.
Highlights from completed reports
Northern Saskatchewan
Overall, through direct and indirect activities, Cameco's operations are responsible for 12.2% of the employment in northern Saskatchewan. As well, Cameco, through direct and indirect activities, is responsible for the employment of more than one aboriginal person in 20 in the province of Saskatchewan. Finally, for every one aboriginal person Cameco hires aboriginal employment in Saskatchewan increases by a total of 2.1 employees by the end of the second year.
Port Hope and Northumberland County
In Port Hope, for every dollar a Cameco employee earns, $0.80 is earned by other workers in the local area through secondary spending effects. In Northumberland, this number is $1.40. Further to that, every dollar spent by Cameco in purchasing supplies from a firm in Northumberland or hiring a local tradesman generates $1.10 of additional revenue for other businesses in the area. In Port Hope, this number is $0.40 of additional revenue.
- indirect employment: 981 secondary jobs
- indirect spending: $132 million in secondary expenditure impact through wages and salaries, local procurement, local trades, and charitable contributions
Wyoming
For every uranium job in the mining sector, there are 1.6 other jobs created elsewhere in the Wyoming economy. For every $1.00 of uranium job income in the mining sector, $1.20 of income is generated in other sectors of the Wyoming economy.
- indirect employment: 144 secondary jobs
- indirect labour income (trades): $5 million in secondary labour income
- indirect economic activity: $16.8 million in secondary economic activity
Nebraska
For every direct uranium job in the mining sector, there are 1.8 other jobs created elsewhere in the Nebraska economy. For every $1.00 of uranium job income in the mining sector, $1.40 of income is generated in other sectors of the Nebraska economy.
- indirect employment: 69 secondary jobs
- indirect labour income: $2.5 million in secondary labor income
- indirect economic activity: $7.8 million in secondary economic activity
What it means
Cameco is a major economic contributor everywhere we operate, both directly through things like salaries, wages, and local procurement, and indirectly through secondary employment and secondary economic activity.
Looking ahead
Cameco will continue to work to understand the economic impact, both positive and negative, we have on communities wherever we operate.
Environmental
^EN3 – Direct energy use (by primary source)
^This indicator provides information about the amount of energy we buy or produce for our own use.
This includes:
- natural gas
- diesel
- gasoline
- propane
- light fuel oil (and other crude-oil derivatives)
Includes all divisions except corporate offices and exploration.
What it means
Cameco's direct energy use is increasing as we expand our operations and increase production.
Looking ahead
We expect our energy use to continue to increase as we expand our operations and increase production in support of our Double U strategy. To mitigate this, we are working towards improving energy efficiency at our older operations, including capturing and reusing waste heat or steam energy to offset primary energy consumption where possible. We are also considering energy balance and efficiency when designing and purchasing new equipment and infrastructure.
EN4 – Indirect energy use (by primary source)
^This indicator provides information about the indirect energy Cameco uses. While the only indirect energy we purchase is electricity, our providers utilize the following renewable and non-renewable sources to produce it:
- steam
- nuclear
- hydro
- wind
- biomass
- hydrocarbons (coal, oil, natural gas)
Includes all divisions except corporate offices and exploration.
What it means
Cameco's indirect energy use is increasing as we expand our operations and increase production.
Looking ahead
We expect our energy use to continue to increase as we expand our operations and increase production in support of our Double U strategy. To mitigate this, we are working towards improving energy efficiency at our older operations, including capturing and reusing waste heat or steam energy to offset primary energy consumption where possible. We are also considering energy balance and efficiency when designing and purchasing new equipment and infrastructure.
EN8 – Water withdrawal (by source)
^This indicator shows the volume of water we withdraw from municipal sources, surface water bodies and groundwater. It includes water we extract from groundwater depressurization, mine dewatering activities, seepage control, and runoff. It also includes streams purged from our in situ recovery (ISR) operations in the US and Kazakhstan (we do this to keep surrounding groundwater running towards our wells rather than away from them). These extraction processes allow us to continuously capture and treat any water that may be impacted by our operations.
Includes all divisions except corporate offices and exploration.
What it means
Although our mining operations have been expanding, our water withdrawal volumes have been relatively stable since 2009. This is because we are working to minimize seepage into our underground mines and are recycling water as much as possible.
Looking ahead
Cameco will continue to practice responsible water use by minimizing the amount of freshwater we use and diverting water around our operating footprints as much as possible.
EN16 – GHG emissions (by weight)
^This indicator shows Cameco's scope 1 and 2 (direct and indirect) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as defined by an international GHG protocol developed by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD).
Includes all divisions except corporate offices and exploration.
What it means
Cameco's energy use is increasing as we expand our operations and increase production. This results in an increase in our GHG emissions because the majority of our GHG emissions are directly related to the combustion of primary and secondary fuel sources.
Looking ahead
We expect our energy use and, as a result, our GHG emissions, to continue to increase as we expand our operations and increase production in support of our Double U strategy. To mitigate this, we are working towards improving energy efficiency at our older operations, including capturing and reusing waste heat or steam energy to offset consumption where possible, and considering energy balance and efficiency considerations when we are designing and purchasing new equipment and infrastructure.
EN20 – Air emissions (by type and weight)
^This indicator provides air emission data for selected constituents of potential concern (COPC) that are released from process or stationary combustion. COPCs are chemical constituents in the environment that may be harmful to plants, animals, land and water ecosystems, and people. The constituents we report on at each site relate to regulatory requirements and community concerns for each jurisdiction. They include:
- nitrogen oxides
- sulphur oxides
- hydrogen fluoride
- uranium and other metals
- ammonia
- particulate matter
| Performance Metric (Unit of Measure) | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Air Emissions Corporate Totals | ||||
| NOx | kg | 275,878 | 287,306 | 353,396 |
| SOx (as SO2) | kg | 346,782 | 210,542 | 313,569 |
| Total PM | kg | 33,015 | 39,248 | 35,171 |
| U | kg | 291 | 257 | 655 |
| NH3 | kg | 101,057 | 76,924 | 67,436 |
Includes all divisions except corporate offices and exploration.
What it means
Emissions decreased 19% between 2009 and 2010 because refurbishments were made to the acid plant at Rabbit Lake in the last half of 2010. However, emissions increased 25% between 2010 and 2011.
During a non-routine inspection of Key Lake's mist eliminator in February 2012 (the emissions control system for the yellowcake calcining facility), we discovered that several filter cartridges had separated from the mounting bracket, reducing the efficiency of the system. This is believed to be the cause of the elevated 2011 air quality measurements. The mist eliminator unit has since been repaired and enhanced instrumentation-based monitoring has been added to alert mill personnel if the unit is not operating normally.
Looking ahead
Cameco will continue work on decreasing emissions in the future. For example, we will be commissioning a new acid plant at Key Lake in 2012 which is expected to reduce our SOx emissions well below 2010 levels.
EN21 – Water discharge (by quality and destination)
^Water volumes
This indicator provides information on the total volume of treated and untreated water we discharge, including process water, non-contact cooling water, and water from mine dewatering activities.
In addition, the indicator includes information about the volume of water we consume in our process whether it is evaporated, used to generate steam, or disposed through deep well injection.
Constituent loadings
Loading information is provided for discharge streams that are treated and released to the surface environment. Loadings are not reported for non-contact cooling water and other unimpacted streams because they are returned to the environment at the same quality at which they were withdrawn. These streams did not gain or lose any of the constituents already present.
Our deep well injection loadings are reported under indicator MM3, because the loadings are classified as mine process waste materials. Please review the mine waste indicator for more information about deep well injection.
Summary Mass Metal Loadings (kg)
| Corporate total - Surface Discharges | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
| Arsenic | 45 | 35 | 53 |
| Copper | 48 | 26 | 24 |
| Molybdenum | 14,911 | 4,170 | 2,438 |
| Nickel | 119 | 224 | 225 |
| Selenium | 125 | 47 | 47 |
| Uranium | 491 | 462 | 490 |
Includes all divisions except corporate offices and exploration.
What it means
In the last three years, the total mass of constituents we released to the environment has decreased most notably selenium and molybdenum. These reductions were achieved through persistent efforts to improve our water management practices and treatment technologies.
Looking ahead
Cameco aims to use water responsibly. We continue to work toward minimizing our consumption and ensuring that the water we discharge will not adversely impact the environment. We also continue to look for ways to divert or otherwise keep unimpacted streams from entering our mine workings and to minimize the potential for contamination. We will continue to look for ways to reduce our loadings to the environment.
About measuring and calculating our loadings
Loading calculations vary slightly at each site, but where constituent concentrations are lower than what our third-party labs can detect and measure, we usually report an amount at the minimum detection level.
For example, if the lab reports <0.001 mg/L, then we assume and report a concentration of 0.001 mg/L. This is a very conservative methodology that is typically used to assess the potential for environmental impacts, but overestimates our actual loadings to the environment.
In the future, we will be reporting in alignment with Environment Canada's National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI) reporting guidelines and the methods described in the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR). When the lab cannot measure the concentration level of a constituent (also referred to as "below detection") we will assume zero loading. If the level fluctuates above and below the detection limit, we will assume the concentration is half of the limit for the readings that fall below the measurable level, and average those amounts with the measurable readings to calculate our total loadings.
EN22 – Waste
^This indicator provides information about the total amount of solid, semi-solid and liquid waste we generate and divert, except wastewater (EN21) and mine waste (MM3). It includes non-hazardous industrial waste, as well as hazardous waste and radioactive or radiologically contaminated waste, as defined by national legislation where the waste is generated.
| Units | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-Hazardous Waste | ||||
| Generated | tonnes | 3,044 | 4,518 | 7,576 |
| Diverted | tonnes | 751 | 1,914 | 1,370 |
| Landfilled or Stored | tonnes | 2,293 | 2,604 | 6,206 |
| Rate of Diversion | % | 24.7% | 42.4% | 18.1% |
| Units | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Radioactive Waste | ||||
| Generated | tonnes | 6,669 | 6,744 | 7,696 |
| Diverted | tonnes | 603 | 1,756 | 1,177 |
| Landfilled or Stored | tonnes | 6,067 | 4,988 | 6,519 |
| Rate of Diversion | % | 9.0% | 26.0% | 15.3% |
| Units | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hazardous Waste | ||||
| Generated | tonnes | 381 | 451 | 226 |
| Diverted | tonnes | 385 | 447 | 225 |
| Stabilized & Disposed | tonnes | 0 | 4 | 1 |
| Rate of Diversion | % | 101% | 99% | 100% |
Includes all divisions except corporate offices and exploration.
What it means
The amount of waste we generate depends on the activities we're involved in. In recent years, we have generated more waste as a result of expanding operations and efforts to clean up legacy waste from across our sites. There is a direct correlation between the amount of waste generated and the amount of people on site. When more people are on site, more non-hazardous waste is usually generated, even when the per-person generation rates diminish slightly.
The type of waste we generate varies depending on our activities, which affects our waste diversion rates from year to year. For example, if a large proportion of the waste generated in one year was metal and could be recycled, the diversion rate might be higher that year compared to a year when there was less recyclable metal.
Looking ahead
Similar to our direct and indirect energy use (EN3 and EN4) and GHG trends, we expect our waste volumes to increase as we expand our operations, increase production, deal with historic waste and progressively decommission our sites. We are pursuing waste diversion initiatives to minimize the amount of waste we landfill.
MM3 – Mine waste (overburden, rock, tailings, sludges)
^This indicator provides information about the amount of mine waste we generate and re-use.
Mine waste includes stockpiled overburden, mineralized and non-mineralized waste rock, and tailings. It also includes loadings from process waste water as referred to under EN21, sludges, slimes and other process residuals.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Mine Waste Generated | 423,454 | 539,319 | 622,198 |
| Total Change in Wasterock Inventories | -113,110 | -63,155 | 47,431 |
| Total Tailings & Process Wastes | 536,564 | 602,474 | 574,767 |
What it means
Despite efforts to use our waste rock material rather than stockpiling it whenever we can, the net amount of mine waste we've generated has increased over the past three years. This is due to expanding underground operations at our northern Saskatchewan operations. The negative values shown in the chart indicate where we were successful in re-purposing stockpiled rock in excess of the fresh waste rock being generated.
The amount of waste rock we can reuse depends on the type of waste rock that is generated and the number of projects in progress (which affects the amount of aggregate we need).
We use uneconomical mineralized waste rock as blend material for ore processing and for structural support in backfilling our underground mines. Clean waste rock is used in concrete mixtures, to build new facilities and to develop or maintain roads. This reduces the size of our waste rock piles and the amount of other natural aggregate resources we consume.
Looking ahead
Similar to our direct and indirect energy use (EN3 and EN4) and GHG trends, we expect our mine waste volumes to increase as we expand our existing operations or open new facilities. We will continue to re-purpose as much of this material as possible.
About deep well injection
For safe disposal of process waste streams at some of our in situ recovery (ISR) operations, Cameco utilizes a liquid waste disposal technology called deep well injection. This method uses injection wells to place treated and untreated liquid waste into confined geologic formations where they will not migrate into potable aquifers. Cameco's wells are classified as Class 1 Non-Hazardous Industrial Waste disposal wells. The depth of these wells varies depending on the geologic characteristics of the site ranging from average depths of 1000 to 2700 metres, with the majority completed at the latter depth. For more information about deep well injection, please visit the US EPA site: http://water.epa.gov/type/groundwater/uic/wells_class1.cfm.
EN23 – Significant incidents (total number and volume)
^This indicator provides information about the number of significant environmental incidents. We consider an incident significant if it is classified as level IV or level V according to our Corrective Action Process. We determine significance based on the incident's actual or potential environmental impact, or by the level of regulatory and public concern about it.
For incidents that involve a release of material, we report the total quantity of material released and any associated impacts.
Significant incidents 2009
Incident 1 – Cameco Fuel Manufacturing (CFM) Cobourg
During non-routine cleaning of the waste treatment area in August 2009 we discovered that the sump pit in the containment area was significantly compromised, allowing fluoride and other contaminants to be released. Subsequent investigation confirmed that there was minor soil contamination but that fluoride (the primary constituent of concern) had not migrated beyond the immediate area. The sump was repaired and all other sumps at both CFM plants were inspected and upgraded as needed.
Incident 2 – Port Hope Conversion Facility
On October 14, 2009, 90kg of R-22 refrigerant was released from an onsite refrigeration system. There was no measurable impact to the environment.
What it means
Both of these incidents had little impact on the environment. They were raised in significance because of heightened regulatory scrutiny and community concerns about similar events including groundwater contamination discovered at the Port Hope Conversion Facility in 2007.
Looking ahead
Cameco will continue to strive for no significant environmental incidents at all our sites. We had no significant incidents in 2010 and 2011.
Definitions
Significant environmental incident
Cameco considers level IV and V environmental incidents significant.
Note
Cameco's Environmental Effect Ratings:
Level I – no measureable impact to the environment
Level II – negligible impact
Level III – short-term, seasonal impact
Level IV – mortality of some species, but not affecting ecosystem function
Level V – impairment of ecosystem function
EN28 – Significant Environmental Fines
^This indicator provides information on the number of "significant fines" that we received for non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations, including:
- International declarations/conventions/treaties, and national, sub-national, regional and local regulations
- Voluntary environmental agreements with regulating authorities
- Cases brought against us through dispute resolution mechanisms
In 2009, we paid a $75,000 (US) fine at our Crow Butte mining operation in Nebraska for an incident dating back to 2006. In 2011, we paid two fines totalling $412,000 (US) in relation to the same incident at JV Inkai in Kazakhstan.
What it means
In 2006, our operation in Crow Butte was issued a Notice of Violation regarding unpermitted use of well cleanup water for drilling. This error was self-discovered and self-reported to the Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality and the practice was discontinued. The $75,000 (US) fine was imposed in 2009, $25,000 (US) of which was paid to the Clerk of the District Court of Lancaster County and $50,000 (US) to the Attorney General's Environmental Protection Fund.
In 2011, JV Inkai was cited for failing to observe environmental legislation in regards to the disposal of some drilling muds and received two fines – one for $205,000 (US) for failing to observe environmental legislation, which was paid under protest, and the other was for damages in the amount of $207,000 (US) for failing to observe applicable legislation.
During the reporting period, Cameco received no other significant fines at any of its operations for failing to comply with environmental laws or regulations.
Definitions
Significant fines
Fines that exceed $50,000, paid by Cameco or a subsidiary to a government authority for failure to comply with its environmental laws or regulations.
Labour Practices and Decent Work
^LA1 – Workforce (by employment type, contract, and gender)
^Safe, Healthy and Rewarding Workplace
This indicator provides information about the total number of employees directly employed by Cameco, broken down by employment type (full- or part-time), contract (regular, temporary or casual) and gender.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | F | M | F | M | F | |
| Regular Full Time | 2344 | 671 | 2446 | 700 | 2556 | 746 |
| Regular Part Time | 3 | 27 | 6 | 33 | 10 | 31 |
| Temporary Full Time | 61 | 25 | 67 | 27 | 73 | 39 |
| Temporary Part Time | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| Casual | 10 | 6 | 16 | 2 | 11 | 7 |
Includes all of Cameco except JV Inkai (Kazakhstan). Figures as of December 31 each year.
What it means
Cameco is a large and growing employer. We are improving our gender balance with more women working for us each year.
As of December 31, 2011, Cameco employed 768 women, representing 24% of our workforce. The Canadian mining and exploration industry average (according to Statistics Canada (2006)) is 14% female, so we exceed the industry average.
LA2 – Hiring and turnover (by age group, gender)
^Safe, Healthy and Rewarding Workplace
This indicator provides information about our annual rates of hiring and turnover, and the total number of employees who are hired or leave the organization, by gender and age group.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| New Hires | Year End | Rate | New Hires | Year End | Rate | New Hires | Year End | Rate | |
| Male | 315 | 2541 | 12.40% | 408 | 2632 | 15.50% | 453 | 2651 | 17.09% |
| Female | 146 | 609 | 23.97% | 199 | 670 | 29.70% | 195 | 823 | 23.69% |
| Up to 35 | 273 | 800 | 34.13% | 353 | 899 | 39.27% | 385 | 1038 | 37.09% |
| 36-55 | 158 | 1551 | 10.19% | 221 | 1641 | 13.47% | 224 | 1954 | 11.46% |
| 56+ | 30 | 326 | 9.20% | 33 | 385 | 8.57% | 39 | 482 | 8.09% |
| Total | 461 | 3150 | 14.63% | 607 | 3302 | 18.38% | 648 | 3474 | 18.65% |
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Turnover | Year End | Rate | Turnover | Year End | Rate | Turnover | Year End | Rate | |
| Male | 195 | 2541 | 7.67% | 275 | 2632 | 10.45% | 314 | 2651 | 11.84% |
| Female | 114 | 609 | 18.72% | 144 | 670 | 21.49% | 115 | 823 | 13.97% |
| Up to 35 | 166 | 800 | 20.75% | 229 | 899 | 25.47% | 219 | 1038 | 21.10% |
| 36-55 | 110 | 1551 | 7.09% | 132 | 1641 | 8.04% | 138 | 1954 | 7.06% |
| 56+ | 33 | 326 | 10.12% | 58 | 385 | 15.06% | 72 | 482 | 14.94% |
| Total | 309 | 3150 | 9.81% | 419 | 3302 | 12.69% | 429 | 3474 | 12.35% |
Includes all of Cameco except JV Inkai (Kazakhstan). Figures as of December 31 each year.
What it means
Cameco continues to hire a large number of people each year.
Our turnover rate is consistent with industry averages and our turnover rate for female employees declined between 2009 and 2011. Turnover remains high in the +35 years age group due to the high mobility of that demographic and competing opportunities in the mining and energy sectors.
Looking ahead
As we continue to expand production, we expect to see our workforce totals rise. We will continue to work to keep employee turnover as low as possible through proactive retention and talent management programs.
Definitions
Turnover
The number of employees who resign, are dismissed, retire or die while employed by Cameco each year.
LA4 – Collective bargaining
^Safe, Healthy and Rewarding Workplace
This indicator provides information about the total number and percentage of Cameco employees who are covered by collective bargaining agreements.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Workers | 3,150 | 3,302 | 3,474 |
| Workers Covered by Collective Bargaining | 893 | 891 | 913 |
| % of Workers Covered by Collective Bargaining | 28.35% | 26.98% | 26.28% |
Includes all of Cameco except JV Inkai (Kazakhstan). Figures as of December 31 each year.
What it means
Cameco participates in collective bargaining with its unionized employees in accordance with applicable legislation. Approximately one-quarter of our workforce is covered by collective bargaining agreements.
The following sites have collective bargaining agreements:
- Key Lake
- McArthur River
- Port Hope Conversion Facility
- Cameco Fuel Manufacturing (Port Hope and Cobourg)
LA6 – Health and safety committees
^Safe, Healthy and Rewarding Workplace
This indicator shows the number and percentage of Cameco's workers who are represented by formal management-worker occupational health and safety (OHS) committees. These committees help monitor and advise on occupational health and safety programs.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total Workers | 3,150 | 3,302 | 3,474 |
| Workers Represented by Joint Committee's | 3,150 | 3,302 | 3,474 |
| % of Workers Represented in Joint Committee's | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Includes all of Cameco except JV Inkai (Kazakhstan). Figures as of December 31 each year.
What it means
All of Cameco's employees in Canada, the US, and Australia are represented by OHS committees.
LA7 – Injury frequency, missed work
^Safe, Healthy and Rewarding Workplace
This indicator provides information about Cameco's rates of absenteeism, lost-time injuries and work related fatalities. For lost-time injuries and fatalities, we include both employees and contractors in our numbers.
We do not track absentee rates in Australia or Kazakhstan.
Cameco has had no fatalities at its sites from 2009-2011.
What it means
Absentee rates across the company have remained consistently low for the past three years.
Cameco is also maintaining a long-term downward trend in lost-time injury frequency across our operations. Our 2011 lost-time injury rate was slightly higher than 2010, but still below the long-term average. There are slight year over year variations in our lost-time injury rates, but these are within the normal range of variability expected for this metric.
Looking ahead
Cameco is committed to sustain safe and healthy workplaces. We will continue to strive for zero injuries and maintain a long-term downward trend in the lost-time injury rate.
Note
Cameco's US and Canadian sites use different criteria to determine absentee rates.
LA12 – Performance and career development reviews (by gender)
^Safe, Healthy and Rewarding Workplace
This indicator provides information about the number and percentage of employees who receive formal performance appraisals and career development reviews.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | F | M | F | M | F | |
| # of Employees | 2,420 | 730 | 2,535 | 767 | 2,651 | 823 |
| # of Employees who Receive Performance Reviews | 1,631 | 626 | 1,749 | 662 | 1,845 | 716 |
| % of Employees who Receive Performance Reviews | 67.40% | 85.75% | 68.99% | 86.31% | 69.60% | 87.00% |
Includes all of Cameco except JV Inkai (Kazakhstan). Figures as of December 31 each year.
What it means
All of Cameco's non-unionized employees receive two formal performance and career development reviews each year.
Looking ahead
Cameco is working with its unionized sites to develop regular performance and career development reviews for unionized employees.
Definitions
Performance review
A formal meeting between an employee and his or her supervisor, to review and discuss the employee's performance against goals and expectations established at the start of the year by employees and supervisors.
Human Rights
^HR9 – Violations of Indigenous rights
^This indicator provides information about the total number of incidents registered through formal means related to Indigenous rights.
There were no incidents registered through formal means involving violations of Indigenous rights by Cameo during the reporting period.
This indicator includes data from Canada, the US and Australia only.
What it means
Cameco respects the rights of Indigenous groups. We have built strong relationships through a variety of mechanisms, including memorandums of understanding and other statements of intent to work respectfully and co-operatively to our mutual benefit.
Looking ahead
As Cameco expands production and moves into new jurisdictions, we are taking the lessons we have learned from working with Indigenous groups in northern Saskatchewan and applying them elsewhere to ensure a positive working relationship that sees these groups benefit meaningfully from our operations.
Definitions
Incident registered by formal means
Formal allegation of a specific Indigenous rights infringement caused by (or expected to result from) a Cameco project or activity.
This allegation can take the form of:
- a complaint filed through a judicial proceeding
- a formal objection filed with the regulator
- activities identified by Cameco's corporate social responsibility team as failing to comply with Cameco's internal policy directives.
MM5 – Proximity to Indigenous territories
^This indicator provides information about the number of Cameco mining and processing operations on (or adjacent to) Indigenous lands, as well as the percentage of formal agreements in relation to the overall number of our operating sites that are on or adjacent to an Indigenous territory.
Cameco is not currently operating any sites on or adjacent to Indigenous territories.
This indicator includes data from Canada, the US and Australia only.
What it means
Cameco has no operations on or immediately adjacent to (contiguous with) Indigenous lands. At certain operations, Indigenous lands are in reasonably close proximity (e.g. the Hatchet Lake Reserve's proximity to Rabbit Lake operation), but none is adjacent.
Looking ahead
Activities at our proposed development property in Australia, Kintyre, will take place on or adjacent to Indigenous lands.
Definitions
Adjacent
Means either (a) physically contiguous (i.e. where the boundaries of applicable lands held by Cameco – or its wholly owned subsidiary – and on which sits its applicable operating site directly intersect with the boundaries of Indigenous territories), or (b) physically proximate such that an Indigenous territory (i.e. the lands themselves, as opposed to the occupants or any activities exercised by the occupants) are directly, adversely influenced by Cameco projects or activities relating to the applicable operating site.
HR11 – Human rights complaints
^Safe, Healthy and Rewarding Workplace
This indicator provides information about the number of formal human rights grievances or complaints that have been filed against Cameco in Canada and the US.
What it means
Cameco has a system for ensuring human rights issues and concerns are addressed and resolved in a timely matter. As of the end of this reporting period, we had no outstanding human rights grievances or complaints.
Looking ahead
Cameco will continue to promote an inclusive and diverse workplace and ensure that employee human rights are protected. When grievances arise, we will continue to pursue a 100% resolution system within one calendar year.
Definitions
Formal grievance or complaint
- a human rights-related union grievance
- a formal respectful workplace complaint
- a complaint filed through a Human Rights Commission by an internal or external stakeholder
Society
^SO1 – Community engagement
^This indicator provides information about the number and percentage of Cameco operations that have local community engagement activities, impact assessments and development programs.
Community engagement activities
This includes various local community engagement activities that are carried out by Cameco operations to support Cameco's 'supportive communities' measure of success. This would include activities such as community visits, community meetings, events, web materials, investments, print publications, presentations, etc.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of Operations with community engagement activities | 10/10 | 10/10 | 10/10 |
| Percentage of Operations with community engagement activities | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Impact assessments
These include socio-economic impact assessments conducted by operations either to meet requirements for environmental impact assessments and/or for standalone local economic impact assessments. These are conducted as required and span an extended timeframe, often over several years.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of Operations with Impact assessments | 5/10 | 8/10 | 8/10 |
| Percentage of Operations with Impact assessments | 50% | 80% | 80% |
Development programs
Community development programs are formalized programs or agreements developed with local communities, groups and/or organizations, such as impact management agreements and/or memorandums of understanding. These are developed as required and often span an extended timeframe, over several years.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of Operations with development programs | 2/10 | 4/10 | 5/10 |
| Percentage of Operations with development programs | 20% | 40% | 50% |
What it means
Community engagement is an important aspect of operational activities across Cameco sites. Year over year there has been an increase in local community activities, assessments, and programs initiated by our operations.
Looking ahead
As we expand our production, we will continue to engage and work with local communities to ensure their input and understanding of our activities. We expect the number of operations involved in community engagement activities to increase in the next reporting period as a result of environmental and social impact assessments currently underway and the potential for other formalized agreements to be developed.
MM6 – Disputes related to land use and customary rights
^This indicator provides information about significant disputes relating to the land use and customary rights of local or Indigenous peoples where we operate.
Cameco was not involved in any disputes related to land use, customary rights or local communities and Indigenous peoples during the reporting period.
This indicator includes data from Canada, the US and Australia only.
What it means
We respect the rights of Indigenous peoples and we invest considerable time in building relationships with local communities through our various engagement activities.
Looking ahead
Cameco will continue to work with Indigenous groups that have an interest in our operations and ensure that we understand and respect their lands, rights and communities.
Definitions
Significant disputes
Disputes that have been elevated to:
- a legal proceeding
- a formal objection filed with the applicable regulator
- a blockade or other form of civil disobedience
- the need to use a dispute resolution mechanism included in an agreement between the community and Cameco.
Note
The English River First Nation (ERFN) has selected surface lands covering the Millennium deposit in a claim for Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE). The Saskatchewan government has rejected the selection, but the ERFN has challenged the government's decision in the courts and this litigation continues. The TLE process does not affect our mineral rights, but it could have an impact on the surface rights and benefits we ultimately negotiate as part of the development of this deposit.
SO5 – Public policy, lobbying
^This indicator provides information about Cameco's involvement in public policy development in Canada, the US, Australia and Kazakhstan, and our marketing and business development interests in emerging markets like China and India.
Overview of reporting period (2009-2011)
Cameco is involved in consultation and discussions with government bodies and regulatory agencies where we operate about public policy positions and laws and regulations that affect our business.
These include:
- climate change and energy
- environmental assessments and oversight
- aboriginal rights and the duty to consult
- nuclear industry rules, regulations and international cooperation
- handling and transportation of hazardous goods
- foreign ownership
We believe that nuclear energy should be the cornerstone of government policy designed to limit greenhouse gas emissions and meet targets for GHG reduction, and we actively promote this position.
Industry associations
Cameco is a member of many industry associations, including, but not limited to:
- the Uranium Producers of America
- the Saskatchewan Mining Association
- the Mining Association of Canada
- the Canadian Nuclear Association
- the World Nuclear Association
- Australian Uranium Association
What it means
On many issues, the success of our company intersects with decisions made by governments at the provincial and federal level, and decisions made by foreign governments. Advocating our positions on issues of key importance to the company is at the core of our efforts to inform government decision making.
SO7 – Legal action (anti-competitive behaviour)
^Outstanding Financial Performance and Governance
This indicator provides information about legal actions initiated against Cameco under national or international law designed to regulate anti-competitive behaviour and address anti-trust or monopoly practices.
This includes information about pending or completed actions and the outcomes of pending or completed actions, including any decisions or judgments.
There were no legal actions initiated against Cameo related to anti-competitive behaviour during the reporting period.
What it means
Cameco is committed to compliance with competition and anti-trust laws everywhere we operate.
SO8 – Significant fines (non-compliance)
^Outstanding Financial Performance and Governance
This indicator provides information about administrative or judicial fines and non-monetary sanctions levied against Cameco for failure to comply with laws and regulations, including:
- national, sub-national, regional, and local regulations
- international declarations, conventions or treaties.
This includes the total monetary value of significant fines and the number of non-monetary sanctions. It does not include fines or non-monetary sanctions related to environmental or labelling regulations, transportation matters and fines or sanctions we are in the process of appealing.
There were no judicial fines or non-monetary sanctions levied against Cameco for failure to comply with laws and regulations during the reporting period.
What it means
Cameco works hard to ensure that the company complies with all laws, regulations and other requirements that apply to us.
Definitions
Significant fines
Fines that exceed $50,000, paid by Cameco or a subsidiary to a government authority for failure to comply with its laws or regulations.
Product Responsibility
^PR4 – Labelling non-compliance
^Outstanding Financial Performance and Governance
This indicator provides information about Cameco's failure to comply with product and dangerous goods labelling requirements defined by transport regulations and reported to regulatory agencies in Canada, the US, Australia and Kazakhstan.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| # of Incidents Total | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| # of Incidents resulting in a fine | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| # of Incidents resulting in a warning | 0 | 0 | 0 |
What it means
Over the past three years, Cameco has had only very minor violations of labelling requirements, with none resulting in fines or warnings from any regulator.
2009-10
Minor events involving:
- faded labels
- missing UN numbers
2011
Minor events involving:
- missing UN numbers
- an incorrectly labelled sample shipment
Definitions
Labelling non-compliance
The types of information that must be correctly presented on our product labels are:
- radioactive category
- subsidiary name(s)
- proper shipping name
- UN number – a number issued by the United Nations which is used to quickly identify dangerous substances for emergency response, handling and storage during transport.
- VRI code (international vehicle registration code – when applicable)
- name of consignor/consignee
- type and weight of package
PR9 – Sanctions (product non-compliance)
^Outstanding Financial Performance and Governance
This indicator provides information about monetary fines imposed by regulatory agencies for non-compliance with laws and regulations related to providing products and services (transportation and customs related fines) in Canada, the US, Australia and Kazakhstan.
There have been no fines levied against Cameco for non-compliance with transport and customs laws and regulations during the reporting period.
What it means
Cameco works hard to ensure that the company complies with all transportation and customs regulations wherever we operate.
Definitions
Provision of products
Transportation of products, on or off-site.
Cameco Indicators
^CA1 – Polling (public support)
^This indicator provides information about the level of public support for Cameco's operations in Saskatchewan, northern Saskatchewan, Port Hope (Ontario), the US, and Australia.
What it means
Cameco continues to enjoy strong support for our operations.
Year over year variance in public support is relatively modest, fluctuating slightly depending on current issues. Support in Saskatchewan declined in 2011, and rose or remained essentially flat in other jurisdictions.
Northern Saskatchewan
Support for uranium mining among northern residents remains strong at 67%. In recent years, however, support has declined somewhat, with the most pronounced drop seen in our fall 2011 polling.
Responses to an open-ended question asked during that polling indicate that some of the decline in support in Northern Saskatchewan at that time may have resulted, in part, from:
- reaction to the events in Japan in the spring of 2011
- opposition to long-term hosting of spent nuclear fuel (interest was expressed by three northern communities around the time of this polling)
- public debate and opinion about resource revenue sharing (a key issue in the 2011 provincial election campaign, which coincided with our polling period).
Looking ahead
We will continue to monitor the level of support for our operations in northern Saskatchewan and gather northern opinion more frequently.
Definitions
The questions our polling companies ask are slightly different in each region:
Saskatchewan and the US
Are you supportive of the continuation of the uranium mining industry in [location]?
Ontario
Are you supportive of the continuation of Cameco's operations in Port Hope?
Australia
Are you supportive of the development of uranium mining in East Pilbara?
CA2 – Average radiation dose to workers
^Safe, Healthy and Rewarding Workplace
This indicator provides information about the average radiation dose to workers at our mining and milling and fuel services divisions in Saskatchewan, the U.S., Kazakhstan, and Ontario.
What it means
Our average radiation dose to workers remains consistently low at under 1 mSv (by comparison, typical background radiation doses to members of the public are 2-3 mSv per year). Cameco exposure rates are far below the maximum annual dosage limit of 50 mSv and 100 mSv over a five-year dosimtery block (note that the US sites do not have this long-term limit in their regulations).
A modest drop in the average dose was noted for all divisions as well as the corporate wide average in 2011. This drop was primarily driven by a significant increase in the workforce at Cigar Lake who receive low doses and decreases in average doses at Blind River, Smith Ranch – Highland and McArthur River. It is possible that the average dose may increase somewhat as the workforce at Cigar Lake transitions from construction and development activities to production over the next several years.
Looking ahead
We will continue to take appropriate measures to limit and monitor radiation exposures at our operations. The average dose to workers may increase slightly as the workforce at Cigar Lake transitions to production activity over the next few years.
Note
The values in the table represent the arithmetic average dose of all employees and contractors at our operations. Another metric used in our annual report is the full-time equivalent average, which normalizes the doses to a standard work year of 2000 hours. Both are valid metrics.
CA3 – Annual business scores and ranking
^Outstanding Financial Performance and Governance
This indicator provides information about Cameco's scores and ranking in the Globe and Mail's Board Games, an annual assessment of corporate governance at more than 200 companies in the S&P/TSX index.
The scoring system includes criteria designed to assess practices that go beyond mandatory governance requirements in the areas of board composition, shareholding and compensation, shareholder rights and disclosure.
This is an externally developed assessment process and the methodology used changes from year to year.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Score | 85 | 88 | 91 |
| Ranking | 15 | 9 | 12 |
| / Out of | 157 | 187 | 253 |
What it means
Cameco continues to score well and receive recognition for our governance practices. We've increased our overall scores each year for the past three years and we've remained in the top quartile since 2007.
CA4 – Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) governance risk indicators
^Outstanding Financial Performance and Governance
ISS is an external organization that measures governance risk in four areas: audit practices, board structure, shareholder rights and compensation.
ISS used a new proprietary model to determine risk in each category in 2010. What they choose to track from year to year changes, to reflect current best practices.
Companies can provide new information at any time, allowing "real-time" risk scoring. ISS reviews company data yearly to ensure authenticity.
2010 - Dec 31| Audit | Board Structure | Shareholder Rights | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score / 100 | 100 | 92 | 73 | 83 |
| Risk Level | Low | Low | Medium | Low |
2011 - Dec 31
| Audit | Board Structure | Shareholder Rights | Compensation | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Score / 100 | 100 | 84 | 79 | 83 |
| Risk Level | Low | Medium | Low | Low |
What it means
Overall, our board risk levels have remained low during the reporting period.
Our shareholder rights score improved from 2010 to 2011 because we amended our bylaws to update the quorum requirements for our shareholder meetings (we now require at least two persons representing at least 25% of the shares to have quorum).
During the same period, our board structure risk level increased (and the score decreased) because one director attended less than 75% of our board meetings.