**2. Differences between the MAC guides and ISO standards**

In the text of the article entitled 'Integrated Risk Management in Mine Tailings Facility' "see [1]", can be found the most notable differences and main points of attention between the guides published by MAC (Tailings Guide, Third Edition, released in February 2019 "see [6]"; OMS Guide, Second Edition, released in February 2019 "see [7]") and the ISO 9001 "in [8] ISO 9001:2015 Quality Management Systems, Requirements", ISO 14001 "see [3]" and ISO 45001 "in [9] ISO 45001:2018 Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems, Requirements with Guidance for Use" management system standards.

In March 2021, MAC published version 3.2, which is an update to the third edition of the Tailings Guide, dated February 2019. Changes were made due to the launch in August 2020, of the Global Industry Standard in Tailings Management (the Standard), thus aiming to improve the alignment between the tailings management component of MAC's TSM® program and the Standard. For the same reason, also in March 2021, MAC published version 2.1, which is an update of the second edition of the OMS Guide, dated February 2019.

In sequence, an analysis is made of the possible impacts of these changes on the differences and points of attention mentioned above, between the two guides published by MAC and the three ISO standards for management systems considered.

### **2.1 Accountability and responsibility**

In Version 3.2 of the Tailings Guide "see [2]", the level of detail in the descriptions of the roles and responsibilities of the Accountable Executive Director has been increased over the previous version.

This greater detail, seeking to clarify the roles and responsibilities of this executive, and greater alignment with the Standard's requirements, in no way impacts the analysis carried out previously and the perspective of integration of the management mechanisms.

*Integrating the Safety Management of Tailings Facilities to the ISO Model and to the Global… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.100020*

### **2.2 Critical controls**

As part of a redistribution of requirements that made up the "Plan" element of the Plan-Do-Verify-Act (PDCA) cycle in Version 3.1 of the Tailings Guide "see [6]", the Critical Controls requirement was repositioned in Version 3.2 "see [2]", becoming part of the Risk Management process.

In terms of content, just highlighting the addition made to the text, incorporating two stakeholders (regulatory bodies and COI) into the process of defining highconsequence events. This in no way impacts the analysis made previously and the perspective of integrating management mechanisms.

### **2.3 Quality management**

As part of a redistribution of requirements that made up the "Plan" element of the Plan-Perform-Verify-Act (PDCA) cycle in Version 3.1 of the Tailings Guide "see [6]", the Quality Management requirement, which was subordinated to Controls, which in turn was included in the Management Process, it was repositioned in Version 3.2 "see [2]", moving up the hierarchy to becoming one of the components of the "Plan" element of the PDCA cycle.

In terms of content, the text of Version 3.2 of the Tailings Guide "see [2]" incorporated the assertion that quality management must address a wide range of aspects related to tailings facilities, considering the initial and ongoing construction, including specifications for materials and construction procedures (e.g. material compaction), OMS activities such as calibration of surveillance instruments, and Quality Assurance and Quality Control related to the closure plan implementation.

### **2.4 Emergency preparedness**

The text added in Version 3.2 of the Tailings Guide "see [2]", over the previous one, reinforced this document's alignment with ISO standards by including what is apparently obvious in terms of what it means to be prepared for an emergency: assessing the range of potential emergency scenarios that could occur, and potential impacts; maintaining the necessary capacity (e.g., personnel, equipment, supplies) to respond; maintaining a state of readiness to respond, in collaboration with external parties (e.g., local first responders) that would be involved in responding to an emergency; developing plans for emergency preparedness; and conducting training and exercises/tests of the plans for emergency preparedness.
