The Company's activities are subject to extensive laws and regulations governing the protection of the environment, natural resources and human health. These laws address, among other things, emissions into the air and air quality, discharges into water and water quality, management of waste, management and disposal of solid and hazardous substances, protection of natural resources, fisheries and wildlife protection, antiquities, endangered species, noise and use and reclamation of lands disturbed by mining operations. The Company is required to obtain governmental permits and, in some instances, provide bonding requirements under federal, state or provincial air quality, water quality, and mine reclamation rules and permits. Although the Company makes provisions for reclamation costs, it cannot be assured that these provisions will be adequate to discharge the Company's future obligations for these costs. Violations of environmental laws may be subject to civil sanctions and, in some cases, criminal sanctions, including the suspension or revocation of permits. While responsible environmental, health and safety stewardship is one of the Company's core values, there can be no assurance that the Company has been or will be at all times in complete compliance with such laws, regulations and permits, or that the costs of complying with current and future environmental laws and permits will not materially and adversely affect the Company's business, results of operations or financial condition.
Our U.S. operations are subject to the Clean Water Act (the "CWA"), which requires permits for certain discharges into waters of the United States. Such permitting has been a frequent subject of litigation and enforcement activity by environmental advocacy groups and the EPA, respectively, which has resulted in declines in such permits or extensive delays in receiving them, as well as the imposition of penalties for permit violations. In 2015, the regulatory definition of "waters of the United States" that are protected by the CWA was expanded by the EPA, thereby imposing significant additional restrictions on waterway discharges and land uses. However, in 2018, implementation of the relevant rule was suspended for two years, and in December 2019 a revised definition that narrows the 2015 version was implemented. Even with the narrowed rule, it is possible that in the future the definition could again be expanded, or states could take action to address a perceived fall-off in protection under the CWA, either of which could increase litigation involving water discharge permits, which may result in delays in, or in some instances preclude, the commencement or continuation of development or production operations. Enforcement actions by the EPA or other federal or state agencies could also result. Adverse outcomes in lawsuits challenging permits or failure to comply with applicable regulations or permits could result in the suspension, denial, or revocation of required permits, or the imposition of penalties, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our cash flows, results of operations, or financial condition.
Some of the mining wastes from our U.S. operations currently are exempt to a limited extent from the extensive set of EPA regulations governing hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA"). If the EPA were to repeal this exemption, and designate these mining wastes as hazardous under RCRA, we would be required to expend additional amounts on the handling of such wastes and to make significant expenditures to construct hazardous waste storage or disposal facilities. In addition, if any of these wastes or other substances we release or cause to be released into the environment cause or has caused contamination in or damage to the environment at a U.S. mining facility, that facility could be designated as a "Superfund" site under CERCLA. Under CERCLA, any present owner or operator of a Superfund site or the owner or operator at the time of contamination may be held jointly and severally liable regardless of fault and may be forced to undertake extensive remedial cleanup action or to pay for the cleanup efforts. The owner or operator also may be liable to federal, state and tribal governmental entities for the cost of damages to natural resources, which could be substantial.
Under certain environmental laws, the Company could be held jointly and severally liable for removal or remediation of any hazardous substance contamination at its current, former and future properties, at nearby properties, or at other third-party sites where the Company's wastes may have migrated or been disposed. The Company could also be held liable for damages to natural resources resulting from hazardous substance contamination. If there is contamination, we could be subject to significant liabilities and held responsible for the remediation. Additionally, environmental laws in some of the countries in which the Company operates require that the Company periodically perform environmental impact studies at the Company's mines. The Company cannot provide assurance that these studies will not reveal environmental impacts that would require the Company to make significant capital outlays or cause material changes or delays in its intended activities, any of which could adversely affect the Company's business.
The failure to comply with environmental laws and regulations or liabilities related to hazardous substance contamination could result in project development delays, material financial impacts or other material impacts to the Company's projects and activities, fines, penalties, lawsuits by the government or private parties, or material capital expenditures. Environmental legislation in many countries is evolving and the trend has been towards stricter standards and enforcement, increased fines and penalties for non-compliance, more stringent environmental assessments of proposed projects, and increasing responsibility for companies and their officers, directors and employees. Future changes in these laws or regulations could have a significant adverse impact on some portion of the Company's business, causing the Company to re- evaluate those activities at that time.
In addition to evolving and expanding environmental regulations providing governmental authorities with the means to make claims against us, private parties have in the past and may in the future bring claims against us based upon damage to property and injury to persons resulting from the environmental, health and safety impacts of prior and current operations (including for exposure to or contamination by lead). Laws in the United States such as CERCLA and similar state laws may expose us to joint and several liability or claims for contribution made by the government (state or federal) or private parties. Moreover, exposure to these liabilities arises not only from our existing but also from closed operations, operations sold to third parties, or operations in which we had a leasehold, joint venture, or other interest. Because liability under CERCLA is often alleged on a joint and several basis against any property owner or operator or arranger for the transport of hazardous waste, our exposure to environmental claims may be greater because of the bankruptcy or dissolution of other mining companies which may have engaged in more significant activities at a mining site than we but which are no longer available for governmental agencies or other claimants to make claims against or obtain judgments from. Similarly, there is also the potential for claims against us based on agreements entered into by certain affiliates and predecessor companies relating to the transfer of businesses or properties, which contained indemnification provisions relating to environmental matters.