Mining for Closure: Policies, practises and guidelines for sustainable mining and closure of mines

ing sector constitutes a very important contribu- tor to local and national economies in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) and SEE/TRB. However, in parts of these regions, the mining sector has often been characterised by inappropriate planning, op- erational and post-operational practices. Moreover, such activities have taken place within inadequate regulatory frameworks. Inadequate implementa- tion of mine rehabilitation and closure activities has been one outcome of note (Nazari, 1999). 7 In the focus region for this document, this has re- sulted in and continues to cause – significant ad- verse environmental, health and safety, social and economic impacts and related liabilities (Burnod- Requia, 2004; ICPDR/Zinke Environment Con- sulting, 2000; Nazari, 1999; Peck, 2004). In addition to these problems, the contribution that mining can deliver to such Economies in Transi- tion (EiT) is also compromised for other reasons. In 1999, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (Nazari) reported that in many EiTs where there are significant mining activities, the lack of implementation of mine closure activities has resulted and continues to result in significant adverse environmental and health and safety im- pacts. Such failure was normally as a result of finan- cial constraints. It should be noted that the finan- 5. According to Gilles Tremblay, Program Manager, Special Projects with Natural Resources Canada (personal communica- tion: Natural Resources Canada, 2005, 2 August), “Mining for Closure” as presented in this document is very similar to the con- cept of ”Design for Closure” and/or “Operate for Closure” utilised elsewhere. He indicates that the term “Design for Closure” was actively promoted by John Gadsby, a consultant from British Co- lumbia, Canada and he used that in a foreword to a volume on Acid Drainage published in 1990 (Gadsby, Malick, & Day, 1990). According to Tremblay, Canadian actors used such terminology extensively during the 1990s and it was mostly focused on reduc- ing the environmental liabilities at the time of closure. Further, he reports that as part of the Seven Questions to Sustainability Task of the North American MMSD (Mining Metals and Sustain- able Development) Regional Process it was realized that to test the contributions of a mining project to Sustainable Development one should change the concept to “Design and Operate for Post- Closure”. The mine then becomes a bridge between the pre-min- ing and post-mining physical and human environment (for green field projects) and served as a powerful way of looking at the con- tributions of mining to SD. 6. It must be stressed; that the “closure” (or lack thereof) as con- ducted by the parties that were active at the majority of abandoned and orphaned mines discussed within this document met the en- vironmental requirements imposed (or not imposed) on them at the time of mining and minerals processing activity. While we find that there have been major improvements in the more indus- trialized countries – such was accepted practice at that time. 7. Then Principal Environmental Specialist, European Bank for Reconstruction & Development (EBRD)

Miller, 2005). When viewed in combination with growing desires to preserve land areas as a reposi- tory for valuable biological assets, for natural envi- ronmental services and for aesthetic appeal, these developments appear likely continue to drive con- tinued improvement in mining practice. As a part of this positive trend, mine planning, mine closure practices and the conduct of mine op- erations to facilitate environmentally and socially acceptable closure have also evolved significantly in recent years. While in the past communities often saw that the only choice available was whether a deposit should be mined or not, it has been clearly shown that the manner in which a mine is planned can have major positive influences on the magni- tude and duration of impacts over the life of the development and following its closure (Environ- mental Protection Agency, 1995a, p. 2). In this context, the title Mining for Closure 5 chosen for this document is not intended to indicate that existing mining activities should be ceased, and future min- ing activities curtailed significantly. To the contrary, the mining sector is a very important contributor to local and national economies (Nazari, 1999). Further, the extractive industries will continue to underpin the economies of many countries in the future. As such, ongoing and new developments to process and mine the mineral resources of “min- ing nations” will be vital for many of them to pur- sue sustainable development. In recognition of this importance, this document is intended to help fa- cilitate mining policy development, capacity devel- opment and institutional development so that they can yield a sustainable mix of social, economic, and environmental outcomes from mining. The key focus of this document is upon countries in SEE/TRB, however much of the material and ideas presented here are intended to be generic. However, while many positive developments have taken place, it cannot be ignored that the major motivating factors behind improvement of exist- ing and new mining activities are the extensive and problematical legacies of abandoned mines and their associated environmental and social problems (Balkau, 2005a, 2005b; U.S. Department of Inte- rior, 1998). 6 Countless thousands of these mining legacies exist around the world and while marked improvements can be noted in the management of ongoing and planned mining developments, the “making good” of past mining sins has been far less impressive. Relatively few of these orphaned or abandoned mines have been restored. The min-

2

MINING FOR CLOSURE