Publication Name

MINING FOR CLOSURE

world that preventative measures leading to ad-

equate mine closure be always put in place. The

next section summarises common expectations

regarding responsible mining and responsible gov-

ernance of mining activities.

4.4

As has been made clear throughout this document,

significant advances have been made in mining

practice over the past two decades or so – particu-

larly in “leading” mining countries. These advanc-

es cannot be divorced from their central drivers

– public expectations, governmental measures that

are stimulated by the expectations of other stake-

holders, and general awareness of the implications

of legacies and the need to prevent more. As has

been outlined in Section 3, the stakeholders that

generate “common expectations” are diverse and

can act alone on in constellations depending upon

individual situations. One trend is certain – expec-

tations regarding the levels of environmental and

sustainability-related practice in mining and for

mine closure are increasing.

4.4.1

base expectations

regarding closure

According to van Zyl

et al

(2002a), the activities dur-

ing the final closure stage for a mine site include:

(1) the removal of infrastructure, (2) the implemen-

tation of public safety measures, (3) re-contour-

ing and revegetation (rehabilitation), (4) ongoing

maintenance of site structures and monitoring of

environmental issues, (5) the operation of site fa-

cilities required to mitigate or prevent long term

environmental degradation and (6) the completion

of company involvement in sustainable commu-

nity economic and social programmes.

Mine decommissioning and closure is the proc-

ess of shutting down a mining operation with the

broad objective of leaving the area in a safe and

stable condition that is consistent with the sur-

rounding physical and social environment and

does not need ongoing maintenance (Environ-

ment Australia, 2002a).

The following text will address that which this dis-

cussion deems these points to mean.

As has been alluded to in the introductory section

and in Section 2, expectations regarding the man-

ner in which mining activities are planned and reg-

ulated (encompassing planning, implementation,

closure and post-closure cycles) encompass at least

the following

planning expectations

planning defines a vision of the end result for

mining land and sets out concrete objectives to

implement that vision;

mine closure plan is an integral part of a

project life cycle;

the preparation of a mine closure plan takes

place early in the process of mine development

and in consultation with the regulating author-

ity and local communities;

planning for mining operations should include

environmental, social and economic aspects.

In general terms this context includes a process

that extends from the pre-mine planning phase,

through construction, mining, and mine closure

to post-mine stewardship (Environment Austral-

ia, 2002b).

It is also important that planning expectations con-

tinually evolve to maintain relevancy in the eyes of

key social actors. Social expectations continually

grow in a wide range of areas as was highlighted

in Sections 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 where principles for in-

vestment were outlined. Despite the fact that those

example are for investment in mining projects, the

reader is encouraged again to examine the content

Appendix C – The Equator Principles and Appendix

D – Governance Principles for FDI in Hazardous

Activities in order to gain a picture of what “current

best practice” expectations may be.

When shifting to the environmental outcomes of

mine closure, expectations include that mine closure

is to provide long-term stabilization of the geochem-

ical and geotechnical conditions of the disturbed

mining areas to protect public health, and minimise

and prevent any abnormal additional or on-going

environmental degradation. As such, and as defined

earlier, the base

environmental expectations

are:

Future public health and safety are not com-

promised;

Environmental resources are not subject to

physical and chemical deterioration;

When dealing with environmental parameters, the

situation may often be that “official expectations”

require (at least in theory) that at mine closure,

mining companies have restored the area affected

common expectat-

ions and emergent

best environmental

practice

•