82 / 120
64
MINING FOR CLOSURE
This document will then conclude with a number
of suggestions regarding the way forward to
achieving
Mining for Closure
in SEE/TRB. The text
addresses each of the following queries areas in
turn:
what
the key issues are;
why
they should be
dealt with;
how
such issues can be progressed,
who
should or can take action and
when
action should
be taken.
6.1
orphaned and
abandoned sites
The reader is reminded that within this report the
term
abandoned
mine site refers to an area former-
ly used for mining and mineral processing (min-
ing operations or facilities) where closure (includ-
ing rehabilitation) is incomplete but whose legal
owners still exist, while an
orphaned
mine site is
deemed to be an abandoned mining operations or
facilities for which the responsible party no longer
exists or cannot be located.
This distinction is important to note in the text that
is included in this sub-section and the sections that
follow.
what are some key issues
regarding orphaned and
abandoned sites in see/trb?
A large number of mineral extractive industry re-
lated sites that are of high hazard exist in SEE/TRB
and many have significant risks associated with
them that threaten the environment, public health
and safety, and/or regional socio-political stability
in the South Eastern European countries.
The enormous financial liability embedded in any
systematic rehabilitation programme for mining
legacies constitutes a challenge that is beyond any
single social actor’s financial or organizational re-
sources to solve alone in a conventional manner.
There is a lack of quantitative data describing the
morphology of sites, their geochemistry, their gen-
eral degree of risk, and which actors who should be
accountable, or can be made accountable for such
sites.
While, the lack of current legal owners of orphaned
mine sites often places the accountability in the
governmental hands, few governments anywhere
have the resources or the expertise to take on physi-
cal and financial responsibility for dealing with
such orphaned sites.
(Evidence suggests that) current liability regimes
act as a disincentive for economic actors to asso-
ciate themselves with orphaned and abandoned
mine sites.
The approaches to social issues taken in rehabilita-
tion programmes are often inappropriate at such
sites and for their neighbouring communities.
The absence of clear criteria and standards for re-
habilitation in many jurisdictions delay action by
both the industry and by public authorities
Many national institutions or jurisdictions lack
direction and require guidance. Further, it is clear
that new approaches are required to find more in-
novative solutions.
why should these issues be
dealt with?
There are very significant risks associated with
non-operational, abandoned and/or orphaned sites