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

nations; that address closure options, processing and ongoing reclamation; that have appropriate terms and conditions for site reclamation and decommissioning; that ensure that closure plans are updated, and that ensure that sufficient fi- nancial security (bonds, assurances, etc.) are in place prior to development. Guidelines for such frameworks are included in the equivalent part of Section 6.2 – and in the key references to this document. By ensuring the effective conduct of inspection and enforcement of rules and regulations once they are in place. By making re-mining operations more commer- cially attractive via reduction in taxes and royalties, changes in land tenure laws, and through reduced legal liabilities for operations that engage in reha- bilitation processes for legacy sites in parallel to their core activities. who should act and where? The governments and minerals administrations of nation states in partnership with international ex- pert resources should undertake the development of frameworks for Mining for Closure tailored to the needs of the region. Mining organizations (the entity that seeks to profit from the activity) should undertake responsibility for mine closure and reclamation for all new mines and re-mining projects within the frameworks de- veloped by government. when should these actions be taken? Again, implementation of such frameworks should be undertaken as soon as is practicable. These are preventative measures and the costs associated with their implementation are minor in compari- son to the economic, environmental and health re- lated benefits they can yield. 6.4 fostering institu- tional frameworks Institutional frameworks enfolding mining are discussed from two perspectives here. The first is in line with the focus of this document – i.e. Min- ing for Closure . The second is related to the broader

conducted properly, these projects offer far more than an economic basis for (social) development – they also offer an opportunity to restore mining legacies. The majority of the answers to the que- ries posed in this section, and salient points to be addressed mirror the previous sub-section. Such information is not repeated here but this section should be read with the previous in mind. Prior to moving into this material, an important point is to be made. New projects require finance – and responsible financing is a topic that was ad- dressed in Sections 2.3.4 and 2.3.5. what are the key issues regard- ing new mining or re-mining projects? To ensure that successful planning yields the maxi- mum freedom to address sustainable development goals during mine operation and at the time of mine closure. To include communities of interest thoroughly in the process of project definition (including closure goals) so that they can contribute to the formula- tion of a successful and equitable mining project. To leverage and encourage new mining projects that can restore mining legacies as a part of their ongoing operation. The need to demonstrate institutional flexibility and a willingness to shape attractive frameworks for new mining and re-mining projects from repu- table mining actors. why should these issues be dealt with? The arguments for new mining projects are listed in the equivalent part of Section 6.2 – the major difference is that much greater possibilities to capi- talise on opportunities exist for new projects. For new projects, the economic recovery of minerals has not yet commenced and economic calculations must incorporate allowances for mine decommis- sioning to take place. how can these issues be pro- gressed?

By developing reclamation and decommissioning standards that are in-keeping with leading mining

71

MINING FOR CLOSURE