Spotlight Feature Articles MWH/Stantec Tailings and Waste Management July 16 | Page 3

TAILINGS AND WASTE MANAGEMENT data would permanently reside and remain connected to the mine rather than the people or consultants working there. Finally, the limitation of using net present value (NPV) calculations to evaluate environmental liabilities including tailings facilities corrective actions and closure, was discussed, and there was agreement that NPV often trivialises future obligations, which can lead to poor short term decision making. Using long term gross lifecycle cash flow costs was considered an equally important decisi on parameter and more representative of true costs when evaluating mining projects. Requirements for qualified persons The tailings dam at Cerro Corona understood, management systems that put the tailing management on par with health and safety. Environmental management, like safety, must be top of mind, all the time. Having tailings management facilities information that is complete, well organised and accessible is a key first step to managing risk. How that information is captured, managed, protected and shared is an area where, Julien suggests, the mining industry needs to fundamentally rethink its game. The NI 43-101 was created to protect investors from false mineral disclosures in the aftermath of the Bre-X scandal. The new data disclosure requirements changed the way geological information is managed and communicated. Handling TMF and water information in the same way as the 43-101 geological information is handled means the info would be centralised and protected from changes that happen over time. Importantly, for Julien the mine waste process cannot operate in a vacuum: it must be linked to performance of the entire mine using an integrated Life of Mine (LOM) approach. The LOM approach requires one to look beyond the day-to-day and evaluate the design, operation, expansion and closure of the TMF while considering the larger system (the mine) within which the waste processing operates. Jeff Reinson of Goldcorp defined sustainability as, “providing safe places to work, live, learn and play for everyone”, and noted that water is key to the company’s sustainability efforts. He challenged the audience by pointing out that there are 999,972 g of waste for a gold grade of 28 g/t (in addition to water used to support the process) and therefore mining is much more about waste management than metal production. The break-out sessions yielded suggestions on how mining companies can take advantage of the opportunity to improve disclosure around tailings. Focusing on business risk means mining companies will further elevate the importance of waste management as will encouraging executives and boards of directors to become meaningfully involved in the planning, stewardship and closure of TMFs. A group led by Ian Hutchison of SLR Consulting pointed out that mining and tailings management has a very important people component to it – and it is people who frequently make mistakes. Future efforts must not only focus on the planning and engineering of mine waste processes, but also on informing, educating and training those who are responsible for building and operating the facilities. Those who manage operations need to have basic education in the critical aspects of tailings management, and operators of facilities need the appropriate training and certification. Water treatment plant operators are typically required to be certified, so why not those who operate tailings dams? Another idea the group brought forward was to create a comprehensive information database for each TMF (particularly the larger ones). Since owners, operators, designers, independent reviewers and review boards frequently change during the life of a TMF, institutional memory and sometimes hard information on the design and operations can get lost. Storing TMF information in the cloud – a ‘mining cloud,’ so to speak – where facility Andy Robertson, founder of Robertson GeoConsultants, spoke on the key attributes required for a tailings qualified person (QP) – whether the QP works within a mining company, as a consultant, or as a government employee for siting, construction, operation and closure of water, tailings and waste management. He parcelled tailings roles under these headings: n Doers: designers, constructors, operators, remediators, and monitors n Checkers: corporate tailings managers; designer’s reviewers; independent reviewers; government reviewers for permits and compliance. The Engineer of Record and the Dam Safety Inspector n Checkers of the checkers: corporate governance responsible persons (technical, organisational, financial); Independent Technical Review Boards (ITRBs). Each needs a technical understanding and relevant experience to perform reviews required for the nature and hazard classification of the facility. Robertson emphasised the importance of understanding the breadth and complexity of technology, operating procedures and management for tailings as well as the need to have a high level of skill in the ‘ologies’. ‘Ologies’ include: geology, geotechnics, seismology, hydrology, hydraulics, hydrogeology, geochemistry, environmental impacts. Finally he underscored the importance of specific expertise in tailings management methods, geochemical control, water management, and closure methods as experience needed for a QP. Todd Martin of Anglo American spoke about tailings management technologies – thickened, paste and filtered tailing disposal – indicating this, along with upstream processes (mining, JULY 2013 | International Mining