TAILING & HEAP LEACH FACILITY MANAGEMENT PURPOSE & OBJECTIVES CONTENT. 1. Planning & Design

Similar documents
Newmont Mining Corporation Tailing & Heap Leach Facility Management Standard

Newmont Mining Corporation Water Management Standard

APPENDIX 22C: CYANIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN

Fairbanks Gold Mining Inc. 2 Modification #2, June 13, 2018 TABLE OF CONTENTS

David Miller, P.E.- Atlanta. The New Coal Ash Regulations Wednesday, May 6, 2015

BEST PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN MINING INDUSTRY

Closure Plan Ash Disposal Area PGE Boardman Power Plant

Magino Project Environmental Impact Statement. Technical Support Document Water Management Plan

Independent Expert Engineering Investigation and Review Panel. Report on Mount Polley Tailings Storage Facility Breach. Appendix G: Water Balance

City of Guelph Transfer of Review Procedures 7 March, 2017

Appendix 3-G SWM AND BMP CONSTRUCTION INSPECTIONS

ICMC RECERTIFICATION SUMMARY AUDIT REPORT YANACOCHA MINE CAJAMARCA, PERU

Plan Requirement Guidance for Quartz Mining Projects

APPENDIX E STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN

Page 1 of 6 Permit No: MN R J. Mineral Mining and Dressing

Tropicana Gold Project Tailings Environmental Management Strategy

D5 Management of tailings and water storage August 2015

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

SUMMARY AUDIT REPORT

Appendix B Stormwater Site Plan Submittal Requirements Checklist

GRADING, EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL

INTERNATIONAL CYANIDE MANAGEMENT CODE AUDIT CORTEZ MINE, NEVADA SUMMARY AUDIT REPORT

D5 Management of tailings and water storage facilities

D5 Management of tailings and water storage facilities

STATE OF ARIZONA AQUIFER PROTECTION PERMIT NO. P PLACE ID , LTF 49639

Appendix G. Haile Gold Mine EIS Monitoring and Management Plan (MMP)

Dankoe Mine. Report on 2014 Dam Safety Inspection of Tailings Storage Facility

TAILINGS MANAGEMENT PLAN

Modernization of High Hazard Dams in Austin, Texas. TFMA Spring Conference May 23, 2007

2 EARTHWORKS AND GEOTECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS

Permeable Pavement Facilities and Surfaces

INTERNATIONAL CYANIDE MANAGEMENT CODE AUDIT CARLIN MINE, NEVADA SUMMARY AUDIT REPORT

The Afton TSF, situated approximately 12 km west of Kamloops, BC has been under care and maintenance since 1997.

Review of ML/ARD Geochemistry & Water Quality Predictions

ICMI Cyanide Code Gold Mining Recertification Audit

Closure Plan Brame Fly Ash Pond

ICMI GOLD MINE RECERTIFICATION AUDIT - SUMMARY REPORT Newmont Ghana Gold - Ahafo Gold Mine

Jim Bridger Power Plant

3.11 Sand Filter Basin

Closure Planning for a Tailings Storage Facility in Western Australia

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey May 2012 STANDARD FOR GRASSED WATERWAYS. Definition. Purpose

GUIDE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF A MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN IN NEW BRUNSWICK

CONSTRUCTION PLAN CHECKLIST

Brickhaven No.2 Mine Tract A Structural Fill

CHAPTER 6 - How to Prepare a SWPPP

DECEMBER 2015 ICMC RECERTIFICATION SUMMARY AUDIT REPORT. Carlin Mine, Nevada, USA

Category 1 Waste Rock Stockpile Groundwater Containment System

In-pit tailings disposal at Langer Heinrich TSFs in a unique hydrogeological setting

CLOSURE PLAN. Bremo Power Station CCR Surface Impoundment: North Ash Pond

Written Closure Plan. Comanche Station - Active CCR Landfill Public Service Company of Colorado Denver Colorado. October 17, 2016

Poly Met Mining, Inc. Antidegradation Review - Preliminary Determination for 401 Certification

ORDER OF THE MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT SECTION 79 AMENDED SPILL PREVENTION ORDER: MO1701

ORDER OF THE MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ACT SECTION 79 AMENDED SPILL PREVENTION ORDER: MO1701

Attachment 1 WORLD BANK ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND SAFETY GUIDELINES 1 MINING AND MILLING UNDERGROUND (INTERIM)

FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY MASTER PLAN 9 General Infrastructure

Stantec Consulting Services Inc Lebanon Road, Cincinnati, OH 45241

SMARA Reclamation Standards Review

SIOUX ENERGY CENTER SCPB CCR IMPOUNDMENT CLOSURE PLAN

Wolverine Project TEMPORARY CLOSURE UPDATE TO RECLAMATION AND CLOSURE PLAN AS REQUIRED BY QML-0006

APPENDIX 3C RISK ASSESSMENT FOR ACCIDENTS AND MALFUNCTIONS OF THE JAY PROJECT

CLOSURE AND POST-CLOSURE CARE PLAN JAMES RIVER POWER STATION UTILITY WASTE LANDFILL CITY UTILITIES OF SPRINGFIELD, MISSOURI

Information Requirements Table for Liquid Waste

Environmental Bill of Rights Draft Version DRAFT - For Consultation Purposes Only Ministry of the Environment

Enviable water recovery in a desert environment a case study

Review of the 2014 Annual Dam Safety Inspection Report, 2-North Pit Tailings Disposal Facility, Quinsam Coal Mine

CHOLLA POWER PLANT CLOSURE PLAN (b) BOTTOM ASH POND CH_ClosPlan_003_

SUMMARY AUDIT REPORT

Response to EPA Comments on Tailings Cell Seepage and Stability Piñon Ridge Project, Montrose County, Colorado

Appendix M Framework Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Prepared by: Idaho Power Company 1221 W Idaho Street Boise, ID 83702

FIRM NAME DESIGNER: CHECKER: DATE: FPID #: DESCRIPTION: COUNTY: DRAINAGE DESIGN CHECKLIST. Designers Initials. Checkers Initials.

STORM DRAINAGE DESIGN MANUAL

GUIDELINES FOR PREPARATION OF MINE CLOSURE PLAN

International Cyanide Management Code Gruyere Pre-Operational Certification Audit - Summary Audit Report

TITLE 252. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY CHAPTER 616. INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER SYSTEMS SUBCHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION [AMENDED]

Coal Combustion Product Risk Assessment Using a Probabilistic Cost Modeling Approach

Grassy Mountain Gold Project Environmental Evaluation - Draft Outline

A-2. Soils. Soil Media. Chapter Contents. Soil Media In-situ Soil Testing Separation from Seasonal High Water Table (SHWT)

Sediment Control Practices

the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) Oceana Gold (New Zealand) Limited Applicant

INTERNATIONAL CYANIDE MANAGEMENT CODE AUDIT TWIN CREEKS MINE, NEVADA SUMMARY AUDIT REPORT

MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT BOARD OF MANAGERS REVISIONS PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES 103D.341. Adopted April 24, 2014 Effective June 6, 2014

MOUNT POLLEY MINING CORPORATION MOUNT POLLEY MINE TAILINGS STORAGE FACILITY

Base Metal and Iron Ore Mining

Tailings Design and Operation Safety!

4.12. Detention Basins

MOUNT POLLEY MINING CORPORATION MOUNT POLLEY MINE TAILINGS STORAGE FACILITY

15A NCAC 13A.0109 STANDARDS FOR OWNERS AND OPERATORS OF HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES - PART 264 (a) Any person who

Lessons Learned from the On-Site Disposal Facility at Fernald Closure Project

EAGLE S NEST PROJECT

WASTE TREATMENT LAGOON

Heap Leach Pad Cover and Facilities Monitoring Program

14.0 MONITORING AND CONTINGENCY 14.1 Effects Monitoring

ILLINOIS URBAN MANUAL PRACTICE STANDARD TEMPORARY STREAM CROSSING (no.) CODE 975. Source: Hey and Associates, Inc.

24. Closure and Rehabilitation

Curriculum Vita NICHOLAS CARL STEVEN BRITISH MARRIED

Guidance for Liner Design for Demolition Debris or Industrial Solid Waste Landfills Waste/Solid Waste #5.02, October 2005

Dirk J.A. van Zyl, Ph.D., P.Eng. P.E. Tailings and Mine Rock Management

General Permit No.: OHR Page 53 of 146

Landfill Closure. SWANA NLC Conference May 2017

INITIAL INSPECTION REPORT ASH LANDFILL AREA SPRINGERVILLE GENERATING STATION SPRINGERVILLE, ARIZONA

Transcription:

PURPOSE & OBJECTIVES This Tailing & Heap Leach Facility Management Standard (the Standard ) sets the minimum Newmont requirements for the design and management of tailing storage facilities (TSF) and heap leach facilities (HLF) to protect human health, wildlife and flora, protect groundwater and/or surface water, prevent uncontrolled releases to the environment, manage process fluids and set requirements for closure and reclamation. Use of this Standard shall be in conjunction with other applicable standards and guidance within the Geology, Process, Mine Engineering and S&ER Functions, and incorporates the elements of the ICMM position statement on Preventing Catastrophic Failure of Tailings Storage Facilities. Sites shall identify, assess, and comply with applicable laws, regulations, permits, licenses, external standards and other applicable or relevant and appropriate requirements. A TSF includes the collective structures, components and equipment pertaining to management of any tailings and associated waters, including dams and reservoirs, other related facilities and appurtenances. A HLF includes heap leach pads, process solution ponds, solution transport pipes, solution application devices, leach pad process plants, and process solution channels. CONTENT 1. Planning & Design 1.1 Area baseline conditions shall be evaluated prior to siting and design of the TSF and HLF through qualified technical studies that address geographic and temporal variation, in accordance with the Investment System Requirements by stage. These studies will include, at a minimum: a) Land use b) Surface and ground water hydrology c) Geochemistry d) Climate e) Flora/Fauna f) Cultural Resources g) Geology h) Seismicity i) Soils j) Visual aesthetics 1.2 During the investment process, the project team must demonstrate compliance with the investment system study/project requirements by stage. This includes identifying all costs associated with the design, construction, operations and closure of the TSF or HLF to ensure that, at all stages of development and operation for the life of the facility, sufficient resources are available to maintain the necessary operational controls, monitor, and review of the facility. SEPTEMBER 2017 Page 1 of 5

1.3 Sites shall develop a TSF and/or HLF Management Plan or equivalent to restrict the release of potential contaminants to the environment. The plan(s) shall include: a) TSF or HLF management framework with design and operating criteria b) Schedule for internal and external audits and inspections c) Applicable regulatory, legal, and other obligations and requirements d) Inventory, description, characterization and management methods for TSF/HLF e) Risk assessments inclusive of risk-based designs and infrastructure/communities located downstream of embankments shall be summarized in the management plan f) Instrumentation, inspection, and site specific monitoring plans with key performance indicators (KPIs) for critical controls based on results of risk assessment g) Organizational structure with clearly defined roles, responsibilities, qualifications and training requirements for all personnel who will operate, maintain, supervise or manage TSF and HLF h) Emergency response plan (ERP) i) Inundation analysis and mapping j) Concurrent reclamation 1.4 A Fluid Management Plan (FMP) or equivalent shall be developed that addresses the management ofsolution based on the site-wide probabilistic water balance including the TSF and HLF. The FMP will identify trigger alert levels and contingency plans, during the operation and closure and reclamation phases. 1.5 TSF and HLF emergency response and key contact information shall be documented in the site ERP and developed in conjunction with the Social Responsibility team to ensure that all potentially affected persons are included in the emergency notification system. The TSF and HLF emergency procedures shall be reviewed annually and tested periodically. 1.6 All sites shall conduct a risk-based assessment of the TSF and HLF designs to ensure adequate levels of protection for human health, water resources, and fauna in accordance with legal and regulatory requirements and other obligations and voluntary commitments. 1.7 Risk-based designs shall be reviewed cross-functionally including the Global Practice leads for Geotech & Hydrology, Environment, Process, Mine Engineering and Projects. 1.8 Where cyanide solutions are present, the TSF and HLF shall meet the requirements of the International Cyanide Management Code. 1.9 Excess TSF and HLF solutions, that require discharge to the environment, shall comply with applicable quality and quantity discharge limits in accordance the downstream designated beneficial use. 1.10 Geochemical testing and characterization shall be completed on ore before placement on a TSF or HLF. Additionally, geochemical testing and characterization shall be completed on soil and rock materials used to construct the TSF or HLF. Geochemical characterization shall be undertaken utilizing a recognized Acid Base Accounting (ABA) methodology. 1.11 TSF and HLF shall be designed to be geotechnically stable, including erosion potential and its potential impact to material containment. 1.12 Tailings solutions shall achieve 50-ppm weak acid dissociable (WAD) cyanide (CN); or lower concentration as determined by legal compliance criteria and/or other risk-based approach at point of discharge into the TSF. 1.13 TSFs shall have a composite liner system consisting of a minimum 300 mm (12-inch) thick soil liner with a permeability of 1x10-6 cm/sec or lower, overlain by a geosynthetic liner with a permeability of 1x10-11 cm/sec or lower. The TSF composite liner system must extend to the maximum expected elevation of the Life-of-Mine operating supernatant pond. Above this elevation, only a soil liner is required. SEPTEMBER 2017 Page 2 of 5

1.14 HLFs shall have a composite liner system consisting of a minimum 300 mm (12-inch) thick soil liner with a permeability of 1x10-6 cm/sec or lower, overlain by a geosynthetic liner with a permeability of 1x10-11 cm/sec or lower and be equipped with a leak collection and recovery system (LCRS) and/or underdrain system, as required from risk-based assessment. 1.15 HLF solution channels external to the pad shall have a single geosynthetic liner with a permeability of 1x10-11 cm/sec or lower over the subgrade with a permeability of 1x10-6 cm/sec or lower. 1.16 Process ponds and under-drainage ponds and sumps that will normally contain process solution during operations (i.e. excludes stormwater ponds) shall have a double liner system consisting of two geosynthetic liners with a permeability of 1x10-11 cm/sec or lower equipped with a LCRS between the double liners. 1.17 Ponds built for contingency overflow of process solutions (i.e. event ponds associated with HLF) shall have a composite liner system consisting of a minimum 300 mm (12-inch) thick soil liner with a permeability of 1x10-6 cm/sec or lower, overlain by a geosynthetic liner with a permeability of 1x10-11 cm/sec or lower. Overflow solutions into these ponds shall be removed per the FMP and operating permits. 1.18 TSF, HLF and associated solution storage and conveyance systems shall be designed and constructed to prevent overtopping and provide containment of a design storm event. The design storm event shall be determined using a risk-based approach with site-specific data, or as otherwise specified by local regulatory requirements, whichever is more stringent. 1.19 Runoff generated outside of a TSF and HLF shall be diverted away from the facility unless approved for collection as make-up water. Temporary and permanent stormwater structures shall be designed and constructed to convey the design storm event determined and documented by the risk-based design approach with site-specific data, or as otherwise specified by local regulatory requirements, whichever is more stringent. 1.20 Groundwater monitoring wells shall be installed upgradient to establish baseline conditions, and downgradient to monitor potential seepage from the TSF and HLF based on area hydrology and hydraulic conditions. 1.21 TSF shall include piezometers designed to measure the solution head build up in the embankment and in the tailing (if applicable). Trigger levels and response plans for the piezometers are to be listed in the TSF Management Plan. 1.22 Quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) monitoring and documentation is required for the construction of TSFs and HLFs. Final as-built documentation with associated QA/QC reports shall be completed by a registered engineer or equivalent and maintained at the site over the life of the operation. 2. Implementation & Management 2.1 All TSFs and HLFs shall have critical controls implemented to mitigate significant risks. Risk assessments of facilities shall be conducted annually and at major milestones. 2.2 All TSFs and HLFs shall be managed with defined accountabilities, responsibilities, and associated competencies to support identification and management of risks. 2.3 Prior to and throughout construction and operation a site-specific change management process shall be developed and reviewed at least annually. 2.4 Operating and human resource requirements to implement the TSF and/or HLF Management Plan shall be included in the Site Business Plan. Sites shall provide training, as required, to maintain the prerequisite skills and knowledge base of industry best management practices and new technologies. 2.5 The TSF and HLF FMP or equivalent, shall be implemented, reviewed, and updated annually or whenever significant changes to the system are made. SEPTEMBER 2017 Page 3 of 5

2.6 TSF and HLF water balances are to be updated throughout operation to reflect changes in mine plans, ore geochemistry, processing, and operations at least annually. TSFs and HLFs shall be included in the sitewide probabilistic water balance. 2.7 All ponds shall be managed consistent with the design and operational criteria. 2.8 The TSF shall be operated to maintain the piezometric head in the embankment and tailing below the trigger levels as specified in the TSF Management Plan and design report. Exeedances of these limits shall be recorded and addressed against a continuous improvement process. 2.9 If discharge is required, process solution including residual drainage shall meet applicable limits at a designated compliance point, and in accordance with downstream beneficial use. 2.10 TSF shall implement dust control measures as required to ensure compliance with air quality criteria. 2.11 Disposal of materials other than tailings in the TSF or HLF must be compatible with operation and management of the facility, comply with laws and permits, and not compromise closure and reclamation designs. 2.12 Sites shall implement the Closure and Reclamation Plan inclusive of the FMP or equivalent, in order to minimize erosion and infiltration while maintaining containment of placed materials and working to achieve post-mining designated land uses. 2.13 TSF and HLF shall be managed to be protective of the environment and fauna, be geotechnically stable and adhere to requirements of the International Cyanide Management Code, permit/license/regulatory requirements, and any other legal obligations and voluntary commitments. 3. Performance Monitoring 3.1 Sites shall follow the detailed monitoring plan for TSF and HLF (including groundwater wells, underdrains, LCRS, and discharges to the environment) and shall continue monitoring through the post-closure period until closure and reclamation is approved by the governing authority. 3.2 Sites shall monitor TSF and HLF material characterization (e.g. geochemistry and ARD potential) throughout the operational life to verify design assumptions. 3.3 TSFs and HLFs shall have an Independent Tailings Review Board (ITRB) where needed. The need for an ITRB will be based on technical, social, and/or political risks as determined by Newmont Regional and Corporate leadership. 3.4 The ITRB shall have a defined charter, with members selected by a steering committee chaired by the Regional SVP, and shall conduct an assessment of the TSF on an annual basis, reporting results to Executive Leadership. 3.5 Sites shall conduct inspection of freeboard, embankments and exposed lined areas to verify adherence to design parameters and conduct maintenance and/or repair as outlined by the monitoring plan. 3.6 Embankment and tailings piezometers shall be measured and reviewed by a suitably qualified and experienced geotechnical engineer on a routine basis but no less than quarterly in accordance with the TSF Management Plan. SEPTEMBER 2017 Page 4 of 5

3.7 At a minimum, Performance Monitoring and inspections shall be conducted as follows: a) Performance Monitoring and Inspections - Daily b) Geotechnical Reviews Annual by a qualified Independent Senior Geotechnical Engineer The results of these reviews shall include a record of the list of observations/findings and a record of when these are closed out. These reports, along with documented actual performance measured against the KPIs shall be reviewed by Executive Leadership on a routine basis, but no less frequently than quarterly. The developed records shall be managed in Cintellate. SEPTEMBER 2017 Page 5 of 5