80 likes | 89 Views
Witwatersrand AMD Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Water & Environmental Affairs 28 th June 2011. Overview of Activities by Gold Mining Companies active in the West, Central and Eastern Basins. 28 th June 2011 John Munro – Spokesperson for the active companies. 8.
E N D
Witwatersrand AMDParliamentary Portfolio Committee on Water & Environmental Affairs 28th June 2011 Overview of Activities by Gold Mining Companies active in the West, Central and Eastern Basins 28th June 2011 John Munro – Spokesperson for the active companies 8
History of Witwatersrand Basins AMD The Western Basin decants • 120 years of underground mining stopped in 1990’s • Workings filled with water - AMD decanted in 2002 • Directives begin 2005 • Attempts at apportionment failed 2005 to date • Active mines directed to : • Install temporary treatment operations • Develop a long term sustainable solution Today6 years later – AMD remains very serious in all basins • Temporary operations continue by current companies • Mines have proposed a Long Term Solution • Central Basin is flooding->300m rise in under 2 years • Eastern Basin is flooding
Working collaboratively towards a solution EBEC WBEC CBEC WBWC WUC
The impact of AMD Up to 40 Ml/d untreated overflow Unsaturated zone Water table Surface water Saturated zone Ground water Critical environmental zone Deep aquifer zone
Overview of activities by active companies • Premised that the AMD is essentially ownerless and is a legacy liability And • Inlight of this, on DWA direction, various companies undertook, “without prejudice” to implement certain practical steps since 2005 : • The Pragmatic approach: • Operate AMD partialtreatment Plants, as a temporary measure • Support the development of a Sustainable Long Term Solution • Presented a Sustainable Long Term Solution to DWA and latterly the IMC- ToE • Worked extensively with Government, regulators and stakeholders on the problem since 2005 right up to date • The Legal Approach • Each company has however a specific unique factual and legal position too. Companies have acted collaboratively where possible. • Extensive legal activity has proven fruitless so far.
Summary of Mining Company activities • 2002 – AMD decant commenced WB–emergency containment measures • 2004 – AMD Partial Treatment Plant commenced operations WB • 2005 – DWA issues first AMD directive • 2005 – Upgraded AMD Treatment Plant commenced operations WB • 2006/7 – Cooperative bodies formed (WBEC, CBEC etc) • 2007 – WUC mandated by WBEC/CBEC/EBEC established to develop long term solution • 2007,8,9 – WUC undertakes extensive studies, piloting and wide consultation • 2009 • DWA’s Water for Growth & Dev Document highlights WUC as “by far most attractive solution” • DWA takes lead in supporting WUC initiative • Government Task Team (GTT) provides “in principle” support for WUC • WUC submits Final scoping report- ready to submit WULA and Final EIA • 2009 - Mining companies engage DWA at high level on advancing Long Term Solution • 2010 – Mining companies engage DWA on alternative solutions at Ministerial level • 2010 – Mining Companies again propose Long Term Solution in revised submission to address perceived DWA objections • 2011 - Mining companies present proposals to IMC Technical Team • Emergency measures • Long Term Solution • Mining companies engage with DWA/TCTA post release of IMC report
The Challenge remains • Large Scale AMD in the Central Wits goldfields • “AAA priority issue” - Hon Min Sonjica - March 2010 • Legacy • The AMD is essentially ownerless • Litigation around apportionment and liabilities has been fruitless • New Operators on the West and Central Basin • These Companies could not have created this problem • Burdening these companies with this legacy is unsustainable • Mining companies have and will continue to work and engage constructively • Resolution is critical to the environment we share • Resolution is critical to the recovery of mining in Gauteng • A Solution has been presented by the mining companies and WUC • Presented to Government in 2009/2010 • Economically viable and able to attract external funding • (reduces reliance on State and new mining companies) • Rejected by DWA and in IMC report • Government now in control • Opportunity for mines contribution diminishing