Successful mine closure or reclamation processes have various definitions in jurisdictions around the world. Setting criteria for a successful mine closure is required to measure progress towards achieving the objectives of closure. The majority of existing guidelines are based on processes – methods and procedures and techniques – the ‘means’ rather than the ‘ends’. Current debate argues that identification of end-use is good practice in mine closure methodology, seeking outcomes such as future use, performance and function. This paper examines aspects of these ‘good’ mine closure practices, identifying the objectives and criteria in the jurisdictions of Western Australia, Canada (BC), Chile and South Africa.
This paper then goes on to contrast these aspects with what is currently found in former Soviet Union (FSU) countries of Russia, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. It is apparent that these FSU countries have much to do to achieve good mine closure practices. The paper concludes with descriptions of planned future development of policies and trends in the FSU arena that could move towards targeting similar good practices.
