global-industry-standard-on-tailings-management.pdf

GLOBAL INDUSTRY

STANDARD ON

TAILINGS

MANAGEMENT

AUGUST 2020

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

CONTENT

PREAMBLE

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

TOPIC I: AFFECTED COMMUNITIES

PRINCIPLE 1: Respect the rights of project-affected people and meaningfully engage

them at all phases of the tailings facility lifecycle, including closure.

TOPIC II: INTEGRATED KNOWLEDGE BASE

PRINCIPLE 2: Develop and maintain an interdisciplinary knowledge base to support safe

tailings management throughout the tailings facility lifecycle, including closure.

PRINCIPLE 3: Use all elements of the knowledge base - social, environmental, local economic and

technical - to inform decisions throughout the tailings facility lifecycle, including closure.

TOPIC III: DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION AND MONITORING

OF THE TAILINGS FACILITY

PRINCIPLE 4: Develop plans and design criteria for the tailings facility to minimise risk for all

phases of its lifecycle, including closure and post closure.

PRINCIPLE 5: Develop a robust design that integrates the knowledge base and minimises the risk

of failure to people and the environment for all phases of the tailings facility lifecycle, including

closure and post-closure.

PRINCIPLE 6: Plan, build and operate the tailings facility to manage risk at all phases of the

tailings facility lifecycle, including closure and post-closure.

PRINCIPLE 7: Design, implement and operate monitoring systems to manage risk at all

phases of the facility lifecycle, including closure.

TOPIC IV: MANAGEMENT AND GOVERNANCE

PRINCIPLE 8: Establish policies, systems and accountabilities to support the safety and

integrity of the tailings facility.

PRINCIPLE 9: Appoint and empower an Engineer of Record.

PRINCIPLE 10: Establish and implement levels of review as part of a strong quality and risk

management system for all phases of the tailings facility lifecycle, including closure.

PRINCIPLE 11: Develop an organisational culture that promotes learning, communication and

early problem recognition.

PRINCIPLE 12: Establish a process for reporting and addressing concerns and implement

whistleblower protections.

TOPIC V: EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND LONG-TERM RECOVERY

PRINCIPLE 13: Prepare for emergency response to tailings facility failures.

PRINCIPLE 14: Prepare for long term recovery in the event of catastrophic failure.

TOPIC VI: PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND ACCESS TO INFORMATION

PRINCIPLE 15: Publicly disclose and provide access to information about the tailings facility

to support public accountability.

ANNEX 1: Glossary

ANNEX 2: Consequence Classiﬁ cation Tables

ANNEX 3: Summary Tables

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

The Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (herein ‘the

Standard’) strives to achieve the ultimate goal of zero harm to people and

the environment with zero tolerance for human fatality. It requires Operators

to take responsibility and prioritise the safety of tailings facilities, through

all phases of a facility’s lifecycle, including closure and post-closure. It also

requires the disclosure of relevant information to support public accountability.

Issues have arisen in the development of the Standard that are difﬁ cult to

translate into an auditable industry Standard for Operators. These issues are

more appropriately addressed through national and/or state level regulatory

authorities, or through multilateral agencies working with the industry. For

example, it is recognised that more work needs to be done by national and/

or state level regulators to develop mechanisms that enable the identiﬁ cation,

maintenance and/or restoration of abandoned or ‘orphaned’ facilities.

The Standard provides a framework for safe tailings facility management

while affording Operators flexibility as to how best to achieve this goal. For

auditing and certiﬁ cation purposes, the Standard includes the Preamble, the

Requirements, the Glossary and Annexes. Unless otherwise speciﬁ ed, the

Requirements of the Standard are directed to the Operator. The Requirements

apply to individual facilities as deﬁ ned in the Glossary, and are all intended to

apply and be auditable.

Conformance with the Standard does not displace the requirements of any

speciﬁ c national, state or local governmental statutes, laws, regulations,

ordinances, or other government directives. Operators are expected to

conform with the Requirements of the Standard not in conflict with other

provisions of law.

The Standard will be supported by implementation protocols which will

provide detailed guidance for certiﬁ cation, or assurance as applicable, and

for equivalence with other standards. Many activities referenced in this

Standard may be found as part of a comprehensive mine-wide environmental

and social management system. Where credible systems for assuring these

requirements are already in place (such as third party audit or veriﬁ cation

processes), these should be recognised as equivalent to avoid duplication, to

the extent reasonably practicable.

Although the Standard follows a logical sequence arranged around broad topic

areas, the Requirements are not presented chronologically. The Principles

are intended to summarise the Requirements that follow and are not in

themselves auditable. To reduce repetition, the disclosure requirements are

grouped under Principle 15. These Requirements support public accountability

and protect Operators from the need to disclose conﬁ dential commercial or

ﬁ nancial information.

All terms that appear in italics are deﬁ ned in the Glossary, Annex 1.

PREAMBLE

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

GLOBAL INDUSTRY

STANDARD ON

TAILINGS

MANAGEMENT

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

CDIV Construction versus Design Intent Veriﬁ cation

DBR Design Basis Report

DSR Dam Safety Review

EOR Engineer of Record

EPRP Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan

ESMS Environmental and Social Management System

FPIC Free Prior and Informed Consent

GTR Global Tailings Review

ICMM International Council on Mining and Metals

ICOLD International Commission on Large Dams

IFC International Finance Corporation

ITRB Independent Tailings Review Board

OMS Operations, Maintenance and Surveillance

PRI Principles for Responsible Investment

RTFE Responsible Tailings Facility Engineer

TARP Triggered Action Response Plan

TMS Tailings Management System

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNGP United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

ACRONYMS

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

AFFECTED

COMMUNITIES

TOPIC I

RESPECT THE RIGHTS OF PROJECT-AFFECTED PEOPLE AND

MEANINGFULLY ENGAGE THEM AT ALL PHASES OF THE TAILINGS

FACILITY LIFECYCLE, INCLUDING CLOSURE.

Demonstrate respect for human rights in accordance with the United Nations

Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGP), conduct human

rights due diligence to inform management decisions throughout the tailings

facility lifecycle and address the human rights risks of tailings facility credible

failure scenarios.

For existing facilities, the Operator can initially opt to prioritise salient human

rights issues in accordance with the UNGP.

Where a new tailings facility may impact the rights of indigenous or tribal

peoples, including their land and resource rights and their right to self-

determination, work to obtain and maintain Free Prior and Informed Consent

(FPIC) by demonstrating conformance to international guidance and

recognised best practice frameworks.

Demonstrate that project-affected people are meaningfully engaged

throughout the tailings facility lifecycle in building the knowledge base and

in decisions that may have a bearing on public safety and the integrity of the

tailings facility. The Operator shall share information to support this process.

Establish an effective operational-level, non-judicial grievance mechanism

that addresses complaints and grievances of project-affected people relating

to the tailings facility, and provide remedy in accordance with the UNGP.

PRINCIPLE 1

Requirement 1.1

Requirement 1.2

Requirement 1.3

Requirement 1.4

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

INTEGRATED

KNOWLEDGE BASE

TOPIC II

DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN AN INTERDISCIPLINARY KNOWLEDGE

BASE TO SUPPORT SAFE TAILINGS MANAGEMENT THROUGHOUT

THE TAILINGS FACILITY LIFECYCLE, INCLUDING CLOSURE.

Develop and document knowledge about the social, environmental and

local economic context of the tailings facility, using approaches aligned with

international best practices. Update this knowledge at least every ﬁ ve years,

and whenever there is a material change either to the tailings facility or to the

social, environmental and local economic context. This knowledge should

capture uncertainties due to climate change.

Prepare, document and update a detailed site characterisation of the tailings

facility site(s) that includes data on climate, geomorphology, geology,

geochemistry, hydrology and hydrogeology (surface and groundwater

flow and quality), geotechnical, and seismicity. The physical and chemical

properties of the tailings shall be characterised and updated regularly to

account for variability in ore properties and processing.

Develop and document a breach analysis for the tailings facility using a

methodology that considers credible failure modes, site conditions, and

the properties of the slurry. The results of the analysis shall estimate the

physical area impacted by a potential failure. When flowable materials (water

and liqueﬁ able solids) are present at tailings facilities with Consequence

Classiﬁ cation of ‘High’, ‘Very High’ or ‘Extreme’, the results should include

estimates of the physical area impacted by a potential failure, flow arrival

times, depth and velocities, and depth of material deposition. Update

whenever there is a material change either to the tailings facility or the

physical area impacted.

In order to identify the groups most at risk, refer to the updated tailings

facility breach analysis to assess and document potential human exposure

and vulnerability to tailings facility credible failure scenarios. Update the

assessment whenever there is a material change either to the tailings facility

or to the knowledge base.

PRINCIPLE 2

Requirement 2.1

Requirement 2.2

Requirement 2.3

Requirement 2.4

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

USE ALL ELEMENTS OF THE KNOWLEDGE BASE - SOCIAL,

ENVIRONMENTAL, LOCAL ECONOMIC AND TECHNICAL -

TO INFORM DECISIONS THROUGHOUT THE TAILINGS FACILITY

LIFECYCLE, INCLUDING CLOSURE.

To enhance resilience to climate change, evaluate, regularly update and

use climate change knowledge throughout the tailings facility lifecycle in

accordance with the principles of Adaptive Management.

For new tailings facilities, the Operator shall use the knowledge base

and undertake a multi-criteria alternatives analysis of all feasible sites,

technologies and strategies for tailings management. The goal of this analysis

shall be to: (i) select an alternative that minimises risks to people and the

environment throughout the tailings facility lifecycle; and (ii) minimise the

volume of tailings and water placed in external tailings facilities. This analysis

shall be reviewed by the Independent Tailings Review Board (ITRB) or a senior

independent technical reviewer.

For existing tailings facilities, the Operator shall periodically review and reﬁ ne

the tailings technologies and design, and management strategies to minimise

risk and improve environmental outcomes. An exception applies to facilities

that are demonstrated to be in a state of safe closure.

For new tailings facilities, use the knowledge base, including uncertainties due

to climate change, to assess the social, environmental and local economic

impacts of the tailings facility and its potential failure throughout its lifecycle.

Where impact assessments predict material acute or chronic impacts, the

Operator shall develop, document and implement impact mitigation and

management plans using the mitigation hierarchy.

Update the assessment of the social, environmental and local economic

impacts to reflect a material change either to the tailings facility or to the

social, environmental and local economic context. If new data indicates that

the impacts from the tailings facility have changed materially, including as a

result of climate change knowledge or long-term impacts, the Operator shall

update tailings facility management to reflect the new data using Adaptive

Management best practices.

PRINCIPLE 3

Requirement 3.1

Requirement 3.2

Requirement 3.3

Requirement 3.4

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION,

OPERATION AND

MONITORING OF THE

TAILINGS FACILITY

TOPIC III

DEVELOP PLANS AND DESIGN CRITERIA FOR THE TAILINGS FACILITY TO

MINIMISE RISK FOR ALL PHASES OF ITS LIFECYCLE, INCLUDING CLOSURE

AND POST-CLOSURE.

Determine the consequence of failure classiﬁ cation of the tailings facility by

assessing the downstream conditions documented in the knowledge base

and selecting the classiﬁ cation corresponding to the highest Consequence

Classiﬁ cation for each category in Annex 2, Table 1. The assessment and

selection of the classiﬁ cation shall be based on credible failure modes, and

shall be defensible and documented.

With the objective of maintaining flexibility in the development of a new

tailings facility and optimising costs while prioritising safety throughout the

tailings facility lifecycle:

A. Develop preliminary designs for the tailings facility with external loading

design criteria consistent with both the consequence of failure classiﬁ cation

selected based on current conditions and higher Consequence

Classiﬁ cations (including ‘Extreme’).

B. Informed by the range of requirements deﬁ ned by the preliminary designs,

either:

1. Implement the design for the ‘Extreme’ Consequence Classiﬁ cation

external loading criteria; or

2. Implement the design for the current Consequence Classiﬁ cation criteria,

or a higher one, and demonstrate that the feasibility, at a proof of concept

level, to upgrade to the design for the ‘Extreme’ classiﬁ cation criteria is

maintained throughout the tailings facility lifecycle.

C. If option B.2 is implemented, review the consequence of failure

classiﬁ cation at the time of the Dam Safety Review (DSR) and at least

every ﬁ ve years, or sooner if there is a material change in the social,

environmental and local economic context, and complete the upgrade of

the tailings facility to the new Consequence Classiﬁ cation as determined

by the DSR within three years. This review shall proceed until the tailings

facility has been safely closed according to this Standard.

D. The process described above shall be reviewed by the Independent Tailings

Review Board (ITRB) or the senior independent technical reviewer, as

appropriate for the tailings facility Consequence Classiﬁ cation.

Subject to Requirement 4.7, Requirements 4.2.C and 4.2.D shall also apply

to existing tailings facilities.

PRINCIPLE 4

Requirement 4.1

Requirement 4.2

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

The Accountable Executive shall take the decision to adopt a design for the

current Consequence Classiﬁ cation criteria and to maintain flexibility to

upgrade the design for the highest classiﬁ cation criteria later in the tailings

facility lifecycle. This decision shall be documented.

Select, explicitly identify and document all design criteria that are appropriate

to minimise risk for all credible failure modes for all phases of the tailings

facility lifecycle.

Apply design criteria, such as factors of safety for slope stability and seepage

management, that consider estimated operational properties of materials and

expected performance of design elements, and quality of the implementation

of risk management systems. These issues should also be appropriately

accounted for in designs based on deformation analyses.

Identify and address brittle failure modes with conservative design criteria,

independent of trigger mechanisms, to minimise their impact on the

performance of the tailings facility.

Existing tailings facilities shall conform with the Requirements under Principle

4, except for those aspects where the Engineer of Record (EOR), with review

by the ITRB or a senior independent technical reviewer, determines that the

upgrade of an existing tailings facility is not viable or cannot be retroactively

applied. In this case, the Accountable Executive shall approve and document

the implementation of measures to reduce both the probability and the

consequences of a tailings facility failure in order to reduce the risk to a

level as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). The basis and timing for

addressing the upgrade of existing tailings facilities shall be risk-informed and

carried out as soon as reasonably practicable.

The EOR shall prepare a Design Basis Report (DBR) that details the design

assumptions and criteria, including operating constraints, and that provides

the basis for the design of all phases of the tailings facility lifecycle. The DBR

shall be reviewed by the ITRB or senior independent technical reviewer. The

EOR shall update the DBR every time there is a material change in the design

assumptions, design criteria, design or the knowledge base and conﬁ rm

internal consistency among these elements.

Requirement 4.3

Requirement 4.4

Requirement 4.5

Requirement 4.6

Requirement 4.7

Requirement 4.8

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

DEVELOP A ROBUST DESIGN THAT INTEGRATES THE KNOWLEDGE

BASE AND MINIMISES THE RISK OF FAILURE TO PEOPLE AND THE

ENVIRONMENT FOR ALL PHASES OF THE TAILINGS FACILITY LIFECYCLE,

INCLUDING CLOSURE AND POST-CLOSURE.

For new tailings facilities, incorporate the outcome of the multi-criteria

alternatives analysis including the use of tailings technologies in the design of

the tailings facility.

For expansions to existing tailings facilities, investigate the potential to reﬁ ne

the tailings technologies and design approaches with the goal of minimising

risks to people and the environment throughout the tailings facility lifecycle.

Develop a robust design that considers the technical, social, environmental

and local economic context, the tailings facility Consequence Classiﬁ cation,

site conditions, water management, mine plant operations, tailings operational

and construction issues, and that demonstrates the feasibility of safe

closure of the tailings facility. The design should be reviewed and updated

as performance and site data become available and in response to material

changes to the tailings facility or its performance.

Develop, implement and maintain a water balance model and associated

water management plans for the tailings facility, taking into account the

knowledge base including climate change, upstream and downstream

hydrological and hydrogeological basins, the mine site, mine planning and

overall operations and the integrity of the tailings facility throughout its

lifecycle. The water management programme must be designed to protect

against unintentional releases.

Address all potential failure modes of the structure, its foundation, abutments,

reservoir (tailings deposit and pond), reservoir rim and appurtenant

structures to minimise risk to ALARP. Risk assessments must be used to

inform the design.

Develop a design for each stage of construction of the tailings facility,

including but not limited to start-up, partial raises and interim conﬁ gurations,

ﬁ nal raise, and all closure stages.

Design the closure phase in a manner that meets all the Requirements

of the Standard with sufﬁ cient detail to demonstrate the feasibility of the

closure scenario and to allow implementation of elements of the design

during construction and operation as appropriate. The design should include

progressive closure and reclamation during operations.

PRINCIPLE 5

Requirement 5.1

Requirement 5.2

Requirement 5.3

Requirement 5.4

Requirement 5.5

Requirement 5.6

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

Requirement 5.7 For a proposed new tailings facility classiﬁ ed as ‘High’, ‘Very High’ or ‘Extreme’,

the Accountable Executive shall conﬁ rm that the design satisﬁ es ALARP and

shall approve additional reasonable steps that may be taken downstream, to

further reduce potential consequences to people and the environment. The

Accountable Executive shall explain and document the decisions with respect

to ALARP and additional consequence reduction measures.

For an existing tailings facility classiﬁ ed as ‘High’, ‘Very High’ or ‘Extreme’, the

Accountable Executive, at the time of every DSR or at least every ﬁ ve years,

shall conﬁ rm that the design satisﬁ es ALARP and shall seek to identify and

implement additional reasonable steps that may be taken to further reduce

potential consequences to people and the environment. The Accountable

Executive shall explain and document the decisions with respect to ALARP

and additional consequence reduction measures, in consultation with external

parties as appropriate.

Where other measures to reduce the consequences of a tailings facility

credible failure mode as per the breach analysis have been exhausted, and

pre-emptive resettlement cannot be avoided, the Operator shall demonstrate

conformance with international standards for involuntary resettlement.

Requirement 5.8

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

PLAN, BUILD AND OPERATE THE TAILINGS FACILITY TO MANAGE RISK AT

ALL PHASES OF THE TAILINGS FACILITY LIFECYCLE, INCLUDING CLOSURE

AND POST-CLOSURE

Build, operate, monitor and close the tailings facility according to the

design intent at all phases of the tailings facility lifecycle, using qualiﬁ ed

personnel and appropriate methodology, equipment and procedures, data

acquisition methods, the Tailings Management System (TMS) and the overall

Environmental and Social Management System (ESMS) for the mine and

associated infrastructure.

Manage the quality and adequacy of the construction and operation process

by implementing Quality Control, Quality Assurance and Construction

vs Design Intent Veriﬁ cation (CDIV). The Operator shall use the CDIV to

ensure that the design intent is implemented and is still being met if the site

conditions vary from the design assumptions.

Prepare a detailed Construction Records Report (‘as-built’ report) whenever

there is a material change to the tailings facility, its infrastructure or its

monitoring system. The EOR and the Responsible Tailings Facility Engineer

(RTFE) shall sign this report.

Develop, implement, review annually and update as required an Operations,

Maintenance and Surveillance (OMS) Manual that supports effective risk

management as part of the TMS. The OMS Manual should follow best

practices, clearly provide the context and critical controls for safe operations,

and be reviewed for effectiveness. The RTFE shall provide access to the OMS

Manual and training to all levels of personnel involved in the TMS with support

from the EOR.

Implement a formal change management system that triggers the evaluation,

review, approval and documentation of changes to design, construction,

operation or monitoring during the tailings facility lifecycle. The change

management system shall also include the requirement for the EOR to

prepare a periodic Deviance Accountability Report (DAR), that provides an

assessment of the cumulative impact of the changes on the risk level of the

as-constructed facility. The DAR shall provide recommendations for managing

risk, if necessary, and any resulting updates to the design, DBR, OMS and

the monitoring programme. The DAR shall be approved by the Accountable

Executive.

Include new and emerging technologies and approaches and use the evolving

knowledge in the reﬁ nement of the design, construction and operation of the

tailings facility.

PRINCIPLE 6

Requirement 6.1

Requirement 6.2

Requirement 6.3

Requirement 6.4

Requirement 6.5

Requirement 6.6

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

DESIGN, IMPLEMENT AND OPERATE MONITORING SYSTEMS TO MANAGE

RISK AT ALL PHASES OF THE FACILITY LIFECYCLE, INCLUDING CLOSURE.

Design, implement and operate a comprehensive and integrated performance

monitoring programme for the tailings facility and its appurtenant structures

as part of the TMS and for those aspects of the ESMS related to the tailings

facility in accordance with the principles of Adaptive Management.

Design, implement and operate a comprehensive and integrated engineering

monitoring system that is appropriate for verifying design assumptions

and for monitoring potential failure modes. Full implementation of the

Observational Method shall be adopted for non-brittle failure modes. Brittle

failure modes are addressed by conservative design criteria.

Establish speciﬁ c and measurable performance objectives, indicators, criteria,

and performance parameters and include them in the design of the monitoring

programmes that measure performance throughout the tailings facility

lifecycle. Record and evaluate the data at appropriate frequencies. Based on

the data obtained, update the monitoring programmes throughout the tailings

facility lifecycle to conﬁ rm that they remain effective to manage risk.

Analyse technical monitoring data at the frequency recommended by the

EOR, and assess the performance of the tailings facility, clearly identifying and

presenting evidence on any deviations from the expected performance and

any deterioration of the performance over time. Promptly submit evidence to

the EOR for review and update the risk assessment and design, if required.

Performance outside the expected ranges shall be addressed promptly

through Trigger Action Response Plans (TARPs) or critical controls.

Report the results of each of the monitoring programmes at the frequency

required to meet company and regulatory requirements and, at a minimum, on

an annual basis. The RTFE and the EOR shall review and approve the technical

monitoring reports.

PRINCIPLE 7

Requirement 7.1

Requirement 7.2

Requirement 7.3

Requirement 7.4

Requirement 7.5

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

MANAGEMENT AND

GOVERNANCE

TOPIC IV

ESTABLISH POLICIES, SYSTEMS AND ACCOUNTABILITIES TO SUPPORT

THE SAFETY AND INTEGRITY OF THE TAILINGS FACILITY.

The Board of Directors shall adopt and publish a policy on or commitment to

the safe management of tailings facilities, to emergency preparedness and

response, and to recovery after failure.

Establish a tailings governance framework and a performance based TMS and

ensure that the ESMS and other critical systems encompass relevant aspects

of the tailings facility management.

For roles with responsibility for tailings facilities, develop mechanisms such

that incentive payments or performance reviews are based, at least in part, on

public safety and the integrity of the tailings facility. These incentive payments

shall reflect the degree to which public safety and the integrity of the tailings

facility are part of the role. Long-term incentives for relevant executive

managers should take tailings management into account.

Appoint one or more Accountable Executives who is/are directly answerable

to the CEO on matters related to this Standard. The Accountable Executive(s)

shall be accountable for the safety of tailings facilities and for avoiding

or minimising the social and environmental consequences of a tailings

facility failure. The Accountable Executive(s) shall also be accountable for a

programme of tailings management training, and for emergency preparedness

and response. The Accountable Executive(s) must have scheduled

communication with the EOR and regular communication with the Board of

Directors, which can be initiated either by the Accountable Executive(s), or the

Board. The Board of Directors shall document how it holds the Accountable

Executive(s) accountable.

Appoint a site-speciﬁ c Responsible Tailings Facility Engineer (RTFE) who is

accountable for the integrity of the tailings facility, who liaises with the EOR

and internal teams such as operations, planning, regulatory affairs, social

performance and environment, and who has regular two-way communication

with the Accountable Executive. The RTFE must be familiar with the DBR, the

design report and the construction and performance of the tailings facility.

Identify appropriate qualiﬁ cations and experience requirements for all

personnel who play safety-critical roles in the operation of a tailings facility,

including, but not limited to the RTFE, the EOR and the Accountable Executive.

Ensure that incumbents of these roles have the identiﬁ ed qualiﬁ cations and

experience, and develop succession plans for these personnel.

For tailings facilities with Consequence Classiﬁ cation of ‘Very High’ or

‘Extreme’, appoint an Independent Tailings Review Board (ITRB). For all other

facilities, the Operator may appoint a senior independent technical reviewer.

The ITRB or the reviewer shall be appointed early in the project development

process, report to the Accountable Executive and certify in writing that they

follow best practices for engineers in avoiding conflicts of interest.

PRINCIPLE 8

Requirement 8.1

Requirement 8.2

Requirement 8.3

Requirement 8.4

Requirement 8.5

Requirement 8.7

Requirement 8.6

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

APPOINT AND EMPOWER AN ENGINEER OF RECORD.

Engage an engineering ﬁ rm with expertise and experience in the design and

construction of tailings facilities of comparable complexity to provide EOR

services for operating the tailings facility and for closed facilities with ‘High’,

‘Very High’ and ‘Extreme’ Consequence Classiﬁ cation, that are in the active

closure phase. Require that the ﬁ rm nominate a senior engineer, approved by

the Operator, to represent the ﬁ rm as the EOR, and verify that the individual

has the necessary experience, skills and time to fulﬁ l this role. Alternatively, the

Operator may appoint an in-house engineer with expertise and experience in

comparable facilities as the EOR. In this instance, the EOR may delegate the

design to a ﬁ rm (‘Designer of Record’) but shall remain thoroughly familiar

with the design in discharging their responsibilities as EOR. Whether the

EOR or the DOR is in-house or external, they must be competent and have

experience appropriate to the Consequence Classiﬁ cation and complexity of

the tailings facility.

Empower the EOR through a written agreement that clearly describes their

authority, role and responsibilities throughout the tailings facility lifecycle, and

during change of ownership of mining properties. The written agreement must

clearly describe the obligations of the Operator to the EOR, to support the

effective performance of the EOR.

Establish and implement a programme to manage the quality of all

engineering work, the interactions between the EOR, the RTFE and the

Accountable Executive, and their involvement in the tailings facility lifecycle

as necessary to conﬁ rm that both the implementation of the design and the

design intent are met.

Given its potential impact on the risks associated with a tailings facility,

the selection of the EOR shall be decided by the Accountable Executive and

informed, but not decided, by procurement personnel.

Where it becomes necessary to change the EOR (whether a ﬁ rm or an in-

house employee), develop a detailed plan for the comprehensive transfer of

data, information, knowledge and experience with the construction procedures

and materials.

PRINCIPLE 9

Requirement 9.1

Requirement 9.2

Requirement 9.3

Requirement 9.4

Requirement 9.5

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

ESTABLISH AND IMPLEMENT LEVELS OF REVIEW AS PART OF A STRONG

QUALITY AND RISK MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FOR ALL PHASES OF THE

TAILINGS FACILITY LIFECYCLE, INCLUDING CLOSURE.

Conduct and update risk assessments with a qualiﬁ ed multi-disciplinary team

using best practice methodologies at a minimum every three years and more

frequently whenever there is a material change either to the tailings facility

or to the social, environmental and local economic context. Transmit risk

assessments to the ITRB or senior independent technical reviewer for review,

and address with urgency all unacceptable tailings facility risks.

Conduct regular reviews of the TMS and of the components of the ESMS that

refer to the tailings facility to assure the effectiveness of the management

systems. Document and report the outcomes to the Accountable Executive,

Board of Directors and project-affected people. The review shall be

undertaken by senior technical reviewers with the appropriate qualiﬁ cations,

expertise and resources. For tailings facilities with ‘High’, ‘Very High’ or

‘Extreme’ Consequence Classiﬁ cation, conduct the review at least every

three years.

Conduct internal audits to verify consistent implementation of company

procedures, guidelines and corporate governance requirements

consistent with the TMS and aspects of the ESMS developed to manage

tailings facility risks.

The EOR or senior independent technical reviewer shall conduct tailings

facility construction and performance reviews annually or more frequently,

if required.

Conduct an independent DSR at least every ﬁ ve years for tailings facilities with

‘Very High’ or ‘Extreme’ Consequence Classiﬁ cations and at least every 10

years for all other facilities. For tailings facilities with complex conditions or

performance, the ITRB may recommend more frequent DSRs. The DSR shall

include technical, operational and governance aspects of the tailings facility

and shall be completed according to best practices. The DSR contractor

cannot conduct consecutive DSRs on the same tailings facility and shall

certify in writing that they follow best practices for engineers in avoiding

conflicts of interest.

PRINCIPLE 10

Requirement 10.1

Requirement 10.2

Requirement 10.3

Requirement 10.4

Requirement 10.5

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

For tailings facilities with ‘Very High’ or ‘Extreme’ Consequence Classiﬁ cations,

the ITRB, reporting to the Accountable Executive shall provide ongoing senior

independent review of the planning, siting, design, construction, operation,

water and mass balance, maintenance, monitoring, performance and risk

management at appropriate intervals across all phases of the tailings facility

lifecycle. For tailings facilities with other Consequence Classiﬁ cations, this

review can be done by a senior independent technical reviewer.

The amount of estimated costs for planned closure, early closure, reclamation,

and post-closure of the tailings facility and its appurtenant structures shall be

reviewed periodically to conﬁ rm that adequate ﬁ nancial capacity (including

insurance, to the extent commercially reasonable) is available for such

purposes throughout the tailings facility lifecycle, and the conclusions of the

review shall be publicly disclosed annually. Disclosure may be made in audited

ﬁ nancial statements or in public regulatory ﬁ lings.

Subject to the provisions of local or national regulations on this matter,

Operators shall use best efforts to assess and take into account the capability

of an acquirer of any of its assets involving a tailings facility (through merger,

acquisition, or other change in ownership) to maintain this Standard for the

tailings facility lifecycle.

Requirement 10.6

Requirement 10.7

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

DEVELOP AN ORGANISATIONAL CULTURE THAT PROMOTES LEARNING,

COMMUNICATION AND EARLY PROBLEM RECOGNITION.

Educate personnel who have a role in any phase of the tailings facility

lifecycle about how their job procedures and responsibilities relate to the

prevention of a failure.

Establish mechanisms that incorporate workers’ experience-based

knowledge into planning, design and operations for all phases of the tailings

facility lifecycle.

Establish mechanisms that promote cross-functional collaboration to ensure

effective data and knowledge sharing, communication and implementation

of management measures to support public safety and the integrity of the

tailings facility.

Identify and implement lessons from internal incident investigations and

relevant external incident reports, paying particular attention to human and

organisational factors.

Establish mechanisms that recognise, reward and protect from retaliation,

employees and contractors who report problems or identify opportunities

for improving tailings facility management. Respond in a timely manner and

communicate actions taken and their outcomes.

PRINCIPLE 11

Requirement 11.1

Requirement 11.2

Requirement 11.3

Requirement 11.4

Requirement 11.5

Requirement 12.1

Requirement 12.2

PRINCIPLE 12 ESTABLISH A PROCESS FOR REPORTING AND ADDRESSING CONCERNS

AND IMPLEMENT WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTIONS.

The Accountable Executive shall establish a formal, conﬁ dential and written

process to receive, investigate and promptly address concerns from

employees and contractors about possible permit violations or other matters

relating to regulatory compliance, public safety, tailings facility integrity or the

environment.

In accordance with international best practices for whistleblower protection,

the Operator shall not discharge, discriminate against, or otherwise retaliate

in any way against a whistleblower who, in good faith, has reported possible

permit violations or other matters relating to regulatory compliance, public

safety, tailings facility integrity or the environment.

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND

LONG-TERM RECOVERY

TOPIC V

PREPARE FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE TO TAILINGS FACILITY FAILURES.

As part of the TMS, use best practices and emergency response expertise

to prepare and implement a site-speciﬁ c tailings facility Emergency

Preparedness and Response Plan (EPRP) based on credible flow failure

scenarios and the assessment of potential consequences. Test and

update the EPRP at all phases of the tailings facility lifecycle at a frequency

established in the plan, or more frequently if triggered by a material change

either to the tailings facility or to the social, environmental and local economic

context. Meaningfully engage with employees and contractors to inform

the EPRP, and co-develop community-focused emergency preparedness

measures with project-affected people.

Engage with public sector agencies, ﬁ rst responders, local authorities and

institutions and take reasonable steps to assess the capability of emergency

response services to address the hazards identiﬁ ed in the tailings facility

EPRP, identify gaps in capability and use this information to support the

development of a collaborative plan to improve preparedness.

Considering community-focused measures and public sector capacity,

the Operator shall take all reasonable steps to maintain a shared state of

readiness for tailings facility credible flow failure scenarios by securing

resources and carrying out annual training and exercises. The Operator shall

conduct emergency response simulations at a frequency established in the

EPRP but at least every 3 years for tailings facilities with potential loss of life.

In the case of a catastrophic tailings facility failure, provide immediate

response to save lives, supply humanitarian aid and minimise environmental

harm.

PRINCIPLE 13

Requirement 13.1

Requirement 13.2

Requirement 13.3

Requirement 13.4

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

PREPARE FOR LONG-TERM RECOVERY IN THE EVENT

OF CATASTROPHIC FAILURE.

Based on tailings facility credible flow failure scenarios and the assessment

of potential consequences, take reasonable steps to meaningfully engage

with public sector agencies and other organisations that would participate

in medium- and long-term social and environmental post-failure response

strategies.

In the event of a catastrophic tailings facility failure, assess social, environ-

mental and local economic impacts as soon as possible after people are safe

and short-term survival needs have been met.

In the event of a catastrophic tailings facility failure, work with public sector

agencies and other stakeholders to develop and implement reconstruction,

restoration and recovery plans that address the medium- and long-term

social, environmental and local economic impacts of the failure. The plans

shall be disclosed if permitted by public authorities.

In the event of a catastrophic tailings facility failure, enable the participation of

affected people in reconstruction, restoration and recovery works and ongoing

monitoring activities.

Facilitate the monitoring and public reporting of post-failure outcomes that

are aligned with the thresholds and indicators outlined in the reconstruction,

restoration and recovery plans and adapt activities in response to ﬁ ndings and

feedback.

PRINCIPLE 14

Requirement 14.1

Requirement 14.2

Requirement 14.3

Requirement 14.4

Requirement 14.5

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

PUBLIC DISCLOSURE AND

ACCESS TO INFORMATION

TOPIC VI

PUBLICLY DISCLOSE AND PROVIDE ACCESS TO INFORMATION ABOUT

THE TAILINGS FACILITY TO SUPPORT PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY.

Publish and regularly update information on the Operator’s commitment to

safe tailings facility management, implementation of its tailings governance

framework, its organisation-wide policies, standards or approaches to the

design, construction, monitoring and closure of tailings facilities.

A. For new tailings facilities for which the regulatory authorisation process has

commenced, or that are otherwise approved by the Operator, the Operator

shall publish and update, in accordance with Principle 21 of the UNGP, the

following information:

1. A plain language summary of the rationale for the basis of the design

and site selected as per the multi-criteria alternatives analysis, impact

assessments, and mitigation plans (Information may be obtained

from the output of multiple Requirements including, but not limited to,

Requirements 3.2, 3.3, 5.1, 5.3, 6.4, 6.6, 7.1 and 10.1); and

2. The Consequence Classiﬁ cation. (Requirement 4.1).

B. For each existing tailings facility and in accordance with Principle 21 of the

UNGP, the Operator shall publish and update at least on an annual basis, the

following information:

1. A description of the tailings facility (information may be obtained from

the output of Requirements 5.5 and 6.4);

2. The Consequence Classiﬁ cation (Requirement 4.1);

3. A summary of risk assessment ﬁ ndings relevant to the tailings facility

(Information may be obtained from the output of Requirement 10.1);

4. A summary of impact assessments and of human exposure

and vulnerability to tailings facility credible flow failure scenarios

(Information may be obtained from the output of Requirements 2.4

and 3.3);

5. A description of the design for all phases of the tailings facility lifecycle

including the current and ﬁ nal height (Information may be obtained from

the output of Requirement 5.5);

6. A summary of material ﬁ ndings of annual performance reviews and

DSR, including implementation of mitigation measures to reduce risk to

ALARP (Information may be obtained from output of Requirements 10.4

and 10.5);

7. A summary of material ﬁ ndings of the environmental and social

monitoring programme including implementation of mitigation

measures (Requirement 7.5);

8. A summary version of the tailings facility EPRP for facilities that have

a credible failure mode(s) that could lead to a flow failure event that: (i)

is informed by credible flow failure scenarios from the tailings facility

breach analysis; (ii) includes emergency response measures that apply

PRINCIPLE 15

Requirement 15.1

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

to project affected people as identiﬁ ed through the tailings facility

breach analysis and involve cooperation with public sector agencies;

and (iii) excludes details of emergency preparedness measures that

apply to the Operator’s assets, or conﬁ dential information

(Requirements 13.1 and 13.2);

9. Dates of most recent and next independent reviews (Requirement

10.5); and

10. Annual conﬁ rmation that the Operator has adequate ﬁ nancial capacity

(including insurance to the extent commercially reasonable) to cover

estimated costs of planned closure, early closure, reclamation, and

post-closure of the tailings facility and its appurtenant structures

(Requirement 10.7).

Such disclosures shall be made directly, unless subject to limitations

imposed by regulatory authorities.

C. Provide local authorities and emergency services with sufﬁ cient information

derived from the breach analysis to enable effective disaster management

planning (Information may be obtained from the output of Requirement 2.3);

Respond in a systematic and timely manner to requests from interested and

affected stakeholders for additional information material to the public safety

and integrity of a tailings facility. When the request for information is denied,

provide an explanation to the requesting stakeholder.

Commit to cooperate in credible global transparency initiatives to create

standardised, independent, industry-wide and publicly accessible databases,

inventories or other information repositories about the safety and integrity of

tailings facilities.

Requirement 15.2

Requirement 15.3

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

GLOSSARY

ANNEX 1

Terms shown throughout the Standard appear in italics and are explained below.

One or more executive(s) who is/are directly answerable to the CEO on

matters related to this Standard, communicates with the Board of Directors,

and who is accountable for the safety of tailings facilities and for minimising

the social and environmental consequences of a potential tailings facility

failure. The Accountable Executive(s) may delegate responsibilities but not

accountability.

A structured, iterative process of robust decision-making with the aim

of reducing uncertainty over time via system monitoring. It includes the

implementation of mitigation and management measures that are responsive

to changing conditions, including those related to climate change, and the

results of monitoring throughout the tailings facility lifecycle. The approach

supports alignment on decisions about the tailings facility with the changing

social, environmental and economic context and enhances opportunities to

develop resilience to climate change in the short and long term.

ALARP requires that all reasonable measures be taken with respect to

‘tolerable’ or acceptable risks to reduce them even further until the cost

and other impacts of additional risk reduction are grossly disproportionate to

the beneﬁ t.

An analysis that should objectively and rigorously consider all available

options and sites for mine waste disposal. It should assess all aspects of each

mine waste disposal alternative throughout the project life cycle (i.e. from

construction through operation, closure and ultimately long-term monitoring

and maintenance). The alternatives analysis should also include all aspects of

the project that may contribute to the impacts associated with each potential

alternative. The assessment should address environmental, technical and

socio-economic aspects for each alternative throughout the project life cycle.

A procedure that has been shown by research and experience to produce

optimal results and that is established or proposed as a standard suitable for

widespread adoption.

The ultimate governing body of the Operator typically elected by the

shareholders of the Operator. The Board of Directors is the entity with the ﬁ nal

decision-making authority for the Operator and holds the authority to, among

other things, set the Operator’s policies, objectives, and overall direction and

oversee the ﬁ rm’s executives. As the term is used here, it encompasses any

individual or entity with control over the Operator, including, for example,

the owner or owners. Where the State serves as the Operator, the Board of

Directors shall be understood to mean the government ofﬁ cial with ultimate

responsibility for the ﬁ nal decisions of the Operator.

Accountable Executive

Adaptive Management

As Low As

Reasonably Practicable

Alternatives Analysis

Best Practices

Board of Directors

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

A study that assumes a failure of the tailings facility and estimates its

impact. Breach Analyses must be based on credible failure modes. The

results should determine the physical area impacted by a potential failure,

flow arrival times, depth and velocities, duration of flooding, and depth of

material deposition. The Breach Analysis is based on scenarios which are

not connected to probability of occurrence. It is primarily used to inform

emergency preparedness and response planning and the consequence of

failure classiﬁ cation. The classiﬁ cation is then used to inform the external

loading component of the design criteria.

A tailings facility failure that results in material disruption to social,

environmental and local economic systems. Such failures are a function

of the interaction between hazard exposure, vulnerability, and the capacity

of people and systems to respond. Catastrophic events typically involve

numerous adverse impacts, at different scales and over different timeframes,

including loss of life, damage to physical infrastructure or natural assets, and

disruption to lives, livelihoods, and social order. Operators may be affected by

damage to assets, disruption to operations, ﬁ nancial loss, or negative impact

to reputation. Catastrophic failures exceed the capacity of affected people to

cope using their own resources, triggering the need for outside assistance in

emergency response, restoration and recovery efforts.

Changes in projects are inevitable during design construction and operation

and must be managed to reduce negative impacts to quality and integrity of

the tailings facility. The impact and consequences of changes vary according

to the type and nature of changes, but most importantly according to how

they are managed. Managing changes effectively is crucial to the success of

a project. A change management system has the objective of disciplining and

coordinating the process, and should include an evaluation of the change, a

review and formal approval of the change followed by detailed documentation

including drawings and, where required, changes to equipment, process,

actions, flow, information, cost, schedule or personnel.

Intended to ensure the design intent is implemented and still being met if the

site conditions vary from the design assumptions. The CDIV identiﬁ es any

discrepancies between the ﬁ eld conditions and the design assumptions, such

that the design can be adjusted to account for the actual ﬁ eld conditions.

Describes all aspects of the ‘as-built’ product, including all geometrical

information, materials, laboratory and ﬁ eld test results, construction activities,

schedule, equipment and procedures, Quality Control and Quality Assurance

data, CDIV results, changes to design or any aspect of construction, non-

conformances and their resolution, construction photographs, construction

shift reports, and any other relevant information. Instruments and their

installation details, calibration records and readings must be included

in the CRR. Roles, responsibilities and personnel, including independent

review should be documented. Detailed construction record drawings are

fundamental.

Refers to the organisational structures and processes that a company puts in

place to ensure effective management, oversight and accountability.

Breach Analysis

Catastrophic Failure

Change Management

System

Construction

versus Design

Intent Veriﬁ cation

Construction

Records Report

Corporate

Governance

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

Refers to technically feasible failure mechanisms given the materials present

in the structure and its foundation, the properties of these materials, the

conﬁ guration of the structure, drainage conditions and surface water control

at the facility, throughout its lifecycle. Credible failure modes can and do

typically vary during the lifecycle of the facility as the conditions vary. A facility

that is appropriately designed and operated considers all of these credible

failure modes and includes sufﬁ cient resilience against each. Different failure

modes will result in different failure scenarios. Credible catastrophic failure

modes do not exist for all tailings facilities. The term ‘credible failure mode’ is

not associated with a probability of this event occurring and having credible

failure modes is not a reflection of facility safety.

A control that is critical to preventing a potential undesirable event or

mitigating the consequences of such an event. The absence or failure of a

critical control would disproportionately increase the risk despite the existence

of the other controls.

A system or a practice whereby people from different areas of an organisation

share information and work together effectively as a team.

A periodic and systematic process carried out by an independent qualiﬁ ed

review engineer to assess and evaluate the safety of a dam or system of

dams (or in this case a tailings facility) against failure modes, in order to

make a statement on the safety of the facility. A safe tailings facility is one

that performs its intended function under both normal and unusual conditions;

does not impose an unacceptable risk to people, property or environment;

and meets applicable safety criteria.

Provides the basis for the design, operation, construction, monitoring and

risk management of a tailings facility.

A qualiﬁ ed professional engineer designated by the Engineer of Record to

design the tailings facility in the case where the Engineer of Record is an

internal professional.

Provides an assessment of the cumulative impact of changes to the

tailings facility on the risk level of the achieved product and deﬁ nes the

potential requirement for updates to the design, DBR, OMS or the

monitoring programme.

A site-speciﬁ c plan developed to identify hazards, assess capacity and

prepare for an emergency based on tailings facility credible flow failure

scenarios, and to respond if it occurs. This may be part of operation-wide

emergency response planning and includes the identiﬁ cation of response

capacity and any necessary coordination with off-site emergency responders,

local communities and public sector agencies. The development of the

EPRP includes a community-focused planning process to support the co-

development and implementation of emergency response measures by those

vulnerable to a tailings facility failure.

Credible Failure

Modes / Scenarios

Critical Controls

Cross-functional

Dam Safety

Review

Design Basis

Report

Designer of

Record

Deviance

Accountability Report

Emergency

Preparedness and

Response Plan

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

The qualiﬁ ed engineering ﬁ rm responsible for conﬁ rming that the tailings

facility is designed, constructed, and decommissioned with appropriate

concern for integrity of the facility, and that it aligns with and meets applicable

regulations, statutes, guidelines, codes, and standards. The Engineer of Record

may delegate responsibility but not accountability. In some highly-regulated

jurisdictions, notably Japan, the role of EOR is undertaken by the responsible

regulatory authorities.

A methodological approach which draws on the elements of the established

process of ‘Plan, Do, Check, Act’, and is used to manage environmental and

social risks and impacts in a structured way in the short and longer term.

An effective ESMS, appropriate to the nature and scale of the operation,

promotes sound and sustainable environmental and social performance, and

can also lead to improved ﬁ nancial outcomes. The ESMS helps companies

integrate the procedures and objectives for the management of social,

environmental (and, local economic) impacts into core business operations,

through a set of clearly deﬁ ned, repeatable processes. An ESMS is a dynamic

and continuous process initiated and supported by management, and involves

engagement between the Operator, its employees and contractors, project-

affected people and, where appropriate, other stakeholders. The interaction of

the ESMS with the TMS facilitates alignment of decisions about the tailings

facility with the changing social, environmental and local economic context

and reflects the fact that a tailings facility is situated within a complex and

dynamic local and global environment.

A mechanism that safeguards the individual and collective rights of

indigenous and tribal peoples, including their land and resource rights and

their right to self-determination. The minimum conditions that are required

to secure consent include that it is ‘free’ from all forms of coercion, undue

influence or pressure, provided ‘prior’ to a decision or action being taken

that affects individual and collective human rights, and offered on the

basis that affected peoples are ‘informed’ of their rights and the impacts of

decisions or actions on those rights. FPIC is considered to be an ongoing

process of negotiation, subject to an initial consent. To obtain FPIC, ‘consent’

must be secured through an agreed process of good faith consultation

and cooperation with indigenous and tribal peoples through their own

representative institutions. The process should be grounded in a recognition

that the indigenous or tribal peoples are customary landowners. FPIC is not

only a question of process, but also of outcome, and is obtained when terms

are fully respectful of land, resource and other implicated rights.

A perceived injustice, which may be based on law, contract, explicit or implicit

promises, customary practice, or general notions of fairness of aggrieved

communities.

Any substance, human activity, condition or other agent that may cause harm,

loss of life, injury, health impacts, loss of integrity of natural or built structures,

property damage, loss of livelihoods or services, social and economic

disruption, or environmental damage.

Engineer of

Record

Environmental and

Social Management

System

Free, Prior and

Informed Consent

Grievance

Hazard

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

A decision-making and management support instrument for identifying,

predicting, measuring and evaluating the impact of development proposals,

both prior to major decisions being made, and throughout the lifecycle of

a project. While impact assessments typically focus on a single project,

assessments can be scoped at the landscape level, and consider strategic

implications of a change. Depending on the context, the circumstances,

and the issues at hand, impact assessments may be discipline-speciﬁ c,

or conducted as part of an integrated set of studies. Assessments can be

conducted in advance of impacts, or retrospectively.

In this context, impacts are consequences to people, built infrastructure or

the natural environment caused by a tailings facility or its failure, including

impacts to the human rights of workers, communities, or other rights holders

and including sensitive ecological receptors and ecosystem services. Impacts

can be positive or adverse, tangible or intangible, direct or indirect, acute,

chronic or cumulative, and measurable quantitatively or qualitatively.

A board that provides independent technical review of the design,

construction, operation, closure and management of tailings facilities. The

independent reviewers are third-parties who are not, and have not been

directly involved with the design or operation of the particular tailings facility.

The expertise of the ITRB members shall reflect the range of issues relevant to

the facility and its context and the complexity of these issues. In some highly

regulated jurisdictions, notably Japan, the role of ITRB is undertaken by the

responsible regulatory authorities.

Resettlement can be either voluntary or involuntary, and may involve either

physical or economic displacement. Involuntary resettlement occurs when

project-affected people do not have the right to refuse resettlement. This

includes cases where a company has the legal right to expropriate land.

Voluntary resettlement occurs when resettled households have a genuine

choice to move. When the voluntary nature of resettlement cannot be

conﬁ rmed, resettlement should be treated as involuntary.

The sum of knowledge required to support the safe management of a

tailings facility throughout its lifecycle. The knowledge base has an iterative

nature and needs to be updated as the need arises and the context changes.

Fundamental elements would include a detailed site characterisation and

baseline knowledge of the social and environmental context. As design,

construction and performance monitoring proceeds additional data are

collected and required and the knowledge base evolves.

Important enough to merit attention, or having an effective influence or

bearing on the determination in question. For the Standard, the criteria for

what is material will be deﬁ ned by Operator, subject to the provisions of

local regulations, and evaluated as part of any audit or external independent

assessment that may be conducted on implementation.

Impact Assessment

Independent Tailings

Review Board

Involuntary

Resettlement

Knowledge Base

Material (adj)

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

A process of mutual dialogue and decision-making whereby Operators have

an obligation to consult and listen to stakeholder perspectives, and integrate

those perspectives into their business decisions. Meaningful engagement

involves measures to overcome structural and practical barriers to the

participation of diverse and vulnerable groups of people. Strategies for

addressing barriers must be appropriate to the context and the stakeholders

involved, and may include, for example, logistics and other support to enable

participation. Preconditions to meaningful engagement include: access to

material information that can be reasonably understood; a structure that

enables transparent communication; and accountability for engagement

processes and outcomes.

Identiﬁ es a series of essential, sequential steps that Operators must follow

through the project lifecycle in order to limit negative impacts and to enhance

opportunities for positive outcomes. It describes a process to anticipate and

avoid adverse impacts on workers, communities and the environment from a

proposed action. Where avoidance is not possible, actions must be taken to

minimise, and where residual impacts remain, to compensate fairly or offset

for the risks and impacts.

A continuous, managed, integrated, process of design, construction control,

monitoring and review that enables previously deﬁ ned modiﬁ cations to be

incorporated during or after construction as appropriate. All of these aspects

must be demonstrably robust. The key element of the Observational Method is

the proactive assessment at the design stage of every possible unfavourable

situation that might be disclosed by the monitoring programme and the

development of an action plan or mitigative measure to reduce risk in case

the unfavourable situation is observed. This element forms the basis of a

performance-based risk management approach. The objective is to achieve

greater overall safety. See Peck, R.B. (1969) “Advantages and Limitations of

the Observational Method in Applied Soil Mechanics” Geotechnique 19, No2.,

pp.171-187.

Describes the performance indicators and criteria for risk controls and

critical controls, and the ranges of performance linked to speciﬁ c pre-deﬁ ned

management actions. An OMS manual also describes the procedures for

collecting, analysing and reporting surveillance results in a manner consistent

with the risk controls and critical controls and that supports effective, timely

decision-making.

The link between OMS activities and critical controls management

underscores the fact that it is essential that OMS Manuals be developed to

reflect site-speciﬁ c conditions and circumstances. An OMS Manual cannot be

purchased ‘off-the-shelf’. To be effective, it must be tailored to the site.

An entity that singly, or jointly with other entities, exercises ultimate control of

a tailings facility. This may include a corporation, partnership, owner, afﬁ liate,

subsidiary, joint venture, or other entity, including any State agency, that

controls a tailings facility.

Mitigation

Hierarchy

Observational

Method

Operations,

Maintenance and

Surveillance Manual

Operator

Meaningful

Engagement

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

For the purpose of Requirement 4.2 of the Standard , preliminary design is a

design performed to a level of detail sufﬁ cient to determine the differences

between viable designs that adopt different external loading design criteria in

terms of required footprints, volumes and drainage requirements.

People who may experience impacts from a tailings facility. People affected by

a tailings facility may include, for example, people who live nearby; people who

hear, smell or see the facility; or people who might own, reside on, or use the

land on which the facility is to be located or may potentially inundate.

All governmental agencies at the State, regional, and/or local level with some

responsibility or authority for regulating mining activities that occur within or

impact their jurisdictions.

Steps taken to achieve a speciﬁ c objective such that any negative impact on

people, social systems, environment, local economy or costs is not out of

balance with the intended beneﬁ ts.

The process of restoring the mine site to a natural or economically useable

state as provided in a reclamation plan. Reclamation results in productive and

sustainable landscapes to meet a range of conditions that might allow for

biodiversity conservation, recreational or agriculture uses, or various forms of

economic development.

An engineer appointed by the Operator to be responsible for the tailings

facility. The RTFE must be available at all times during construction,

operations and closure. The RTFE has clearly deﬁ ned, delegated responsibility

for management of the tailings facility and has appropriate qualiﬁ cations and

experience compatible with the level of complexity of the tailings facility. The

RTFE is responsible for the scope of work and budget requirements for the

tailings facility, including risk management. The RTFE may delegate speciﬁ c

tasks and responsibilities for aspects of tailings management to qualiﬁ ed

personnel but not accountability.

The process of assisting recovery of the social, environmental and local

economic systems that have been degraded, damaged or destroyed.

The robustness of a tailings facility design depends on each particular

situation and it may be associated with various aspects including, for example,

the factor of safety against each of the potential failure modes, the presence

or absence of materials with brittle behaviour, the degree of brittleness of

these materials, the degree of variability of the materials and the potential for

thresholds of deformation that materially affect the facility performance. The

degree of robustness is related to the facility maintaining its overall integrity

despite less than ideal performance of one or more of its components.

A closed tailings facility that does not pose ongoing material risks to people or

the environment which has been conﬁ rmed by an ITRB or senior independent

technical reviewer and signed off by the Accountable Executive.

Public Sector

Agencies

Reasonable Steps

Responsible Tailings

Facility Engineer

Restoration

Robust Design

Safe closure

Preliminary Design

Project-affected

People

Reclamation

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

An independent professional with in-depth knowledge and at least 15 years’

experience in the speciﬁ c area of the review requirements, e.g. tailings design,

operations and closure, environmental and social aspects or any other speciﬁ c

topic of concern. The independent reviewer is a third-party who is not, and has

not been directly involved with the design or operation of the particular tailings

facility.

A professional who is either an in-house employee or an external party with

in-depth knowledge and at least 15 years’ experience in the speciﬁ c area

of the review requirements, e.g. tailings design, operations and closure,

environmental and social aspects or any other speciﬁ c topic of concern.

Persons or groups who are directly or indirectly affected by a project, as well

as those who may have interests in a project and/or the ability to influence

its outcome, positively or negatively. Stakeholders may include workers, trade

unions, project-affected people or communities and their formal and informal

representatives, national or local government authorities, politicians, religious

leaders, civil society organisations and groups with special interests, the

academic community, or other businesses. Different stakeholders will often

have divergent views, both within and across stakeholder groupings.

A by-product of mining, consisting of the processed rock or soil left over from

the separation of the commodities of value from the rock or soil within which

they occur.

A facility that is designed and managed to contain the tailings produced by the

mine. Although tailings can be placed in mined-out underground mines, for

the purposes of the Standard, tailings facilities refer to facilities that contain

tailings in open pit mines or on the surface (‘external tailings facilities’).

For the purposes of the Standard, tailings facilities are higher than 2.5 m

measured from the elevation of the crest to the elevation of the toe of the

structure, or have a combined water and solids volume more than 30,000 m3,

unless the Consequence Classiﬁ cation is ‘High’, ‘Very High’ or ‘Extreme’, in

which case the structure is considered a tailings facility regardless of its size.

For the purposes of this Standard, existing tailings facilities are facilities that

are accepting new mine tailings on the date that the Standard takes effect or

not currently accepting new mine tailings but are not in a state of safe closure.

All other facilities will be treated as New for the purposes of this Standard.

Tailings

Tailings Facility

Senior Technical

Reviewer

Stakeholder

Senior Independent

Technical Reviewer

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

Tailings Governance

Framework

Tailings Facility

Lifecycle

The phases in the life of a facility, which may occur in linear or cyclical

succession, consisting of:

1. Project conception, planning and design;

2. Initial construction;

3. Operation and ongoing construction (may include progressive reclamation);

4. Interim closure (including care and maintenance);

5. Closure (regrading, demolition and reclamation);

6. Post-closure (including relinquishment, reprocessing, relocation, removal)

A framework that focusses on the key elements of management and

governance necessary to maintain the integrity of TSFs and minimise the

risk of catastrophic failures. The six key elements of this TSF governance

framework are:

1. Accountability, Responsibility and Competency;

2. Planning and Resourcing;

3. Risk Management;

4. Change Management;

5. Emergency Preparedness and Response;

6. Review and Assurance.

The site-speciﬁ c TMS comprises the key components for management and

design of the tailings facility and is often referred to as the ‘framework’ that

manages these components. The TMS sits at the core of the Standard and

is focused on the safe operation and management of the tailings facility

throughout its lifecycle (see above). The TMS follows the well-established

Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle. Each Operator develops a TMS that best suits

their organisation and tailings facilities. A TMS includes elements such as:

establishing policies, planning, designing and establishing performance

objectives, managing change, identifying and securing adequate resources

(experienced and/or qualiﬁ ed personnel, equipment, scheduling, data,

documentation and ﬁ nancial resources), conducting performance

evaluations and risk assessments, establishing and implementing controls

for risk management, auditing and reviewing for continual improvement,

implementing a management system with clear accountabilities and

responsibilities, preparing and implementing the OMS and EPRP. The TMS,

and its various elements, must interact with other systems, such as the

environmental and social management system (ESMS), the operation-wide

management system, and the regulatory system. This systems interaction is

fundamental to the effective implementation of the Standard.

A TARP is a tool to manage risk controls, including critical controls. TARPs

provide pre-deﬁ ned trigger levels for performance criteria that are based on

the risk controls and critical controls of the tailings facility. The trigger levels

are developed based on the performance objectives and risk management

plan for the tailings facility. TARPs describe actions to be taken if trigger levels

are exceeded (performance is outside the normal range), to prevent a loss

of control. A range of actions is pre-deﬁ ned, based on the magnitude of the

exceedance of the trigger level.

Trigger Action

Response Plan

Tailings Management

System

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

CONSEQUENCE

CLASSIFICATION TABLES

ANNEX 2

Table 1: Consequence Classiﬁ cation Matrix

Dam Failure Consequence

Classiﬁ cation

Incremental Losses

Potential Population at Risk Potential Loss of Life

Environment Health, Social and Cultural Infrastructure and Economics

Low

None

None expected

Signiﬁ cant

1–10

U n s p e c i ﬁ e d

High

10–100

Possible (1–10)

Very High

100–1,000

Likely (10 – 100)

Extreme

> 1,000

Many (> 100)

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

Dam Failure Consequence

Classiﬁ cation

Incremental Losses

Potential Population at Risk Potential Loss of Life

Environment Health, Social and Cultural Infrastructure and Economics

Minimal short-term loss or deterioration

of habitat or rare and endangered

species.

Minimal effects and disruption of

business and livelihoods. No measurable

effect on human health. No disruption

of heritage, recreation, community or

cultural assets.

Low economic losses: area contains

limited infrastructure or services.

<US$1M.

No signiﬁ cant loss or deterioration

of habitat. Potential contamination

of livestock/fauna water supply with

no health effects. Process water low

potential toxicity. Tailings not potentially

acid generating and have low neutral

leaching potential. Restoration possible

within 1 to 5 years.

Signiﬁ cant disruption of business, service

or social dislocation. Low likelihood of

loss of regional heritage, recreation,

community, or cultural assets. Low

likelihood of health effects.

Losses to recreational facilities, seasonal

workplaces, and infrequently used

transportation routes. <US$10M.

Signiﬁ cant loss or deterioration of critical

habitat or rare and endangered species.

Potential contamination of livestock/

fauna water supply with no health effects.

Process water moderately toxic. Low

potential for acid rock drainage or metal

leaching effects of released tailings.

Potential area of impact 10 km

– 20 km

Restoration possible but difﬁ cult and

could take > 5 years.

500-1,000 people affected by disruption

of business, services or social dislocation.

Disruption of regional heritage, recreation,

community or cultural assets. Potential

for short term human health effects.

High economic losses affecting

infrastructure, public transportation, and

commercial facilities, or employment.

Moderate relocation/compensation to

communities. <US$100M.

Major loss or deterioration of critical

habitat or rare and endangered species.

Process water highly toxic. High potential

for acid rock drainage or metal leaching

effects from released tailings. Potential

area of impact > 20 km

. Restoration or

compensation possible but very difﬁ cult

and requires a long time (5 years to 20

years).

1,000 people affected by disruption of

business, services or social dislocation

for more than one year. Signiﬁ cant loss of

national heritage, community or cultural

assets. Potential for signiﬁ cant long-term

human health effects.

Very high economic losses affecting

important infrastructure or services

(e.g., highway, industrial facility, storage

facilities, for dangerous substances),

or employment. High relocation/

compensation to communities.

< US$1B.

Catastrophic loss of critical habitat or

rare and endangered species. Process

water highly toxic. Very high potential

for acid rock drainage or metal leaching

effects from released tailings. Potential

area of impact > 20 km

. Restoration

or compensation in kind impossible or

requires a very long time (> 20 years).

5,000 people affected by disruption of

business, services or social dislocation

for years. Signiﬁ cant National heritage

or community facilities or cultural assets

destroyed. Potential for severe and/or

long- term human health effects.

Extreme economic losses affecting

critical infrastructure or services, (e.g.,

hospital, major industrial complex,

major storage facilities for dangerous

substances) or employment. Very high

relocation/compensation to communities

and very high social readjustment costs.

>US$1B.

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

The intention of this guidance is to provide a consistent manner to establish

minimum external loading design criteria for the safe design of

tailings

facilities

. Alternative guidance exists, for example, by reputable national

dam associations, which, in turn, form the basis of jurisdictional regulatory

requirements. These alternative guidances can be considered by the

EOR

RTFE

and

RTFE and RTFE

ITRB

or independent technical reviewer and adopted, if appropriate

and approved by the

Accountable Executive

There is a distinction between Operations and Post-Closure (also referred

to as Passive Care Closure) where Operations involves all phases of

construction and operation, periods of temporary cessation of operations,

and the Closure phase (transition phase into post-closure also referred to

as active care closure). Post-Closure refers to permanently closed facilities

that have been conﬁ gured for their perpetual form/state and thereby will be

subjected to the maximum time of exposure irrespective of the Consequence

Classiﬁ cation for the facility.

Table 2: Flood Design Criteria

Consequence

Classiﬁ cation

Flood Criteria

– Annual Exceedance Probability

Operations and Closure

(Active care)

Passive-Closure

(Passive Care)

Low

1/200

1/10,000

Signiﬁ cant

1/1,000

1/10,000

High

1/2,475

1/10,000

Very High

1/5,000

1/10,000

Extreme

1/10,000

The term “Maximum Probable Precipitation” (PMP) or “Probable Maximum

Flood” (PMF) are terms sometimes used to denote extreme hydrological

events. The concepts of PMP and PMF are acceptable for assigning

flood loading if they meet, or exceed, the requirements above for Extreme

Consequence Classiﬁ cation facilities and/or facilities at the Post-Closure (or

Passive Care Closure) phase.

Table 3: Seismic Design Criteria

Consequence

Classiﬁ cation

Seismic Criteria

2,3

– Annual Exceedance Probability

Operations and Closure

(Active care)

Passive-Closure

(Passive Care)

Low

1/200

1/10,000

Signiﬁ cant

1/1,000

1/10,000

High

1/2,475

1/10,000

Very High

1/5,000

1/10,000

Extreme

1/10,000

1. For existing

tailings facilities

the

EOR

, with

review by the

ITRB

or a

senior independent

technical reviewer

, may determine that

the upgrade to this design criteria is

not feasible or cannot be retroactively

applied. In this case, the

Accountable

Executive

shall approve and document the

implementation of measures to reduce both

the probability and the consequences of

tailings facility

failure in order to reduce

the risk to a level

as low as reasonably

practicable (ALARP)

. The basis and timing

for addressing the upgrade of existing

tailings facilities

shall be risk-informed

and carried out as soon as reasonably

practicable (see Requirement 4.7).

2. The selection of the design ground

motion should consider the seismic setting

and the reliability and applicability of the

probabilistic and deterministic methods for

seismic

hazard

assessment. The Maximum

Credible Earthquake (MCE) is part of a

deterministic approach that can govern in

some areas. The method that produces the

most appropriate ground motion for the

facility safety should be used for the design.

3. For existing

tailings facilities

the

EOR

, with

review by the

ITRB

or a

senior independent

technical reviewer

, may determine that

the upgrade to this design criteria is

not feasible or cannot be retroactively

applied. In this case, the

Accountable

Executive

shall approve and document the

implementation of measures to reduce both

the probability and the consequences of

tailings facility

failure in order to reduce

the risk to a level

as low as reasonably

practicable (ALARP)

. The basis and timing

for addressing the upgrade of existing

tailings facilities

shall be risk-informed

and carried out as soon as reasonably

practicable (see Requirement 4.7).

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

SUMMARY TABLES

ANNEX 3

Key Role

Function

Items listed below are either expressly requested in the Standard

OR are listed against those roles which typically undertake these

activities. It is understood that this may vary depending on the

operation.

Responsible

Tailings

Facility

Engineer

(RTFE)

•

Accountable for the integrity of the

tailings facility

(Requirement 8.5).

•

Responsible for liaising with

EOR

, operations, planning, regulatory

affairs, social performance and environment teams (Requirement 8.5).

•

Responsible for implementation of the design.

•

Accountable for the establishment of a

change management system

(Requirement 6.5).

•

Responsible for the monitoring system and communication of the

results to the

EOR

, including performance reviews (Requirements

7.2, 7.3).

•

Responsible, with the

EOR

, for the

Construction Records Report

(Requirement 6.3).

•

Responsible for the

OMS Manual

(Requirement 6.4).

Engineer of

Record (EoR)

•

Responsible for the

Design Basis Report

(Requirement 4.8).

•

Responsible for the design (Requirement 9.1).

•

Responsible for the design report.

•

Responsible for construction and performance reviews

(Requirement 10.4).

•

Responsible for the

Deviance Accountability Report

(Requirement 6.5).

•

Responsible, with the

RTFE

, for the

RTFE, for the RTFE

Construction Records Report

(Requirement 6.3).

•

Support the

RTFE

on the

OMS Manual

(Requirement 6.4).

Accountable

Executive

•

Accountable for the safety of the

tailings facility

and for environmental

and social performance (Requirements 7.1, 8.2, 8.3, 8.4).

•

Approval of the adopted design criteria and measures to reduce the

risk of failure of existing facilities to

ALARP

(Requirements 4.3, 4.7, 5.7).

•

Accountable for

tailings

management training, emergency

preparedness and response (Requirement 8.4).

•

Selection of the

RTFE

(Requirements 8.5, 8.6) and the

EOR

(Requirements 9.1 to 9.5, 8.6).

•

Appointment of the

ITRB

or a

senior independent technical reviewer

(Requirement 8.7).

•

Establishment of a process for addressing concerns

(Requirement 12.1).

Independent

Tailings

Review

Board (ITRB)

or senior

technical

reviewer

•

Review of the design, construction, risk assessments,

governance

systems and other risk management matters that can affect the

tailings facility

ensuring that the required expertise and skill sets are

involved.

•

Review of the adopted external loading design criteria and

measures to reduce the risk of failure of existing facilities to

ALARP

(Requirements 4.2, 4.7, 5.7).

•

Review of the

alternatives analysis

(Requirement 3.2), design,

construction, risk assessments (Requirements 10.1), governance

systems and other risk management matters (Requirement 10.6) that

can affect the

tailings facility

•

Review the

Design Basis Report

(Requirement 4.8).

•

Determine the frequency of

Dam Safety Review

(Requirement 10.5).

Table 4: Summary of Key Roles and Functions mentioned in the Standard

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

Table 5: Summary of Key Documents mentioned in the Standard

Key Documents Description

Design Basis Report

Details the design assumptions and criteria, including

operational constraints to provide a basis for all phases

of the tailings facility lifecycle.

Design Report

Includes among other items: documentation of the

relevant aspects of knowledge base, the consequence

classiﬁ cation, multi-criteria alternatives analysis, water

balance modelling, design analyses and evaluation of

their results, design of all stages of the facility including

monitoring requirements, construction requirements

and speciﬁ cations, operational constraints and

construction drawings. The Design Report typically

includes constuction drawings.

Construction Records

Report

Includes among other items: survey data and drawings,

ﬁ eld reports, QC and QA reports, CDIV reports, changes

required during construction, drilling and ﬁ eld test data,

instrumentation installation details and calibration

reports, instrumentation monitoring data, description of

ﬁ eld procedures and equipment, photographic records

(Requirements 6.2, 6.3, 6.5).

Operation, Maintenance

and Surveillance Manual

Provides the context and critical controls for the safe

operation of the tailings facility to support effective risk

management. Includes among other items: description

of the facility, (Requirements 6.4, 6.5). It includes the

Trigger Action Response Plan (TARP).

Deviance Accountability

Report

Provides an assessment of the cumulative impact

of the individual changes assessed, approved and

documented in the change management system, on

the risk level of the as-constructed tailings facility and

provides recommendations for managing the risk, if

required.

Annual Performance

Report

Provides the results of the annual performance review

and typically includes results of visual inspection,

instrumentation monitoring and assessment. Some

Operators may conduct internal performance reports

on a more frequent basis.

Dam Safety Review Report

Provides the results of a review of the safety of a

tailings facility covering technical, operational and

governance aspects, conducted by an independent

technical specialist according to established best

practices.

Emergency Preparedness

and Response Plan (EPRP)

Provides a detailed, site-speciﬁ c plan developed to

identify hazards of the tailings facility, assess capacity

internally and externally to respond, and prepare for an

emergency and to respond if it occurs.

Impact Assessments and

Mitigation Plans

Assessments of the social, environmental and local

economic impacts from a tailings facility or its failure,

and the associated impact mitigation and management

plans.

GLOBAL INDUSTRY STANDARD ON TAILINGS MANAGEMENT

Table 6: Summary of Levels of Review mentioned in the Standard

Key Documents Description

Internal Reviews

Includes reviews of company processes, procedures,

guidelines and corporate governance requirements and

systems (including TMS, ESMS) (Requirement 10.3).

EoR Review

Engineering ﬁ rms typically have internal review systems

for all engineering work to manage the accuracy and

quality of the technical product and provide mentoring

and training to staff. This is also good practice

for technical work done in-house by the Operator

(Requirement 9.3).

Annual Performance

Reviews

Conducted by the EOR or an independent reviewer.

Regular performance reviews are typically mandated

in many jurisdictions, often annually or twice a year.

Some Operators may conduct internal performance

reviews more frequently. These reviews typically

involve visual inspection, review of construction and

operation practices and review and assessment of the

instrumentation monitoring data.

Dam Safety

Review (DSR)

Independent review of the safety of a tailings facility

covering technical, operational and governance

aspects, conducted by an independent technical

specialist according to established best practices.

It should be conducted at intervals based on the

Consequence Classiﬁ cation and the complexity of its

condition or performance. It is regulatory requirement

in many jurisdictions.

Independent Tailings

Review Board (ITRB)

or Senior Technical

Reviewer

Provides ongoing senior independent review of the

planning, siting, design, construction, operation,

maintenance, monitoring, performance, risk

management at appropriate intervals across all phases

of the tailings facility lifecycle (Requirement 8.8).

Co-convened by

Co-convened by the International Council on

Mining and Metals (ICMM), United Nations

Environment Programme (UNEP) and Principles for

Responsible Investment (PRI), the Global Tailings

Review has established a robust, fit-for-purpose

international standard for the safer management of

tailings storage facilities.