Faro Mine Remediation Project - A Risk-Based Approach to Work - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Faro Mine Remediation Project

• A Risk-Based Approach to Work Planning -

April, 2016

2

Faro Mine Site Background

• History
• Site Overview
• Conceptual Closure Plan
• Remediation Schedule

Faro Mine Site Project Challenges Faro Mine Site Risk-Based Work Plan

• Degrading Site Conditions (North Fork Rose Creek)
• Engineering Risk (Down Valley Hydraulic Upgrades)

Next Steps

Agenda

3

Timeline Faro Mine Site History 1969-1998 OPERATION - Open pit mine produced lead and zinc 1998 RECEIVERSHIP - Last operator (Anvil Range Mining Corporation) went into receivership and Deloitte and Touche court -appointed Interim Receiver. 2003 DEVOLUTION - Authority to manage public lands and resources, including abandoned mine sites, was transferred to the Government of Yukon (YG).

• INAC maintained liability and responsibility for funding the remediation of

the Faro Mine; YG took over administration and control of land and water

• The First Nations identified as having been most affected by the mine are

the Ross River Dena Council, Liard First Nation, Kaska Dena Council and Selkirk First Nation 2006 OBJECTIVES – All three parties agree on Closure Objectives for the Faro Site.

• 1. Protect human health and safety
• 2. Protect and, to the extent practicable, restore the environment including

land, air, water, fish and wildlife

• 3. Return the mine site to an acceptable state of use that reflects pre-mining

land use where practicable

• 4. Maximize local and Yukon socio-economic benefits
• 5. Manage long-term site risk in a cost-effective manner.

2009 CONCEPTUAL CLOSURE PLAN - All three parties agree to the preferred closure options.

Faro Mine Site History

4

Faro Mine Site Overview

5

• Capture Acid Rock Drainage Seepage/Runoff
• Upgrade Surface Water Diversions

Water Management

• Upgrade Dams and Spillways
• Stabilize Open Pit Wall

Dams and Impoundments

• Regrade and Cover Tailings
• Regrade and/or Cover Waste Rock

Tailings and Waste Rock

• Demolition of Infrastructure
• Remediate Contaminated Soil

Other

Faro Mine Site Conceptual Closure Plan

6

Phase 1 Project Assessment Phase 2 Project Definition Phase 3 Project Implementation Phase 4 Monitoring and Maintenance

1998 – 2008 2009 – 2024 2024 – 2039 2039 –

• Site Assessment
• Care and

Maintenance

• Identify

Remediation Approach

• Conceptual

Closure Plan

• Interim

Remediation Work

• Regulatory

Approvals

• Full-Site

Remediation

• Post-Remediation

Adaptation

• Care and

Maintenance

• Water Treatment
• Long-Term

Monitoring

• Care & Maintenance

∞

All funding provided by the Federal Contaminated Sites Action Plan

Faro Mine Site Remediation Schedule

7

In October 2013, elevated level of zinc was discovered through ongoing routine monitoring The project drills seven wells at the toe of the Intermediate Waste Rock to try and find the source

• f the seep.

The project drills ten additional wells upstream of the Rock Drain to try and find the source of the seep. Newly constructed Seepage Interception System commences operation. October 2013 March 2014 July 2014 January 2015

Faro Mine Site Project Challenges

8

Faro Mine Site Risk-Based Work Plan

• Participants:

– INAC & Yukon Government – Independent Peer Review Panel

• Constraints:

– Limited funding and timing ($225M over 4 years)

• Methodology:

– Consequence (Environmental, Special Considerations, Legal, Costs, Community/Media Reputation, Human Health & Safety) – Severity (Low, Minor, Moderate, Major, Critical) – Likelihood (Almost Certain, Likely, Possible, Unlikely, Very Unlikely)

9

Faro Mine Site Risk-Based Work Plan

• Conceptual Closure Plan:

– Divided into 10 sub-projects

• The Scenario:

– (sub-project #1) won’t be completed until (year) and, recognizing the ongoing deterioration of site conditions, results in additional significant impact on a valued ecosystem component.

• Lessons Learned:

– Ensure the right people are involved in the process – Clearly articulate all constraints, assumptions, decisions – No such things as too much information! – Challenge all assumptions (no ‘status quo’ option).

10

Faro Mine Site Risk-Based Work Plan

Work Package ¡ Risk ¡ Notes

10a North Fork Rose Creek Diversion ¡ Very High ¡ Implement! 1 Water Treatment Plant ¡ High ¡ Mitigation Plan 8 Waste Rock High ¡ Linked to 10a 2 Infrastructure Upgrades ¡ Moderately High ¡ Assess Risk 10b Faro Creek Diversions ¡ Moderately High ¡ Mitigation Plan 7 Tailings Moderate ¡ Down Valley Hydraulic Upgrades 9a Cross Valley Dam ¡ Moderate ¡ 9b Intermediate Dam ¡ Moderate ¡ 10c Rose Creek Diversion ¡ Moderate ¡ 3 Building Demolition Low ¡ n/a 4 Emergency Tailings Area ¡ Low ¡ n/a 5 Cross Valley Dam Seepage System Low ¡ n/a 6 Surface Water Management ¡ Low ¡ n/a

11

Deteriorating Site Conditions - North Fork

12

Rose Creek Diversion Channel Intermediate Dam Spillway

Engineering Risk – Down Valley

13

• Design:

– North Fork Rose Creek Diversion (2016) – Down Valley Hydraulic Upgrades (2016-2017) – Closure Plan (2016-2017)

• Regulatory:

– Closure Plan (2018-2020)

• Implement:

– North Fork Rose Creek Diversion (2017-2019) – Down Valley Hydraulic Upgrades (2018-2019) – Closure Plan (2021+)

Next Steps