THE RELOCATION OF TAILINGS J.R. Goode, P. Eng. Vice-President, Mining and Metallurgy, Kilborn Inc.

2200 Lake Shore Boulevard West Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M8V 1A4 Phone:(416) 252-5311, Telefax:(416) 231-5356

ABSTRACT In many cases, existing tailings storage sites can be satisfactorily and economically decommissioned through regrading, revegetation and similar processes. However, other tailings deposits are physically or chemically unstable. These pose serious problems for those entrusted with the task of developing acceptable closure plans. In some cases, relocation of the tailings into a more controlled environment, such as an abandoned open pit, deep lake or a new surface site, could offer a practical solution. As an adjunct to the relocation operation, it may be possible to treat the tailings to render them chemically more stable or to recover values left from earlier operations. The low-cost relocation of tailings deposits is common practice. At the present time, tailings relocation and reprocessing projects are profitably moving about 100 million tonnes of material per year. Several methods of relocation, including hydraulic monitors, dredges and mechanical techniques are presently in use and are discussed in this paper.

Presented at the CIM Metsoc Symposium Advances in Environmental Protection for Metallurgical Industries, Quebec City, August 30 - September 1, 1993

Page 1 of 16

INTRODUCTION Large quantities of mill tailings have accumulated in mature mining districts around the world. For example, there are about two billion tonnes of gold tailings in the Johannesburg area of South Africa. Even in an area with relatively low mill tonnage, such as Timmins, Ontario, about 200 million tonnes of tailings have accumulated since gold production started in 1906. The earlier mineral processing mills were often characterized by high head grades and low recovery. Today there are more efficient, low cost, processing techniques. These techniques, and the economies possible with large scale operations, have led to tailings reprocessing schemes in older mining districts. These reprocessing complexes include some of the highest tonnage operations in the world. At the time of writing there are several such operations treating 40 000 tonnes per day or more. Cumulatively, tailings reprocessing operations handle about 100 million tonnes of material per year. The bulk of this reprocessing involves the recovery of gold - sometimes with uranium and sulphuric acid as principal or by-products. A significant amount of material is reprocessed for the recovery of copper. Other materials recovered from old tailings deposits include silver, tin, diamonds and platinum (1). There are other reasons, besides the commercial, for interest in old tailings dams. It is evident that many of the older deposits are chemically or physically unstable and are cause for environmental concern. In some cases in-situ remediation work is feasible. However in other cases relocation of the tailings to a more suitable environment, such as a mined-out pit or a deep lake, might be a viable option. This paper presents information on existing tailings relocation schemes. The methods that have been successfully developed to retrieve tailings from their original location are discussed and costs for typical relocation schemes are presented. Reprocessing methods, potentially useful to defray moving costs or to remove deleterious components, are also briefly discussed. REVIEW OF SELECTED TAILINGS RELOCATION OPERATIONS Table I, presented at the end of this section, records data for selected relocation and retreatment operations. Three typical projects are reviewed in more detail below. Eastmaque Gold Mines Ltd., Kirkland Lake, Ontario, Canada (2,3) General In late 1987, Eastmaque started the reclamation of material from gold tailings deposits near Kirkland Lake containing more than 8 million tonnes. The treatment rate was about 2000 t/d at a head grade of around 1.5 g/t. Operations closed in late 1991 because of falling gold prices and declining mill feed grade.

Page 2 of 16

Dredge Reclaim The earlier Kirkland Lake gold mills deposited their tailings in lakes located adjacent to the mills. The tailings deposits were generally less than 15 m deep and were recovered by Eastmaque using two 200 mm (8") cutterhead suction dredges. Tailings recovery continued throughout the winter when night temperatures of -30 C were common. Gold Recovery The reclaimed tailings slurry was screened for trash removal, thickened and ground. Rougher-scavenger flotation of pyrite followed by two stages of cleaning yielded a concentrate containing about 60 g/t of gold. This was thickened, filtered, and trucked to the Noranda smelter located about 90 km to the East of Kirkland Lake. Tailings Disposal New tailings, free of gold and pyrite, were returned to the same lake from which they were removed but into a new area separated from the old tailings by a dam. Daggafontein Division of ERGO, Transvaal, South Africa (4) General A nominal 1 million tonnes per month of gold tailings are reclaimed from old tailings dams located East of Johannesburg. Reserves include several dams up to 15 km from the plant and amount to 286 million tonnes at grades of between 0.24 and 0.53 g/t of gold. The project started operation in 1987. Monitor Reclaim Two tailings dams are reclaimed at a given time, each at a rate of 500 000 t/month. Each dam usually has two 150 mm (6") monitors in operation. Slurry flows from the face, through a slurry ditch to a below-grade primary screening plant equipped with 3 mm square mesh screens. Screened slurry, with a density of between 1.35 and 1.55, is pumped to thickeners for dewatering. Trash and sand is then removed using Delkor linear screens with 0.65 mm aperture cloth. Gold Recovery Prepared feed is pre-leached with lime and cyanide then subjected to carbon-in-leach (CIL) processing for gold adsorption. Carbon is retained in the tanks using NKM screens and periodically advanced using recessed impeller pumps. Carbon loaded with between 700 and 800 g/t of gold is stripped, the eluate treated with zinc, and the resulting precipitate taken to ERGO for final refining. Tailings Disposal Tailings are screened for fine carbon recovery then pumped to a new tailings area some 7 km from the plant. Dam walls are built using cyclone sands produced in portable cyclones. Cyclones are moved around the dam wall as required. Water is reclaimed from the dam and recycled to the process.
Page 3 of 16

Tailings Leach Plant, ZCCM, Zambia General Zambia Consolidated Copper Mines (ZCCM) Limited has access to about 140 million tonnes of copper tailings accumulated during some 50 years of mining on the copper belt. Tailings contain about 0.6% of acid soluble copper. An initial tailings leach plant (TLP) was commissioned in 1974. This plant has since been expanded to process a total of 1 500 000 t/month comprising 750 000 t/month of current tailings and 750 000 t/month of reclaimed tailings. Monitor Reclaim Old tailings are reclaimed using a combination of water erosion and high pressure monitoring. Erosion is caused by the application of low pressure water to the top of the dam. High pressure monitors further reslurry the tailings which are then screened at 25 mm (1") before being pumped to the TLP. Copper Recovery Slurry is screened at 6 mm (.25") on vibrating screens, dewatered by thickeners to 60% solids and then belt filtered to 80% solids prior to acid leaching. Dewatering the leach feed results in higher grade copper pregnant solution and improved reagent economies. Two-stage acid leaching takes place in a series of pachucas and CCD (counter-current-decantation) thickeners. Final CCD thickener underflow is processed over belt filters to ensure high soluble copper recovery. Pregnant solution flowing at 3 200 m3/h and containing 4 kg/m3 of copper is clarified before solvent extraction. Copper is extracted from the pregnant solution in four parallel solvent extraction (SX) streams. Each stream includes three extraction and two stripping mixer-settlers. Pregnant strip solution containing 50 kg/m3 of copper is treated for copper recovery in a standard electrowinning operation. Spent electrolyte containing 35 kg/m3 of copper is returned to the solvent extraction stripping circuit. Summary Listing of Reclamation Operations The examples above, and those summarized in Table I, show the broad range of reclaim methods, processing rates, and processing routes that have been used. The way in which a tailings relocation project can be developed, the reclaim choices available, and other factors are discussed in the sections which follow.

Page 4 of 16

Table I - Tailings Relocation and Reprocessing Projects

Operation Location Miami Copper Co. Miami, AZ, USA (5) Nchanga Zambia Ohio Copper Utah, USA Metal Recovered Cu Monthly Tonnage 324 000 Reserves t & Grade 35 000 000 3.3 kg/t Cu 138 000 000 10 kg/t Cu 5 000 000 4 kg/t Cu Annual Production 7 000 t Cu Reclaim Method Monitors Reprocess Flowsheet Dewater-Acid leachCCD-Filter-ClarifySX-EW Dewater-Acid leachCCD-Filter-ClarifySX-EW Acid leachCementationFlotation of cement Cu and sulphides Leach Filter-Merrill Crowe

Cu

1 500 000

120 000 t Cu

Erosion & Monitors Monitors

Cu

30 000

1 200 t Cu

Chaffers Plant Lakeview & Star Kalgoorlie, Aust.

Au

60 000

3 000 000 1.6 g/t Au

1 000 kg Au

Blast, Monitor with 15% Solids Feed Monitors Cutter Dredge Monitors

Daggafontein (4) South Africa Eastmaque (2,3) Kirkland Lake Ontario, Canada ERG (6,7) Timmins, Ontario, Canada Freegold Consol. Mines (JMS), RSA

Au Au Conc. (Pyrite) Au

1 000 000 68 000

280 000 000 0.36 g/t Au 6 100 000 1.4 g/t Au 130 000 000 0.4 g/t Au 200 000 000 0.4 g/t Au 30 g/t U

2 800 kg Au 750 kg Au

Leach-CIL Flotation-DewaterTruck to Smelter Flotation-RegrindLeach-CIL Flotation-Conc. Leach for U-Roast for H2SO4 and AuCIL for Au in TailsVibro Energy mill for excess Py Thicken-CIL Macassa Mill (grindLeach-CIP) Leach-CIP Flotation-Cyanidation of Py.-Py Sale Leach and CIL on flot.tails Regrind-FlotationCIP on Tails Agglomerate with cement-Heap LeachMerrill Crowe silver recovery Slimes reject-Flash Regrind-FlotationTruck and Rail to Smelter Acid leach-CCDCCIX-Eluex-Float for Au

1 000 000 (8 month/a) 1 000 000

3 100 kg Au

Au,U,H2SO
4

3 700 kg Au 164 t U 300 000 t H2SO4

Monitors

Giant Yellowknife NWT, Canada Lac Minerals Kirkland Lake Ontario, Canada Mount Morgan Q'land, Australia Rand Mines Milling and Mining, RSA (8) Simmergo South Africa Anaconda, Darwin project California, USA Santa Julia Plant Real del Monte y Pachuca, Mexico Blyvooruitzicht (9) Gold Mine, RSA

Au Au Conc. (Pyrite) Au Au,Pyrite

250 000 (6 month/a) 22 000

6 400 000 2.3 g/t Au 3 700 000 2.4 g/t Au Not known 70 000 000 0.67 g/t Au 13 000 000 0.8 g/t Au 1 500 000 47 g/t Ag

1 200 kg Au 440 kg Au

Monitors Cutter Dredge B'wheel Dredge Front-end Loaders & Monitors Electric Shovel/Tru ck Front-end loader

250 000 370 000

1 400 kg Au 2 400 kg Au

Au

174 000

2 000 kg Au

Ag

120 000

35 000 kg Ag (?)

Ag

200 000

55 000 000 48 g/t Ag

88 000 kg Ag

Monitors

U,Au

100 000

12 000 000

500 t U

B'wheel

Page 5 of 16

Operation Location Chemwes (10) South Africa

Metal Recovered U,Au,H2SO

4

Monthly Tonnage 290 000

Reserves t & Grade 367 000 000 300 g/t U

Annual Production 580 t U

Reclaim Method Monitors & B'wheel Ex. Suction Dredge Monitors

Reprocess Flowsheet Acid leach-Belt filterCCIX-Float for H2SO4 prod. and Au recovery from Calc. Regrind-Leach-FilterSX Flotation-Conc. Leach of U-Roast for H2SO4 and Au-CIL for Au in Tails

Eldorado, Port Radium NWT, Canada ERGO (11,12) South Africa

5 000

300 000 4 kg/t U 367 000 000 0.43 g/t Au 36 g/t U

210 t U

U,Au,H2SO
4

1 700 000

6 600 kg Au 164 t U 500 000 t H2SO4

Note: This table is not intended to be complete. Numerous small reprocessing schemes around the world have been omitted. Details of certain operations are incomplete.

RECLAMATION METHODS There are several methods of economically reclaiming old tailings deposits. The optimum method depends on the location of the tailings, the tonnage involved, the nature of the interstitial water, the method of reprocessing (if any), and the proposed method of finally disposing of the tailings. A detailed analysis of the options, and possibly a pilot operation, are required to make the proper selection. The most important methods of retrieving tailings are presented below. All of the methods are presently in routine use at commercial tailings relocation/reprocessing sites. Hydraulic Mining Monitors Hydraulic mining operations employ high pressure water jets (monitors or guns) to reslurry the tailings. Monitors are equipped with hydraulic cylinders which allow the water jet to be aimed in the required direction. The direction control unit, which can incorporate a memory capable of storing a pattern, is usually located in a weatherproof cabin. The water pressure at the monitor is typically 2 MPa (290 psi). Under these conditions the monitor delivers an impressive amount of water over a great distance. As an example, it can be noted that a 150 mm (6") monitor equipped with a 54 mm nozzle delivers 350 m3/h and has an effective range of about 30 m. The velocity at the nozzle in this example is 150 km/h (about 100 miles per hour). Additional data is provided in Table II presented below. The percentage solids in the reslurried tailings arising from the monitoring of a high dam face (say 20 m high) might be 50%. Thus the single 150 mm gun in the above example reclaims about 350 t/h of tailings (8 400 t/d or about 250 000 t/month). With modern automatic monitors, a single operator could attend to two or three such units. The rate of advance of the tailings face away from a 150 mm monitor is significant - perhaps 2 m/h for a 20 m high face. To keep the monitor within a reasonable distance
Page 6 of 16

of the face, it is necessary to move the monitor, its cabin and monitor water delivery pipe on a daily basis. This task can require a significant number of people and equipment especially if the conditions on the exposed tailings base are adverse. Table II - Monitor Water Flow and Reclaim Rate At 2 MPa, 50% Solids and 690 h/month 100 mm Monitor Nozzle Size mm 25 35 41 Water Flow m3/h 80 180 220 Tonnage t/month 55 000 124 000 152 000 Nozzle Size mm 48 54 60 150 mm Monitor Water Flow m3/h 270 350 470 Tonnage t/month 184 000 242 000 324 000

The data in Table II are intended to be indicative only and incorporate several assumptions that require site specific verification. If reprocessing is practised, it is preferable to operate two or more dams at the same time rather than reclaim from a single dam. This leads to more even production rate and reclaimed slurry density. Monitor water is usually obtained from the new tailings dam using barges equipped with vertical turbine pumps. The high pressure required for the monitor is obtained by booster pumps. These can be quite large and consume significant amounts of electric power. The booster pump required for the single 150 mm gun in the example above would draw about 270 kW (360 HP). Slurry Trenches Slurry from the reclaim face must be directed to a sump adjacent to the dam where the slurry is pumped to the reprocessing plant. It is common to dig trenches to contain and direct the slurry in the desired direction. Trench floor slopes of 1 in 150 are often used. Coarse tailings, as are often found in dam walls, are best handled with a steeper slope perhaps 1 in 100 or 1 in 80. If the dam is known to contain much coarse, floating debris then culverts and other means of crossing the slurry trench are a liability since they will plug up with debris. In areas of the world where heavy rain is common it is advisable to provide a substantial emergency containment pond in the trench system. At Daggafontein in South Africa, the emergency catchment basin has a capacity of 4 000 m3. Even in more arid areas it may be necessary to provide emergency storage for slurry. It must be recognized that slurry will continue to drain away from the dam face for some time after monitoring is stopped.

Page 7 of 16

Slurry Pumping Usually the new tailings disposal area, or the reprocessing plant, will be located at an elevation above the slurry trench. Therefore, the slurry trench is usually terminated in a sump and a pump is used to pick up the slurry and deliver it to the plant in a pipeline. Various configurations of sump and pump are used depending on scale of operation, required life of the pump station and local conditions. Included are the following:
@ @ @ @ @ @ @

Suction lift pump with suction pipe dipped into sump Fully submersible pump with auger head - hung from lift device Vertical spindle pump - hung from lift device Vertical spindle pump - in perforated box Vertical spindle pump - mounted on barge Horizontal centrifugal pump in dry well Venturi pump immersed in sump

The selection of the slurry retrieval and pumping technique is one of the most crucial decisions to be made in planning the hydraulic mining option. The correct selection requires sound knowledge of ground contours, a carefully conceived mining plan, and experience. Applicability of Monitoring Hydraulic monitoring is best suited to above-grade deposits. High face dams can yield 50% solids under the right conditions. Monitoring of below-grade deposits is possible given favourable side slopes and material of the underlying ground. However for various reasons the percentage solids obtained by monitoring below-grade tailings is usually closer to 35%. Hydraulic monitoring can be effected at below freezing temperatures. However, it gets more difficult as temperatures fall. This is especially true if the source of monitor water is the new tailings dam - the usual case. Under these conditions the recycle water temperature progressively falls until the system is no longer workable. Dredging Equipment The typical tailings reclaim dredge is similar to the dredges used to keep shipping channels clear. Dredges are generally categorized by the size of pump suction stated in inches. Typical data are presented in Table III.

Page 8 of 16

Table III - Approximate Dredge Reclaim Rates and Data Assumes 30% Solids in Reclaim and 690 h/month Dredge Size (inches) 6 8 10 16 24 Maximum Depth (m) 8 10 12 15 25 Pump Power (kW) 120 200 300 950 1 500 Total Power (kW) 150 250 430 1 300 3 000 Dredge Size (L m x W m) 8 x 2.4 12 x 3 17 x 4 32 x 9 84 x 16 Reclaim Rate (t/month) 50 000 120 000 200 000 400 000 1 200 000

The dredge comprises a floating platform with a `ladder' which can be lowered below the surface by winch or hydraulic cylinders. A suction or cutter-suction device is mounted at the end of the ladder. The ladder permits reclaim from as much as 25 m below the pond level depending on dredge size. A variety of suction ends are available depending on the degree of consolidation of the tailings and the preference of supplier and operator. In addition to the simple suction type, the following are available:
@ @ @

Horizontal auger Single and double wheel excavators - rotation parallel to advance Single wheel excavator - rotation perpendicular to advance

The power consumed by the cutter head can be considerable. For example the cutter head of the 24" dredge noted above might consume 600 kW. The dredge pump is often located on the ladder and immediately behind the cutter head. It is thus operated submerged in tailings/water. Both the cutter head and the primary pump are usually hydraulically driven with fluid supplied through flexible hoses. Hydraulic power is generally obtained from a pump which is direct mounted on a diesel engine located in the dredge. However, in the largest dredges, power comes from a shore-mounted electric power source through a floating cable. It is common to have a second pump on the dredge to boost the reclaimed slurry to shore and the processing plant. The booster pump is often direct coupled to a second diesel power unit. Other essential parts of the typical dredge are the swing winches and the spud system. The swing winches are equipped with lines which pass over pulleys at the bow of the dredge and on to shore anchor points or `deadmen'. Spuds are located at the stern of the dredge and, when down, anchor the stern location. Movement of the cutter head through about a 90 degree arc is effected by operating the swing winches. Forward movement of the dredge is effected by `walking' the dredge using the spuds or with a spud carriage. Tailings reclaim dredges are equipped with a cabin for the operator. It is prudent to equip the dredge with mass flow monitoring equipment. It is difficult for the operator to know what is happening 10 m below the surface.
Page 9 of 16

The normal dredge has a crew of two, one operator and a helper who attends to fuel, the engines and similar service functions. Various work boats and barges are required to fuel and service the working dredges. Dredging reclaim rates vary with tailings density, fluidity, depth and operator skill. Typical solids in reclaimed slurry is 33%. Recovery of tailings is not always complete. Sonic depth indicators are useful units for obtaining bottom profiles. Parallel ridges can indicate that material has been left behind and a clean-up pass perpendicular to the original reclaim direction may be warranted. It will be appreciated that a substantial amount of water leaves the dredging area with the reclaimed tailings. This must be made up by the addition of water to the pond. In a preferred situation, the new tailings are deposited underwater in a basin adjacent to the reclaim area and excess water flows back into the reclaim basin in a closed loop. Applicability of Dredging Dredging is applicable to tailings deposited in old lakes or other depressions capable of holding water. It is also possible to operate dredges on an above-grade deposit with competent walls as has been demonstrated by Denison Mines in Elliot Lake. Denison are using a dredge to redistribute above-grade tailings on one of their deposits. Dredging has been successfully conducted through the ice at Port Radium in the 1950's and recently by Eastmaque in Kirkland Lake. Several special operating strategies are required including the use of backhoes to break ice, de-icing pumps, submerged slurry lines etc. Mechanical Excavation Bucketwheel excavators have been used on above-grade tailings dams in South Africa. The primary reason for their selection has been their ability to deliver `dry' tailings. This is useful if the tailings are to go to a retreatment plant that requires particularly high percentage solids. Such is the case with reprocessing for uranium recovery. It is therefore not surprising that Chemwes and Blyvooruitzicht, South African uranium producers, were early users of this reclaim method. Blyvooruitzicht also preferred the excavator because of concerns about the possibility of sink-hole formation resulting from hydraulic reclamation. Tailings reclaimed by the excavator is transferred to a conveyor running parallel to the direction of reclaim. This conveyor may transfer to other conveyors which go to the reprocessing plant. Alternatively the main conveyor can discharge to a repulper at the dam site with the resulting slurry pumped to the reprocessing plant. The Blyvooruitzicht excavator was an Orenstein & Koppel SH 250 equipped with 0.25 m3 buckets. With a peak digging rate of 400 m3/h of tailings, this unit satisfied the feed requirements of a 100 000 t/m reprocessing plant. Chemwes used a similar machine produced by PHB Weserhutte. These South African excavators are small compared to those used in other industries. Units capable of handling 10 000 m3/h are employed in the German brown coal mines.

Page 10 of 16

Despite the advantage of high percentage solids, bucketwheel excavators are not used extensively. They are costly to purchase and operate. The tailings must be very competent to carry the mass of the excavator - not always the case in the centre of a slimes dam. Other Reclaim Methods Back-hoes and trucks, electric shovels and conveyors, and other methods have been, or are used to reclaim tailings. The wide variety of techniques used reflects the local conditions and serve to stress the importance of good studies of the options. Trash Removal No discussion of tailings reclaim is complete without including trash! Tailings dams are seen by the mine staff and the public as being good places to dispose of trash, rubbish, old containers, and a wide variety of unmentionable articles. Trash can cause considerable difficulties during reclaim by blocking slurry trenches, plugging pumps, and interfering with mechanical reclaim methods. Indeed the expected amount and type of trash is one factor in the selection of the reclaim method. Apart from trash, many tailings deposits have vegetation on the tops and sides. This can be natural or the result of man's re-vegetation efforts. In either case it is wise to remove this material prior to commencement of reclaim. Small areas can be stripped in one pass. Larger areas might be stripped on a campaign basis in which an area is cleared ahead of the advancing face. Older tailings disposal sites were usually not cleared prior to their use and buried vegetation can also cause problems. Efforts to intercept trash from slurry trenches and sumps are manpower intensive and not very effective. Trash is best removed from the reclaimed slurry stream using a vibrating screen at the earliest opportunity. This can be done by sinking the screen below grade in a dry well - a common practice in South Africa. However this is a costly method and there is the danger of flooding. There is also the problem of getting the trash out of the screen pit - usually by conveyor. A preferred way is to pump from the reclaim sump using a dredge type pump to an elevated screen. Trash can then be dropped into a skip or against a buttress wall for removal by front-end-loader. Primary trash will comprise rocks, timber from old tailings lines and cribbing, natural vegetation, sundry bits of metal, plastic, and rubber. The primary trash screen must be rugged since it will be required to handle material as large as the passing sphere size of the primary pump. This could be as high as 250 mm. Passages in the screen feed box must allow this material to pass through and onto the screen deck. A screen aperture of 2 x 20 mm is commonly selected. Primary trash yield is very variable but might amount to 0.5% of the screen feed when handling dam wall material - the most difficult material to deal with. Secondary trash removal is often practised if a tailings retreatment process is applied to the reclaimed tailings. The screening aperture is determined by the subsequent recovery process. For gold recovery operations the aperture will be about 0.6 mm. The linear screen has become the standard unit for this application. The amount of trash recovered on the secondary screen can be staggering. Values as high as 4 m3 per 1000
Page 11 of 16

tonnes of plant feed have been seen. Removal of trash skips can be quite labour intensive. Secondary trash is usually a mix of wood fibres and sand particles from the tailings dam. TYPICAL RELOCATION COSTS Kilborn has examined, engineered and operated several relocation projects over the last few years. Typical data for a hydraulic monitoring and a dredging operation are presented below. All costs are expressed in 1993 United States dollars. Example 1 - Hydraulic Monitoring Basic Data The above-grade tailings deposit of Example 1 contains about 40 000 000 t and occupies an area of 200 ha. The tailings contain residual base metals and sulphides and present environmental concerns. It was proposed to remove tailings above a certain elevation and flood the remainder. After initial studies of alternative relocation options, hydraulic monitoring was selected for further study. In the proposed project, five 150 mm monitors would reslurry and move 4 800 000 t/a of tailings over a 6 month/a operating season. The tailings would be collected in a sump, pumped to trash screens, then relocated to an existing open pit. The operation would proceed for 24 h/d, 7 d/week during the 6 months of warmer weather. The recovery of residual base metals using the existing mill was proposed to defray movement costs. The costs presented below are for the tailings movement only and do not include any milling costs. Capital Costs The total initial cost of the project was estimated to be $7,000,000. Major cost items included the monitors ($400,000), pumps and motors ($1,000,000), electrical supply to the tailings area ($250,000), and the many kilometers of piping. Operating Costs Operating costs were developed as follows: Labour - a total labour force of 30 was proposed. Six operators would cover each of the 4 shifts, and six management and maintenance people would work on day shift. Monthly costs were estimated to be $100,000 or about $0.125/t of tailings moved. Maintenance Supplies - the costs to replace pump parts, maintain pipe lines and similar activities were estimated at $80,000 per month or $0.10/t moved. Electrical Power - the pit was located some distance above the tailings dam and electrical power consumption for pumping slurry was estimated to be significant. The total of the installed motors was 4 500 kW and an average power draw of 2 600 kW was
Page 12 of 16

expected. At the local rate of $0.05/kWh, power costs equated to $100,000/month or $0.125/t moved. It was estimated that the monitor water booster pumps (1 200 kW installed) would consume 40% of the power and the slurry transfer system most of the balance. Contractor - a large number of small but important jobs have to be performed to keep a tailings relocation project moving smoothly. The monitor system must be moved, slurry trenches have to be constructed and maintained, trash removed to a safe storage area, and roads maintained. It is common to contract this work out to a local enterprise. In the project under discussion, it was estimated that costs would be about $420,000 per year or $0.08/t of tailings relocated. The costs developed above are summarized overleaf in Table IV. Table IV - Summary of Typical Operating Costs - Example 1 800 000 t/month Hydraulic Monitoring Cost Area Labour Maintenance Supplies Electrical Power Contractors Total Monthly Cost ($/month) 100,000 80,000 100,000 70,000 350,000 Unit Cost ($/t) 0.125 0.100 0.125 0.088 0.438

Example 2 - Dredging Basic Data The tailings deposit in Example 2 is located in the western US and contains about 8 000 000 t of gold-bearing, pyritic tailings in a basin about 10 m deep. The tailings also contain arsenic compounds and are a major environmental concern since a stream flows over the deposit. After an initial analysis, it was decided to divert the stream around the tailings, use a dredge for reclaim, recover gold and remove arsenic, and place the new tailings in a deep lake adjoining the contaminated tailings area. In the proposed project, two 8" dredges would reclaim about 150 000 t/month of material over a 12 month/a operating season. The tailings would be pumped to trash screens, reprocessed by flotation, then relocated to the new area. The costs presented below are for the tailings movement only and do not include any decontamination or reprocessing costs.

Page 13 of 16

Capital Costs The total initial cost of the relocation portion of the project was estimated to be $4,000,000. Major cost items included diversion of the stream around the active tailings reclaim area ($1,000,000), dredges and workboats ($800,000), miscellaneous pumps and motors ($200,000), and piping. Operating Costs Operating costs for the removal operation were developed as follows: Labour - a total labour force of 15 was proposed. Three operators would cover each of the 4 shifts, and three management and maintenance people would work on day shift. Monthly costs were estimated to be $50,000 or about $0.333/t of tailings moved. Maintenance Supplies - the costs to replace cutter head and pump parts, maintain pipe lines and similar activities were estimated at $20,000 per month or $0.133/t moved. Electrical Power - the estimated electrical power demand was low since the dredges were diesel powered. The total demand for lights, smaller pumps and other items associated with the reclaim operation was 200 kW and an average power draw of 100 kW was expected. At the local rate of $0.04/kWh, power costs equated to $3,000/month or $0.020/t moved. Diesel Fuel - the two dredges were each expected to consume about 40 L/h of fuel. Including work boats and other usage, monthly consumption was estimated at 50 000 L at a cost of $15,000/month or $0.100/t of tailings moved. Contractor - minor equipment maintenance jobs, trash removal etc. would be contracted out. It was estimated that costs would be about $15,000 per month or $0.10/t of tailings relocated. The dredging costs developed above are summarized in Table V. Table V - Summary of Typical Operating Costs - Example 2 150 000 t/month Dredging Operation Cost Area Labour Maintenance Supplies Electrical Power Diesel Fuel Contractors Total Monthly Cost ($/month) 50,000 20,000 3,000 15,000 15,000 103,000 Unit Cost ($/t) 0.333 0.133 0.020 0.100 0.100 0.686

Page 14 of 16

REPROCESSING Tailings can be reprocessed to recover valuable components left by the earlier processing operations. Indeed all of the operations in Table I were initiated for this reason. If the relocation of tailings is being considered for environmental reasons, the possibility of reprocessing should be examined. By-product recover might help offset costs, or even turn the operation into a profitable venture. Tailings might be reprocessed for environmental reasons alone. The removal of pyrite, arsenopyrite or radioactive components might be readily effected once tailings have been reslurried. The removal of these components might be a valuable part of a site remediation program. If a new processing plant is to be constructed for the retreatment of tailings, the designers can often take advantage of new processes and high capacity equipment, that were not available, or appropriate to the original operation. Unit operating costs can be very low for the higher tonnage operations. CONCLUSIONS This paper has shown that the relocation of tailings at rates up to 2 million tonnes/month is readily accomplished at low cost. Various methods are available, each best suited to a certain type of deposit. The relocation option should be considered in any proposed tailings remediation program. REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. F.C. Harvey, "An overview of gold tailings retreatment methods". Paper presented at local meeting of Timmins branch of CIM, April 1988. Anon. "Eastmaque mining gold from tailings in Ontario Lake". International Dredging Review. February 1989, Vol. 8, No. 2, 6-7. Anon. "Tailings yield gold for operators". The Northern Miner. August 19, 1991, 20. Anon. Technical Brochure. East Rand Gold & Uranium Co. Ltd., Daggafontein Division. T. McWaters, "Developing Magma's tailings leach operation", Mining Engineering, September 1990, 1075-1080. P. Wilson, "ERG tailings retreatment project", Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mineral Processors, Ottawa, January 1989. K.R. Suttill, "Tailings retreatment in northern Ontario", Engineering and Mining Journal, September 1988, 58-62.
Page 15 of 16

8.

P.A. Laxen, "The carbon in pulp plant at Rand Mines Milling and Mining Company: Problems encountered and developments introduced", Mintek Report No. M259. 29 August, 1986. Anon. "NIMCIX is a commercial success at Blyvooruitzicht", Engineering and Mining Journal, November 1978, 178-181. M.A. Ford, et al. "The first six years of the Chemwes uranium plant", Journal of the South African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, Vol 87, No. 4, 113-124. Anon. "Tailing reclamation: New profits for Ergo and others", Engineering and Mining Journal, November 1982, 132-135. Anon. "Ergo Technical Information", Booklet published by ERGO, 1978.

9. 10. 11. 12.

Page 16 of 16