Sibanye-Stillwater is committed to the safe and environmentally responsible stewardship of our tailings storage facilities. Tailings facilities store a mine’s primary waste stream. Without proper management, these facilities can pose a significant risk to the natural and social environment. Catastrophic tailings facility failures can devastate the environment and destroy lives and livelihoods. Such catastrophic failures are unacceptable, and Sibanye-Stillwater is dedicated to ensuring that systems, standards and resources are in place to prevent failures.
Sibanye-Stillwater is on a journey of continual improvement in health, safety, and environmental performance with the ultimate goal of zero harm. The Group is dedicated to minimising human and environmental risk associated with its tailings storage facilities. The goal of zero harm from tailings facilities encompasses both physical and chemical performance objectives including zero catastrophic failures of our tailings storage facilities and no significant adverse effects on the environment or human health.
Sibanye-Stillwater is committed to transparency regarding the safety and integrity of our TSFs. This includes submissions required by organisations such as the Church of England Pensions Fund and the ICMM. The Global Industry Standard for Tailings Management details specific aspects regarding the management and status of TSFs required in such disclosures.
Sibanye-Stillwater’s tailings storage facilities (TSFs) at the SA, US, and AUS operations conform to the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM).
*The Keliber lithium project’s TSF is under construction and we are working towards conformance prior to commissioning in Q3 2026.
MORE INFORMATION
As a responsible mining group and a proud member of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), Sibanye-Stillwater has committed to aligning its tailings management systems and practices with the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM), launched on 6 August 2020. Recognised as the leading international benchmark for tailings management, the GISTM commitment extends beyond our obligations as an ICMM member to encompass accountability to all stakeholders, including affected communities and the broader public.
The GISTM covers the entire TSF life cycle, from site selection, design and construction to management, monitoring, closure and post-closure. It seeks to strengthen current practices in the mining industry by integrating social, environmental, local economic and technical considerations. The standard aims for zero harm to people and the environment and significantly raises the bar for the industry in achieving strong social, environmental and technical outcomes. It elevates accountability to the highest organisational levels and introduces additional requirements for independent oversight. The GISTM also establishes clear expectations for global transparency and disclosure, improving the understanding of interested stakeholders.
The GISTM comprises six topic areas, 15 principles and 77 auditable requirements, and is supported by the ICMM conformance protocols. These protocols provide detailed guidance for certification and assurance, as well as alignment with other standards. The ICMM Tailings Governance Framework: Position Statement included the following key elements:
- Accountability, responsibility and competency
- Planning and resourcing
- Risk management
- Change management
- Emergency preparedness and response
- Review and assurance
Following the publication of the GISTM, Sibanye-Stillwater initiated a comprehensive programme to achieve conformance with its requirements. The Group successfully attained conformance for all tailings storage facilities (TSFs) classified as Very High and Extreme consequence ahead of the ICMM’s 5 August 2023 deadline. Additionally, by the fourth quarter of 2023, Sibanye-Stillwater achieved full conformance for all remaining TSFs across both its South African and United States operations, well in advance of the 5 August 2025 deadline. The Australian operations achieved full conformance by 31 July 2025.
Since 2021, we have spent approximately R570 million – primarily in the SA operations – to ensure the safe operation of, and conformance with, the GISTM across all TSFs. In 2025, we spent around R150 million to comply with the GISTM’s “meets with a plan” proviso, in line with the objectives set in 2023. All major TSF upgrades included in the 2023 conformance declaration have been completed.
Following full GISTM conformance at all our active operations, validation of conformance and the closure of outstanding projects are scheduled for 2026. In 2024, PwC completed an external validation of GISTM conformance, with no material findings; the next external validation is scheduled for 2026.
We conduct quarterly GISTM self-assessments for each TSF using Pivot (an electronic safety management system). The US Independent Tailings Review Board (ITRB) reviews US TSFs annually, while the SA ITRB reviews high-risk SA TSFs annually and others every three years.
Aligned with our focus on GISTM conformance and our drive to enhance surveillance, we use Decipher (a cloud-based tailings management platform owned by InxK2Fly) across all SA and US operations. Decipher incorporates satellite deformation monitoring and geo-referenced surveillance data, enhancing risk mitigation across our footprint.
Achieving conformance is viewed not as the final objective, but as the foundation for a continuous journey toward enhanced TSF safety. Sibanye-Stillwater remains committed to ongoing improvements, with a strong focus on governance, technical excellence, and social responsibility in the management of its TSFs.
Effective risk management requires that communities are well informed and prepared to respond when necessary. We collaborate with local authorities on emergency planning, simulations and environmental protections, and are formalising partnerships with public agencies and first responders. We’ve secured TSF safety MOUs for all our SA TSFs. Our Ulwazi app shares information on TSF risks, and we regularly conduct mock drills – often meeting and often exceeding GISTM standards – in partnership with local authorities.
Refer to the 2025 Group impact supplement for further details on community engagement on tailings management – Baobab TSF (Limpopo), SA Gold (Gauteng TSFs) and Kroondal TSF.
The governance structure for tailings management, indicated in the figure below, is closely aligned with the requirements of the GISTM.
The Independent Tailings Review Boards (ITRB) conduct reviews of Tailings Storage Facilities (TSFs) to evaluate their safety with respect to design, construction, operation, and management, ensuring performance aligns with the original design intent. In addition, independent reviews are carried out on the broader tailings management system and its components. These reviews provide assurance to the Board, executive management, and stakeholders that the TSFs do not present any unacceptable risks.
SA operations
The SA operations ITRB comprises three members, all of whom participate in multiple ITRBs for various mining companies. Due to various reasons, the members of the ITRB established in 2021 changed at the end of 2024.
2021 to 2024
Mr John Wates (Chairman): John provides independent consulting services through John Wates Consulting. He has had over 40 years of experience in design and construction management of mine tailings storage facilities, water dams and industrial and domestic waste disposal sites. John resides in South Africa.
Dr Dirk van Zyl: Dirk is a geotechnical engineer with more than 44 years’ experience in research, teaching and consulting in tailings and mine rock management and heap leach design for international projects. He spent in total about 24 years in academia. Dirk also participates on the US operations ITRB. Dirk resides in Washington State in the United States.
Mr Danie Brink: Danie is an independent specialist consultant in tailings management, with 37 years of experience in mining and industrial waste management. His expertise lies in the design and monitoring of tailings storage facilities, as well as the closure planning of waste and tailings sites. Danie is based in South Africa.
2025 onwards
Mr Danie Brink (Chairman): Danie is an independent specialist consultant in tailings management, with 38 years of experience in mining and industrial waste management. His expertise lies in the design and monitoring of tailings storage facilities, as well as the closure planning of waste and tailings sites. Danie is based in South Africa.
Dr Pierre van den Berg: Pierre currently serves as a contractor for Jones and Wagener (Pty) Ltd, where he previously held the position of CEO from 2014. He brings over 35 years of technical expertise in geotechnical engineering and infrastructure design, with a focus on water dams and tailings facilities. Pierre is based in South Africa.
Andrew Brown: Andrew has more than 40 years of experience and offers independent consulting services in hydrology, mine closure, and rehabilitation. He led the mining portfolio at the South African Department of Water and Sanitation for 22 years, followed by 15 years heading the Closure and Rehabilitation department at WSP Pty Ltd (formerly Golder Pty Ltd), where he also served as a board member.
US operations
The US operations ITRB also comprises three members:
Dr Dirk van Zyl: Dirk is a geotechnical engineer with more than 44 years’ experience in research, teaching and consulting in tailings and mine rock management and heap leach design for international projects. He spent in total about 24 years in academia. Dirk also participates on the US operations ITRB. Dirk resides in Washington State.
Mr Matt Fuller: Matt is a Founding Principal of Tierra Group International and an Engineering Geologist. Matt’s professional technical experience spans more than 30 years providing geological, geotechnical, geo-environmental and geological hazards consulting services to the international mining industry. Matt resides in Colorado.
Dr. Richard Dawson: Richard is currently a Senior Principal at Stantec based in Vancouver, Canada. Richard has over 40 years of experience in geology, mining, and geotechnical engineering related to resource development. Richard’s technical expertise is in mine waste geotechnics (waste dumps and tailings), slope stability (rock and soil), and risk evaluations.
Recent global Tailings Storage Facilities (TSFs) failures have highlighted the vital importance of engaging local authorities, affected communities, and first responders in the development and testing of Emergency Preparedness and Response Plans (EPRPs).
SA operations
As part of our commitment to responsible tailings management, Sibanye-Stillwater’s South African operations (SA operations) continues to provide tailings awareness training to surrounding communities. In parallel, we are actively engaging with local and district municipalities to coordinate emergency response efforts both proactively and in the event of a potential disaster. To date, multiple Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) have been formalised with municipalities across the South African operations. These agreements are designed to ensure a unified and effective response to emergencies, including potential TSF incidents.
To evaluate and strengthen emergency preparedness across our operations, Sibanye-Stillwater conducts regular external simulations and mock drills. These exercises are undertaken in close collaboration with Disaster Management Teams, local and district municipalities, and key emergency services, ensuring a coordinated and effective response framework. In parallel, household censuses are conducted within potentially impacted communities. The data collected through these censuses enhances our understanding of community vulnerabilities and informs the refinement of EPRPs ensuring they are tailored to the specific needs and risk profiles of each community.
Sibanye-Stillwater has partnered with the Gift of the Givers Foundation – the largest disaster response NGO (non-government organisation) of African origin. Initial engagements focused on post-incident TSF response; however, this collaboration has since evolved into a broader Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) encompassing support for a wide range of potential mine-related emergencies.
US operations
At our US Platinum Group Metals (PGM) operations, community engagement is embedded in every aspect of tailings management through the Good Neighbor Agreement (GNA) councils. These councils, which represent local community interests, have played a central role in the design, monitoring, and closure planning of Tailings Storage Facilities (TSFs).
The GNA councils were actively involved in the review of Emergency Preparedness and Response Plans (EPRPs) and were instrumental in the development of a tailored community education program. This collaborative approach ensures that local perspectives and concerns are integrated into our emergency preparedness strategies.
Regular engagement is maintained between mine representatives, county officials, and first responders to facilitate tailings awareness training and conduct emergency preparedness exercises. Looking ahead, functional EPRP drills are scheduled to take place across US PGM sites in 2025, further reinforcing our commitment to safety, transparency, and community resilience.
Aus operations
The Century Operations TSF in Australia is classified as a low-risk facility, primarily due to the significantly reduced volume of tailings currently stored. In the unlikely event of a containment issue, the TSF is protected by a secondary containment system, the evaporation dam, which is designed to capture any potential discharge. The TSF is located in a remote area with a low population density. Additionally, the site maintains a dedicated earthworks fleet capable of responding rapidly to contain and mitigate any potential environmental release.
Despite the low risk, Century Operations has a comprehensive Site Emergency Management Plan in place. A trained Emergency Response Team (ERT) conducts regular drills at the TSF to maintain readiness.
The PCTSF Dam Safety Emergency Plan (DSEP) was last updated in 2022. This included flood inundation mapping which was used to inform consequence assessments and emergency planning. Emergency personnel and first response services contact lists and procedures are updated as required. Attendance at mock scenarios facilitated by other West Coast mines is mandatory.
The Mt Lyell Princess Creek TSF (PCTSF) remains at a High consequence category due to the risk of downstream environmental impact. To ensure containment, the PCTSF includes multiple zoned embankments, a broad created weir spillway with capacity for Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) events and reinforced concrete decant systems. Princess Creek is in a remote area with no persons displaced or living in the vicinity of the TSF.
Tailings are what remains after extracting valuable minerals and metals from mined ore and usually take the form of a slurry comprising crushed rock, water, trace quantities of metals and additives used in processing.
Tailings are pumped into surface dams known as tailings storage facilities (TSFs) where the material is allowed to dry. Post operations, TSFs are rehabilitated with the area generally restored with grass and other vegetation. TSFs can be constructed in a number of ways depending on a number of factors, namely, local topography, rainfall, seismic activity and the proximity of the mine to local communities.
Tailings storage facilities follow one of three wall construction designs – downstream, upstream or centreline.
Downstream
Centreline
Upstream
Source: globaltailingsreview.org
We manage tailings risk through rigorous monitoring and adherence to global best practices, including independent reviews by ITRBs and the designated EoRs (engineers of record). This approach is applied across our SA, US, and AUS operations. The primary tailings risk is excessive rainfall beyond design limits, which could disrupt operations and impact nearby communities. All TSFs are engineered to withstand a 1-in-10,000-year flood event, as required by the GISTM for TSFs with extreme consequences. Our approach to risk mitigation includes:
- EoRs performing dam breach analyses, assigning consequence classifications, and identifying potentially affected areas and communities
- Warning sirens at TSFs and within affected communities to alert community members in the event of an emergency
- Comprehensive internal and external evaluations conducted by EoRs and the ITRB
- Industry-leading TSF monitoring technologies (K2Fly and GeoLytics by Groundwork)
- An emergency preparedness and response plan (EPRP) for each dam, including contacts for local communities
- Trigger action response plans (TARPs), which define responsibilities in the event of major TSF failures
- Planned evacuation routes and assembly points for employees, contractors and community members
- Community outreach and education initiatives to raise awareness of TSF risks and promote emergency preparedness
- Regular internal and external emergency drills conducted with local authorities and affected communities
- MOUs with Gift of Givers for humanitarian assistance, as well as with local municipalities
In South Africa, the principle management guidance document for tailings storage facilities is SANS 10286, the origin of which dates back to 1998. This standard contains fundamental objectives, the principles and minimum requirements for best practice, all aimed at ensuring that no unavoidable risks, problems and/or legacies are left to future generations. The standard does not, however, address the environmental issues or health and safety concerns of tailings storage, but places more focus on the need for management throughout the life cycle of a tailings storage facility. SANS 10286, in its current format, falls short of the more stringent requirements as contained in the GISTM and is in the process of being updated.
In the US state of Montana, new regulations (MCA 82-4-376) were promulgated in 2015 which are broadly reflective of international best practice in the management of tailings storage facilities. These regulations stipulate all storage facilities are to be designed using the most advanced practices and technologies available, requiring ample review and approval of design, operation, maintenance and closure by expert engineers ahead of construction.
In Australia, TSFs are regulated under a robust framework of federal, state, and industry-specific legislation and standards. Key regulations include the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 at the federal level, alongside state-based Mining and Quarrying Safety and Health Act 1999. Environmental protection laws Industry best practices are guided by the Australian National Committee on Large Dams (ANCOLD) Guidelines and international standards such as the GISTM.
In Finland, TSFs are regulated under a strong legal and environmental framework to ensure their safe design, operation, and closure. Key legislation includes the Dam Safety Act (494/2009), Environmental Protection Act (527/2014), Mining Act (621/2011), and the Land Use and Building Act (132/1999). Operators must obtain permits through the Regional Administrative Agency (AVI), Finnish Safety and Chemicals Agency (Tukes) and the Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment (ELY Centre), which e.g. approves mining waste facility and water retaining infrastructure designs prior construction, grants commissioning approvals, and monitors dam safety requirements. Best practices are guided by national regulations, the European Union’s Best Available Techniques Reference Documentation such as the Management of waste from extractive industries, in accordance with Mining Waste Directive (2006/21/EC) and international standards such as the GISTM.
In recent years, Sibanye-Stillwater has undertaken various initiatives to improve its rehabilitation capabilities, particularly as they relate to tailings storage facilities. Key to this was the purchase of a 50.1% shareholding in DRDGOLD in South Africa, a world leader in the retreatment of surface gold tailings, and 100% ownership of Century operations in Australia. This has allowed Sibanye-Stillwater to leverage:
- Reversing the environmental legacy of mining through the retreatment of tailings storage facilities; redeposition of the resultant tailings in a TSF that meets best global best standards
- Project managing the execution and implementation of surface processing infrastructure development
- Optimising innovative and technology-driven processing
The acquisition of DRDGOLD and Century has helped the Group reduce the number of legacy TSFs under its management and derive economic value from tailings retreatment.
Tailings storage facilities across our operations
Sibanye-Stillwater manages a global portfolio of 37 tailings storage facilities (TSFs) across multiple continents, underscoring the scale and complexity of its mining operations. These facilities span a range of operational stages:
- 20 are currently active
- 12 are dormant
- 5 are undergoing re-mining
The majority of these TSFs (32) are located in South Africa, with additional facilities in the United States (3) and Australia (2). A significant number of these sites were incorporated into the portfolio through historical acquisitions, reflecting the Group’s growth over time. Beyond the existing portfolio, two new TSFs are currently progressing through the permitting phase:
- The Keliber TSF in Finland
- The Lewis Gulch TSF at the US PGM operation
Collectively, this portfolio reflects Sibanye-Stillwater’s ongoing commitment to responsible and sustainable tailings management across all countries of operation.
Details of our managed TSFs are listed below. Individual fact sheets summarising details of the TSF and the current status determined through independent reviews are provided. Any material risks and the related mitigation measures are discussed. For the purpose of these fact sheets, “material” is defined as a risk or event that may have a short or long-term impact on the integrity of the facility requiring mitigation.
Upstream TSFs require enhanced management to operate within design specifications. None of our South African TSFs are designed to store water; they maintain sufficient freeboard (the distance between the tailings surface and the lowest point of the outer wall) and minimal supernatant (liquid above solid residue) ponds, thereby reducing the risk of failures historically observed at other facilities.
Sibanye-Stillwater’s TSFs, constructed by various companies over decades to differing specifications, are not uniform. Prior to our ownership, these facilities were managed under varying governance structures and jurisdictional regulations. Alignment with the GISTM enables a standardised and consistent approach to TSF management.
SA operations
All 32 of our TSFs in South Africa are upstream TSFs, of which 24 (comprising 20 active TSFs, three dormant TSFs and one under re-mining) are classified, according to the GISTM, as having either a very high or extreme consequence classification. A further eight are classified, according to the GISTM, as having high, significant or low consequence classifications.
US operations
All three TSFs in the US operations are classified as extreme-consequence downstream TSFs, two of which are currently active.
Australian operations
We operate two TSFs – one under re-mining and one dormant – both classified as high consequence.
| Operation | TSF name/ map link | Coordinates | Status | Consequence Classification (GISTM, 2020) |
Hazard Classification (SANS 10286:1998) |
Risk exposure | Operating methodology | Date commissioned | Life of TSF | Current max height | Fact sheet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Beatrix | BTX1 (Beatrix Dormant TSF compartment) | -28.28695, 26.7704111 | Inactive Care and Maintenance | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
1983 | N/A | 30 | Download |
| 2 | Beatrix | BTX2 (Beatrix Active TSF compartment) | -28.2736972, 26.7716583 | Active | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
2002 | 2029 @1,5m/year | 26,9 | Download |
| 3 | Beatrix | BTX4 (Oryx TSF) | -28.188975, 26.7037361 | Dormant since mid-2019 | Significant | High | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
1981 | N/A | 20 | Download |
| 4 | Burnstone | Burnstone TSF | -26.6224333, 28.6782361 | Dormant since 2015. | High | Low | L | Cyclone | 2010 | N/A | 6 | Download |
| 5 | Cooke Mine | Cooke TSF | -26.2434528, 27.749525 | Dormant since January 2015 | High | Medium | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
1977 | N/A | 66 | Download |
| 6 | Driefontein | Driefontein 1 TSF | -26.2434528, 27.749525 | Active | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
1972 | 2036 @1,5m/year | 59 | Download |
| 7 | Driefontein | Driefontein 2 TSF | -26.3705278, 27.5026583 | Active | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
1972 | 2034 @1,5m/year | 52 | Download |
| 8 | Ezulwini | Ezulwini North TSF | -26.35345, 27.7256778 | Active | Extreme | Medium | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
1982 | 2035 @2m/year | 30 | Download |
| 9 | Kloof | Kloof TSF 2 | -26.4434417, 27.5908444 | Transferred to DRDGOLD, effective 1 December 2025 | High | High | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
1960 | Dec 2022 @1,5m/year | 65 | Download |
| 10 | Leeudoorn | Leeudoorn TSF | -26.4601028, 27.5680028 | Dormant since August 2024 | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
1982 | Upper: 2046 @1,5m/year Lower: 2060 @1,5m/year |
Upper: 32.5 Lower: 38 |
Download |
| 11 | Cooke Mine | Millsite Complex (38, 39, 40, 41, valley dam) | -26.1317444, 27.7018139 | Inactive Care and Maintenance, Dam 38 undergoing remining | Significant | Medium | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
1900 | N/A | 50 | Download |
| 12 | Ezulwini | Ezulwini South TSF (Cooke 4) | -26.3811667, 27.7197667 | Inactive Care and Maintenance | Low | Medium | L | Upstream, Day-wall |
1959 | N/A | 36 | Download |
| Operation | TSF name/ map link | Coordinates | Status | Consequence Classification (GISTM, 2020) |
Hazard Classification (SANS 10286:1998) |
Risk exposure | Risk description and mitigation measures | Operating methodology | Date commissioned | Life of TSF | Current max height | Fact sheet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 13 | Limpopo | Baobab 1 | -24.3698, 29.4712 | Dormant | Very High | Medium | L | Upstream, Spigot | 2002 | 2029 @2.5m/yr | 22 | Download | |
| 14 | Marikana | Eastern Plats TD1 | -25.6870, 27.6042 | Re-mined | N/A | N/A | L | Upstream, Spigot | 1989 | Oct-04 | 36 | ||
| 15 | Marikana | Eastern Plats TD2 | -25.6872, 27.5957 | Remining | Extreme | High | M | Instability, extensive seepage. Mitigation measures: A drained buttress has been constructed along 80% of the outer wall. No further concerns have been experienced. |
Upstream, Spigot | 2002 | 2027 @2,5m/yr | 36 | Download |
| 16 | Rustenburg | Hoedspruit | -25.6727, 27.4097 | Active | Very High | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | 2004 | 2044 @2,5m/year | 40 | Download | |
| 17 | Kroondal | K1 (K1 Concentrator) | -25.71306, 27.3296 | Active | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | 1999 | 2026 @2m/year | 38 | Download | |
| 18 | Kroondal | K150 (K1 Concentrator) | -25.7164, 27.35163 | Active | Extreme | High | L | Upsteam, Cyclone | 2001 | 2026 @2m/year | 60 | Download | |
| 19 | Kroondal | K2 (K1 Concentrator, K2 Concentrator in emergency) | -25.71688, 27.3604 | Active | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | 2005 | 2026 @2,7m/year | 70 | Download | |
| 20 | Marikana | Karee 1 | -25.6815, 27.4522 | Inactive Care and Maintenance | High | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | 1989 | N/A | 37 | Download | |
| 21 | Marikana | Karee 2 | -25.6769, 27.4460 | Active | Very High | High | L | Spigot, converting to Hybrid Paddock System during 2024 | 2001 | 2026 @1.3m/yr | 32 | Download | |
| 22 | Marikana | Karee 3 | -25.6792, 27.4351 | Active | Very High | High | L | Spigot, converting to Hybrid Paddock System during 2024 | 2002 | TD3A: 2024 @1.5m/yr (deposition ceased in June 2024), TD3B:2028 @1,5m/yr (deposition ceased in November 2025) | 33 | Download | |
| 23 | Marikana | Karee 4 | -25.6498, 27.4491 | Active | Very High | Medium | L | Spigot | 2008 | 2045 @1.3m/yr, 2043 @1.5m/yr | 17 | Download | |
| 24 | Kroondal | Marikana (K2 Concentrator) | -25.732519, 27.40939 | Active | Very High | High | M | Seepage on NW & West flank. Mitigation measures: Phase 4 of the buttress was completed mid-February 2023. No further concerns have been experienced. |
Upstream, Spigot | 1999 | 2030 @2m/yr | 27 | Download |
| 25 | Rustenburg | Paardekraal Central | -25.6373, 27.3171 | Active | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | 1983 | 2026 @2.5m/year, 2031 (extension) @2.5m/year | 62 | Download | |
| 26 | Rustenburg | Paardekraal PK4 | -25.6273, 27.3053 | Active | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | 2007 | 2069 @2.5m/year | 23 | Download | |
| 27 | Rustenburg | Paardekraal PK5 | -25.6457, 27.3271 | Active | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | 2008 | 2069 @2.5m/year | 36 | Download | |
| 28 | Platinum Mile | Waterval East | -25.6676, 27.3166 | Re-mined | N/A | N/A | L | Upstream, Spigot | 2004 | N/A | |||
| 29 | Platinum Mile | Waterval West | -25.6642, 27.3131 | Re-mining | N/A | N/A | L | Upstream, Spigot | N/A | ||||
| 30 | Marikana | Western Plats TD1 | -25.7085, 27.5093 | Inactive Care and Maintenance | High | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | Pre 1980 | N/A | 23 | Download | |
| 31 | Marikana | Western Plats TD2 | -25.7149, 27.5269 | Inactive Care and Maintenance | High | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | Pre 1980 | 2034 @2.5m/yr | 34 | Download | |
| 32 | Marikana | Western Plats TD5 | -25.6968, 27.5264 | Currently being recommissioned with expected completion Q1 2025 | Extreme | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | 1980 | Nov-17 | 63 | Download | |
| 33 | Marikana | Western Plats TD6 | -25.6745, 27.5582 | Active | Extreme | High | L | Spigot, converting to Hybrid Paddock System during 2024 | 2000 | 2030 @2.5m/yr | 36 | Download | |
| 34 | Marikana | Western Plats TD7 | -25.7020, 27.5409 | Currently being recommissioned with expected completion Q1 2025 | High | High | L | Upstream, Spigot | 1992 | N/A | 23 | Download | |
| TSF name/ map link | Coordinates | Status | Consequence Classification (GISTM, 2020) |
Hazard Classification (CDA, 2016) |
Risk exposure | Operating methodology | Date commissioned | Life of TSF | Current max height | Reports | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 35 | East Boulder TSF | 45.5059, -110.0850 | Active | Very high | Significant | L | Impoundment, Spigot | 2001 | 2030 | 44 | More… | ||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| 36 | Nye TSF | 45.3856, -109.8759 | Closure in progress | Very high | Significant | L | Impoundment, Spigot | 1986 | N/A | 30 | More… | ||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| 37 | Herzler TSF | 45.4533, -109.7861 | Active | Extreme | Significant | L | Impoundment, Spigot | 2002 | 2030 | 54 | More… | ||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| 38 | Lewis Gulch | 45.512811, -110.095811 | Permitted | Extreme | Significant | Impoundment, Spigot | 2030 | 2043 | More… | ||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| Operation | TSF name/ map link | Coordinates | Status | Consequence Classification (GISTM) |
Hazard Classification | Risk exposure | Operating methodology | Date commissioned | Life of TSF | Fact sheet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 39. | Mt Lyell | Princess Creek TSF | -42.0959, 145.5082 | Dormant | High | High B | L | Impoundment | 1996 | N/A | Download |
| 40. | Century | Century TSF | -18.7842, 138.6448 | Re-mining | High | High C | L | Hydraulic re-mining | 1998 | 2027 | Download |
| Operation | TSF name/ map link | Coordinates | Status | Consequence Classification (GISTM) |
Hazard Classification | Risk exposure | Operating methodology | Date commissioned | Life of TSF | Fact sheet | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 41. | Keliber | Keliber TSF Complex | 63.6389, 23.8502 | Commissioning (Q3 2026) | High | L | Impoundment | 2026 | 2044 | Download | |
REFERENCES
Princess Creek TSF at Mt Lyell in Tasmania is under care and maintenance. The water forms a cover to the tailings to reduce oxidation and the potential for further pollution from acidic drainage as required by permit conditions.
