An analysis of actual cost data for surface mine rehabilitation projects in South Africa and comparison with guideline values published by the Department of Mineral Resources

dc.contributor.authorCornelissen, Hermanus Stephanus
dc.date.accessioned2019-03-20T09:30:45Z
dc.date.available2019-03-20T09:30:45Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.descriptionA research report submitted to the Faculty of Engineering, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science,en_ZA
dc.description.abstractIn 2004, the Department of Minerals and Energy (DME, predecessor to the current Department of Mineral Resources - DMR) published a guideline to calculate the amount that a mining right holder would require for financial provision at mine closure. This research report reviews the guideline, specifically focussing on the “rules-based approach” for determining the quantum of financial provision. Some authors have recorded the misapplication of this guideline in practice and their research supports a conclusion that the guideline does not provide adequately for the real costs of mine closure. This research report makes a comparison between the DME guideline master rates for mine closure costs and actual tendered prices for those same elements of mine closure in the period from 2009 – 2016. The analysis of the actual tender prices for the various master- and component rates in comparison with the DME guideline rates delivered mixed results. While the actual tender values exceeded the guideline master rates in most cases, there were notable exceptions where the actual tender results lagged the master rates. The data obtained from the actual tender prices for mine rehabilitation projects by a third party suggests that the use of CPI to escalate mine rehabilitation costs was very quickly overtaken in reality by higher annual costs and rate increases for most of the DME guideline master rates that relate to surface mining. It means that the DME guideline master rates were not reflective of actual rehabilitation costs by the time that the use of the DME guideline was superseded by the publication of new regulations by the Department of Environmental Affairs in November 2017. Whilst no perfectly linear and distinct relationship could be deduced, the results broadly support the findings of several authors that the actual costs to rehabilitate a mine are much more than the DME guideline document would lead a mine to provide for. The application of a rules-based approach remains an exercise mired in controversy and with many potential inaccuracies. The new NEMA regulations for financial provision completely negate the need for a guideline and relevant State Departments and mining companies alike are consequently dependant on third parties to prepare closure cost estimates.en_ZA
dc.description.librarianE.R. 2019en_ZA
dc.format.extentOnline resource (100 leaves)
dc.identifier.citationCornelissen, Hermanus Stephanus, (2018) An analysis of actual cost data for surface mine rehabilitation projects in South African and comparison with guideline values published by the Department of Mineral Resources, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, https://hdl.handle.net/10539/26592
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10539/26592
dc.language.isoenen_ZA
dc.subject.lcshMineral industries--Finance
dc.subject.lcshMine valuation--South Africa
dc.titleAn analysis of actual cost data for surface mine rehabilitation projects in South Africa and comparison with guideline values published by the Department of Mineral Resourcesen_ZA
dc.typeThesisen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
MINN7044 Research report H Cornelissen 813837 FINAL_Edited_&_Checked_July2018.docx
Size:
20.2 MB
Format:
Microsoft Word XML
Description:
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
MINN7044 Research report H Cornelissen 813837 FINAL_Edited_&_Checked_July2018.pdf
Size:
2.76 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Collections