-
Main Corporate Website
-
XPS
-
Glencore Technology
-
Zipatank
-
Hypersparge
-
IsaKidd
-
IsaMill
-
IsaSmelt
-
JamesonCell
-
Albion Process
-
Viterra
-
Aquarius Energy
-
Glencore in South Africa
-
Glencore in the DRC
-
Mutanda Mining
-
Kamoto Copper Company
-
Astron Energy
-
Katanga Mining Limited
-
Glencore Australia
-
Viterra Australia
-
Bulga Coal
-
Liddell Coal
-
Mangoola
-
McArthur River Mine
-
Mt Owen Complex
-
Ravensworth operations
-
Ulan Coal
-
United Project
-
Wandoan Coal
-
West Wallsend
-
Murrin Murrin
-
Mount Isa Mines
-
Main MenuWho we are
-
Main MenuWhat we do
-
What we doMetals & minerals
-
What we doEnergy
-
Marketing -
Recycling
-
-
Main MenuSustainability
-
Main MenuInvestors
-
Main MenuMedia
-
Main MenuCareers
-
Suppliers
The information on this webpage and provided in each factsheet and in the TSF Register (including but not limited to the facts, figures, accompanying explanations and descriptions) has been prepared by Glencore in good faith and in accordance with the methodology set out on this webpage. It should be read in conjunction with the important notice at the end of this webpage concerning this webpage and the factsheets for our TSFs which can be downloaded from the webpage.
Message from the CEO
Over recent years, the mining industry has experienced several tailings dam failures resulting in catastrophic loss of life and environmental damage. At Glencore, we recognise the possibility of a tailings storage facility (TSF) failure as a material risk with the potential to result in devastating impacts to the surrounding communities and environment.
We are committed to the responsible management of our TSFs to prevent impacts on health, safety, the environment, and communities. As part of this commitment, we publicly disclose information on our TSFs on our website.
Our approach to TSF and dam management is based on a rigorous TSF Framework and an ethos of continuous improvement. Our goal of safe and responsible tailings management requires us to implement the commitments and requirements detailed in our applicable policies and standards, which are supported by comprehensive governance and assurance.
Through our membership of the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), we participated in the development of the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM) and are committed to its implementation. In accordance with Principle 15 of the GISTM (Publicly disclose and provide access to information about the tailings facility to support public accountability) and our ICMM commitments, we disclose information on our TSFs with an ‘Extreme’ and ‘Very High’ Consequence Classification. This detailed disclosure demonstrates our commitment to providing information to actively engage with interested stakeholders.
Our TSFs with ‘Extreme’ or ‘Very High’ Consequence Classifications undergo independent assurance that includes a technical review of the design, construction, operation, closure, and management of TSFs. The assurance findings, as well as evolving regulatory requirements, improvements in climatic modelling and technical developments, support our ongoing risk assessment and mitigation process.
We are committed to designing, building, and operating our TSFs to address failure risks associated with extreme flood events or earthquakes, and in addition, improving TSFs acquired through acquisitions that do not meet our expectations. In response to our risk assessments and dam assurance programme, we undertake TSF upgrade projects, which include constructing new dams, emergency spillways and buttresses. We will continue to upgrade our TSFs to address identified risks and to implement the practices prescribed by the Canadian Dam Association (CDA) and the GISTM.
We will continue to engage on our approach to responsible tailings management with interested stakeholders, as well as update our disclosure on an annual basis.
Gary Nagle - CEO - August 2024
In 2016, Glencore published its first Tailings Storage Facility Protocol, setting out our commitment to the responsible management of TSFs. In the same year, we also launched our health, safety, environment, community, and human rights assurance programme, requiring independent dam safety audits of the design, construction, operation, closure plans and management of all TSFs in our portfolio. These dam safety audits aim to ensure the alignment of our industrial assets’ tailings management systems with the Glencore Tailings Storage Facility Framework (TSF Framework). The findings of these dam safety audits are reported to Glencore’s senior management, including the respective Accountable Executive, and our Board HSEC Committee.
Starting in 2019, we participated in the Global Tailings Review (GTR), an initiative co-convened by the ICMM, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI). In 2019, we published our first TSF disclosure in response to the Mine and Tailings Waste Initiative request.
As part of our commitment to continuous improvement in the management of TSFs, beginning in 2019, we updated our Tailings Storage Facility and Dam Management Standard (TSF and Dam Management Standard) to consider the CDA’s Dam Safety Guidelines and the International Commission on Large Dams (ICOLD). In response to the GISTM being issued in 2020, we further updated our TSF and Dam Management Standard. As part of these updates, we committed to upgrade our facilities to reflect international leading practices and address risks associated with extreme flood events or earthquakes.
In Canada, we completed the construction of the new Narrows Dam in 2022, to reduce the potential effects of any breach associated with dam failure. In Kazakhstan, we began a significant programme of works to upgrade our TSFs to address risks associated with potential earthquake events. Since 2019, we have placed over 29 million tonnes of rock to buttress TSFs at many of our sites.
In 2020, we entered into an agreement with a provider of Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) high-resolution satellite monitoring for over half of our TSFs, prioritised based on the GISTM’s Consequence Classification. All our TSFs with an ‘Extreme’ or ‘Very High’ Consequence Classification are now monitored using InSAR. The data is available via a cloud-based platform, ensuring its continuous availability for review and analysis, as well as supporting our operations in making informed decisions in the event of any anomalous observations.
To support implementation of our TSF and Dam Management Standard and the GISTM, we developed our Tailings Manager Academy (TMA) which offers training on technical, environmental, and social areas of tailings management.
As part of Glencore’s commitment to human rights and stakeholder engagement we seek to manage human rights risks at each stage of our business and, for industrial assets, at every stage of their lifecycle, from exploration through to closure.
We recognise that robust and respectful engagement with our stakeholders is essential for our industrial assets to maintain their licence to operate. Through building constructive and transparent relationships with our stakeholders, we aim to strengthen our approaches to improve our operating processes and performance.
During 2023, we rolled out a global Geographical Information System (GIS), capturing environmental, social, and local economic knowledge for all regions in which Glencore has TSFs. We continue to maintain and update this information when there is a Material (as defined in the GISTM glossary) change in the environment surrounding our TSFs.
Tailings are 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.
We define TSFs as specially designed and managed facilities that contain the tailings produced by metallurgical processes at mines, concentrators, or, if they have a credible flow failure mode, smelters. Although tailings may be stored in mined-out underground mines, we refer to TSFs as those facilities on the surface or in open pit mines where the combined water and solids volume is more than 30,000m3 or are at least 2.5 metres high measured from the elevation of the crest to the elevation of the toe of the structure. Where the Consequence Classification of the facility is ‘High’, ‘Very High’ or ‘Extreme’, such structures are considered a TSF regardless of its size.
Where TSFs are formed by dam(s), they are typically constructed using one of four dam construction methods based on the predominant raising method: upstream, downstream, centreline, filtered. In some cases, a hybrid of these methods may be applied.
Upstream tailings dams are built progressively upstream of the starter dam (in green) by controlled deposition of tailings into the dam for support.
Centreline tailings dams are raised progressively while maintaining the original centreline of the starter dam.
Downstream tailings dams are raised progressively downstream of the starter dam using an internal drain or filter.
Filtered tailings dams consist of compacted and uncompacted tailings, with the compacted tailings typically forming the containment structure.
In-pit TSFs are where tailings are deposited in previously mined open pit voids.
In 2020, the GTR, made up of the ICMM, UNEP and PRI, published the new Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM). Glencore participated in the development of the GISTM through our membership of the ICMM.
On 5 August 2020, all ICMM members, including Glencore, committed to implementing the GISTM. As contemplated by the ICMM Conformance Protocols – Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management of May 2021, in August 2023 and 2024, we reported on the conformance with the GISTM for our TSFs with an ‘Extreme’ or ‘Very High’ Consequence Classification and by August 2025 we will further report on our TSFs with ’High’, ’Significant‘ and ‘Low’ Consequence Classifications.
The GISTM comprises six topic areas supported by 15 Principles and 77 requirements (as defined in the GISTM glossary) summarised in the figure below that apply to tailings storage facilities as defined by the GISTM that are not closed tailings facilities in a demonstrated state of safe closure.
Figure: Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management. ©Global Tailings Review/ICMM
We are committed to responsible management of our TSFs to prevent and minimise impacts to health, safety, the environment, communities, cultural heritage, and infrastructure.
We have implemented a comprehensive TSF Framework, with clear governance, accountabilities, systems, training, auditing, and reporting on performance.
The planning, design, construction, operation, maintenance and monitoring of our surface and underground mines, water and TSFs, smelters, refineries and other infrastructure and equipment is carried out in a manner consistent with international guidelines and standards, and designed to prevent incidents and protect our people, assets, communities, the environment, and other stakeholders.
Wherever there are Material deviations with regards to any requirements of our approach to tailings management or the GISTM as set out in sections 1 through 12, such Material findings are included in the relevant TSF specific factsheets available in the ‘TSF disclosure’ section.
A strong governance structure supports our TSF management. Our TSF Framework is governed by the Glencore Board through its HSEC Committee. It requires the appointment of an Accountable Executive for each industrial commodity department (excluding oil, which does not have TSFs), as well as dam owners, Engineers of Record (EOR) and Responsible Tailings Facility Engineers (RTFE) at our industrial assets.
- Our Accountable Executives are answerable to Glencore’s Chief Executive Officer and are required to report to the Board of Directors at a minimum annually on their respective TSF portfolio.
- Each TSF has a dam owner, who is the site’s senior executive management person with assigned responsibility to appropriately resource the TSF.
- Each TSF has an EOR who is responsible for verifying that the TSF is designed, constructed, and operated in accordance with the applicable regulations, as well as our TSF Framework.
- A RTFE/responsible person is also appointed for each TSF and has clearly defined, delegated responsibility for the TSF management throughout its entire lifecycle.
For all TSFs with an ‘Extreme’ or ‘Very High’ Consequence Classification, an Independent Tailings Review Board (ITRB) is required. Further, Group Assurance has been commissioning independent third-party dam safety audits of TSFs from internationally recognised dam consultants, typically on a 12- to 18-month basis.
Our Tailings Storage Facility Policy (Policy) articulates the fundamental elements of our approach and commitment to the safe, responsible, and sustainable management of our TSFs. Our Policy commits us to preventing TSF failures through designing, constructing, operating, and closing our TSFs in a responsible manner which includes:
- Assessing our TSFs against seismic and flooding events considering the impacts of climate change, and incorporating the outcomes into the design and operation of our TSFs;
- Establishing monitoring systems and processes to regularly check stability of TSFs;
- Striving to continuously improving the design, construction, and operation of our TSFs and actively participating in leading initiatives that reduce and/or eliminate tailings;
- Proactively engaging with all relevant stakeholders to share information on the risks and the controls we have in place to manage our TSFs, as well as to engage with them on our Emergency Preparedness and Response Plans (EPRPs);
- Providing the appropriate training to our workforce involved in, or responsible for, tailings management;
- Conducting assurance activities throughout the lifecycle of our TSFs (including closed facilities) and reporting findings to the Board HSEC Committee, as well as taking appropriate responsive actions in a timely manner; and
- Planning and providing adequate funding for the decommissioning and closure of our TSFs.
Glencore’s TSF Framework is aligned with the ICMM’s Tailings Governance Framework position statement, the GISTM, the CDA’s Dam Safety Guidelines and the ICOLD. Our TSF and Dam Management Standard embeds corresponding dam design and management guidance, as well as other internal and external guidelines to inform the requirements detailed in our TSF and Dam Management Standard.
Figure: Relationship of key documents and guidelines that support the Glencore TSF Framework
We have established an online TMA to develop the knowledge of TSF management. Training modules within the TMA are organised into three levels (Level 1 to Level 3) of competency and are assigned to employees based on their roles and responsibilities: operators and technicians (Level 1), dam owners, managers, and Accountable Executives (Level 2) and RTFEs/responsible persons and engineering staff (Level 3).
The TMA was developed with the assistance of external subject matter experts. It is aligned with leading industry guidelines and standards, such as the CDA’s Dam Safety Guidelines and GISTM, and covers all aspects of tailings management, from geotechnical and hydrotechnical engineering, environmental and closure to emergency response planning, human rights, and social performance. The TMA includes competency tests and, to support our diverse portfolio, is also available in Russian, Spanish and French.
We recognise that we have the potential to impact human rights directly through our operations, and indirectly through our relationships with joint ventures, contractors, and suppliers. We are committed to respecting human rights and actively support our workforce, business partners and suppliers to understand and meet this commitment. Our ambition is to uphold and promote respect for human rights within the Group, and throughout our value chain, to enable peoples’ basic rights and freedoms. We aim to:
- avoid causing, or contributing to, adverse human rights impacts;
- prevent or mitigate adverse human rights impacts linked to our operations, products, or services, through our business relationships; and
- make a positive contribution to the advancement of human rights of all people.
In the event we cause or contribute to an adverse impact on human rights, we provide for, or cooperate in, processes to enable an appropriate remedy.
Our Human Rights Policy, which was developed in consultation with communities and external experts, articulates Glencore’s approach and how we fulfil our commitment to respect human rights. The policy aligns with the ICMM Mining Principles, and the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (UNGPs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Our Human Rights Standard defines the minimum requirements for Glencore industrial assets to identify, assess, and manage human rights risks linked to our operations.
Glencore maintains a human rights risk rating tool comprising input data from internal and external sources to assign a ‘High’, ‘Medium’ or ‘Low’ human rights risk rating to each Glencore industrial asset and set minimum performance expectations for human rights management and due diligence. Human rights due diligence refers to the on-going process through which we identify, prevent, mitigate, and monitor human rights risks associated with the presence of our industrial assets. Completion of Human Rights Risk Assessments (HRRA) or Human Rights Impact Assessments (HRIA) are essential steps in the human rights due diligence process.
All industrial assets with a ’High’ human rights risk rating are required to complete an HRIA using a competent third-party expert which must be reviewed and, where required, updated at least every five years or sooner, based on risk.
Industrial assets with a ‘Medium’ or ‘Low’ human rights risk rating are required to conduct HRRA. A third-party expert is required to participate and provide support for ‘Medium’ risk industrial assets. Third-party expert support is optional for ‘Low’ risk industrial assets. The HRRA must be reviewed and, where required, updated every two years or sooner, based on risk.
Glencore is committed to building and maintaining constructive, long-standing relationships with its stakeholders. Culturally appropriate engagement mechanisms, tailored to local contexts, are established by our industrial assets with communities and other stakeholders to facilitate open dialogue, exchange information and seek feedback, and address any complaints or grievances, including in relation to TSFs where appropriate, throughout the industrial asset’s lifecycle.
Our local engagement activities support the building of community and stakeholder knowledge about how we manage our TSFs and, where appropriate, support their participation in decisions that may have a bearing on public safety. Our Social Performance Policy requires our industrial assets to develop and maintain local level complaints and grievance processes where all stakeholders can raise any complaints or grievances they may have and which our teams are required to investigate and seek to resolve in a timely and consultative manner.
We seek to ensure that Indigenous Peoples are consulted and have given their Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) in relation to new TSFs or changes to existing TSFs where significant adverse impacts are likely to occur, including relocation, disturbance of lands and territories with critical cultural heritage. We seek, through good faith negotiation, to reach agreements with Indigenous Peoples who maintain an interest in, or connection to, the land on which we operate TSFs, formalising engagement processes and sustainable benefits.
Aligned with the GISTM and to support safe tailings management, we require our industrial assets to develop and document knowledge about the local social, environmental, and economic context for each of their TSFs. This information is referred to as a Knowledge Base that is stored and managed within a centralised, digital GIS. Each industrial asset Knowledge Base displays, manages, and evaluates geospatial data within a single environment and can be used to inform tailings dam Consequence Classification and to prepare for long-term recovery in the event of a TSF emergency. The Knowledge Base also considers uncertainties associated with climate change.
Industrial assets are required to review and update their Knowledge Base at least every five years, and whenever there is a Material change either to the TSF or to the local social, environmental, and economic context.
The consideration of Credible Failure Modes, and the design measures/operational controls that should be in place in response, are key elements of our TSF design. The GISTM defines ‘Credible Failure Modes/Scenarios’ as "Refers to technically feasible failure mechanisms given the materials present in the structure and its foundation, the properties of these materials, the configuration 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 TSF as the conditions vary. A facility that is appropriately designed and operated considers all these credible failure modes and includes sufficient 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."
The assessment and selection of the Consequence Classification is based on Credible Failure Modes. It does not represent the likelihood or risk of a dam failure, meaning the Consequence Classification of a TSF is not equivalent with risk of TSF failure.
We assess our TSFs in accordance with the requirements of the GISTM and assign them a Consequence Classification based on the potential effects of dam failure by assessing the downstream conditions documented in the Knowledge Base and selecting the Consequence Classification corresponding to the highest consequence.
We re-assess the Consequence Classification of our TSFs when there is a Material change in the condition of the TSF, or downstream conditions documented by the Knowledge Base, informed by the dam break analysis (DBA). The ITRB regularly review these DBAs for our TSFs with an ‘Extreme’ or ‘Very High’ Consequence Classification for alignment with international best practice.
The Consequence Classification for a facility is required to be assessed and recommended by the EOR, based on the DBA informed by Credible Failure Modes. The ITRB is required to undertake their independent review and confirms the Consequence Classification with the Accountable Executive. In cases where the EOR and ITRB come to diverging assessments with regards to the recommended Consequence Classification, a further review and discussions are required to be held to reach alignment.
As the Consequence Classification can change throughout the TSF’s lifecycle we review and disclose on these on an annual basis for all our TSFs.
The assessment and management of risk is essential to the effective operation of TSFs across their entire lifecycle. For each TSF, our industrial assets are required to undertake a multidisciplinary risk assessment that considers the applicable Credible Failure Modes and the hypothetical consequences of a failure. Our industrial assets are also required to ensure and verify the adequacy and effectiveness of the preventative and mitigating controls for all Material risks for each of their TSFs. The verification conducted by our industrial assets is assured by Group Assurance.
When considering the risks posed by TSFs, there needs to be a methodology for assessing whether the risks may be classified as intolerable or tolerable. Where risks are classified as intolerable, we require actions to be undertaken to reduce the risks and where risks are classified as tolerable these risks may be considered acceptable without further risk reduction being undertaken. This range between intolerable and broadly acceptable risks is referred to as the As Low As Reasonably Practicable (ALARP) risk level. As defined in the GISTM, 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 benefit. Risks in the ALARP zone may be tolerable if it can be demonstrated to have been reduced to a level that is ALARP.
Applying the ALARP demonstration process to the risks posed by Glencore’s TSFs is conducted through a combination of Glencore’s TSF vulnerability matrix, which shows the vulnerability regions and where ALARP applies, and a measure of meeting Glencore’s TSF and Dam Management Standard. The assessment of ALARP is also supported by multi-disciplinary risk assessments which are required to consider the Credible Failure Modes, Consequence Classification of the TSF and the adequacy of the preventative and mitigative controls.
Whilst risk quantification can be used within an ALARP demonstration, this has not been adopted by Glencore for TSF risk management because quantitative techniques have the effect of compounding uncertainties and producing erroneous levels of confidence by using input data (such as TSF failure rates) that are generalised across incidents at sites that may have little in common with Glencore’s sites and approach to TSF management.
Satellite monitoring
In 2020, we entered into an agreement with a provider to deploy Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) high-resolution satellite monitoring to over half of our TSFs, prioritised based on Consequence Classification. Since January 2023, nearly all our TSFs with an ‘Extreme’ or ‘Very High’ Consequence Classification are monitored using InSAR.
This satellite monitoring measures our TSFs’ surface movements every 11 days, currently which is the industry standard frequency for this type of data collection. The data is available via a cloud-based platform, ensuring its continuous availability for review and analysis, as well as supporting our operations in making decisions in the event of anomalous movements. The cloud-based platform also enables oversight by our internal and external assurance providers.
Robust designs are required to be developed that minimise the risk of failure during all phases of the TSF lifecycle, including closure and post-closure for all TSFs. For new TSFs, options relating to the site, technologies and design are to be assessed to identify the opportunities to reduce the potential consequences of a dam failure and support transition to a closure condition that minimises the long-term risk. We also require existing TSFs to periodically review new technologies to reduce risk and improve environmental outcomes.
Uncertainties and impacts due to climate change are also required to be considered in the design, operation, maintenance, and closure of TSFs. A closure plan is required to be developed for each TSF with supporting details to a level of detail that is commensurate with the life of the facility.
The operational management model of our TSFs follows a Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle through all phases of the lifecycle of a TSF: project conception and planning, design, construction, operations, and ongoing construction, temporary or permanent closure and post-closure when facilities have been configured for their perpetual form/state.
Our TSF Framework requires our industrial assets to develop and maintain TSF-specific EPRPs to ensure preparedness and response in the event of a failure. The EPRP is to provide information on managing the emergency response to a potential TSF failure event that presents a risk to people and the environment.
We require our industrial assets to undertake a drill of their EPRP at all phases of the TSF lifecycle at a frequency established in the plan, or more frequently if triggered by a Material change either to the TSF or to the social, environmental, and local economic context.
Information and training sessions on the EPRP are required to be held with our employees and contractors to inform the implementation of preventative measures and mitigating controls.
Our industrial assets must communicate their EPRPs with relevant stakeholders. Where appropriate, industrial assets may also engage with local and regional emergency response services in scenario planning and practice exercises.
TSF closure plans are required to be developed in accordance with the applicable regulations, as well as our internal standards and guidelines and are approved through the regulatory process where required.
When we decommission and close our TSFs, we require that our industrial assets put in place appropriate measures for physical and geochemical stability and that land is rehabilitated for appropriate post-mining use in a manner that enhances stability. Where a landform for a closed TSF is not possible, closure plans of our industrial assets must address physical stability and the control of geochemical stability in a manner that protects the environment.
Until they reach the state of safe closure, TSFs are required to be inspected and monitored by dedicated teams on a regular basis. Our decommissioned and closed industrial sites with TSFs that are not in a state of safe closure are required to have operational manuals that include instructions on actions in case of an anomaly, emergency response, monitoring, etc. Our Group Assurance programme includes closed industrial sites.
Glencore has developed and implemented assurance processes to review effective execution of its TSF Framework and responsible management of our TSFs.
Self-assessment
Our industrial assets are required to monitor their TSFs on an ongoing basis and identify, assess, and manage risk against the requirements of our TSF Framework to identify possible gaps and develop implementation plans to address them. The results are shared with industrial asset and commodity department management and reviewed as part of the dam safety audits by Group Assurance.
Independent technical review
Our TSF Framework requires independent technical review by an ITRB or external engineer of the design, construction, operation, closure, and management of TSFs. The independent reviewers are required to be third parties who are not, and have not been, directly involved with the design or operation of the TSF.
Group Assurance and dam safety audits
Group Assurance commissions independent third-party dam safety audits to review alignment of our industrial assets’ Tailings Management Systems with the Glencore TSF Framework. The results of these dam safety audits are reported to Glencore’s senior management, including the Accountable Executives, and our Board HSEC Committee. Findings are followed up through verification audits, which include review of progress on actions to close out findings.
Dam Safety Reviews (DSRs)
We require our industrial assets to commission DSRs in accordance with the schedule set out in the TSF’s Operations, Maintenance and Surveillance Manual based on the Consequence Classification of the structure. Our Standard mandates that DSRs must be conducted at least every five years for TSFs with an Active or Inactive Status and at least every eight years for facilities with Closed Status unless there has been a Material change in performance or site conditions.
The DSRs are required to be carried out by an independent qualified review engineer who assesses and evaluates the safety of a dam or system of dams against Credible Failure Modes and defines an action plan to address any findings.
All our industrial assets are working towards conforming to all 77 GISTM requirements for our TSFs. Where the GISTM requirements are not yet fully met, time-bound actions for reaching conformance are disclosed in the individual TSF factsheets for each of our TSFs with an ‘Extreme’ or ‘Very High’ Consequence Classification. Based on the ongoing TSF Management Systems we have in place we believe that any gaps in conformance are identified and managed appropriately. We recognise that technology, standards, and expectations evolve over time. As such, our approach is one of ongoing implementation and improvement.
We publish information for each of our TSFs with an ‘Extreme’ or ‘Very High’ Consequence Classification, and Murrin Murrin Paddock TSF, which has been reclassified from ‘Very High’ to ‘High’ Consequence Classification, according to the GISTM disclosure requirements in the factsheets accessible via the table below.
As part of our implementation of the GISTM requirements, we worked with external consultancies to independently assure various elements. We engaged Klohn Crippen Berger (KCB), an engineering, geosciences, and environmental consulting firm, and, where KCB is the Engineer of Record for the relevant TSF, another competent engineering consultant, to provide assurance of the technical engineering aspects of the GISTM. We engaged Acorn International, an environment, social, governance (ESG) assurance consulting firm, to provide assurance on the social performance and human rights aspects of the GISTM, and KPMG to provide assurance on GISTM Principle 15 (disclosure) and associated ICMM Conformance Protocols.
- Acorn International Assurance Statement for Glencore TSF Social Aspects
- KCB Assurance Statement GISTM Disclosure - Glencore's Tailings Storage Facilities
- KPMG Independent Limited Assurance Report to the Directors of Glencore plc
- Strata-Geo Assurance Statement GISTM Disclosure – Glencore Tailings Storage Facilities Heath Steele Mine Facility
TSF Register*
Our TSF register includes our TSFs with a ‘High, ’Significant’ and ‘Low’ Consequence Classification, now including also our TSFs that are in-pit facilities (TSF Register). Our TSF Register still excludes tailings that are fully encapsulated within mine material and tailings facilities in safe closure as confirmed by an ITRB or senior independent technical reviewer and signed off by the Accountable Executive. With a view to further transparency with our stakeholders, we have gone beyond the requirements of the GISTM in including our TSFs at our smelters if they have a credible flow failure mode (TSFs at our smelters previously included in the TSF Register that in the meantime have been assessed to not have a credible flow failure mode have been removed from the TSF Register).
*Glencore recently closed the acquisition of a 77% interest in Elk Valley Resources (EVR) from Teck Resources. Integrating EVR into the Group will include work to embed Glencore’s TSF Framework in the management of EVR’s TSFs and we will be completing independent reviews of EVR's TSFs. We will update the previous disclosure of EVR’s TSFs once these reviews are completed. In the meantime, our TSF factsheets and our TSF Register do not include EVR’s TSFs.
The terms used in our TSF disclosure, which includes the TSF factsheets, align with the GISTM Glossary and the Consequence Classification table in Annex 2 of the GISTM, which are capitalised and incorporated here by reference, except for a tailings facility definition that is provided below, which is broader than that of the GISTM in as it includes our TSFs at our smelters, which have a credible flow failure mode. The glossary below explains additional terms and acronyms used and contains information on our approach to the disclosure.
Term | Description | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Active (status) | Operating TSFs | ||||||||
Area of influence |
Specifically identified physical elements, aspects and facilities including transport corridors that generate, or are likely to generate, impacts or environmental/social risks. An area of influence may be:
|
||||||||
CDA | Canadian Dam Association | ||||||||
CDA Dam Safety Guidelines | A reference document for dam safety in Canada and internationally. Find out more here: cda.ca/publications/cda-guidance-documents/dam-safety-publications | ||||||||
Closed (status) | TSFs that are either closed or progressing to closure. This includes closed industrial sites where water treatment is required. | ||||||||
Conformance with the GISTM |
As a member of ICMM, Glencore is required under the ICMM Assurance and Validation Procedure, to disclose in August 2023 whether a TSF with an ‘Extreme’ or ‘Very High’ Consequence Classification is in conformance with the GISTM. To determine overall TSF conformance with the GISTM we evaluate each TSF with an ‘Extreme’ or ‘Very High’ Consequence Classification against all applicable GISTM requirements. We then report the overall conformance with the GISTM using the criteria provided within the ICMM Conformance Protocols. Where there are material gaps in conformance, we report the summary finding and time bound measures to address them.
|
||||||||
Coordinates | Coordinates as per the World Grid System 84 (WGS84) | ||||||||
Commodity department | The commodity departments comprising Glencore's business are Aluminium, Coal, Copper, Ferroalloys, Iron Ore, Nickel, Oil and Zinc. | ||||||||
Cycloning | Tailings are passed through a cyclone to separate fine and coarse particles in the tailings. The cyclone under flow consists of coarse sand that can be used as a construction material for the dam. | ||||||||
Flow failure | A failure where materials flow – water alone or water and solids | ||||||||
Dam break analysis (DBA) | Term Glencore uses for Breach Analysis as defined in the GISTM. | ||||||||
Dam owner | A site’s senior executive management person with assigned responsibility for ensuring the TSF or dam is appropriately resourced. | ||||||||
Dam safety audits | Has the meaning as set out in Our approach, section 13 (Group Assurance and dam safety audits). | ||||||||
Date of initial operation | Glencore has provided dates with respect to the initial design/commissioning. For TSFs where this date is uncertain, an estimated date has been provided. Where there are multiple secondary dams a range of start dates has been provided to show the evolution of the facility. In some cases, there also could be a discrepancy relating to reporting of the dates of design, construction, or commissioning, however, Glencore does not believe that this is a Material discrepancy. | ||||||||
Dam Safety Assessment | Term Glencore uses for Annual Performance Review as defined in the GISTM. | ||||||||
Dry cover | TSF will be converted into a permanent stable landform | ||||||||
DSR | Dam Safety Review | ||||||||
EOR | Engineer of Record | ||||||||
EPRP | Emergency Preparedness and Response Plan | ||||||||
ERT | Emergency Response Team | ||||||||
EWS | Early Warning System | ||||||||
Filtering | Tailings are filtered using a porous layer to retain solid particles while driving liquid particles through the porous layer, progressively dewatering the tailings to increase solid densities. Filtered tailings are then placed in the TSF. | ||||||||
FPIC | Free Prior and Informed Consent | ||||||||
GIS | Geographical Information System | ||||||||
GISTM | Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management | ||||||||
Glencore Standard | A document issued by Glencore which sets out the key requirements established on a particular topic. It contains detailed requirements that support the principles set out in our Code of Conduct or a policy. A standard does not set out the step-by-step process of how the specific requirements should be met. | ||||||||
Glencore Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) Framework | Glencore’s TSF Framework articulates the fundamental elements of our approach and commitment to the safe, responsible, and sustainable management of our TSFs and is aligned with Glencore’s Code of Conduct. | ||||||||
Grievance process | A formal grievance process/mechanism for local community members or other stakeholders to use to register any complaints or grievances about real or perceived actions by nearby operations, with the objective of resolving problems before they escalate. | ||||||||
Group Assurance | Corporate function that provides independent assurance on various risks, including of our catastrophic hazard management and in relation to our TSFs, following an annual risk-based audit plan, as approved by the relevant Board Committees. The function has recently been constituted as an amalgamation of Internal Audit and HSEC Audit and is managed by a newly appointed Head of Group Assurance, who joined the Group in 2022, reporting directly to the Chair of the Audit Committee and administratively to the CEO. | ||||||||
GTR | Global Tailings Review | ||||||||
HSEC&HR | Health, Safety, Environment, Social Performance and Human Rights | ||||||||
Human Rights Impact Assessment (HRIA) | A method for identifying and analysing potential and actual human rights impacts to a rights holder (e.g., changes to livelihoods, health, and wellbeing). Impacts can be both positive and negative. | ||||||||
Human Rights Risk Assessment (HRRA) | A systematic process of hazard / threat / opportunity identification, risk analysis and evaluation. | ||||||||
Human rights risk rating tool | A Glencore-specific tool to provide a consistent but preliminary human rights risk rating for all industrial assets to guide minimum human rights risk management controls | ||||||||
ICMM | International Council of Mining and Metals | ||||||||
ICOLD | International Commission on Large Dams | ||||||||
ILO | International Labour Organization | ||||||||
Inactive (status) | TSFs that are in care and maintenance and have not progressed to closure. This includes industrial sites that are under care and maintenance with a reasonable expectation of reopening and industrial sites which are being used to attenuate water flows for the TSF. This does not include closed sites where water treatment is required (see, Closed). Also includes TSFs under construction but not yet operational. | ||||||||
Indigenous Peoples | People in countries whose social, cultural and economic conditions distinguish them from other sections of the national community, and whose status is regulated wholly or partially by their own customs or traditions, or by special laws or regulations; or people in countries who are regarded as Indigenous on account of their descent from the populations which inhabited the country, or a geographical region to which the country belongs at the time of conquest or colonisation, or the establishment of present state boundaries and who, irrespective of their legal status, may retain some or all of their own social, economic, cultural and political institutions (as defined in the ILO Convention 'Concerning Indigenous People in Independent Countries, 1989 (No. 169)). | ||||||||
Industrial asset | An operation involved in the extraction, production or processing of minerals and metals and energy products for sale or further processing. An industrial asset may comprise several sites in different locations (e.g., port, pipelines) under the same management control supporting these activities | ||||||||
InSAR | Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar | ||||||||
ITRB | Independent Tailings Review Board | ||||||||
LOM | Life of Mine | ||||||||
Not applicable (primary deposition method) | Applies to TSFs that either closed or inactive (see Status), or where tailings are no longer being deposited. | ||||||||
Other (primary deposition method) | Other deposition methods may include integrated tailings and waste rock management, tailings stream separation, centrifuges, tube presses or microwaves. | ||||||||
Operational control | Where Glencore directly or indirectly controls and directs the day-to-day management and operation of the entity engaging in such activity, whether by contract or otherwise. | ||||||||
Our TSFs | The TSFs that are not in a state of safe closure as per the GISTM for which Glencore plc is the Operator as defined in the GISTM glossary and has operational control. | ||||||||
Planned safe closure concept | See Dry cover, Removal or Water cover. | ||||||||
Primary deposition method | See Cycloning, Filtering, Not applicable, Other, Spigotting, Thickening. | ||||||||
Raising method | Glencore reports the predominant raising method although some TSFs may have occasional raises with different methods (e.g., downstream raises, centreline raises, upstream raises and hybrid – combinations of different methods). Where there are secondary dams present, Glencore also reports the various raising methods. | ||||||||
Removal | Tailings are re-mined and/or relocated to another TSF. | ||||||||
RTFE | Responsible Tailings Facility Engineer | ||||||||
Social impact assessment | The identification of social and economic impacts generated by our operations. | ||||||||
Status | See Active, Closed, or Inactive | ||||||||
Spigotting | Tailings are discharged from the slurry distribution pipeline at single or multiple locations. | ||||||||
Tailings storage facility (TSF) | Tailings Storage Facilities (TSFs) are specially designed and managed facilities that contain the tailings produced by metallurgical processes at mines, concentrators, or, if they have a credible flow failure mode, smelters. Although tailings may be stored in mined out underground mines, Glencore refers to TSFs as those facilities on surface or in open pit mines where the combined water and solids volume is more than 30,000 m3 or are at least 2.5 metres high measured from the elevation of the crest to the elevation of the toe of the structure, unless the Consequence Classification is ‘High’, ‘Very High’ or ‘Extreme’, in which case the structure is considered a TSF, regardless of its size. | ||||||||
Thickening | Tailings are progressively thickened by dewatering the tailings to increasing solid densities. Thickened tailings are then pumped to the TSF. | ||||||||
TSF and Dam Management Standard | The purpose of the Glencore TSF and Dam Management Standard is to identify, understand and minimise or eliminate potential health, safety, environmental, social, and business risks (including social licence to operate) associated with TSFs used to store a combination of mineral residues, water treatment sludge, sediment control and water. The Standard also applies to water storage dams. | ||||||||
UNGPs | United Nations Guiding Principles | ||||||||
Water cover | Tailings will be covered with water to address potential geochemical risks. |
Last review date: 5 August 2024
Factsheets and other information relating to Volcan Compañia Minera S.A.A. were removed following Glencore's announcement of the sale of its stake in May 2024
Important notice concerning this webpage, the factsheets for each Tailings Storage Facility ("TSF") and the TSF Register which can be downloaded from the webpage.
The information on our TSF webpage and provided in each factsheet and in the TSF Register (including but not limited to the facts, figures, accompanying explanations and descriptions) (the "Information") has been prepared by Glencore in good faith and in accordance with the methodology set out on our TSF webpage. This material does not purport to contain all of the information you may wish to consider.
The Information is provided in response to the ICMM Conformance Protocols – Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management of May 2021, and the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management ("GISTM") in Glencore's capacity as a member of the International Council on Mining and Metals.
There are inherent limitations to the Information including the following:
-
The scope and depth of the information, which is contemplated by the GISTM is extensive and covers a wide range of topics. The data gathering process has therefore necessitated the collection and assessment of a considerable volume of historical and current business records and data that are generated and maintained by Glencore and its subsidiaries and affiliates (the "Data and Records").
-
The process also involved interpreting the Data and Records and making evaluations and assessments. The findings set out in the Information provided are therefore the products of subjective professional judgments which were made during the review and assessment process. This includes Information on the historical, current, and future assessments of the status and structural integrity of each TSF as identified on our TSF webpage and in the factsheets and the TSF Register.
-
The findings set out on our TSF webpage and in the factsheets and the TSF Register moreover represent the outcome of assessments conducted at a specific "point in time" when the Information was generated. The Information shall accordingly not, under any circumstances, create any implication that there has been no change in the current status or structural integrity of any of the TSFs as described on our TSF webpage or in the factsheets or the TSF Register after the date on which the Information was generated, or that the Information (or any part thereof) is correct as at any time subsequent to that date.
Certain descriptions on our TSF webpage, the factsheets and the TSF Register contain statements that are, or may be deemed to be, “forward looking statements” which are prospective in nature. Forward-looking statements are not based on historical facts, but rather on current predictions, expectations, beliefs, opinions, plans, objectives, goals, intentions and projections about future events, results of operations, prospects, financial condition, and discussions of strategy. These statements reflect judgments, assumptions, estimates and other information available as at the date of publication of the Information or the date of the corresponding assessment, review, planning or scenario analysis process.
Forward looking statements involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond Glencore’s control. Forward looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and may and often do differ materially from operational performance and actual results. Important factors that could cause these uncertainties include, but are not limited to, unforeseen extreme weather events, unforeseen seismic events, or other unforeseen natural phenomena such as hurricanes, cyclones, storms, floods, earthquakes, fires, landslides or other events, or other events or factors which are entirely beyond Glencore’s control. Such events and factors could adversely affect the current consequence classification, status, and structural integrity of the TSFs which are described in the factsheets.
Neither Glencore nor any of its subsidiaries or affiliates, nor any of its or their respective associates or directors, officers, employees, agents, or advisers, provides any representation, assurance or guarantee in respect of the occurrence (or non-occurrence) of the events expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements on our TSF webpage or in the factsheets or the TSF Register. In addition, neither Glencore nor any of its subsidiaries or affiliates, nor any of its or their respective associates or directors, officers, employees, agents, or advisers accepts any liability or may be held accountable for any loss or damage that may result for a person relying on any forward-looking statements. Subject to any terms implied by law which cannot be excluded, Glencore accepts no responsibility for any loss, damage, cost, or expense (whether direct or indirect) incurred by any person as a result of any error, omission, or misrepresentation in information on our TSF webpage, or in the factsheets or the TSF Register. You are cautioned not to place any reliance on any of these forward-looking statements which only speak as of the date of our last update to our TSF webpage, the factsheets or the TSF Register.
Except as required by applicable regulations or by law, Glencore is not under any obligation, and Glencore and each of its subsidiaries and affiliates expressly disclaim any intention, obligation, undertaking or duty of care, to update or revise any information, including forward looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, on our TSF webpage or in the factsheets or the TSF Register during the course of the year.
The Information should be read in conjunction with Glencore's other publications, including the "Risk management" and “Important notice” sections in its most recent Annual Report.
The companies in which Glencore plc directly and indirectly has an interest are separate and distinct legal entities. References to “Glencore”, “Glencore group” and “Group” are used for convenience only where references are made to Glencore plc and its subsidiaries in general. These collective expressions are used for ease of reference only and do not imply any other relationship between the companies. Likewise, the words “we”, “us” and “our” are also used to refer collectively to members of the Group or to those who work for them. These expressions are also used where no useful purpose is served by identifying the particular company or companies.
This material does not constitute or form part of any offer or invitation to sell or issue, or any solicitation of any offer to purchase or subscribe for any securities. The Information is made available for information purposes only. It has not been prepared as financial or investment advice, to provide any guidance in relation to our future performance, or as a disclosure document that is required to be lodged or filed with any regulatory authority in any jurisdiction.
Principles we follow
![UN Global Compact](/dam/jcr:6e548d6b-38c2-4224-b16d-8f20daf54558/logo-un-global-compact.jpg)