Kennedy, T 2025, 'A mine water system framework: designing with the end in mind for monitoring 
that works across and beyond mine life', in S Knutsson, AB Fourie & M Tibbett (eds), Mine Closure 2025: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Mine Closure, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 1-14, https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_repo/2515_68
(https://papers.acg.uwa.edu.au/p/2515_68_Kennedy/)
Abstract: Mine water monitoring programs are often designed with limited reference to how water interacts across a site. Geology, landforms and materials shape water movement, active processes and system response over time. Yet monitoring locations are typically defined by compliance spacing, infrastructure layout or stability concerns. Closure monitoring, by contrast, must characterise how the site functions as a system – how water interacts with landscape features, what risks or opportunities may arise and what stable performance looks like beyond operations.
Water moves according to geology and landscape, not compliance maps. In geology we say, “there is a reason for every feature in the landscape”. The same is true for water, though in reverse: water reasons with every feature in the landscape. As landforms evolve, so do the interactions with water, the responses of systems and the models used to explain them.
Establishing long-term and future-focused monitoring earlier in the mine life improves the ability to anticipate and respond to these challenges. At closure, unresolved or slow-developing issues – previously managed through reporting cycles – require resolution. If monitoring networks are not structured with closure in mind, gaps in understanding can lead to misrepresented risks, increased costs, asset impairments or prolonged regulatory review.
This paper presents the Mine Water System Monitoring Framework – a method for addressing complex water issues through the design of a monitoring network tailored to how water interacts with the geology, landscape and mining landforms. Drawing from examples in waste rock, heap leach, tailings and pit lakes, the framework is grounded in practice and focused on landform function and system behaviour. Case studies from legacy, active and planned operations demonstrate how monitoring aligned with geology, landform evolution and system logic improves effectiveness, reduces closure uncertainty and supports more confident decisions.
Successful monitoring is not about collecting more data or building larger models. It’s about designing representative networks that reflect how the site works – providing the foundation for shared understanding across operations, transition and closure.

Keywords: mine closure, mine water, monitoring framework, landform evolution, representative monitoring, geology and environment, holistic water management, water strategy, complex problems