Search Documents

By Edward Holloway

The basis for the selection of the ultimate pit for an open pit mining operation is generally opaque. Some form of value-based analysis will generally guide the final decision; however, the value will often gradually plateau whilst the ultimate pit size continues to increase. There is no established framework to guide specialists in the selection of the ultimate pit, with such decisions regularly made on a somewhat arbitrary basis. The key component that is missing from the analyses typically used to select the size of the ultimate pit is risk. Once risk is quantified within the analysis framework, the decision-making range is significantly reduced, and the process for selecting the ultimate pit becomes more consistent, replicable, and defensible. This paper provides an approach to including risk in the process used to select the ultimate pit.

Feb 21, 2024

By R. L. Grayson, R. C. Althouse, L. A. Layne, M. J. Klishis

Introduction The researchers combine a detailed microanalysis of accident data and roof bolting field observations to develop new and meaningful risk indices for the roof bolter job classification. These indices incorporate information that has not been used in traditional measures of risk. The significant parameters that these new indices incorporate are the total number of accidents occurring within a particular work activity, the amount of time a miner usually spends performing the work activities in which the accidents occurred, and the average severity of the injuries incurred in the accidents. Being specific for a particular job, they aid comparisons among work tasks performed in the bolting cycle. The indices' specificity provide anew basis for reexamination of training and operational development of miners for specific jobs. Microanalysis The roof bolting microanalysis was performed by examining the empirical data and written summaries for all bolting accidents reported in the West Virginia Safety Information System (WVSIS) for the years 1983-1987. The WVSIS database contained more than 15,000 accident narratives. The microanalysis of bolting accidents covered 2083 reported personal injuries (RPIs). This large number of injuries, performed at an industry-wide level, provides a broad picture of the nature of roof bolting injuries. The analysis focuses on the activities associated with the cyclical routines of the roof bolting process. For this analysis, roof bolting tasks were categorized into work routines based on the sequence of work activities performed by roof bolters. Four work routines were identified within the overall bolting cycle. And these routines comprised 70% (1217) of all roof bolting accidents at the face. The routines include: face area preparation; tramming, positioning and setting the automated temporary roof support (ATRS); drilling holes; and installing bolts. The types of injuries most common within a routine and the average severity of those RPIs were also identified. Table 1 gives a breakdown of the percentage of accidents by the bolting routines. Another 19% of the roof bolting RPIs cannot be classified in a particular routine because of the vagueness of the narratives. However, it was clear that these accidents involved drilling holes or installing bolts. These results are consistent with previous research. It identified drilling and bolting, followed by tramming, as the most frequent sources of injuries (Helander, Krohn & Curtain, 1983). [Table 1-Accidents by bolting routines at the face Accidents Bolting routine Percent Number Face area preparation 18.2 222 Tram, position, ATRS 23.3 284 Drilling holes 34.2 416 Installing bolts 24.2 295 Total 1217] Roof bolter operators were involved in 82% (1706) of the 2083 accidents. The RPIs incurred by classified roof bolters occurred largely on working sections (95%) and at the face area on the working section (75%). Approximately 23% of the 1706 roof bolter RPIs occurred during tasks which were not part of the bolting cycle. These included belt utility work, providing supplies and section moves. Miners in other job classifications who were involved in roof bolting accidents accounted for the remaining 18% of the 2083 roof bolting RPIs. Among this group were section utility men and general laborers (41%), section machine operators (38%), and electricians and mechanics (11%). Another 9% were performing on-section supervisory functions. Face area preparation Face area preparation work led to a substantial number of injuries, although it accounted for the lowest number of injuries of the four routines. Several tasks were associated with the injuries incurred in this routine. Table 2 shows the percentage of injuries associated with face area preparation. [Table 2- Accidents occurring during face area preparation 26.6% Setting temporary and supplemental supports 24.8% Scaling roof and ribs 21.2% Installing ventilation devices 15.8% Handling supplies and materials 11.6% Miscellaneous tasks] The injuries commonly involved overexertion and 'struck by' falling coal and rock. Handling materials often led to overexertion injuries. Nearly 66% of the scaling-related injuries and about 33% of the injuries incurred during the setting of temporary supports involved 'strikes' by equipment, materials, top and rib. Tramming, positioning and setting the ATRS During tramming operations, workers were often struck by components of the machine and hit by loose roof and rib. Poor footing also led to slips, sometimes against the moving machinery. Table 3 gives a breakdown of accidents in this routine. Control levers were a significant problem in this routine.

Jan 1, 1993

"A long-term mine production schedule optimization based on stochastic integer programming is presented that manages the risk due to geological variability and uncertainty while jointly considering mine profitability, truck fleet requirements and waste management. The evolution of the pit is controlled so that space within the mined-out pit is continuously provided to allow for tailings and waste rock to be replaced, thus minimizing the project’s environmental footprint. The method is applied at a taconite iron ore deposit and has a project net present value that is 16.9 percent higher than that of a conventional schedule and has a higher chance of meeting production forecasts. The stochastic schedule reduces equipment requirements by delaying waste mining and by mining selectively in order to meet plant ore feed requirements without stockpiling material, resulting in 23.7 and 26.2 percent lower mining capital and operating costs, respectively. IntroductionThe LabMag iron ore deposit is part of the Millennium Iron Range, a 210-km (130-mile) belt of taconite in northern Quebec and Labrador, Canada. LabMag has significant economic potential. It contains more than 3.3 Gt (3.6 billion st) of proven reserves at an average total iron content of 29.8 percent and is very low in impurities. However, on a project basis of 23 Mt/a (25 million stpy) of product, the required capital expenditure is estimated at more than $5 billion (SNC-Lavalin, 2014), which necessitates careful evaluation of all sources of risk. Resource estimation is one of the main sources of risk in a mining project as knowledge of the orebody is primarily based on drilling, which is often sparse because it is expensive. If the expected ore tonnages and qualities are not obtained when mining, the project cash flows are directly affected. The expected quantities and qualities of ore and waste are defined by the mine production schedule, which specifies the sequence of extraction and is dependent on the resource estimation. The goal of mine production scheduling is thus to maximize the expected profit, while also meeting all production targets and constraints, by creating an extraction schedule that is robust in the face of geological risk and has the highest chance possible of actually being realized."

Jan 10, 2017

By Sandy Worden

Coal mining companies in Australia are managing the high-consequence risks across their operations more effectively by using an interactive online risk management system known as Riskgate Developed by the Minerals Industry Safety and Health Centre (MISHC) at the University of Queensland, Australia, Riskgate contains detailed information about 11 high-consequence risk areas (called topics in the system) for opencut and underground coal mines (Table 1). The existing topics are: fires; strata control for underground mining; ground control for opencut mining; tires; isolation; collisions; explosions and explosives; manual tasks; and trips, slips and falls. Every Riskgate topic is focused on coal industry activities (mining, processing, transport and storage). The scope includes mine sites, lease areas and mine infrastructure (mobile, fixed plant, field equipment, buildings, road and rail transport), and all aspects of the mine life cycle from design through to decommissioning. The topics uniformly recognize that a loss of control can result in injury or fatality, equipment damage, production loss, reputation loss and environmental damage. However, the priority focus for Riskgate is the safety of mine personnel.

Jul 1, 2013

By S. E. Younis

The mining industry is currently looking to better understand, anticipate, and be able to mitigate business and operational risks in order to deliver the rewards of risk taking, and to minimize the frequency and impact of risk on the downside. Assessing risk works from the premise that the identification and management of existing risks can be very challenging, especially when threats are not easy to detect, the likelihood of occurrence is difficult to gauge, and/or the consequences are uncertain. Some approach this as a ?check the box? task, even though fire and safety incidents continue to occur and investigations often find the hazard analyses did not properly identify the cause or consequence. You cannot engineer protective designs and safeguards for causes and consequences that have not been identified appropriately. For the mining industry, risk management is an important tool for making critical decisions and, in some cases, meeting regulatory requirements. Providing high-quality documentation that meets both regulatory and corporate requirements is critical for maintaining safe, uninterrupted mining operations. Risk management is a five-part process: 1. Identify the hazards and their causes, 2. Determine the hazard consequences, 3. Calculate the frequency of occurrence, 4. Quantify the risk associated with the system, process, or procedure, and 5. Provide feasible solutions for the risks

Jan 1, 2012

By Andy Thompson, Frank Perrone

"As part of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s $10.5bn East Side Access Project in New York, 3,200 m of tunnel had to be constructed in rock, mix face and soft ground conditions beneath one of the largest passenger railroad junctions in North America, handling over 780 trains per day. The use of risk based decision making tools was essential in developing the bespoke contract framework that was adopted as well as making informed decisions once excavation commenced. This paper will outline the risk management process adopted, discuss the risks and mitigation strategies adopted and comment on the impacts of this approach on the as built Project cost and schedule. In particular, the paper will outline the unique approach used to establish the baseline against which the Contractors performance would be measured as the selection of a Slurry TBM to excavate the tunnels was considered to compromise the effective use of a Geotechnical Baseline Report. BACKGROUND AND CHALLENGES Contract CQ031, Queens bored Tunnels and Structures was awarded in September 2009 to a joint venture of Granite Northeast/Traylor Brothers/Frontier Kemper (GTF JV) for $717.6m following a negotiated procurement process. A robust approach was taken with regard to the management and payment for risks associated with the construction of these tunnels. Risk assessments were carried out during the design phase and a risk register was developed prior to procurement. During the procurement phase close attention was paid to ensuring that the allocation and pricing of known risks, together with mechanisms for managing future risks were clearly defined between the MTA and GTF JV.In comparison to the excavation work in Manhattan, which was performed in competent hard Manhattan schist, the tunnels in Queens were excavated predominantly through soft ground with a high water table and complex environmental conditions. Not only did this require the use of pressurized face TBM technology, a first in New York, but also a re-evaluation of the contractual mechanisms used to manage the hard rock excavation contracts for their appropriateness to the soft ground tunnel work."

Jan 1, 2016

By Emily Rose

The concept of risk management is applied to multiple aspects of the mining lifecycle including safety, mine design, business plan—anything that affects getting the ore to the mill for production. However, risk management is not a topic that can readily be taught in universities. Many situations require knowledge gained from experience to know how this impacts current and future operations. Recent graduates, who must develop and apply decisions based on geotechnical monitoring, likely have not developed “operational experience” and may not be aware of options and typical applications. Thorough resources that explain different monitoring systems, and when and how to implement them, are available for geotechnical professionals. Accessibility to this information can often cause information overload, leaving one unsure of where to start, without knowing where to start. This paper is intended to serve as a high-level overview of development practices, levels of risk, and risk tolerance for entry-level geotechnical and mining professionals who do not come from a geotechnical background. Summarized detail on typical monitoring practices, types of instrumentation, and how to communicate what the data indicates to key stakeholders are provided.

Feb 22, 2026

The mining industry has indeed gone global. International minerals producers are spending big money to move into countries that were off limits a few years ago. Due mostly to political reasons, these countries' huge mineral deposits - worth billions of dollars - were locked up and mining companies could only sit on the side and wonder "what if." Now much of the world is going the free market route. Once closed countries and developing nations are rewriting their mining and tax laws hoping to attract foreign investment to develop their natural resources. And big businesses - mining companies included - are lining up to get their share. But with new opportunities come new risks. While emerging nations are slowly accepting the free market concept and the privatization that goes along with it, many remain plagued with political instability and violence. Even developed nations carry their unique risks. Some of these include inadequate or contradictory legal and regulatory infrastructures, political patronage and outright corruption. So companies hoping to expand into new regions of the world must do more than examine the market. They must study the political stability and structure of a country, as well as its tax and environmental laws. And they must guarantee the safety of their employees. Control Risks Group is an international management consulting company that assists companies preparing to move into a new country. It employs about 225 people in 14 offices throughout the world. Control Risks personnel include lawyers, bankers and former law enforcement officers and intelligence people. The company held a one-day seminar in Washington, DC to update some of its clients on the state of affairs in various regions of the world. The seminar also covered extortion, corruption and product diversion. About 175 people attended the seminar. Speakers included Control Risks' operators, analysts and investigators. Here is a summary of what some of those people had to say.

Jan 1, 1998

By A. Moergeli

The Swiss are building the world’s longest tunnel, the 57-Kilometer (35-mile) long Gotthard Base Tunnel. Lot 252, Tunnel Amsteg: Two Hard Rock Tunnel Boring Machines (TBM) crossed hydro-thermally decomposed granite. While the East TBM advanced slowly but steadily, the West one got stuck for five months and had to be recovered by special means and methods. Both TBMs have finished their more than 11-Kilometer (7 miles) long drives successfully. Lot 360, Tunnel Sedrun: For the first time in tunneling, roadway support machines are used through most challenging, squeezing geology. They constantly advance in full face mode for about one Tunnelmeter/24 hours.

Jan 1, 2007

By A. Moergeli

The Swiss are currently building the world’s longest tunnel, the 35-mile long Gotthard Base Tunnel. At Sedrun, for the first time in tunneling, four Roadway Support Machines will drive through most difficult ground, supporting variable diameters of up to 13 m. The machines are prepared for their first deployment. At Amsteg, two Hard Rock TBMs have successfully crossed a known fault zone by applying full circle steel arches and shotcrete immediately behind the cutter head. Comparisons between Drill& Blast and Hard Rock TBM are shown.

Jan 1, 2005

By Moreno Pescara, Luca Soldo, Piergiorgio Grasso

"Risk management in tunneling is more important today than it was a few years ago, considering increasing demands for safety and environmental and socio-economic sustainability, which are now required by citizens, owners, lenders, and insurers. Moreover, our current risk management philosophy should not only address risk avoidance and mitigation, but should also be used as a means of value creation, benefiting the overall project. Given the strategic implications of risk management, the authors intend to present, in this paper, a comprehensive overview of references and experiences from current practice—e.g., what is missing or weak, as well as possible or necessary developments that can have a key role in implementing effective risk management, particularly for a project’s design and construction phases. Therefore, as God has set some things in broad daylight; as he has given us some certain knowledge, though limited to a few things so, in the greatest part of our concernments, he has afforded us only the twilight, as I may so say, of probability (John Locke) PREFACE Many large-scale engineering and construction projects suffer millions of dollars in cost overruns, delays in design and construction, and operability troubles once finally completed (Edward W. Merrow, 2011). The undesired effects of these problems can become disastrous for large-scale megaprojects (those that typically cost US$1 billion or more), particularly considering that these are increasingly used as the preferred delivery model for infrastructure (Bent Flyvbjerg, 2014), often in public-private partnerships (PPPs). McKinsey G.I. (2015) has estimated that bridges and tunnels average 35% in cost overruns, and roads 20%. Some of the values published by Flyvbjerg (ibidem, 2014) for projects with relevant underground elements are the highest, with cost overruns from 60% to 300%. The analysis of 32 other case histories (from 1994 to 2010) given by Hartmut, R. (2011, IMIA Annual Conference, Amsterdam) indicates an average increase of costs around $55 million, with a 20-month average delay."

Jan 1, 2016

By Yves Boissonnas, Marco Bettelini

"INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The operational safety of long and very long rail tunnels represents a key issue in all development stages, including design, construction, commissioning and operation. The spectrum of potential threats is very broad and challenging. These issues can only be mastered by means of a proper combination of a number of safety measures at various levels. This paper focuses on the specific safety issues and the extremely challenging conditions characterizing very long and deep tunnels. They include a significantly increased risk during operation that the incident train cannot exit the tunnel by its own means, long self-rescue and rescue distances, the presence of a number of trains, possibly mixed traffic as well as significant thermal issues. Amberg Engineering is strongly involved in the design and construction of most long and very long rail tunnels in Europe, including in particular the Gotthard Base Tunnel (GBT), Lyon-Turin Base Tunnel (LTF) and the Brenner Base Tunnel (BBT). The combined experience arising from these tunnels forms an invaluable body of expertise, which is summarized in this paper. The focus is on shared issues with practical relevant examples and project-specific solutions. Special attention will be devoted to the 57 km long Gotthard Base Tunnel, which will be operational by mid-2016 and will be the longest infrastructure tunnel worldwide. VERY LONG TUNNELS IN EUROPE Overview From the point of view of safety, tunnels in excess of about 20 km exhibit a significantly increased risk that incident trains could stop within the tunnel. This is related to the European Technical Specifications for Interoperability (TSI) on rolling stock, to be discussed in the chapter on rescue stations. This paper will specifically focus on the following longest tunnels in construction or operation, listed in Table 1."

Jan 1, 2016

By Brendan Henry

The Canada Line is a 19km long automated light rapid transit system with 16 stations in Vancouver, BC, Canada. The Concession was awarded to InTransitBC to design, build, partially finance, operate, and maintain the system for 35 years. The project must be complete by November 2009 to be ready for the 2010 Winter Olympics to be held in Vancouver and Whistler, BC. The bored tunnel section consists of 2.45 km of twin bored tunnel and 3 stations. The station work is limited to the excavations and temporary support necessary to facilitate the bored tunnel works. A joint venture between SNC-Lavalin Constructors Pacific and SELI (SSJV) has recently completed the design and construction of this section. Work for the bored tunnel commenced in November 2005 with shoring and excavation works for the tunnelling operations pit that will become Olympic Village Station and will be completed in the spring of 2008. The tunnels were driven with a 6m diameter Earth Pressure Balance Tunnel Boring Machine (EPBM) and lined with 250mm thick, 5.3m diameter precast concrete segments. Seven hundred and fifty meters of each tunnel were driven through glacial and interglacial deposits of sand, silt, and clay with granitic boulders. The paper discusses the challenges faced in negotiating these soils which contained unforeseen geological conditions. These conditions were overcome by developing a systematic approach to Risk Management that included thorough risk assessments, regular risk management meetings with the participation of two of the world?s leading EPBM experts, Professor Eisenstein and Professor Kovári, and by the ability of the construction team to effectively analyze and mitigate problems.

Jan 1, 2008

By Steven W. DeCou, Marcus R. Jensen, Stephen Navin

The Lake Mead Intake No. 2 is a project constructed for the Southern Nevada Water Authority which includes a 12-foot diameter lake tap and intake shaft constructed in over 225 feet of water; 1650 feet of 16x14-foot horseshoe-shaped tunnel leading to a forebay that is 165 feet long, 35 feet tall, and 30 feet wide; twenty-two 4-foot diameter steel lined well shafts extending 325 feet from the ground surface to the forebay; 3500 feet of 12-foot diameter pipeline crossing a bay in Lake Mead that has water depths of up to 80 feet; and 2700 feet of 9-footdiameter steel-pipe-lined tunnel. Major site grading for a future pumping station in the area above the forebay is also included as part of the project. The project is on the schedule’s critical path for completing the first phase of a $2 billion water supply program for the Las Vegas Valley. In this paper, the owner, the designer and the construction manager present a discussion of the risk management strategies that were used to control costs, minimize project delays, and facilitate problem resolution. The discussion includes an assessment of the effectiveness of the risk management strategies in meeting these objectives. This paper will be of interest to owners and engineers planning underground projects, especially those projects that present unique risks during the construction phase.

Jan 1, 1999

By Peter Zhang, Mark Van Dyke, Ted Klemetti, Morgan Sears

Room-and-pillar mining is a mining method used in the United States to extract coal from underground, and pillar recovery is widely practiced for maximizing coal recovery and mining economics. Under certain conditions, room-and-pillar mining can create high stresses in coal pillars resulting in a coal outburst. These outbursts represent one of the more severe safety hazards in underground coal mines, potentially causing injuries and fatalities. Over the past ten years, coal outbursts have resulted in three fatalities in U.S. room-and-pillar mines. Though coal outbursts generally occur under deep cover, they are more likely to occur during pillar recovery and under multiple-seam mining conditions. Coal outbursts are generally associated with strong roof and floor and heavy loading of coal pillars, but it is difficult to predict whether, where, and when they will occur. In this respect, risk management provides a proactive tool to prevent coal outbursts in room-and-pillar mining by identifying mining areas with high risk of outburst and mitigating the risk accordingly.

Apr 26, 2022

By A. Moergeli, Philip Sander, John Reilly

"SUMMARY While the basic elements of risk management, including probability, consequences, risk registers, mitigation measures, etc., are now well understood, the process to include correlation, dependencies and linkage of risks and risk scenarios is less well defined and not well understood. To perform accurate and complete risk analysis and risk management, it is necessary to include correlation, dependencies and linkage between risk events, as well as risks that may occur multiple times. In this way, owners and contractors can more accurately determine risk-based costs, risk impacts and risk mitigation strategies. This paper will outline methods to deal with correlation, dependencies and linkage and will consider risks that may occur multiple times. Practical result comparisons – with or without these elements – will be presented. INTRODUCTION We believe the reader is familiar with basic concepts of risk, risk management and mitigation and the use of probabilistic cost-risk processes versus deterministic ones (Reilly et al. 2015; Sander et al. 2015). The probabilistic approach, compared to the simpler and more common deterministic approach (unit prices times unit costs plus a contingency), offers more useful information with respect to the range of probable cost as well as cost “drivers” and better quantifies the effects of risks, opportunities and variability – which improves understanding, leading to a better potential for profit (or loss) for contractors and added value for owners. In this context, a valid and sufficient quantification of correlation, dependencies and linkage of risk events, plus the impact of risks that may occur multiple times, is essential. Components of Cost Estimates – Base Cost, Risks and Other Uncertainties The components of cost that need to be correctly addressed in an estimate include (Moergeli et al. 2015): •,Base costs – the costs that will result if “all goes according to plan” (Reilly 2004) •,Risk costs – the resulting costs of threat and opportunity events, if they should occur •,Escalation costs – costs resulting from normally expected inflation with variability •,Other uncertain costs – costs that result from other events, normally external to the project team’s control, which may include unanticipated events, politically related changes and “black swan” events (Talib 2007)"

Jan 1, 2016

By B. N. Conley, K. D. Luxbacher

"The underground coal mining industry in the United States has recently seen the occurrences of several high profile, multi-fatality events. The explosions that occurred at the Sago Mine in 2006, the Darby Mine in 2006, and the Upper Big Branch Mine in 2010 have caused a ripple in an otherwise steadily improving safety record. These events transpired in the midst of an unprecedented level of government regulations and modern safety technologies. The recent increase in fatal events in conjunction with a minimal decline of both fatal and non-fatal injuries over the past decade may signify that current safety practices have reached a level of diminishing returns. Risk management, a safety approach that has been successfully applied in various industries including mining across the world, may provide a means to surpass the safety plateau in the U.S. RISKGATE is an Australian risk management program for mines that shows great potential for application in the U.S. However, fundamental differences between the coal mining industries in Australia and in the U.S. prevent direct implementation. This paper discusses aspects of the RISKGATE body of knowledge that require some adaptation before this program may be applied to the U.S. mining industry. INTRODUCTION The underground coal mining industry in the United States has recently seen the occurrences of several high profile, multi-fatality events. These events transpired in the midst of an unprecedented level of government regulations and modern safety technologies. The recent increase in fatal events in conjunction with a minimal decline of both fatal and non-fatal injuries over the past decade may signify that current safety practices have reach a level of diminishing returns. In order to combat this stagnation in performance, a modification to the manner in which the mining industry approaches worker safety may be warranted. The implementation of a risk management based approach presents a potential method for not only surmounting the current safety plateau but also for achieving the long desired objective of zero harm. RISKGATE a risk management body of knowledge designed for the Australian mining industry that shows great potential for application in the U.S. This paper discusses aspects of the RISKGATE body of knowledge that require adaptation before implementation in the U.S. mining industry. These adaptations are based on differences in operating practices and governmental regulations. This discussion will focus on the three major U.S. risk areas of explosion prevention, ground control, and moving equipment."

Jan 1, 2015

By J. A. Restrepo, K. D. Luxbacher

"The U.S. underground coal mining industry has recently seen the occurrences of several multifatality events that have interrupted an otherwise steadily improving safety record. These events transpired even with an unprecedented level of government regulations and safety technologies. These events may indicate that current safety practices have reached a level of diminishing returns. Risk management, a safety approach that has been successfully applied in numerous industries including mining, may provide a means to overcome this plateau. Riskgate is an Australian mining risk management program that may be successfully applied in the United States. However, fundamental differences between the Australian and U.S. coal mining industries prevent direct implementation. This paper discusses aspects of the Riskgate body of knowledge that require adaptation for its application in the United States. IntroductionThe underground coal mining industry in the United States has recently seen the occurrences of several high profile, multifatality events. These events transpired in the midst of an unprecedented level of government regulations and modern safety technologies. The recent increase in fatal events in conjunction with minimal declines in fatal and nonfatal injuries over the past decade may signify that current safety practices have reached a level of diminishing returns. In order to surpass this plateau, a modification to the manner in which the mining industry approaches worker safety may be warranted.The implementation of a risk-management- based approach may potentially provide a means for not only surmounting the current safety stagnation but also for achieving the long-desired objective of zero harm.Riskgate is an Australian risk-management- based body of knowledge that shows great potential for application in the United States. This paper discusses aspects of the Riskgate body of knowledge that require adaptation for the U.S. mining industry. The proposed adaptations are based on differences in operating practices and government regulations. This discussion will focus on the three major U.S. risk areas of explosion prevention, ground control and moving equipment."

Jan 1, 2015

By J. Duran

Mining at Phoenix is currently done by surface operation in the Fortitude and Bonanza Pits, at a combined rate of approximately 110,000 tons per day. A portion of the ore bodies targeted by these pits was mined previously by underground mining methods, dating back to the mid to late 1800?s. Most of the underground workings (voids) are located in the west central area of the Bonanza Pit. The surface operation requires excavation through voids, and there is a risk of pit floor subsidence that has to be addressed. This paper presents a review of the risk mitigation measures that were implemented to reduce risks to people and equipment working in the area.

Feb 23, 2014

By J. Duran

Mining at Newmont Mining?s Phoenix?s Mine is currently done by surface operation in the Fortitude and Bonanza pits at a combined rate of approximately 100 kt/d (110,000 stpd). A portion of the orebodies targeted by these pits was mined previously by underground mining methods, dating back to the mid-to late-1800s. Most of the underground workings (voids) are located in the west central area of the Bonanza pit. The surface operation requires excavation through voids, and there is a risk of pit floor subsidence that has to be addressed. This article presents a review of the risk mitigation measures that were implemented to reduce risks to people and equipment working in the area.