Search Documents

By O. D. Staman

The risk assessment project examines the likelihood of inorganic contaminants from copper dump-leaching operations to contaminate domestic water supplies. The project examines contaminant transport by modeling contaminant movement from the base of a leach pile through the unsaturated zone and into the saturated zone. The modeling effort is unique in that it models infiltration, contaminant transport in the unsaturated and saturated zone combined with geochemical modeling of the unsaturated zone. The project incorporates probability theory to reflect the uncertainty of hydrogeologic parameters.

Jan 1, 1994

By W Patton

Investment decisions in the mineral resources sector are made on the basis of an assessment of the economic potential for a mineral deposit. Given the supporting information for the location, scale, and quantity of the commodity of interest, miners and investors aim to make risk-informed decisions when considering further investment. The objective of resource classification is the synthesis of various types and quantities of geologic information used in resource model construction to assign confidence categories to the estimated mineral resources, which can then be used to support informed economic decisions. In this paper a risk-based classification scheme for iron ore mineral resources using conditional simulations is presented. The method involves categorisation of each block according to a confidence level, considering expected recoveries from a kriging model over mining production volumes. The realisations of the simulated model are used to assign risk-based confidence categories to zones of the ore deposit. One motivation for this work is to assess the sensitivity of the scheme to geologic uncertainties. Specifically, that which uncertainty in the layout of mineralising alterations and weathering overprints influence variabilities of associated rock properties and the likelihood of obtaining expected ore recoveries. It is shown these risks have material implications for a project’s economic potential. How the scheme can be extended to the grade control context and the value subsequent grade control activities is also quantified.

May 24, 2023

By A Reid, A W. Musk, O Jones

In this paper, the authors attempt to bridge the gap that currently exists between the duty-of-care responsibilities of underground mining industry personnel, and the multifaceted health challenges facing mineworkers in Western Australia’s metal mines where diesel-powered mobile equipment predominate. In addressing this issue, the complexities of the nature and extent of the challenges are discussed along with the current inadequacy of existing regulatory metrics. Support is given to the need for well-organised in-mine baseline studies to clearly define the distribution and aging characteristics of the toxic and carcinogenic pollutants within the mine ventilation system, with special emphasis given to exploring the validity of biomonitoring systems. The paper concludes with the proposal that a template risk assessment data sheet be prepared for the industry to provide mining personnel with a sound basic knowledge of the health risks involved and the control measures and precautions available for minimising and/or eliminating the hazard.CITATION:Jones, O, Musk, A W, Reid, A and Davis, C, 2017. Risk assessment tool for mines using diesel-powered mobile equipment, in Proceedings 13th AusIMM Underground Operators’ Conference 2017, pp 151–154 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Oct 16, 2017

By David J. Hatem, K. Bhattarai

The increasing popularity of alternative methods in delivery of underground infrastructure projects has given rise to innovative and collaborative contracting strategies to allocate and manage the unique risks associated with the work. This paper presents approaches and recent examples of how risk has been dealt with using various alternative delivery methods, including Progressive Design Build (PDB) and Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC). Based on the experience gained from these examples, recommendations for an innovative and collaborative risk baselining approach using contingency sharing are presented that should advance the overall goals of equitable risk sharing and compensation.

Jun 13, 2023

By K. Komnitsas

Activities in the mixed sulphides industry, such as mining and beneficiation, cause adverse impacts to the environment due to excavation, treatment and disposal of low-grade ores and tailings containing residual sulphide minerals. The greatest impact is caused by the oxidation of sulphide phases contained in the tailings and waste rock and the subsequent production of leachates characterized by low pH and high concentration of heavy and toxic elements and sulphates, called acid mine drainage, that contaminates soils, surface- and groundwater. Therefore, rehabilitation of these sites is required in order to render these pollution sources inactive and minimize environmental impacts. The calculation of risk, based on acid mine drainage probability and magnitude of consequences at the disposal sites offers engineers, environmental scientists and authorities a valuable tool for the selection and application of the best remediation technology. Several parameters, such as the chemical and mineralogical properties of the wastes, the most probable pathways the contaminants follow, the potential receptors and the exposure scenarios have to be taken into account. Therefore, risk is the most critical parameter in decision-making regarding management of mining wastes and rehabilitation of disposal sites.

Jan 1, 2002

By Michael Samis

The real option valuation method is often presented as an alternative to the conventional discounted cash flow (DCF) approach because it is able to recognize additional project value due to the presence of management flexibility. However, these two valuation methods can be separated on a more fundamental level by their differences in risk discounting. Real option valuation applies the risk-adjustment to the source of uncertainty in the cash flow while the DCF method adjusts for risk at the aggregate level of net cash flow. This seemingly small difference is the reason why the real option method is able to differentiate between projects according to each project?s unique risk characteristics while the conventional DCF approach cannot. This paper provides an overview of the real options and DCF valuation frameworks and discusses the differences in risk discounting that exist between the two methods. Using grade-school mathematics, this paper clearly demonstrates how, with real options, a unique project risk discount can be calculated which is directly linked to the project?s unique risk profile. It also highlights why the DCF method fails in this regard and shows why a call to ?increase the Risk-Adjusted Discount Rate? is an incomplete solution at best. Finally, a heap-leach project and satellite reserve development project are valued with both techniques and the difference in investment conclusions is explained in terms of the risk-discounting concepts discussed here.

May 1, 2003

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 T Ireland, S Eratne, W Newns, P Spies

The approach to risk management during the procurement of major projects often has a significant outcome on the ultimate delivery of a project. The NZ$1.4 B Waterview Connection project is the largest and most complex project yet undertaken by the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) and the procurement process for an alliance contract was refined to provide compliance with the International Tunnel Insurance Group (ITIG) Code of Practice for Risk Management of Tunnel Works (TCoP). The principle of shared risk within an alliance incentivises a common understanding of project risks prior to finalising the alliance agreement and therefore enables superior risk management through design, construction and beyond. Risk management practices need to be instigated well in advance of commercial phases, so that commercial competition does not lead to a significant elevation of project risk. In particular the practice of gaining commercial advantage by taking on a potentially unmanageable level of risk is one of the outcomes to be avoided by the TCoP.During the procurement phase the NZTA placed high value on design and construction mitigation measures proposed in order to address ground risks, as is appropriate for a major tunnel project. In order to achieve alignment on the level of geotechnical risks an Alliance Geotechnical Baseline Report (AGBR) process was developed.This paper describes the measures taken during the procurement process to achieve certainty with respect to outcomes and minimise project risks whilst also achieving value for money. Refinements to the procurement process to ensure compliance with the TCoP prepared by the International Tunnel Insurance Group (ITIG) are described along with the AGBR process applied as part of a suite of measures to achieve a successful procurement outcome.CITATION:Ireland, T, Spies, P, Eratne, S and Newns, W, 2014. Risk management and use of a geotechnical baseline report for a competitive alliance procurement?process, in Proceedings 15th Australasian Tunnelling Conference 2014 , pp 553–562 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Sep 17, 2014

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 Dave Paul

Dam rehabilitation involves a range of design, construction, and operation risks, some of which are not encountered in new dam construction. These risks can have significant impact on project schedule and project budget. Owners, engineers, and contractors need to understand these risks. Existing dams typically were designed in an era of design and construction standards that have been upgraded and changed. Modern standards will impact the construction approach taken and involve understanding the earlier standards. Knowledge of historical standards/practices as well as current design standards and construction methods is valuable for developing and designing rehabilitation components. Construction records and as-built drawings are valuable when they are available. Rehabilitation projects often consist of older projects where as-built documents or construction records are not available. Where these records exist, many (most) times, they do not fully reflect the current conditions within the dam and appurtenant works. leading experienced practitioners to “expect surprises” both during investigation of the existing facility, as well as during construction. “Surprises” should be expected even when historical records of investigations, design and construction are available. Unknowns, be they known unknowns or unknown unknowns, can be planned for by developing an approach for the design and construction process to identify potential issues/problems, or at least alert the designer and contractor of potential issues. A Risk-Based approach applied for the entire life of the rehabilitation project can be used to alert the parties of potential “surprises” and provide direction for mitigating issues as they arise. This type of approach is particularly effective when the process includes senior practitioners with decades of design and construction experience in all aspects of dams. Minimizing impacts created by “surprises”, particularly during construction, can result in an improved project meeting budget and schedule goals and design standards. This paper identifies and categorizes risk types salient to dam construction, reviews the process of risk identification and analysis, discusses guidelines for risk allocation, reviews strategies to mitigate risks, presents several case studies where risk mitigation strategies were employed successfully (or unsuccessfully), and presents lessons learned. The paper concludes with a summary and recommendations for best practices for Project Risk Management and mitigation that can be used by: Owners; Design Engineers; and Construction Managers, in planning, design, pre-construction and construction phases of dam related projects.

By A Querzoli, B Williams

In late 2014 the Flinders Power Management Team was executing business improvement plans to ensure continued electricity generation until 2028 and beyond. Six months later, in June 2015, the Board announced the closure of the Flinders Power South Australian business, including the Leigh Creek Coal Mine, the Northern and Playford Power Stations located at Port Augusta and the 250km railway line. The announcement was preceded by a brief period of internal planning. A date was soon set for ceasing coal mining operations, being November 2015. The mine is unique in many ways. Located approximately 550km north of Adelaide the site has over 100 years of history and was formerly operated by the South Australian Government. Privatisation in 2000 saw the mine continue operation under Perpetual Leases from the South Australian Government. The leases included exemptions from multiple sections of the Mining Act 1971, obliging primary regulation under the Mines and Works Inspection Act 1920. The coal, being a low rank sub-bituminous brown coal, is prone to self-heating and spontaneous combustion. The mine and company town Leigh Creek were the economic and cultural heartbeat of the community. Facilities at the mine were shared by the community and vice versa. While many mines across Australia and the world enter periods of care and maintenance, few have been actively closed to the point of relinquishment (Bennett and Lacy, 2016). A swift decision to close, followed by a short mining operations shutdown period, presented significant technical and regulatory challenges for both the mine operator and for Regulators. The subsequent joint risk mapping process employed by Flinders Power and South Australian Mining Regulators was a unique real-world example of collaborative mine closure planning and execution. Lessons learnt are valuable for all mines, production facilities and for Regulators, even for those who may wrongly assume that closure is many years away. CITATION:Williams, B and Querzoli, A, 2018. Risk management for minesite closure planning and execution – start now! Lessons from the closure of the Leigh Creek Coalfield, South Australia, in Proceedings Life-of-Mine 2018, pp 68–72 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Jul 25, 2018

By T Atkinson, A Cobb, R AJIington

Risk management is concerned with the whole spectrum of financial, geological, engineering, legal, governmental, social and occasionally ethnic issues, concerned with mining projects. The inherent risks in mining operations are well publicised, but new issues and hazards arrive on the scene and lake precedence, but the older risks still remain, while insurance cover may not he ‘full cover’ in the future. It has long been recognised that quantitative approaches to risk analysis can play a major role, but although these methods are capable of considerable theoretical precision, the lack of sound risk input data and experienced personnel limits the usefulness of theoretical analysis. It can, however, greatly assist in comparing cases, in identifying areas of risk and help in the investment decision process. Its major contribution to a mining project is that it imposes an investigative discipline that also assists in improving the quantitative approach to risk analysis and hence risk management. Risk analysis and risk management also requires sound common sense and major inputs from experienced geologists, mining, mechanical, electrical and mineral processing engineers. The Engineering Council, in 1992, issued a ten point code of professional practice entitled ‘Engineers and Risk Issues’ (The Engineering Council. 1992), covering our professional responsibilities, the law, our conduct, the need for a systematic approach to risk issues, the use of professional judgement, communications, risk management, evaluation of risk, our professional development in this field and the encouragement of public awareness of risk issues. This is a specific area of training perhaps long neglected by our industry and academic institutions (Atkinson. 1983).

Jan 5, 1996

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 Iain G. Bruce

The need to improve supply reliability while improving our environmental record during the past half decade of low metal prices has required the mining industry to prioritise expenditures. Quantitative Risk Assessments using third party reviewers and specialist risk management teams have assisted in identifying hazards that can both disrupt supply and impact the receiving environment. Graphical displays using risk ellipses can simplify the presentation of the results in a Probability-Consequence (PC) graph. Development of risk acceptability envelopes using readily available financial data superimposed onto the same PC space assists management to prioritise their risks and focus on risk reduction measures. Development of this system and examples of the successful implementation of the system from several recent projects are described.

May 1, 2003

By Ralph E. Burnham, Jeff Taylor, Jonson Montgomery, J. Kelly Ratliff, Rennie Montgomery, Martin Brashear

Top priorities for all blasting companies and individual blasters are risk management, safety of company personnel and the general public, regulatory compliance, and liability protection. On a daily basis, hundreds of shots are detonated by well-trained, skilled, and experienced blasters without incident. Unfortunately, accidents inevitably occur, which is why blasting is considered an “ultra hazardous” or “inherently dangerous” activity from a legal perspective. Despite countless regulations, recent advances in technology, improved training, ongoing research, and improved communication in the industry, mistakes and the resulting incidents continue to occur during blasting operations. These result in dangerous or deadly flyrock, site security lapses, increased complaints, blast damage claims, and lawsuits, which lead to increased insurance costs and other financial tolls for blasting companies. In life, lessons learned the hard way are rarely forgotten. The same is true in blasting operations. Blasting missteps and the resulting events are often the best catalysts for improving risk management and thereby reducing accidents, liability, and financial tolls. This paper provides a summary of two incidents, one safety and the other liability related, and the errors that resulted in a fatality in one case and a multi property lawsuit in the other. The two incidents provide examples that serve as a case study for lessons learned the hard way in blasting operations and offer guidance for the considerations that blasters and blasting companies should incorporate into daily operating procedures.

Jan 1, 2018

Risk management has taken on renewed vigor since the economic crisis of the late 2000s. The resources of governments, individuals, and corporations are being stretched to a point where only the most promising projects move forward. Risk management is a crucial part of the decision making process, yet it remains a broad term that includes disciplines from engineering to finance. A collaborative effort will be necessary to ensure that the most auspicious and appropriate projects are the ones moving forward. Risk management can be quantified to an extent by comparing the likelihood of an instance with the result of consequence of the instance occurring. In this manner it is possible to assign risk factors to instances and ultimately, begin to associate monetary value to the instance. Carbon sequestration is an emerging field that has a number of unique challenges. Risk management and mitigation must be an integral part of the overall picture. This begins with the planning and design phase, continues through implementation and production, site closure, and does not cease until termination of liability. The ability of carbon sequestration projects to successfully assess, mitigate, and recover from leaks will be a decisive characteristic of overall success. The costs of mitigation and failure will need to be analyzed on a test level, but will still need to be reliable enough to extrapolate to a commercial level operation. This paper will build a risk management profile based on case studies and field tests in Tennessee and Virginia. These tests are scheduled to commence in late 2013 and consist of small-scale injection tests in unconventional storage reservoirs with an emphasis on enhanced coalbed methane (ECBM) recovery and enhanced gas recovery. The ultimate goal will be to provide a clear and concise direction to move carbon sequestration from the test phase to commercial scale. While it is necessary from a risk management perspective to analyze all risk points, the scope of this paper will focus on pre-injection risk assessment for carbon dioxide (CO2) leakage potential. Despite the differences between the two tests, CBM compared to shale among other differences, a framework for analysis and mitigation can be developed pertaining to leakage risk. The probability of each type of failure will be assessed and analyzed, and plans to mitigate or reduce these risks will be reviewed.

Aug 1, 2013

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

Solid Energy New Zealand Limited (æSolid EnergyÆ) is a state-owned coal mining company, producing 4.0 Mtpa from a number of opencast and underground mines in the Huntly, West Coast and Southland regions in New Zealand. The company currently exports 2.1 Mtpa of coking coal. Exports are expected to grow strongly over the next five year as the company expands production into new semi-soft and thermal coal reserves. Domestic coal demand is also expected to grow strongly, particularly in the North Island, as the Maui gas field reserves diminish, and thermal coal becomes more important for electricity generation and meeting the energy needs of forest processing and other industries. Solid Energy is expanding and developing its risk management practices across all areas of the business: strategic planning û extensive use of scenario analysis and probabilistic modelling over a 20 year period; investment decisions û development and application of a rigorous six stage æProject Assessment GuidelineÆ process for all new mine developments; geological and geotechnical risk assessment techniques û use of best practice techniques including seismic surveys; financial risk management û a dynamic approach to hedging based on effects based analysis of Cash Flow at Risk analysis against preset risk tolerances; risk financing û the use of a captive insurance subsidiary, and the experiences of a small coal company seeking to obtain insurance cover on a æhardÆ international insurance market; and integrated risk management û the challenges of trying to implement a broad integrated risk management approach across the company, that supports implementation of strategic objectives as well as meeting æcompliance or legislative basedÆ risk management requirements.

Jan 1, 2003

A formalised approach to risk management has been regulated in the United Kingdom (UK) since the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 1994 (CDM) came into force in 1995. These regulations have recently been revised in 2007. In response to a series of significant claims around the world the UK insurance industry published a code of practice for risk management of tunnels in 2003, and that was followed by an international version in 2006. Probably one of the main contributions of this new approach is the recognition that health and safety risks can best be addressed early in the process, initially by the owner and then by the designers. One of the aims is to achieve elimination of risks by good design. The advantage of a risk-based approach to tunnel design is that all risks are considered explicitly, and any residual risks in the design are communicated clearly to the construction team. This paper looks at the implementation of this formalised approach to risk management with reference to the A3 Hindhead Project. The design has been undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the CDM regulations, and also in compliance with the Joint Code of Practice for Risk Management of Tunnel Works in the UK. An outline of the risk-based design process used is provided, including examples.

Jan 1, 2008

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