Search Documents

By R Knight

"In project evaluation there are two matters of keen interest to non-executive directors: the process by which an investment recommendation is reached, as well as the investment itself, as presented. It is sometimes mistakenly believed that Boards of directors are interested only in the result. That is not so. The process by which project evaluations are derived and socialised with the Board is as important as the result, sometimes more so.Setting aside the gloomy predictions of the doomsayers and looking through short-term volatility in supply and demand, the overall availability of mineral resources more often than not exceeds demand. There are in reality more development projects in prospect at any one time than are needed to meet the market. Only the fittest will prosper, although some others may survive.Optimism springs eternal in the mining industry and every project promoter, executive or entrepreneur has a convincing project development case. Some will create value for shareholders, but the historical evidence suggests that many will fail to meet the expectations set in their evaluation.Boards of directors make the final decision to invest, or not, in a new mine. Knowledge is power, and on that basis the balance of power favours management. Management has the facts (or in some cases, what passes for fact) and the passion to invest. The non-executives have the power of approval – yes or no – but before making a decision directors must demonstrate due diligence, the essential precursor to project approval.Management has a vital part to play in facilitating that due diligence process and in encouraging the independent thought processes of the Board. A closed approach by management fosters a negative, risk-averse attitude on the part of the Board. One that encourages an understanding of the rigour of the project evaluation process and the robustness of the result will allow directors to understand better the implications of their decision.CITATION:Knight, R, 2016. Project evaluation – a non-executive director’s perspective, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 11–19 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By L I. Rozman

"There have always been development projects that fall short of expectations. In the last decade, we have seen more than the usual number of mining and oil/gas development projects taking significantly longer to develop and costing materially more than expected. The recent resource-equity market slump proves that investors are now far more cautious about investing new capital in the mineral and petroleum resources sector.What have we learned since 2005? Why have projects missed their targets? Why do investors often feel misled?Valuation of a project and the estimation of value is a more complex process than the evaluation of the merits of project development. The merit of project development can be clear from a prefeasibility evaluation, but this is no reason to skip the rigour of a feasibility study. The valuation of any project that is developed with any added risk should be discounted for this added risk.The development of a project impacts on other stakeholders, and the indirect cost of these impacts can have material implications for the cost structure, time and ultimate valuation of the project for its financial backers. The development of new projects (and thereby supply) can also have an impact on commodity prices, and therefore an impact on returns for financial backers.This paper will provide commentary on the author’s experiences and observations as a project developer and operator for 25 years, before becoming a project financier a decade ago.CITATION:Rozman, L I, 2016. Project evaluation and valuation – an investor’s golden rule, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 31–36 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By J Evans-Wheeler

"The mandate of the 2005 VALMIN Code to provide ‘(all) reliable, thorough, understandable material information required by investors and their advisers when making investment decisions’ requires that due diligence for tenure be full and thorough. Yet a published due diligence would often appear to be simply a list of tenures allegedly held without any commitment as to the standing of the tenure as safe and secure or otherwise.The value of due diligence for tenure, as mandated in the 2012 JORC Code and the 2005 VALMIN Code, must focus on compliance rather than simply on ‘vital statistics’. Enforcement in every jurisdiction in Australia focuses on penalties (some more harsh than others) for non-compliance, which, in turn and most importantly, reflects directly on security of tenure. Some 22 Acts (on average) impinge on security of tenure and fundamentally underpin the security of any mineral asset.This paper will outline regulatory processes to demonstrate how tenure compliance is achieved and argue that the rigorous application of good practices in tenure evaluation will lead to more of this information being made available on a regular basis.The paper will then focus on further practical examples of tenure compliance failures, the application of these to the requirements of the JORC and VALMIN Codes and due diligence that failed to fulfil the mandate. Examples will be given that alerted other professionals using the JORC Code to complex geological and mining situations of which they were unaware in their valuations.Finally, the author will make a personal plea for tenure to be considered at the commencement of any reporting process.CITATION:Evans-Wheeler, J, 2016. The VALMIN code and tenure compliance – not just a list, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 112–121 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

"Recognising that the mining industry is wedded to the break-even cut-off grade rather than a cut-off grade that optimises value, the author examines some perils and pitfalls in the use of break-even grades that lead to what the author calls ‘negatively geared ore reserves’.Negatively geared ore reserves occur when a portion of the ore reserves actually has a negative value and is effectively being subsidised by the more profitable portion of the ore reserves. This situation is generally difficult to detect with the level of information available to the public investor. The ore reserves can still be quite profitable in total, but now possess a level of risk that may not be appreciated.The risk profile (financial risk) of a negatively geared ore reserve is far greater than for a non-negatively geared ore reserve. Like a negatively geared investment property in a falling property market (for readers familiar with the Australian tax minimisation investment strategy), when the price of a commodity falls, a company that possesses a negatively geared ore reserve loses value at a magnified rate relative to a company that has a neutral or positively geared ore reserve. In the extreme case of a major commodity price reduction, as happened with the gold price in mid-2013, the negatively geared ore reserve can easily become negative value in total, not just in part.The negatively geared ore reserve is sometimes intentional – for instance in order to increase published ore reserve tonnages and meet the CEO’s key performance indicators – but is also often unintentional, resulting from various errors in the break-even calculation. Common errors in calculating a break-even grade include using fixed metallurgical recoveries, not including allowances for ideal laboratory versus real plant results, ignoring available operational data and using modal rather than mean parameter values in cost and performance calculations.This paper examines a common value distribution profile in many ore reserves and the effect of common break-even grade errors on this profile.CITATION:Poniewierski, J, 2016. Negatively geared ore reserves – a major peril of the break-even cut-off grade, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 236–247 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By S G. Gemell

"The financial model is an integral component of any project evaluation based on mineral resources, ore reserves and (at least internally) exploration targets. Given the unity of purpose for preparing financial models for project evaluation purposes, the diversity of both format and content of the finalised models is surprising. Many models are prepared by staff or consultants who are comfortable with a particular format that may be used for other purposes, such as budget preparation or financial reporting. It is natural in these situations that the practitioner will take these models and adapt them to the purpose. The end result may or may not succeed in providing a clear, accurate and sufficiently detailed view of the project’s economic viability.When preparing a model, the practitioner should be cognisant of the interpretation and review, or audit, process. The auditor may be a consultant or employee of a bank, potential equity provider or of the project sponsor itself. Depending upon the scale of the project and the level of participation of the entity that the auditor represents, the financial model will be interrogated more or less rigorously. In any event, the end user will require the model to permit easy change of inputs and will wish to confirm that such change is appropriately and thoroughly transmitted throughout.Accordingly, there are some ‘dos and don’ts’ that can be readily applied in the creation of the financial model that will greatly assist the end user, not just in the change of inputs, but also in reviewing the model’s integrity. The less time and effort required by an auditor in this regard is reflected directly in the cost of the review process.CITATION:Gemell, S G, 2016. Financial modelling with the auditor in mind, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 172–180 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By D Hunter, N Cusworth, J Miller

"Recent project failures have called into question the use and relevance of benchmarking and independent reviews, forcing a rethink of traditional processes and procedures.With cost estimates and schedules dramatically varying from lows seen around the global financial crisis to peaks experienced in the recent mining boom, benchmarking has ranged between essential and misleading.Profound shifts are now underway in future project delivery strategies as the market moves away from cost-plus engineering, procurement and construction management. The current trends in project implementation are to utilise more lump-sum design and construct or fixed-price supply and construct contracts. This trend will remove transparency in detailed cost information by reducing the sources and clarity of cost data.Independent peer reviews (IPRs) of studies and investment recommendations performed over the last decade have both failed to prevent flawed or deficient projects from proceeding to approval and funding, and been successful in ensuring that owners did not proceed with doomed investments.In recent times, it has been recognised by some owners, contractors and engineers that traditional benchmarking checks or IPRs, or a combination of both, will not necessarily produce reliable assessments of study conclusions and of the forecasts of project outcomes. To be of value, the benchmarking process now also needs to recognise the highly volatile responses from the engineering and construction industry to the current and future markets for their services.Similarly, reviewers who draw upon benchmarks of past project experiences on an understanding of the things that shaped and influenced their outcomes need to be more aware of how a future dynamic market may impact the outcome of the projects and raise warning flags accordingly.With the commodity cycle currently approaching what is hoped is its bottom, ensuring that benchmarking and independent reviews evolve into reliable, transparent and worthwhile processes becomes even more important. This can only be achieved with more transparent and analytical benchmarking and business-orientated reviews that both recognise and calculate the impacts of dynamic markets on project implementation.CITATION:Cusworth, N, Hunter, D and Miller, J, 2016. The role of benchmarking and independent reviews, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 249–259 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By R Jacobs

"The Jaguar project is relatively unique in that it was evaluated, financed, built and operated to completion within the last ten years, providing the opportunity to holistically review and reconcile expectations against the actual outcomes. It is a case study that allows wider conclusions to be drawn with respect to the risks and opportunities involved with project evaluation and execution.Jaguar is located in the Leonora Mining District of Western Australia and was commissioned in mid-2007 as an underground accessed, single high-grade volcanic-hosted massive sulfide (VHMS) deposit with an on-site concentrator, producing copper and zinc concentrates exported via the Port of Geraldton to South-East Asian markets.The feasibility study (FS) had several iterations (JML, 2005a); the last dated July 2005 was specifically targeted to secure project funding, and summarised the reserves-only portion of the resource and its planned exploitation. The commissioning of the mine was the transition for the owner Jabiru Metals NL from junior explorer to producer and the project was the dominant asset of the company.Jaguar operated through several significant deviations from the linear project plan set out in the FS, including the Global Financial Crisis (GFC), a corporate takeover and disruption to the mine plan from the onset of material geotechnical issues. Whilst the GFC or mining disruption were not specifically predicted in the FS or peer reviews, the generic effects of the events were assessed in the project risk assessment and they influenced subsequent management decisions. In parallel to the internal project-specific risks, the short planned life of Jaguar was a risk to the continuation of the corporate entity which was being addressed by significant investment into brownfields exploration to extend or replicate the project, and ultimately added value such that attracted a corporate takeover.Holistically, the project delivered the returns predicted in the FS, but in a much different guise than was expected. This paper will describe the reality of operations compared with the study predictions and expectations through the perspective of the project and corporate risk assessment.CITATION:Jacobs, R, 2016. Jaguar base metals project case study – has reality reflected the study?, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 86–97 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By J A. Wells, K G. Thomas, R F. Dewhirst

"One of the contributing factors to the extreme cost escalation in the first decade of the 21st century was the increase in the amount and cost of engineering work that went into studies and projects. Various reasons for this were identified, including unsatisfactory productivity due to a shortage of experienced/qualified engineers, the increased complexity and infrastructure requirements of many projects due to location, metallurgy that is more challenging and increasing environmental and social requirements. These conditions often led to unsatisfactory project results in terms of cost and schedule blowouts and created a loss of confidence – both internally and externally – in the industry’s ability to complete projects on time and on budget.Technical fundamentals aside, the experience and effectiveness of project teams has had, and continues to have, a major impact on project cost, schedule and ramp-up to nameplate capacity and operating parameters. There are unfortunately too many examples of where project teams have not been as effective as they could or should have been, all to the ultimate detriment of the project.Using the authors’ extensive experience on both owner’s and engineer’s teams, this paper discusses some of the main reasons for suboptimal team, and hence project, performance and offers thoughts on how best to build and maintain project teams. The analysis and conclusions drawn are built around the Tuckman model of group development known as ‘forming-storming-norming-performing’, which was first proposed some 50 years ago. Given the importance of good teamwork to project success, understanding how project teams grow and become efficient and productive is an essential part of good project management that should receive more attention.CITATION:Dewhirst, R F, Thomas, K G and Wells, J A, 2016. Building and maintaining effective project teams, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 38–48 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By P B. Card

"The website www.economicevaluation.com.au, which had its origins at the Project Evaluation Conference 2009, provides a free way for industry professionals to teach themselves economic evaluation. At its core is a set of fast-moving modules and three worked examples.The website recognises that economic evaluation is a discipline with a hierarchy of three levels:decision-makingevaluating the project/businesshands-on modelling.There are a set of modules for each level that describe the concepts and activities in detail. These emphasise that the most important and rewarding work is the evaluation of Level 2. The economic model created in Level 3 is merely a working tool and should not become a sophisticated ‘trophy’ in Excel that only one or two people can comfortably use.Hands-on modelling contains three sets of practices designed to make any model rigorous and intuitive so that it can be easily understood and used by others in the project team. Even if the model develops into a long, detailed and complex workbook, it should remain easy to follow and be intuitive. The website advocates freedom to devise any architecture that best suits the project under study, but promotes rigour through the following practices:four cash streams and graphsthree architectures – concept, prefeasibility and feasibilitysix principles.The modules in the Level 2 evaluation use conversational language to describe in detail the broad range of activities needed to properly understand and characterise a project/business. It stresses that net present value is nothing more than the mathematical treatment of a whole set of opinions, is not an absolute truth and is only a fraction of the evaluation process. The modules describe in detail the range of economic metrics that should be computed and the full spectrum of equally important characterisations required to make the decision in Level 3.CITATION:Card, P B, 2016. Teach yourself economic evaluation, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 160–171 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By S Love, M Anderson, M Boland

"The high rate of failure of new mine developments to meet feasibility study expectations has been the subject of many fine technical papers. Yet failure rates remain stubbornly high.Similarly, the common occurrence of disastrous acquisitions resulting from failed due diligence on projects is well known. Yet such mistakes continue to be made.The authors argue that project and due diligence failure are caused at least partly by cognitive biases. These biases pervade decision-making throughout project evaluations.A wider understanding of these biases (and their effects) is necessary. Only then can mitigating actions be taken.The opportunity for this wider understanding exists. A number of best-selling books have been published on the topic in recent years. With wider understanding of key concepts and terms, cognitive biases can be recognised and discussed. They can also be challenged and mitigated.The authors believe that these concepts should be entry-level, required knowledge for anyone evaluating, developing, reviewing or financing mining projects.Perhaps the most prevalent biases in project evaluation failure are the ‘over-optimism’ biases. In particular, the planning fallacy and confirmation bias.The anchoring effect is also pervasive. This bias propagates unrealistic assumptions from scoping and prefeasibility studies through to so-called definitive feasibility studies. Unrecognised anchoring biases also undermine the validity of many ‘independent’ due diligence reviews. They are also prevalent in corporate acquisitions.The availability heuristic refers to a mental shortcut that can lead to a number of biases. One of these is the narrative fallacy. The mind constructs coherent narratives and opinions, regardless of the amount and quality of the information that support them. Narrative fallacy commonly occurs in the evaluation of social and political risk. Another is disaster neglect, which is especially common in the failure to assess risks associated with tailings management.This paper outlines the relevance of these biases to mine project evaluations. It also provides examples where the authors have observed their effects.CITATION:Love, S, Boland, M and Anderson, M, 2016. Influence of cognitive biases on project evaluation, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 226–235 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

"Cash flow modelling during project evaluation is enhanced when probabilistic methods are applied to the inputs. One of the important inputs is the quarterly production profile. Typically, the steady-state production profile provided to project evaluation practitioners is deterministic, with each quarter the same as every other quarter. This is unrealistic as actual production profiles from existing mines exhibit a range or quarter-on-quarter variance. Monte Carlo stochastic simulation of the production profile can be used to provide a range of possible outcomes, but how are these ranges selected? This paper describes the use of quarterly production variance from a large database of mines worldwide as a benchmark to inform the appropriate selection of ranges. The coefficient of variation is used to rank the production from mines, with quartile analysis applied to indicate industry best, median and worst variation. Due diligence of existing mines and evaluation of future production performance can be quantitatively assessed using this approach. Examples of the effect on value are provided.CITATION:Stewart, C A, 2016. Production variance benchmarks and their use in project evaluation and due diligence, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 201–213 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By R Jacobs, J Yeates

"The Stockman base metals project is situated in State Forest in the alpine area of East Gippsland, Victoria, adjacent to a National Park and within the headwaters of a major Ramsar-listed wetland catchment and the Murray-Darling River system. Site topography is steep, and elevated (650 m – 1200 m above sea level), and subject to circa 1 m annual rainfall, with occasional winter snowfall. The project consists of two volcanogenic massive sulfide (VMS) deposits to be mined by underground methods and treated in a 1.0 Mt/a central concentrator to produce copper and zinc concentrates for export over a ten year operational life. New resource projects are rare in Victoria. Recognising the sensitive setting, planning for the Stockman Project, which is now in the advanced permitting stage, has focused on balancing economic, environmental and social outcomes to ensure social licence to operate is secured and can be maintained. This has involved close attention to triple bottom line (TBL) risks and outcomes. Stockman has successfully gained State and Federal approvals via the Environmental Effects Statement process. The process of obtaining these approvals has required close attention to effective stakeholder involvement, and management of a lengthy and difficult approvals process, which is still to be finally concluded. This paper is a case study of the process of that permitting and the issues encountered to date. Key learnings from the experience have included: successful approvals require close attention to much more than just the project and its technical aspects and physical setting – effective stakeholder involvement and endorsement is critical the differing consultation requirements for local, regional and government stakeholders, to design and plan implementation of a project to meet TBL objectives, and to gain social licence to operate within the Victorian approvals process, the need for an effective lead government agency with policy authority dealing with material policy change requiring post-closure financial sureties estimating realistic permitting time and cost during the project evaluation phase. CITATION: Jacobs, R and Yeates, J, 2016. Stockman base metals project – sustainability, social licence to operate and permitting lessons learnt, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2016, pp 98–110 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne)."

Mar 8, 2016

By José Beltrán

El monitoreo de condiciones es una herramienta importante en las operaciones mineras -en tanto asegura una buena salud de los equipos de producción. En ese sentido, el presente texto muestra los resultados de un equipo evaluador que opera el sistema de condiciones MineCare y valida distintos casos de análisis reales y cotidianos, verificando las ventajas de utilizar esta herramienta en ejemplos reales para las mejores prácticas operacionales dentro de la operación extractiva minera.

Mar 1, 2016

By J. Gutiérrez

"La conciliacíón minera es la comparación entre un ítem estimado (un modelo de recursos, de reservas, programa de producción de concentrados, etc.) y un ítem medido o procesado (mineral in situ, mineral extraído, concentrados producidos, etc.). Antes de entrar de lleno al proceso de conciliación es necesario mostrar las definiciones utilizadas en Fortuna Silver Mines. En ese sentido, el presente texto señala los logros más importantes dentro de la implementación de un proceso corporativo de conciliación en dos operaciones subterráneas del Perú y México. En el primero, tenemos el yacimiento polimetálico y en el segundo; el yacimiento de alta ley en plata y oro. De otro lado, se plantea evaluar los problemas más comunes de datos de entrada, salida e índices dentro de la conciliación. "

Feb 1, 2016

By Jordan Hoover, Erika Moonin, Chuck George

"In response to a severe regional drought and in preparation for the further decline of water levels in Southern Nevada’s Lake Mead, the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) built a new intake system to ensure water supply to Las Vegas and its surrounding communities. In 2015, design began on the Low Lake Level Pumping Station (L3PS) that will move the water from this lower intake, ensuring operability of the water delivery system despite these declining lake levels. The L3PS Project includes a 159-meter-deep shaft, a large underground chamber, and 34-each 152-meter-deep, 2.4-meter-diameter drilled well shafts to be constructed in highly faulted and fractured ground. The Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) delivery method was chosen to facilitate early contractor involvement in the design process to address the significant challenges and risks anticipated on this US$650 million Project. This paper describes the CMAR selection process; the CMAR involvement during design and benefits resulting from that involvement; and the unique collaborative effort among the owner, engineer, program manager and CMAR used to evaluate and select the best design approach, preferred underground construction methods, and coordinated geotechnical baseline report. PROJECT BACKGROUND AND NEED Seven of the United States’ western states rely heavily on the Colorado River and its tributaries for their water supply. The primary source of water for the Colorado River is winter snow that falls in the mountains ringing the Colorado River Basin. Flows in the Colorado River vary significantly from year to year, depending on the amount of snow and rain deposited in the basin. Beginning in the year 2000 and continuing to the present, snowfall has been well below documented historical averages and Colorado River flows have diminished."

Jan 1, 2016

By A. Cecala, J. Noll, J. Hummer

"NIOSH has observed that many control rooms and operator compartments in the US mining industry do not have filtration systems capable of maintaining low dust concentrations in these areas. In this study at a mineral processing plant, to reduce respirable dust concentrations in a control room which had no cleaning system for intake air, a filtration/pressurization system originally designed for enclosed cabs was modified and installed. Eighty-seven percent of submicron particles were reduced by the system at static conditions, meaning that greater than eighty-seven percent of respirable dust particles should be reduced. The particle size distribution for respirable dust particles are greater than for submicron particles, and filtration systems usually are more efficient in capturing the larger particles. A positive pressure near 0.02 inches of water gauge was produced which is an important component for an effective system and minimizes particles (e.g. dust) from entering into the room. The intake airflow was around 118 cfm, which is greater than the airflow suggested by ASHRAE for acceptable indoor air quality. INTRODUCTION Chronic overexposure to respirable silica dust (particle diameter < 10 microns) leads to a progressive lung disease known as silicosis. Workers who develop silicosis have an increased incidence of lung cancer and pulmonary disorders. In June 1997, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (1) found sufficient evidence to declare that inhaled crystalline silica in the form of quartz and cristobalite is carcinogenic. Mining is one of the leading industries for occupational exposure to silica dust (2-7). Control rooms located in dusty areas in some mines are of particular concern (8). Many mineral processing operations utilize operator’s compartments and/or control rooms to house workers who are performing particular job functions. Most industrial processing mills have rooms where a worker looks out over the facility and has direct control over the product flow throughout the entire building. In addition, primary crusher operators are often located in a compartment from which they are able to view the primary crushing function. Their job is to control when trucks dump into the primary jaw crusher and the rate of feed of the ore from the hopper into the crusher. Many of these control rooms and operator booths do not have filtration systems capable of cleaning air entering the control room or booth, which can result in elevated concentrations of dust in the room or booth. To reduce the dust concentrations in these rooms, it would make sense to clean the entering air with filtration/pressurization units similar to those proven to provide a clean environment in enclosed cabs."

Jan 1, 2016

By Raj K. Rajamani, Nikhil Dhawan

"Agglomeration has become common pre-treatment step to improve heap leach percolation thereby recovery, the fundamental understanding of the agglomeration process for crushed ores is still lacking. Agglomeration is required for ores which either contain excessive amounts of clay or an excessive quantity of fines generated during mining and crushing. Numerous experiments have been carried out in laboratory scale batch drums using different ores. It has been found out that experimental agglomerate size distributions exhibit self-preserving spectra. The self-preserving/ similarity distribution of the agglomerates is found to be independent of operating conditions and is uniquely determined by the size enlargement mechanism. An empirical model based on the absolute difference between moisture applied and optimum moisture was developed. This model uses self-preserving spectra in the form of a Rosin-Rammler distribution function to predict size distribution at different operating conditions. The empirical model was considerably easier to work with plant scale agglomeration drums. Also, a test known as dip test is developed which improves fundamental understanding of the agglomerate formation and growth mechanisms. This test also provides the progeny size distribution of each agglomerate size. The progeny size distribution was analyzed with a model that partitions the particles into a host and guest category. The ensuing partition coefficient identifies the behaviour of a particle as a host for other particles or a guest layering on other particles. This concept helps in identifying the type of agglomerate that would result for a specific feed size distribution. INTRODUCTIONHeap leaching is one of the hydrometallurgical processes that have served as a green and economically viable process for the treatment of low grade complex ores of copper, uranium, nickel, silver and gold (Dhawan et al., 2013). Heap leaching appears to be a favorable candidate for the least energy consuming process for low grade ores. In heap leach operations nowadays a pretreatment step known as crushed ore agglomeration has been implemented (Dhawan et al., 2013). A bed of agglomerates improves the uniform percolation of solution through the heaps of ore. Therefore, it was possible to treat wastes and mill tailings via agglomeration and heap leaching. Agglomeration pretreatment is required for ores which either contain excessive amounts of clay or an excessive quantity of fines generated during mining and crushing (Bouffard, 2005; Dhawan et al., 2013).While agglomeration has become common practice pretreatment step in heap leach operations, the fundamental understanding of the crushed ore agglomeration process is still lacking. The author reviewed publications up to 2012 on the crushed ore agglomeration process and did not come up with modeling studies on the topic (Dhawan et al., 2013). Some of the possible reasons can be the stochastic nature of the process, experimental difficulties, and lack of instrumentation for fundamental studies."

Jan 1, 2016

By M. K. Boateng, K. Awuah-Offei

"Language barrier in a workplace affects workers’ productivity and safety. The objectives of this paper are to: (1) review the various approaches for breaking language barriers among miners; and (2) analyze the costs and benefits of these approaches, and make recommendations on the way forward. The authors achieve these objectives by reviewing the current approaches in breaking language barriers among miners. The review reveals that some of these approaches can be expensive with less benefits. Thus, it is concluded that mining companies should carefully select the optimal approach to break language barrier. INTRODUCTION Multi-national mining companies have expanded their operations into non-traditional mining destinations to grow and meet market expectations. For instance, Newmont Mining Corporation has about 14 operations and projects located in Africa, Asia, Australia and America (Newmont Mining Corporation Operations and Projects, 2015). Similarly, Freeport-McMoRan operates about 14 mines in North America, South America, Southern Asia, and Africa (Freeport-McMoRan Inc., 2015). Some mining companies have also attracted expatriate workers into their workforce. For example, Ma’aden, the Saudi Arabian mining company, in its 2013 annual report states that 34% of its total employees are expatriates (Ma'aden, 2013). Expatriates constitute a key source of skilled labor and facilitate skill transfer. The success of many international operations relies greatly on expatriate performance (Erbacher, D'Netto & Espana, 2006). Even companies that do not expand their operations into other foreign countries still have to deal with language barriers due to changing language demography of the country and the areas from which labor is sourced. For example, the language composition of the workforce and languages used in South African mines is diverse with miners proficient in Afrikaans, English, Zulu, Xhosa and others to varying degrees (Research Focus (Pty) Ltd, 2011). As a result of these trends, most mines today operate with a multinational workforce. This means cultural differences, including language barriers, exist among the miners. Marschan-Piekkari, Welch and Welch (1999) emphasize the fact that language problems become prominent as companies internationalize and grow their operations into more countries. According to a survey by Forbes, language barrier affects operations. For example, business owners acknowledge that language proficiency may promote a safer work environment (Rubin, 2011). A research has shown that language and cultural barriers in a workplace contributes to reducing workers’ productivity, increasing accidents, and hurts employers’ ability to recruit, hire and retain workers (Morris, 2002). Hence, mines are making efforts to break language barriers in their operating environments. Ma’aden, for instance reported in 2013 that 1,506 of its employees received training in English as a second language (Ma'aden, 2013)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Bauer, Steve, Colin Goodwin, Gerald, Randy Dempsey, Courtland

"The City of Ottawa’s Combined Sewage Storage Tunnel consists of two interconnected tunnels totaling 6.2 km with a diameter of 3m including access shafts and hydraulic structures which connect to the City’s most critical sewers. This tunnel will be built 15m to 30m below ground in the downtown core adjacent to, and crossing below, the Light Rail Tunnel, which introduces additional considerations in terms of sequencing and risk mitigation. The City embarked on a unique Procurement Process to address the risks involved with a large tunnel project and those associated with tunneling below downtown, underneath and adjacent to UNESCO World Heritage Sites, and connecting to live critical sewers. This paper describes the unique procurement approach employed and the contractual risk mitigation measures developed to provide the best value while minimizing risk. Specific features include Market Sounding, using a Fairness Commissioner, Contractor Prequalification and Risk Mitigation Measures in the Tender documents. INTRODUCTION This paper describes how the City of Ottawa (the City) and the project design team developed a strategic Procurement Process and Tender that incorporated industry best practices for technical and contractual risk management for the Combined Sewage Storage Tunnel (CSST) project. The process was unique in that, while it employed a systematic review of project risks, it also solicited input from industry, stakeholders and provincial and federal partners to develop the request for Tender for this traditional design-bid-build project. Key drivers for this approach were initiated from the City’s concerns for cost control, cost certainty and overall project risk mitigation. To address these concerns, the City implemented the risk review and mitigation process right from the project design team selection. It was critical that the project design team embraced this risk management philosophy and carried it through each phase of the project. This paper serves as an excellent resource for municipalities or other owners embarking on a similar tunnel project, on how to properly apply industry best practices and the benefits of using them."

Jan 1, 2016

By P. Henderson, M. E. Morris, W. A. Johnson, F. D’Alessandro, D. Wilton

"The objective of this research is to develop and apply computer models to evaluate the potential lightning impacts on underground coal-mining. These models can then be utilised to assist in the design of effective controls. This project will provide a significantly improved level of knowledge and control over current lightning abatement techniques. The findings may also be applied to open cut and coal preparation situations. Computer modelling identified that by isolating cased boreholes from underground conductive media such as roof mesh, and placing spacings between roof mesh the risk of an ignition can be reduced by more than a factor of ten. These controls should be applied in conjunction with minimising the potential for a flammable atmosphere to exist underground and ensuring that there is no transmission medium for the lightning to reach the atmosphere. INTRODUCTION The objective of this research was to develop and apply computer models to evaluate the potential lightning impacts on underground coal-mining. These models could then be utilised to assist in the design of effective controls. If successful this project would provide a significantly improved level of knowledge and control over current lightning abatement techniques. The direct potential for harm from lightning has long been recognised for the surface facilities of coal mines. However recent events at Blakefield South in NSW on January 5 2011 (DTI, 2011) and at Sago mine in the USA in 2006 (MSHA, 2007) have suggested that there is potential for lightning to cause significant damage to the underground workings of a coal mine. A very detailed analysis carried out by as part of the MSHA investigation into the SAGO disaster by Sandia Laboratories identified at least ten other incidents over the past thirteen years where lightning had probably caused the ignition of a sealed goaf area of a mine (SANDIA, 2011). In addition there is a long history of lightning related incidents in South African coal mines (Geldenhuys, 1985). Fortunately in those cases no lives were lost. The event at Blakefield South has suggested that there may be the potential for ignition to occur in an active longwall goaf. The potential for a lightning strike to ignite a flammable atmosphere in an underground coal mine has been demonstrated from the past experience both here and overseas. It requires three things: • Lightning • A mechanism to convey the lightning underground to the flammable atmosphere • A flammable atmosphere."

Jan 1, 2016