ASSESSMENT APPROACHES

ACQUIRE
QUANTITATIVE INFORMATION
AS REQUIRED
OBJECTIVE MEASUREMENTS
EXPENSIVE
SLOW
COST-INEFFECTIVE

QUALITATIVE
INFORMATION

SUBJECTIVE RANKING SYSTEM

INEXPENSIVE
FAST
COST-EFFECTIVE

COST
 ASSESSMENT PROCESS
ITERATIVE PROCESS PASS 1 GENERAL
PASS 2 SPECIFIC
PASS 3 DETAILED

SUBJECTIVE RANKING SYSTEM

EMERGENCY TREATMENT - TRIAGE
OCUPATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETY
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

RESPONSE TO POTENTIAL EVENTS

ACTION PLAN
PRIORITIZATION
SCHEDULE & BUDGET
 RANKING SYSTEM
PROBABILITY CONSEQUENCE
OF X OF
OCURRENCE OCURRENCE
1 HIGHLY LIKELY A FATALITY
2 LIKELY B DISABILITY
3 MODERATE C SERIOUS INJURY
4 UNLIKELY D MEDICAL INJURY
5 RARE E MINOR INJURY
1 2 3 4 5
SAFETY PROBLEM
A 1 2 4 7 11
HIGH RISK 1-8 3 5 8 12 16
B
SIGNIFICANT RISK 9-16
MODERATE RISK 17-20 C 6 9 13 17 20
LOW RISK 21-25
D 10 14 18 21 23
E 15 19 22 24 25
 RANKING SYSTEM
1 FATALITY HIGHLY LIKELY
2 FATALITY LIKELY
3 DISABILITY HIGHLY LIKELY
4 FATALITY MODERATELY LIKELY
5 DISABILITY LIKELY
6 SERIOUS INJURY HIGHLY LIKELY
7 FATALITY UNLIKELY
8 DISABILITY MODERATELY LIKELY

9 SERIOUS INJURY LIKELY

10 MEDICAL INJURY HIGHLY LIKELY
11 FATALITY RARE
12 DISABILITY UNLIKELY
13 SERIOUS INJURY MODERATELY LIKELY
14 DISABILITY UNLIKELY
15 MINOR INJURY HIGHLY LIKELY
16 DISABILITY RARE
 SERIOUSNESS & RESPONSE
1 2 3 4 5
A 1 2 4 7 11 PROACTIVE
RESPONSE
B 3 5 8 12 16
C 6 9 13
NUMBER OF EVENTS

17 20
REACTIVE
D 10 14 18 21 23 REACTIVE
E 15 RESPONSE
19 22 24 25

PROACTIVE SERIOUS 1-8

SIGNIFICANT 9-16
MODERATE 17-20
SERIOUSNESS MINOR 21-25
 ASSESSING MULTIPLE PARAMETERS
VERY HIGH / LARGE
DEVELOP ASSESSMENT CRITERIA HIGH / LARGE
5 CATEGORIES MODERATE
LOW / SMALL
VERY LOW / SMALL

IDENTIFY IMPORTANT PARAMETERS

SPAN 1 TO 5
GROUND QUALITY 1 TO 5
BLAST VIBRATIONS 1 TO 5
MINING INDUCED STRESSES 1 TO 5

A B C D
SPAN 1 2 4 4
GR. QUAL. 4 2 5 5
BLAST VIB. 2 3 5 3
MIN. IND. STRESS 5 5 5 5
40 60 500 300
 Ground Support Change Management
Matrix
FACTOR Prob of Conseq.
LEVEL OF TECHNICAL REVIEW REQUIRED (I.E. DATA
FACTOR APPLIES? Occur (1- of Occur.
COLLECTION/ANALYSIS/TOOLS)
(Y/N) 5) (A-E)
Low Risk Medium Risk High Risk
current level
stress change over time review of local history 2 dimensional numerical modelling 3 dimensional numerical modelling
depth of stress induced damage understanding of regional underground observations 2 dimensional flac modelling
rock/ore strength stress regime load/capacity analysis energy release study
major structure stress monitoring
burst potential micro-seismic analysis
unravelling potential field trials
support mechanism
support capacity

wedge potential underground observations review of local geology mapping detailed structural mapping/scanlines
wedge viability review of local history stereonet (unwedge) analysis joint characteristic analysis
joint characteristics understanding of regional rock mass classifications streonet (unwedge) analyses
stress change stress regime load/capacity analysis ground movement monitoring
rock mass classification field trials
failure mechanism probabilistic analysis
support capacity
support mechanism

type of blasting review blast design visual assessment of blast damage blast vibration monitoring
blast vibrations borehole diameter, spacing, borehole camera survey
blast damage explosive type, lbs per delay,
firing sequence

span ?? review plans (design and as built) conduct stability graph analysis
orientation conduct parametric studies
shape monitor
profile
overbreak
brows/overhangs

mining method ?? review plans (design and as built) conduct field trials
purpose monitor blast vibrations
proximity to other excavations conduct blast analyses
deterioration/corrosion
existing ground support
life expectancy
 DETERMINE RELATIVE RANKING

CASE A = 40 = RANK 2 SERIOUS

CASE B = 60 = RANK 3 SERIOUS
CASE C = 500 = RANK 20 MINOR
CASE D = 300 = RANK 12 MODERATE

54 = 625 (X = 4)

5X / 5 (X-2) = 25
1 2 3 4 5
RANK 1 = 1 - 25
RANK 2 = 26- 50 6 7 8 9 10
RANK 3 = 51- 75...
RANK 25 = 601- 625 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25
 MAGNITUDE OF PROBLEM
1 2 3 4 5

MAJOR PROBLEM A 1 2 4 7 11

SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM B 3 5 8 12 16

MODERATE PROBLEM C 6 9 13 17 20

MINOR PROBLEM D 10 14 18 21 23

E 15 19 22 24 25
RELATIVE RANKING

MAGNITUDE COST
PROACTIVE / REACTIVE
OF TO
RESPONSE
PROBLEM ADDRESS
 Evaluation of the Hierarchy of Risk

Rank 21 to 25 Rank 9 to 20 Rank 1 to 8

Report Report Report

Review by CME, GF. Review by peer Review by peer
Initial report Review by CME, GF, Optg. Supt. Review by CME, GF, Supt.MTS,
Ammend applicable standard Initial report Supt. Optg., Manager
Ammend applicable standard Initial report
OSHE notification Ammend applicable standard
OSHE Notification Resign Standard
Implement
Implement OSHE Review
Implement
Foreman/ G.C.Spec/Planner
G.C.S/Div.Super/MineEng/Supint. (1-3) Manager (4)
(1-2)
 REHABILITATION PROGRAM
SINGLE PHASE SCHEDULE
MULTI-PHASE PRIORITIZE & SCHEDULE

RATIONALE FOR SCHEDULE

TECHNICAL FACTORS
NO FINANCIAL FACTORS

OPERATIONAL FACTORS
DISRUPTION TO PRODUCTION
LOST OPPORTUNITY COSTS

COST PROHIBITIVE
INVOLVEMENT OF STAKE-HOLDERS
WORKFORCE, DoME
 RESPONSE

PROACTIVE SERIOUS INCIDENTS

IMPOSSIBLE TO REPAIR DAMAGE

COST TO REPAIR DAMAGE VERY HIGH
DESIGN SYSTEM TO AVOID / PREVENT

REACTIVE MINOR INCIDENTS

POSSIBLE TO REPAIR DAMAGE

COST TO REPAIR DAMAGE MINOR
DESIGN TO PREVENT / AVOID - IMPOSSIBLE