Safety case regime

Yes - the requirements of the safety case must be set out.

The case must be approved before operations can begin. This allows the regulator to make sure appropriate processes are in place.

An improved understanding of hazards and risks present in mines, and the controls required to manage them.

Improved oversight by the regulator in advance of work being done.

It will only be effective with a well-resourced regulator with the capacity to oversee the plans and distinguish between credible safety strategies and mere 'paper systems'.

The mining industry is relatively small; the introduction of such a comprehensive system may be seen as excessive.

The compliance costs involved could potentially affect the viability of the mine due to the time and money involved in creating and maintaining a safety case.

Small businesses may be disadvantaged as they have less expertise in safety management systems, and may require external expertise.

May assist in subsequent inspections but it does not replace the need for subsequent checks.

Licensing regime

Yes - the requirements of the licensing process must be set out.

Inspectors will be more aware and able to make sure that hazard management has been taken into account.

Improved hazard management, as high-risk activities would be carried out by competent people.

Increased compliance costs from securing a licence.

Mines may need to bring in external people if they do not have appropriate qualifications, increasing compliance costs (especially in small operations).

Which activities would be included?

Would the licence be a one-off type, or will it be valid for a period of months or years?

What would appropriate qualifications be?

Third-party monitoring system

Yes - the requirements of the monitoring system must be set out.

Activities will be carried out by suitably qualified people, reducing potential risks.

Improved hazard management, as the activities would be carried out by qualified people.

Increased compliance costs involved in securing an expert.

Small operations may face more costs; larger operations may have the expertise required already on site.

If there is a shortage in available experts, delay in operations will occur.

Which activities would be included?

Which qualifications would be considered appropriate?

Notification regime for high-risk activities

Yes - expansion of section 8 of the regulations to include other high-risk activities.

Inspectors will be more aware and able to make sure that hazard management has been taken into account.

Inspectors would be notified of any dangerous activities so they can intervene if deemed necessary, leading to more managed hazards.

Increased compliance costs from notifying the inspectors.

What activities would be included and what information would be needed?

H&S management systems and major hazard management plans

Yes - the requirements of the systems and plans must be set out.

The best way to manage hazards will be set out on paper for the operator to follow.

Improved knowledge, awareness and management of hazards.

Increased compliance costs in preparing and maintaining the plans.

Operators can create or obtain 'paper plans', which look good on paper, but are not put into practice.

What would need to be included?

Supporting guidance and ACOPs to improve hazard management

No.

Mining operations will have more guidance around how to manage hazards day to day.

Potential increased guidance in the mining sector, leading to better hazard management.

Relatively cheap compared to other options.

Does not involve a change to the regulations or the Act.

Constant resource will be needed to ensure they are kept up to date.

There will be nothing binding in the supporting guidance to ensure they are followed.

Apart from the ACOP, what other guidance material would be needed?

What form would the ACOP take (i.e. would it be written by industry, us, or as a collaborative effort)?

Extend coverage of Mining Underground Regulations

Yes - any gaps identified would require an amendment to include them.

Further areas that present hazards would be regulated for to improve the way the hazards are managed.

Improved hazard management of certain activities.

Adding further activities to the regulations does not ensure, in itself, that the hazards will be managed better.

It may be seen by the industry as just adding more requirements that they need to follow, without more guidance.

What other gaps are present in the regulations besides machinery standards (conveyors, crushers, provision of emergency stops), vehicles and transport issues (access and condition of roadways, slopes, separation of walkways from flume roads)?

Amending the Mining Administration Regulations so a coal mine deputy would no longer be able to run a mine of eight or fewer people

Yes.

There are some basic hazards (for example, ventilation, managing old workings) in underground coal mines that are not covered in the certificate of competence requirements for a coal mine deputy. In contrast, the underviewer certificate of competency covers a wider range of hazards in underground coal mining and provides a good basic level of hazard management.

This option recognises that the hazards faced in the mining environment are predominantly unrelated to the number of people on site.

The upgrade to an underviewer's certificate will result in strengthened managerial competency requirements and increased breadth of knowledge for small underground coal mine managers.

The recognition that the hazards involved with underground coal mining are not associated with the number of people present.

There are currently only four small underground coal mines that are run by a coal mine deputy, employing eight people in total in New Zealand. Amending the regulations for such a small number may be seen as excessive.

May not result in a reduction in the number of injuries and fatalities in small underground coal mines.

Current coal mine deputies and their employers will face compliance costs of both time and money to upgrade their certificates to a coal mine underviewer, as it requires an additional 91 credits, equating to 910 hours of additional study. However, as this estimate does not take into account prior learning and current competencies, the actual time may be much less.

The compliance costs involved could potentially impact on the viability of the mine due to the time and money involved in upgrading the manager's certificate, particularly if the manager has sole charge of the mine.

Specifying employee participation requirements

It depends - there are a range of options from amending the HSE Act, to amending regulations, to guidance.

Employees are often the first people to pick up on hazards - strengthening their participation could lead to the hazards being identified earlier and dealt with appropriately.

Improved hazard management due to increased employee participation.

There are already employee participation requirements in the HSE Act - introducing new requirements specifically for the underground mining industry could lead to inconsistencies with the general duties in the HSE Act.

Smaller mines may not have sufficient resources to meet the new requirements.

The magnitude of any benefits and costs in strengthening employee participation requirements may vary with the differing levels of legal obligations.

Specifying the frequency and nature of inspectorate visits

No - it would require amendments to the HSE Act.

Inspectorate visits ensure that mines are complying with the HSE Act.

Inspectors would be more aware of what is going on in every mine.

Specifying the frequency and nature of the visits will help ensure that businesses are complying if they know that an inspector will be visiting.

Requiring that inspectors go underground at every visit could interfere with their right to refuse dangerous work.

There may not be enough resources available to carry out the increased number of inspections.

Specifying the frequency and nature of inspector visits is not possible within current regulations, and amendments would be required to the HSE Act.