Comparison of Legislation on the Safe Utilisation of Explosives and its Application in Boliden Mines

Abstract

Blasting operations form a central part of any hard rock metal mining operation, and are, given its inherent hazards, critical in ensuring safe mine working environments. In order to improve workplace safety in such operations, it is important to select the right explosives and technologies, to issue rules and procedures and to offer adequate training and ensure awareness of hazardous situations. Because multinational mining companies work under different jurisdictions, they have to comply with different rules with different regulators. New Boliden is a Sweden-based mining and metals company, involved in both the extraction, refining and recycling of primarily base metals, with mining operations in Sweden, Finland and Ireland. Given that their aim is to have no Lost Time Injuries (LTI’s) at any operation within the company and that there are prospects of further international expansion and technological developments, it is important to develop working practices that both comply with various legal requirements, are practically usable and lead to a very safe working environment. The aim of the research is therefore to identify applicable legal requirements, technologies and working methods, in order to see if different working practices are compliant with these legal requirements, and whether these different requirements and practices can help to meet both the requirements of different regulators and Boliden’s own mission objectives.
This research has identified the legal requirements applying to mining operations in Sweden, Finland and Ireland, and compared working practices in several mines, operated by Boliden Mineral AB in these countries. With a comparable number of relevant legal sources, the legal structure on explosives safety requirements is generally similar. However, Nordic legislation generally puts more generic responsibilities on the employer, whereas Irish regulations are more specific. Blasting requirements in Finland and Sweden are mostly similar and apply to underground and surface mining operations and civil engineering, whereas Irish legislation is tailored specifically to underground mining operations. Significant differences can be seen when comparing explosives handling, in particular explosives storage, Ireland has a very different approach in this respect, which may be helpful in improving safety performance in Nordic mines as well. The main technologies influencing the explosives handling and blasting safety performance are considered to be the initiation systems used, the reliability of explosives and successful implementation of a digital track&trace system. No events leading to human injury have occurred following the utilisation of explosive materials in Boliden Mines in the past ten years. To get a good impression of problematic issues, using both Boliden and international data, it was found that the main types of explosives- and blasting related incidents are misfires, flyrock, toxic fumes and early detonation. Fault Tree Analysis, adapted forms of reliability modelling and the bow-tie method have been used to identify critical parts of the explosives handling and blasting process, based on available statistical data. For more critical cases, root causes of these failures have been identified. Critical activities are these surrounding evacuation of the blasting area, material failures and explosives materials being unguarded. Most incidents appear to be caused by failures in communication between different departments and insufficient awareness of existing safety procedures.
Considering that there is overlap between the various operations in terms of legal requirements and practices, especially requirements with a European background, explosive materials used and operational- level working methods, it is judged to be useful to more closely align these practices, since learning from each other’s practices might improve safety levels. Also, alignment of track&trace systems, and the adoption of electronic initiation systems seem to be beneficial in this regard. It is deemed less useful to align more typically national requirements and practices, such as permitting and licensing procedures. In order to be able to exchange best practices, company-wide safety guidelines and reporting based on a clear distinction of responsibilities per activity are recommended. The main conclusion therefore is that alignment of existing safety practices and technology use is achievable given the various legal and operational constraints and is expected to ensure a zero-LTI explosives handling and blasting safety performance.