Autonomous mining is accelerating as regulatory regimes seek to keep pace

The iron ore sector in Western Australia has led the adoption of autonomous trucks in Australian mines. Benefits commonly attributed to automation, including increased efficiencies, productivity and enhanced safety, are driving the trend. COVID-19 could also prompt mine operators to adopt autonomous plant, as the ability to safely and regularly move a workforce within and across States has presented a risk to operations.

By contrast, the roll out of on-road automated vehicles has slowed. This is due to the safety and regulatory challenges of operating in these complex environments. Australia's general regulatory reform program relating to automated vehicles has also slowed, to ensure legislation does not 'get ahead' of the technology. However, a tipping point is likely to occur in the next few years, followed by a rapid adoption of higher levels of automated vehicles on our roads. In the meanwhile, mining and agriculture can continue to lead the way in Australia.

The increased uptake of automation in mining presents challenges for government as legislative and regulatory regimes seek to appropriately adapt to new technology. On 10 September 2020, the New South Wales Resources Regulator released a guideline for the use of autonomous mobile mining plant. The guideline follows the code of practice for mobile autonomous mining published by Resources Safety in Western Australia in 2015, along with various guidelines for autonomous systems published by the Global Mining Guidelines Group. 

Scope and application of NSW guideline

The NSW guideline applies to the introduction of autonomous mining equipment such as haul trucks, loaders, dozers, graders, water carts, blast hole drill rigs, excavators and load haul dumps and boggers. The guideline will also apply to other types of mining machinery as autonomous systems develop, such as shuttle cars and continuous miners for underground coal operations.

Unlike the WA code (which is issued under legislation, contains legal requirements and is admissible in court proceedings), the NSW guideline is not published under a specific legislative power. Instead, the guideline restates and clarifies existing mine safety laws in NSW, along with best practice for risk assessment and risk management.

NSW guideline seeks to address new and different risks arising from autonomous mining

The guideline acknowledges that, while autonomous and semi-autonomous mining equipment can reduce hazards and increase performance, they also introduce new and different risks. For example, the guideline identifies that while autonomous operation (by definition) means there will not be people onboard machines, they may still be in the autonomous operating zone or 'AOZ' (e.g. to perform inspections, maintenance and repairs, change-over to manually controlled plant and operate service and ancillary vehicles).

Regarding maintenance in particular, the guideline states that the introduction of tele-remote operation introduces new risks for maintenance workers who must approach a machine to undertake fault finding and repairs. The guideline also identifies that removing operators from the mining environment results in a loss of sensory awareness (i.e. sight, hearing, touch and smell), which impairs the ability to quickly identify developing problems on a machine and may lead to a more significant incident.

There are two substantive components of the NSW guideline, which seek to clarify mine operators' legislative obligations and best practice principles to assess and manage such risks.

First, the guideline confirms the legislative requirements for the use of autonomous equipment.

Relevant legislative requirements include:

• the primary duty of care for persons conducting a business or undertaking under the Work Health and Safety Act 2011.
• specific duties under Part 3.1 of the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2017 and Part 2 of the Work Health and Safety (Mines and Petroleum Sites) Regulation 2014 that are particularly important when considering the introduction of autonomous vehicles (e.g. mine operators must notify the regulator of incidents involving any loss of control of heavy earthmoving machinery that is operated remotely or autonomously).

Second, the guideline identifies key risks and components of necessary risk assessments, with a focus on critical controls that will prevent associated incidents, mitigating controls for circumstances where an incident occurs. Emphasising risk management, it highlights the need for prior planning and consultation and for mine operators to carefully consider key factors such as mine design, systems for collision avoidance and cybersecurity.

The NSW guideline states:

• that an increased level of risk to workers is not an acceptable consequence of automation: The NSW guideline acknowledges that pedestrians and other workers are likely to interact with autonomous machines, particularly in the early stages of autonomous adoption. Risk assessments must consider all foreseeable scenarios where it is possible for people to interact with the machines, or where machines might interact with other equipment or infrastructure. In contrast, the WA code requires separation of autonomous fleet from manned fleet where possible.
•  the need for properly implemented change management: The NSW guideline also emphasises the need for mine operators to be vigilant as the use of autonomous machines expands and notes the risk of weakening controls where risk management processes fail to adapt to those changes. A well-constructed and documented change management process is also a focus of the WA code. Change management is a key feature in a number of mine related prosecutions and will continue to be an issue closely monitored by regulators.

Reflecting NSW's position at an early stage of the autonomous lifecycle, the NSW guideline allows a degree of flexibility in system design and implementation. This is encouraging for mine operators considering retrofitting projects or trials. It is also less prescriptive than the WA code in respect of training and system planning, and serves as a foundation for mine operators to build (or amend) their own policies and procedures.

Looking forward for Queensland

Planning is currently underway for autonomous haul trucks and drilling systems in Queensland at a number of Bowen Basin coal operations. This could prompt Resources Safety and Health Queensland to introduce its own guidelines or regulations under mining safety legislation.

The Queensland mining industry has undergone a range of changes of late. This includes establishing a new regulator, introducing an industrial manslaughter offence and a focus on the Board of Inquiry. Taking this into account, the safety systems relating to autonomous vehicles may be expected to be managed on a risk basis through a mine's safety and health management system until autonomous mining vehicles are more broadly operating in Queensland.

In the interim, mine operators and contractors should refer to the WA code and NSW guideline, as well as relevant ISO and Australian Standards including ISO 17757:2019 Earth-moving machinery and mining — Autonomous and semi-autonomous machine system safety.

Industrial relations consultation requirements for autonomous mining

Given the potential impact on employment, the CFMMEU is closely monitoring the introduction of autonomous mining, with a focus on the opportunities for retraining or reskilling workers who may lose their positions due to automation.

One Queensland coal mine recently faced a union dispute in the Fair Work Commission in relation to a consultation process following a decision to introduce autonomous haulage trucks at its Goonyella Riverside Mine in Queensland. A key issue in dispute was whether the employer had to provide information (or further information in some cases) about trials of autonomous vehicles at other sites, safety issues and training.

In this instance, the Commission found that in circumstances where the employer claimed during consultation that autonomous vehicles would improve safety, the employer had an obligation to provide information upon which it based that assertion. This includes information about the safety features of the vehicles, the operating system, data that would be available to manage safety and the arrangements that would be in place in relation to the zones where the vehicles would operate. However, this does not extend to the details of any review of the Safety and Health Management System under the coal mining safety regime.

The decision has been appealed but has not yet been heard. At this stage, until further guidance is provided, it is clear that consultation on a move to autonomous mining:

• should (subject to the requirements of applicable industrial instruments) include discussing automation with employees and their representatives. This includes matters such as timing, anticipated adverse impacts, measures taken or proposed to be taken to manage those impacts and training opportunities to help affected employees to transfer into new roles; but
• does not need to include information to inform discussions about whether the decision to implement the autonomous system should have been made.

It is clear that the introduction of autonomous mining operations requires careful planning and consideration, including mapping out a clear consultation process based on the relevant industrial instruments. The outcome of the Goonyella Riverside appeal should also be closely monitored by mine operators considering a move to autonomous operations.

Other issues

Australian mining and agricultural companies have a proud history of innovation and technology adoption. To remain globally competitive, this needs to continue. The recent impact of COVID-19 to supply chains and operations has highlighted personnel and procurement risks. These impacts have potentially strengthened the case for automation in mining, and further investment from the government in the mining, equipment, technology and services (METS) sector. However, with the economy in recession the mining sector is also being asked to increase apprenticeships and jobs. Automation projects that result in job losses will likely attract greater union response and negative publicity, potentially compromising a mine operator's 'social licence' and community engagement. Retraining existing personnel into roles requiring very different skill sets can also be challenging. Given the long life of mining equipment, and significant capital costs associated with fleet upgrades and replacements, these are decisions that will take careful planning.

If you wish to discuss the regulatory landscape surrounding implementing automated processes, including how to mitigate associated risks, please contact us.