2009/2010 Stage 2 Problem Statement - SME

2009-2010 SME/NSSGA Student Design Competition
1. General Background Information
During a due diligence process, one of the goals of an engineering team is to identify,
understand, evaluate, and mitigate risk. Risk can be understood and reduced in many ways,
including site visits, further exploration, analysis of past mining, and personal experience(s).
This problem is intended to highlight potential real-world issues that arise during a due diligence
process. How your team reacts to these issues, communicates understanding, and develops
creative solutions will determine the success of your project.
This problem focuses on the importance of the structural and engineering geology in regards to
mine planning and reserve estimation. It also highlights potential maintenance problems that
may occur if geologic conditions are encountered that were not anticipated during the mine
planning and feasibility studies.
This problem uses data from actual mining companies in the United States. This is real data and
therefore will represent the type of information that you will have as a mining engineer of the
future. The companies that donated this information have hundreds of thousands of dollars
invested in the data you will be using and this information is proprietary to those companies.
Therefore, the data should be respected, not reproduced, and kept confidential-this includes the
actual location of the quarry, should it be accidentally disclosed.
1.1. Problem Statement
From the information in Phase One, further due diligence of the Bev Quarry was required. A
visit to the quarry and a small drill exploration project were completed. You will be required to
update the Phase One submission to reflect the results of the further due diligence. Also, the
board of directors will be interested in a full 20-year financial model so a final decision can be
made. Because your competitors are also interested in the Bev Quarry, your results and
recommendations must be presented on February 28, 2010 so that the board of directors can
make a timely decision.
2