• Share

Benchmarking Safety Data: Progress of ICMM Company Members (2016)

28 April 2017

ICMM is committed to strengthening the health and safety performance of its members and reducing operational fatalities to zero. As part of this commitment we produce an annual safety data report of our membership.

Recognising that companies report differently and adhere to different calendar years, we have developed a common approach to reporting as defined in the ICMM publication: Health and Safety Performance Indicators.

ICMM regrets to report that 2016 saw an overall increase in the number of fatalities from 60 to 63 compared to 2015. 

This is viewed against a background of an 11 per cent reduction in the total hours worked reported by companies and a decrease in the number of incidents that resulted in a fatality. There were five incidents resulted in more than one fatality. Of those, one incident resulted in more than five fatalities. This increase in fatalities is also in contrast to the 19.5 per cent decrease in the number of total recordable injuries from 10,494 to 8,445 seen in the same period.

The fatality and injury rates – which provides the number of fatalities or injuries per million hours worked – shows a similar story with the fatality frequency rate showing an increase from 0.027 in 2015 to 0.032 in 2016, which is a similar increase as seen between 2014 and 2015. There was a decrease in the injury rate from 4.70 in 2015 to 4.26 in 2016, following an increase between 2014 and 2015.

Table 1: ICMM Safety Performance Data (2012-2016)[1]

Year Total Recordable Fatalities Fatility Frequency Rate (FFR)[2] Total Recordable Injuries (TRI) TRI Frequency Rate (TRIFR)[2] Total Hours Worked
2016 63 0.032 8,445 4.26
2015 60 0.027 10,494 4.70
2014 56 0.024 10,455 4.50
2013 91 0.035 11,636 4.52
2012 90 0.033 13,895 5.07

Fatalities by Hazard Category and Location

While it’s difficult to attribute these trends in fatality and injury frequency rates to a single cause, it is possible to identify the most common type of incidents and where member companies are focussing prevention efforts.

Table 2: 2016 Fatalities per Continent

Continent Total Hours Worked % of Total Hours per Continent Total Recordable Fatalitites Fatality Frequency Rate[2] % of Fatalities per Continent
Africa 735,884,354 37 40 0.054 63
Americas 687,372,779 35 12 0.017 19
Oceania 247,131,500 12 2 0.008 3
Asia 157,878,746 8 6 0.038 10
Europe 141,820,687 7 3 0.021 5
Other 11,060,522 1 0 0.000 0
Total 1,981,148,588 100 63 0.032 100

Graph 3 shows that over half of fatalities are attributed to either fall of ground in underground mines or mobile equipment & transportation.

Graph 4 and table 2 shows that 63 per cent of the fatalities occurred in Africa, 19 per cent in the Americas, 10 per cent in Asia, 5 per cent in Europe and 3 per cent in Oceania.  

This regional data plays an important role in determining focus areas for our health and safety work going forward. In 2017, ICMM’s work on safety will continue to focus on the sharing and learning between member companies at our member H&S Forums, and we will start work on a project related to collision management, as a response to the one of the key hazards linked to the fatalities.

Working Towards Zero Fatalities 

What the data shows us is that the increased and sustained focus on the elimination of fatalities has yet to mature. We have seen continued success in reducing the number and rate of injuries; however a focus on fatalities must remain. 

We are confident that our members will be able to get to a position where there are no fatalities experienced in the mining and metals industry. One of the key strategies to reach this goal is ICMM’s work on critical control management.  

Critical control management is founded on the principle that not all controls are crucial. Companies should therefore focus on systematically identifying, assessing, implementing and evaluating those controls that are essential to the prevention of fatal or catastrophic events.

While critical control management is well documented in many high hazard industries, ICMM produced the first consolidated framework for the mining and metals industry in 2015. The guide titled Critical Control Management Guide: Good Practice Guide seeks to provide a summary of the process, touching on the history of critical control management, its benefits, the challenges and how to prepare and plan to implement the approach. It is accompanied by additional Critical Control Management: Implementation Guide developed in December 2015.

2016 Safety Data per Company

Below are three graphs that show a more detailed analysis of data for calendar year 2016 per Member Company. Graph 5 shows the fatality rate for each company for 2016 and graph 6 shows the number of fatalities for each company in 2016 compared against 2015. Graph 7 shows the injury rate for companies in 2016. The total number of fatalities per company can be seen in table 3 at the end of this report.

Table 3: All Data for ICMM Member Companies in 2016

Year Total Recordable Fatalities Fatility Frequency Rate (FFR)[2] Total Recordable Injuries (TRI) TRI Frequency Rate (TRIFR)[2] Total Hours Worked
African Rainbow Minerals 0 0.000 276 5.72 48,255,477
Anglo American[3] 11 0.038 1,040 3.55 293,134,631
AngloGold Ashanti 7 0.056 972 7.71 126,000,762
Antofagasta Minerals 1 0.025 275 6.91 39,770,624
Areva[4] 1 0.057 68 3.87 17,591,617
Barrick 1 0.016 123 1.98 62,128,443
BHP Billiton[5] 1 0.007 594 4.03 147,458,556
Codelco[6] 4 0.030 676 5.10 132,500,985
Freeport-McMoran 6 0.041 472 3.20 147,291,443
Glencore[7] 16 0.049 1,329 4.05 328,262,516
Goldcorp 1 0.025 221 5.61 39,419,153
Gold Fields 1 0.018 124 2.27 54,669,196
Hydro 0 0.000 105 2.62 40,032,090
JX Nippon 1 0.155 45 7.00 6,432,504
Lonmin[8] 4 0.049 1,029 12.60 81,636,059
MMG 2 0.049 77 1.90 40,453,939
Mitsubishi Materials[9] 0 0.000 6 4.65 1,289,851
Newmont 0 0.000 116 1.16 71,910,761
Polyus[10] 2 0.048 28 0.67 41,923,314
Rio Tinto 1 0.006 345 2.19 157,495,226
South32[11] 3 0.065 299 6.44 46,412,204
Sumitomo 0 0.000 33 1.46 22,534,736
Teck[12] 0 0.000 191.6 5.55 34,544,502
Total 63 0.032 8,445 4.26 1,981,148,588


While all effort is made to ensure the data complies with the definitions, it should be noted that some minor differences still exist between companies. Acknowledging this, we are continuously looking at ways to improve the consistency of data.

1. TRI and TRI frequency rate have been updated since the previous report published by ICMM.

2. Rates are per 1 million hours worked (calculated by dividing the total number of fatalities or TRIs by the hours worked at the companies, and then multiplied by 1 million).  Fatality rate is shown at 3 decimal places, injury rate shown at 2 decimal places.

3. The data is compliant in terms of injury severity classification, however the scope of reporting excludes those off-site work-related incidents that are not within Anglo American management control and where there is no clear evidence of negligence (for example a lost time injury due to an incident on a public road in company provided transportation). Anglo American’s TRCFR includes fatal injuries, lost-time injuries and medical treatment cases only, and not first aid cases. However, in some parts of the business, first aid cases are also included. Anglo American’s TRCFR may therefore not be directly comparable to peers.

4. AREVA have differences regarding the classifications of the No Loss Time Injuries (NLTI - medical aids and first aids). AREVA group classifies its events regarding the location of the treatment.  If the injured person has to go for treatment outside the sites - and come back to work the day after, it is considered as medical aid.  If the treatment occurs at the first aid station on site (no matter what the treatment is) and the injured person goes back to work immediately after, it is considered as a first aid.

5. The above data set includes data from our Petroleum business.

6. The ICMM definitions, Chapter 2 — 2.2/2.2.1 the affected worker is outside the employer’s controlled location and performing a controlled activity - situations included as occupational cases. "If a worker transporting ore under contract from a mine to a seaport has an accident and is injured, it is considered to be occupational because the employer has the right to expect or enforce vehicle and driving safety considerations by contract".  Codelco does not consider incidents when we do not have rights or enforcement about drivers, vehicles and roads respect to safety matters outside of our controlled location (eg public roads, interaction with another –third parties). Chapter 3.3 – Codelco also does not differentiate between First Aid Case and Medical Treatment.

7. A few specific exclusions exist in Glencore's classification guidelines that apply in the determination of whether incidents are workplace related to assist in the decision making process.

8. Lonmin reports medical treatment cases, lost time injuries and fatal injuries as total recordable injuries, however due to the Lonmin accident/injury reporting requirements at the sites the medical treatment cases could include first aid cases which would therefore increase the number of total recordable injuries.

9. The data of site is direct control by the Metals company of Mitsubishi. Materials. These names are Akita Smelter, Sakai factory, Ikuno business facilities and Naoshima Smelter and Refinery in Japan. And Mitsubishi Materials did not operate a mine as a main shareholder.

10. The TRI calculation does not include FA.

11. South32 data fully complies with the ICMM recording boundaries.  South32 use Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) definitions for Injuries and Disease classification which differs slightly from ICMM definitions.

12. The total number of TRIs for Teck includes TRIs attributed to operations where Teck is a partner but not the managing partner.  These TRIs are included pro-rata based on the percentage of Teck ownership.