SMP 365 PHMP Manager for Mining Operations

What is SMP 365 PHMP Manager?

SMP 365 PHMP Manager for Mining Operations connects principal mining hazard plan scope, critical controls, verification evidence and assurance actions. The interface provides a PHMP register, verification schedule, assurance workbench, actions, an evidence library and reports. It supports the work of keeping a plan connected to operational evidence after the document has been written.

The system does not identify every principal hazard for a mine, approve the technical content of a plan or certify legal compliance. Hazard identification, technical assessment, consultation and authorisation remain with the appropriate people. Your operation must establish which plans and requirements apply to its activities and jurisdiction.

Give each plan a clear operational scope

A useful plan has a recognisable boundary: the operation, activity or exposure it addresses, and the people responsible for maintaining it. Before moving documents into a register, agree how each plan will be named, owned and connected to its current approved material. This helps distinguish the plan that governs the work from drafts, supporting assessments and superseded versions.

Use a realistic example such as mobile plant interaction in the demonstration. Ask how the plan’s scope is presented alongside the controls and assurance work. The objective is to make the relationship understandable to operations, not merely to create another document index.

Connect critical controls with verification evidence

A control being listed in a plan is different from evidence that it is working as intended. SMP 365’s PHMP workflow brings critical controls together with verification and evidence, allowing the operational discussion to move beyond whether a plan exists.

Your mine should define what each control is expected to achieve, what evidence is relevant and who is competent to judge it. Review a verification example against that expectation during configuration. An uploaded photograph or a completed check is not automatically adequate evidence. The technical standard and the acceptance decision must come from the approved control-management process, not from the fact that the software accepts a record.

Make verification a planned part of operations

The verification schedule provides a dedicated view of planned verification work. Use implementation workshops to agree how the work will be allocated, when it is expected and what should happen if it cannot be completed. The schedule should reflect the operation’s requirements rather than a generic frequency applied to every hazard.

Consider how verification fits into supervision, specialist inspections and changing operational conditions. Demonstrate an item with missing or inconclusive evidence as well as a completed review. A due date is an administrative prompt, not a statement that the underlying risk is controlled until that date arrives.

Turn assurance findings into accountable follow-up

The assurance workbench, actions and evidence library give the review process a place to connect findings with follow-up. The important question is not simply how many checks were completed, but what the evidence says about the controls and what action is required when it is insufficient.

Agree who assesses findings, who owns the response and what evidence is needed for closure. Use the reports to support a conversation about unresolved issues and the quality of assurance, rather than relying on a single reassuring total. A software action cannot replace the operational response required when a control is absent or ineffective.

Migrate plans with their evidence and ownership

Start migration by reviewing the current plan register, associated control descriptions, verification arrangements and open findings. Preserve the context needed to interpret existing evidence, including which plan and review it relates to. Do not import a folder of documents and assume the relationships will be understood.

For a Microsoft deployment, involve the people who own identity, access and document governance alongside mining and safety specialists. Confirm which users can review or maintain plans and how supporting information is made available at the operation. Connections to risk management, action workflows or other systems must be included in the agreed scope rather than assumed from shared branding.

PHMP Manager for Mining Operations questions