Start: Your project snapshot

• Tell me your current project stage and the decision deadline that will force a bankable flowsheet into the schedule Options: Concept/early feasibility, Feasibility study under way, Bankable feasibility required immediately, Financing locked, design only, Not sure / need guidance
• Describe your target plant throughput (t/day) and the concentrate grades the feasibility study must support
• Walk me through the specific performance targets stakeholders will treat as non-negotiable, for example recovery %, concentrate grade, water use, or energy consumption Options: Recovery %, Concentrate grade, Throughput (t/day), Power kW/t, Reagent kg/t, Other
• Who will be required to sign off on the feasibility study and capital approval in your organization Options: Project Director, Metallurgical Lead, Plant Manager, CFO, Board/Investment Committee, Procurement
• When do you need pilot-plant or bench results delivered to avoid slipping the finance or procurement milestone Options: Within 4 weeks, Within 8 weeks, Within 12 weeks, Longer than 12 weeks, No fixed deadline

Where a small recovery miss becomes existential

• What single recovery or grade shortfall would force you to reopen the flowsheet or pause financing Options: >5 percentage points recovery loss, 3–5 percentage points recovery loss, 1–3 percentage points recovery loss, Concentrate grade below contractual spec, Other
• Give an example of a prior project where an assumed recovery or grade proved optimistic, and what consequence it had on capital or schedule
• Estimate the annual revenue or NPV impact if recovery falls by 3 percentage points on your current reserve or mill plan Options: <$1M, $1M–$5M, $5M–$20M, >$20M, Not estimated yet
• Where do you currently see the single biggest technical uncertainty in hitting your targets — ore variability, reagent behavior, grind control, or equipment throughput Options: Ore variability/lithology, Reagent response, Grind control/size distribution, Equipment capacity or scale-up, Middlings handling/circulating loads, Other
• If pilot work validates the recovery and grade numbers this month, what internal approvals remain and how quickly could you move to sign equipment procurement Options: Can sign within 2 weeks, 2–6 weeks, 1–3 months, Longer than 3 months, Sign-off dependent on further conditions

The ore story, not the brochure

• Walk me through the last time feed composition or metallurgical behaviour shifted unexpectedly, and what changed in your plant results
• List the ore types and lithologies you expect in the first two years of operation Options: Oxide, Transition, Fresh sulphide, Porphyry, Laterite, Sedimentary, Other
• How many distinct geometallurgical domains or sample groups will be represented in the material you plan to send for pilot testing Options: 1–5, 6–15, 16–50, >50, Not sure
• Describe known liberation or refractory issues you have seen, for example very fine intergrowths, preg-robbing carbon, or locked gold-silver in sulphides
• What acceptable range of feed variability in grade or lithology must the flowsheet tolerate without additional testwork before procurement proceeds Options: ±5% grade, ±10% grade, ±20% grade or more, Require separate circuit per domain, Not defined

Pilot testwork — what would make you keep or walk

• Name the single pilot outcome that would stop procurement immediately Options: Recovery below target by >3pp, Concentrate grade below spec, Mass pull too high leading to oversized plant, Uncontrolled reagent consumption, Unstable steady state
• Which pilot scale do you prefer to validate the flowsheet: batch bench, continuous bench, or mini-pilot run Options: Bench batch tests, Continuous bench scale, Mini-pilot continuous, Combination (bench then mini-pilot), Undecided / need recommendation
• Share the sample volume, split plan, and preservation method you can make available for a standard pilot program Options: Sufficient bulk for mini-pilot (>1 t), Bench-scale only (5–50 kg), Multiple splits at different domains, Samples require special handling (frozen, controlled atmosphere)
• To validate a flowsheet for procurement, which signals matter most — steady-state recovery, concentrate quality consistency, reagent consumption stability, or energy draw Options: Steady-state recovery, Concentrate grade consistency, Reagent kg/t within target, Power kW/t within target, Mass pull and tail grade stable
• If pilot results hit recovery but show reagent consumption or energy use higher than projected, at what threshold would you require further optimisation before signing Options: Reagent >10% above estimate, Reagent 10–25% above, Reagent >25% above, Energy >10% above, Would still proceed with commercial terms adjusted

Who's at the table and who can stop the train

• Who in your organization would be the primary internal blocker if schedules slip or capital increases Options: CFO/Finance, Project Director, Metallurgy Lead, Plant Manager, Environment/Permitting, Procurement
• List internal stakeholders, their roles, and the single metric each will use to judge whether the project is acceptable
• Which external parties must review pilot data or equipment specifications before purchase, for example lenders, regulators, or technical review consultants Options: Lenders/Owners Engineer, Regulators/Permitting, Third-party technical auditor, Insurance underwriter, None
• To what extent will executive sponsors accept technical risk in exchange for schedule acceleration, for example sign now with further optimization later Options: Acceptable with strict gating, Acceptable only for minor scope, Prefer to delay and de-risk first, Undetermined
• Assuming a pilot meets targets, who can approve a Letter of Intent or purchase order and what single condition would prevent them from signing immediately Options: Project Director can approve, CFO approval required, Board or investment committee required, Procurement conditions pending, Technical third-party sign-off required

What could break the plan — constraints and single points of failure

• Where would a single failure, such as equipment delivery delay, reagent shortage, or permit denial, stop your critical path Options: Equipment delivery, Site civil completion, Power connection, Regulatory permit, Spare parts supply chain
• Give an example of a supplier delay or technical issue you experienced recently and the mitigation that worked or failed
• Estimate the schedule or cost impact if a long-lead item is delayed by three months Options: <1 month schedule delay, 1–3 months delay, 3–6 months delay, >6 months delay, Significant cost increase likely
• Are there local sourcing, customs, or logistics constraints that regularly affect equipment delivery to your site Options: Customs delays common, Limited port or road access, Local fabrication possible, No known constraints, Other
• Name the single constraint that, if unresolved, would cause you to abandon an external vendor option and seek an alternate path Options: Missing critical permit, Insufficient site power, No local spares/support, Vendor unwilling to accept performance guarantee, Other

Competitive landscape — the other options you are weighing

• Tell me which alternatives you are actively keeping on the table and why, for example incumbent supplier, internal build, or another vendor Options: Incumbent supplier, Internal build or detailed design in-house, Competitor vendor A, Competitor vendor B, Multiple vendors
• Do any internal teams currently propose to run testwork or design the flowsheet without an outside vendor Options: Yes, metallurgy team proposes internal testwork, Yes, engineering proposes internal design only, No internal proposal, Undecided
• Outline what would have to be true about your current incumbent approach for you to stay with it rather than switch Options: Proven on this ore type, Lower total cost of ownership, Shorter delivery schedule, Performance guarantee from incumbent, Other
• Assuming an internal build option proceeds, what single capability would the internal team likely lack that a vendor must deliver Options: Pilot-plant capacity and experience, Equipment fabrication to spec, Commissioning and start-up specialists, Spare parts logistics, Guaranteed performance validation
• What would make you move from evaluating alternatives to selecting a preferred vendor this quarter Options: Pilot data confirming targets, Favourable commercial terms, Shorter delivery schedule, Reference site proof, All of the above

Operational readiness and hard constraints

• Point to the one infrastructure prerequisite that is currently missing and would prevent deployment on the planned timeline Options: Site civil works incomplete, Power not contracted, Water supply not secured, Access roads or logistics not in place, None missing
• Confirm whether site power, process water, and heavy haul access are contracted, available, or only proposed Options: All contracted and available, Power contracted, water proposed, Water contracted, power pending, Access/roads pending, Multiple items pending
• Identify the person or team who controls permits and environmental approvals and whether they have provided a timeline we can rely on Options: In-house permitting team, External consultant, Government liaison assigned, No clear owner, Timeline provided
• Do you have the headcount and technical skill available to support commissioning, or will you require vendor-resident commissioning support Options: Internal commissioning team ready, Need vendor-resident commissioning specialists, Shared approach, Undecided
• Should a critical integration like control system or spare parts supply prove unworkable, what fallback will you use — vendor-managed interim spares, internal stock, or schedule pause Options: Vendor-managed interim spares, Internal emergency stock, Delay commissioning, Alternate equipment vendor

Acceptance criteria and the path to sign

• On the premise that pilot testing proves the target recovery and grade, list the must-have commercial or technical items that would allow you to sign a purchase order immediately
• Provide the measurable acceptance criteria you will require at commissioning, for example recovery %, concentrate grade, throughput t/h, and power kW/t, with thresholds if available
• When do you expect final commissioning sign-off under normal conditions after mechanical completion Options: Within 2 weeks of mechanical completion, 2–8 weeks, 8–16 weeks, Longer than 16 weeks, Depends on performance
• Identify the role that can veto final acceptance and state the single condition that would trigger withholding sign-off Options: Metallurgy Lead (performance mismatch), Plant Manager (safety or operability), Project Director (cost or schedule breach), Financier/Owner rep (technical non-conformance), Other
• What is the one next step you want from a potential vendor after this discovery to accelerate your decision Options: Detailed pilot program proposal, Preliminary equipment scope and lead times, Cost estimate based on pilot scenarios, Reference visits to similar plants, All of the above

• desired_state
• current_state
• stakeholders
• gaps
• success_criteria
• decision_readiness
• desired_state
• decision_readiness
• current_state
• success_criteria
• gaps
• stakeholders
• desired_state
• success_criteria
• stakeholders
• gaps
• current_state
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness
• decision_readiness

• Pilot-Plant Locked-Cycle Run
• Bench-Scale Flotation Optimization
• Comminution Performance Trials
• Gravity Separation Pilot Trials
• Dewatering and Thickening Trials
• Mineralogy and Metallurgical Characterization
• Flowsheet Design and Equipment Sizing Package
• Equipment Supply and Delivery
• Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT)
• On-Site Installation and Mechanical Completion
• Commissioning, Start-up and Ramp-up Support
• Operator Training and SOP Handover
• Spare Parts Kit and Logistics Supply
• Project Financing and Incentive Qualification

Pilot-Plant Locked-Cycle Run

• Will you require a locked-cycle run on representative drill-core, ROM, or composite feed? Options: Yes, No
• How much mass should the locked-cycle program process to simulate steady-state (kg or tonnes)? Options: ~100 kg (bench pilot), ~1 tonne (small pilot), 2-5 tonnes (pilot plant), >5 tonnes (extended pilot)
• Which sample sources will you provide for locked-cycle testing (select all applicable)? Options: Drill core composite, Run-of-mine (ROM) samples, Stockpile composite, Production blend sample
• Provide the assay and QA/QC deliverables you require with the pilot run report (for example replicate assays, CRM standards, duplicates).
• Who in your team will approve sample dispatch and chain-of-custody documentation for the locked-cycle run?
• Will you need a full stage-by-stage mass balance and stream assays (concentrate, tails, middlings) reported after the locked-cycle run? Options: Yes, No

Bench-Scale Flotation Optimization

• Which reagent families should be screened during bench tests (collector, frother, depressant, pH modifier)? Options: Collector types, Frother types, Depressants/scavengers, pH modifiers/activators
• What target concentrate grade and recovery should bench-scale tests aim to validate for your primary marketable product?
• Which feed grind targets (P80 values) should the flotation matrix include for comparison? Options: <75 µm, 75-150 µm, 150-212 µm, Custom grind profile
• Will you require locked-pulp (continuous) flotation tests or discrete batch cell matrices to inform scale-up? Options: Locked-pulp (continuous), Batch cell matrix, Both
• Provide the list of analytes or elements that must be reported for concentrate and tails (for example Cu, Au, Fe, PGM).
• Who on your team will approve changes to the reagent recipe during iterative bench testing?

Comminution Performance Trials

• Which comminution tests do you require for design: Bond ball mill work index, SAG/rod mill characterisation, or JK/Rittinger metrics? Options: Bond ball mill work index (BWi), SAG/rod mill characterisation, JK drop-weight or JK fracture tests, Other
• What feed size fractions and P80 targets should trial reports include to support mill sizing? Options: P80 <75 µm, P80 75-150 µm, P80 150-212 µm, Multiple P80 scenarios
• Are multiple ore-domains or variability composites required (for example soft vs hard zones) for comminution testing? Options: Yes, multiple composites, Single representative composite, Undecided
• What design throughput (tonnes per hour) and maximum feed top size should equipment sizing use from the comminution trials?
• Will you require breakage distribution data and simulated media/mill charge recommendations for liner and media selection? Options: Yes, No
• Who will be the technical contact for approving comminution test composites and results used in equipment selection?

Gravity Separation Pilot Trials

• Which gravity devices should the pilot evaluate: Knelson/Falcon concentrators, spirals, shaking tables, or a combination? Options: Knelson/Falcon type, Spirals, Shaking table, Combination
• What product grades and recoveries for gravity concentrates are you targeting to justify inclusion in the flowsheet?
• How much pilot feed mass and which particle size distributions should be used for gravity trials (kg or tonnes and size fractions)?
• Will you require liberation analysis (for example QEMSCAN or MLA) on gravity concentrate and tail fractions? Options: Yes, No
• Should the trial report include coarse reject, middlings split, and downstream circuit implications for gravity product handling? Options: Include coarse reject and middlings reporting, Concentrate only, Undecided
• Who will sign off on gravity trial sample selection and acceptance of results for flowsheet inclusion?

Dewatering and Thickening Trials

• What target underflow solids concentration and clarifier overflow clarity (NTU) should the thickening trials validate?
• Will you require flocculant type screening and dose-response curves for the feed water chemistry provided? Options: Yes, No
• Which feed solids percentages and particle size distributions should be used in dewatering trials?
• Which dewatering mode do you plan for design: conventional thickener underflow, high-density paste, or dry-stack tailings? Options: Conventional thickened tails, High-density paste, Dry-stack, Undecided
• Do you need scale-up metrics and thickener area/underflow density calculations included for design handover? Options: Yes, No
• Provide any site water quality constraints (for example TDS, pH, hardness) that will influence flocculant selection.

Mineralogy and Metallurgical Characterization

• Which mineralogy techniques do you require: QEMSCAN, MLA, XRD, SEM-EDS, or a combination? Options: QEMSCAN, Mineral Liberation Analyzer (MLA), X-ray diffraction (XRD), SEM-EDS
• Will you require liberation-by-size and modal mineralogy reports for concentrate and tail fractions? Options: Yes, No
• What specific elements or minerals must be quantified in the deportment study (for example Cu, Au, Fe, sulfide speciation)?
• Do you want reagent interaction mapping or surface chemistry interpretation linked to mineralogy for flotation tuning? Options: Yes, No
• Will you require an independent third-party mineralogy validation report for lender or owner sign-off? Options: Yes, mandatory, Optional, No
• Who will provide provenance documentation and chain-of-custody for the composite samples used in mineralogy tests?

Flowsheet Design and Equipment Sizing Package

• What design throughput (tonnes per hour) and product split assumptions should the flowsheet package be based on?
• Which duty points must be included in equipment datasheets: grind P80, design feed size, mass pull percentage, and target recoveries? Options: Grind P80 and feed size, Mass pull and concentrate grade, Target recoveries per circuit, All of the above
• What measurable acceptance criteria will confirm the flowsheet sizing package is complete for procurement (for example mass balance within a percent, P&ID issuance, equipment performance guarantees)?
• Which engineering deliverables do you require in the package: preliminary P&IDs, single-line electrical diagram (SLD), utility load list, and instrument index? Options: P&IDs, Single-line electrical diagram (SLD), Utility load list, Instrument index
• What spare-parts coverage should be specified in the package (for example critical spares list and months of coverage)? Options: 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, Custom
• Who will be the technical approver for issued equipment lists, datasheets, and P&IDs on your side?

Equipment Supply and Delivery

• Which major equipment items must be factory-assembled vs site-assembled (for example mills, flotation banks, thickeners)?
• What delivery milestones and maximum shipment lead times are acceptable against your construction schedule? Options: Standard lead times, Expedited lead times required, Just-in-time deliveries, Vendor stock available
• Which packaging and export crating specifications are required for sea freight and inland haul to the mine site? Options: Standard export crating, Heavy-lift skids and sea-fastening, Hazardous materials packaging, Undecided
• List site lifting and transport constraints to consider for deliveries (for example crane capacity in tonnes, road width in metres, bridge limits).
• Which delivery Incoterm will you accept for major equipment shipments (for example FOB, CIF, DDP)? Options: FOB, CIF, DDP, Other
• Who will coordinate customs clearance, import permits, and site receiving logistics on your side?

Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT)

• What specific FAT acceptance evidence will you require on delivery: as-built run-time video, manufacturer's test certificates (MTC), a performance test at rated duty, and a witnessed test report?
• Will you witness FAT in-person at the factory, require live remote video witnessing, or accept recorded test evidence? Options: On-site witness, Remote live video, Recorded evidence only
• Which mechanical and electrical tests must be included in FAT (for example no-load mechanical run, loaded performance test, instrument loop checks)? Options: No-load mechanical run, Loaded performance test, Instrument loop checks, Electrical insulation and megger tests
• Which documents must accompany FAT deliverables: operation and maintenance manuals, spare parts list, as-built wiring diagrams, and MTCs? Options: Operation and maintenance manuals, Spare parts list, As-built wiring diagrams, Manufacturer test certificates (MTC)
• Who will be authorised to sign the FAT acceptance certificate from your organisation?
• Will you require a vendor punch list and corrective action timeline following FAT? Options: Yes, No

On-Site Installation and Mechanical Completion

• Which installation model do you prefer: vendor-led installation, owner-managed installation, or third-party EPC contractor? Options: Vendor-led installation, Owner-managed installation, Third-party EPC contractor
• What mechanical completion deliverables are mandatory: as-built P&IDs, welding and NDT records, torque certificates, and loop-check evidence? Options: As-built P&IDs, Welding and NDT records, Torque certificates, Loop-check evidence
• List site permits and safety procedures installers must comply with (for example lockout/tagout LOTO, hot-work permits, confined space entry).
• What temporary site facilities are required for installation: laydown area size (m2), erection workshop, crane hire duration (days)?
• Who will coordinate interfaces with civil and structural contractors for equipment foundations and anchor-bolt verification?
• Will you require vendor superintendence during pre-commissioning and mechanical completion checks? Options: Yes, No

• Master Supply and Services Agreement (MSA)
• Statement of Work (SOW)
• Equipment Purchase Agreement / Order Confirmation
• Payment Milestones & Invoice Schedule
• Commissioning & Acceptance Protocol
• Warranty, Spare Parts & Service Agreement
• Performance Guarantee and Remedies
• Performance Bond and Insurance Requirements
• Change Order Agreement

• Go-live Health Check (weeks 1 to 4)
• First Measurement Review (weeks 4 to 10)
• 90-Day Performance Review and Operational Closure
• Ongoing Quarterly Performance Review

• Place procurement requests to restore critical spare-parts days on hand to the agreed minimum level.
• Confirm spare-parts shortfalls and place priority orders for any critical long-lead items.
• Publish the measurement report showing recovery, throughput, reagent use, and availability against Solution Scope targets.
• Create a remediation task list with timelines to re-measure the affected metrics.
• Place orders for identified critical spare parts and update expected delivery dates in the project tracker.
• Restate numeric targets from Solution Scope
• Agree the final remediation plan with dates that will close remaining gaps against Solution Scope targets.
• Confirm the incumbent system is either decommissioned or formally retained read-only and that data archival and contract actions are complete.
• Establish the steady-state handover date and criteria for moving into quarterly performance cadence.
• Deliver the 90-day performance pack documenting gaps, root causes, and the approved remediation plan.
• Execute the incumbent wind-down actions: decommission or set to read-only, archive operational data, and confirm contract/renewal closure.
• Issue purchase orders for any remaining critical spare parts required by the remediation plan.
• Rolling performance metrics and trend review
• Maintain or improve the rolling 90-day recovery rate and operational availability toward Solution Scope targets.
• Ensure critical spare-parts days on hand meet the agreed minimum to avoid extended downtime.
• Close at least 50 percent of high-priority open service tickets or agree extension dates with remediation owners.
• Publish the quarterly performance dashboard with rolling metrics and open-ticket status.
• Update the preventive maintenance schedule and operator training plan as agreed.
• Re-confirm success criteria and ownership
• Confirm the plant is operationally stable enough to produce meaningful first-measurement data within the agreed window.
• Produce a prioritized list of top 5 open issues with containment actions and target resolution dates.
• Confirm operator training status and controller baseline settings for repeatable measurements.
• Distribute the go-live health report including the top open issues and containment steps.
• Log and assign remediation tasks into the service ticket system with target dates.
• Schedule the First Measurement Review within the 4 to 10 week window.
• Present measured recovery rate and throughput vs Solution Scope targets
• Decide the corrective actions required to move measured recovery rate and throughput toward Solution Scope targets.
• Document root causes for each gap and the remediation steps with target dates.
• Present 90-day aggregated performance vs targets
• Service tickets and open defect burn-down
• Deployment and installation validation
• Reagent consumption and concentrate grade review
• Document unresolved operational issues and their remediation status
• Operator training and control setpoints
• Spare-parts inventory and procurement health
• Equipment availability and maintenance events
• Preventive maintenance and operating-practice updates
• Incumbent system wind-down and data archival
• Early adoption signals and usage patterns
• Root cause analysis for any shortfalls
• Open issues, immediate blockers, and containment actions
• Finalize remediation plan and schedule steady-state handover
• Agree quarterly action items and shorten future reviews when no changes
• Spare-parts and service requests status
• Agree corrective actions and timeline to remediation
• Agree immediate remediation tasks and next checkpoints