A push for improvements in lateral development quality has been taking force amongst Canadian mining companies in recent years. Bad quality tunnelling introduces re-work in the form of rehabilitation and delays of the project schedule. The benefits of drifting quality have the potential to improve development rates and directly contribute to rapid development, as well as lowering cost in materials and man/machine operating hours.

The development practices at hard rock mines of Falconbridge Ltd. and Boliden AB, in Canada and Sweden respectively, are compared in an effort to identify the key parameters that affect excavation quality. These key parameters can aid mine engineers in implementing the required changes to the activities of a development cycle in order to achieve a higher level of drifting quality, remove the need for re-work, and speed up the development cycle. It is found that, while both practices achieve modest rates of advance, overall, the Boliden practice has better quality performance than the Falconbridge practice.

A methodology is proposed, in the form of a data collection protocol for cycle activities that looks at the aspects affecting excavation quality in light of adherence to drifting standards by development crews, time taken to complete a task, organizational structure, utilized machinery, treatment of machinery by crews, and the "as built" final quality result. This research assesses the ultimate quality achieved by the two development cycles based on the above criteria. The proposed protocol can be customized in order to meet the needs of varied development cycles utilizing a wide range of machinery.