The supply chain
underneath a mine
is where the cost lives.
Capital cost overruns in mining average 43%. Most of that variance doesn't start with engineering errors or commodity swings. It starts in the contractor billing layer — trade invoices approved at scale by teams without the infrastructure to verify every line against every contract term. Synterminal reads that layer.
The same invoice forensics that finds a 6× price multiplier on a 2-inch PVC fitting in a landscape contractor's invoice finds it in a smelter's reagent supplier billing. The mechanism is identical. The materials are different. The scale is larger. The structural gap — invoices approved without line-item verification against contract terms and market rates — is the same.
Synterminal reads the supply chain underneath the operation. Not the EPCM contractor's project management methodology. Not the capital structure. The invoices — what was ordered, what was delivered, what was billed, and whether those three things are consistent with what was agreed.
In an EPC contract, the contractor takes price risk. In an EPCM contract, the owner takes price risk — the EPCM manages procurement and approves contractor invoices, but liability for cost overruns ultimately sits with the project owner.
What this means in practice: trade contractor invoices are approved by the EPCM's cost engineering team. That team is managing dozens of contractors across a capital project with a schedule to hit. The depth of line-item verification against contract terms and current market rates is a function of how much time the cost engineer has — which is never enough.
Synterminal is not an audit of the EPCM contractor. It is an independent verification layer on the invoices the EPCM is approving on the owner's behalf — the same invoices the owner is ultimately writing the check for.
Average copper ore grade has declined from 0.80% in 1991 to below 0.45% today. Moving twice the ore to produce the same metal doubles energy costs, water consumption, and operational complexity — before a single invoice is reviewed. Mine development lead times average up to 25 years. New supply cannot respond to demand shocks. The structural cost floor is rising and it isn't coming back down.
Against that backdrop, the contractor billing layer is one of the few cost variables the owner can actually verify and correct. An ore grade is geological. A trade contractor billing Sch 80 fittings against a Sch 40 quote is not. That's a document problem. Documents are readable.
FTI Consulting ran a documented engagement for a global mining company covering 100% of purchasing transactions across a defined period — 46 data analytics tests, vendor risk heat map, invoice verification diagnostic ensuring payments aligned with commercial terms. That engagement required Big Four infrastructure and a multi-month timeline. Synterminal runs the same document-level analysis at a fraction of the cost and timeline, with findings tied to source documents the owner already holds.
FTI Consulting, Revenew, PRGX — they operate at enterprise scale, on long timelines, with large teams, at fees that reflect all three. They serve Tier 1 majors with established internal audit functions and the procurement infrastructure to manage a multi-month engagement. That is the right service for that client.
The junior miner who just made a final investment decision and appointed an EPCM contractor for a $150M copper project in Arizona does not have a Big Four relationship. Their project director is managing the EPCM relationship, the permitting process, community relations, and the board. Their cost engineer is one person. The trade contractor invoices are being approved by the EPCM and submitted for payment on a weekly cycle. Nobody is reading every line.
That is the client Synterminal serves in this vertical. Not the Tier 1 major. The junior and mid-tier operator who needs the document-level verification layer without the enterprise-scale engagement that comes with it. The analysis is the same. The infrastructure requirement is not.
Similarly: the mid-size copper smelter buying reagents from three suppliers on long-term contracts that haven't been actively managed in two years. The toll refiner processing concentrate from multiple mines and buying chemicals at volume from a single preferred vendor. The gold processing operation that knows reagent costs have been rising faster than the gold price index and wants to understand why.
If the invoice exists and the contract or purchase order exists, the analysis runs. The scale is larger than a trade contractor. The mechanism is the same.
the operation.
Direct intake. Describe the project or operation, the supplier relationships you want examined, and the volume of invoices in scope. We scope it and respond same day. Every finding traces to a source document.
ugly problem.
Direct intake for difficult information problems. Physical markets, procurement, pricing, supply chain, entity resolution, litigation support. Describe the problem. We scope the engagement.