This paper summarises the process taken to simplify 35 ground support standards accounting for the multiple development profiles, dynamic geotechnical environment and the practical safety implications of a large-scale change in the ground control standards. This reduction was required after an incident involving incorrect standards being issued. The subsequent investigation identified that: • Selection of ground support standard for a mining instruction (MI) is not straightforward due to multiple standards, standards not reflecting current reinforcement used and complex geotechnical environment being encountered. Instead, site-specific ground control instructions were being issued. • Ground support standards were hard to follow and confusing, errors were present and not all standards to scale. • Ground support standards being used did not reflect what was being installed, ie bolt type incorrect and mesh orientation different. • No process or tier action response plan (TARP) for operators to follow for ground control standard noncompliance. • No justification for ground support standards being used in the current geotechnical environment. • No process for ground support standard selection and thereby no paper trail to document and assess adequacy of performance. A project was undertaken to reduce and simplify the ground support standards, produce a justification document to support ground support design and develop a process for site practitioners to identify the type of ground support standard required for the mining instruction. The exercise of rationalising the ground support was met with some challenges, including: • Technical aspects to determine the level of demand and the capacity for each ground support scheme. • Training the geotechnical engineers how to determine the level of risk for each area. • Winning over other technical services staff and the underground mining contractor of the new approach and then implementation. One of the major successes was the acceptance by the underground operators who found the system simplified their work and gave them increased confidence in management of seismicity. The rationalised ground support standards have now been successfully in place for over two years.