This chapter is a continuation of the seismic stability analysis suggested by Mendecki (1993; Real time quantitative seismology in mines: Keynote Address. In R. P. Young (Ed.), Proceedings 3rd International Symposium on Rockbursts and Seismicity in Mines, Kingston, Ontario, Canada (pp. 287–295). Balkema, Rotterdam.). The assumption here is that an inhomogeneous rock mass subjected to loading displays certain seismic symptoms when approaching instability. (1) An overall softening, measured by a decrease in the average value of the apparent stress. (2) Increased rate or accelerating deformation, measured by an increase in the activity rate and/or apparent volume. (3) An associated increase in correlation length where one would expect to observe an increase in the spatial distribution of seismic activity, measured, for example, by seismic diffusivity. (4) A decrease in the dimensionality, or localisation, of seismic activity as can be measured by the shape factor. The objective of seismic stability analysis is not to predict instability or to manage seismic exposure in the short term, but to guide control measures to mitigate seismic hazard.