Search Documents

By D Whitworth

The Golden Pig mine has embarked on a diamond drill program design philosophy that increases flexibility of the program by greatly increased drill pattern densities. The use of standard broad pattern diamond drilling at the Golden Pig mine has previously lead to operational inefficiencies and impacted significantly on the costs of the mine. The diamond drill program philosophy and its interaction with mine planning is explained. The case study of the E lode mining as used to internally justify the increased drill densities is detailed.

Jan 1, 2002

By Elizabeth Holley, Meriel Young, Gabriel Walton

"The coal mine roof rating (CMRR) was developed by Chris Mark and Greg Molinda to bridge the gap between geological variation in underground coal mines and engineering design. The CMRR accounts for the compressive strength of the immediate roof, the shear strength and intensity of any discontinuities present, and the moisture sensitivity of the immediate roof. The CMRR has been widely used and validated in Eastern US coal mines, but it has seen limited application in the Western US.This study focuses on roof behavior at a Western coal mine. Mine A shows significant lateral geological variation, along with localized faulting and a laterally extensive sandstone channel network. The CMRR is not used to predict roof instability at the mine.It is, therefore, hypothesized that there are other factors that are correlated with roof instability in underground coal mines that could potentially also be included in the CMRR.This hypothesis was tested by collecting 30 CMRR measurements at Mine A. At each measurement location, a binary record of the roof condition (stable or unstable) was made along with parameters, such as depth of cover, thought to also correlate with roof stability. A statistical analysis of the data was performed to determine the parameters in addition to those included in the CMRR, which can be correlated to roof stability.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDRoof fall is one of the greatest hazards facing underground coal miners (Barczak et al., 2000). In 2017, 91 lost-time injuries occurred due to roof fall in US underground coal mines. A further 48 roof falls occurred with no lost days (MSHA, 2018).The coal mine roof rating (CMRR) classification was developed by Molinda and Mark (1994) to quantify the geological description of mine roof into a single value that could indicate mine roof stability and be used in engineering design. It is widely used in the Eastern US as an input for the analysis of longwall pillar stability (ALPS) in underground coal mines. It provides an excellent start; however, it is arguably not fully comprehensive, nor is it widely used in the Western US."

Jan 1, 2018

By A G. Guinea

If you were reading this article in a newspaper or similar in the 1800s, you would know that the world was firmly in the grip of the Industrial Revolution. You might have been one of the families that decided that an agriculturally based existence was no longer for you, and that the promise of a factory job was more appealing and more secure. And it was. Financially at least. Not so much from a workplace safety perspective.

May 5, 2022

By Y Potvin

Underground mines in Australia are progressively operating at greater depth, sometimes in conditions where mine induced stresses are very high. In such conditions, the seismic activity often becomes intense and violent and in response, mines must develop and implement a sound rock burst risk management strategy to continue operating safely.This paper discusses the latest techniques successfully used in Australian mines to mitigate the risk of rock bursts. In particular, the paper describes how the analysis of data collected from seismic monitoring systems can provide an understanding of the seismicity and be used for quantifying seismic hazards in the mine. Once an adequate understanding and assessment of seismic hazard has been achieved, the associated risk can be mitigated using different layers of protection.Strategically, modifying the mining method, the extraction sequence and/or the mining layout can alleviate the seismic hazard, but these solutions generally cannot be implemented rapidly. In the short-term, seismic risk can be mitigated tactically using an energy absorbing support system or to remove personnel from being exposed to rock burst damage by implementing exclusion zones.

Mar 21, 2011

This paper will address this question from the point of view of a drill and blast engineer or researcher working in open cut and underground mining operations. The paper will establish a common set of reference standards for high-speed imaging and data capture, which engineers and researchers can apply when deciding which type of imaging technology is appropriate. It will present an overview of current image analysis technologies and practices in use across a range of appropriate scientific fields and draw lines of commonality of approach between these fields and the field of mining and blasting applications analysis and research. In addition, the paper will examine the different technologies from an image quality and data stream reference point, ease of operation, cost, and reliability parameters. Finally, this paper will present an argument for the hybridisation of established and new technologies which could provide a more beneficial approach to the use of imaging as a tool of quality control, research and analysis in the mining based industries. This will include a novel approach to digital high-speed imaging and data analysis in the field, which should deliver high-quality images and data analysis in a time frame that is more appropriate to the need for immediate action, analysis and problem solving.

Jan 1, 2007

By A Scott, A C. Torrance

Explosive properties are typically summarised on manufacturers’ technical data sheets. The values most commonly referred to are the density of the explosive, the energy it is expected to release and its velocity of detonation (VOD). This information is provided so that blasting engineers can make a considered selection of the most appropriate product for a particular blasting application. As an example, a lower VOD and energy product is better suited to blasting in soft, weathered material. In contrast, blasting hard, competent material generally requires a higher energy product which is usually characterised by higher VOD and energy.A review of the technical information supplied by manufacturers shows a wide range of methods of reporting both VOD and energy. A meaningful comparison between products from different suppliers is almost impossible to achieve based on these data. For a similar product, one supplier may have a VOD range of 2800–5800 m/s and a relative bulk strength of 1.34 while a corresponding product from another supplier is quoted with a VOD range of 3100–6300 m/s and a relative bulk strength of 192. In the end, the user has to rely on the level of confidence available from their experience using a certain type of explosive in the type of rock to be blasted at that mine.This paper reviews some of the technical and supporting information that is freely available in the literature and attempts to provide some clarity as to what the numbers that are reported actually mean for the end user. An alternative approach to the evaluation of the suitability of a given explosive to blast a given rock mass is proposed.CITATION:Torrance, A C and Scott, A, 2015. What is relative about energy?, in Proceedings 11th International Symposium on Rock Fragmentation by Blasting, pp 447–454 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Aug 24, 2015

By P. J. Petit

Changing mining conditions, legislative issues, rising costs, and the constrained supply of skills and electricity in South Africa, have been some of the criteria forcing mine operators and engineers to review the traditional use of compressed air to power underground hand-held drilling operations in narrow-stope, hard-rock mines. In answering the question, 'What is the best way to power this mine?', they have resorted to trade-off studies with results of limited usefulness, because they are site-specific, and use only a few comparative parameters, based on a small data set. This paper aims to provide definitive, objective and quantitative decision-making approaches to evaluate alternative energy delivery systems for stoping in narrow-reef hard rock mines, based on primary and relevant criteria. These include quantifiable criteria such as capital expenditure, operating costs, resulting financial returns, energy and water usage, production performance, life-of-mine, etc. Other important criteria with qualitative aspects are integrated. These are safety, health and environmental concerns, legislative requirements, business risk, technology change, etc. The paper begins with a review of decision making processes available, and proposes the use of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method as a multiple-criteria decision making tool and the decision tree-based on milestone-driven uncertainties, to validate the selection of the energy delivery system. The results of a multiple-criteria questionnaire completed by a variety of industry experts and professionals, such as production and operation managers, consultants, suppliers and techno-financial analysts, are discussed. The evaluation indicates the potential for hydropower to be the best solution for narrow reef hard rock mines, based on current information, mine design layout and production.

Jan 1, 2012

By P. J. Petit

Changing mining conditions, legislative issues, rising costs, and the constrained supply of skills and electricity in South Africa, have been some of the criteria forcing mine operators and engineers to review the traditional use of compressed air to power underground hand-held drilling operations in narrow-stope, hard-rock mines. In answering the question, 'What is the best way to power this mine?', they have resorted to trade-off studies with results of limited usefulness, because they are site-specific, and use only a few comparative parameters, based on a small data set. This paper aims to provide definitive, objective, and quantitative decision-making approaches to evaluating alternative energy-delivery systems for stoping in narrow-reef hard rock mines, based on primary and relevant criteria. These include quantifiable criteria such as capital expenditure, operating costs, resulting financial returns, energy and water usage, production performance, life-of-mine, etc. Other important criteria with qualitative aspects are integrated. These are safety, health, and environmental concerns, legislative requirements, business risk, technology change, etc. The paper begins with a review of decision-making processes available, and proposes the use of the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) method as a multiple-criteria decision-making tool and the decision tree based on milestone-driven uncertainties, to validate the selection of the energy delivery system. The results of a multiple-criteria questionnaire completed by a variety of industry experts and professionals, such as production and operation managers, consultants, suppliers, and techno-financial analysts, are discussed. The evaluation indicates the potential for hydropower to be the best solution for narrow-reef hard rock mines, based on current information, mine design layout and production.

Jan 1, 2013

By D Connelly

Magnetite orebodies generally means mining lower grade iron ores, crushing and grinding with significant energy costs in processing and the capital costs being significantly higher than for direct shipping ores (DSO). Overseas, the mining and processing of magnetite ores has a long history of production due to the lack of DSO deposits. This raises the question as to why the new magnetite projects have been so problematic and also whether there is a future for the long list of potential magnetite projects in Australia.The quality of the magnetite concentrate product is superior to most DSO products and the magnetite contains energy benefits when converted to hematite in sintering or pelletising. The industry’s hopes for new projects have been dashed and questions are being raised as to the financial viability of such projects.A comparison of Grange Resources Savage River, Arrium’s Project Magnet, the Sino Iron Project and Gindalbie’s Karara Iron Project is used to understand the differences between the projects and why some are more successful than others.CITATION:Connelly, D, 2015. What is the future for magnetite projects in Australia and why have some of the new projects been so problematic?, in Proceedings Iron Ore 2015, pp 107–114 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Jul 13, 2015

THERE are certain facts that the mining industry in Australia is faced with at the present moment which may be accepted as axioms. The industry is at a low ebb, as evidenced by statistics. Metals form the basis of all modern industries, and are necessaryfor the welfare of Australia. Mining is a wasting asset. Every ton of ore extracted is one ton less which c.annot be made good, and it should be our duty to get as much profit froin that ore as possible, otherwise there is a permanent loss to the country.The metal market cannot be controlled by Australia; it is more or less an international matter. Australia has not been thoroughly prospected. There are no mines being developed that are likely to replace those which are being depleted.Our mining engineers are as capable as those in other parts of the world, and have made good where they have been given a chance. There is no one cause for the present depression; there are several, more or less, interwoven. Of course, the war has had an adverse effect, but that has only dislocated things temporarily; it upset our markets, influenced the price of metals, and affected the labour market and cost of stores. Labour troubles made their appearance before the wave of unrest swept over the world. The cause of labour discontent must be investigated, and if possible removed. As each industry has .its·own problems, miners must inquire into their special problems, as there is no sovereign remedy that will suit all cases.It is obvious that we cannot mine ore if we do not know where it is; therefore, the first thing is to discover workable deposits.

Jan 1, 1919

The Curtin University Gold Technology Group has been involved in surveying, modelling and optimisation of batch centrifugal concentrator type gravity circuits and CIP/CIL circuits for nearly two decades. The most commonly asked question regarding gravity recovery is, “What is the benefit of a gravity circuit”, which can be hard, if not impossible, to quantify. With the help of the AMIRA P420 Project’s Integrated Liberation Leach Model (ILLM) it is now possible to evaluate the effect of gravity recovery on total gold recovery when changes are made to the grind size, gravity and/or leach/adsorption circuits. This paper demonstrates how the ILLM can be used to determine the net benefit of introducing or modifying a gravity circuit and assess the effect of operating conditions (grind size, coarse gold size distribution, leach residence time, carbon activity, etc.) on plant performance.

Jan 1, 2017

By M A. Tuck

Atmospheric air on a moisture free volume basis consists of approximately 21 per cent oxygen. The current minimum threshold for oxygen in Australia is 19.5 per cent. Atmospheric air generally will also contain water vapour and will also pick up further moisture as it flows around a mine ventilation network. This paper details the results of a study to determine how much oxygen depletion can occur due to the sole impact of increasing the moisture content of air and the potential impacts of this on ventilation system design. The study shows that the moisture content can have a significant impact on the oxygen concentration in mine air. The main factors controlling the impact are the barometric pressure, dry bulb temperature and relative humidity of the air.CITATION:Tuck, M A, 2015. What is the oxygen depletion potential of ?water vapour?, in Proceedings The Australian Mine Ventilation Conference, pp 173–176 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

Aug 31, 2015

By Ryan T. Smith, Anthony Sahj, Alexander T. Darnell

Every second can count when trying to board a departing flight or catch a ride-share to your final destination. Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport is in the midst of a project that aims to cut about 13 seconds between automated people mover trains (Plane Train) that move passengers between the terminals and concourses. The project involves extending the Plane Train tunnel west from its existing terminus under the domestic terminal. Working from inside non-public areas of the terminal, Keller North America, Inc. (Keller) incorporated systems of micropile-supported steel beams and grillage to both underpin existing columns prior to tunneling and support open-cut excavation at the tie-in of the new to the existing tunnel. Dewatering aided in mining a challenging section at the start of the drive of the mixedface, sequentially excavated tunnel and an automated instrumentation system monitored the performance of the construction and its impact to the terminal. Cut and cover egress and ventilation tunnels required braced support of excavation.

Oct 1, 2022

By H. Lyn Bourne

This is the fourth annual tabulation that gives mineral royalty information. The table presents previous information plus about two dozen new entries. In addition to the royalty information, some entries show the cost of purchased reserves. Last year's tabulation appeared in two issues, to accommodate all of the information. This year the format has been changed slightly so the table can be printed in one issue. This year's table presents the commodities in the same sequence as last year. Sand and gravel information appears first, followed by: crushed stone for aggregate; other stone; industrial sand; other industrial minerals; energy minerals (coal, oil shale, uranium); and finally metals. As always, a caveat relates to factors that influence the reserve values. The data should serve only as a general reference. The table is not intended to present an absolute scale of reserve costs. Several factors influence the value of mineral commodities. These factors include: • location and transportation costs (especially significant for most industrial minerals); • market conditions for both the commodity and the company acquiring the right to mine it; • quality or grade of the deposit as it reflects the amount of processing and beneficiation necessary to produce the finished product; • and legislative restrictions and conditions for mining a given material at a given site. These and other factors will influence reserve costs of reserves. The table shows the range of royalties and the variations in the basis of computing the fees. In a few instances, it gives the cost of acquired reserves based on purchase price and quantitative estimates of the material in place. The table lists the commodity; the location (either by state, US geographic area, or Canadian province); the cost (R for royalty and P for purchased cost); and the year in which the lease or purchase agreement occurred. The last column offers either comments or gives a footnote number for more information. The cost column requires more explanation. The units may refer to cubic yards (/yd), cubic feet (/cuft), tons (/T) (2000 lbs) or acres (/A). 1 cu yd = 0.76m3 1 cu ft =0.28m3 1st = 0.9 t7 1 acre = 0.40 ha or m2 In several cases the royalty is a percentage of the finished products, sale price and is levied against either the amount produced or the amount sold. We thank those who contributed information for the table: J. Dunn, T. Eyde, K. Loda, L. Morgan, F. Nix, H. Sorenson, and L. Williams. Several people have said they would like this to be an annual tabulation. That can happen if new information comes to the writer. What appears in the table is only a very small fraction of the cost information relative to the various commodities and the geographic areas for which there is royalty information. If you find this column of interest and possess information write or call: H. L. Bourne, c/o Neyer, Tiseo & Hindo, Ltd., 38955 Hills Tech Dr., Farmington Hills, MI 48018, (313) 553-6300. Only with new information can this become an annual and current source of reserves costs.

Jan 8, 1986

By H. Lyn Bourne

This is the fifth annual tabulation of mineral royalty information. This tabulation, like the previous editions, includes all of the earlier data. There are also 60 new entries. In addition to royalty information, some entries show the cost of purchased reserves. Two articles relative to the evaluation of minerals reserves appeared in December, 1986. R.H. Paschall (In the Aggregate, ME, p 1139) wrote a good article, although it lacked specific royalty data. However, this author takes exception to two ideas in Paschall's column. Paschall contends that the royalty rate does not affect the mineral appraisal. This present author could not disagree more. Paschall also claims the location of an industrial mineral deposit is the only serious or practical caveat in comparing royalties. Comments received here from readers helped make the list of caveats that are cited each year. The readers will decide which factors influence the mineral value for their commodities of interest. Paschall's point about the relationship of the parties who are negotiating a royalty agreement is important and very well taken. The other article, written by William Vernon (Pit and Quarry, December 1986), gives a step-by-step process on how to conduct a mineral appraisal. The article cites three reasons for an appraisal: transfer rights; collateral for a loan; and taxation. A fourth reason is to establish adequate compensation for reserves lost through condemnation. This author has appeared in several court cases where compensation for loss of mineral reserves through condemnation required a mineral appraisal. Royalty rate becomes an important factor in the appraisal process, although the Pit and Quarry article refers to that part of the valuation equation as "profitability." Both articles were well written and are recommended reading for those interested in mineral valuations. The same caveats that have appeared in previous columns relative to factors that influence the value of reserves are restated. The data in the table serve as a general reference and are not intended to present an absolute scale of reserves costs. Several factors influence the value of any mineral commodity. The factors include: • location/transportation - especially significant for most industrial minerals; • market conditions both for the commodity and the company acquiring the right to mine; • quality or grade of the deposit as it reflects the amount of processing/beneficiation necessary to produce the finished product; and • legislative restrictions and conditions for mining a given material at a given site. These and other factors will significantly influence the cost of reserves. The table shows the range of royalties and the variations in the basis of computing the fees. In a few instances, it gives the cost of acquired reserves based on purchase price and quantitative estimates of the material in place. The table lists the commodity in column 1, and the subsequent columns give: • the location by state, US geographic area, or Canadian province ; • the cost - R for royalty and P for purchased cost; • the year in which the lease or purchase agreement occurred; and • comments or footnotes for more information. The cost column requires more explanation. The units may refer to cubic yards (/cu yd), cubic feet (/cu ft), short tons (/T), or acres (/A). 1 cu yd = 0.76 M2 1cuft = 0.28m3 1 st = 0.9072 t 1 acre - 0.4047 ha or m2

Jan 7, 1987

By H. Lyn Bourne

This is the ninth annual tabulation of royalty information. Again this year, some of the older information has been deleted to make room for more than 30 new entries. Several articles and publications crossed the author's desk this past year that relate to mineral valuation and mineral royalty. Tom Loucks presented a paper, "The Valuation of Hard Rock Mineral Property," at the Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Foundation in Santa Fe, NM in July, 1990. His paper gives an indepth explanation of the definitions and concepts related to mineral valuation. It includes descriptions of numerous legal cases that have dealt with mineral valuation and proper reference is given for each case. Loucks works for the Denver Mining Finance Co. Gold royalties generally range from 5% to 7%, net smelter return. However, Severn Brown sent information that shows a much wider variation. Echo Bay Mines reported in its 1989 annual report royalties that range from 1.5 % to 30% for gold from various gold properties. Brown also sent a copy of an article that appeared in the Dec. 27, 1982, issue of Fortune magazine. This issue carried an article by Walter Guzzardi, Jr. "The Huge Find in Roy Ash's Backyard." The article gives the history of Newmont's leasing in Nevada on property that became the Carlin, Bootstrap and Blue Star Mines. The article states that the initial royalty was 10% that escalated to more than 16%. Another property, the site of Gold Quarry, provides an 18% royalty to the same own¬ers. The article makes interesting reading for those interested in mining history.

Jan 1, 1991

By H. Lyn Bourne

This is the sixth annual tabulation that gives mineral royalty information. This tabulation, like the previous editions, includes all of the earlier data plus more than 100 new entries. In addition to the royalty information, some entries show the cost of purchased reserves. An article in the December 1984 Kentucky Coal Journal could have far reaching applications. It explains that a banking firm examined the "reserve risk" as one of six factors for analysis when financing a coal project. The firm concluded that coal reserves in Kentucky are worth an average of $0.29/t ($0.26 per st) in-place. The banking firm based this in-place value on its examination of more than 50 leases. In-place value is especially important when trying to establish a mineral value for a given deposit. Ernie Lehman wrote to this author after last year's column appeared and he quoted the lease rates for lead and zinc on federal land. He states, from first hand information, that the leases are based on a percentage of net smelter return as follows: 4% for the first five years, 4.5% for the next five years, and 5% thereafter. The figures used in last year's column ($ per st) came from dividing reported royalty income by reported production. The information reported last year merely translates the results of the net smelter return (as written in the lease) to royalty income per ton to the US Government for the various years. Statistics from the Minerals Management Service of the Federal Government show that oil and gas account for 40% and 53%, respectively, of the Federal royalty income. Coal accounts for about 4% and all other minerals, the remaining 3%. Oil and gas leases are mostly at 12.5%. Most of the coal leases are at 12.5% for surface mining operations and 8% for underground mining. Many of the other commodities are leased at 5%, which has been true for decades. Relative to Federal leases, this year's table shows some percentages and some costs per ton. This was done to give information about the leases and also to show income produced by various commodities. Note that some commodities have a variation in $/ton even though the royalty percent is the same. These variations result from a combination of factors that influence the value of a mineral commodity. The same caveats that have appeared in previous columns relative to factors that influence the value of reserves are restated. The data in the table serve as a general reference and are not intended to present an absolute scale of reserves costs. Several factors influence the value of any mineral commodity. The factors include: • location/transportation (especially significant for most industrial minerals); • market conditions both for the commodity and the company acquiring the right to mine it; *quality or grade of the deposit as it reflects the amount of processing/beneficiation necessary to produce the finished product; and • legislative restrictions and conditions for mining a given material at a given site. These and other factors will significantly influence the cost of reserves. The table shows the range of royalties and the variations in the basis of computing the fees. In a few instances, it gives the cost of acquired reserves based on purchase price and quantitative estimates of the material in place. The table lists the commodity in column 1, and the subsequent columns give the location - either by state, US geographic area or Canadian province; the cost - R for royalty and P for purchased cost; and the year in which the lease or purchase agreement occurred. The last column offers either comments or gives a footnote number for more information. The cost column requires more explanation. The units may refer to cubic yards (/yd), cubic feet (/cu ft), tons (/T, 2000 lbs) or acres (/A). 1 cu yd = 0.7646 m3 1 cu ft = 0.2832 m3 1st=0.9078t 1 acre = 0.4047 hm or m2 In several cases, the royalty is a percentage of the sales price of the finished product and is levied against either the amount produced or the amount sold. We thank those who contributed information for the table: G. Anderson, B. Brown, R. Ganis, K. Hauser, E. Lehman, and S. Sims. Their help is appreciated as are the contributions by those who asked to remain anonymous. This column requires additional information each year. That data must come from people in the minerals industry who have royalty information. What appears in the table is only a very small fraction of the cost information relative to the various commodities and the geographic areas for which there is royalty information. If you find this column of interest and possess information write the author at the address given in the author's box or call 313-462-0005.

Jan 7, 1988

By P Card

Some project managers accept unsatisfactory economic evaluation modelling because they are unaware of what constitutes good practice. They tend to leave it to the evaluation specialist or others to decide. The AusIMM has published on its website a draft set of guidelines for technical economic evaluation which will allow these project managers to take control and demand worldÆs best practices.The style of the guidelines is described and the source of a worked spreadsheet example in Excel is given.Economic evaluation in project management is described. A simple test for the acceptance or rejection of evaluation work is offered. The nature of modelling and evaluation in each of the three study phases of concept, prefeasibility and final feasibility are described. Suggestions on the selection of specialists for each phase are given. The three levels of evaluation thinking are described, namely, modelling, valuation and evaluation. Finally the meaning of æfinancial analysisÆ is explained.The conclusion is that æthe role of an economic evaluation specialist is to create models and evaluations for the whole project team to readily understand and use: it is not to create models for his/her own useÆ.CITATION:Card, P, 2012. What project managers must demand from an economic evaluation!, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2012 , pp 173-176 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 24, 2012

By Jodi Banta

In an effort to reverse the trend of declining enrollments to mining engineering programs that began in 2015, the University of Arizona has implemented a number of interventions over the past five years, including ramping up its pre-college mining education and outreach, and undertaking several enrollment research projects. This article is the second of two installments to discuss the results of our latest study. The first part can be found in the September 2025 issue of Mining Engineering magazine. To better understand mining’s competitive position, the School of Mining Engineering and Mineral Resources conducted a comprehensive study to determine: 1. How prospective college students, parents and educators perceive the industry, related careers and the mining engineering degree. 2. Factors affecting students’ choices of degrees and career plans. 3. The roles parents and educators play and how they influence students.

Nov 1, 2025

By Barry J. Hansen

Mining can make two major contributions to the cleanup of the environment. The first of these is the extractive technology that has become highly developed as a result of centuries of development. Of equal impor­tance are the methodology of analysis and the development of engineering solutions that are the stock in trade of the mining industry. Despite the differences between the industries, the processes for the development of a mine and the cleanup of a hazardous waste site are similar. The characteristics that impact the ability to develop a suitable process for treating an ore body or correct­ing an environmental problem are those relat­ed to the distribution of the contaminant or metal in the host material.

Jan 1, 1991