Search Documents

Business meeting was opened at 9:30 a.m., June 28, 1967. President James Westfield asked that the meeting come to order. "We have some business to be taken care of this morning. First, we will have a report from the Auditing Committee." Mr. W. S. Landers read the report and said that it had been audited and approved and the motion was made and seconded that it be accepted. It was accepted unanimously. (See Index for Treasurer's Report.) The Resolutions Committee Report was read by Mr. Cliff Artis as follows:

Jan 1, 1967

of our good friends and fellow members: William D. Brennan Charles Beuchat who left the world better for their having lived in it.

Jan 1, 1931

John Chrystal Richard R. Fenner G. D. Grayer Albert M. Keenan C. E. Osborn Stanley C. Shubart George Sumers Cal Witmer Death is not the end, but the beginning, Not the surrender of life, but of earth Not a time for tears ... but faith.

Jan 1, 1982

By W. R. Deeths

The Great Plains Coal Gasification Project is the first commercial scale grass roots synthetic fuels (SNG) plant to be built in the United States. The plant will be constructed in two phases, with each phase producing 125 million cubic feet per day of pipeline quality (970 BTU per cubic foot) substitute natural gas from lignite coal. The plant is located north of Beulah in Mercer County, North Dakota. The first phase complex, when completed, will cost about 1.2 billion dollars and will include all necessary process units, oxygen production, steam generation, coal handling and preparation, utilities and infrastructure. The plant will be owned and operated by, the Great Plains Coal Gasification Associates, a partnership consisting of the following companies: ANG Coal Gasification Company, Mid Con Corporation, Tenneco, Inc., Transco Energy Company and Pacific Lighting Co. The Project began in late 1973 with a Phase I feasibility study and site selection study. The feasibility study was completed in 1975, at which time Kaiser Engineers and C. E. Lummus, the two engineering contractors, proceeded with a Phase II conceptual engineering design for the project. The culmination of the Phase II work was the publication of a detailed scope definition and control estimate, which was to become the cost guideline for procurement and plant construction. Following an engineering slowdown period in 1979, due to continuing delays in regulatory procedures, detailed engineering effort was reinstituted in early 1980 and by mid-1981 was approximately 35 percent complete. The total home office engineering effort amounts to approximately 3.5 million man hours of work split between Kaiser Engineers and Lummus. These totals exclude the engineering effort expended by Lurgi of Germany in the process design. The gasification plant shares the site and certain other facilities with the Basin Electric Power Station. Among these facilities are the plant access railroad, peripheral drainage ditch and raw water supply system. In addition, the gasification plant will draw its power directly from the Basin main substation, and Basin will receive coal from the gasification plant, consisting of the coal fines which cannot be gasified in the Lurgi units. The overall construction program covers a period of approximately 44 months with mechanical completion and initial gas production slated for late 1984. Craft labor requirements amount to approximately 11.5 million man hours and the work force peaked in excess of 4,500 people. In anticipation of an early resolution of both Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ruling and Department of Energy loan guarantee commitments, certain work on the site was commenced during 1980. This work consisted of site rough grading, driving of piles, and erection of three of the plant auxilliary buildings. Orders and subcontracts were placed for compressors, pumps, electrical equipment, material handling equipment, piping, structural steel, boilers, oxygen plant and cooling towers. Over 40 major Federal, State and local permits were required. Among these were such diverse permits as: ? Soil conservation ?Railroad and pipeline rights of way ? Certificates of site compatibility ? Permits for structures in areas controlled by the ? U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ? Environmental permits required by the North ? Dakota Department of Public Health. The preparation of an Environmental Impact Report began in September of 1973. FPC (now FERC) guidelines and North Dakota special requirements were followed except that, at the time, the highly structured form of environmental impact statements we know today was not in use. We were required to develop a number of new sampling and evaluation techniques and reporting procedures at a time when the requirements were vague and often contradictory. In March 1975, field studies were completed and submitted to the Bureau of Recla¬mation, which then began to prepare its own EIS. Two years later, in May 1977, public hearings began on the Project. The hearings and public review of the report drew over 400 comments or questions. Responses o the comments were in¬corporated in a Final Environmental Impact Statement issued in January 1978. In March 1975, the original filing was made for an FPC Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity which included: ? A technical feasibility study ? An Environmental Impact Assessment ? An Economic and financial feasibility assessment. An amended filing was submitted in 1976 to build the plant in two phases because studies then indicated that the cost of the plant had increased substantially. A second amended filing was submitted in 1977 to reflect the involvement of Peoples Gas (now Mid-Con Corporation) in the Project. At the time, it was believed that an FPC Certificate could be issued by December 1977. However, approval would be contingent on the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation having a complete Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Project. In 1977, with the formation of the Department of Energy, the FPC

Jan 1, 1984

BENEDICT SHUBART: I am rather surprised at one statement of Mr. McKeehan, that he found it satisfactory to bond only one track. It has always been my idea of good practice to bond both tracks and cross bond frequently, so that in case of any break in the bonding of one track, which frequently occurs, there will be no interruption in the circuit.

Jan 1, 1923

By Richard L. Lawson

Thank you President Nielsen, and thank you ladies and gentlemen of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. I'm glad you asked me to join you a second time. The setting here at Tamarron is splendid. A few days ago the National Coal Association held its Diamond Anniversary meeting at the Broadmoor in Colorado Springs. Although NCA is junior to this Institute in years, we do try to keep up. Our speakers looked at 1992 as the possible eve of a new era in world history - a pivotal year. It offers the opportunity to replace a dying era of war and tension with a new one of peace and prosperity built on economic cooperation and trade and, of course, energy to uphold all four - trade, cooperation, prosperity and peace. The Persian Gulf War was only a sample of what can happen to the other four if the energy isn't there. And so I especially like your theme: Energizing America With Coal. It is most pertinent. I was invited to discuss the National Energy Policy and its impact on coal and I intend to do that. But more important is coal's impact on the Nation and the world and so 1 shall discuss that as well. This year - 1992 -also will be pivotal in the Nation's politics.

Jan 1, 1992

Jan 1, 1968

Pictured on these pages are the eight RMCMI Scholarship Award Winners for the 1990-1991 year followed by a brief profile. All winners, except John Nixon from Texas, were present as guests of the Institute at the June convention in Keystone, Colorado to receive recognition at the Welcome Session Monday, July 1, 1991. Each state vice president served as the host for the collegiate winner. In addition to receiving a plaque from the Scholarship Chairman, Dr. Donald Gentry, each winner receives $750 tuition credit for the coming academic year. As this is a continuing award, the winners from the previous year will receive another $750 for tuition credit in their senior year if they have maintained good academic standing and are recommended by their university. Criteria for these awards to be made in the spring annually is (1) That the award be made to a sophomore student and used as tuition during the junior year. (2) That the recipient be both a U.S. citizen and a resident of the state involved. (3) That the recipient have good academic standing, be pursuing a degree in a mining related field and have an expressed interest in Western coal as a possible career path. The scholarship program includes curricula other than those in the mining departments, but in the engineering disciplines, such as geology, mineral processing and metallurgy. Contributions to this worthy project are tax deductible to each individual RMCMI member or his firm. Through annual donations of $100 or more, the Patrons of the Institute fund the scholarship program and the various vice presidents contribute the travel expenses to conventions for these outstanding young collegiates. Donations to this worthwhile program may be made payable to RMCMI Scholar- ship and mailed to the RMCMI Office, 3000 Youngfield Street, Suite 324, Lakewood, CO 80215. Profiles of the 1991 Scholarship Winners follow. [ ] Walter Mengel III University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona Walter has attended the Mining Engineering program at University of Arizona since fall, 1990. He is a very diligent student and has recently been selected student mine foreman for the San Xavier Mine. Walter is secretary of the U. of A. AIME Student Chapter and a student member of the AIME Tucson Chapter. His career interests lean towards western coal mining. [ ] Matthew Madden Colorado School of Mines Golden, CO Matt carries a 2.619 cumulative grade point average in the Mining Engineering Department and ranks 194 in a class of 440. He is involved in a number of school activites such as a member of the Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, Inc., member of the Resident Hall Association, a Admissions Ambassador, and will be a Resident Hall Director for 1991-1992. Matt is also involved in wrestling and received a Colorado School of Mines Athletic Scholarship in 1990.

Jan 1, 1991

The 71st Regular Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute convened at the Steamboat Village Inn, Steamboat Springs, Colorado, and was in session at 10:00 a.m. The session was called to order by William W. Grant, Assistant to Manager of Navajo Mine, Utah International, Inc., Fruitland, New Mexico. Mr. Grant was delegated to open the meeting due to the untimely death of Past President A. F. Geiger. Mr. Grant introduced President Roy Coulson, President and Director of the Kemmerer and Gunn-Quealy Coal Companies, Frontier, Wymoing. His biography follows: Jan. 7, 1922 Born to Jean and Joseph Coulson, Ernest, Pennsylvania 1940 Graduated - Indiana High School, Indiana, Pennsylvania

Jan 1, 1975

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: We have with us a gentleman from Utah, who is familiarly known -as the "Mudite King," Mr. Reid, of the Lion Coal Company. Here is a letter I would like to read, and probably Mr. Reid will give us an idea of his Mudite machine, or the results he is obtaining. This question was brought up in Rock Springs, Wyoming, but Mr. Reid was not there personally during the discussion, but Mr. Burnell, who is general superintendent of the Lion Coal Com¬pany, as much as he possibly could, described the system and its effects. I believe Mr. Reid will probably be able to give a somewhat clearer statement this afternoon. This letter is from the Coal Mining Inspector of the State of Utah, John Crawford. "February 10, 1925. "The Industrial Commission of Utah, Building. "Statement of John Crawford, Coal Mine Inspector, in regard to Muditing in Coal Mines: "That Muditing used in connection with our present sprinkling system in coal mines is the missing link to the system we have had heretofore, because the water applied by the former system began to dry out, in heavy air currents, the moment it was put on. Consequently the dust that had been humidified by sprinkling, came back to its natural condition, and if anything, the combustible parts of it, in my opinion, were more intensified than previous to being wetted down. "The advantages that Muditing has over the old system of sprinkling are: "1st. The dust that is on the roof, timbers and sides of the entry is washed completely off and rolled up in the Mudite solution which entirely destroys the wings, crudely speaking, of the fine coal dust. "2nd. Sprinkling with the Mudite system, the water and mud is of greater extent than could be applied with a hand hose by a sprinkler. This sprinkling can be done while the mine is in operation, just the same as if water alone was being used. "3rd. The Mudite solution, when dried out, leaves a coating which serves as an armour to the coal, so that in the event of a local explosion, the inflammable matter on the coal is non-combustible; whereas, if that same coal had been sprinkled with water only, and made free of dust, the heat would have the same effect on the coal as it has on a stove when coal is thrown into it-instantaneous combustion. "Therefore, it is my opinion that the Mudite system is the missing link to the perfecting of our sprinkling system here in Utah. "(Signed) JOHN CRAWFORD." Mr. Reid has with him a few sam¬ples of his Mudite, after it has become solidified, taken from the floor, as I understand it. It is interesting. We have a few minutes to spare to good advantage, were we to ask Mr. Reid to give us an idea of his machine, as briefly as he possibly can, and also what he thinks the effect of the Mudite is compared to dry rock dust. Mr. Reid. (Applause.) MR. W. J. REID (Lion Coal Company) : I came down here with no intention of making any talk on Mudite. However, there being so many people that have seen Mudite at Wattis

Jan 1, 1925

PRESIDENT PRYDE: Any discussion on Mr. Poster's paper? MR. J. BEVAN: I would like to ask the gentleman how fine the dust has to be to cause an explosion? MR. T. FOSTER: According to the Bureau of Mines, it is claimed coal passing through a 100 mesh screen would be considered fine enough. That is all I can learn from the different bulletins. MR. BEVAN: Will the coal dust be that fine; going back in the empty cars on the tipple in the mine? MR. FOSTER: Possibly a great deal of it would be. MR. BEVAN: Will the coal dust be that fine, going back, in the empty the coal dust going back in the cars on the tipple, and into the mine? MR. FOSTER: In some places, they are wetting the cars at the tipple, -in the Rock Springs District, we have as the trip goes out, they have a big pipe, and they souse the car, and wet the load, and in some places, near the timbers; that helps to a certain extent. That does not absolutely eliminate it all, but it helps considerable. MR. WM. LITTLEJOHN (Utah Fuel Company) : I think we have all listened very attentively to the paper that Mr. Foster has just read. He has brought up a subject rather close to my heart, for a long time. He mentions particularly, the Scofield disaster, which happened the first of May, 1900; two hundred men lost their lives in the explosion; and I think it is generally conceded that is about the first time it had ever been brought to the attention of coal miners or operators that such a thing was possible, namely, a purely coal dust explosion. The term "Scofield disaster" is rather a mistake, in a way; while the mine that exploded at the time is in the Scofield District all right, it is now known, and probably was known at that time, as the Winter Quarters Mine, one of the mines which belongs to the Utah Fuel Company at the present time, and did at that time. This mine

Jan 1, 1924

[Adams, Douglas K General Electric Co., P.O. Box 2331, Denver 1, Colo. Alger, Van Kaiser Steel, Sunnyside, Utah Allan,-Andrew Thompson Creek Coal & Coke Corp., Glenwood Springs, Colo. Allen, Earl W Mine Safety Appliances Co., 257 Rio Grand St., Salt Lake City, Utah Allen, John P Development & Resources Corp., 50 Broadway, N. Y. 4, N. Y. Allen, Thomas Chief State Coal Mine Inspector, State Services Bldg., Denver, Colo. Alston, George L Mine Safety Appliances Co., 201 N. Braddock, Pittsburgh 8, Pa. Anderson, Nephi W Book Cliffs Coal Co., Dragerton, Utah Anderson, W. J Texaco, Inc., 845 N. 5th E., Price, Utah Ankeny, Marling J U. S. Bureau of Mines, 5308 Roosevelt St., Bethesda, Md. Archer, Bryon J., Jr Peabody Coal Co., 421 Glenwood St., Grand Junction, Colo. Arentzen, E. M Lee-Norse Co., Charleroi, Pa. Arentzen, L. E Lee-Norse Co., 2975 18th St., Boulder, Colo. Artis, Cliff E Big Horn Coal Co., 247 Sherman Ave., Sheridan, Wyo. Atchison, Lee Atchison Construction Co., Drawer D, Aztec, N. Mex.]

Jan 1, 1963

PRESIDENT PRYDE: I think that the overcutting machine undoubtedly presents a great many benefits, especially where the roof is frail. I have found a good substitute for the Arcwall, getting a lighter machine by equipping a machine with a turret truck, you get a much lighter weight, and while the cutter is not movable vertically, you cut not on top of the seam, but about the middle of it. MR. SC'HLOSS: I would like to ask Mr. Pryde the advantages of cut- ting with this turret-mounted Shortwall machine. PRESIDENT PRYDE: It is better for development work in narrow places. In development work you have a lot of narrow places. MR. LITTLEJOHN: Mr. Chairman, we were compelled at Winter- quarters, one time, to introduce them for reason of sand rolls'. We have in that mine a condition-we have sand rolls from twelve inches to two and a half feet, sometimes higher than that-usually twelve inches to two and a half feet, and we had to get some of the C. E. 7's on the turret there and used them for advance work not only in the entries, but in rooms; not only in that particular district, but in fact all the districts in the mine-we have abandoned the power trucks. You can cut without unloading, and that is one of the principal advantages, and when the sand rolls come in it enables you to cut over the top of the sand roll, but the particular objection, we were working a nine-foot wall, and some of the coal was twelve feet thick, so that the miners have raised a little objection to the drilling.

Jan 1, 1924

By Robert M. von Storch

Chairman Doc, distinguished guests, and fellow members of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute: It's a genuine pleasure to meet with you again at the 54th regular meeting. I might add that it is always pleasant to be at the top of the batting order. The field is wide open since there is no danger of repeating something already said. At the same time, I am aware that the lead-off speaker has a responsibility to avoid stepping on the toes of subsequent speakers. I promise to confine my remarks to areas other than those to be covered by the well qualified speakers that follow. During our meetings at this convention, many fine papers will be presented. Our thanks are due Bob Williams and his hard working program committee for the superior selling that brought so many eminent speakers to our meeting. And, of course, our special thanks go to Doc Schloss, general chairman of this meeting. Doc and his able colleague, Stan Shubart, have been the spark plugs that fired up all of the arrangements we are enjoying here in Glenwood Springs. I'm sure all of us are appreciative of the many hours Doc has devoted to seeing that our meetings will be pleasant and profitable. When we mention arrangements, we always think of that master arranger, Fred Whiteside, who, as a charter member and secretary-treasurer of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, has had more to do with more matters around these parts than just about anyone I can think of.

Jan 1, 1958

I have sketches of the radiators, and on this sketch up in here (indicating) we show the line from the fan-exhaust steam from the fan, and the trip spray at the mouth of the mine, which is usually near the tipple, the set of radiators on each side of the entry, exhaust steam exhausting in by the radiators, the small atomizers which I mentioned, and the man sprinkling at the hose. There are times, when at different times we have a man sprinkling during the day time, when he is out of the way, and during the night, sprinkling on the motor roads. I will leave that print up here and let you look at it and if you have any questions you wish answered, Mr. McAllister and myself will be glad to answer them. (Applause.) PRESIDENT PRYDE: . I am going to ask Mr. Hair to leave the sketch on the wall. From the back part of the hall, it is hard to see what is there. The figures are very important. I think one member of this association will be glad to know the cost of water, Friend Littlejohn. MR. LITTLEJOHN: I don't know as I want to ask any questions. The only thing I' would say about the cost there, it is very close to that cost that we tabulated for the Utah Fuel Company at the Utah mines here some time ago. We have not tabulated lately. It may be a little over that at the present time if you take the. labor costs and the material. costs. As I remember, some time ago we did get up some figures and it was, as near as I can remember, exactly two cents per, ton for the labor and material. We haven't got the radiators, etc., that the C. F. & I. have in their mines there, probably due to the fact that we have no shortage of water. We have plenty of that there, and our system is absolutely nothing more nor less than pipe lines, hose and nozzles and the man at the end of the nozzle. PRESIDENT PRYDE: I would like to ask Mr. Hair about the cost of the steam. MR. HAIR: That steam we use there in exhausting, of course, is from the fan, and we have a back pressure valve set right here (indicating), from three to four and sometimes five pounds, and the exhaust from the fan was a five or six inch exhaust, and our exhaust into the mine is nothing less than eight inches, and is practically low back pressure you might say, and all those large radiators, that I spoke of, are heated by live steam, and these probably take a little more coal, but as to just what that cost is I couldn't say. As far as the exhaust steam is concerned, you might as well use it in the mine as discharge it outside. MR. HARRINGTON: Mr. Hair, I would like to ask, is this installation on an intake haulage-main haulage course? MR. HAIR: Yes, sir. MR. HARRINGTON: In the winter time, when it is, say between five or ten degrees below zero, how far into that haulage road does the fogging go? MR. HAIR: Well, that goes in half a mile, sometimes in 3,000 feet. MR. HARRINGTON: Wouldn't that interfere pretty seriously with the motor? MR. HAIR: To some extent, but I wouldn't say seriously enough to interefere with the production of coal. We have one mine we are working in two and three-quarters miles. Our mines are all pretty deep, and we don't find it objectionable. I don't believe that it interferes in the production of coal. I don't believe it makes any more difference between a real cold day in winter time than it does in the summer time. MR. HARRINGTON: I was down at Dawson, and in their mines they have an installation very much like Mr. Hair describes, but we went in there one night and stayed all night, getting a certain amount of data, and the fog was intense for-a full half mile; so intense that you could hardly see your hand in front of your face-see your hand that far (indicating) dis-

Jan 1, 1924

By Margaret N. Maxey

For the past quarter century, it is fair to say that the political agenda of Western industrialized societies has been driven by those opposed to forms of economic growth providing sustenance to a growing population. They regard growth as the major threat to their social philosophy which champions a wholly "new ethic of biocentric equality" or "living as if Nature mattered." This ethic demands that "a violent, plundering humankind" must abandon its alleged rape of Planet Earth and derive its ethical norms from pre-existing harmonies and fragile, precarious balance present in Nature. A Green political agenda appeals strongly to deep longings shared among many people whose temperament seeks tranquillity in a world of wild natural beauty uncluttered by dependency on tools and experts and specialists. According to proponents of the Green philosophy, our world is pregnant with enormous problems. Armed with expanded political powers, regulatory guardians at state and local levels have mustered their forces with shotguns cocked, poised to prod an ignorant and lazy citizenry to the altar for an exchange of vows with Environmental Ethics. Social engineers have skillfully discredited the traditional role of professionals in scientific engineering who are summarily dismissed as the failed architects of an industrial system pillaging the earth. They stand accused of producing unmanageable offspring - from mining minerals and energy resources to disposing of toxic wastes - whose disputed parentage and expectant crimes against humanity must be prevented by removing them from normal custody. Green critics claim that markets cannot be given custody of industrial offspring - pollutants, wastes, land-use abuses. Markets appear to have failed to provide equity to present and future generations. The only custodian with sufficient coercive power seems to be the regulatory bureaucracy. The upshot is a stark Hobson's choice - Shotgun Wedding vs. Custody Dispute. It derives its fateful predestination from an uncritical acceptance of several preconceptions which currently undergird the altar of Sustainability characterized by its acolytes as "a new and exciting doctrine." It is significant that Limits to Growth slogans of the 1970s have been displaced in the 1990s by the more palatable language of Sustainability. As a policy recommended to forestall an impending doom, Sustainability derives its credibility from dire predictions of global warming, ozone depletion, acid rain and the like. The Rio Declaration announced to the world in June 1992 that, although energy is essential to human well-being, its production and consumption in wealthy industrialized nations is unsustainable. It called for a complete overhaul of energy systems with nothing short of a total replacement of fossil fuels, uranium fission reactors, and large hydroelectric projects by means of so-called renewable energy sources, augmented by coercive regulations to force conservation and limit consumption demands. The social and political consequences of such a sweeping

Jan 1, 1995

Jan 1, 1955

Jan 1, 1974

Jan 1, 1980

By M. H. Forester

The Bituminous Coal Industry has for the past year been faced with a most serious problem. I am sure that you have had your own individual and local problems, as do we all. In my thirty years of practical experience with coal mining, I have never found an operating man nor a coal mine without problems. The very nature of mining, with so many unknown factors involved, precludes the absence of problems. But they are not insurmountable, and one should not dwell on them interminably. They should be recognized as a challenge to our ability and ingenuity to solve them, and once the proper solution is found, it should be applied and the problem dismissed. However, we find ourselves at the moment in the midst of a serious challenge to our very existence. In the early thirties, many in the industry welcomed the re-establishment of Unionism as a balance wheel, in the belief that the stabilization of wage scales would also stabilize prices and eliminate disastrous price cutting practices. The ultimate effects of having twenty-six years of benevolent paternalism in the administrative branches of Federal and State Governments with their labor courting policies, could hardly have been anticipated. And so with wages spiralling under government sponsorship, we have finally reached the point where competitive fuels, such as natural gas and oil are more attractive to the consumer, from the economic angle of cents per BTU cost, than coal.

Jan 1, 1953