Search Documents

By Circadian Technologies

Alertness levels naturally fluctuate during the day and night Basic functions ??digestion, body temperature ? follow predictable 24-hour patterns Adjustment to night work creates health challenges for shiftworkers Performance decreases during overnight and post-lunch dip hours Fatigue supercedes training & experience Fatigue is a major cause of human error

Jan 1, 2010

Jan 1, 2009

By James J. Bryja

The production capabilities of today?s longwall systems have resulted in significant increases in retreat rates. This has in turn resulted in a heightened demand on panel development rates to assure that subsequent panels are completed in time to avoid a longwall production outage. As a means of reducing the pressure on the panel development activity a trend has developed towards the use of wider face lengths. The aim of using a wider face is to reduce the longwall retreat rate without sacrificing productivity and thereby reduce the pressure on increasing panel development rates. However, as the face width increases so too does the number of hydraulically powered roof supports that are required to control the longwall face roof. This increase in the number of units inherently translates into increases in the level of required maintenance relative to the multitude of mechanical and hydraulic components, and an increase in the time required for tear-down and installation time during the moves between panels. An obvious method of mitigating the maintenance and move-time impacts of wider faces is to employ the use of individual roof supports having a wider center-to-center spacing. This practice would serve to minimize the number of roof supports and maximize the time availability for longwall face production. With this target in mind a joint research project with DBT was initiated in 1998 to study the feasibility of using 2 m wide shields to replace the then standard 1.75 m wide shields. After four years of comprehensive work, the technical team from DBT and RAG American Coal completed the design and development of a prototype shield that would later become part of the world?s widest longwall face employing the use of shields having a spacing of +2 meters. The final spacing of the shields actually became 2.058m in order to match the standard pitch of the rack bar shearer haulage elements on the conveyor. In July 2002, the 2 m wide shields were successfully installed in LW-46 panel at RAG Cumberland mine in the U. S. The authors in this paper summarize the design considerations of and operational experiences with the world?s widest longwall face using +2 meter wide roof supports.

Jan 1, 2008

By Vern Pfannenstiel

Jan 1, 2005

By Jim Gunderson

Jan 1, 2004

Jan 1, 1996

Pictured on these pages are the seven RMCMI Scholarship Award Winners for the 1992-93 year followed by a brief profile. All winners were present as guests of the Institute at the June convention in Beaver Creek, Colorado to receive recognition at the Institute Awards Luncheon Monday, June 28. 1993. Each state vice president served as the host for the collegiate winner. In addition to receiving a plaque from the Scholarship Chairman, Alan Czarnowsky, 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. A resident from each of the eight RMCMI member states is selected from among Board approved institutions. 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 member state. (3) That the recipient have good academic standing, be pursing 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 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 pro- gram and the various vice presidents contribute the travel expenses to convention for these outstanding young collegiates. Donations to this worthwhile program may be made payable to RMCMI Scholarship and mailed to the RMCMI Office, 3000 Youngfield Street, Suite 324, Lakewood, CO 80215. Profiles of the 1993 Scholarship Winners follow. [ ] ARIZONA WINNER Kevin Shirley University of Arizona Tucson, Arizona A member of the Student Chapter - Society of Mining Engineers, Mr. Shirley also belongs to the Campus Crusade for Christ organization. He enjoys baseball, basketball and football. He states, "Miners are meeting the demand of the public by providing energy fuels and minerals to support the standard of living we enjoy. It is sad to see people out of work in this country, but the third world is largely undeveloped, and many jobs are moving abroad." 'I consider winning the RMCMI scholar- ship a great motivator; your belief in me will help me become my best." [ ] COLORADO WINNER Derek Rawson Colorado School of Mines Golden, Colorado "1 have been enthusiastic about the mining industry since I lived in Divide, Colorado and spent time exploring the old mine sites." Derek says. "President Clinton may hit the mineral industry with many reforms, but I believe self sufficiency is important ... we need to produce here in the U.S. what we consume." Mr. Rawson is involved with intramural sports and varsity track. He is a member of the Society for Mining, and Exploration, Inc.; Colorado School of Mines Caving Club; Colorado School of Mines Shooting Club; and Alpha Tau Omega Leadership Fraternity.

Jan 1, 1993

By John D. Janak

Thank you for inviting me to come here and be your keynote speaker. Texas also thanks you for being included as part of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. We'll kind of think of Texas as Baja Rocky Mountains. I've always wondered why coal miners were the only people to go to the mountains in the summer time-and now I know why. The program committee should be given a big hand for selecting this RESORT. And the golf course is stimulating to say the least. This is a very beautiful location. I was asked to talk about CHALLENGES, OPPORTUNITIES and INNOVATIONS as they affect the coal industry. I am going to do that from a Texas perspective. But first, since Texas is the newest state to belong to the Institute, I would like to give you a little background on how our coal industry got started and where we are at today. The vast majority of our coal is called lignite-it has a little lower heating value than most other coals and ranks somewhere between buffalo chips and sub- bituminous. Lignite is found In three geological formations running Northeast to Southwest through South and East Texas. In-place reserves lying within 200 ft. of the surface total 14 billion tons. This slide shows the lignite formations with cur- rent mine operations colored in RED. Mines that are planned to be built in the next 10 years are shown in BLUE. Lignite was used mostly by settlers in Texas during the 1800s. It was used as a fuel to fire locomotives during the Civil War. Between 1900-1930, about 100 mines, mostly underground, were operating in Texas producing lignite for home heating and as a boiler fuel. Here are some slides showing underground access, [lie tipple used to process the lignite, and the underground workings. This is the "BIG LUMP COAL COMPANY" as shown here. The typical underground mine was 100-150 ft. deep and each miner produced 7-10 tons per day-all by hand. In 1926, the Texas Power & Light Company built the Trinidad Power Plant and began using lignite as a boiler fuel. The lignite was mined by the McAlester Fuel Company at the nearby Malakoff Mine. Here are some slides showing a stripping shovel at Malakoff uncovering lignite. The lignite was loaded into railcars in the pit for transport to the power plant. This is a picture of the Trinidad Plant which had two 20 MW units and one 32 MW unit. At the time, Trinidad was the largest power plant in the United States using lignite exclusively as a fuel. Trinidad operated until 1942 when it was converted to natural gas that was sold to the plant for 3 ½ ¢ per MMBT'U. The mine closed after having produced 7 million tons. Lignite was mostly forgotten about until 1953 when Alcoa started an aluminum smelter. Our Company formed a subsidiary called Industrial Generating Company to operate the power plant that furnished electricity to the smelter. We also operated the nearby Sandow Mine that supplied lignite as a fuel to the power plant

Jan 1, 1989

By Steve Griles

Mr. Griles did not make his speech available for reprint. Looking Down the Road: The Environmental Side of the 1990s and Beyond Environmental Social Responsibility Love Canal, Buffalo Creek, Widow Combs, Bohpal and Three Mile Island are familiar names to all of us-names which evoke memories of environmental tragedies. These memories, as well as memories of other environmental disasters, lead us to pose this question: What is the nature of the environmental social contact between industry and society? The manner in which one answers this question will. in large measure, answer the question of where one thinks environmental issues will go, or should go, in the 1990s and beyond. The history of the evolution of the environmental movement will be helpful in defining and under- standing just what society's environmental responsibility is and, perhaps, what it will be. To Define the Future Start With the Past The common law, which most of the United States adopted from the English system of jurisprudence, traditionally considered pollution control and other environmental issues to be a matter of determining the relative rights of private property owners and of individuals. Legal and equitable theories, such as nuisance, negligence, trespass and the law of riparian rights, were utilized to allocate responsibilities between parties under the common law. The discharge of pollutants into streams and into the air was by and large considered acceptable, at least up to the point that another's "reasonable" use of the same air or waterway was significantly impeded. Further, the judicial decisions interpreting the applicability of the common law to the protection of the environment generally reflected the social and economic pressures of the age. During the Industrial Revolution, the decisions and policies had a marked tendency to favor industrial development. Jobs and industrial growth are deemed as important, and in some cases more important, than the protection of people and property. Additionally, the idea of a social responsibility, beyond that owed to a competing land or water user, was nearly alien to the early common law.' One could even go so far as to say that, had there been a social environmental contract under early common law (which, of course, there was not); but if there were, it would have been to promote actions which facilitated industrial development, even at the expense of the environment. Post-World War LI industrial expansion brought with it a growing awareness of limits on the environment's ability to absorb increasing levels of pollution. Thus evolved an era of social and political adjustment, as society began to shift away from supporting big business and industrial development and toward supporting domestic government programs and limits on industry. States gradually stepped in with efforts to address environmental issues. The Pennsylvania Clean Streams Law and the West Virginia Surface Mining Act of 1939, while lax in comparison to today's standards, nevertheless marked definitive efforts toward altering the balance between industrial development and environmental protection Pollution control continued to be viewed as a state responsibility through the 1950s, until Congress began, for the first time, to allocate funds for federal research on air and water pollution and to implement

Jan 1, 1988

By Donald P. Brown

[Mr. Brown did not make his speech available for reprint.] Productivity is the Answer - Always Was; Always Will Be When Bill Balaz invited me to speak here this morning, he asked me to examine the three most important issues Consol will face over the coming decade. There are more than three. But the more I thought about that question, the more I realized all our issues come down to only one. As I reviewed the U.S. coal industry over the past ten years, and as I thought ahead into the year2000, one thing stood out. Not markets. Not government regulations. Not record tonnages. But productivity. The recent history of American coal is a tale of productivity improvement. It is a story that needs telling. And understanding. Not just for the good of the coal industry, but for the benefit of the American economy. Americans today do not appreciate the value of productivity growth. I don't say that lightly. As I review recent debate over American industrial competitiveness, as I look at certain legislative proposals, I see disturbing trends. It's not that anyone is against productivity per se. But many people seem to fear the very processes that enhance productivity. Twentieth century America enjoyed unprecedented growth in productivity. And in personal standards- of-living. Those two go together. This century has been one of change. Demographics. Education. And technology. Many new industries-cable television, computer services, telecommunications, for example-have grown from mere dreams to billion- dollar enterprises employing tens-of-thousands. And some older industries have declined. The nature of work has changed-from manual work to know- ledge work. From agriculture, to manufacturing, to services. In the mid-1960s. AT&T employed more than one million people. These were not high-paying jobs: telephone operators, linemen and equipment assemblers. Today, the successor Bell companies and their new competitors employ no more than a few hundred thousand. Because of automation. Because of enormous gains in employee productivity.

Jan 1, 1988

By Michael A. Poling

Ladies and gentlemen, I appreciate this opportunity to be with you, and to share my outlook on the future of Federal coal leasing. I'm told that you wanted the best speaker on this subject in the world. Perhaps it's a reflection of these trying financial times, but I'm glad you finally agreed to settle for the best speaker your budget would afford. I have been asked to give you some insight on the status of Federal coal leasing, and how the budget problems facing the Department will affect the coal program. So I've polished up my crystal ball, and I'll try to give you a peek at the future. Before I do that, however, let me first go back in time - to when this Administration took office in 1981. We had a coal program then, after a hiatus of ten years. But that program was untested and - for reasons well known to all of you - did not work well in practice once we began operating the program. We went back to the drawing board and redesigned the program so that it can do what it is intended to do. We've made the program more predictable. That means that when future lease sales are scheduled, those sales will be reflective and reactive to the need to lease coal. On February 26, Secretary Hodel unveiled a framework for resumption of Federal leasing program activities, ending a more than two-year suspension of regional coal sales. The new program will provide the opportunity to satisfy market demand for acquiring and developing new leases, assure the government of fair market value for its coal reserves, and provide a stable supply of coal for this country's energy needs. The new program grew out of the Department's response to recommendations of the Linowes Commission and the Office of Technology Assessment, coupled with a supplemental environmental study. The Linowes Report, issued in 1984, contained 36 recommendations and three Judgments on leasing levels, tract selection, sale procedures, appraisal methods, key statutory and related factors, and organization and management of the leasing program. Major changes in the new leasing program reflect these concerns. We have developed a definition for captive tracts and devised procedures to appraise their value to the adjacent coal or mine owner. Other steps include a coal lease appraisal guide which describes our appraisal methodology and is available to the public. Improvements have also been made in the gathering of lease assignment information to help in estimating the value of potential lease tracts. To improve market analysis, a three-tiered system will be used to ensure that steps of the lease sale decision process are undertaken in the context of coal supply and demand. Regional Coal Teams will thus have the advantage of long range, regional and tract specific market studies to help them determine whether sufficient demand is expected first to warrant the initiation of activity planning, then to set regional leasing levels, and finally to actually offer specific tracts for lease sale. Sale procedures will also be improved in many ways to encourage competition, improve the chances for receiving adequate bids, and to evaluate whether bids represent fair market value. We made additional modifications to the program in response to the OTA recommendations. Regional Coal Teams have been given a larger role in recommending key decisions concerning the amounts of coal to be studied and the actual selection and scheduling of tracts for lease sale. These recommendations will be accepted unless the Secretary can cite an overriding national interest factor, or a governor's request to modify the recommendations. Smaller, more frequent sales will be held, to better judge market conditions and prevent over- or under-leasing. Public participation guidelines have been written, to document all opportunities for the public to comment at various stages in the planning process. We also decided that resource management plans prepared after the passage of FLPMA in 1976 must be completed, in order for a new round of lease sale planning to begin. The BLM will also beef up its procedures for consulting with affected Federal agencies during the planning process, to assure that the purposes and values of those agencies are considered and factored into land use decisions. To assure consistent use of an adequate data base in coal lease decision-making, Regional Coal Teams will develop standards and guidelines for data adequacy, and document the use of these standards. These procedures will also be applied to the unsuitability criteria screening process. Thus, the new leasing system announced by Secretary Hodel: is fully responsive to recommendations made by the Linowes Commission and the Office of Technology Assessment for improving environmental planning and fair market value procedures; gives the regional coal teams a major say in determining leasing levels, and on the timing,

Jan 1, 1986

By Ted Schwinden

It's my pleasure to welcome the Rocky Mountain Coal Institute to Montana. Now that you've ended a 74 year history of meeting outside our borders, I hope you'll be back more often. Even if I can't convince you to come back before 2060, when another 74 years will be up, I'm confident the Kalispell and Flathead Lake area will do the persuading for me. In recent weeks, I've made a number of speeches around the state pointing out just how wrong the revenue projections in Montana's state government made in April of '85 were when we came to April of '86. Since the middle of this month, Montana's legislators have been in Helena struggling to balance a state budget that, by the end of fiscal year '87, threatened to be some $88 million in the red. Other western states reliant on natural resource and agricultural economies have found themselves caught in the same deflationary spiral. The "window of opportunity" I proposed and the 1985 Montana Legislature passed, couldn't have been opened at a more difficult time. What was envisioned as an incentive to expand Montana's coal production, and our tax base, ran aground on low oil prices and excess hydroelectric power. De- spite the one-third severance tax rebate offered on new coal production, year-to-date figures published in the June 2nd Coal Week show that production in Montana is down almost 10 per- cent from last year. Again, we're not alone. Production in Wyoming is down 8 percent and in North Dakota, it has dropped 13 percent. An over- all 3 percent production decline in western states looks even worse when contrasted against a 12 percent increase for your eastern competitors. Montana's "window of opportunity" had the potential to be a significant signal to your industry. That potential was quickly tempered by the inability of Arab nations to stabilize world energy prices. If any of us had forgotten, the last twelve months have reminded western states that the well-being of our natural resource economies has a tremendous impact on the ability of all levels of government to provide services. The past year has also driven home that in the world of business and in the business of the world, risk-taking is still the name of the game. The Western Governors recognize the problems facing this industry - and our states - and we're prepared to fight for the future of western coal. In the past two decades, legitimate environmental concerns have created a vast body of new legislation affecting coal producers. The industry has been required to meet new reclamation standards - tough regulations relating to ground water, air quality and wildlife habitat. To the industry's credit, coal companies have hired professionals with the technical know-how to do it right. Rather than considering reclamation laws to be an unreasonable burden, today's coal company is more likely to view its reclamation efforts as a source of corporate pride. In a sense, the industry and the agencies which regulate it have matured together . . . although at times OSM is reluctant to admit that either of us capable of or willing to play by the rules. Certainly some abuses exist and OSM's oversight has been helpful in ensuring parity between those states willing to comply and those that would rather defy federal law. Nonetheless, penalizing the more modem and responsible western coal industry for abuses that occur elsewhere is both unfair and counterproductive. Federal penalties range from "cruel and unusual" reporting requirements to the proposed electricity tax that would effectively force utilities and ratepayers who have already met the sulphur emission standards to subsidize those who have dodged their cleanup responsibilities. As a member of the Alliance for Acid Rain Control, I have joined corporate leaders, academicians, environmental representa-

Jan 1, 1986

DR. BANOWSKY: Thank you very much. That was the shortest introduction that I have had lately, and I didn't have time to get my coat on. But I appreciated it, and I'm delighted to be here with an industry with which 1 feel strong affinity. At the University of Oklahoma we have an energy history. We are a little more currently involved in oil and gas, and those of you who know the history of our state would be aware we have an early coal development back really before the turn of the century in the southeast part of our state what we call Little Dixie. How many of you have spent anytime in Oklahoma or are from the state of Oklahoma? I'm not going to ask how many are from OSU or the University of Colorado. We did send you a football coach here from Oklahoma, and 1 see you have exchanged him. Several of you were only interested in the lobby in asking about our football team this year. 1 would like to go somewhere where we can talk about something besides football. I'm just trying to build a University that our football team can be proud of. We're going to be strong again. 1 can assure you. We've got the best football team money can buy. It's not quite as bad as the college president who called the coach in and said, "Coach we're in trouble, you're losing games and the alumni is very unhappy." "What can we do?" the president asked. The coach said, "Well the football team is flunking the admissions test. We can't get them in with the standard achievement and SAT tests." The president said, "What can we do?" The coach said, "Well the coaching staff has substituted for the American College Test the simple fill in the blank questionnaire." The president said, "Let's use it. We have got to get the team in." The first question was, Old MacDonald had a (-). And a couple of the big tackles were taking it and one of them said, "Hey, what did Old MacDonald have?" His friend said, "Stupid, Old MacDonald had a farm." "Well how do you spell farm?" He said, "Stupid, e i e i 0." Now the gentleman who met me at the registration line from Lakewood, Colorado, was asking me about one of our great big tackles; and he is doing well. We call him Doctor Death; he is also a wrestler and that gentleman said, "1 don't know how bright he is." 1 said, "He is bright enough for our academic tutoring that he is going to get through all right." So I'm delighted to see you and be here with my very dear friend, Carl Terzian. Carl and 1 were in Los Angeles together for 10 or 12 years when I was president of Pepperdine University. He and I are exactly the same age. Born in 1935 and 1 a month or two later in 1936. Fewer children were born in that period than in any other period of time in this century. For those of you who remember anything about that period, you will know why no one was having babies during that period. But Carl called and said, "Bill do you know where Vail, Colorado is?" Well when you live in Oklahoma, you learn where Colorado is in a hurry. 1 not only know this beautiful area, but have made too much of an investment here at a place called Beaver Creek. The real estate is cheap over there. 1 play regularly in the Gerald Ford Invitational Golf Tournament here. Hope you will visit Beaver Creek. It's just 10- 12 miles to the west. The sight of the 1976 winter olympics until the people of Colorado voted them out. And now Vail Associates and I are good Oklahoma families. Bass family, Harry Bass of course, many of you know this story, who is chairman of the Board of Vail Associates, is making quite an investment in that year-round resort area. Beautiful golf course now. You can come out and afford the green's fee and beautiful, beauti-

Jan 1, 1982

The following pages contain valuable information about the products and services offered by our advertisers

Jan 1, 1982

MR. McKEEVER: I think we had to start some- where. The proceeds of the beltbuckles and hard hat stickers will certainly be a beginning in a scholarship for some of our young people. And maybe, you know we might even get one of them sometime to go to the University of Oklahoma. A few years ago the luncheon speaker for tomorrow, Brooks Mitchell, got a few of the mine presidents together and we spent a full five hours of just dedicated listening to Carl Terzian. We listened basically on three subjects: how to work with the media, how to work with image, and how to identify with our political systems and those who are in them. I remember that as one of the turning points in my perspective on how our system really works. This gentleman who will be addressing you today, Mr. Terzian, will be conducting about a three-hour session tomorrow. And it's a shame that our other activities will not allow some of the golfers to probably be there. Those of you who can come to the session tomorrow morning will find it most rewarding. A little bit later on we will also have a panel session. And I see all of the panelists are here except for Bob Golten, but I understand that he is registered. We should have a full afternoon session with Charlie and his panel. When we started working on this, we naturally went back to Carl Terzian to give us some guidance. If there is anything wrong with your session, it's my fault because he knows how these should be done and he guided us along the way. One thing that I am sorry, it wasn't his fault necessarily, is that Harry Reasoner will not be with us for lunch tomorrow. Brooks Mitchell is going to make all of the PR he can out of the fact that Harry got scratched and he got in place for him. Brooks gave me one comment along that line. He said, "Do you know what you get when you cross a gorilla with a computer"? Of course I bit on that. He said. "Well, you get a Harry Reasoner." A little over a month ago I was invited out to California to Woodbury University at Carl Terzian's insistence. I happened to be sitting by one of his vice presidents. It was a formal affair. We had to wear tuxedos and everything and Mr.Green was sitting there and he said, "You know," he didn't know who I was at that time, but he said, "You know Carl really didn't want this formal affair. Said he had a couple of friends coming from the coal mining industry and they wouldn't know what to do with tuxedos." So with that Carl, we will start this little session and it's your mike. MR. TERZIAN: Thank you very much Ira. Let me begin by expressing my appreciation to the men and women of the Institute for allowing me to be here. I'm deeply concerned about my reputation, my image and don't want you to get the inference that I am responsible for Ira McKeever's image. Nobody could be responsible for that! But it is a great case in point that we all should be concerned about our images. I guess tomorrow morning from about 8:30. a.m. to about 11:30 a.m. we are going to do a? hopefully, a productive and very pleasant expertence for all of us in this growing field and great interest that people have in the area of image. I happen to be from Los Angeles. I have a national firm which has handled about 600 corporations', over the years through the areas of public relations,' community, civic involvement all built around a strengthening and safe guarding our precious, free enterprise system. And the message that I hope to give you, as you will be eating your lunch today, is really not so much about the image of individuals but as the attitudes built on what Bill Banowsky

Jan 1, 1982

The Wednesday morning session was called to order by President Lewis at 9:00 am, He called on Bob Wilson to conduct the business meeting. In the absence of any of the Auditing Committee, the treasurer's report, which had previously been examined by them was read. He asked for a motion of approval. It was made, granted and approved. The Resolution Committee was called on to make its report. Mr. Shirl McArthur read the following report: (1) "WHEREAS, the Pneumoconiosis or Black Lung provisions of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act which have been construed and administered largely as a welfare program rather than as just compensation for occupational disease has resulted in enormous expenditures and commitments from the Federal Treasury, WHEREAS, the imposition of the full cost of future welfare oriented black lung awards on coal operators without regard to workmen's compensation standards and without due process in granting benefits is grossly unfair and discriminatory to the coal operator and places an undue burden on the present cost of coal,

Jan 1, 1973

The morning session opened at 9:00 a.m. and was presided over by Mr. George A. Nugent, Manager Mining Division, Peter Kiewit Sons' Company, Sheridan, Wyoming. The first speaker was Mr. Jack Huebler, Vice President Research, Institute of Gas Technology, Chicago, Illinois. Mr. Huebler joined IGT in 1961 as Director of IGT's contract research program, a major part of which is IGT's extensive coal gasification work. He is also an adjunct associate professor at Illinois Institute of Technology, teaching gas utilization. Before joining IGT, Mr. Huebler spent 20 years with Surface Combustion Corporation where he was chief research engineer. He developed, designed, and constructed a wide variety of heat processing equipment and the associated chemical processes and was involved in applied research in heat treating, gas chemistry, and gas-solids reactions. He has carried out extensive research on the heat treating of ferrous metals, oil gasification and gas combustion, and has made major contributions to the development, construction, and operation of large-scale industrial furnace equipment. He received B.S. degrees in 10th chemical engineering and mathematics from the University of Michigan in 1941. He has 60 publications including 15 patents. He is also a world traveler in the field of engineering. Mr. Huebler's subject "Gasification of Western Coals." (See Index for printed text of Mr. Huebler's paper.)

Jan 1, 1972

[Adams, Douglas K General Electric Co., P.O. Box 2331, Denver 1, Colo. Adams, Kenneth L Peabody Coal Co., 301 N. Memorial Dr., St. Louis, Mo. 63102 Ahlborg, William Joy Mfg. Co., 1400 17th St., Denver, Colo. Allen, Dr. Harry C U. S. Bureau of Mines, Washington, D. C. 20242 Anderson, Robert Mine Safety Appliances Co., 1881 West N. Temple, Salt Lake City, Utah Archer, Bryan J., Jr Peabody Coal Co., 421 Glenwood St., Grand Junction, Colo. Arentzen, E. M W. RD 1, Charleroi, Pa. Arentzen, L. E. Lee-Norse Co., 6030 55th Pl., Arvada, Colo. Arentzen, Rolf F Lee-Norse Co., Box 582, Charleroi, Pa. Arnston, E. K Standard Oil Div. American Oil, Rt. 1, Box 504, Golden, Colo. Artis, Cliff E Big Horn Coal Co., 247 Sherman Ave., Sheridan, Wyo. Atchison, Lee Atchison Construction Co., Drawer D, Aztec, N. Mex. Audin, Clement, Jr Champion Coal Mining Co., Paonia, Colo.]

Jan 1, 1969

Mr. Robert Von Storch opened the meeting at 9:00 a.m. Mr. Von Storch: As a matter of fact, I am very much surprised to see many of these faces. The way you were acting last night I did not expect to see so many but you are evidently all right, and survived. This morning's session is the ?RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT? theme, and our first speaker- (and we made a little switch) - is Jack Huebler, Associate Director, Research Institute of Gas Technology, Chicago, Ill. The switch is because of a projector problem. Jack Huebler was born in Michigan and received degrees in Chemical Engineering and Mathematics from the University of Michigan in 1941. He joined the Surface Combusion Corp. immediately and was with them for 20 years, rising to the head of research. He took leading roles in the invention and development of many heat using processes involving gas chemistry combustion and metallurgy. The now famous Erie Mining Taconite Pellet Process was one of these. He pioneered in gas carburizing and in the preparation and use of prepared atmospheres. He specialized in the heat transfer aspects of many new industrial metal heating processes. He left Surface 5 years ago to join IGT.

Jan 1, 1966

Jan 1, 1966