Search Documents

[Abbott, Jay Union Supply Co., 7458 So. Jackson St., Denver, Colo. 80122 Achziger, Ronald H Midwest Rubber & Supply Co., 6404 E. 39th Ave., Denver, Colo. 80207 Acre, Lee Dorchester-Colomine, 2944 Hwy 6 and 24, Grand Junction, Colo. 81501 Adams, Robert W Energy Fuels Corp., 3 Park Central, Suite 900, Denver, Colo. 80202 Adams, Dell H Consolidation Coal Co., Consol Plaza, 1800 Washington Rd., Pittsburgh, Pa. 15241 Adams, Douglas K General Electric Company, P.O. Box 2331, Denver, Colo. 80201 Adams, E. E Armco Steel Corp., Box 53, Parker, Colo. 80134 Ahlborg, William Joy Mfg. Co., 26 Sedgwick Dr., Englewood, Colo. 80110 Albrecht, Wayne H North American Coal Corp., Kirkwood Office Tower, Bismarck, N.D. 58501 Albrechtsen, Ray H. Mountain States Resources Corp., 1399 So. 700 East, Suite 11, Salt Lake City, Utah 84105 Alke, R. J Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 55 West 5th Ave., Denver, Colo. 80204 Allen, Thomas S Construction Machinery, Inc., 6121 Clermont, Commerce City, Colo. 80022 Allison, Thomas W Gullick Dobson International, 603 Parkway View Dr., Pittsburgh, Pa. 15205 Allmendinger, James W Falkirk Mining Co., P.O. Box 731, Riverdale, N.D. 58565 Almarez, John Jeffrey Mfg. Div., Dresser Industries, 720 So. Colorado Blvd., Denver, Colo.80222 Althouse, John G Coteau Properties Co., 2400 Astronaut Dr., Bismarck, N.D. 58501 Amundson, Adolph L. Western Slope Carbon, University Club Bldg., Suite 2240, Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Anderson, Andy Power Motive Corp., 5000 Vasquez Blvd., Denver, Colo. 80216 Anderson, Carl L Industrial Screen & Maint., Inc., 1680 Sherrelwood Dr., Denver, Colo. 80221 Anderson, Charles W. R. Stamler Corp., 600 Main Street, Millersburg, Ky. 40348 Anderson, Daven Energy Engineering, Inc., P.O. Box 33, River Forest, Ill. 60305 Anderson, Forrest S Anderson Mavor (U.S.A.) Ltd., 303 Progress St., Cranberry Ind. Park, Zelienople, Pa. 16063]

Jan 1, 1979

The Role of Partnerships ?Industry history ?Companies were their own kingdoms ?MSHA and NIOSH were out of touch and focused on enforcement with no direction ?Labor and management were constantly at odds with each other

Jan 1, 2002

By J. B. Forrester

In the operation of the coal mines in Utah few adverse conditions confront us. Physical conditions for the economical extraction of the coal are as near perfect as it is possible for them to be. Still several obstacles are encountered to keep up our interest and prevent us from getting in a rut. Of these I shall speak only of Burning, Wants, and Sluffing of Ribs. Should one travel the outcrop from Ivy Creek in Emery county to the Utah-Colorado line, there would be one outstanding feature indelible impressed upon one's mind. That feature is the omnipresent indications of burning in place. Viewing the eastern escarpment of the Wasatch Plateau from a distance, many splotches of dark red are plainly seen always lying above the coal floor. This stratum is a felspathic sandstone, appearing as a white line running the full length of the above escarpment and about midway between the floor of the valley and the top of the plateau. The coal bearing complex consists of shales, sandstones and coal. This complex varies from two hundred to eleven hundred feet in thickness. The number of coal seams are exceedingly variable. As a rule the argilutites form the bulk of this complex. This material is baked by the burning of the coal and the iron present is oxidized to the ferric state, coloring the shale to a dark red. This baked material forms a shingle tales that in places cover the entire complex. It is natural to expect that the most extensive burning is in the canyons facing to the south and east and on the south slopes of the ridges running to the east or west. Such, indeed, is the case. Still in this arid region many crop fires have existed upon the north slopes, especially in those canyons that face to the east. In fact today, instances are not rare where grassy north slopes, heavily timbered with balsam and fir that have attained a diameter of 14 to 24 inches, are found growing upon the disintegrated baked shingle and later development proves that the coal has been burned at least 500 feet back from the outcrop. Still these conditions are not normal. In this arid climate the south and east exposures are steep and barren, except for the scrub pine, cedar, mahogany and kindred semixerophytes. Bunch grass is also a lover of such exposures. There is very little soil found in such places; it is either blown away as fast as formed or washed away by the rare torrential rains, or the rapidly melting snow. Thus we see that the physical conditions are favorable for the starting and maintainence of outcrop fires. This brings us to the probable origin of this phenomenon. There are four probable ways' that such fires, could be started, namely:

Jan 1, 1921

By Grainne A. Matthews

Jan 1, 2009

By C. H. Trik

Any article or discussion on the ventilation of Working Faces under different systems of concentrated mining is of little value to any practical man unless based upon facts gleaned from actual experience, and empirical data on this subject is, to say the least mighty scarce. Of this one thing, however, you can rest assured, the old cry of "no air at the working faces" will have become a thing of the past. No longer will we hear of some operator who has been too eager to get out the coal and who has lost sight of everything else in his mad dash for production, digging himself shut until his airways are mere pin- points and his air current a feeble thing, too weak to combat the high resistance of his restricted mine. A mine operating under one or more of the various systems of concentrated mining should always have plenty of air, for in concentrated mining the tendency is toward greatly reduced mine resistances due to increased sectional areas. It can readily be seen that the tendency is to large, wide areas across the panel and where this is true large volumes and low gauges are the rule, unless inordinate restriction is encountered in the permanent airways, and no operator, far sighted or progressive enough to adopt this system of mining when his conditions permit, would ever allow his main airways both intake and return, to be anything but model courses. As a matter of .fact, we are likely to encounter the opposite of what is usually the case in most mines to day. We are apt to find the air at the working faces sluggish due to the large areas of passage rather than to high resistance. This is combated in. various ways which will be discussed further along in this article. Those companies, of which we have knowledge in this country who, to- day are using any of the new systems of mining, seem to proceed alike in the general method of developing their acreage. Let us assume, for this discussion, the Utah Colorado Coal Corporation is going to open a mine under the new system and their conditions are such as to permit their adopting the simple block system, each face served by a separate machine, each entry having its conveyor to the cars. After the permanent haulage and airways are driven "narrow work" starts to shape the blocks. We are not interested in the length of these "conveyor headings" since we do not need to drive breakthroughs nor build stoppings for ventilation until we have reached their end when we connect them together. We have two methods of sending air to the face of these dead ends. We can laboriously and expeilsively install brattice cloth, as we go, or we can use a small auxiliary blower with canvas tubing to the face. Indeed I may say that one of the great difficulties encountered under the new systems is in the ventilation of these narrow faces. After they have been connected and an air circuit or current established, ventilation becomes plain sailing until the block is worked out. The auxiliary blower when used with flexible canvas tubing, has been found to be the ideal answer to the question of how to ventilate the headings which are anywhere from 100 to 1,000 feet long. These small blowers when properly used, can go a very long way to assist in further reducing the cost of production already assured by the new method of mining. Right angle bends are made by the tubing manufacturers to enable the fan to sit in the fresh air current, yet out of the way of operations and any recirculation is positively avoided by blowing the air around the corner to the face.

Jan 1, 1926

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 Don Sakata

Jan 1, 2005

MR. HARRINGTON: I would like to ask Mr. Bottomley if they fire their shots while the men are in the mine? MR. BOTTOMLEY: No sir; the shot-firing law in our State requires the shots to be fired after the men are out of the mine. We fire more shots than we did under the hand method of loading. Where formerly four holes were drilled, now we drill eight, using the same amount of powder as we did formerly, perhaps a little more, but we use a slower grade of powder. CHAIRMAN LITTLEJOHN: Any further discussion, gentlemen? MR. GIBSON: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Bottomley, if, in his shot-firing system, as I understand it, he has a very high coal and is working something like eleven feet? MR. BOTTOMLEY: Something like that. MR. GIBSON: I read the article that you referred to. Did you use both the first and the second delay explo¬ders in shooting the coal? MR. BOTTOMLEY: We use the ordinary fuse. MR. GIBSON: That is what I wanted to find out; whether you use the delay exploders and the detonators. In Utah, we are getting away from the fuse altogether, because we do not think it is accomplishing anything to use the electric light on the cap, and' at the same time shooting with fuse. We are defeating the object we might gain in using the electric safety lamp. That is a point that might be discussed a little further. MR. E. H. JOHNSON, The Coloder Company: I would like-since it is a general opinion that mechanical loading breaks up the coal, to ask Mr. Bottomley, if he finds a larger percentage of small coal, or how much, through the use of the mechanical loaders? MR. BOTTOMLEY: We do not find any great difference. In fact, we have succeeded in improving our lump coal percentage, and that is important, because it is largely domestic. At first, when the machines were installed, the boys shot the coal too hard, and we fell down a little, about two or three per cent, the first month, in our lump percentage, and we tightened up a little and changed our methods in shooting and got on to the stunt of drilling more holes and getting a slower grade of powder. We could not load as much coal in one day as we could before, but we did succeed in in. creasing our lump coal percentage four and a half per cent over the hand method, and that is quite a factor-quite an important factor and since our domestic trade is over with, we loosened up on the shooting and we are running about the same as we did with the hand loading, maybe a half per cent more, or one per cent, but pretty much the same. MR. SHUBART: Your coal is very high? MR. BOTTOMLEY: Yes. MR. SHUBART: Have you tried sunbbing the coal before shooting? MR. BOTTOMLEY: No, we have not tried that. It is very hard coal to shoot; we have no defined cleavage in our coal. It is the worst coal I ever saw to shoot. We do not try to snub it. Formerly, as I said, the miners drilled four holes, pretty well up near the top, and then four holes down, within about three feet of the bottom. It is the same thing as a snub shot, and that we find is the best method for shooting the coal. We have not tried any mechanical device for snubbing as yet. SECRETARY SHUBART: At one mine I saw snubbing tried with a Jeffrey undercutter with a seven-foot Jeffrey bar. This mine, by the way, is very similar to Mr. Bottomley's condition. They have very high coal, so the snub cut is a small percentage. They cut a seven foot undercut and raise the machine on an eight inch tie and undercut five feet to give the effect of a snub cut, 14 inches at the front of the cut, and then six inches at the back of the cut. They made a very marked increase in lump. (The bug dust would be a small percentage of the total coal), and they increased the percentage of the slack at the same time. They found a decrease by reason of the easier shooting of about 15 per cent in their slack. In other words their nut and lump coal ran considerably higher and their slack decreased 5 per cent with the snubbing cut. Mr. Bottomley, I believe, understands those conditions.

Jan 1, 1926

Profiled below are the eight RMCMI 1999 Scholarship Award winners. Seven of the eight attended the 95th Regular Meeting and convention at Crested Butte, Colorado in late June. Each spoke during the Scholarship Awards Monday luncheon and shared their goals with attendees. In addition to receiving a $1,500 tuition credit, thanks to the Patrons of the Institute annual funding of scholarships, each received recognition at the luncheon with a brass plaque signifying this honor. The winners are guests of the Institute Sunday through Tuesday and have an incredible opportunity to meet many in the coal industry who could be potential employers. The state vice presidents host the winners and pay for their travel and hotel expenses. This is a continuing scholarship and may be renewed for tuition credit again in the senior year if they remain a full time student and if recommended by the dean of their college or university. A resident from each of the eight member RMCMI states is selected by the Scholarship committee from Board approved institutions. Criteria for these annual awards is that the recipient (1) is a full time sophomore student who will use the tuition credit the junior year. (2) Be both a U. S. citizen and a legal resident of the member stare. (3) Maintain 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. Contributions to this worthwhile project are tax deductible to each individual RMCMI member or his company. Through donations of $100 or more to the Patrons of the Institute, each Patron receives a plaque and a year bar for each additional year contributions are made. These may be directed to RMCMI Patrons, 3000 Youngfield Street, #324, Lakewood, CO 80215-6553. [ ] ARIZONA WINNER Jennifer Jannusch University of Arizona Jennifer is the daughter of Peggy and Larry Jannusch of Phoenix. She graduated from Shadow Mountain High School in the top 15% of her class. She has been on the Dean's List and won the National Collegiate Engineering Award. Jennifer belongs to the Association of Engineering Geologists, SME, Best Buddies, and enjoys running, painting and languages. [ ] COLORADO WINNER Alan S. Maste¬rs Colorado School of ties Alan is the son of Lee and Ellen Masters of Lakewood, Colorado. He graduated from Lakewood High School and has been on the Dean's List at CSM. He resides with his wife, Karen, and children Morgan, Nicole and Scott. Spending twelve years as a mechanic and semi-truck driver, Alan decided to return to school to pursue an engineering degree. Having maintained a 4.0 G.P.A. at Arapahoe Community College, he was accepted at CSM where he continues to excel. He firmly believes that the future of our country will be enhanced by our ability to utilize our natural resources. Alan enjoys time with his family, fishing, water skiing, bowling and reading Tom Clancy or John Grisham novels.

Jan 1, 1999

By John McNeil

Mr. President, and Members of the Rocky Mountain Coal-Mining Institute-Gentlemen : I appreciate the distinction of addressing this representative body of men upon a subject that lies so close to the heart of each one of us, and which is one of the principal objects of our gathering here today, in this beautiful city-so beautiful, with its grand and glorious mountains looking down upon us, that its charm makes us almost forget the men we left toiling "underneath the ground." But that object-the safeguarding of our coal-miners, who spend the greater part of their lives delving in the bowels of the earth-is the cause of our gathering from the "rock-ribbed" States of Utah, Wyoming, New Mexico, and Colorado. And, as I look about me, my eye lights on the face of many an old-time friend- on some with whom I have walked for more than thirty years; so, whatever the merit of this little talk of mine, it cannot be said that it was made by a "tenderfoot." You must not for a moment think that I shall attempt the impossible task of completely covering so comprehensive a subject as '(Accidents in Coal Mines,' and take much more time than has been allotted me, or would be advisable for me to consume. So I shall confine myself, as briefly as possible, to some of the most common causes of accidents, and the possible means by which these disasters may be diminished. For a great many years the cause of mine accidents and their prevention have been the subject of grave thought and investigation by both national and state governments. As early as 1835 Great Britain appointed a royal commission of talented men, possessing special knowledge in the conduct of coal- mining, also eminent authorities in science and its application, to search into these matters. Since 1835 there has been a succession of such commissions of research, at frequent intervals, in all countries wherever coal has

Jan 1, 1913

By L. M. Cooley

The coal stripping project of the Edna Coal Company in Routt County, Colorado, near Oak Creek, is not greatly different than many other such projects in the United States-with two rather significant exceptions. The project is at an altitude of approximately 8,000 feet, and the topography is that characteristic of mountainous terrain. The first exception-that of high altitude-makes year round operation a challenge. The second exception-that of rugged topography makes the haulage of materials a difficult task.

Jan 1, 1948

By Fredrick D. Palmer

The World is Turning to Coal Peabody?s View ?We believe the world is increasingly energy-short, led by unprecedented demand from population centers and economic hubs in Asia, the Middle East and South America ?This occurs as:?Traditional energy sources are clearly constrained, requiring coal-based alternatives?Energy-rich nations leverage political gain from their assets, and nations urgently look to improve energy security ?In this environment:?Oil, coal and gas face a greater long-term convergence, ?Coal?s traditional regionalized nature becomes global, and ?Coal?s compact energy form becomes an attractive source for liquids and substitute natural gas ?The world is blessed with an abundance of coal to help meet all human energy needs

Jan 1, 2008

By S. W. Farnham

Those who remember the years of patient effort and the slow results obtained in the first introduction of electrical coal cutters and locomotives will, I think, admit that mechanical loading of coal is unquestionably being established at a much more rapid rate than any previous application of machinery to reduce manual labor in mines. There are many operators who consider the progress of the loaders today as slow, but considering the number of years it took to thoroughly establish electrical coal cutters and locomotives, and comparing it with the short time that the mechanical loader has been on the market, and the results that have been obtained today, they will admit, I think, that the progress of the latter is much more rapid. It is about 35 years since the advent of the electrical coal cutter and electric locomotive. Their use has brought about these improved conditions, increased tonnage per mine and other features, which are of assistance to the installation of mechanical loaders. The management and the technical staff in practically all of the American mines are trained in the use of electrical machinery and understand its operation, care and maintenance. . There is frequently, a surplus of electrical power and wiring available to take care of the small requirements of the electrical loader. The mechanical loader, therefore, starts today with the ground prepared for it. Those manufacturing companies who have had years of experience in the design and construction of mining machinery, know in a large measure what to incorporate in their designs to make the parts of the new type of machine effectively strong and to operate with efficiency under the severe conditions encountered in mining service. All these advantages greatly assist the success of a new type of machine such as the mechanical loader. In spite of these advantages, however, there are bound to be some failures. All new types of loaders have to be developed. We hear of some that are a success and some that are set aside. The field of application of each type and its limitations first must be determined by actual operation. The earlier loaders had to be changed and improved in design as weaknesses developed. Not all of the new types of coal loaders have been built by mining machinery manufacturers of long experience, and the lack of experience in this line is responsible for some of the early failures. The coal mining company staffs and also those of the loader companies had to learn what the operating factors were that made mechanical loading a success. The difference in results obtained by loaders in different properties under similar physical conditions indicates that the mine management is a very large, if not the major factor, affecting the efficiency of mechanical loading. Many articles have been written on the question of loading. The subject has been quite fully discussed at recent coal meetings and in the technical press. It is not always as easy or simple a matter to form conclusions as may first appear as to one's own particular loading problem. Mechanical loading is a comparatively new art, and many companies while claiming that loaders are quite successful, do not have an accurate line on the actual saving they are affecting. Many of them have only a few of the factors taken into account in their costs. Many loaders have been generally bought without very careful consideration given to all details and except where extremely favorable conditions prevail, failure resulted. When contemplating the installation of mechanical loading, one naturally desires to select the type of loader that will, fit his mining conditions. The things

Jan 1, 1924

ACM Equipment Sales Co. ACM/ICM Andalex Resources, Inc. ARCO Coal Company Behre Dolbear & Company, Inc. Coastal State Energy Company Colowyo Coal Co. L.P. Commercial Testing & Engineering Company Continental Conveyor & Equipment Company Crane & Hoist Cyprus Amax Coal Company Dakota Coal Company Driltech Inc. Empire Machinery Energy West Mining Company Fleischli Oil Company Inc. Halbach & Braun Industries Hemscheidt Corporation GH Hensley Industries Ingersoll-Rand Company Jennmar Corporation Joy Technologies, Inc. K & P Sales Engineers, Inc. Kennametal, Inc. Kerr-McGee Coal Corporation LeTourneau,Inc. Long-Airdox Company Magnum Metals, Inc. McLanahan Corporation Morgantown Machine & Hydraulics Morrison Knudsen Corporation National Mining Association The North American Coal Corporation Peabody Coal Company Phillips Machine Services, Inc. Pincock Allen & Holt Powder River Coal Co. Ramsey Technology, Inc. Rust Tractor Company Salt River Project Savage Industries Inc. Stamler Corporation Tamarron Resort TerraMatrix Inc. Texaco Lubricants Company TIC (The Industrial Company Wyoming, Inc.) Trapper Mining Inc. Wagner Equipment Comp any Western Energy Company Wheeler Machinery Company

Jan 1, 1995

Participating Scholarship Colleges and Universities 134 AmerCable, Inc 144 Andalex Resources, Inc 118 ARCO Coal Company 148 Behre Dolbear & Company, Inc 101 Coastal States Energy Company 100 Commercial Testing & Engineering Company 88 Crane & Hoist Sales Inc 121 Cyprus Amax Minerals Company 115 Dakota Coal Company DriltechInc 135 Empire Machinery Company 94 Energy West Mining Company 122 GH Hensley Industries 126. 127 Hitachi Construction Machinery (America) Corp. 12 Ingersoll-Rand Company 141 Jennmar Corporation 142 Joy Mining Machinery - A Harnischfeger Industries Company 104 K & P Sales Engineers, Inc 114 Kennametal Inc 95 Kennecott Energy Company 133 Kerr-McGee Coal Corporation 96 LeTourneau, Inc 145 Long-Airdox Company 112 Magnum Metals, Inc 138 McLanahan Corporation 129 Mine Technik America 124 Morrison Knudsen Corporation 97 National Mining Association 98 Nielsons,Inc 136 The North American Coal Corporation 130 Northwestern Resources Company 125 O&K Orenstein & Koppel, Inc 14 Peabody Western Coal Co 131 Phillips Machine Service, Inc. 13 Pincock Allen & Holt 120 Powder River Coal Company 107 Ramsey Technology, Inc 119 Rust Tractor Company 90 Salt River Project 91 Savage Industries Inc 89 Sheraton Steamboat Resort and Conference Center 111 Stamler Corporation (An Oldenburg Group Company) 117 Tamarron Hilton Resort 137 TerraMatrix Inc 139 TIC (The Industrial Company of Wyoming, Inc.) 99 Trapper Mining Inc 106 Wagner Equipment Company 116 Western Energy Company 105 Wheeler Machinery Company 128

Jan 1, 1996

Amax Coal Inc. Colowyo Coal Company Continental Conveyor & Equipment Company Crane & Hoist Sales Cummins Southwest, Inc. Energy West Mining Company Paul J. Epley The Falkirk Mining Company Fleischli Oil Company T. J. Gundlach Machine Company Halbach & Braun Hemscheidt Corporation GH Hensley Ingersoll Rand Jennmar Corporation Joy Technologies K & P Sales Engineers, Inc. Kennametal, Inc. Kerr-McGee Coal Corporation L & H Welding McLanahan Corporation National Coal Association The North American Coal Corporation Northwestern Resources Company Peabody Western Coal Company Phillips Machine Service, Inc. Pincock, Allen & Holt The Pittsburg & Midway Coal Mining Co. Ramsey Technology, Inc. Roberts & Schaefer Co. Rust Tractor Company Salt River Project Schroeder Industries Smith, Barney, Shearson Snowmass Resort Association Southern Pacific Lines Stamler Corporation TerraMatrix TIC (The Industrial Company Wyoming, Inc.) Trapper Mining Inc. Wagner Equipment Company Western Energy Company Wheeler Machinery Company

Jan 1, 1993

[ACC, Inc. Bucyrus-Erie Company CINCO (Coal Industry Consultants, Inc.) Coal Magazine Colowyo Coal Company Coors Ceramic Company Crane & Hoist Sales, Inc. Cummins Power. Inc. Cummins Southwest, Inc. Cyprus Coral Company Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad Company Energy Fuels Corporation FMC Corp.- MHE Division Ford. Bacon & Davis Inc. T.J. Gundlach Machine Company Hemscheidt American Corp. GH Hensley Industries Honnen Equipment Company Jennmar Corporation Soy Technologies, Inc. K&P Sales Engineers, Inc. Kennametal, Inc. Kerr McGee Coal Corp. McLanahan Corporation National Mine Service Company Peabody coal Company Pitrsburg & Midway Coal Mining Co. Pyramid Parts, Div. American Alloy Ramsey Technology. Inc. Roberts & Schaefer Company Santa Fe Pacific Coal Corporation Scandura. Inc. Tamarron Resort TIC (The Industrial Company) Tribol Utah Power & Light Western Energy Company]

Jan 1, 1988

By Todd A. Myers

Forward Looking Statement Disclaimer This presentation may include forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements about the Company's vision, strategy, operations, growth, development and any other statements containing the words, "believes, " "expects, " "anticipates, " "plans, " "estimates, " and similar expressions. There are a number of factors that could cause Westmoreland Coal Company's actual results to differ materially from those indicated by such forward-looking statements including, but not limited to: general economic and business conditions; healthcare cost trends; the Company's ability to manage growth and significantly expanded operations; the ability of the Company to implement its business strategy; the Company's ability to pay the preferred stock dividends that are accumulated but unpaid; the Company's ability to retain key senior management; the Company's access to financing; the Company's ability to maintain compliance with debt covenant requirements; the Company's ability to successfully identify new business opportunities; the Company's ability to achieve anticipated cost savings and profitability targets; the Company's ability to utilize its tax net operating losses; demand for electricity; the effect of regulatory and legal proceedings; and other factors identified in the Company's most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent reports filed with the SEC. The Company disclaims any intention or obligation to update any forward-looking statements as a result of developments occurring after the date such statement was first made.

Jan 1, 2008

By T. H. Brien, O&apos

At nearly all of the copper smelters in the Southwest, at some time, calculations have been made having in view the economy of replacing fuel oil with pulverized coal as a heat-producing medium for smelting operations This matter has been, and is more so now than at any time heretofore, of very great importance. Due to the intensive development of oil-producing areas of the world and the tremendous use of fuel oil for many purposes, it seems that before many years the supply of oil will become so small as to prohibit its use for such operations as smelting. This may be caused by prohibitive prices, or even by government decree as a conservation measure. In the event that the use of fuel oil becomes out of the question, the copper companies have just two alternatives: the use of pulverized coal or electricity. The copper companies of the Southwest produced an average of 808,400,000 pounds of copper per year for the war years of 1916, 1917 and 1918. This figure is, of course, a higher one than has prevailed since the war, but at the present time nearly all of the mines and smelters are getting back to capacity. There is no doubt whatever that the consumption of copper is going to increase, perhaps for the next ten years. This means that more copper mines will be discovered and developed, and that the mines which are now producing will be called upon for a greater production. This all tends to show that the mine manager who is looking ahead must develop some substitute for fuel oil in the event of its use becoming prohibitive, and all indications seem to point in that direction. The only coal which is commercially available to the smelters in the district under discussion must come from Colorado and New Mexico. These coals are high in ash and volatile matter and comparatively low in calorific value. The proximity of the smelter to the coal mines is a large factor in determining which fuel is more economical. Most of the smelters within two or three hundred miles of the coal mines find it more profitable to burn coal, while those at greater distance find that the higher freight charges on the coal make the use of oil more economical.

Jan 1, 1923

President Robert Wilson opened the meeting at 9:00 a.m. He introduced William A. Bear, General Manager Bear Coal Company, Inc., Somerset, Colorado, who presided over the session. George Nugent, Peter Kiewit Sons' Company, Sheridan, Wyoming, presented a most interesting film "Montana Mine Reclamation." His biography follows: George Nugent first entered the coal business in 1943 when he developed Peter Kiewit Sons' Co.'s first coal mine-Big Horn Coal Company at Sheridan, Wyoming. Since that time he managed an expansion program for P.K.S. in mining that resulted in the development of two other producing mines - Rosebud Coal Sales Company at Hanna, Wyoming and Decker Coal Company at Decker, Montana, in which Pacific Power and Light is a partner. Applications are now pending for a third mine. Black Butte, a joint venture of P.K.S. and Rocky Mountain Energy Company, near Point of Rocks, Wyoming. Nugent is a Past President of the Wyoming Chapter, Association of General Con- tractors, Wyoming Mining Association and Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. He was President of Big Horn Coal Company and Rosebud Coal Sales Company as well as Manager of the Mining Division of Peter Kiewit Sons' Co. and Decker Coal Company when he retired Jan. 1, 1975.

Jan 1, 1976