Search Documents

The thirtieth regular meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was called to order at 11: 20 o'clock A. M., Wednesday, June 3, 1931, President G. A. Kaseman presiding: PRESIDENT KASEMAN spoke in part as follows: I have in mind to say a few words of welcome to the coal operators, but I am afraid that the words I might have said would be hardly appropriate, because I believe the coal operators are in the minority today. It demonstrates to my mind something that has been running through it for some little time. When the hard times came on a year ago, we thought we were going to get over it rather lightly. I recall at this time a year ago we thought that the depression was about at an end. The National Administration from Washington told us we had reached bottom and things were going to perk up, and for a few weeks or maybe a month or more there was a sort of optimism throughout the country. I had been East, and when I re- turned to Albuquerque I said to my friends and associates that things were getting better in the East and that they would soon be better out here and we will not have felt the hard times very much. But I have learned differently since. I have learned that hard times are no respecter of communities or corporations, or persons, or activities, and that we all suffer alike. On that account we find that our Institute is suffering just the same as other activities, whether national, state, local, social, or what- ever it may be. Our attendance is light or, that account. We all know when times are hard we have to stay at home and watch things closer than when they are good. And when they are good we feel that the machine will run of its own momentum and in this way we can get away to see what is going on in the world. When times are hard we have to stay at home and look after everything from day to day and hour to hour.

Jan 1, 1931

(Referring to map) If there are any methods to improve on this I would like to have some suggestions on it. The maps there are on a scale of one inch to two hundred feet. At the time of each extension a letter is used and a line drawn across the entry and the room. The date of the extension is given up in the margin of the map. Here is an extension made April 6th. Extension L is shown in each one of the rooms, November 29th. N-you see the two rooms have been finished down into here. 0-the last extension, has just been stopped, and the three working rooms. Now, one of the features of this plan, when the rooms have been stopped, the line is drawn straight across. When the room or entry is still going, there is a small projection beyond the line, indicating that the next cut is changed. When the distance cannot be ascertained by the engineer, he gets the distance from the mine boss or some other source which is reliable, and that is put on in a dotted line. That gives you a complete story. Anyone looking over the map can see immediately every place that was working at the time of this extension, every place that is inaccessible, and get a complete picture. The extension of the coal is put on the extension at each extension. The survey stations are put in, showing each survey point. The pillars when they are pulled-only the pillars that are pulled are cross-hatched. The whole map is in cross-hatch without any regard as to what pillars are pulled. If a little stump is left in, that is shown on the map. The engineer only shows what pillars are pulled that he has actual knowledge of, or has been given to him in detail by the mine foreman. I believe that concludes the work on the mine map, and there is certainly room for a lot of improvement on most of the mine maps which we have been getting into the office. PRESIDENT PRYDE: Does anyone want to ask any questions? Any questions about the leasing regulations? I want to say there are several leases in the Rock Springs field, and when Mr. Smith comes on one of his visits the Rock Springs Institute have asked him to address them on the leasing proposition.

Jan 1, 1924

By O. C. Irwin

For several years the C. F. & I. Co. men have been working on a fan signal and many different schemes have been tried. I will describe a few of them. A make-and-break attachment was placed on the fan shaft which caused a light to flicker. A hinged door was placed on air course and counter balanced so that it would have a slight travel when the air pressure was reduced an appreciable amount. This motion was used to open the power circuit, blow a whistle, or ring a bell. Series transformers were placed in motor leads of fan drive motor and the variation in amount of power to motor was used to control the fan signal through a magnet or relay. A governor was placed on the fan shaft which opened a signal circuit when speed of fan was reduced. We tried to produce a machine actuated by the volume of air, (that is on the principle of the anemometer) but had to discard this due to its being too delicate. None of the above schemes seemed to fill the conditions which the State and our Mine Inspector wanted covered. They gave us the following demands for a signal: 1. Must open mine circuit and sound alarm when air pressure was reduced below a certain amount. 2. Must be fool proof. 3. Must work on any kind of fan drive (steam or motor). 4. Must be safe to ' install- in any mine or fan house. 5. Must not depend upon mechanical device which could become inactive due to friction or other causes. 6. Must be as simple and easy to adjust as possible.

Jan 1, 1925

By William Perry Pendley

Let us go back in time, back to when a Navy veteran from the South was President of the United States, a man from the Rocky Mountain West was Secretary of the Interior and a leading environmentalist was head of the EPA; and there followed what many perceived of as a war on the West-on our water, on our timber, on our oil and gas and mineral exploration, and on our small communities. It's easy to think that I'm talking about the administration of James Earl Carter, III of Georgia, but I'm not. I'm talking about this administration, the administration of George Herman Walker Bush of Texas. I say that as a life-long Republican who never voted for a Democrat and who worked hard to put George Bush in the Oval Office. Many of us wondered, in 1988, what Vice President George Bush meant when he said; "I am an environmentalist." Well, now we know. In his State of the Union address, which was otherwise lacking in specific detail, George Bush said two very specific

Jan 1, 1990

The 69th Regular Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute convened in Manor Vail Lodge, Vail, Colorado, and was in session at 10:00 a.m. The meeting was called to order by Past President Joseph E. Ward, former District Manager, Denver Office, Coal Division, Joy Manufacturing Co. and now retired. Mr. Ward, after reading a brief biography of President O. F. "Os" Lewis, introduced him to the assembly. Biographical sketch read as follows: Mr. Lewis is President, General Manager, and a Director of Colowyo Coal Company. "Os" was born in Reno, Nevada. He attended the University of Utah at Salt Lake City, Utah, and later the Denver University in Denver, Colorado. His career in the Western Coal Industry started back in 1923 when he was employed by the Central Coal and Coke Company of Salt Lake City, Utah, as a clerk, then chief clerk and as a traveling sales representative for a period of 13 years. Later, in 1936, when that company was acquired by an affiliated company of Harris Coal Company, he was transferred to Denver as Assistant Sales Manager, Purchasing Agent and later as Executive Assistant to the President.

Jan 1, 1973

By Dan Jackson

9:00 a.m., June 28, 1983 MR. MORTENSEN: Good morning ladies and gentlemen. Again, it gives me great pleasure to welcome you to another session of the 79th meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. The thing again that has always been impressive are the activities that we've had so far. The success in the meetings has been delightfully encouraging to all of our committee people. Please welcome the chairman of the session, Charlie Margolf. MR. MARGOLF: Thank you, Vernal. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. It would be my privilege to serve as the session chairman this morning. To allow the maximum time for our speakers, I'll turn the microphone over to Bernie Bernstrom who will introduce our first speaker. MR. BERNSTROM: Thank you. As Vernal mentioned, Dan Jackson will be our first speaker. He is the Western Editor of Coal Age Magazine. Dan really doesn't need an introduction to this group. He's belonged to the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute about 25 years. Dan is a native of West Virginia and he's an ex-coal miner. He graduated form West Virginia University as an electrical engineer and worked for Amherst and West Bending Coal prior to employment by Coal Age Magazine. Back in 1972 Coal Age moved him to Denver from New York City. MR. JACKSON: When Vernal Mortensen asked me speak to the members of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute earlier this year I found it impossible to say no to the guy because of what he has contributed to western coal. Little did 1 know that the subject he had in mind would be entitled, "An Outsider's View of Western Coal." At first I asked myself-I've been associated with the coal industry for some 38 years, 12 years in national operations and 26 years reporting on it. You might say that I've been married to two industries, coal and the business press for 26 years, but today I'll put on my business press hat and try to make an impression of what an outsider might think of western coal. But at the outset, let's get one thing straight: When you say press, whether it's business press, the media or whatever, and you heard some comments yesterday as far as what the media has done .to this industry and there's been some definitions bandied around as to just what an editor is. One of the most recent ones has defined an editor as a person who can talk on any subject with an open mouth. Now that's not my case. Secondly, I don't give long talks. Several years ago I was giving a rather lengthy talk to a group similar to this and it was halfway through the talk when I noticed one guy on my right looking at his watch quite frequently. I didn't mind that too much because all of us do that once in a while, but when he looked at his watch, took it off and shook it, I thought, "My God, better cut short." But for more than a decade western coal has enjoyed substantial annual increases in production from some 30,000,000 tons in 1970 to some 264,000,000 tons in 1981, but 1982 was a different story. We lost about 6,000,000 tons of production in that year. In 1983 it's expected to be a little worse than '82. Coal historically doesn't rebound from a recession as quickly as other industries. It takes about eight to 10 months longer for us to really get moving again and I'm afraid that you'll still have to don your fighting helmets and flack jackets when you go out into the market to sell your product. Western coal, as you know, has problems and al l of them are not going away when the recession ends and they won't go away overnight. I'm sure most of you are aware of what those problems are. Carl Bagge and Jim Harris, along with other speakers, at this meeting have educated us well on those problems and I'm sure you'll hear more from Jim Watt at today's luncheon. If everyone in this room were asked to list three orfourof the most serious problems facing western coal, I'd make book that the total of the answers wouldn't vary by more than 3 to 5%, if that much. But coal is not the only mining segment in the U.S. with problems. Metal and non-metal mining has its share, too. I'd like to step back into the past for a few minutes, if I may, to a time when our problems were just beginning. Since 1979 a third of the nation's mines, including coal, metal and nonmetal have been shut down. The total volume of all mining in the U.S. in that year totaled some $24 billion. Today that figure has dropped some 21 %. The after tax rate on return for mining companies has fallen from 6'/% in 1980 to minus 3% in 1983. But that's really not where our problems began. They began 20 years ago when a profound change began taking place in the U.S. economy. Our economy had been growing at about 2'/-3% annually without exception except for the great depression. Our inflation rate was about I'/%, interest rates were running about 6%, and the federal budget was $77 billion, really great figures compared to today. From 1960 to 1980 the federal budget increased almost 1.000% and taxed paid by individual families increased by 700% during that same period. Despite the huge increases in taxes, the federal deficit kept getting larger and larger year after year and within this 20 year period the national debt climbed to a trillion dollars. Economic progress of this type can't continue indefinitely without some serious consequences. The result of that economy, well, you know what happened and there is a direct relationship of that

Jan 1, 1983

PRESIDENT MARKS: We have a letter from Mr. Frank N. Cameron, of the Utah Fuel Company, that perhaps I had better read to you. It is addressed to Mr. Shubart, Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute (hands letter to Secretary Shubart). UTAH FUEL COMPANY MINE SUPERINTENDENT Castle Gate, Utah, February 9, 1926 Mr. F. N. Cameron, Vice-President & General Manager, Salt Lake City, Utah. Dear Sir: It has now been about nine months since we started the system of having the fire bosses take charge of all shooting and gas inspections at the Castle Gate Mines. We had considerable trouble when we started. Like all other new systems which have been installed, this one was hard to get started and was criticised both by the miners and officials in our own organization, as well as by other organizations in the mines of this county. The older the official and miner was the stronger they seemed to be opposed to the new method. They have no arguments to offer against it, but they know it is not right "because their grandfather did not work it in that way." We know that when some of the other systems were started in the mines of this county, they were fought from all angles. The electrical shooting almost brought the miners at Sunnyside out on strike; their main argument was that they could not make a living if they had to obey the rules that the company was trying to enforce. They also claimed that they could not make enough coal for the day's work by only shooting once at the end of the shift. The same applies to the sprinkling the miners claimed that they would all die of some disease if they were forced to work in a sloppy, wet mine every day. The mining machine was another thing that was hard to install the miners claimed that the company was trying to rob the Door miner out of a chance to make living by installing mining machines to cut the coal. I do not think that the system we have at our mines is perfect-there is still room for improvement in the shooting and inspection of the mines, but I do really think that for safety and efficiency, the inspection department at our mines, working under the new system, is as good if not better than any other inspection department working under the old method in the other mines. I am giving some of the arguments in favor of the new system and would like to hear the arguments against it-if there are any. In cutting the men from monthly to day wages, I do not think it is only the company that benefits by the arrangement, but the fireboss is the one that gets the best of it by the change. How often have we heard the fireboss complain of the hours he had to put in just because he was a monthly man? Under the new wage scale he is paid for every hour he puts in the mines, and when the mines are working every day he makes considerable more than when he was being paid a monthly salary. When the mines are working slow, there is generally some work that has to be done on idle days, or in slow times the force could be cut to a point where some of the work could be done on idle days, and thus the fireboss could be given the preference in this extra work and in this way, his wage could be kept up to the standard monthly salary he was getting before. Under this arrange-

Jan 1, 1926

By C. P. Crawford

Bureau of Mines Technical Paper 172, by S. H. Katz and H. C. Porter, entitled "Effects of Moisture on the Spontaneous Heating of Stored Coal", says at the outset, "Spontaneous fires in storage piles of bituminous coal' have been the source of trouble and loss since the industrial utilization of coal began. In Europe the idea arose that spontaneous combustion is more liable to happen during wet weather than during dry. Statements favoring or opposing this idea have crept into the literature. Conflicting conclusions, based on experiment as well as opinions based on observations of various degrees of reliability, are given in most of the recorded discussions of the subject. "Because of the uncertainty of the effect of moisture and its seeming importance among the conditions that affect spontaneous combustion in stored coal, the work described in this paper was undertaken by the Bureau of Mines. The experiments showed that a coal from Illinois oxidized faster when dry, whereas a sample of Pittsburgh coal oxidized faster when moist. These discordant results and similarly inconsistent results from the observations of different investigators may be coupled with the fact that under actual conditions of, storing, both coal and air always contain a considerable amount of moisture." The foregoing report of the investigations of the Bureau demonstrates that the mystery of spontaneous combustion has not yet been solved. This fact adds to the fascination of the subject. I became interested in the matter about ten years ago in observing what was probably one of the best exhibitions of this phenomenon. The old dump at Castle Gate No. 1 Mine contained boney coal and track cleanings generally. In winter when snow fell upon this old dump, the snow was soon melted by the heat of the dump which was comparatively warm at all times. Within 48 hours afterward little blue flames were in evidence on the surface of the pile. Few of the gas feeders were sufficiently constant to maintain a steady flame at any given point, but shifting emissions of gas were ignited one by another, resulting in a continuous popping and apparent running about of the flames. Another interesting exhibition of spontaneous heating was to be seen a few years ago in the storage coal piles of the local sugar factories. This coal was piled in concrete lined pits and the latter were filled with water. However, or this occasion the coal extended above the surface of the water. At every plant where this condition existed the coal was affected heating, and in each case the affected area was in a plane horizontal to and from 8 to 1.4 inches above the water level. The height of the hot area above the surface of the water appeared to be affected by the fineness of the coal. It is well known that oily rags have a tendency to heat when allowed to accumulate in some location protected from free air circulation. For some reason, as yet unknown, this does not apply to petroleum or its derivatives. Now, the most common explanation of spontaneous combustion is that the combustible material oxidizes by being brought into contact with air in the presence of moisture, the theory being that the moisture acts as a catalytic agent. My theory is that spontaneous combustion is due to oxidation of combustible matter by free oxygen carried in solution by a liquid, the oxidation taking place only as, when, and at the place where this oxygen is released from solution by the evaporation of the liquid. Also, this oxidation takes place to some degree regardless of the condition of the combustible-whether it be lump coal, coal dust, straw, wheat flour, coke, or any other combustible but, as the speed of oxidation is directly influenced by temperature, it follows that spontaneous combustion only becomes noticeable or serious in cases where the resulting heat' cannot escape as fast as it is generated.

Jan 1, 1925

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

By Thomas Collier

MR. PRESIDENT AND CO-WORKERS IN THE COAL INDUSTRY: I was requested by our president to prepare a paper on Longwall Coal Mining, to be read before this honorable organization. There are three general systems of Longwall, Longwall advancing and Longwall retreating, and the Nottingham system which is worked in England and South Wales. In Fremont county, where I am employed, the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company are working their mines on the advancing system. The face is started generally from the bottom of the shaft or other mine opening, or, at the outside of the pillar left to support the shaft or slope-bottom and advances toward the boundary of coal area. As the roads in this system are maintained by pack walls, it is sometimes called gob-roads system, and by these means the mine is opened up rapidly and consequently early returns are secured from the capital invested. By this method, there is no expense for narrow work, and a minimum amount of timbering of the roads is required. Now what I call ideal Longwall work is where there is about eight inches of dirt mining-and four and one-half feet of coal, .and when the entries and rooms will gob themselves, so that there will be no rock or dirt to haul out to the surface. But this is not the case in the mine I am in charge of. The entries and rooms will not gob themselves, therefor we have to haul the rock and dirt to the surface, which runs up the cost of production. Now the ideal roof in Longwall is composed of tough elastic and pliable strata that yield gradually by bending when the coal is removed, and throwing a sufficient weight or roof pressure on the coal face to break the coal when the same has been mined or undercut. Timbering should be done systematically, the coal well spragged before the miner starts to undermine the coal. Cogs or cribs are alright in their place, but I am not a believer in crib in Longwall working because they are too strong for the roof and do not leave the roof to squeeze .down gradually and break the roof around the crib. Longwall work requires particular skill on the part of the miner, and a familiarity with the conditions affecting room and pillar work, and a good room and pillar mail may not be successful in. Longwall work. A good Longwall miner realizes more than any one else the importance of being regularly at his place every working day. A day lost causes his place to fall behind the others which makes his work harder, and his daily output is further reduced by the amount of small coal that is liable to result from the excessive pressure where the face falls behind. The bad results are also felt by the miner working on each side of such place, as the roof pressure is often insufficient and the coal does not break as well as when the face is kept in a uniform line.

Jan 1, 1921

By Eugene McAuliffe

The labor turn-over at coal mines has long been a fertile subject for parade by complaining coal operators, the question invariably occupying a place of prominence in the list of disabilities that tend to increase the cost of producing coal, adding likewise to the now startling number of accidents that occur in coal mines. This disability, however, is like the weather question, which some humorist once remarked of by saying, "The weather is something we all talk about, but nobody does anything to improve it." Endless compilations covering the shift of employment by coal mine labor have been made and published, and while the actual loss expressed in cents per ton in cost of coal produced has never been determined, the fact remains that such represents a substantial item, taking the mines of the country as a whole. Efficiency engineers who have made studies covering the cost of breaking in and training each new man employed in certain manufacturing industries, fix same as averaging not less than $100.00 per man, and when the character of mine employment is given due consideration, including its ever-present hazards, the difficulty of close personal super- vision of individual employes, and the, at times, almost impossible ability to transmit to men of many diverse nationalities understandable instructions, it is quite safe to say that the cost of securing and breaking in new men for underground mine work will fully equal that suffered by the factory managements. When we speak of mine labor turnover we must necessarily exclude the enforced shifting about of men who are laid off by the closure of mines due to accident or lack of market, con- fining ourselves to the turn-over occasioned by- (a) the dismissal of individual men or groups of men; (b) the voluntary resignation of the individual workman. It is these two methods of severance that the employer and employe alike suffer from; the item "Unclaimed Wages" carried in the accounts of every large coal company illustrative of the "quit this job, get another one" attitude of many workmen, who frequently, when leaving, fail to claim small sums due them, while others, in turn, leave a train of debts, large and small, behind. There is' ample evidence abroad to the effect that many

Jan 1, 1925

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Before we open the discussion on the Utah mining laws, I want to bring out what I consider a slight misunderstanding on some of the things that I said this forenoon relative to our comparison of accidents. I did not mean to infer that we, as mine officials, are satisfied we have done the best we can to eliminate the accidents, when I was talking about a four-to- one comparison. I do not want any- one to get the idea in their heads that I do not think we are doing all we can. There is not any of us who can state that, even if we better these figures. It is the general understanding that these figures are based upon ratios per thousand man shifts and not upon the tonnage basis that we use. If it were based upon a tonnage basis, I think the figures would be pretty nearly reversed, for we are producing from two to four tons more per man than they do in Great Britain. The discussion will now be continued as I said this morning. There is a gentleman in the audience here that is as guilty of making these laws as I was, and I am quite sure when speaking he will confine himself to the subject of Utah Mining Laws and the prospective results. Before Mr. Monay starts with his paper, I want it understood that this discussion must be finished by 2:30 for the reason that we have still quite a lot of business before us this afternoon.

Jan 1, 1925

By Scott Dupont

Due to the scarcity of miners, and the necessity of decreasing the cost of mining, the Phelps-Dodge Corporation, Stag Canon Branch, at Dawson, [ ] New Mexico, decided to try, by various methods of mining, to increase the tonnage of coal mined per man, per day. With this in view, they first tried mining on a 250-foot face, maintaining the track at the face and using six to eight men shovel- [ ] ling. These men were able to aver age from ten to twelve tons each per, day when they were loading, but with

Jan 1, 1926

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 John H. Emrick

At the meetings of this Institute held two years ago, there was presented a very comprehensive paper on the subject of shearing coal. It was well prepared and contained data based upon actual test and experiment. The conclusions reached showed that where the shearing cuts and tests were made and conducted [ ] there was no advantage but a disadvantage from having sheared the coal. In presenting my ideas on the subject of this paper to you, I do not mean to take issue with the author who addressed you two years ago but only to report the advantages which have recently been secured from shearing coal. All of this goes to prove again the well known fact that what one mine's conditions will permit another's will not. A number of years ago, when most of the coal produced was shot from the solid and when the "good, old" pick miner?s pay was based on the amount of lump coal he loaded out of his room, he was frequently seen putting in a vertical cut in the face as deep as he could do so with his pick. This man was the best ac- [ ] quainted with the peculiarities of the coal and, no doubt, saw that his pocketbook would be fattened more if he put forth the extra effort to make this vertical cut. Fortunately he was well repaid, and his employer loo, on account of the greater percentage of lump produced. Coal cutting machines of various types were then introduced to help along still more the cause of lump coal and, since the natural way to

Jan 1, 1926

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: The paper of Mr. Emrick will now be open for discussion for about twenty minutes. The meeting is now open for discussion. MR. EMRICK: There is some question that may have occurred to you at different times, that is how are you going to tell when the bits are properly made? A fairly good rule to go by is when the used bits come out of the mine, if half of them are bent and half of them are broken, the average is pretty good MR. GEO. B. PRYDE (Union Pacific Coal Company): I would like to ask Mr. Emrick if he has any figures as to the saving of Dower with the different styles of its. MR. EMRICK: I suppose you mean chisel point bits and pick point bits? MR. PRYDE: Yes. MR. EMRICK: So far as I have been able to learn, the only reason why chisel point bits are used is to prevent coring that might be done by the cutter chain. The pick point bit, of course, is the proper thing to use. It can be used when the position of the cutter links in the cutter chain is right. I do not know of any figures which give power consumption ratings on the use of pick point and chisel point bits, but there are tests and ratings, etc., which have been taken- which have been tested as against different bits, which have been given proper clearances against bits not having been given proper clearances, and they will run,-in their saving in power, they will run 20 to 25 per cent. MR. A. C. WATTS (Chief Engineer, Utah Fuel Company) : I would like to ask Mr. Emrick if he has any record showing the saving in power on using the alloy steel chisel bits. I know that several experiments have been made; I do not recall the figures now, but we had a very decided saving in power. MR. EMRICK: I haven't any of the records. Do you think that is because of the steel that has been used? MR. WATTS: Well, they were all sharpened by the same man and used in the same machine, and at the same shop. I do not know the composition. It is "Red Star" Vanadium that I had in mind. MR. EMRICK: I have not seen any records. Some companies are using the tool steel bits because they stand up a little bit better. MR. BENEDICT SHUBART (Secretary) : I was going to ask Mr. Emrick about that question. There is one company that does not recommend tempering the bits. They recommend using not exactly self-hardening steel, but one that is bard enough without quenching-they use 80-90-point car- bon but about a 70-point manganese, not exactly self-hardening steel, but they do not temper this at all. Will Mr. Emrick state if a steel of that kind could be worked in the bit sharpening machine that his company makes, as it

Jan 1, 1925

By A. L. Jones

The subject assigned to me of "The Power" Problem of the Mine" is so broad that I have decided to confine myself to the question of the power supply itself, rather than the application of electricity throughout the property. We will look over certain economic aspects of the problem, particularly in the way it affects the mine manager or executive and his attitude toward the power plant. The accepted method of power application to the mine is by electric power, and the experience of each of you is that the job is never complete as you are always undertaking some further electrification which necessitates the stiffing up the power house to care for the additional load. The mine executive, then, is wrestling almost continuously with the problem of his power plant. Either it is overloaded and must be enlarged and rebuilt; or its operating costs are excessive; or it breaks down and limits coal output; or some one wants to sell new and improved machinery, until the manager almost hates the thought of such a restless part of his property. If he purchases power, every day new uses for it seems to be found. In many ways this unrest is due to short-sighted policy toward the problem, and the tendency when the problem of extension has to be met, to dispose of it in the cheapest way and without thought as to where the future is leading. The day when each opening had its own boiler plant, steam hoist, steam driven fans, steam pumps, steam loaders, etc., seems to be far behind us. The recognized method of power distribution today is by electric power, except for rather limited applications of compressed air; most of which is electrically compressed. During fifteen years contact with mines of Colorado and Wyoming the writer has seen nearly every mine power house double or triple in capacity or abandoned in favor of purchased power, worn. out and inefficient machinery thrown out, isolated boiler plants dropped, seam pumping at great depth changed to electric drive, all resulting in greatly reduced labor and fuel costs. Power costs, which in such isolated plants were considered normal, would be unthinkable today. One property where the main power supply was by compressed air from steam driven com¬pressors used under boilers 8.35 per cent of all the coal mined. The cost of power was 12 1/2 cents per ton of coal mined. Another property of four openings, each with its own boiler plant and usual equipment of hoists, pumps, etc., had a power cost of 10.3 cents for each ton mined; and these were days when you did not get very high prices for coal. Another property operating two mines mostly by steam used 11.1 per cent of the coal output under their own boilers and the power cost was 19.45 cents for each ton mined. Each of these properties is now electrified and power costs are from 3 to 4 cents per ton, and the fuel burned runs from 1 to 2 per cent of the output. With the broadening market and high prices for slack coal and the high prices for labor in boiler and engine rooms, the cost of steam is reaching a high figure, and efforts must be made to keep this down, by more efficient steam production and by utilizing this steam in better machinery which will increase the work done by each pound of steam. It must not be overlooked either, that the plant which is very wasteful of fuel is usually a pretty old one and one far from reliable. In a general way the more efficient the plant, the greater its reliability. Ample and reliable power supply means ability to get out coal when there is a market. The increasing use of purchased power is largely due to changing conditions which are tending constantly to push up the cost of power, unless the most efficient machinery is used and large scale production possible. The

Jan 1, 1923

By Gary Carmack

Overview: Public awareness of the drug abuse problem within the government and industry is growing each day. The economic cost to industry is staggering-estimated to be more than $50 billion per year. Employee drug testing programs are one way to combat the problem, yet they are not without legal and scientic pitfalls. Some of the issues and needs that should be considered before implementing or continuing a testing program are: Why test? What do you test for? Are the results accurate? What impact will the new Federal Rules have? Accuracy of the testing continues to be controversial, especially when the "poppy-seed" and "cold-medications" issues are mentioned. The new Federal laboratory certification program which is about to start, should reduce or eliminate the question of lab error. Determination of on the job impairment will, however, continue to be a problem.

Jan 1, 1988

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

The first session of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was called to order by Past President, R. R. Williams, Jr., Manager of Mines, The Colorado Fuel and Iron Corporation, Pueblo, Colorado, who introduced the President, W. K. Dennison, Jr., Superintendent, Raton Operations, Kaiser Steel Corporation, Raton, New Mexico. His speech of welcome to the Institute follows: The President's Remarks Guests and Members of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute: It is my privilege and pleasure to welcome you to the 56th regular meeting of the Institute. A look at the program will show that the various chairmen and their committees, headed by General Chairman A. Z. Dimitroff, have been hard at work to prepare a program which I am sure you will find to be informative as well as entertaining. I think that a special vote of thanks and appreciation is due Glenn Sorensen, who stepped in to head the Program Committee when Clint Cornelius moved from this area.

Jan 1, 1960