Search Documents

By John S. Livermore

I feel very privileged to be added to the distinguished group that has received this award since the first recipient, Reno Sales, received it in 1954. If my research is correct, the last geologist to be honored was Bill Callahan in 1982. Perhaps the Awards Committee decided it was about time to select a geologist, and I became the beneficiary. Regarding the discovery of the Carlin ore body, it was the culmination of several studies - one going back as far as 1939 when a US Bureau of Mines engineer named W.O. Vanderberg recognized an unusual type of gold mineralization in sediments in northern Nevada. What was unusual was the fact that the gold was so fine that it would not concentrate in a pan. This, plus the study of the Roberts Mountain thrust by Ralph Roberts (1960) and conversations with Harry Bishop, manager of the Gold Acres Mine, pointed Alan Coope and me in the direction of the Lynn Window and, eventually, the Carlin discovery. There has been a great deal written about this discovery. I thought it would be interesting to discuss the evolution of Carlin gold exploration in Nevada since this time and to discuss the changes in perception of this unique type of mineralization. The method used by Coope and me in following up on Roberts' work was to map geologically the Roberts Mountain thrust and conduct geochemical sampling of favorable outcrops and float. Coope was highly experienced in geochemical exploration, as he had graduated from the Royal School of Mines in London, studying under John S. Webb, one of the pioneers of geochemistry as applied to mineral exploration. We first considered using pathfinder elements, but finally concentrated on gold analyses alone, even though the sensitivity of fire assays used at that time was only about one-half part per million. According to the spatial relationship of the mineralization to the Roberts Mountain thrust, as pointed out by Roberts (1960), we were looking for mineralization within the thrust itself. Our models were the known Gold Acres and Getchell mines, which contained reserves on the order of 0.9 to 1.8 mt (1 to 2 million st). These were not of substantial size, but I had hoped we might find more than one of these tributary to a mill that would justify an operation for our employer, Newmont Mining Corp. What we ended up with was the type of deposit we were looking for - an open pit deposit of micron gold, which the old timers had missed because the gold was not capable of being panned. But never in our wildest dreams did we think there was a chance of finding a body containing 10 mt (11 million st) of ore at 0.30 oz/st (10.3 g/t).The deposit was not in the thrust proper but was found in a favorable horizon of Roberts Mountain siltstone that was below the thrust. This is the first example of how a model should not be followed blindly. Newmont was successful in keeping this discovery quiet for some time. After a considerable amount of drilling, a rumor circulated that they had discovered a large low-grade ore body of around 1.7 to 2.1 g/t (0.05 to 0.06 oz/st), which of course would not have been economic with gold at $1.13/g ($35/oz), which was the fixed price at that time. The company, for obvious reasons, did not discourage the rumor. When, however, the true results came out there was a lot of feverish activity. Because of this new type of so-called "invisible gold," which could have been missed by the old timers, the thought was that other deposits would be discovered very soon. The Carlin and other smaller deposits, including Bootstrap, Blue Star and Gold Quarry, were in windows where the lower plate of the Roberts Mountain formation (below the thrust) had been exposed by erosion. This then became the new

Jan 1, 1997

The seventh Annual RMCMI Mine Rescue Evaluation was held during the 1998 Institute convention at the Silvertree Hotel, in Snowmass Village, Colorado. The Mine Rescue committee, co-chaired by Becki Boam and Elliott Tsosie, is one of 18 committees of the Institute. In 1998 a record number of 10 teams participated in the program. The teams were from the four western states of Montana, New Mexico, Texas and Wyoming and were comprised of about eight members each. Teams participating were BHP-La Plata Mine, BHP-Navajo Mine, BHP-San Juan Mine, all from Farmington, New Mexico; Bridger Coal Company, Rock Springs, Wyoming; General Chemical, Green River, Wyoming; Jacobs Ranch Mine, Gillette, Wyoming; Powder River Coal Company-North Antelope/Rochelle, Gillette, Wyoming; Sabine Mining, Hallsville, Texas; Solvay Minerals, Green River Wyoming, and Western Energy-Colstrip, Montana. The professional evaluators provided challenging scenarios for over 90 participants and many observers. The evaluators were: Art Saenz and Tom Bass of Western Environmental Associates, Keith Mitchell and Jim Jennings of Emergency Services Detail; Mary Bailey of Mary Bailey Associates; and John Peleaux of Innovative Access. Teams are not given advance warning of what the problem will entail. They are provided the necessary details when they arrive at the scenario location and work to resolve the problem in an effective and efficient manner. [ ] Seven participants made up each team with an . eighth member as an alternate. Team trainers and other mine personnel traveled with the team from scenario to scenario providing support and encouragement. The teams were presented with four scenarios each day, involving High Angle Rescue, Low Angle Rescue/Medical, Hazmat, and Confined Space. All of the victims, except for one, were provided through the cooperative efforts of the Snowmass Fire Department, who also assisted with providing several evaluators. Snowmass Fire Department is to be commended for providing over 20 victims/evaluators each day to facilitate the evaluations. Training sessions were held Friday afternoon and Saturday evening to help the teams prepare for the scenarios. A swap meet was held Friday evening for teams to trade hats, shirts, belt buckles, stickers, etc. All mine rescue participants and spouses and registered families attended the Bar-B-Q on Sunday evening followed by an adult dance. [ ] Front row: Ray Blaisdell, Solvay; Gary Rasmussen, General Chemical; Spencer Thompson, Sabine; Jack Ervin, Western Energy. Back Row: Ken Kellywood, BHP Navajo; Jonathan Sorrell, BHP LaPlata; Elton Stanton, Jacobs Ranch; Travis Roy, Powder River Coal; Ron Neff, BHP San Juan; Steve Whaley, Bridger. Sponsors who contributed to the 1998 program financially were: Blue Mountain Energy, (Deserado Mine); Flanders Electric Motor Service, Inc.; Rocky Mountain Electric Motors, L.S.; and Western Environmental Associates. Glass trophy cups, with an etching of a Mine Rescue figure and the RMCMI Logo on cherry wood bases, were presented to the 10 team captains at the Monday Mine Rescue Awards Breakfast. Eight of the ten teams had a proficiency level of 3 and 2 teams achieved a proficiency level of 2.

Jan 1, 1998

By Patrick M. James

Many in mining believe that the industry is slipping behind in public image, in public mineral education and, particularly, in mining's basic right to do business. It is critical to turn things around - to change the rules of the game soon - before mining loses any chance of recovery. In the industry's experience, there is a technique of project development and operation that can help gain ground on public opinion. Only recently has this technique had a name, and that is sustainable development. What is sustainable development? Sustainable development is broadly accepted and supported by the international business community. And significant thought and work has been devoted to the subject. Research into the topic was initially confusing because the definitions of sustainable development are written in terms the writer, and his or her constituency understands. To some, it refers to environmental protection. To others, it is about social responsibility. And to the developer, it is about economic benefit. Slowly a theme emerged from the research that seemed to be part of all the definitions. That theme has three parts. First, the development, whatever or wherever it is, must contribute economic value to the developer and the stakeholders of the development. Stakeholders in this context include employees, neighbors, residents of the surrounding area, citizens of the country, suppliers and all others affected by the development. Next, sustainable development must contribute environmental value. This means that at a very minimum it must be neutral and not cause irreparable damage. And last, and what is new for miners and most other businessmen, it must contribute real social value to the stakeholders. How to use the concept? With that three-part theme as a working definition, the mining industry must find ways to use that “the challenge is for an individual company to translate what sustainable development means for them. There is no one model..." Donald W. Gentry is president and chief executive officer of Polymet Mining and former professor emeritus of mining engineering at Colorado School of Mines. He added: "While simple to state, the concept is anything but simple to implement. Present trends indicate ... one wins the sustainable development argument by staking out the high ground early..." In other words, start using sustainable development principles at the beginning of the project. New ways of doing business The mining industry's challenge is to implement sus¬tainable development universally around the world. Paternalism as a way of doing business is dead and a new model of doing business is emerging. All types of businesses are learning to deal with the stakeholders of new developments. Mining cannot be an exception to these trends. To understand how the international mining business came to sustainable development, it is useful to look back a few years. For many North American mining engineers, there were few opportunities for foreign assignments from the 1960s to the 1980s. American companies had been asked to leave many of the Latin American countries. Africa was going through a continent-wide upheaval. The Soviet Union and China had Eastern Eu-

Jan 1, 2000

The eighth annual RMCMI Mine Rescue Evaluation was held during the 1999 Institute convention at the Crested Butte Marriott Resort, Colorado. [ ] Elliott Tsosie, Mary Rowell, Janna Aune, Guy Horton, Art Saenz and Bill Balaz were pleased with the 1999 Mine Rescue Program, The Mine Rescue committee is but one of 17 volunteer committees; this one co-chaired by Bill Balaz, Elliott Tsosie and Janna Aune. There were three evaluators, Art Saenz, Western Environmental; Mary Rowell, ProCare and Guy Horton, Horton Rope Rescue. Nine teams participated and brought 89 participants, 26 spouses, nine children and five teens. The teams were BHP LaPlata, BHP Navajo, BHP San Juan, all from Farmington, NM; Bridger Coal Co., Rock Springs, WY; The Coteau Properties Co., Beulah, ND; Northwestern Resources, Jewett, TX; Powder River Coal Co., Gillette, WY; Solvay Minerals, Green River, WY and Western Energy Co., Colstrip, MT. To observe were members from Centralia Mining Co., Centralia, WA. [ ] Evaluators: Mary Rowell, Guy Horton &Art Saenz The three professional evaluators provided challenging scenarios for the Mine Rescue participants on the grounds of the resort property. Some attending convention were alarmed to see stretchers with "victims" and phoned the hotel switchboard to report the catastrophe. Team members had no prior knowledge of what the scenarios might be and derails were provided only as they arrived at the scenario location, with one exception. Seven to ten or more articipants make up each team. Some teams also ring an alternate and team trainer. For identification purposes, the "victims" wore white shirts emblazoned both front and back with a red VICTIM designation. There was a staged demonstration by three response teams who had not previously worked together. This was enacted on the convention floor following a Technical Session meeting attended by about 200 members. Three response teams from BHP's Navajo and San Juan Mines together with Coteau Properties' Freedom Mine provided a demonstration of their response skills. For never having worked together before, they presented a very professional enactment. This is described at length in the Welcome Session copy. Training sessions were held Saturday and Sunday to enable the teams to prepare for the scenarios. A swap meet was Saturday evening for teams to swap hats, shirts, belt buckles, stickers etc. Each participant received a royal blue golf shirt and ivory cap with royal blue bill. Culmination of the Mine Rescue program was a Tuesday morning Awards breakfast when teams were presented with jade acrylic plaques. [ ] Teams participating in the Mine Rescue Evaluation received trophies on Tuesday morning. The captains above represent BHP-La Plata, BHP-Navajo, BHP¬San Juan, Bridger Coal Co., The Coteau Properties Co., Powder River Coal Co., Solvay Minerals, and Western Energy Co. Sponsors who contributed financially to the 1999 Mine Rescue program were Balaz & Associates, CMC, Civil Constructors, Colstrip Electric, Farmington Fire Equipment & Safety, Fisher Safety, Flanders Ellctric Motor Service, Magnum Metals, Richard Palmtag, Rocky Mountain Electric Motors, Sedona Consulting and Western Water Consultants. [ ] Evaluator Art Saenz likes to have the upper hand and will take whatever steps necessary to get it.

Jan 1, 1999

By Roderick K. Davey

Kennecott Copper Corp.'s Metal Mining Div. operates three major open-pit copper mines in the western United States. These operations include Utah Copper Div., Ray Mines Div. in Arizona, and Chino Mines Div. in New Mexico. At each of these operations, the material is loaded by large electric shovels and transported by both truck and rail haulage. In 1977, 197 350 774 t (217,542,000 st) of ore and waste were mined at these operations, and 302 040 t (332,942 st) of copper were produced. Also a significant amount of molybdenite was produced as a byproduct. In operations as complex and large as these, there is an inherent need for up-to-date reports concerning how much material was mined during the previous day, and year-to-date, what equipment is scheduled for maintenance, how equipment has been performing, etc.

Jan 1, 1979

By Bruce T. Stanley

Though most porphyry-molybdenum deposits lend themselves to various reserve estimating techniques, still there must exist the constant effort to not merely obtain an estimate but rather to obtain the best estimate. To answer the challenge of a complete ore reserve estimation, one must attack the problem with the purpose of obtaining the results closest to reality. What we wish to determine is simple: metric tons (short tons), grade, and kilograms (pounds) of molybdenum contained. In order to effectively accomplish this task, further consideration must be given to the ease of using the information obtained and its inherent reliability. The only known method for ore reserve estimation that supplies the needed results along with its distribution and a measure of confidence provided by sound mathematical backup is geostatistics. The following review is an example of geostatistical application of an ore reserve estimate at the AMAX Henderson mine demonstrating technique, viability, and usefulness of results.

Jan 1, 1979

By David B. Dill, Edgar R. Lea

The zinc deposits of the Balmat-Edwards Division of the St. Joseph Lead Company in northern New York State provide some 10 per cent of the domestic zinc produced annually within the United States. These complex ore deposits are contained within marbles of the Precambrian Grenville series, in a repetitive sequence of dolomites and silicated units. The Balmat ore bodies are localized at various intervals throughout some 1800 feet of the stratigraphic column on the northwest side of a band of gneiss that has continuity to the Edwards area, some 10 miles to the northeast. The Edwards ore bodies are located to the southeast of this gneiss. The marble formations are thought to have included repetitive intervals of marine sedimentation that provided mineralized source "beds" and were subsequently folded, flooded, and injected with melts at great depth and were sheared, recrystallized, and reconstituted. Detailed structural and stratigraphic studies throughout the northwestern Adirondacks, in the Balmat-Edwards district, and at each mine in particular indicate the close dependence of the ore deposits on the enveloping structure whether it be local, district-wide, or regional in scope. Primary folding has developed a northeast regional trend with northwest dips. Secondary folding has been developed by an almost horizontal northeast-southwest-oriented shear couple in the plane of the regional trend. The secondary folding has produced crossfolds that intersect the regional northeast trend and plunge north to northwest at various angles. The ore bodies are found within certain stratigraphic horizons where repeated alternation of competent and incompetent beds encouraged unusually complex folding. Analysis of individual mine structures indicates that the location of each deposit is controlled by structural crossing of primary and secondary folding. The ore bodies, which are tabular, lenticular, or pod-like in form, have features that suggest parallelism to true bedding or modified flow banding, developed by northeast-southwest shearing stresses related to the development of the crossfolds. The ore deposits in general follow both structural and recrystallization trends within the wall rocks. Mobilization of the pre-metamorphic ore minerals is believed to have involved a combination of plastic flow under stress and solution of the sphalerite, minor galena, and pyrite. The ore fluids are thought to have been guided by secondary shearing and microbrecciation into structurally prepared areas where reprecipitation took place. The presumed premetamorphic mineralization now exhibits epigenetic high-temperature features related to late-stage metamorphism.

Jan 1, 1968

By Lennart Malmqvist

Decision-making in exploration deals with experience, knowledge, and sometimes faith, but very often financing and profit, mineral resource aspects, employment, and general political ambitions are parts of the scene. At one end of this spectrum, there is the prospector and his decision on the actual project. The exploration business now expands from its pioneering phase for the benefit of a single company to a wider spectrum which includes the benefit of the large mining consortium and a national development program. Its objectives are also to maintain employment and to favor long-term stability in a mining district or a mining company. The prospector then has new aspects and questions to consider such as, what to do in mining districts where there is a shortage of ore resources but there are still useful investments in mines, processing plants, etc. To analyze the exploration process, therefore, seems to be of great importance in a time of rapidly changing conditions. As in other areas of complex decision-making, for example, in the fields of investments, of production, and of the armed forces, computers most certainly have an important role to play in future exploration decision-making systems. However, we must first analyze our own business as closely as possible to find out what kind of information we need, i.e., why we recommend an exploration program as a good or a poor one. An important part of the debate about exploration is the case study. Case studies on exploration are few and most of those written are only about successful exploration programs. Where are the case studies of the failures and the not so successful programs? Every prospector knows that the majority of exploration projects fail. Consequently, the most important experience seems to be hidden in the failures.

Jan 1, 1979

By D. A. Whitley, R. P. Carone

"Shaft sinking by blind shaft drilling offers the mining industry a different approach to shaft construction. Benefits of blind drilling include less construction time and fewer safety problems while being economically competitive with conventional sinking methods under certain conditions in soft water-bearing formations.Technology and equipment are available today to drill blind shafts up to 20 feet in diameter and over 3,000 feet deep. This is an extension of proven techniques developed by private industry. To drill a 20-foot-diameter hole requires a specially manufactured hydraulic drill unit with a rated hoist of 2 million pounds and 500,000 ft/lb of torque.This brief paper will discuss the following aspects of blind shaft drilling:• benefits;• equipment f or drilling;• circulation methods;• circulation rates;• shaft alignment; and• progress rates to be expected.IntroductionShaft sinking by blind shaft drilling offers the mining industry an improved alternative method for shaft construction. The drilling of 20-foot -diameter shafts to depth s in excess of 3,000 feet can be done by utilizing equipment specifically designed and manufactured for this purpose. This equipment is a distant cousin, at best, to standard oil well drilling rigs. The actual configuration of these drilling machines will be discussed in a following section.To most people, the drilling of mine shafts may seem to be a new or at least recent technology. However, as early as the I920s, German and Dutch miners were drilling 24-foot diameter shafts for coal mines. What led ""miners to resort to drilling were ground conditions that still plague conventional shaft sinkers today: soft , water-bearing formations. The major drawback to these early attempts was a low penetration rate due to poor bit cleaning. This, however, was not the end of early shaft drilling activity. From 1936 to 1950, a number of mine shafts were drilled by the calyx or coring method. This method employs a bit with a large bore down the center. As it drills, it cuts a core. When 5 to 10 feet have been drilled, the core is removed. The disadvantages of this method were the time and work involved in breaking the core free, and it was inadequate in soft water-bearing ground."

Jan 1, 1981

By Ann Barron

For millions of people, cold weather is a fact of line – and one that can make a major challenge out of just getting to work. But for those working in the blasting industry, a number of obstacles are created when old man winter blows in. In addition to the obvious concerns regarding personal protection, Mother Nature can throw some very nasty weather at the blasting crew trying to travel with explosives products from the magazine site to the job site. As such, divers need to be familiar with cold, ice, and snow driving conditions both on and off the blast site. It’s critical to know what to expect before you leave. Keep informed of the latest weather and road conditions as they change often; it will help you make the right choice in clothing and driving habits. Remember bridges and overpasses will freeze first even in temperatures above or near the freezing mark due to the effects of wind chill. Plan to take extra time to and from the job site.

Jan 1, 2004

By Steve Dillingham

With the millennium fever all but faded, we look to a new century filled with awe and excitement. We step forward in time, marveling over the achievements of the 20th century and wondering what the next 100 years could possibly bring. Will there ever be another time that produces such technological advances, economic progress or social changes? Keeping pace with the awesome accomplishments of the past century has not been an easy task and we must prepare ourselves for the possibilities of the future. Take, blasting safety for instance. We all know that safety is personal - a culture - promulgated not only by the company by which you are employed, but, by a sense of your own personal responsibility that must constantly be reinforced through awareness, training, and discipline. Great strides have been made in blasting safety since its crude beginnings, however, safety consciousness becomes even more important as technological advances and scientific progress are made in the coming years. It all begins with a positive safety attitude where every employee habitually examines each situation encountered, identifies potential hazards, and takes precautions to avoid those hazards.

Jan 1, 2002

By Steve Dillingham

The origin of the written blasting log or shot report can likely be traced back to the earliest annals of blasting and record keeping. These records were, for the most part, a way of checking inventory, production progress, or billing, and not necessarily designed with the intention of being used as a legal document in a court of law. As our litigious society has evolved to include far reaching regulatory requirements, however, the blasting log has developed to support and aid in the defense of the common blaster from blasting lawsuits by providing a comprehensive written report of his or her actions.

Jan 1, 2002

By Steve Dillingham

PHYSICAL BLAST DATA Pattern Description All measurements related to the description of the physical blast pattern must be made with the mind-set that it has to tell a powerful factual story enabling a future accurate reconstruction of the event. A case has never been lost because too much factual information was available to assist investigators. An accurate physical description of the pattern must be provided based on the blaster’s observations of the pattern actually loaded. The blaster must measure the pattern size, depth, face heights, etc., recording only accurate results. All too often, a blaster records simple pattern sizes and information relayed to him or her from the driller, or from a phone call into the office the night before for powder pre-load inventory purposes. If a pattern was actually measured on the job site by the blaster to be 8.5 x 9.5’, it may, in fact, originally have been ordered at 9’x9’, 8’x9’, or 9’x l0’. In a claim situation, particularly flyrock, recording a “generalization” of what was loaded could result in an interpretation of a blaster’s negligence due to “not knowing or caring” what the actual pattern was, and not loading appropriately for conditions. It is important to remember that other documentation exists such as a drill log from a contract driller or mine records that may provide a different interpretation of the loaded pattern.

Jan 1, 2002

By Steve Dillingham

A blast site incident has just occurred. Tensions are high, and, as the blaster, you’re in charge of the crisis at hand. Your mind is reeling, your thoughts frantic. The main areas of concern for you at the scene are to deal with immediate problems...aid the injured, take a head count, assess the damage, call emergency response, contact company headquarters, calm the neighbors, update your customer, and respond to the press on site. You feel as if all the bases have been covered...but, then again, have they? One of the biggest mistakes blasters and their companies can make is not including their Insurance carrier in the critical on-site accident procedures and emergency call list. Unfortunately, many companies believe that they are immune to the perils that can often, within a matter of minutes, create chaos that only happens to someone else.

Jan 1, 2002

By Ann Barron, Mark Abernethy

Regardless of the care exercised by a blaster, seismic and acoustic effects produced by blasting can be disruptive and alarming to many people. With the general trend toward larger blasts, increased population, and urban sprawl, as well as sensational accounts of explosives - related incidents by the news media, fear and concern often leave residents searching for damage to their property. As a result, many blasting companies today find themselves at the center of litigation at an accelerating rate. Obviously, the best strategy for handling vibration and airblast complaints is to operate in a manner that does not create grounds for them in the first place. During the bidding process, ask questions. See the actual site to perf o rm an “exposure analysis.” Collect as many facts as possible before blasting including geological issues, contractual obligations, zoning, historical use of site, disruption of daily life to local residents, demographics of the surrounding area, as well as any unfavorable public opinions or prejudices connected with local construction projects or mining operations. A consultation with local pre-blast firms may assist in tracking down previous problems in the area.

Jan 1, 2004

By Hugo T. Dummett

I would like to share some observations about the mining business and place the ongoing discussion in the context of our changed world. The mining industry practices its trade in a universe defined by prices, laws and governments. Prices, as in what the industry is paid for what it produces, and the costs of goods and services. Laws that have to be transparent and fair. And governments that the industry prefers to be stable and supportive of the industry, and certainly not corrupt. However, the day-to-day realities of the mining business in 2000 are not what they were 10 years ago. Several events have occurred that have resulted in a less populated workplace that is obliged to work much smarter and faster. These include real declining prices for most mineral commodities; low and diminishing returns to company shareholders; massive restructuring of the industry through mergers, partnerships and alliances; gold’s changed role from reserve currency to just another commodity; the growing importance of native title and the startling imperatives of “sustainable development.” In addition, the “borderless world” now means that resource companies will need to pass the test of being responsible corporate guests who respect and enhance the social, moral and societal values of their host countries.

Jan 1, 2000

The ninth annual Mine Rescue Evaluation was held in conjunction with the RMCMI 2000 convention at the Sheraton Tamarron Resort, Durango, Colorado June 25 thru 27. The purpose of the mine rescue evaluation program is to provide an opportunity for mine rescue teams to learn new skills and improve their existing ones in a non-competitive environment. Several staged "disaster" scenarios were [ ] held where the teams are called upon to exhibit their life saving abilities. The evaluators meanwhile are offering suggestions, both verbal and written, to help the teams better understand the situations presented them. This non-competitive environment allows the teams to work together and share their knowledge with fellow mine rescue teams providing everyone with a positive learning experience. Mine Rescue Chairman Bill Balaz was in charge of coordinating the events. Seven teams consisting of seven to ten members each (totaling 63 members) participated in the two-day event. Each team was required to respond to three different real-life scenarios plus a written general knowledge test daily. This year's four professional evaluators included Art Saenz (Hazardous Materials) of Western Envi¬ronmental Associates; Guy Horton (Ropes), Guy Horton Rope Rescue; Mary Bailey (Medical), MBA Training and Ron Lauer (Confined Space) also lassos Western Environmental Associates. They cash prov- [ ] ided three different challenging mock situations per day per team. The teams had no prior knowledge of what the scenarios would be as details were provided only as they arrived. Ten volunteer victims added much drama and excitement to the event. Their realistic enactments, complete with false blood makeup and severed limbs, made for some very tense scenarios. The Mine Rescue Teams participating this year were BHP LaPlata, BHP Navajo, BHP San Juan, all from Farmington, New Mexico; Bridger Coal Co., Rock Springs, Wyoming; Sabine Mining, Longview, Texas; Solvay Minerals, Green River, Wyoming and Western Energy Co., Colstrip, Montana. Many new [ ] friendships were made and much knowledge shared. A swap meet was held Saturday afternoon for the teams to exchange miscellaneous equipment, hats, shirts, etc. The teams were asked to evaluate the program and the evaluators. Then responded with many positive suggestions that will help improve the upcoming events in the years to come. Culmination of the Mine Rescue program was a Tuesday morning awards breakfast where the teams were presented with plaques. The participating victims and evaluators were also commended for their outstanding efforts. Sponsors for the Mine Rescue program were Big Sky Coal Company, CMC Rescue, Magnum Metals, Inc., and Rocky Mountain Electric. Many hours of volunteer time and effort from various family members of participants helped make the 2000 event a huge success.

Jan 1, 2000

Teleoperation is one method by which an operator can remotely control and monitor a vehicle. The operator monitors the status and progress of the remote vehicle by watching the video transmitted from one or more cameras which are mounted on the vehicle. In the case of an LHD, it will be fitted with three cameras. For a twin-boom Jumbo, four cameras are mounted on the drill, three of which will have remote pan, tilt, 15x zoom, focus and lens cleaning controls. The advantage of teleoperation is that an operator can stand in the drive and send the remote vehicle around a corner, completely out of sight and still clearly see what is happening. This means that an LHD returns with a full bucket and a Jumbo can be operated from a safe distance. Standing in the drive teleoperating vehicles, exposes the operator to passing traffic including the remote vehicle. There are two solutions to this problem. One is to equip the operator with a Nautilus æBuddyÆ jacket which will help to protect them from all vehicles. The other is to move the operator into a safe room or area, away from the fumes, the noise and the traffic. In this comfortable, less stressful environment, the operator will be more productive and less likely to accidentally damage the vehicle. The operatorÆs æsafeÆ room does not have to be a formal control room, it can be any area which has AC or DC power available and is large enough to contain a chair and a 1.5 m x 0.75 m table. The æsafeÆ room can be on the surface or underground, it does not matter to the operation of the Nautilus Equipment. If the LHDÆs, trucks, locomotives, etc are automatically guided from origin to destination, the operator is free to operate several vehicles at a time, performing only those tasks which are too difficult for a computer to do by itself.

Jan 1, 1998

The tenth annual Mine Resale Evaluation was held in conjunction with the RMCMI 2001 convention at the Steamboat Springs Sheraton Resort, Steamboat Springs, Colorado June 23 through 26. The purpose of the mine rescue evaluation program is to provide an opportunity for mine rescue teams to learn new skills and improve their existing ones in a non-competitive environment. Several staged ?disaster? scenarios were held where the teams are called upon to exhibit their life saving abilities. The evaluators meanwhile are offering suggestions, both verbal and written, to help the teams better understand the situations presented them. This non-competitive environment allows the teams to work together and share their knowledge with fellow mine rescue teams providing everyone with a positive learning experience. Mine Rescue Chairman Bill Balaz, Balaz & Associates, was in charge of coordinating the events. Six teams consisting of seven to twelve members each (totaling 60 members) participated in the three-day event. Each ream was required to respond to direr different real-life scenarios plus a written general knowledge test daily. Cindy Burnham has assisted Bali, for a few years. Her responsibilities include grading all of the written tests. This year's tour professional evaluators included Art Seanz (Hazardous Ma¬terials) of Western Environmental Associates ; Guy Norton (Ropes), Guy Horton Rope Rescue; Mary Bailey (Medical), MBA Training and Morley Hense (Confined Space). Carolyn Durga, BHP Coal, also assisted in hazardous materials and medical scenarios. They each provided three different challenging mock situations per day per team. The teams had no prior knowledge of what the scenarios would be as details were provided only as they arrived. Ten volunteer victims added much drama and excitement to the event. Their realistic enactment, complete with false blood makeup and severed limbs, made for some very tense scenarios. The Mine Rescue Teams participating this year were BHP LaPlata, BHP Navjo, BHP San Juan, all from Farmington, New Mexico; Bridger Coal Co., Rock Springs, Wyoming; Sabine Mining, Longview, Texas; Solway Minerals, Green River, Wyoming and Western Energy Co., Colstrip, Montana. Many new friendships were made and much knowledge shared. A swap meet was held Saturday afternoon for the teams to exchange miscellaneous equipment, hats, shirts, etc. The trams were asked to evaluate the program and the evaluators. They responded with many positive suggestions that will help improve the upcoming events in the years to come. Culmination of the Mine Rescue program was a Tuesday morning awards breakfast where the teams were presented with trophies. Each member was also given a gold pin with the words Continuing Challenge - Ropes.' The pin was the first in a series that will be given over the next few years. The participating victims and evaluators were also commended for their outstanding efforts. Special signed "Victim" shirts were given to select volunteers. Sponsors for the Mine Rescue program were Flanders Electric Motors, Magnum Metals, Rocky Mountain Electric Motors, Sedona Consulting and Balaz & Associates. Many hours of volunteer tine and effort from various family members of participants helped make the 2001 event a huge success.

Jan 1, 2001

By W. Hustrulid

"In recognition of his inspiring dedication to the mining industry through education, research contributions and dissemination of practical knowledge, exceptional leadership and excellence in mining engineering practice and for his lecture, “You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.” Recipient of the 2002 D.C. Jackling Award Introduction It is always difficult to decide on the most appropriate title to give to a paper or talk. It is a particularly difficult decision in the case of the Jackling Lecture, because the title becomes part of the award citation. I hope that the significance of this unusual title will become crystal clear as you read the pages that follow. However, to assist you in this journey, I will provide the following few words of guidance. In making a cake, you need the proper ingredients. If one or more of them are missing, it will not be a cake. In addition, the quality of the cake depends on the quality of the ingredients. In my lecture, the "cake" is the U.S. mining industry of the future. A national perspective President George W. Bush in his State of the Union Address (Bush, 2002) delivered on January 29, 2002, defined three national objectives: •win the war on terrorism, •protect the homeland and •revitalize the economy. Under the heading "revitalize the economy," he indicated the importance of "good jobs" and "energy production" by saying: "Good jobs begin with good schools. Good jobs also depend on reliable and affordable energy. This Congress must act to encourage conservation, promote technology, build infrastructure and it must act to increase energy production at home so America is less dependent on foreign oil." I wish that he would have broadened his focus and stated instead that: "This Congress must act to encourage conservation, promote technology, build infrastructure, and it must act to increase materials production at home so America is less dependent on foreign sources." With regard to jobs, all jobs are not equal. To paraphrase John Reeves of MidContinent Resources (Reeves, 2002): "If our nation is to prosper, we all cannot make a living by doing each other's wash. Some of us, at least, must be actively engaged in the primary production of raw materials from the riches of the earth and other Americans must turn those materials into consumer products." The unfortunate trend in our country has been to neglect the primary production of basic materials, even those coming next in line. We have left those responsibilities to others while we concentrate instead on performing various services, i.e., doing each other's wash and flipping burgers. This cannot continue. It must be remembered, especially by those in leadership positions, that all "jobs" are not created equal. Some jobs are much more essential to the security and wellbeing of our country than others. We must be sure that the important ones are in place. We cannot produce the basic materials that our nation requires without access to those materials. This leads to my Proposition 1: You cannot have a viable mining industry without a clearly enunciated, positive U.S. materials policy. Background regarding U.S. materials policy Resources for freedom. In January 1951, President Truman created the President's Materials Policy Commission, with William S. Paley as chairman. As expressed in the invitation letter from the president to Paley: This commission, within the executive office of the president, is to study the broader and longer-range aspects of the nation's materials problems as distinct from the immediate defense needs. The task of the commission is to make an objective inquiry into all major aspects of the problem of assuring an adequate supply of production materials for our long-range needs and to make recommendations that will assist me in formulating a comprehensive policy on such materials. The commission should study, together with any other aspects deemed by it to be pertinent, such questions relating to production materials as: - the long-range requirements outlook; - the long-range supply outlook; - the prospect and estimated extent of shortages; - the consistency and adequacy of existing government policies, plans and programs; and - the consistency and adequacy of private industry practices.

Jan 1, 2003