Search Documents

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

Jan 1, 1926

By Robert M. von Storch

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

Jan 1, 1958

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

Our next speaker this afternoon is a good friend of mine of some years. I must introduce him by way of a little story. Now Harris Sherman, many of you know because he was really in charge of everything to do with the mining industry in the State of Colorado for a good many years. Some of you may know that before he became part of Governor, Lamm's first cabinet as Director of Department of Natural Resources, he was an attorney for the Environmental Defense Fund and that caused me considerable panic as I think it might have caused some of you. I have observed Hams from the time he stepped into that office until he retired from that office to go into private practice as the senior partner of Arnold & Porter's Denver office, one of the , nation's most prestigious law firms. Hams is a Colorado native. He's lived here all of his life. He's a graduate of Columbia Law School for his law degree and a graduate of Colorado College down at the Springs for his BA. He has served in state government, but I thought it might be appropriate, since he is no longer in state government, if we used Harris, today, to tell us from a former state official's perspective what the image is of the coal industry from the seat he held in Governor Lamm's cabinet for a good many years. He has been the recipient of a number of honors that I think you should know about including Phi Beta Kappa and

Jan 1, 1982

By W. R. Deeths

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

Jan 1, 1984

The Annual Meeting of The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was called to order by the President, John T. Atkins, at 2:00 p.m. Tuesday, June 26, 1984 in the Colorado Ballroom of the Marriott's Mark Resort in Vail, Colorado. There were 36 members in attendance. It was moved by Bob Diederich, seconded and carried to dispense with the reading of the 1983 Annual Meeting minutes as printed on pages 105 thru 109 of the 1983 Proceedings. In keeping with the printed agenda in the convention program/ticket booklet, the President called for reports of standing committees as follow: 1. Bylaws & Resolutions - Loren Linville, Chairman Linville noted that the committee had been working for two years on bylaws changes and concluded a corporate lawyer specializing in nonprofit organizations be engaged. He then introduced Mr. Peter B. Nagle of the Denver law firm of Sherman and Howard who outlined the major changes in converting the Institute's current status of 501(c)(6) to 501(c)(3). He pointed out that such a conversion would give the Institute a proper legal status, would give individual contributors to the scholarship or other programs a personal income tax deduction, would qualify the Institute for the postal nonprofit mailing rate and the Institute would achieve the advantage of limited liability inherent in a corportion and would insulate its members, officers and directors from liability for corporate obligations. Copies of the Articles of Incorporation as well as the Bylaws were available for all members. A discussion ensued and the following resolution was moved by Bob Diederich, seconded and carried: RESOLVED, that the unincorporated association known as the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute be, and hereby is, dissolved and in its place, and to carry out its objectives, shall be formed a nonprofit corporation under the laws of the State of Colorado, which corporation shall also be known as The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, and to which shall be transferred all of the assets and liabilities of this association. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the proper officers of this association are authorized and directed to execute and file with the Colorado Secretary of State, Articles of Incorporation in a form substantially similar to those prepared for this association by its counsel, and the names of the individuals identified in such Articles of Incorporation as the initial Board of Directors of such corporation, which names were proposed and recommended by the Nominating Committee of this association, are hereby approved. FURTHER RESOLVED, that the proper officers of this association are authorized and directed to do all acts necessary or convenient to carry out the terms of the preceding resolutions. (Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws as adopted are printed following these minutes.) Additional resolutions were read by Linville as follows: Item 1: WE RESOLVE herein that in the year since the last convention of the RMCMI, the Institute and the coal industry have suffered the loss, through death, and the services of: Lloyd W. Taylor Charles T. Holland THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that we record in the minutes of the RMCMI, recognition of the passing of these members who have so greatly contributed to the advancement of the industry, both nationally and in the Rocky Mountain area, and that a copy of this resolution be sent to the next of kin as evidence of the sincere sympathy and deep regard of the members of the Institute. Item 2: RESOLVED, that in recognition of their long and faithful service to the coal industry that the status of Life Member be conferred upon: Bernard Bernstrom Roy Coulson Shirl C. McArthur Item 3: RESOLVED, that we commend and express our gratitude to our Executive Secretary, officers, chairmen and committees for an outstanding job in presenting. the 80th RMCMI meeting. Item 4: RESOLVED, that the RMCMI express its gratitude to K&P, INC. of Golden, Colorado for their generous donation of office facilities and furniture for the RMCMI office and to K&P SALES ENGINEERS, INC. also of Golden, Colorado for their assistance in telephone answering, other office procedures and the use of certain office equipment. Item 5: RESOLVED, that six scholarships be awarded annually to advance the education program of the Institute to worthy students pursuing career paths in mining or other related industry in the six states in which the Institute generally operates and has members and in accordance with the criteria set forth by the Scholarship Committee. It was moved by Jim Neal, seconded and tamed

Jan 1, 1984

BHP-Utah International, Inc. Coal Magazine Crane & Hoist Sales, Inc. Cummins Southwest, Inc. Cyprus Coal Company Harnischfeger Corporation Hemscheidt Corporation Jennmar Corporation Joy Technologies, Inc. K&P Sales Engineers, Inc. Kennametal, Inc. Kerr McGee Coal Corporation McLanahan Corporation National Mine Service Company The North American Coal Corporation Peabody Coal Company Pittsburg & Midway Coal Mining Co. Roberts & Schaefer Company Santa Fe Pacific Coal Corporation Southern Pacific Lines Tamarron Resort Utah Power & Light Company Utility Fuel

Jan 1, 1991

DM&E PRB Project [ ] DM&E HISTORICAL MILESTONES ?Start-up in 1986 (former C&NW). ?Colony Line acquisition in 1996 (from UP). ?PRB Project Announcement in 1997 ?IC&E Acquisition in 2002 (former CP/IMRL). ?FRA Federal Refinancing in 2003 (RRIF-1).

Jan 1, 2006

By Lyman Fearn

Men and institutions are what they are largely because of inheritance. Out of the past comes experience that enables men to build more wisely than did preceding generations. The field of possibilities has widened as the horizon of men's vision has been extended. The realization of these possibilities has depended largely on the application of men's natural endowments, brain and brawn, to the problems at hand. In the field of mechanized mining, Wyoming has a greater percentage of men with vision, who have a realization of the possibilities of mechanized mining, than any other state in proportion to tonnage production. With the introduction of mechanized mining systems have come problems that have caused the men who are connected with the safety work much thought. Discussions on mechanical drilling, cutting, loading, conveying, haulage, etc., have come in for their share of the debate. There have been a few attempts made to show that mechanical mining is safer than are the more primitive ways of doing underground work by man power. We also have a number of places in the coal producing States of the United States, where the mechanized systems have been abandoned chiefly on account of the safety element involved bringing about condemnation of the system by State inspection forces. Certain types of scraper systems have been condemned, and some have voiced opposition to long faces. This would lead us to believe that the question is still a debatable one as far as the safety element is concerned. It is only fair that we discuss the operations of mechanical systems and from the results obtained take analysis of conditions as they exist, basing our conclusions from the results obtained.

Jan 1, 1928

[Page Vernal Mortensen, RMCMI President 1982-1983 2 RMCMI Officers 1982-1983 4 Treasurer's Report 198 1-82 5 Remembrance of Deceased Members 6 Roster of Advertisers 7 President Ira E. McKeever's Address 9 1982 New Member Listing 10 "Which Shall it be - Pity or Pride?" Keynote Address, Dr. William S. Banowsky 17 "Don't Desert the American Dream - Fulfill it!" Carl Terzian 22 "The Image of the Coal Industry" Symposium, Charles W. Margolf, Chairman 33 The Honorable Michael Enzi 34 Harris D. Sherman 38 Robert Golten 40 Ralph Looney 43 "Sure You Have an Image - But What Kind?", Carl Terzian 46 Resolutions 77 Advertisements 79 Acknowledgment, Appointment 111 Invitation to 1983 RMCMI Meeting 112]

Jan 1, 1982

Jan 1, 1930

By G. A. Murphy

This tipple differs from the ordinary tipple only in that it embodies numerous refinements for grading and otherwise preparing the coal. Coal from the mines is delivered to the tipple over a surface tram. There are two tracks for loads, which will hold about forty cars, and one track for empties which will hold about the same number. The loads are fed to the dump by gravity from both tracks and are controlled by two squeeze blocks. These blocks are of the type originally designed by Mr. W. J. Elwood, but unlike the original blocks which were of wood and operated by hand levers, are built of steel and operated by com¬pressed air at 100 pounds pressure. They are capable of holding securely twenty-four three-ton cars on a grade of 2.5%. The dump is of the complete revolving type and has a capacity of five cars per minute. After being dumped the empty cars go to the usual kick-back and onto the empty track by gravity. The hopper under the dump has a capacity of approximately fifteen tons, and the coal from this hopper is fed to the shakers by a reciprocating feeder. The screens are of the usual shaker type. They are eight feet wide, seventy-two feet long in two sections, balanced, pitch 12° 30", travel six inches and the eccentric shaft makes 100 revolutions per minute. The upper section of the screen is shorter but heavier than the lower section, and contains the slack and nut screens, consisting of plates with 1 5/8" and 3" round perforations respectively. The lower section contains plates with 4 ½ ", 6" and 8" round perforations respectively, from top to bottom in the order named. The shaker is so arranged that nearly all changes for making the different sizes of coal are made by merely shifting levers. The most complicated change has been made in two and a half minutes; most of the other changes can be made in less than one minute and some of then without stopping the shaker. One of the refinements is what we call the degradation screens. Just before the coal leaves the shaker it goes over a screen with 1 3/8" round perforations, which takes out the fine coal made while the coal is going over the other perforations. This fine coal goes into hoppers and onto the degradation conveyor and to the slack chute. The different sizes of coal, excepting the slack, are delivered by the shaker onto three picking tables. These tables are horizontal for twenty-four feet and then hinged to form the loading booms, so that each picking table forms a unit of continuous conveyor. Centrally located under the picking tables and under the floor, is the refuse conveyor which runs at right angles to the tables. The impurities picked from the coal are dropped into openings in the floor and onto this conveyor, from which they are discharged into a bin of 100 tons capacity. From this bin the refuse is loaded into railroad cars through a gate. The slack may be loaded directly into railroad cars through a chute from the hopper under the shaker, or it may be conveyed to the rescreener. Gates are provided by which all or any part of the slack may be loaded either directly into railroad cars or conveyed to the rescreener. The rescreener is a shaker four feet wide with sixteen feet of plate perforated with 3/4" round holes. The framework is wood, the pitch is 5° and it is driven by eccentrics having a 5 3/4" throw running 143 R.P.M. It is hung on 1"x10" ash boards, rigidly fixed at the support and on the shaker, so that the spring of the boards allows for its movement. The eccentric rods are also of ash, rigidly fixed and spring to allow the movement of the eccentrics. The dust going through this shaker drops into a bin of 80 tons capacity and is loaded into railroad cars

Jan 1, 1925

By H. F. Nash

Coal is the basic necessity of our present-day civilization, and those engaged in the industry, whether miner, day-man, pit boss, tipple boss, superintendent, salesman or operator, have a direct responsibility to the public at large. Our country is blessed with a great supply of Bituminous coal, upon which it must largely depend for its industrial prosperity. Anthracite coal, in its relation to our economic situation, is a small factor, as its ratio of production to Bituminous coal is only about one-sixth. However, within the last ten years, electricity and oil have largely displaced the use of coal in industry, so that the use of Bituminous coal is decreasing, relatively, and the potential production of Bituminous coal has largely increased since the war. High wage scales and high freight rates make the delivered price of coal to the consumer so out of proportion to the cost of electricity and oil -and strikes make the supply of coal so uncertain-that industry is rapidly turning to electricity and oil. The energy in a ton of coal can be transported, by electric current, a distance of 250 miles for 78% of what it costs to ship the coal in bulk, by rail, in the East-and, for about 60% of what it costs in our section of the country. The use of fuel oil, distillate and gasoline, in industry, has increased by leaps and bounds. Especially was this noticeable during the strike this year, as the large packing plants in Kansas City, Omaha and Sioux City (that formerly used nothing but coal) are now practically all using oil. This also supplies to other industrial plants throughout our territory in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Nebraska. Many railroads are using oil, as are also the smelters, cement plants, etc., etc. Ten years ago, 100% of the threshing in the state of Kansas was done with coal-today not over 25% of it is done through that means-and so it goes all along the line. The use of our coal is being yearly more restricted in industry. In the case of domestic consumption, the circle is also ever decreasing.' In small towns and on farms, kerosene, gasoline and wood are largely utilized for cooking. For the past four years, along any country road, it is a common occurrence to hear a buzz-saw cutting old fence posts or timbers taken from creek bottoms. Many thousands of tons of coal are displaced each year through the use of corn and cobs. In larger towns, gas plants have been installed, and many housewives use gas-in communities contiguous to natural gas, that is used for industrial and domestic purposes. The time has gone when industrial and domestic consumers or dealers are satisfied to buy anything that is black-competition among the coal-producing states is keen, and will become more so. Eastern and southern fields are turning out splendidly prepared coals of high quality, and with their lower freight rates to competitive territory, will entirely nullify the use. of our Western coal unless-

Jan 1, 1922

CONCLUSIONS: Our experience, where we attempt to remove a continuous face with a seam more than six and one-half feet in thickness, has been rather disastrous. We have been able to open up faces and retreat for a distance of 75 to 100 feet in this particular character of coal, but after the supporting timbers have been removed for the second or third time we have found that the roof has a tendency to ride over the props and break off at the face of the coal support. However, where our coal is below six and one-half feet in thickness we have had very good success in handling the roof and breaking it off systematically with our break line of props, which are usually from 12 to 15 feet from the face of the coal. Our practice in to set props at about two-foot intervals in each direction and remove two sets of props, at the same time two additional sets are placed along the coal face. At all times we are very insistent that all props be removed from the gob and that entire coal be taken out so that it is possible for the roof to break freely and all come down, not having any supporting pillars in the gob. The conclusion of our experiments to date is that if all the supports beyond the breaking line of props are taken out as the long face retreats and the closer the breaking line of props is kept to the face the better the results will be. We have never felt it safe to have less than four rows of props to protect the machinery and men working along the coal face. We feel that the time element as to the rapidity with which these faces are advanced or retreated, is of vast importance, but to date have not had an opportunity or experience enough to reach any conclusion as to what time element is proper here with us. We feel that the crushing strength of the overlying strata will govern this to a large extent, and as ours varies considerably, it is going to he very difficult for us to reach a definite conclusion. My opinion is, that conditions may be such that rather than have a short face and retreat rapidly, it will be found that a longer facewith a slower retreat will work out better. Such a condition might give the overlying strata time to settle. The caving of roof or of control of this caving, with us, is quite closely associated with the ventilation. We find that the places where the strata overlying the coal are composed of shale, that the effect of the air on this is of very great importance. It is our endeavor, at all times, not only to remove obnoxious gases, but to keep a current of fresh air moving along the face and, of course, a portion of this travels over the gob and comes in contact with the roof and overlying strata. This, we find, helps materially in keeping the roof on the move. As it is our practice to keep water for sprinkling purposes at all places, we also use this water to keep the roof wet back in the gob. The effect of water on the shale is to cause it to disintegrate quite rapidly. MR. HOLMAN (Concluding): If there are any questions about this, I will be glad to answer them. I have some prints and also some pictures of the scraper loader and the shaking conveyors (distributes.) PRESIDENT MOSES: We wish to thank you, Mr. Holman, and also wish that you would thank Mr. Dupont for his paper. Are there any discussions? Do you wish to ask Mr. Holman any questions? (No response.) PRESIDENT MOSES: Mr. Holman, I would like to ask you how you take the photographs; were they taken by flashlight, or were globes used, or how were they taken, in a gaseous mine? MR. HOLMAN: Our mines being gaseous, we do not use the ordinary flashlight for taking underground photographs, but we have had considerable success, I think, with underground pictures by means of electric lights. We use 250 watt globes. We have six of these rigged up with tin reflectors, 18 inches in diameter, on standards, and we carry two or three hundred feet of wire connected with these six lights, and they can be turned on in the room where we take the photograph, by means of this extra wire. We set the kodak up and arrange the picture and take a long time-exposure. We usually take an

Jan 1, 1926

By M. H. Forester

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

Jan 1, 1953

By Richard M. Whiting

Thank you very much for that introduction. I spent part of my early career in the coal industry here in Colorado, and I am always happy to return. In such a beautiful setting, it seems out of place to talk about "Improving the Climate". But in our work-a-day worlds, we know the climate for the coal industry is something less than picture perfect. But unlike Mother Nature's climate, there are some things we can do about the climate for coal. Today, I want to talk to you about sonic of the activities that we are engaged in... and that you can support... to improve that climate. A number of challenges and opportunities face our industry. I will try to set the stage for this conference by briefly describing the current climate for coal - which is indeed very challenging. I will then outline some of the steps we are taking to broaden our base to include our allies in the rail and electricity industries and the public at large.

Jan 1, 2000

By Bill Reid

Jan 1, 2007

Jan 1, 1980

PRESIDENT MOSES.: The meeting will please come to order. Will you kindly state your names prior to making any statements, in order that we may deep the record straight? The first paper this morning is a joint one on vocational training, by D. W. Rockey, H. A. Tiemann and Wm. Moorhead. Mr. Rocdey. (Applause.) D. W. ROCKEY (State Superintendent, Industrial Education, Santa Fe, New Mexico) (Mr. Rocdey's notes not received in time for publication.) MR. TESCHER: I would like to ask you, Mr. Rocdey, you say you gave the Phelps-Dodge Corporation financial assistance; to just what extent was the State obligated, and how much assistance was given, etc.?

Jan 1, 1927