Search Documents

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

By Margaret N. Maxey

Man's capacity far fretting is endless, and no matter what difficulties we surmount, how many ideals we realize, there is a stealthy pleasure in rejecting mankind or the universe as unworthy of our approval. - Will Durant Until recently, reasons for favoring one or another energy alternative were advanced on the basis of technical considerations and economic realities. However, it is an indication of the cultural climate of our society and growing realization of why energy is our master resource that many citizens have begun to express concern about the social and ethical implications of our energy deci¬sion-making. A vivid indication of this shift toward ethical concerns is reflected in the attention being focused on conservation - even to the point of regarding it as a virtual panacea equivalent to a "free energy resource." Among others, the authors of a publication by Resources for the Future cautions us about the difficulties of defining conservation. They also point out that unrealistic expectations for achieving the high levels of conservation claimed by true believers may boomerang if, at the same time, we are morally required to maintain economic growth and robust productivity for the basic well-being of more people. In its economic meaning, conservation signifies the most economic or cost-effective applications of energy, together with other resources, in a given process or activity. To achieve conservation that is cost-effective, saving energy alone is not sufficient; the cost involved in saving the energy must be no greater than the cost of the energy that is saved. Using its thermodynamic meaning, conservation and efficiency are viewed as constrained by physical laws and measured against ideal limits set by these laws and processes. Since achieving higher levels of technical performance is not without costs, the economic meaning of conservation must be factored into technical possibilities. It is the ethical, equity and environmental meaning of conservation that concerns us here. In its third meaning, conservation consists in moderation as a value which appears inherently worthwhile both in itself and in relation to social choices dedicated to achieving distributive justice. The value of moderation seems predicated on the assumption that natural resources and the environment have fixed, finite, exhaustible capacities for satisfying human needs. Hence norms for moderating human behavior appear to require prescriptions by some authority. Such norms presuppose some agreement on "essential" uses of energy. However, the difficulties of setting behavioral norms loom large, because "... it is as difficult to determine essential energy consumption as to determine what is essential in any other phase of consumption, whether it involves food, clothing, shelter, or recreation." The ethical meaning of conversation is further complicated by a centuries-old argument over the proper exercise of stewardship - i.e., how best to develop natural resources. On the one hand, the preservationist position insists on an inviolate, "hands-off" policy and stands opposed to ongoing development of wilderness areas and mineral resources. On the other hand, the "scientific conservationist" who preaches the "gospel of efficiency" insists on development of resources based on principles of sustained-yield, multiple use and - in the case of competing claims - reserving resources or land for their "higher use." Current confusion reigns among opinion leaders in the environmental movement because they appear to have lost the genius of the original Conservation ethic, developed in the 19th century. They seem to think that conservation is preservation. The question I wish to explore is whether a single-minded, exclusive pursuit of "conservation" in its economic, thermodynamic and preservationist meanings may actually do more harm than good in serving the ethical goals of conservation. There

Jan 1, 1986

By D. C. McClure

MR. McCLURE: Mr. Chairman, you sprang a surprise on me; I really came over here for a good time. Gentlemen, I am not at all qualified to pose as an expert on pulverized fuel; I have merely been making some rather interesting observations, and unfortunately at the present time, a great deal of substantial data, the technical data, I don't happen to have with me; it is still in the process of being calculated, but I will be very glad to tell you some of the observations as I have made them, and in as truthful and complete a way as I can. The question of how we would handle fuel became a very pressing subject in this new Valmont electric plant, which is now under progress. We have studied the methods of burning fuel for a number of years on different types of stokers at the existing plants in Denver; we are burning it with a natural draft chain grate and with underfeed and with forced draft chain grates, and I am very frank to confess at the present time that I have no answer as far as stokers are concerned for a better solution of the problem of burning lignite. In other words, I could not tell you that this or that is a better type of stoker to use for that coal. However, to boil the thing down, after considerable trials, the underfed stoker was chosen as the one most adaptable for the utilizing of lignite fuel if stokers are to be used. In other words, the chain grate was put aside. I might say in support of the chain grate, the prime reason for which that type of stoker was condemned, as far as lignite goes, is the initial investment charge and the large maintenance which is involved.

Jan 1, 1923

[Page Officers of the Institute 5 Minutes of Twenty-first Meeting 9 The U. S. Fuel Company's Tipple at the Hiawatha Mine John M. Jennings 11 Some Experiences With Mechanical Loading in Central Pennsylvania¬ O. G. Sharrer 13 Mechanical Loading Underground- A. W. Dickinson 25 Operation by Long-Face Conveyor Method at Sweetwater Mine Glen A. Knox 39 Discussion of Mechanical Loading 44 Discussion-Safety in Mechanical Loading 45 New Steel Tipple, Spring Canyon, Utah- G. A. Murphy 46 A Theory on the Cause of Spontaneous Combustion-C. P. Crawford... 48 Rock Dusting in the West-D. Harrington 50 Mudite-L. C. Clare 57 Discussion of Harrington's and Clare's Papers 59 Material for Rock Dust-Prepared Discussion-Edward K. Judd 60 Tipple and Mine of the Columbia Steel Corporation-T. C. Harvey 63 Mechanical Stoking of Domestic Fuel-Joseph Harrington 67 The Garrison Automatic Domestic Stoker-Lloyd Garrison 70 Discussion of Domestic Stokers 71]

Jan 1, 1925

By Geo. A. Murphy

MR. ARTHUR E. GIBSON (General Manager, Consumers Mutual Coal Company of Utah) : I suppose the reason I was called upon to read this paper was because I was at the mine for several years, but I have not been there for the past four years and the installation has been put in since I left. This article has been written by my successor-it follows: At the very urgent solicitation of your Secretary I have consented to prepare this paper descriptive of the spiralizing plant which is a part of the new steel tipple recently erected by the Spring Canyon Coal Company to serve its mines at Spring Canyon, Utah. I have been reluctant in giving this consent for two reasons: one of which is an excellent one, and the other isn't any good at all. First,, I find that it takes a long time to become familiar with the eccentricities of spirals-to get wise to their whims and peculiarities, and while this plant has been in operation for a number of months, something new seems to crop up nearly every time I see it, and -it would be impossible to describe all of these things even if I remembered them. The second reason is, purely personal. Among the many things I have learned by attending the sessions of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute is that if a man is not pretty sure of the ground he attempts to cover, he had better keep his mouth shut, because if he isn't right, he is dead sure to be called down by someone. However, as I will not attend the session, this feature will not hurt much, but it will make it necessary for someone else to read the paper and this will make it much better for those who are obliged to listen to it because I don't read English very well. To begin with I will say that what is said in this paper applies only to the plant under discussion as I have had no experience with any other plant. While spirals have been in use for quite a number of years, and there are some large plants in the East, their use has not been general, and I believe the plant at Spring Canyon is the only one in the United States west of the Mississippi River. The details of the plant were worked out by Mr. Thos. R. Stockett, General Manager of the Spring Can= yon Coal Company; it was manufactured by the Anthracite Separation Company of Hazelton, Penn., incorporated in the design and erected by the Link-Belt Company of Chicago, in connection with the balance of the tipple. It consists of five units. Each unit consists of a vertical wood column about 6 inches in diameter, and 9 feet 6 inches in height, around which the spiral is built. It is something like a triple screw conveyor, set vertically, with flights down which the coal and refuse travel by gravity in the process of separation. There are three of these flights, forming a sort of nest but about 7 inches apart, and they make 21 turns around the column in its length. These flights dip toward the column about 27 degrees; they have a uniform pitch downward of 31 degrees; they are 19 inches wide at the top (measured from the column) and taper gradually until they are about 9 inches at the bottom. They are not made with one continuous plate from top to bottom, but are made up of a number of plates. Some of these plates are slightly waved, others have small corrugations in them and still others are perforated with small holes, all of which are intended to accelerate or. retard the movement of the coal and refuse as they pass down, At intervals there are adjustable plates in the flights for the purpose of decreasing the maximum outside;

Jan 1, 1926

Saturday, June 28 A pre-convention activity kicking off the 93rd RMCMI meeting was a Saturday evening June 28 reception for all Mine Rescue participants, their convention registered spouses, professional evaluators and RMCMI Board of Directors. This was at Buddy's Run in the Sheraton Steamboat Resort, Colorado. An estimated 100 persons enjoyed the buffet: fresh vegetable erudite with ranch dressing, fresh fruit and cheese displays and silver dollar rolls filled with ham or turkey. Blue golf shirts and red caps and convention packets were distributed to each Mine Rescue team member. Evaluators received red shirts and blue caps during the reception. Meeters and greeters from the Reception Committee wore red RMCMI arm bands and were stationed at strategic hotel spots, answered attendee's questions and gave directions to the registration area. Convention packets were first distributed Saturday afternoon by Julie Cummings and Lorraine McDonald. Sunday, June 29 A 7:30 a.m. shotgun scramble kicked off the golf tourney at the Sheraton course for 145 golfers. Yes, 145! as Lois Egan, President Tom's wife, completed a five-some with Tom and their three sons. A continental breakfast preceded the tourney. Another 65 golfers began play at 1:00 p.m. making this a record number of 210 golfers! Julie Cummings and Loren Linville sold $2,620 worth of $10 mulligans to the golfers with proceeds to the scholarship program. [ ] Both golf tourneys were co-chaired by Dave Mallak and Gordon Merriam who distributed prizes at 4:30 p.m. Monday. Prizes were donated by Amax Coal Sales West, Inc.; Austin Powder Co.; BHP Minerals-Navajo Mine; Bucyrus International, Inc.; Commercial Testing & Engineering Co.; Empire Machinery Co.; Ingersoll Rand; The Jeannot Group, Komatsu Mining Systems; Long-Airdox Co.; Marston Environmental Inc.; MEGA Corp.; The P&M Coal Mining Co.; Scandura, Inc. and TerraMatrix. [ ] RMCMI registration was an all day venture headed by chair Julie Cummings and assisted by Pat Johnson. [ ] Nearly 40 persons met for a Chef Demonstration and wine tasting at the Sheraton at 11:00 a.m. Executive Chef Jacques Wilson prepared broiled achiote shrimp with cantaloupe, grilled duck stuffed blue corn pancakes with herb grained bread and fresh fruit meringues. Wilson shared his recipes with the group and appropriate wines were served with each course, all sampled by the attendees. The chef arranged an impromptu showing of the main kitchen following the demo. [ ]

Jan 1, 1997

RMCMI members were welcomed at 12:30 p.m. by President McKeever. Following the luncheon held at the Conference Center, McKeever introduced Mr. Brooks Mitchell who is President, Human Resources Management, Inc. in Richardson, Texas. His topic was "Perspective on the Last Five Years. " The RMCMI Championship Tennis Tournament was held at the Marriott's Mark courts under the direction of Chairman Alan W. Czarnowsky and his committee members Mary Kay Aisenbrey and Jon Pratt. EVENING Tuesday, June 29, 1982 From 6:00 to 9:00 p.m. a Mini-Banquet was held for the young people of RMCMI members in the East Room of Lionsquare Gore Creek Lodge. The 6:00 p.m. time found RMCMI members gathered for a social hour at Marriott's Mark poolside, The Annual Speechless banquet followed at 7:00 p.m. in the Conference Center. After the dinner, President McKeever introduced the Golf and Tennis Chairmen who announced the prize winners. Robert W. Wilson, Chairman of the Nominating Committee, presented the following slate of officers for 1982-83: President, Vernal Mortensen; Vice Presidents-Colorado, Charles W. Margolf; Montana, Art K. Neill; New Mexico, Robert Diederick; North Dakota, James A. Brown; Utah, Bernard Bernstrom and Wyoming, John T. Goodier. It was moved by Loren V. Linville, seconded and carried that the elective ballot of RMCMI be cast for the officers as nominated. Mr. Wilson advised RMCMI that a successor to Mrs. Whiteside would be selected at a later date by the Committee and Executive Board inasmuch as Mrs. Whiteside's resignation had been received only ten days earlier and there had been no time for interviews. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. MORNING SESSION Wednesday, June 29, 1982 President McKeever called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. in Salon A of the Marriott's Mark. New business included a report of the Auditing Committee and it was moved by Chairman Paul Hronich, seconded and carried that the Financial Report as prepared by the Treasurer, Mrs. Augusta Whiteside, be approved as submitted. The report of the Resolutions Committee was presented by Chairman Ed Ziolkowski who moved that certain resolutions be approved. The motion was seconded, carried and the resolutions follow: 1. RESOLVED, WHEREAS, in the year since the last convention of The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, the Institute and the coal industry have suffered the loss, through death, of the services of: John Chrystal Richard R. Fenner G. D. Grayer Albert M. Keenan C. E. Osborn Stanley C. Shubart George Sumers Cal Witmer NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that there be recorded in the minutes of The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute 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 and deep regard and sympathy of the members of the Institute. 2. RESOLVED, that in recognition of the faithful service to the coal industry generally, and to this Institute in particular, the status of Life Membership in The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute be hereby conferred upon these members: John T. Leech George C. Lindsay A. George Setter

Jan 1, 1982

The Wednesday morning session was opened by President Joe Ward at 9:30 a.m. He complimented Walter Mueller, Program Chairman, for the excellent job he did as head of that very important committee. He also thanked all those on the various committees, speakers, and all who participated in making the 1972 meeting a success. He called on William S. Landers, Chairman of the Auditing Committee, to give his report. He read the report and asked for a motion of approval. Motion was made, seconded and approved. (See Treasurer's report on page 5.) A. E. Pagnotta of the Resolutions Committee read their report as follows: RESOLVED: Whereas, since the 67th Regular Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. held at Park City, Utah, the Institute and the coal mining .industry has suffered the loss through death of service and fellowship of the following members: W. H. Carson James Dalrymple Edward H. Denny A. B. Foulger Thomas E. Graham G. R. Harris Frank Markosek Anthony C. Moschetti Harry Swihart Franklin B. Thomas

Jan 1, 1972

PRESIDENT OLIVER: May I have your attention, please, gentlemen? The Forty-Fourth Meeting of the Rocky Mountain, Coal Mining Institute is now In session. I want to say just a few words of welcome to all the delegates this morning, both old and new. There is a large group of men around here I notice who come to this meeting year after year, and it occurs to me that they must be getting something worthwhile out of these meetings, the renewal of old acquaintances, the making of new acquaintances, and the opportunity to find out what is doing in the technical end of the coal business, and what is new. So, we greet you enthusiastically and trust that you will find this meetnig on a par with all those which have gone before and. that each one of you will leave these sessions determined that you will not miss next year but will be back again. So, with that introduction, we will proceed with the business of the convention. As time is fleeing away from us, if there is no objection, I wil lentertain a motion to dispense with the reading of last year's minutes. Will somebody make that motion? MR. H: C. MARCHANT: I move we dispense with the reading of last year's minutes. (The motion was carries unanimously.)

Jan 1, 1948

President Heiner opened the final session of the Institute at 9:30 a.m. Frances Leonard read the report of the Auditing Committee. Motion made by Stan Shubart for acceptance of audit and approval. Seconded and carried. R. R. Williams of the Resolutions Committee presented the following resolutions to the, group for their approval: RESOLVED: That the members of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, in convention assembled, hereby ratify and confirm all official actions of the Officers, the Executive Committee and other committees of the Institute between and including July 3, 1963 and July 1, 1964.

Jan 1, 1964

By John Pfisterer

Leadership Priorities in a New Business Environment ?Komatsu Equipment Company ?Health and Safety of Our Workforce ?The Green Economy & Market Challenges ?Equipment Trends ?Our Business Approach

Jan 1, 2009

A symposium concerning "The Image of the Coal Industry" was presented at 2:00 p.m. in the Conference center and chaired by Charles W. Margolf, RMCMl Program Chairman and Vice President, Western Coal Development, W. R. Grace & Co. MR. McKEEVER: I'd like to do one thing and that's to introduce our Program Chairman, Charlie Margolf, who will be handling this portion of the program. Charlie and I have been acquainted since late 1973. He has worked together with me on several projects at W. R. Grace here in the west; a dear friend and one that I just want to say thanks to again. I think I have a little token of that appreciation here for Charlie. Here you are Charlie. (present given) I turn the command over to you. Mr. Margolf, a native of State College, Pennsylvania, received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Industrial Engineering from Pennsylvania State University in 1950 and a Juris Doctor Degree from University of Pittsburgh School of Law in 1953. His professional experience has beem as an attorney in the Law Department of Reynolds Metals Company, Richmond, Virginia, where he served as legal counsel to the Geological Department the mining subsidiaries of the parent company both foreign and domestic, the Power Department and the Oil and Gas Division. He was closely associated with Reynolds Mining Corporation's project at Lake DeSmet, Wyoming, from its inception in 1954 and became Manager of the Wyoming Division of Reynolds Mining Corporation when it was established in 1966, holding that position until September 1972 when he joined Cameron Engineers, Inc. of Denver, Colorado as Vice President in charge of its coal, water and environmental activities. Mr. Margolf joined W. R. Grace & Co. in January 1974 as Director of Western Coal Operations. Memberships are held in the Virginia Bar Association, the Wyoming Bar Association, the American Bar Association and its Section of Natural Resources Law, the Wyoming Engineering Society, the Colorado Mining Association, the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute which he has served as vice president for Wyoming, the Society of Mining Engineers of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineers, the Minerals Information Committee of the Denver Chapter of AIME and the Denver Coal Club which he has served as Chairman of its Board of Directors. He has also been a member of the Montana Coal Council and served as a director, the Wyoming Water Development Association which he has served as a director for industry and as first vice president and the Wyoming Mining Association. He has been reappointed by Governor Lamm to the Governor's Scientific Advisory Council. He was appointed by the Federal Power Commission, Gas Policy Advisory Council, to its Supply- Technical Advisory Task Force - Synthesized Gaseous Hydrocarbon Fuels and served as Vice Chairman of that Task Force. He has been reappointed by the Secretary of the Interior to the Solid Fuels Unit, Department of the Interior, National Defense Executive Reserve. He also serves on the Advisory Council to the Industrial Ecology Institute of the Colorado School of Mines and was recently elected a member of the Board of Directors of ROMCOE (Center for Environmental Problem Solving). Chairman Margolf presented the symposium from the perspective of: ? A local government official - The Honorable Michael Enzi, Mayor of Gillette, Wyoming ? A former state government official - Harris D. Sherman, former Director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources ? A representative of a national environmental. organization- Robert Golten, Senior Counsel, National Wildlife Federation ? A representative of the printed news media- Ralph Looney, Editor of The Rocky Mountain News in Denver

Jan 1, 1982

By R. Dawson Hall

*This paper was not read as it arrived too late. In the beginning of the last century "cottage industry" gave way to the factory system, and at present manufacturing that was once performed in homes is done wholly in factories. Division of labor came into being at the same time. In earlier years rarely more than a half-dozen men worked at the home of the master workman. Each group performed all the labor involved in changing crude material to the finished article, and many of the masters in a cottage industry themselves took the raw material and converted it by their own efforts into a highly specialized product ready for the market. Mining has in a degree moved in the same direction. But for the most part every man still has his own room. Pick miners in many places get their cars at the room neck, push them to the face, undercut their coal, drill their shot-holes, load and fire them, complete the breaking down of their coal, fill their cars, push them to the entry and also test their roof for weak spots, examine for gas, timber their rooms, bail them out and lay their own track. Mining is still in a way a "cottage" industry, only the cottage is a room in the mines instead- of a home. The men who gather the coal and take it to the tipple are in a measure like the middlemen who went from cottage to cottage and gathered the product of the owners or "masters", to use the term then prevalent. The change in ordinary industry from old methods to new came with machinery. The machines then introduced needed power for their operation, and distribution of power from house to house was too great a task for those times. Power could not readily be taken to machinery where water power only was available. It was necessary for the machinery and its workers to go to the power. Nor when steam was harnessed could every cottage have its steam engine. Compressed air and electricity had not arrived, and con-

Jan 1, 1922

PRESIDENT MOSES: Mr. Hall, can you tell us something that will help our cause? R. DAWSON HALL: I did not want to tell anything; I wanted rather to say something, if. I said anything at all, about my impressions regarding the safety of the mines in the West. We heard yesterday how terribly dangerous they were, and I think that is due to the natural conditions. It is interesting to note that many of the developments of safety, which you will find all through the country, had their origin here in the Rocky Mountain States. It has not been because the Rocky Mountain States have been negligent - though, of course, they could have been more active - but it is becaues the conditions have been such as to make accidents more numerous. Rock dusting by mechanical means was used here before any other country adopted it, let alone the United States. It is true that rock dusting was started in England; but it was by hand, as it remained with the Victor -American Fuel Company to be the first to distribute rock dust by machines, and that is to the credit of Mr. Murray, who was the man that did the original dusting in those mines. It was at Delagua, they put up shelving and put dust on it; they used the adobe, and Mr. Pryde, at Reliance, very early in the game, put dust in the Reliance Mines, and some of the dust, I believe, is there yet but they can hardly find it for the new dust. That is not all. I believe it was first in the Utah Fuel Company's mine that incombustible clay was used for stemming, and in the East, where we were in the habit of using slack entirely, that was a big advantage. Another thing that the West has originated has been the wetting of the chain in cutting. The people in Alabama took a great deal of credit for having used that very early, but not as early as Mr. Brennan did at the Hanna Mine, he having used water on the cutter bits in 1913. Another development was that the Phelps Dodge Corporation were the first people to use, I believe in the United States, storage battery locomotives for main haulage, and while they didn't go ahead with that, so far as putting in power trucks and mining machines, until just recently-I think the Consolidation Coal Company in the East managed to get ahead of them in that development,-notwith-standing, they were the earliest to use it for main haulage. When I came through this section of the country, in 1912, I think it was, I went through the mines of the Union Pacific Coal Company. I was surprised to see the extent to which fire-proofing had been carried out in that mine, with regard to non-combustible brattices and overcasts, which were of concrete; even the boxes were covered with sheet metal. They were very far ahad of us in that respect; far, far ahead of us in the East, because the East has its favorable conditions in the fact that most of the lump in the mines is more or less wet all the time. Another safety provision which has been taken by the Utah Fuel Company, was shooting from the surface. That has not spread very much in the, East, but it has been used in Oklahoma and the middle West. I think there is plenty of evidence that the Western people have been thinking for themselves, in going ahead and' establishing new standards in Safety. One of the most unusual things is this Safety Committee, permanent Safety Committee of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, which has been endeavoring here to find out the conditions under which safety cant best be practiced. I think it is those who venture to. criticize the West that) have to show that in the East there is not the spirit which has led the Rocky Mountain region to endeavor to reduce its very terrible death rate that really exists. It has to be faced and it furnishes a cause, an incentive; for further work toward safety; but none can deny that the desire of the western mining man has been to find

Jan 1, 1926

At the meeting of the American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers, G. S. Rice, Chief Mining Engineer of the U. S. Bureau of Mines, announced the definition of a gassy mine. This definition has been awaited with much interest, especially by the Safety Committee of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. It applies to the whole area of all mines, any part of which is on the public domain of the United States. Consequently it will be of wide application in the western part of this country. The safety committee of the R. M. C. M. I. has been hopeful that the Institute would adopt this definition without exception as the codes of rules to be recommended at all mines in the Rocky Mountain area. The statement follows: "The U. S. Bureau of Mines believes that all coal mines are potentially gassy; but for purposes of administration in respect to prevention of explosions and fires, the Bureau recommends the following classification: "Class 1 coal mine-A practically non-gassy mine in which flammable gas in excess of 0.05 per cent cannot be found by systematic search. "Class 2. coal mine-A slightly gassy mine in which (a) flammable gas has been found, ? but in quantity less than two per cent in still air in any active or unsealed-abandoned workings; or (b) flammable gas can be found, but in quantity less than four per cent, in some place from which the ventilating current has been shut off for a period of one hour; or (c) flammable gas can be found,* but in quantity less than one-fourth per cent in a split** of the ventilating current; or (d) flamamble gas is found in quantity greater than' specified rate*** of not more than 25 cu. ft. per minute. "Class 3 coal mine- A gassy mine in which flammable gas is found in quantity greater than specified for a Class 22 coal mine. GENERAL NOTES REGARDING DECISION NO. 3 "(A) Flammable gas found in coal mines is, with rare exceptions, methane. In coal-mining fields where natural gas is found in lower geologic horizons by deep wells which pass through or nearby the coal mines, there have been rare instances of la leakage from the well. Natural gas is chiefly methane; that constituent almost always forms more than 85 per cent of the whole, but it usually contains ethane, propane and traces of butane also. Therefore if the latter gases are found in mine air it is an indication of leakage. The lower limit of explosibility of methane-air mixture when there is turbulence of five per cent and of natural-gas-air mixtures with about ten per cent ethane and associated hydro-carbon gases is 4.6 per cent. The limit therefore varies with the character of the mixture. " (B) To determine the proper classification of a coal mine, it is advisable that systematic testing and sampling be done at least three times in a period of not less than 72 hours. All tests and samples of the mine air, except one, must show an inflammable-gas content less than the maximum limit of the class to which the mine is assigned. In other words, a tolerance of one test or analysis may be permitted to provide for a mistake or a very exceptional occurrence. "(C) When a new mine is being opened in a coal field where existing mines are generally gassy, it is common sense to assume that similar conditions will be found in the new mine, and its development and equipment should be based upon the expectation that it will be assigned to Class 3."

Jan 1, 1926

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

Jan 1, 1966

By C. B. Huntress

"We have ourselves to blame in the steel industry for our condition." These words were addressed twelve days ago by James A. Farrell, President of the United States Steel Corporation, to his "comrades" at a meeting of the American Iron and Steel Institute. They carry a note of challenge to all industry, and particularly to the coal industry, where they point the way to the pressing need for operators everywhere to get their feet under one table. It is that note which I would stress to all producers. You have yourselves to blame for your condition. True, there are inter-district competition and competition of substitute fuels, but they'll always be with us, more or less, and the only sensible, sane course is to remove the evils within our respective districts, which can be done only by constructive effort along cooperative lines. It's the same story in Alabama, the same in Illinois and elsewhere. The larger number of the men gathered here are at the front, as it were, in the business of mining coal. They are the men who are doing a remarkable operating job. And naturally, the sessions of this annual meeting treat of news from the front, of technical problems. But, as in actual warfare, those at the front are often uninformed of developments in the rear. They keep on fighting without fully sensing the significance of a disaster at headquarters. You've played your eighteen holes today and evidenced the efficiency of your technique in the, production of coal. It is not amiss to take advantage of this moment, the nineteenth hole, to ponder over what it's all about. After all, what do improvements in the art of mining mean if business policies engulf you in red ink? To the extent that mechanization is a factor in increased overhead, which in turn increases the pressure to produce regardless of market demand, it only aggravates our troubles unless there is the controlling influence of coordinated effort.

Jan 1, 1931

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: We have with us a gentleman from Utah, who is familiarly known -as the "Mudite King," Mr. Reid, of the Lion Coal Company. Here is a letter I would like to read, and probably Mr. Reid will give us an idea of his Mudite machine, or the results he is obtaining. This question was brought up in Rock Springs, Wyoming, but Mr. Reid was not there personally during the discussion, but Mr. Burnell, who is general superintendent of the Lion Coal Com¬pany, as much as he possibly could, described the system and its effects. I believe Mr. Reid will probably be able to give a somewhat clearer statement this afternoon. This letter is from the Coal Mining Inspector of the State of Utah, John Crawford. "February 10, 1925. "The Industrial Commission of Utah, Building. "Statement of John Crawford, Coal Mine Inspector, in regard to Muditing in Coal Mines: "That Muditing used in connection with our present sprinkling system in coal mines is the missing link to the system we have had heretofore, because the water applied by the former system began to dry out, in heavy air currents, the moment it was put on. Consequently the dust that had been humidified by sprinkling, came back to its natural condition, and if anything, the combustible parts of it, in my opinion, were more intensified than previous to being wetted down. "The advantages that Muditing has over the old system of sprinkling are: "1st. The dust that is on the roof, timbers and sides of the entry is washed completely off and rolled up in the Mudite solution which entirely destroys the wings, crudely speaking, of the fine coal dust. "2nd. Sprinkling with the Mudite system, the water and mud is of greater extent than could be applied with a hand hose by a sprinkler. This sprinkling can be done while the mine is in operation, just the same as if water alone was being used. "3rd. The Mudite solution, when dried out, leaves a coating which serves as an armour to the coal, so that in the event of a local explosion, the inflammable matter on the coal is non-combustible; whereas, if that same coal had been sprinkled with water only, and made free of dust, the heat would have the same effect on the coal as it has on a stove when coal is thrown into it-instantaneous combustion. "Therefore, it is my opinion that the Mudite system is the missing link to the perfecting of our sprinkling system here in Utah. "(Signed) JOHN CRAWFORD." Mr. Reid has with him a few sam¬ples of his Mudite, after it has become solidified, taken from the floor, as I understand it. It is interesting. We have a few minutes to spare to good advantage, were we to ask Mr. Reid to give us an idea of his machine, as briefly as he possibly can, and also what he thinks the effect of the Mudite is compared to dry rock dust. Mr. Reid. (Applause.) MR. W. J. REID (Lion Coal Company) : I came down here with no intention of making any talk on Mudite. However, there being so many people that have seen Mudite at Wattis

Jan 1, 1925

CHAIRMAN LITTLEJOHN: Some of the members will want to question Mr. Farnham on some of the things he has brought tip, so we will throw the meeting open for discussion. I am quite sure Mr. Farnham will be willing and glad to answer any questions that may be put to him. MR. HOLMAN: I would like to ask Mr. Farnham a question in regard to the Duckbill: How wide a face will it operate without moving the bill? MR. FARNHAM: The Duckbill is a device that was developed in the Union Pacific Mine at Rock Springs, within the last few months, and it is shaped something like, a dustpan, with discharge throat in the rear. They made one seven feet wide and found it was too wide, and the one they are using now is between three and four feet in width. The front section of the conveyor, which attaches to the duckbill, meshes into it to form a sliding section, and the front end of the Duckbill is pushed by the upper segments. I saw one used in a room twenty-four feet wide, and they drew it back after they cleaned out one room and pushed it forward again. MR. HOLMAN: You have no arrangement other than ratchet work? MR. FARNHAM: The ratchet is for forward working and back; the sections are made 12 or 13 feet long, and the stroke of the conveyor automatically works the ratchet; they can ratchet it back; it is a hand device. MR. HOLMAN: They just swing the end of the conveyor across the face to pick up the loose coal? MR. FARNHAM: Yes; they are also planning to use it endwise along the panel face, that and the room work both are quite new in their application, and I do not think the Union Pacific is giving out any results as yet, because the system has not been in use long. MR. HOLMAN: We are planning on putting one in very shortly. MR. HALL: I understand they can swing it over 30 degrees one way or the other, and it goes the same way easily because of the continual jar of the back and forward motion on a 60-degree swing. SECRETARY SHUBART: Take on a comparatively long conveyor, you can get quite a sweep, a large part of the circle. The Duckbill could command quite a large range. For a 12-foot entry, take a four-foot wide advance through the middle of the shot coal, with a 12-foot advance, ratchet back, swing the Duckbill to the rib and repeat; but I do not think they could get as much as 60 degree. on the end of the Duckbill without curving further back. The conveyor is light and not normally set on any permanent foundation. I saw one of Mr. McCarty's first machines, a rather rudimentary one, clean tip a 12-trot entry, 21 tons of coal, in 16 minutes, three men at the face and one at the loading end. MR. FARNHAM: The average time to clean the entries is about an hour-to clean up good-it wouldn't take but a short time; that is why they get this record of several cuts a shift. CHAIRMAN LITTLEJOHN: Are there any other questions you would like to ask Mr. Farnham? MR. HOLMAN: We were discussing this entry driving in regard to the entry loader; an entry loader in advance work, just what you have to do to place the jackbars with the sheave-blocks? Do you dig along the ribs after the coal is shot or do you have any other scheme that could be worked out to a good advantage? MR. FARNHAM: This record is a report I have just received from our Chicago office, without the full details, which I have written for. I am sorry I cannot give you the details. This was an Indiana or Pennsylvania mine, near Pocahontas, not the one where they had an accident. I assume they set the jacks ahead and swung and dumped the coal partly out with a scoop and partly by hand, but the application for that for entry driving is entirely new. The reports stated that they anticipated using that as a standard method of entry driving in the future. I will be glad to see that you get a copy of it when I get the report completed. MR. MONAY: Mr. Shubart, did you say they loaded 12 tons in 16 minutes? SECRETARY SHUBART: Twenty-one tons. MR. MONAY: How long did it take to change the machinery out of there

Jan 1, 1926

By Todd A. Myers

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

Jan 1, 2008