Search Documents

The Morning Session of the Forty-Eighth Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute convened in the Little Theater of the Broadmoor Hotel, Colorado Springs, Colorado, at 10:00.a. m.; June 2, 1952, Howard B. Crandell, President, presiding. PRESIDENT CRANDELL: Gentlemen, the meeting will come to order. I presume most: of you have heard the decision of the Supreme Court in the steel case. The decision was six to three that the President had no legal authority to seize the steel industry, and it is reported that the strike is already under way. Gentlemen, it is both a pleasure and an honor to talk to you who come to the meeting of the Coal Mining Institute, many of you, from long distances. Our program committee has suggested that the president give a 30-minute talk, but you may be at case because I assure you I won't take anywhere near that long, when we will pass to more instructive and enlightening subjects. Another reason for the short talk that I am going to make is that many men in this audience know more about coal mining, specialized subjects, than I do.

Jan 1, 1952

By D. Harrington

Discussion was prepared by A. L. Jones and Frank A. Rank, of the General Electric Company, read by Mr. Jones; by C. B. Officer, of the Sullivan Machinery Company, read by Mr. J. H. Emrick; by Mr. D. C. McKeehan, Chief Electrician of the Union Pacific Coal Company; and by Mr. L. C. Ilsley, of the United States Bureau of Mines, read by Mr. K. P. Marshall. Their prepared answers are inserted in the body of Mr. Harrington's paper, as answers to his questions. Introductory Remarks PRESIDENT MARKS: We have made special assignments for the discussion of this paper, and I believe these discussions are to be answered in sections, and as the different sections are read applying to this paper, we will just have a brief discussion on that particular point and proceed to the next and try and expedite this discussion as much as possible, be- cause I realize a good many of you have something to say. The first discussion is by Mr. Frank A. Rank, of the General Electric Company, Salt Lake City. MR. F. A. RANK (General Electric Company, Salt Lake City, Utah) : Mr. Chairman, while my name has been put on the program as being the one to discuss this paper, I believe Mr. Jones of our company has prepared a discussion on it, and therefore will let him talk in my place. MR. A. L. JONES: I think that it is passing the buck. However, Mr. Rank sent me a copy of the paper, and I read it over with a good deal of interest. There is one thing I want to say: Mr. Shubart, in his breezy letters, stated this paper was to be written by Mr. Harrington, assisted by a number of manufacturing and operating companies, among them the General Electric Company. We did not function. The paper was completed, and we were not consulted, and I believe that is true of the others. After reading the paper over, I dictated a few notes which I want to read, to give you the view-point that we have on the subject We do not want to minimize electrical dangers, or in any way slow down high-grade construction maintenance, but there is such a thing as overstating the case. A. L. Jones, Engineer, General Electric Co., Denver, Colo. Mr. Harrington's paper in some ways pleases me very much, but in others gives me quite a different sensation. It is so full of condemnation of most existing practices and conditions that it reminds me somewhat of the nerve-racked mother who sent an older brother to see what Willie was doing and to tell him to "stop it." His recital of electrical dangers is harrowing and if I felt it were a true picture I should feel that any of us having anything to do with the recommending or selling of electrical equipment for mines would be party to a crime. Fortunately all mines are not gaseous nor is all dust explosive or we

Jan 1, 1926

By William M. Wallace

Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen: The subject, "Shake It for Results," may or may not suggest just what is to be shaken, or just what results are to be obtained. I can assure you that if you are thinking about anything outside the realm of pure mining application you have come to the wrong meeting, and if this be the case, you have come to hear a subject discussed that I am not prepared to undertake-at the moment, at least. At the very beginning of time, results were definitely obtained by shaking. If you will recall, Eve shook a certain tree of forbidden fruit-need I recount to you the results that were, and are still, being credited to that bit of engineering? To get closer to the subject at hand, it is the intent of this paper to touch generally on the shaking, principally the vibratory shaking, of materials on a piece, or pieces, of perforated metal or screen cloth. Through the evolution of such a motion we find that great strides have been made toward a highly efficient "operation which is an essential factor in the mining world of today. The object of the shaking motion is to more efficiently separate one size material from another, according to the openings in the screening medium over which it is passed. Sizing is an important operation in every ore dressing, coal prepara¬tion or other mineral-preparing plant for reducing the product to a form more concentrated or more convenient for utilization than that in which it was mined. In coal preparation, market requirements, convenience, custom, and efficiency in combustion necessitate grading mined coal by sizes. All ore-dressing or coal preparation plants therefore must have what is called screening, sizing, or grading apparatus.

Jan 1, 1941

Pictured on these pages are the six RMCMI Scholarship Award Winners for the 1986-87 year followed by a brief profile. Five of the winners were present as RMCMI guests at the June convention at Kalispell to receive their recognition plaques at the welcoming session held Monday, June 30, 1986. In addition to the plaques, each winner will receive $500.00 to be used toward tuition in the coming academic year. Also, as this is a continuing award, the winners from the 1985-86 season, will also receive an additional $500.00 for tuition use in their senior years provided they have maintained a good academic standing. Criteria for these awards is (1) That the award be made in the spring to a sophomore student to be used toward tuition during the junior year. (2) That the recipient be both a U. S. citizen and a resident of the state involved. (3) That the recipient have good academic standing, be pursuing a degree in a mining related field and have an expressed interest in Western coal as a possible career path. Contributions to this worthy project are tax deductible to each individual RMCMI member. Checks payable to RMCMI Scholarship may be mailed to the RMCMI Office at 2700 Youngfield Street, Suite 100 in Lakewood, CO 80215. Profiles of the 1986 winners follow: [ ] ROBERT BAUGHMAN Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado Bob is spending this summer in field camp at the Colorado School of Mines. His hobbies are fly fishing, hunting and photography. After graduation, he "would like to work for a stable mid-sized company and someday work his way into a management position." He is a member of AIME and Sigma Phi Epsilon and plays intramural football and softball. [ ] BRENT LaMOURE Montana College of Mineral Science & Technology, Butte, Montana Brent has a 3 5 grade point average and has completed courses In Mining Engineering, Underground Mining, Rock Fragmentation, Mineralogy and Petrology and Plane Surveying He is "interested in trying to make the mining industry as efficient as possible "

Jan 1, 1986

Jan 1, 2009

of our good friends and fellow members: Patrick J. Quealy J. C. Roberts Gilbert Morton Sidney W. Farnham who left the world better for their having lived in it

Jan 1, 1930

By J. A. Bullington

Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen: Some of you men may know who are familiar with what we have been doing in the C. F. & I. the last three years, that we have revamped our entire method of cost accounting from the pit bosses' report through to the final report of the president. The basic ideas involved in our cost system are not ours. They were given us by one of the best management and industrial engineering concerns in the country-at least they have that reputation. All I can do now is to try to pass on to you some of the ideas we have from various sources and the methods we have used in teaching those ideas to our coal men on cost accounting. This will not be a technical paper. I tried to put it in language we could all understand, and I hope I will be talking the same language that you gentlemen talk when you think about the cost of your coal in your own mines. Accounting of all kinds is classed as overhead expense, and as overhead expense we must justify its cost by the service it gives the rest of the organization. That brings us up to the problem of making the cost department pay its own way, just the same as the power plant has to pay its own way, and we have gotten away from the old idea of cost accounting in that it is sufficient within itself. The cost sheets are only so good as they enable the operating man to reduce his costs. The cost sheets are only just so much work for the cost department, and if they do not help the operating man to control his costs, we figure that is so much work wasted. The cost department works for the operating department.

Jan 1, 1931

Jan 1, 1980

PRESIDENT SHOTT: Gentlemen, the meeting will now come to order, please. Members of the Institute: It is with great pleasure and honor that we welcome you to the thirty-ninth regular meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. I assure you that Mr. Krippner, the General Chairman, and his associates have an outstanding program in store for you, and trust it will be of much interest to the industry. I note by the program they have me slated for an opening address, but I am going to defer that, proceed with the remainder of the program, and endeavor to go on schedule and keep matters on schedule as outlined on our program. The first item on the program is the reading of the minutes of the thirty-eighth regular meeting by the Secretary. I might say that it has been customary in the past that we omit the reading of the minutes. If that is not agreeable, we will read them; otherwise, I would like for someone to make a motion that we dispense with the reading of the minutes, inasmuch as they are published in our annual report each year. What are your wishes?

Jan 1, 1941

By L. Ross Weber

Gentlemen and guests of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute: This is the thirty-second regular meeting of our Institute, and rather than try to make some extemporaneous remarks, I thought it best to write them out, so I could in that way give them to you, and probably give you a new thought for the future conduct of our Institute. The thirty-first regular meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was held in Salt Lake City, June 22, 23, and 24, 1932, and due to rapidly changing conditions in the coal industry, subsequent meetings have been postponed from time to time, as many of our members and our Secretary have been tied up with code and labor matters. Since our last meeting, at which was discussed problems of vital interest to all of us, especially the production and marketing of coal safely and economically, and the stabilization of our industry, which has already suffered two years of deplorable conditions, almost two more years have been added to the record, but during the past six months miracles have happened, and an industry which formerly was unable to govern itself, has now, through the aid of our Government, at least learned how to make a proper start in that direction. Whether we like it or not, and whether or not the things being done are in agreement with our various political beliefs, without doubt, we are in a much better position today than prior to this transformation. However, it is a pleasure to all of us to note that safety has not been lost sight of in the interim, and without doubt, as later papers and statistics will substantiate, the period since our last regular meeting has probably shown the most remarkable safety achievement of any period in recent history.

Jan 1, 1934

By C. A. Herbert

We all deplore the high accident rate of our coal mines, but when brought to task we immediately attempt to appease our conscience by calling attention to the high tonnage rate per fatality in American coal mines as compared to European mines, losing sight of the fact that the accident rate per hours of exposure has shown no improvement during the past twenty years. Measuring our accidents in terms of hours of exposure, not in terms of production, is the only correct method. Certainly it can be of only scant satisfaction to the miner to know that his chances of getting killed this year are as great, or perhaps greater, than last year, but the tonnage rate per fatality will have gone up. We cannot help asking ourselves why it is the other major industries, almost without exception, have made wonderful strides toward reducing accidents, while coal mining stands alone as the one major industry in which no improvement has been made. It certainly cannot be charged entirely to the increased use of machinery and the increased productivity per man employed, as the other industries likewise, or to an even greater extent, have increased the use of machinery and the production per man.

Jan 1, 1931

By Peter B. Lilly

Thank you, Tom, I appreciate that generous introduction - and your generous welcome. When Doris Finnie asked me to speak here today, my decision to join you couldn't have been easier - for two reasons. First, I can't say no to an opportunity to return to Steamboat Springs. My family has wonderful memories of skiing here. And this time of year, golf in the mountains is so good you almost don't miss the skiing. The second reason this was such an easy decision is that The Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute is such an important forum for the coal industry, and it's certainly important to Peabody. We have mines in five western states - Arizona, Colorado, Montana, New Mexico and Wyoming. Last year, our western mines produced more than 110 million tons of coal. That's about two-thirds of our total domestic production. So western states are obviously critical to us. A couple of weeks ago, the west became even more significant to Peabody. Of course, I'm speaking of PacifiCorp's planned acquisition of The Energy Group - including Peabody - announced the middle of this month. Admittedly, when I agreed to speak here - some months ago - I had no idea just how much change Peabody would face in this relatively brief period. Still, not knowing then about the PacifiCorp announcement, I chose change as the subject for this talk. I'll update you on our recent news. But, first I want to establish a broad context for the PacifiCorp/Energy Group announcement and other change in the electricity business, change here in the United States and all over the world. ? We'll see how change is driven by two major trends - privatization in emerging markets and deregulation in mature markets, In turn, those two trends will cause ever-increasing consolidation - in both the coal industry and the broader power industry. ? After outlining those trends, I'll discuss the change that will dramatically affect Peabody following the announcement a week ago that PacifiCorp and The Energy Group intend to join forces to create one of the world's largest international integrated energy companies - an event that adds considerable credibility to the prophesies I'll outline in my remarks today. ? Finally, I will discuss an issue that threatens our industry's future - and, indeed, the economic future of all Americans. That issue is the inappropriate response to the unproven possibility of global climate change. Let's set the stage for change. And let's begin with the first trend I mentioned - the trend to privatization in developing economies. What drives the trend to privatization? Economics. It's all about the supply and demand of capital. And the engine that drives the supply/demand ratio is growth in electricity demand - tremendous growth in demand in developing economies. The U.S. EIA projects worldwide growth in electricity demand at 63 percent between 1990 and 2010, most of it in developing countries. This strong growth means that a new 500 MW power plant will be needed every three and one-half days until the year 2010. Now, if we say that a 500 MW plant will cost about $500 million dollars, we're talking about a bill of about $1 billion dollars a week - through 2010. That voracious demand for capital drives the trend to privatization. It means countries in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union want to sell generating assets. And Asian countries - for example, India, Indonesia and the Philippines - want to find private investors to build power plants. Privatization already is well underway. In the future, it will grow, with countries in South America, Central America, and Africa joining the trend. Bottom line: The privatization trend means rich new opportunities for companies willing to think beyond "business as usual." Meanwhile, developed economies face a different but no less fundamental change. Western European countries, the United States and Australia face deregulation. Why does deregulation represent such a big change? Consider a few basic facts about the U.S. electricity market to see what a big change -

Jan 1, 1997

Oren. F. Bridwell: The President declares there is a quorum. Since the minutes of last year's meeting arc published in the Proceedings, unless there is objection, we will dispense with the reading of the minutes. There being no objection the minutes will he dispensed with. Is there a report from the Treasurer? Raymond Venous, Chairman, Auditing Committee: I'd like to submit the report for the Secretary-Treasurer for the previous year. Following is the financial report of the Treasurer from May 21, 1964 to May 24, 1965. (Report submitted) May we say, "Cussie," you keep a very, very nice set of hooks. Thank you. Oren F. Bridwell: You have heard the report of the condition of our treasury. We are solvent, at any rate. You have also heard the report of the Auditing Committee. If we might have a motion that the report of the auditing committee he accepted. Moved, seconded and carried. We'll have a report of the Resolutions Committee. Max A. Robe, Chairman, Resolutions Committee: Ladies and gentlemen, we have four resolutions, which we trust are going to he in the best interests of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute and the coal industry in general.

Jan 1, 1965

The 73rd Regular Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute convened at The Mark Conference Center, Lionshead Village, Vail, Colorado, and was in session at 10:00 a.m. Past President, Robert W. Wilson, President and General Manager, K&P, Inc., Golden, Colorado, called the meeting to order. The membership was asked to stand and pledge allegiance to the flag. As your immediate past president, it is my pleasure to have the responsibility of introducing our current President. But before I tell you about Ralph, I would like to make the following brief reflection, which I feel very strongly about: In these days of so much negativism toward our coal industry by so many people, we all must remember one thing as we go about producing energy for our country. Coal mining is just as American as the American hamburger, the American hot dog, and just as American as the flag to which we just pledged allegiance.

Jan 1, 1977

President elect Ralph Moore opened the business meeting at 9:30 a.m., he called on the Auditing Committee to present its report on the financial statement of the treasurer. Gabe Ishley read the report and asked for its approval. A motion was made, seconded and carried. The Resolutions Committee was called upon to make its report. William A. Bear submitted the following: (1) WHEREAS, the 72nd Regular Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute celebrates sixty-four years of most successful service to the coal industry, and WHEREAS, this success is largely due to the faithful and devoted service of our Secretary-Treasurer, Augusta Whiteside, during the last fifty years of its existence, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that we commend and express our sincere thanks to "Gussie" for her outstanding devotion in per- forming a job well done. (2) RESOLVED: WHEREAS, in the year since the last convention of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, the Institute and the coal mining industry have suffered the loss through death of the services of:

Jan 1, 1976

By Scott Jones

New Mexico Coal Operations ?San Juan, La Plata, And Navajo Mines ?Three Sites 100% Owned By BHP Billiton ?San Juan And La Plata Mines Owned/Operated By San Juan Coal Co. Supplies Coal To San Juan Generating Station ?Navajo Mine Located On Navajo Nation Lands Supplies Coal To Four Corners Power Station

Jan 1, 2008

The Wednesday Morning Session of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was called to order by Albert Keenan of the Thompson Creek Coal and Coke Company, Denver, Colorado, in the absence of the President. He introduced Edward Prostel of the University of Wyoming Natural Resources Research Institute, Laramie, Wyoming, who spoke on "Coal Utilization Work at the University of Wyoming." (Please refer to the index for printed text of the paper.) Following Mr. Prostel's talk, R. Park Lamborn of the National Mine Service Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania asked Mr. Prostel two questions: (1) What -has been done in tar research? and (2) Has there been large scale research on brickets? Mr. Prostel stated that he could not say too much about the first question as this research was done in the petroleum department and he would prefer to have a chemist talk about it. As to the second question, the system of carbonization is a big project. There are many possibilities. At the University they are trying to do that in the same unit that produces the char. This system was introduced in Canada. The brickets are bound with sulphite liquor. Mr. Schloss asked Mr. Prostel to report on a project that they have been working on at the University, and Mr. Prostel stated that some time ago they began to experiment to see if it would be economically possible to dry coal at the mine (coal containing 30% moisture) and then ship it a distance of 130 miles to be used. Results are that it would be possible, but will require a considerable quantity. He felt it might be possible to operate such a scheme in a few years.

Jan 1, 1957

The 67th Regular Meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute convened in the C'est Bon Hotel, Park City, Utah, and was in session at 10:00 a.m. The meeting was called to order by Past President John A. Reeves, Vice President, Mid-Continent Coal & Coke Company, Carbondale, Colorado. Mr. Reeves introduced President Max A. Robb and read a brief biography as follows: A Westerner by birth, he has chosen to pursue his mining career with United States Fuel Company, a subsidiary of United States Smelting, Refining and Mining Company. United States Fuel Company is the largest underground producer of commercial and utility coal in the Intermountain West. Max attended Utah schools and has kept his education current through correspondence courses in mining technology and business education, and through attendance at various university-sponsored development seminars.

Jan 1, 1971

Jan 1, 1961

The morning session opened at 9:00 a.m. and was presided over by Mr. Don Ross, Manager of Mines, Kaiser Steel Corporation,- Sunnyside, Utah. The first speaker was Mr. S. W. Zanolli, Partner in Law Firm of Webster and Kilcullen, Washington, D.C. Mr. Zanolli was born and raised in a coal mining community of Fredericktown, Washington County, Pennsylvania. He was educated at Washington and Jefferson College and graduate schools of the University of Pittsburgh. He served as an infantry officer in the European Theatre of operations during World War 11. He worked as' a handloader at Vesta No. 5 Mine of Jones & Laughlin during summers while attending Washington and Jefferson College. He worked at a variety of production jobs at No. 7 Mine. of Island Creek Coal Co. of Holden, West Virginia. Assigned to a variety of industrial relations assignments at Island Creek Coal' Company during 1949-51, attaining position of Supervisor of Personnel and Labor Relations. Served in many industrial relations assignments at U.S. Steel Corp. headquarters during 1953.-1967, attaining a position of Personnel Director-Heavy Products Operations. In January, 1968" he became a member of the Bituminous Coal Operators Association-as Executive Vice President. This past year he went back to practicing law and is a member of the Law Firm of Webster and Kilcullen, Washington, D.C. He is married and has five children.

Jan 1, 1973