Search Documents

By H. Lyn Bourne

This is the fourth annual tabulation that gives mineral royalty information. The table presents previous information plus about two dozen new entries. In addition to the royalty information, some entries show the cost of purchased reserves. Last year's tabulation appeared in two issues, to accommodate all of the information. This year the format has been changed slightly so the table can be printed in one issue. This year's table presents the commodities in the same sequence as last year. Sand and gravel information appears first, followed by: crushed stone for aggregate; other stone; industrial sand; other industrial minerals; energy minerals (coal, oil shale, uranium); and finally metals. As always, a caveat relates to factors that influence the reserve values. The data should serve only as a general reference. The table is not intended to present an absolute scale of reserve costs. Several factors influence the value of mineral commodities. These factors include: • location and transportation costs (especially significant for most industrial minerals); • market conditions for both the commodity and the company acquiring the right to mine it; • quality or grade of the deposit as it reflects the amount of processing and beneficiation necessary to produce the finished product; • and legislative restrictions and conditions for mining a given material at a given site. These and other factors will influence reserve costs of reserves. The table shows the range of royalties and the variations in the basis of computing the fees. In a few instances, it gives the cost of acquired reserves based on purchase price and quantitative estimates of the material in place. The table lists the commodity; the location (either by state, US geographic area, or Canadian province); the cost (R for royalty and P for purchased cost); and the year in which the lease or purchase agreement occurred. The last column offers either comments or gives a footnote number for more information. The cost column requires more explanation. The units may refer to cubic yards (/yd), cubic feet (/cuft), tons (/T) (2000 lbs) or acres (/A). 1 cu yd = 0.76m3 1 cu ft =0.28m3 1st = 0.9 t7 1 acre = 0.40 ha or m2 In several cases the royalty is a percentage of the finished products, sale price and is levied against either the amount produced or the amount sold. We thank those who contributed information for the table: J. Dunn, T. Eyde, K. Loda, L. Morgan, F. Nix, H. Sorenson, and L. Williams. Several people have said they would like this to be an annual tabulation. That can happen if new information comes to the writer. What appears in the table is only a very small fraction of the cost information relative to the various commodities and the geographic areas for which there is royalty information. If you find this column of interest and possess information write or call: H. L. Bourne, c/o Neyer, Tiseo & Hindo, Ltd., 38955 Hills Tech Dr., Farmington Hills, MI 48018, (313) 553-6300. Only with new information can this become an annual and current source of reserves costs.

Jan 8, 1986

By Mengxiong Guo, Xuxin Shao

The recent depressant research is summarized, and a new kind of depressant (SCO) has been put forward in this article. Using Na-oleate as a collector and SCO as a depressant, separation of dolomite and phosphate was studied. When SCO was added in the concentration range of 80 g/t to 2kg/t at pH 9.5 ± 0.2, dolomite was absolutely depressed, and apatite kept its floatability. Interestingly, in the mixture of phosphate and dolomite, the dolomite floated. The reasons for such a behavior are investigated through flotation and electrokinetic studies. It was found that the adsorption of dissolved species on dolomite and phosphate resulted in reverse flotation. A concentration of 31.59% P205 and 83.87% recovery of P205 was obtained from the mixture of phosphate and dolomite (2:1) with 26.6% P205 using 210 g/t SCO and Na-oleate 4.93*10-5 M at pH 9.

Jan 1, 1989

Editor?s note: Each year, the June issue of Mining Engineering features an industrial minerals review. Several people put in a fair amount of time in developing the material for this issue. Thank you to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the technical committees chair and vice-chair, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles. Jim Norman, member SME, of GeoTrans, Inc., is the industrial minerals annual review editor. SA Ravishankar, member SME, of Cytec Industries, is chair of the industrial minerals technical committees. Technical committee vice chairs include: ? Abani Samal, member SME, of Pincock Allen & Holt, agricultural minerals. ? Aaron McMahon member SME, of Pincock, Allen & Holt, ceramics and refractories. ? Bradley S. Van Gosen, member SME, of the U.S. Geological Survey, chemical raw materials. ? Mark Zdunczyk, member SME, of Continental Placer, Inc., construction materials. ? Jerry Gauntt, member SME, of JEG Minerals Consultants, fillers and pigments. ? Michael Cheshire, member SME, of Indiana University, sorbents, filters and process aids. Their help makes possible this June industrial minerals issue. On behalf of ME readers, the editors thank them.

Jan 1, 2008

By H. Lyn Bourne

This is the fifth annual tabulation of mineral royalty information. This tabulation, like the previous editions, includes all of the earlier data. There are also 60 new entries. In addition to royalty information, some entries show the cost of purchased reserves. Two articles relative to the evaluation of minerals reserves appeared in December, 1986. R.H. Paschall (In the Aggregate, ME, p 1139) wrote a good article, although it lacked specific royalty data. However, this author takes exception to two ideas in Paschall's column. Paschall contends that the royalty rate does not affect the mineral appraisal. This present author could not disagree more. Paschall also claims the location of an industrial mineral deposit is the only serious or practical caveat in comparing royalties. Comments received here from readers helped make the list of caveats that are cited each year. The readers will decide which factors influence the mineral value for their commodities of interest. Paschall's point about the relationship of the parties who are negotiating a royalty agreement is important and very well taken. The other article, written by William Vernon (Pit and Quarry, December 1986), gives a step-by-step process on how to conduct a mineral appraisal. The article cites three reasons for an appraisal: transfer rights; collateral for a loan; and taxation. A fourth reason is to establish adequate compensation for reserves lost through condemnation. This author has appeared in several court cases where compensation for loss of mineral reserves through condemnation required a mineral appraisal. Royalty rate becomes an important factor in the appraisal process, although the Pit and Quarry article refers to that part of the valuation equation as "profitability." Both articles were well written and are recommended reading for those interested in mineral valuations. The same caveats that have appeared in previous columns relative to factors that influence the value of reserves are restated. The data in the table serve as a general reference and are not intended to present an absolute scale of reserves costs. Several factors influence the value of any mineral commodity. The factors include: • location/transportation - especially significant for most industrial minerals; • market conditions both for the commodity and the company acquiring the right to mine; • quality or grade of the deposit as it reflects the amount of processing/beneficiation necessary to produce the finished product; and • legislative restrictions and conditions for mining a given material at a given site. These and other factors will significantly influence the cost of reserves. The table shows the range of royalties and the variations in the basis of computing the fees. In a few instances, it gives the cost of acquired reserves based on purchase price and quantitative estimates of the material in place. The table lists the commodity in column 1, and the subsequent columns give: • the location by state, US geographic area, or Canadian province ; • the cost - R for royalty and P for purchased cost; • the year in which the lease or purchase agreement occurred; and • comments or footnotes for more information. The cost column requires more explanation. The units may refer to cubic yards (/cu yd), cubic feet (/cu ft), short tons (/T), or acres (/A). 1 cu yd = 0.76 M2 1cuft = 0.28m3 1 st = 0.9072 t 1 acre - 0.4047 ha or m2

Jan 7, 1987

By Robin J. Batterham, Dave J. Robinson

The history of mineral processing in general and flotation in particular is long and has always been tied to mining methods of the day. Building on the ever-improving fundamental understanding of the underlying science, the most significant trend in flotation has been the putting into practice the learnings from trailblazers such as Professor Fuerstenau that has given the confidence that enabled an ever-increasing scale of operations. There is, however, doubt this ongoing trend is enough to maintain the economics against global trends such as that of falling grades, increasing mining costs, pressure on water supply and demand, rising energy demands needed for mineral processing, and a focus on whole of life value and mine legacy issues. In addition, we see that globally, the social license to operate for mining (and hence mineral processing) is far from secure and, at the very least, is under much more rigorous scrutiny. In this paper, we comment on the ramifications of broader uptake of more sustainable mining for mineral processing methods and address the specific question of whether recent progress in in-place recovery will lead to a timely breakthrough. The answer proposed is that this is possible in the next 10–20 years but in the meantime, the focus is just as likely to be on removal of waste (beneficiation) much earlier in circuits. Either way, mineral processing and flotation, as we know it, will change significantly.

By J. A. Cooper, M. R. Petersen, P. O. Jackson, J. C. Langford

The organic, inorganic, and radiological characteristics of airborne aerosols have been measured as a function of particle size in controlled atmosphere test chambers and operating uranium mines. Concentrations of benzo(a)pyrene in two mines ranged from 26 to 57 ng/m3 of air. The carbon chain length of adsorbed n-alkanes was correlated with particle size. Normal mining activities produced an ore dust aerosol with mass median aerodynamic diameter (MMAD) greater than 2 µm. The elements Na, Al, Si, K, Ca, Ti, V, Fe, and U exhibited elemental ratios similar to bulk ore and had comparable MMAD's. The S, Zn, and Pb were higher in aerosols than bulk ore and were associated with smaller MMAD particulates. Radon daughter particle size distributions were influenced by the kinds of particulates

Jan 1, 1981

"One of the major issues that the Rare Earth Elements Mining Industry has to deal with is the legislation vacuum that exists in many countries around the world. Among these, are countries which have long history and tradition in mining. In many cases the lack of direct legislation for REE mine management as well as for other potentially polluting industries can be a barrier to sustainable development. Moreover, the case of lax legislation in China has led to environmental pollution problems and extended smuggling of rare earth elements. This paper looks into the current regulatory status on the mining of REEs, identifies the loopholes and suggests some elements for a new global legislation framework for sustainable development in the REE mining industry. The setting of this regulatory framework will be in line with the present and future challenges of the rare earths market as well as with the policy strategies that are defined internationally. The aim of such a legislative framework will be to strengthen the global rare earth elements supply chain, appease social concerns and ensure the preservation and conservation of the environment. INTRODUCTION The general public received their first introduction to rare earth elements (REEs) in 2010, when the previously inconspicuous commodities became the subjects of front-page headlines. It was when China created a furore in global high-tech markets after imposing an embargo on Japan following a minor marine dispute (Barakos et al. 2015b). Soon enough the Chinese embargo was extended on REE export restrictions all over the world and thus aroused concerns to many countries over potential supply disruptions. The world had suddenly realized that these wonder materials underpin products that they care about. Governmental and industry executives, policymakers and material scientists voiced concerns and conducted numerous reports stating the situation and the risks of a supply crisis. The price spike of 2011 intensified the crisis and the public turmoil, yet the drama did not last for long as the prices declined significantly in 2012. Nevertheless, the world was nonplussed by the fact that China has the total control of the market with more or less the 90% of the global production. More potential entrants became interested, thus initiating an exploration boom during the recent years that has resulted in a significant increase in known global REE reserves that could have potentials for exploitation."

Jan 1, 2016

By A. Nieto

This article is a review of previous discussions about underground mining method selection and classification with the purpose to clearly define and classify the two groups of variables (indicators) involved in the mining selection process: key deposit indicators (KDIs) and key mining method indicators (KMIs). This paper provides a simple and clear approach for the classification and selection of a feasible underground mining method based on a predetermined set of favorable deposit characteristics, which are defined as key deposit indictors (KDIs). This article also gives a summary of the key advantages and disadvantages associated with every underground mining method based on their key mining indicators (KMIs). The selection method given in this paper is based on defining field KDIs and comparing them to the KDIs that are favorable to every considered mining method. By cross validating a matrix of favorable KDIs, the paper presents a simple approach to rank several underground mining methods using a scale from favorable to less favorable accordingly to the ore deposit characteristics (KDIs). KMIs are used to further complement KDI rankings by analyzing every method’s KMI performance based on the expected productivity of the mining operation being considered. To further assist the reader through the selection process, this paper gives basic sketches representing each of the primary underground mining methods discussed in this paper. Each method is given using the same 3D isometric view as spatial reference to assist the reader with visual interpretation and comparison between methods.

Jan 1, 2010

By Stanley Lefond

The health of the industrial minerals industry appears to be improving year by year. In fact, preliminary information suggests that only three commodities (asbestos, bromine, and sulfur-other) failed to show a production gain in 1984 over 1983. In 1983, 10 commodities failed to post gains and six remained constant. The total value of industrial mineral production in 1984 was $16.7 billion, up $1.4 billion from 1983. Cement, clays, gypsum, and crushed stone production increased. Since these are used in housing and construction, this suggests these industries are moving out of their recent doldrums. Barite and clay production also improved in 1984. Local US barite production, however, still has a long way to go to attain the 1981 high of 2.6 Mt (2.9 million st). Barite imports remain high. But they are not as high as the 1982 importation of 2 Mt (2.3 million st). Bentonite production in 1984 increased 20% in volume and 25% in value over the previous year. This suggests improvement in the drilling industry and an increase in demand for iron ore pelletizing grades. All in all, the industrial mineral industry is alive and well. And it shows signs of great improvement in the next few years. Many thanks to those industrial mineral technical committee members for their assistance in assembling this industrial minerals review: M. F. Dibble, H. W. Allen, G. H. Gallup, S. G. Ampian, D. W. L. Spry, H. G. Fleshman, and L. J. Czel.

Jan 5, 1985

By Timothy J. Orr, Robin J. Burgess-Limerick, Jennica L. Bellanca, MARGARET E. RYAN

Powered haulage continues to be a large safety concern for the mining industry, accounting for approximately 50%of the mining fatal accidents every year. Among these fatal accidents, haul-truck-related accidents are the most common, with 6 of 28 and 6 of 27 fatal accidents occurring in 2017 and 2018, respectively. To better understand why these accidents continue to occur and what can be done to prevent them, researchers reviewed the 91 haul-truck-related fatal accidents that occurred in the USA from 2005 to 2018 and performed bow-tie analyses using the final reports published by the Mine Safety and Health Administration. The analyses explore the context of the accidents with a focus on the initiating event, event outcome, hazards present, and possible preventative and mitigative controls. Overall, the vast majority of the accidents resulted in a haul truck colliding with the environment, and the majority of these events were initiated by loss of situational awareness or loss of control. The majority of the hazards were related to design and organizational controls. The results of this study suggest a need to investigate operator decision-making and organizational controls and to focus on improving design and operation controls such as mine design and operational procedures.

Feb 22, 2021

By Z. J. Hladysz

A Deep Underground Science and Engineering Laboratory (DUSEL) is being planned at the site of the former Homestake Gold Mine in Lead, South Dakota, under the sponsorship of the National Science Foundation (NSF) in cooperation with the Department of Energy (DOE). This national facility will host a variety of multi-disciplinary science and engineering experiments including physics experiments that require shielding from cosmogenic radiation. Current plans include construction of large rooms (up to 55 m in width) at depths of 1.48 km (4850 ft) and 2.25 km (7400 ft) below the surface. Preparation of the preliminary design required the development of a geotechnical characterization program including: preliminary drilling and coring, core logging, drill hole mapping with a televiewer, drift mapping of the geology and rock structure, in-situ stress measurements, and laboratory testing of the mechanical properties of the rocks and discontinuities. Overall rock quality is very good to excellent. Site investigations were followed by geotechnical assessments for the construction of caverns and laboratory modules. The results are favorable and reaffirm selection of the Homestake site for establishment of a Deep Underground Engineering and Science Laboratory.

Jan 1, 2011

By Ching L. Wu, Joseph Penzien

An analytical procedure is presented for evaluating the stresses in linings of bored tunnels caused by kinematic soil-lining interaction. Three cases of interaction as produced by the following conditions are treated: (1) relaxation of in situ soil stresses near a lining following its installation; (2) overburden pressure at the soil surface; and (3) free-field soil response resulting from an earthquake. Non-dimensional formulas and graphs resulting from parametric studies are presented for practical tunnel design applications. The procedure is applied separately to a steel lining and a concrete lining for a site located at the lower end of Market Street in San Francisco through which a BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)tunnel passes.

Jan 1, 1997

By M. J. Raffaldi, K. W. Harris, K. A. Perry

"Highwall miners have been widely used to extract additional coal reserves from existing surface operations, particularly on contour operations in the Appalachian coalfields. Using a continuous miner cutting head, coal may be extracted from significant depths (such as 150 m), leaving behind an array of web and barrier pillars with the purpose of maintaining highwall stability. This method inherently involves elevated risks to both equipment and personnel due to proximity to and increased exposure time near highwalls. As a result, modern operations should actively design web and barrier pillars to maximize extraction while providing adequate stability. The ARMPS-HWM software, an empirical-based program created for the design of web and barrier pillars at highwall mining operations, is one such approach. The calculated stability factor is compared with empirically established guidelines produced from examining case histories.The ARMPS-HWM program is a handy tool for initial design, but understanding the site’s structurally significant geologic features and geomechanical behavior is important and may potentially increase extraction. We created a two-dimensional numerical model using FLAC3D and calibrated it to ensure pillar strength, closely following the Mark- Bieniawski formula for a typical range of pillar geometries and overburden properties. The development of pillar stresses along a highwall panel was then numerically investigated as mining progressed, and the stress distribution between barrier pillars was found to be asymmetric, which can result in an over-design of the closeout web pillars if tributary area loading is assumed. Finally, the importance of adequate barrier pillar stability is highlighted."

Jan 1, 2014

By Raymond W. Henn, Kent A. Pease, Glen J. Rorison

The paper focuses on construction of a 2.55-km (8,365-ft) long, 2.4-m (8-ft)diameter storm drain tunnel in Evansville, Indiana. The tunnel was driven through saturated soft ground varying from clay to fine sand. The paper presents: an overview of design and design rational including specific EPB machine requirements; the contractor’s proposed and accepted alternative construction methods and TBM design; and construction issues and performance. Some of the key points discussed are the use of the TBM in different operational modes for alternative ground conditions, the effectiveness of dewatering systems, production rates, and issues such as surface settlements and gas.

Jan 1, 2001

By Richard Hanke

Tunnel construction on the Brightwater Conveyance System?s East and Central contracts required ground modifications of the existing site soils, comprised of sandy alluvium to very dense glacial till, to assist with both hand-mined and TBM tunneling operations at vertical access shafts. The ground modification program was completed with a modified double fluid jet grouting system to construct continuous overlapping soilcrete columns to depths up to 94-ft below existing grade. This paper presents the sequence and methodology for the ground modification work and capabilities of jet grouting for structural support and groundwater control in the challenging soil profile present at the Brightwater Conveyance System Project.

Jan 1, 2008

By S. Hamm

Elevated total dissolved solids (TDS) content in waters downstream from surface coal mines in Central Appalachia is an increasing concern, as unnaturally high TDS and/or associated specific conductivity (SC) may contribute to deteriorated stream ecosystem health. The aim of this preliminary study was to explore the efficacy of accelerated leaching as a means of minimizing long-term TDS/SC generation by problematic overburden materials. Five spoil samples were collected and leached using simulated rainwater solutions under ambient and acidified pH conditions. SC and pH were monitored during each leach cycle, and ICP-MS was used to determine how leaching conditions affected release of specific ions. This paper highlights the results of both jar and column leaching tests. Among the most significant findings was that, for certain spoil materials, SC in leach column effluent was effectively reduced when spoil was leached first with acidic rainwater followed by ambient rainwater (vs. ambient rainwater leaching alone). This suggests that accelerated leaching might aid in long-term stabilization of some materials.

Feb 23, 2014

By Charles S. Robinson

INTRODUCTION Geology, the science of the earth, is the fundamental science in the construction of a tunnel. The approximate site of a tunnel is determined by its purpose. The geology of the tunnel site will determine the cost--or feasibility of a tunnel--the specific alignment to accomplish the purpose of the tunnel, the design of the tunnel (within the limits of the purpose of the tunnel), and the methods of construction. The more accurately the geology of a proposed tunnel can be depicted, the more accurately can the cost of a tunnel be estimated. The factors that should be defined for tunnel design and construction are the physical characteristics of the material in which the tunnel is to be constructed. The physical characteristics of the material are determined by the genesis of the material, and subsequent geologic processes that have affected the material. The geologic materials in which tunnels are constructed can be broadly classified as unconsolidated and consolidated. The unconsolidated materials include chiefly deposits of recent geologic time that occur near the surface. Because these deposits occur near the surface, and tunnels constructed in them will be at shallow depth, methods of physical exploration such as geophysical methods, trenching, and drilling will give more data at relatively low cost--therefore the physical exploration is generally, or should be, quite extensive--and the

Jan 1, 1997

By K. A. Stanley, N. A. Karl, D. R. Wilburn

"This summary of international mineral exploration activities for the year 2014 draws upon information from industry sources, published literature and specialists in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Minerals Information Center. The summary provides data on exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry and presents analyses of exploration activities performed by the mineral industry.Three types of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. current dollars provided by SNL Metals & Mining (SNL) of Charlottesville, VA; 2) regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2014 as compiled by the USGS and 3) regional events that affected exploration activities including economic, social and political conditions, which were derived from published sources and discussions with USGS and industry specialists. Commodity and regional compilations are presented in this summary. Because multiple sources are used to develop these compilations, statistics may differ depending on the source and type of data that are being reported.The SNL data summarize planned company budgets for worldwide exploration activities in 2014 for 19 nonfuel mineral commodities based on company surveys. Research focused on precious metals (gold, platinum-group metals and silver), base metals (cobalt, copper, lead, molybdenum, nickel, tin and zinc), bulk commodities (iron ore, phosphate and potash), and specialty mineral commodities (diamond, lithium, niobium, rare-earth elements, tantalum and uranium). Information on uranium exploration activities was included for the first time in 2007. Data on lithium, niobium, phosphate, potash, rare-earth elements and tantalum were compiled for the first time in 2010 because of their increased significance. Since 1999, companies with exploration budgets of $100,000 and greater were included in the SNL compilations. SNL budget estimates exclude bauxite, coal and oil and gas. Exploration budget estimates for iron ore have been compiled since 2011 but reported separately. The 2014 SNL company survey is reported by SNL to cover an estimated 95 percent of the world’s nonferrous, nonfuel mineral exploration budgets. The 5 percent that is not covered includes companies that chose not to participate in the SNL survey, private companies that do not publish their budget data, and government-funded exploration activities"

Jan 1, 2014

By Russel Delmar, Rick Everdell, Harry Charalambu, John Tait

Award of the Design/Build Agreement for construction of Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG’s) Niagara Tunnel Project was made after an intensive 8-month international procurement process. The 14.4-m diameter × 10.4-km long rock tunnel will divert 500 m3/s of water from the Niagara River to the Sir Adam Beck hydroelectric generating complex. The procurement process and Design/Build Agreement included features to address the owner’s requirements regarding risk allocation and cost and schedule certainty, while encouraging innovative ideas from the industry, both technically and commercially. The process included an international expression of interest and prequalification, followed by an invitation for design/build proposals to qualified proponents, and comprehensive proposal evaluations and negotiations with several respondent proponents. An honorarium was provided to the unsuccessful participants in the proposal stage. The resultant negotiated Design/Build Agreement includes Owner’s Mandatory Requirements, negotiated contract terms and conditions, performanceincentive bonuses and liquidated damages for schedule and water delivery performance, a multistaged Geotechnical Baseline Report, joint risk management, references to preexisting community impact agreements and measures to reduce impact on tourism. It also addresses regulatory approvals and permits, an owner controlled insurance policy that required reference to the International Tunneling Insurance Group (ITIG) Code of Practice for Risk Management as a condition of coverage, site specific safety, security and environmental plans, formal team building, a dispute review board, and escrow documentation.

Jan 1, 2007

By Jamal Rostami, Ataollah Rahbar

"Uma Oya Multipurpose Development Project is under construction in Sri Lanka. This project involves 2 Rolled Concrete Core (RCC) Dams connected through a tunnel currently under construction by Drill and Blast method. The water is transferred from first diversion dam to the 2nd regulatory dam and from which, it will be transferred through a 14 km headrace tunnel to the top of a 650 m deep drop shaft that feeds the high pressure water to an underground powerhouse and turbine chamber for generation of 120 MW of electricity. The Headrace and Tailrace tunnels are being excavated by two 4.4 m diameter double shield TBMs. The headrace tunnel has already passed 5km milestone and is mined in hard rock, while the tailrace tunnel has been completed in rather weak and fractured ground. This paper will review the history of the project along with the geology of the site. The operation of TBM in headrace tunnel will be discussed in more detail, focusing on the challenges of excavating through very strong and abrasive quartzite and gneiss on this site, as well as reaches of tunnel in high inflow of water reaching 400 L/Sec. INTRODUCTION This paper aims to introduce the Uma Oya Multipurpose Development Project (UOMDP) as a hydro mechanical project in Sri Lanka, targeted generating hydro-electric power, transferring water for irrigation purposes and controlling seasonal devastating flood. This project lies in the south-eastern part of the central highland region of Sri Lanka (Figure 1). The main part of the project is located in the south-western part of the Badulla district in the province of Uva. The south-eastern end of the project site is in the central west of the Moneragala district (province of Uva). Bandarawela is the largest urban setting within the project area, located halfway between the upstream and the downstream ends of the planned hydropower plant and combination of dams, tunnels, and downstream facilities. The Multi-Purpose Project Of Uma Oya is planned to convey water from Uma Oya to Kirindi Oya Basin for hydroelectric energy generation includes Puhulpola RCC Dam on the Uma Oya river, Dyraaba RCC Dam on the Mahatotilla Oya river, a conveyance tunnel from Uma Oya to Mahatotilla Oya (L=3750m), a long feeder tunnel from Mahatotilla Oya to Kirindi Oya. The feeder (power) tunnel Lot consists of a headrace tunnel (L=15554m), the surge shaft (L=200m) and tank on the upstream of the vertical shaft, a vertical shaft with steel lining (L=650m), an underground powerhouse and a tailrace tunnel (L=3650m)."

Jan 1, 2016