October Optimized 10

Post-miningsustainability

Oregon’s new heavy

minerals minewww.miningengineeringmagazine.com

OCTOBER 2010VOL. 62 NO. 10

Iron ore’srecovery

KHD High Pressure Grinding Rolls

Copyright © 2010, Weir Slurry Group Inc. All rights reserved. | WARMAN is a registered trademark of Weir Minerals Australia Ltd and Weir Group African IP Ltd; VULCO is a registered trademark of Vulco SA; CAVEX is a registered trademark of Weir Minerals Australia Ltd; ISOGATE is a registered trademark of Weir do Brasil Ltda.

KHD is the registered trademark of KHD.

Get more out from what you put in with the

Weir Minerals Mill Circuit Solution.

You manage a lifecycle: maximum raw material in, maximum processed material

out. The Weir Minerals Mill Circuit Solution delivers longevity, capacity and

operating efficiency through our proven high performance wear resistant

technology and engineering know how. Through focused application on your

operation critical processes we can help you deliver enhanced performance at a

lower total cost of ownership. Weir Minerals’ superior engineering and design

and the combination of five performance-leading brands ensure optimised

productivity. Because we know you have to keep your asset moving.

To learn how to realise full processing potential, visit www.weirminerals.com

IS YOUR

REALISING ITS POTENTIAL?

PROCESS

2 OCTOBER 2010 Mınıng engıneerıng www.miningengineeringmagazine.com

Feature Articles

19 Residual impacts of a mining project Madan M. Singh, Timothy D. Hogan and Jamie Sturgess

24 Iron ore review 2009/2010 Magnus Ericsson, Anton Löf and Olle Östensson

29 A new industrial mineral sand mine near Coos Bay, Oregon Joseph D. Drew, Todd M. Lessard, Daniel F. Smith and Bill A. Hancock

40 TECHNOLOGY NEWS: Optimizing flotation cells in the mining industry

Technical Papers (peer-reviewed and approved)

41 Continuous miner spray considerations for optimizing scrubber performance in exhaust ventilation systems

J. Organiscak and T. Beck

47 Breaking the ice on the booster fan dilemma in US underground coal mines

A.L. Martikainen and C.D. Taylor


Copyright 2010 by the Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration, Inc. All rights reserved. MINING ENGINEERING (ISSN 0026–5187) is published monthly by the Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc., at 8307 Shaffer Parkway, Littleton, CO, 80127–4102. Phone 1–800–763–3132 or 303–973–9550. Fax: 303–973 –3845 or e-mail: sme @smenet.org. Website: www.smenet.org.Periodicals postage paid at Littleton, CO and additional mailing offices. Canadian post: publications mail agreement number 0689688. POSTMASTER: Send changes of address to MINING ENGINEERING, 8307 Shaffer Parkway, Littleton, CO, 80127–4102. Article copies and back issues available on microfilm or microfiche from Linda Hall Library in Kansas City, Mo. Printed by Cummings Printing Co.

24

24

OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF SMEwww.miningengineeringmagazine.com

R7

Ad Number: MET_GON_P02888D010-10PB4Publication(s): Mining Engineering

This ad prepared by: SGL Communications • 2 Bloor St. West, Toronto, Ontario • phone 416.413.7495 • fax 416.944.7883 File Location: SGL_A-M:Volumes:SGL_A-M:MEDT-SED:‚Ä¢Magazine:USA versions_Mag:USA_Atlas Creative_Mag:MET_GON_P02888D010-10PB4.indd

JOB SPECIFICS

Client: MEDTCreative Name: Atlas Copco USAgency Docket #: MET GON P02448Main Docket #: SED COR P02448Art Director: NoneCopy Writer: NonePrint Production: Milan StojanovicRetoucher: NoneLive: 7.375” x 10.125”Trim: 8.125” x 10.875”Bleed: 8.375” x 11.125”Artwork Scale: 1:1Print Scale: 100%

FILE SPECIFICATIONS:

File Name: MET_GON_P02888D010-10PB4.inddCreation Date: 8-16-2010 1:40 PMLast Modified: 8-16-2010 3:34 PMWorkstation: T06-0203InDesign Version: CS3 App. Version: 5.0.3Round #: 1 Page Count: 1GRAPHIC PRODUCTION:

Operator: Matt EvesCorrection: None

SIGNOFFS:

Creative:

Production:

Premedia:

Proofreading:

Account:

Client:

PREMEDIA OPERATOR:

Operator: RJ

INKS:

Cyan

MAGENTA

YELLOW

BLACK

FONTS & PLACED IMAGES

Family Style

Helvetica RegularHelvetica Neue 55 Roman, 75 Bold, 77 Bold Condensed, 65 Medium

File Name Colour Space Eff. Res (PPI)

Diamond_Reflect.psd CMYK 444 ppi2007_Trillium Ontario.eps2007_Ontario CanadaOntMap_REVISED_July09.eps

This proof was produced by the following department:

PREPRESS

Paid for by the Government of Ontario.

Atlas Copco didn’t

have to dig very deep before discovering the most valuable resource in Ontario’s

North: the people. Over 55% of the workforce in the main urban centers has a post-

secondary education. So it’s no wonder that an innovative, research-driven company

like Atlas Copco partnered with our metallurgical engineering talent to develop the

world class Torpedo diamond drill bit. Ontario’s North is well-positioned to establish

lasting relationships with many industries. Radiating from our central location is a

transportation network with four border crossings, two major freshwater ports, and

two international airports. Our telecommunications infrastructure is state-of-the-art,

our three universities and six colleges ensure a steady supply of graduates, and

our business costs are among the most competitive in the world. Vibrant industries

from aerospace to alternative energy will find a wealth of talent in Ontario’s North.

THE WORLD WORKS HERE.

ATLAS COPCO FOUND THE MOST VALUABLERESOURCE ABOVE GROUND IN ONTARIO’S NORTH.

i nve s t i n o n t a r i o .c o m / s u c c e s s

S:7.375”

S:10.125”

T:8.125”

T:10.875”

B:8.375”

B:11.125”

15

R7

Ad Number: MET_GON_P02888D010-10PB4Publication(s): Mining Engineering

This ad prepared by: SGL Communications • 2 Bloor St. West, Toronto, Ontario • phone 416.413.7495 • fax 416.944.7883 File Location: SGL_A-M:Volumes:SGL_A-M:MEDT-SED:‚Ä¢Magazine:USA versions_Mag:USA_Atlas Creative_Mag:MET_GON_P02888D010-10PB4.indd

JOB SPECIFICS

Client: MEDTCreative Name: Atlas Copco USAgency Docket #: MET GON P02448Main Docket #: SED COR P02448Art Director: NoneCopy Writer: NonePrint Production: Milan StojanovicRetoucher: NoneLive: 7.375” x 10.125”Trim: 8.125” x 10.875”Bleed: 8.375” x 11.125”Artwork Scale: 1:1Print Scale: 100%

FILE SPECIFICATIONS:

File Name: MET_GON_P02888D010-10PB4.inddCreation Date: 8-16-2010 1:40 PMLast Modified: 8-16-2010 3:34 PMWorkstation: T06-0203InDesign Version: CS3 App. Version: 5.0.3Round #: 1 Page Count: 1GRAPHIC PRODUCTION:

Operator: Matt EvesCorrection: None

SIGNOFFS:

Creative:

Production:

Premedia:

Proofreading:

Account:

Client:

PREMEDIA OPERATOR:

Operator: RJ

INKS:

Cyan

MAGENTA

YELLOW

BLACK

FONTS & PLACED IMAGES

Family Style

Helvetica RegularHelvetica Neue 55 Roman, 75 Bold, 77 Bold Condensed, 65 Medium

File Name Colour Space Eff. Res (PPI)

Diamond_Reflect.psd CMYK 444 ppi2007_Trillium Ontario.eps2007_Ontario CanadaOntMap_REVISED_July09.eps

This proof was produced by the following department:

PREPRESS

Paid for by the Government of Ontario.

Atlas Copco didn’t

have to dig very deep before discovering the most valuable resource in Ontario’s

North: the people. Over 55% of the workforce in the main urban centers has a post-

secondary education. So it’s no wonder that an innovative, research-driven company

like Atlas Copco partnered with our metallurgical engineering talent to develop the

world class Torpedo diamond drill bit. Ontario’s North is well-positioned to establish

lasting relationships with many industries. Radiating from our central location is a

transportation network with four border crossings, two major freshwater ports, and

two international airports. Our telecommunications infrastructure is state-of-the-art,

our three universities and six colleges ensure a steady supply of graduates, and

our business costs are among the most competitive in the world. Vibrant industries

from aerospace to alternative energy will find a wealth of talent in Ontario’s North.

THE WORLD WORKS HERE.

ATLAS COPCO FOUND THE MOST VALUABLERESOURCE ABOVE GROUND IN ONTARIO’S NORTH.

i nve s t i n o n t a r i o .c o m / s u c c e s s

S:7.375”S:10.125”

T:8.125”T:10.875”

B:8.375”B:11.125”



Post-miningsustainability Oregon’s new heavy minerals mine

www.miningengineeringmagazine.com


Iron ore’srecovery

SME News55 SME Foundation56 SME Young Leaders56 SME student sections57 Henry Krumb lecturers59 Student design competition60 SME scholarships62 Meetings63 Obituaries

Departments

6 President’s page8 Politics of mining

10 Industry newswatch54 Coming events 64 New products66 New media68 Web directory69 Classifieds73 Professional services79 Index of advertisers80 Drift of things

Editorial StaffEditor Steve [email protected]

Senior Editor William M. [email protected]

Senior Editor Georgene [email protected]

Technical Editor Emily [email protected]

Production Designer Nate Hurianek [email protected]

Business StaffMedia Manager/AdvertisingJohanna [email protected]

Phone: 1–800–763–3132Fax: 303–973–3845 E-mail: [email protected]: www.smenet.org

Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc. OfficersPresidentNikhil C. TrivediPresident-ElectJohn N. Murphy

Past PresidentWilliam H. Wilkinson

Executive DirectorDavid L. Kanagy

Mining Engineering CommitteeJamal Rostami (Chair), Joseph C. Zelanko (Vice Chair), Jurgen F. Brune, Robert W. Reisinger, William H. Langer, D.R. Nagaraj and Christopher J. Bise

Peer Review Editorial BoardChristopher J. Bise, Kirk McDaniel, Kelvin Wu, Vladislav Kecojevic, Keith Heasley, Jurgen F. Brune, Nikhil Trivedi, Rajive Ganguli, Catherine Dreesbach, Hugh Miller, G.T. Lineberry, Henry McCarl, Biswajit Samanta, Gerrit Goodman and Rossen A. Halatchev

Reproduction: More than one photocopy of an item from SME may be made for internal use, provided fees are paid directly to the Copyright Clearance Center, 27 Congress St., Salem, MA, 01970, USA. Phone 978–750–8400, fax 978–750-4470. Any other form of reproduction requires special permission from, and may be subject to fees by SME. SME is not responsible for any statements made or opinions expressed in its publications. Member subscription rate included in dues. Nonmember subscription rate, $245; in Europe, $275. Single copies $25, July directory issue, $150.

Cover StoryWhile most of the world saw falling production, crude steel production in China increased by 13.5 percent, compared to the 2.3 percent growth the year before. China now accounts for almost half of the world production of crude steel (47 percent). Magnus Ericsson, Anton Löf and Olle Östensson give a review of the iron ore sector, page 24. In the past, little was done by communities to plan for economic changes after the closure of a mine. But that is not the case with the proposed Rosemont project in Arizona, where the residual impacts of the project were studied at length, page 19. And it’s not often that there is mining news from the state of Oregon. But this month Joseph D. Drew, Todd M. Lessard, Daniel F. Smith and Bill A. Hancock write about a new industrial sand mine near Coos Bay, OR, page 29. Cover photo courtesy of LKAB.

29

OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF SMEwww.miningengineeringmagazine.com

64

Polysius AGGraf-Galen-Straße 17 · 59269 Beckum · DeutschlandTel.: +49-(0)2525-99-0 · Fax: +49-(0)[email protected]

Polysius Corp.180 Interstate North Parkway, Atlanta, GA 30339-2194/USATel.: +1-770-955-3660 · Fax: [email protected]

...dressing made by Polysius

Polysius

Gold-/Copper ore

MineralsRep

rt4/10

Mine operators count on POLYCOM® high-pressure grinding rolls.Whether in Peru, Brazil, Australia or Africa; the POLYCOM® HPGR is asserting itself on the

gold and copper mining sector.

For new plants, the POLYCOM® is an economically superior

concept compared to conven-tional systems such as SAG mills.

The prospect of achieving maximum increases in the throughput of existing grind-

ing plants also makes the POLYCOM® a popular machine

for plant extensions. The POLY-COM® can be easily incorporated

into existing plant configurations.

Benefits: x Capacity increase of existing plants 20 to 30 % x Less power consumption x Lower wear cost.

Anzeige Mining, us.indd 1 12.08.2010 8:11:46 Uhr


President’s Page

The parents were married in Wilkes-Barre, PA. It was an historical event, with a

wedding party of 22 and a total of 71 people attending. Their honeymoon was a trip to the most beautiful fields in the Wyoming Valley of Pennsylvania.

The marriage was built on a very specific passion, which was cultivated and grew through a continuing hunger to learn and share. The parents lived quite comfortably and, over time, they thrived and prospered. They shared many things, traveled to many places and hosted many gala events. They were members of the country club, where other parents also came together to learn and share their combined wisdom.

The parents had children. As babies, the children were totally dependent on the parents. As the children grew older, the parents took them along on their travels, to their galas and to the country club. They taught their children to play with the other club member’s children. They raised them to think for themselves and to stand on their own. They taught them to be independent, and also to recognize the value of their friends at the club.

The children grew up and wanted to venture out on their own. Each had matured and defined themselves as a unique person, with specific interests and passions that, while still bearing a family resemblance, were not the same as the other siblings. The parents encouraged their autonomy and independence, but still embraced

each child with loving arms as each of their respective families matured and grew.

The parents are older now. They live on a modest income from the returns on their investments. One of those investments generates significant dividends that cannot be bequeathed to the children if the parents die. They continue to support their children and enjoy their membership in the country club. The children were never allowed to join the club — it quit taking new members years ago.

As the parents have aged, the children sometimes say that their parents try to do too much. The children feel like they can do most things better themselves. They are younger, more nimble and have families of their own who can get things done more easily and efficiently than the parents. The parents need to step back and let the children do the work and to run their own lives.

The children respect their parents and their traditions, but they have their own lives to live. They want the parents to live on, but the relationship is so different now than it was when they were babies. They understand the importance of the network at the country club, and they recognize that they do not need to be members themselves because they have full access to the club and all of its benefits as long as the parents keep their membership.

It really is a special family. The parents are

A family story, SME’s parent organization takes a look at its family and future

by Nikhil C. Trivedi, 2010 SME president

(Continued on page 17)

During the past several months, I have visited many of SME’s local

sections in different parts of the country. Some of the local sections continue to proudly proclaim themselves as sections of the American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum Engineers (AIME) and rightly so. AIME is SME’s parent organization and we honor our heritage. In August, SME Executive Director Dave Kanagy and I attended the AIME Board of Trustee’s annual meeting. SME is ably served at the AIME level by Mike Karmis and Barb Filas. At this event, Karmis’s term ended and George Luxbacher was inducted as the next SME representative to the AIME

board and he will be AIME president in 2013.

When we talk about AIME, it is logical that we also want to know what is happening with the Women’s Auxiliary of AIME (WAAIME). Well, the WAAIME group, SME’s youngest Division, is doing very well. This year, the WAAIME Division is led by Winnell Burt, Susan Harwood and Veronica Yovane-Brahm. This year alone, the WAAIME group has awarded $200,000 in scholarships to deserving students in several countries including the U.S. Many decades ago, I was fortunate to receive a WAAIME scholarship. The WAAIME Division is always on top of my mind when I feel generous and I hope you will feel the same way.

And since so many SME members are curious about AIME and its current mission, I asked Barb Filas (2005 SME president) to tell the AIME story. So, here it is……

— Nikhil Trivedi

To order, simply mail or fax the form above with your payment or call 800-763-3132

A Publication

of the Society

for Mining,

Metallurgy, and

Exploration, Inc.

COMMINUTION

FLOTATION

GRAVITY SEPARATION

CLASSIFICATION

MAGNETIC SEPARATION

LEACHING

BIOTECHNOLOGY

SOLVENT EXTRACTION

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY

DEWATERING

ELECTROWINNING

FLOCCULATION

PROCESS CONTROL

MODELING AND SIMULATION

MINERALOGY

AN INTERNATIONAL PEER-REVIEWED JOURNAL

2006_COVER_IMAGE.indd 1 2/1/06 11:22:39 AM

MINERALS & METALLURGICAL PROCESSING focuses on process descriptions containing information on plant operations and research. These papers present data on new techniques, new solutions to common problems and the application of conventional methods to new raw material sources. The journal also focuses on specific unit operations, such as crushing and grinding, flotation, gravity separation, magnetic separation, leaching and roasting. Presented are new equipment concepts, equipment selection, theoretical studies and engineering with emphasis on equipment arrangements, trends, circuit design and concepts.

Process this.

AN OFFICIAL SME PUBLICATION

CHOOSE YOUR PAYMENT METHOD: 1 YEAR • 4 QUARTERLY ISSUES • PUBLISHED FEB, MAY, AUG, NOV 2010 PREPAYMENT REQUIRED - Please indicate the payment you are enclosing:❏ VISA ❏ MASTER CARD ❏ AMERICAN EXPRESS ❏ DISCOVER ❏ CHECK NO. ______________

2010-2011 SUBSCRIPTION ORDER FORM

NAME (please print)___________________________________________________________________________________TITLE _______________________________________________ SME MEMBER NO. _______________________COMPANY ______________________________________________________________________________________ADDRESS _______________________________________________________________________________________CITY ____________________________STATE ______ ZIP/POSTAL CODE ________ COUNTRY _____________EMAIL __________________________________________________________________________________________SIGNATURE _____________________________________________________________ DATE__________________CREDIT CARD TYPE: _________________ NUMBER ____________________________________EXP _________Send this order form and your payment to SME, 8307 Shaffer Parkway, Littleton, CO 80127 or fax your credit card order to 303-973-3845 or call 800-763-3132 for more information. Allow 4-6 weeks. *Prices include airmail delivery for all international subscribers.

1

CHOOSE YOUR SUBSCRIPTION TYPE*: ❏ SME MEMBER PRINT&ONLINE $119 ❏ SME MEMBER ONLINE ONLY $99 ❏ NONMEMBER PRINT&ONLINE US $149 ❏ NONMEMBER ONLINE ONLY US $129 ❏ NONMEMBER PRINT&ONLINE INTL $159 ❏ NONMEMBER ONLINE ONLY INTL $129 ❏ INSTITUTIONAL/LIBRARY PRINT $599

2

PROCESSTHIS_AD_2010.indd 1 6/22/10 8:53 AM


Politics of Mining

TWO FIRST NATIONS groups have signed historic tax-sharing agreements with the British Columbia provincial government that will share mining taxation revenues between the government and the First Nations.

The McLeod Lake Indian Band and the Stk’emlupsemc of the Secwepemc Nation claim the mining projects in British Columbia are part of traditional First Nation territory.

The chief and council of the McLeod Lake Indian Band and the British Columbia government signed

a historic agreement with the First Nation band to share mineral tax revenue generated by Thompson Creek and Terrane Metals’ Mt. Milligan copper-gold mine project.

The British Columbia government also signed its first historic mining revenue-sharing agreement with the Stk’emlupsemc of the Secwepemc Nation, which covers future revenue from New Gold’s New Afton gold mine.

Mt. Milligan is planned for an annual production of 36.7 kt (81 million lbs) of copper and 6 t (194,000 oz) of

gold over a 22-year mine life. Proven and probable reserves are 952 kt (2.1 billion lbs) of contained copper and 186 t (6 million oz) of contained gold.

Located 10 km (6.2 miles) from the community of Kamloops in south-central British Columbia, New Afton is expected to commence production at the former Teck mine in the second half of 2012. The mine is expected to produce an average of 2.6 t (85,000 oz) of gold, 6.6 t (214,000 oz) of silver and 34 kt (75 million lbs) of copper over a 12-year mine life. n

First Nations sign mining tax agreement with British Columbia

Federal judge issues pricey cleanup order to Patriot Coal

A RULING FROM a federal judge in West Virginia could have far-reaching consequences for coal mining in the Appalachian Region if it becomes a precedent.

Judge Robert Chambers of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia ordered Patriot Coal Corp. to clean up selenium pollution at two surface coal mines in West Virginia. Chambers gave Patriot about two years to get its selenium discharges down to the limits specified in its mining permits. He also ordered the company to post a $45-million letter of credit to ensure that it installs the equipment at the two mines, McClatchy Newspapers reported.

Selenium is one of a number of contaminants — including arsenic, cadmium and lead — that are discharged from mining operations and also are found in coal ash and other wastes from coal-fired power plants.

The ruling applied to only two mines. Environmental groups that are fighting the spread of mountaintop removal mining said that, if it became a precedent, it might make some mines too expensive to operate.

Patriot said in a statement that it would have to spend $50 million on the cleanup system and $3 million a year to run it.

The company said its subsidiary, Apogee, was ordered to install a fluidized bed reactor (FBR) system to treat selenium discharges at its Ruffner Mine. Another subsidiary, Hobet, was required to submit a treatment plan for its Hobet 22 Mine.

“While Patriot believes that FBR has promise, it is important to understand that this technology has never before been used in commercial applications for the removal of selenium in any context, including coal mining,” the company said in a statement.

The judge previously had ruled that the selenium discharges at the mines exceeded what was authorized by their permits under the Clean Water Act. The order found Patriot in contempt of court and specified what its subsidiaries must do about the permit violations.

“We are particularly disappointed with the contempt ruling,” Patriot’s president and chief executive officer, Richard M. Whiting, said in a statement. He said Patriot had “dedicated significant resources over the last several years to take an industry-leading position in identifying viable treatment technology to address selenium discharges.” n

CHILEAN PRESIDENT Sebastian Pinera’s approval rating surged to a new high in August for his efforts to rescue 33 miners trapped, but alive weeks after a cave-in, and it could help him push through a mining royalty hike.

A survey by pollster Adimark GfK showed Pinera’s approval rating rose to 56 percent in August, up 10 percentage points from a previous poll in July. It is his highest rating since he took office in March.

The jump in approval could give Pinera’s government the upper hand in its push to pass a mining royalty overhaul through the opposition-led Congress.

The bill, revised and re-sent to Congress after the royalty was rejected by center-left opponents in July, calls for higher levies from global miners like BHP Billiton and Xstrata.

Pinera, who has angered mining companies with his proposal, expects the new royalty scheme to raise around $1 billion during the next three years to help finance rebuilding of cities ravaged by a massive Feb. 27 earthquake. n

Mining royalty hike could get boost in Chile

The Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc.8307 Shaffer Parkway, Littleton, CO 80127 USA

Toll-free 1.800.763.3132

Local 303.948.4225

Fax 303.933.6269

www.smenet.org [email protected]

Your most precious resource.

HOIST & HAUL 2010Proceedings of the InternationalConference on Hoisting and Hauling

Edited by Peter Brokenshire and Susan Andersen

2010, 344 pages, 3 lbsISBN-13: 978-0-87335-337-3Book Order Number: 337-3

$99 Member$79 Student Member$119 Non-Member/List

• Brakes and Brake Controls• Incline Shaft Systems• Shaft Guides• Innovative Systems• Drives and Drive Controls• Hoisting System Elements• Health, Safety, and Risk• Shaft Systems: New and Upgraded• Underground Materials Handling• Horizontal Transport• Design, Operation, and Maintenance of Ropes

Today’s mining professionals must meet the ever increasing challenges of larger, more efficient, and safer ore handling systems. New developments in technology have led to a host of different transport solutions. Design decisions are greatly influenced by these advancements, which can dramatically impact the financial requirements for new projects.

Hoist and Haul 2010 provides the most current, cutting-edge insights into these important issues.

This book is a compilation of the papers delivered at the prestigious “2010 International Conference on Hoisting and Haulage.” It provides a comprehensive update of major developments and lessons learned since the last industry gathering in 2005.

From the handling of ore at the point of extraction to stockpiling on the surface, dozens of case histories document the latest trends in shaft hoisting, incline and drift hoisting, conveying, hydraulic hoisting, rail haulage, tramming, and truck haulage.

Experts involved in key mining projects throughout the world share best practices on the design of systems and components, operations, and economic and safety issues.

Hoist and Haul 2010 is essential reading for anyone in the mine hoisting and underground material transport community, including operators, engineering and construction firms, equipment vendors, consultants, academicians, and government officials.

Contents

Hoist and Haul 2010

Hoist and Haul 2010


Industry Newswatch

Newswatchcontents12Alberta ranks first in Fraser Survey

13Nevada slips in global gold output

14Stillwater Mining buys Marathon

15First Bucyrus branded MT3700 goes into service

AN EXPANSION OF Kennecott Copper’s Bingham Canyon Mine in Utah could extend the life of the mine to 2034, while tapping into a resource of 635 Mt (700 million st) of copper.

The Cornerstone Project would push back the south wall of the mine by about 305 m (1,000 ft) and deepen the mine by 91 m (300 ft). The expansion faces a series of regulatory hurdles, including the updating of about 25 environmental permits, as well as approval from Rio Tinto’s board of directors, Kennecott’s parent company. If the plan moves ahead, it could secure more than 2,000 jobs and pump an average of $1 billion a year into the local economy through the mid-2030s.

The extension of the mine would require increasing the size of the mine’s fleet of large haul trucks, adding an in-pit crusher and another grinding line and supporting equipment at the Copperton concentrator. The extension will also require an additional 100

CANADIAN GOLD MINER Kinross Gold will create one of the largest gold miners in the world with its acquisition of Red Back Mining.

Kinross Gold announced that it will buy the 91 percent of shares of Red Back Mining that it does not already own in an all-stock deal that has been valued at C$7.1 billion.

The deal would unite the two Canadian companies to create one company with 10 mines and four development projects in eight countries. Red Back is a major gold producer with a focus on African assets.

Under the terms of the deal, Red Back shareholders will receive 1.778

Kinross shares and 0.11 common share purchase warrants for each of their shares.

“By combining Kinross’s world-class mines, growth projects and proven ability in mine development with the potential of Red Back’s assets, we are creating a gold growth powerhouse,” Tye Burt, Kinross’s chief executive, said in a statement.

Lukas Lundin, Red Back’s chairman, and Richard Clark, the company’s chief executive, are expected to join Kinross’s board after the deal closes.

Based in Vancouver, Red Back focuses primarily on its western Africa assets, notably in Mauritania and Ghana. n

Kinross Gold purchases Red Back Mining for C$7.1 billion

MW of electricity to power the improvements. The addition of equipment and technology will allow Kennecott to maintain current production levels of 272 to 308 kt/a (300,000 to 340,000 stpy) of refined copper for several decades, the company said.

A study conducted by the University of Utah’s Bureau of Economic and Business Research department (BEBR) found that Rio Tinto spent approximately $900 million in 2009 on employee salaries and benefits, taxes and fees, as well as purchases from nearly 1,000 Utah companies. The study estimated if the Cornerstone investment is not made, the economic contribution will decrease beginning in 2021 by an average of $630 million a year. In contrast, the study estimated that extending the life of the mine will pump an average of $1 billion a year into the local economy through the mid-2030s. The project will also help sustain Rio Tinto’s employment of 2,400 people and an additional 14,800

indirect jobs, for a total of 17,200 Utah jobs.

Kennecott officials already have briefed the state Department of Environmental Quality about their intentions. Each permit adjustment will require public hearings, said Doug Bacon, a project manager in the department’s Division of Environmental Response and Remediation, The Salt Lake City Tribune reported.

Kennecott also has permits with the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining, the state agency that oversees reclamation of mining properties. One permit covers the Bingham Canyon Mine, while others include its Copperton concentrator and tailings impoundment north of Magna.

“Kennecott has a great history in Utah, and this mine expansion offers an opportunity for us to continue producing about a quarter of the country’s copper for years to come,” Kennecott chief executive officer Kelly Sanders said. n

Bingham Canyon extension could extend life of mine to mid-2030s by moving south wall

www.miningengineeringmagazine.com Mınıng engıneerıng OCTOBER2010 11

Industry Newswatch

}{

{ Add Firestone, Add Reliability }

Geomembranes that work

• • TaiTailinlings gs FacFaciliilitietiess• S• Soluolutiotion Pn Pondond LiLinernerss• W• Wateater Rr Reseeservorvoirsrs• C• Canaanal Ll Lineinersrs

• T• Tailailingings Fs Faciacilitlitiesies • S• Soluolutiotion Pn Pondond Li Linernerss• H• Heapeap LeLeachach Pa Padsds• I• Intenterlirlift ft LinLinersers

800-428-4442 l www.fi restonesp.com/me3 l info@fi restonesp.com

Firestone Specialty Products manufactures high-quality, durable EPDM and reinforced polypropylene geomembranes

ideal for a variety of mining application.

VISIT US AT BOOTH 108 AT THE NWMA SHOW.

GRUPO MEXICO announced that it plans to produce molybdenum at its Cananea copper mine that recently reopened following a strike that lasted nearly three years. However, the Mexican copper miner also announced that it was declaring a force majeure at the La Caridad smelter and refinery complex after “Los Mineros” union members blocked contract workers from entering the facility.

In a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Grupo Mexico subsidiary Southern Copper Corp. (SCC) said the refinery is operating at a reduced capacity, forcing Mexcobre, the operating company of La Caridad, “to notify all of its clients and supports about this commercial force majeure situation.”

News reports from the state of Sonora said violence has erupted in the copper towns of Cananea and Nacozari de Garcia between members of the National Union of Mine and Metals Workers, commonly referred to as Los Mineros, and replacement workers. State and federal police are guarding mining facilities at both Cananea and La Caridad.

At Cananea, Grupo Mexico, the world’s No. 3 producer of molybdenum, said it will invest $30 million to begin producing 2 kt/a (2,200 stpy) by the first half of 2013.

“We are developing the first molybdenum circuit at Cananea ... which would increase our actual production by 10 percent, since we now produce around 20 kt (22,000 st) (overall),” Jorge Pulido, Grupo Mexico’s head of investor relations told Reuters.

The company operates four openpit mines in Mexico and Peru. Cananea is the only one that does not produce molybdenum, which can be mined as a byproduct of copper, Pulido said.

The company must first repair damages at Cananea, Mexico’s largest copper mine, idled by the three-year labor dispute.

The national miners union lost a court decision this year and the company retook control of the installations, backed by federal police.

Once Cananea is up and running,

Grupo Mexico will kick off a $3.8-million expansion plan by the fourth quarter of 2012 to more than double the 180-kt (198,000-st) copper capacity. n

GrupoMexicotoinvest$30millionin Cananea Mine, but still struggles with labor issues


Industry Newswatch

QUEBEC’S THREE-YEAR run as the top mining jurisdiction in the Fraser Institute’s Survey of Mining Companies came to an end with the publication of the survey’s 2010 midyear report. It ranks Alberta as the top spot in the world, with Finland ranking second.

The shakeup in the standings was caused by mining tax hikes in Canada and Australia, according to the survey’s coordinator, Fred McMahon.

“After ranking Quebec as the best place in the world for mining investment for three years in a row, it appears that miners’ confidence in the province has been shaken by increases in mining taxes that were announced without consultation in Quebec’s spring budget,” said McMahon.

The survey results also appear to reflect concerns about Bill 79, the review of Quebec’s mining law, and could be seen as a blow to the province’s reputation for offering stable government policies.

Also slipping far in the ranking was Australia. South Australia dropped from 10th place to 15th place, the Northern Territory from 14th to 30th, Western Australia from 19th to 28th, Queensland from 24th to 33rd and New South

Wales from 20th to 38th. This was largely because of the Australian government’s announcement to impose a heavy Resources Super Profits Tax on the mining industry. Although the tax was cancelled after the Fraser Institute survey was conducted, miners still face significant tax increases in Australia.

After the Australian states, perennial mining favorite Nevada’s score suffered the biggest fall in the developed world, dropping from third to 10th out of 51 jurisdictions.

While miners still consider top U.S. gold mining state Nevada a good place to mine, survey results show “they were worried by an effort to put a huge tax increase to a referendum (the referendum petition failed to get enough signatures to be put on the ballot). The legislature did, however, enact a new one-time mining tax,” the survey said.

Overall, the top 10 jurisdictions are Alberta, Finland, Quebec, Yukon, Saskatchewan, Chile, Newfoundland and Labrador, Botswana, Alaska and Nevada. Seven of the jurisdictions ranked among the top 10 are the same in both the updated survey and the previously released 2009/2010 report. The three exceptions are New Brunswick, which was not included in the updated survey; Manitoba, which fell from ninth place to 11th and South Australia, which dropped from 10th to 15th.

The bottom 10 scores went to Ecuador, Mongolia, Kazakhstan, Bolivia, Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Russia, Colorado, Indonesia and Tasmania.

The Philippines, Democratic Republic of Congo and California, which were among the worst ranked nations in the 2009/2010 survey, managed to climb out of the bottom 10. n

Alberta ranks first in Fraser Survey;Tax increases drop Quebec and Australia from top spots

THE YARRABUBBA PROJECT, 50 km (31 miles) southeast of Meekatharra in Western Australia, which is believed to have most of the geological characteristics of the Sudbury mining camp in Canada, will be the site of a drilling program conducted by the joint venture team of Impact Minerals and CITIC Nickel Australia.

The Yarrabubba Joint Venture tenements cover about 1,200 km2 (463 sq miles). Within these, there is a very large magnetic low in regional airborne magnetic data and outcrops of distinctive geological structures indicative of shock metamorphism, which have been interpreted also to be caused by a major meteorite impact. The feature in this area is called the Yarrabubba Impact Structure, and is situated in the northern Yilgarn Craton between the towns of Sandstone and Meekatharra, central Western Australia, reported MineWeb. n

Drilling to begin atYarrabubba Project


Industry Newswatch

IN THE NEVADA Mining Association’s annual report, Economic Overview of Nevada’s Mineral Industry, University of Nevada, Reno, economist John Dobra said Nevada’s rank in world gold production slipped to sixth. While Nevada remains the largest gold producing region in the U.S. accounting for 79 percent of total U.S. production, China, South Africa, Australia, Russia and Peru all rank ahead of Nevada on a global scale.

Proven and probable gold reserves in the top U.S. gold mining state of Nevada increased from 2.2 kt (70 million oz) in 2008 to 2.3 kt (75 million oz) in 2009. Dobra said this is enough to maintain the state’s gold production at current levels for another 13 years.

“Nevada’s production declined for the eighth straight year because higher prices allow operators to process lower grades of ore. While lower production levels may seem like bad news in the short term, in the long run it extends the life of orebodies and enhances the sustainability of the industry,” Dobra said.

The Nevada Department of Minerals reported Nevada gold operations mined 175 t (5.64 million oz) of gold last year, down slightly from 177 t (5.7 million oz) in 2008. Silver production, mostly byproduct production in Nevada mines, was 224 t (7.2 million oz) in 2009, down from nearly 249 t (8 million oz) in 2008.

Because of lower silver production and a decline in silver prices last year, the calculated value of 2009 Nevada silver production dropped from $119 million in 2008 to $105.6 million in 2009. However, Dobra advised that the planned restart of the Coeur-Rochester silver mine near Lovelock this year is expected to reverse the state’s decline in silver production.

Copper production last year was reported to be 66 kt (145.7 million lbs) from two Nevada mines, down from 79.6 kt (175.5 million lbs) in 2008.

“Because of renewed production at Quadra Mining’s Robinson Mine near Ely and Newmont’s Phoenix Mine near Battle Mountain, copper production is once again a significant contributor to minerals industry output,” Dobra observed. “Copper is the second most important mineral produced in the value of output, although only a little more than one-tenth the value of gold production.”

The Nevada Department of Taxation (NDT) reported gross proceeds of gold and silver at $5.1 billion out of total state gross mine proceeds of $5.8 billion in 2009. Copper production gross proceeds were $442 million in 2009, a drop from 2008 due to lower copper prices,

the NDT said.Geothermal producers generated

more than $110.8 million in 2009, the agency reported, up from $95 million in 2008, making geothermal the fourth largest mineral category in Nevada.

Nevada mines also produced aggregates, barite, diatomite, dolomite, gypsum, limestone, lithium carbonate, molybdenum, magnesium oxide, perlite, precious opals, salt, silica sand and specialty clays in 2009, for gross proceeds of $156 million, which Dobra noted “is down significantly from the previous year.”

Dobra attributed the sharp drop in the total value of the other Nevada-mined minerals to the national recession and a decrease in demand. n

Nevadaslipsinglobalgoldoutput;State still leads nation, but now ranks sixth in world

Sioux has the Clean You Need... Reliability Guaranteed!

SIOUX CORPORATIONToll-free: 888-763-8833 · Fax: 605-763-3334International: [email protected] · www.sioux.comOne Sioux Plaza · Beresford, South Dakota 57004 USA

Sioux Equipment – Anything but Standard

All-Electric Explosion-Proof

Hot Water Washer

New Dakota II Hot Water Washer

(oil or gas fired)

Call today to put Sioux to work for you!

Best Return on Your Investment – Rugged frames and quality components provide 5 times longer life in extreme conditions. – It’s all backed by Sioux’s 70 years of experience and exceptional quality and service.

Recognized Leader in All-Electric Pressure Washers – Sioux is widely recognized as THE BEST All-Electric design, setting the standard for reliability and value.– 100% electric means no fuel, no fumes, no flames. Ideal for rugged mining applications, particularly underground. – XP models for hazardous, classified environments.

Wide Range of Application-Specific Equipment – From quick ship stock to custom engineered models, the right equipment for the job saves time and money.– 50 or 60 Hz, nearly any voltage and hundreds of other options!

The ONLY 20-Year Reliability Guarantee in the Industry!

Sioux Equipment

All-Electric Explosion-Proof

Best Return on Your Investment – Rugged frames and quality components provide 5 times longer life in extreme conditions. – It’s all backed by Sioux’s 70 years of experience and exceptional quality and service.

Recognized Leader in All-Electric Pressure Washers – Sioux is widely recognized as THE BEST All-Electric design, setting the standard for reliability and value.


Industry Newswatch

Peabody Energy walks a dragline;13 million lb machine moved to Bear Run Mine

PEABODY ENERGY’S 5.9-million-kg (13-million-lb) dragline began a 30-km (18-mile) “walk” in August from the Farmersburg Mine in Sullivan County, IN, to its new home at the Bear Run Mine south of Dugger, IN.

Bear Run will be the largest coal mine in the eastern United States, initially operating two draglines to move rock and reveal coal seams. Mined areas are ultimately restored to productive farmland and pasture.

One of the largest machines in the world, the Bucyrus-Erie 2570-W dragline will cross the countryside and two Indiana state highways during its month-long journey to Bear Run.

Transporting a machine of the 2570’s size requires great precision and extensive planning, said Kent Holcomb, Bear Run’s operating manager. “It takes a lot of hard work from many people to move anything of this scale,” he said.

The walk will continue 24 hours a day, seven days a week, at a pace

of less than one-tenth of a mile an hour. A crew of up to 20 staff will support the machine’s operators, including maintenance personnel and electricians responsible for the 22,900-volt cabling that powers the dragline’s progress.

At 5.9 million kg (13 million lbs), the 2570 weighs more than 150 Boeing 737-700 jetliners. It towers 67 m (220 ft) high and swings a 102-m (335-ft) boom with a maximum operating radius of 91 m (300 ft), the length of a football field. This boom carries an 88-m3 (115-cu yd) bucket capable of moving a 155,000-kg (335,000-lb) payload.

The machine sits on a tub spanning 24 m (80 ft) in diameter and walks with two shoes measuring 22 m (72 ft) in length by 4 m (14 ft) in width. This size is necessary to lift and advance the dragline’s massive frame.

The Indiana Department of Transportation also will close highways 48 and 54 temporarily to accommodate the dragline’s journey.

At each highway crossing, teams will layer plastic, straw, clay and shale above the road to protect the asphalt and will remove these items after the dragline’s passage. Because the process may take several hours, the department has planned detours and ongoing alerts for motorists.

At the end of its travels, the dragline will immediately begin operating at the Bear Run Mine. With a 7.2-Mt/a (8-million stpy) capacity, Bear Run will bring significant economic benefits to the community, Peabody Energy chief operating officer Eric Ford said of the company’s newest mine.

“Bear Run employs more than 350 skilled workers and annually contributes approximately $140 million in direct economic benefits into the regional economy. Annual payroll at the site alone is expected to exceed $50 million,” said Ford. “We’re enormously proud to bring online another new source of affordable, made-in-America energy in the Illinois Basin.” n

Stillwater Mining buys Marathon;Deal between platinum group metals miners worth $118 million

STILLWATER MINING, a U.S.-based platinum group metals (PGM) producer, has agreed to purchase Marathon PGM for about $118 million in cash and shares, the companies said.

Marathon’s main asset is its Marathon PGM project in Ontario, Canada. The company completed a definitive feasibility study on the property in November 2009. The firm has since been working on permitting and financing the asset.

Stillwater operates two mines, Stillwater and East Boulder, in the Beartooth Mountains of south-central

Montana, in the U.S. The company also runs a metals recycling business.

The acquisition of Marathon is expected to boost Stillwater’s platinum and palladium production by about 40 percent within three years.

The deal was unanimously approved by both boards of directors, and is expected to close by the end of November, assuming it receives regulatory and exchange approvals and a positive vote by Marathon shareholders.

“This transaction offers significant value and upside potential to

Stillwater shareholders, and as the Marathon PGM/copper project is one of the few near-term PGM development opportunities on this continent, it solidifies our position as North America’s leading PGM producer,” Stillwater chief executive officer Francis McAllister said in a statement.

The Marathon PGM project has proven and probable reserves of 76.2 t (2.45 million oz) of palladium, 21.6 t (696,000 oz) of platinum, 227 t (251,000 oz) of gold, 225.4 kt (497 million lbs) of copper and 131.5 t (4.23 million oz) of silver. n


Industry Newswatch

AN UPDATED SCOPING study focused on the development of the underlying sulfide resource at Allied Nevada’s Hycroft Mine has prompted the company to look at building a larger milling facility than indicated in an April 2010 study.

Production at the mine is forecast at 18.9 t/a (610,000 oz/year) of gold and 840 kt/a (27 million oz/year) of silver, from a combined 100 kt/d (110,000 stpd) milling operation and 74 kt/d (81,500 stpd) heap leach operation, Allied Nevada said.

The average cost of sales is forecast at around 32 cents/g ($350/oz), after silver byproduct credits.

“This mine is expected to support an operation with a much greater production profile than was originally presented in the April scoping study,” said chief executive

officer Scott Caldwell.Ongoing drilling is expected to

continue to expand the resource, which could further improve the economics of the project.

The updated sulfide study envisages a large-scale bulk tonnage openpit operation, with lower grade oxide mineralization processed as run-of-mine heap leach material and both higher-grade oxide mineralization, along with sulfide mineralization, processed at a 100-kt/d (110,000-stpd) milling facility.

The April study envisaged a 30-kt/d (33,000-stpd) mill, milling sulfide ore. The updated project is expected to cost about $1.1 billion, including the milling and flotation process facility, additional leach pads, mining equipment and other ancillary infrastructure, Allied Nevada said.

The company plans to complete a feasibility study on the sulfide project by mid-2011.

Permitting for the project will likely take three years, with another two years for construction and commissioning.

Allied Nevada is already working on an expansion of the capacity to mine and process oxide mineralization at Hycroft, which it announced in April of this year. The mine is currently producing at a rate of around 3.1 t/a (100,000 oz/year) of gold and 9.3 t/a (300,000 oz/year) of silver.

The oxide project involves additions to the mine fleet, leach pad expansions, the addition of a crushing circuit and modifications to existing infrastructure like the process plant and refinery. n

HycroftMinetogetlargermill;Allied Nevada adjusts plans following scoping study

First Bucyrus branded MT3700 goes into service attheNewGoldMesquiteMineinCalifornia

IN MAY 2010, Bucyrus commissioned the first of two additional MT3700 ac haul trucks at the New Gold Mesquite Mine in southern California. These haul trucks, capable of hauling payloads of 186 t (205 st), are the first Bucyrus trucks delivered in the United States since the company’s acquisition of Terex Mining in early 2010. They are the first trucks to be painted in Bucyrus branding. This delivery will bring the Mesquite Mine’s fleet to a total of 16 Bucyrus MT3700 ac haul trucks.

The Bucyrus MT3700 ac haul trucks are powered by MTU 16V 4000 1,860 kW (2,500 hp) engines, and are electrically driven by a General Electric ac drive. The uphill loaded speeds are substantially improved over mechanical and dc electrical powered trucks, providing a productivity benefit to its owners.

New Gold is an expanding gold

mining company headquartered in Vancouver, Canada with operations in six countries around the world. The Mesquite Mine was previously owned by Newmont, but was closed in late 1999 when gold prices dropped to a level at which mine operation was no longer profitable. When gold prices started to rebound, the mine was purchased by Western Gold Fields, headquartered in Toronto, in 2006. As the new owners of this operation, one of the first tasks was to acquire the needed mining equipment. The MT3700 ac haul trucks and RH340excavators werethe chosenhaulage and

loading tools. The original purchase was for 14 MT3700 ac trucks and two RH340 excavators, many of which have been in operation since 2007.

The Mesquite Mine is currently producing more than 3.1 t/a (100,000 oz/year) gold, and its fleet of Bucyrus equipment is an integral factor in the achievement of their production targets. n


Industry Newswatch

Chinese look to the sea floor for minerals;Government applies to mine in Indian Ocean

IN ITS QUEST to feed its demand for commodities, the Chinese government will look to the sea floor 1,700 m (5,000 ft) beneath the surface of the Indian Ocean. The Chinese government recently lodged the first application to mine for minerals under the seabed in international waters with the hope of recovering metals such as copper, nickel and cobalt as well as gold and silver, The Independent reported.

The area that the Chinese intend to mine is populated with inactive hydrothermal vents, underwater geysers driven by volcanic activity.

Some of the vents, known as “black smokers,” are black chimney-like structures containing high levels of sulfur-bearing minerals, or sulfides.

Having explored the area using

remotely operated underwater vehicles, the Chinese want to mine the sulfide deposits in a region of seabed in the southwest Indian Ocean for the rich mineral ores they contain. They have applied to do so to the International Seabed Authority (ISA), the Jamaica-based body set up under the 1982 U.N. Convention on The Law of the Sea to deal with the liabilities relating to seabed exploitation and the environmental damage it may cause.

The application, which will be heard at a meeting next April, is the first to be made for permission to mine in international waters and could spark a sort of offshore gold rush. Toronto-based Nautilus Minerals is working on a seabed sulfide-mining project in the waters of

Papua New Guinea. The environmental worries

thrown up by the prospect of deep-sea mining are considerable and have been dominating headlines because of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Although it is not known exactly what damage a deep-sea mine would do to the marine ecosystem, experts agree that removing a considerable part of the sea floor would cause a major disturbance.

During the past 10 years, the demand for metals from the economies of the main developing countries, led by China, has led to a resurgence of interest in seabed minerals. The focus for this has now switched from nodules to hydrothermal vents, which have been found all around the world. n

Coal talks heat up in US, Australia;BHP head calls for carbon tax, coal families rally in D.C.

MARIUS KLOPPERS, the chief executive of BHP Billiton, warned that the Australian economy would suffer significantly if the country did not implement a carbon tax before the international community imposed one. The UK Telegraph reported that he said that “failure to do so will place us at a competitive disadvantage in a future where carbon is priced globally.”

In the United States, coal allies, including miners and their families, rallied at the Capitol in Washington, D.C., against actions on climate change and mountaintop removal mining that that have been proposed by the Obama administration.

In both countries, the use of coal has become a hot political topic.

Kloppers said Australia needed to “look beyond coal” for alternative sources of energy before the introduction of a global price on carbon.

However, neither major political party in Australia has committed to reducing coal use, fearing a voter backlash from those employed by the industry. Kevin Rudd, the former prime minister, was dumped by his party earlier this year after he announced he would scrap an ambitious carbon pollution reduction scheme because the opposition had refused to support it. His successor, Julia Gillard, has pledged to hold a series of citizens’ assemblies to find out what the electorate wants the government to do – a move that has sparked widespread derision and contributed to her party’s failure to secure a majority government at the general election last month.

Gillard, whose government has a majority of just one after entering into a deal with independents and Green party members, said the government

was committed to working toward a price on carbon.

The coal rally in Washington, D.C., organized by the National Mining Association and other groups, was met by a counter demonstration from environmentalists.

Among the speakers at the pro-coal rally was West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin, the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate seat long held by the late Robert Byrd.

Manchin bemoaned the Obama administration’s support for so-called cap-and-trade legislation to combat climate change and accused the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of jeopardizing jobs by holding up the issuance of permits that coal companies need to carry out their operations. The EPA has said its actions are aimed at ending pollution, not coal mining. n


Industry Newswatch

President’spage;AIME’s new mission is to support its member societies

(Continued from page 6)

healthy, financially strong and supportive of their children. The children each have healthy families of their own and are doing quite well. They all enjoy a strong respect for the history, traditions and values that the parents have built.

Well, if you have read this far, my strategy worked. I knew no one would read the article with a title like “Trustees rethink the strategic plan at the AIME Annual Meeting.” So now, go back and re-read the story and replace “parents” with AIME; “children” with SME, The Minerals, Metals, and Materials Society (TMS), the Society of Petroleum Engineers (SPE) and the Association for Iron and Steel Technology (AIST), the four member societies of AIME. And replace “country club” with the United Engineering Foundation Inc. (UEF), of which AIME is one of five founding member societies. One of the “investments” that goes away if the parents die is the Offshore Technology Conference (OTC). The modified story, in its own twisted way, gives some organizational history and describes the outcome of the recent AIME strategic planning process.

I cannot take credit for coming up with the analogy. Incoming AIME President DeAnn Craig (SPE) used it to characterize where AIME has come from and where it should go in the future at its annual meeting at the Garden of the Gods Club in Colorado Springs, CO on Aug. 6-7, 2010. I took some pretty ridiculous privilege in presenting her parity in my own words, but I think it serves to illustrate some of the changes that AIME needs to make (as the parents get older) to remain relevant, even as its member societies (the children) have grown independent and autonomous. It was clearly time to reassess the role that AIME plays and refocus on adding value to the four member societies.

At the annual meeting, the

AIME trustees and member society executive directors debated the merits of the different roles that AIME could play. They even went as far as discussing whether AIME should be eliminated altogether. In the end, they unanimously agreed that AIME should remain intact, based on two compelling reasons. First, to maintain the founding member seat at the UEF table (the country club membership that is no longer open to new members). Second, to preserve the investment that cannot be bequeathed to the children. In addition to these, the AIME portfolio currently sits at a little more than $9 million, so if AIME were dissolved, dividing up the proceeds would likely be divisive among the member societies (the children would fight over the parents’ retirement nest egg).

Given that AIME will continue to exist, the real task is to determine what AIME should do and how it should be staffed going forward. We asked ourselves what it would take to make AIME a valuable and relevant partner to its member societies. We agreed that the role and vision of AIME needed to be refocused based on the following priorities:

• Distributing more funds to the member societies to support mutually beneficial initiatives.

• Functioning as a conduit to channel initiatives to member societies where the staff and volunteers reside.

• Honoring the AIME legacy and fostering goodwill, communication and trust among member societies.

This all boiled down to a new AIME mission — support its member societies.

We will fulfill this mission by:

• Exercising fiscal responsibility.• Distributing funds.• Facilitating interaction with

the larger scientific and engineering community.

• Enhancing collaboration among the member societies.

• Honoring the legacy and traditions of AIME.

The idea is to have AIME function more like a foundation going forward, limiting the activities and initiatives that it undertakes as a society to the maximum practical extent and pushing down the day-to-day work to the member societies as much as possible. So, with that directive, President Craig appointed a new committee to work on reallocating programs and responsibilities to the member societies, reassessing AIME staff and overhead requirements, and some serious budget trimming. The ultimate goal is to generate revenue that can be distributed to the member societies while, at the same time, preserving the financial security of AIME. There is a lot of work to do, changes to be made and belt tightening to be done. Hopefully, we will see the fruits of these labors in the years to come. The efforts are well aligned with the new mission and will get AIME closer to its new vision: To honor our legacy by becoming a relevant and valued partner to our member societies.

So the children are all grown up and successful now. They respect their parents and value their heritage. The parents continue to lend their support, share their country club membership and help their children to live their own lives. Their legacy will live on.

— Barb Filas

Given that AIME will continue to exist, the real task is to determine what AIME should do and how it should be staffed going forward. We asked ourselves what it would take to make AIME a valuable and relevant partner to its member societies.

T&UC – Tunneling & Underground Construction – brings the

underground construction and mining professional serious resources

each and every issue. Feature articles from respected leaders in the

field. Tunnel Demand Forecast – an in-depth review of top mining

projects. New technology. Top products and services. If you are serious

about underground construction – get serious with the resources you

will find in T&UC. Join SME for a free subscription or call to purchase, +1-800-763-3132.

Need advertising or marketing support? +1-303-948-4243. Dig Deeper.

TUCMagazine.CoM sMeneT.org

WE CannEvErDig DEEpEnough

DIG DEEPER.

SME-onecannever_NOV209.indd 1 11/10/09 11:38:59 AM


Sustainable development

Residual impacts of a mining projectby Madan M. Singh, Timothy D. Hogan and Jamie Sturgess

A new mining project can raise questions about what effect it will have on the community

after it closes. Historically, little was done by communities to plan for and accommodate the changes in the economic infrastructure when a mine project is finished either after the ore runs out or if market conditions deteriorate and make it unprofitable.

Projects that were underfunded were generally unable to withstand periodic market downturns. However, data in a recent study conducted by the Seidman Research Institute leads to the conclusion that, even when a mining project is terminated, there can be (and, in the specific case studied, is) a residual beneficial economic effect in the community, which lasts for a long period of time.

Most mining operations functioning today are well-funded and committed to the principles of sustainability. Government regulations also require that proper reclamation procedures be followed, and adequate financial guarantees put in place to make the project successful. Before a lengthy public review process can take place, the company must complete comprehensive documents and permit applications on the project. If federal lands are involved, a mine plan of operations, that details how the operations will comply with all federal, state and local laws from opening through closure, is required. Regulations guiding the plan’s development include federal laws, such as the Clean Water Act (CWA); Clean Air Act (CAA); Endangered Species Act (ESA); National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), to ensure that operations meet or exceed current cultural and environmental requirements. Through the NEPA process, the public has ample opportunity to comment on the planned operations of a proposed mine.

Rosemont operations planRosemont Copper Co. has proposed the

Rosemont project, a copper mining project with an estimated 559 Mt (616 million st) of ore, confirmed or identified. Rosemont Copper has submitted a mine plan of operations that is currently in the NEPA process and being evaluated through the production of an environmental impact statement (EIS).

The Rosemont property consists of a group of federal patented mining claims, federal unpatented mining claims and privately owned

Madan M. Singh, member SME, is director, Department of Mines and Mineral Resources, State of Arizona, Timothy D. Hogan is professor emeritus, Seidman Research Institute and Jamie Sturgess is vice president Augusta Resources Inc. e-mail [email protected].

The use of plow systems fell

out of favor in the U.S. in the

1970s, but recent advancements have made the

technology safer and more efficent.

©iStockphoto.com/pamspix

Former molybdenum plant flowsheet.

fee land that covers most of the Rosemont Mining District and the adjacent Helvetia Mining District. The property is located within Pima County in southeastern Arizona, approximately 50 km (30 miles) southeast of Tucson, west of State Route 83 (Fig. 1). Most of the unpatented claims were staked on federal land administered by the U.S. Forest Service (Coronado National Forest) with a few claims on U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands. The total area of

Figure 1


the property is approximately 6,022 hm2 (14,880 acres). The footprint of the operation, including the utility corridor, is estimated to be 1,787 hm2

(4,415 acres) with approximately 403 hm2 (995 acres) on private land, 1,354 hm2 (3,345 acres on federal lands managed by the Coronado National Forest and the BLM, and 30 hm2 (75 acres) on state trust lands.

Rosemont is projected to produce more than 104 kt/a (230 million lbs/year) of copper (roughly 9.6 percent of the U.S. production in 2009) for 20 years. Average annual production of molybdenum and silver will be 2.3 kt (5 million lbs) 109 t (3.5 million oz), respectively. The capital costs for the


Cost category 2008 $millionsSite development $8.5Mine $214.6Oxide plant $53.6Sulfide plant $327.3Power/water systems $82.0Ancillary facilities $26.9Total direct cost $712.7Indirect costs (field mobilization, EPCM*, taxes, commissioning, spare parts, contingency funds, etc.) $184.4Total costs $897.2

Column may not add to totals due to rounding.EPCM is engineering, procurement, construction and management.

Construction costs for Rosemont (data from Rosemont Copper project updated feasibility study, 2009).

For year twoCost category 2008 $millionsMine operations $70.1Processing - mill $91.5Processing - SX/EW $18.4Other operating costs $9Shipping, refining and smelting $62.4Taxes/royalty $30.8Preproduction mining costs $2.9Reclamation costs $0.8Other costs/salvage value $-2.1Depreciation $173.4Total production costs $457.1

Column may not add to totals due to rounding.EPCM is engineering, procurement, construction and management.

Productions costs for Rosemont (data from Rosemont Copper project updated feasibility study, 2009).

project are expected to be $897.2 million (2008 dollars, Table 1), and the operating costs will be nearly $189 million (2008 dollars for year two of operation, Table 2). Approximately 400 people will be directly employed full time, drawn from a largely local pool of workers. Another 1,700 persons will be affected indirectly. This schedule estimates a mill throughput of approximately 68 kt/d (75,000 stpd), which computes to an annual mill throughput of nearly 24.5 Mt (27 million st).

Mining of the ore will be through conventional openpit mining techniques. Waste rock will be blasted and transported by haul truck to the waste rock storage areas. Ore will be blasted and either transported by haul truck to the leach pad, or crushed and loaded onto a conveyor for transport to the mill, depending on the type of ore.

Sulfide ore will be processed by conventional milling operations and the copper concentrates from the milling operations will be shipped offsite to a smelter. Leach ore (oxide material) will be placed on the leach pad and irrigated with a raffinate (a recycled process solution). Leach solutions from the pad that now contain copper will be collected in a lined process pond and then processed through the solvent extraction/electrowinning (SX/EW) plant. Copper cathodes generated from the SX/EW plant will be transported offsite for further processing or direct use.

Construction Production/post (four-year period) (20+ years ) 2008 $millions 2008 $millionsEconomic activity $96 $701/yearWages + nonlabor income $38 Average $143/yearLocal revenues $5 $19/yearTotal impacts $385 $15,000 Gross regional product $245 $8,000 Personal income $152 $3,000 Government revenues $18 $404

Employment 3,600person-years 2,100 Workers at mine 406-444 Other jobs 1,700

Wages includes salaries.Nonlabor income includes dividends, interest, rent, owner’s income, net profit.

Economic activity in Cochise, Pima and Santa Cruz counties as a result of the Rosemont Mine operation (data from Seidman Research Institute).

Table 1 Table 2

Table 3



The ancillary facilities necessary to support the Rosemont operations include an administration building, change house, warehouse with lay down yards, analytical laboratory, light vehicle and process maintenance building, mine truck shop, mine truck wash and service facility, secured powder magazines and ammonium nitrate storage, and a main guard building with truck scale. Also included are fuel and supplies storage as well as dispensing facilities for mine and process equipment.

Rosemont has been designed to embrace state-of-the-art reclamation practices, including greenhouse and field studies to determine optimum plant species for revegetation, and the construction of perimeter buttresses with one to three vertical to horizontal, slopes to stabilize soils and enhance revegetation. In addition to employing reclamation practices from the beginning of operations, construction of the tailings and waste rock storage facilities will be designed and built to facilitate closure. Significant planning has gone into the staging of facility construction as well as the facility design itself in order to minimize the footprint of the mine. In addition to limiting facility placement to a single drainage, visual impacts of the site, both during operations and at closure, were also considered in the mine’s overall design. As much as practical, perimeter buttresses are staged around the facility footprint to minimize the visual impact of both construction and operation from SR-83.

Recently, an economic study was conducted by the Seidman Research Institute of the W.P. Carey School of Business of the Arizona State University for the Department of Mines and Mineral Resources of the state of Arizona on the Rosemont copper project. This revealed that there was a lasting, positive economic effect on adjoining towns in Cochise, Pima and Santa Cruz counties, even after mine closure.

Residual economic impactsResults from the Regional Economic Models

Inc., Policy Insight, v. 9.5 (REMI PI+) forecasts of economic activity for the years after the closure of the mine show that the Rosemont project would have lasting effects on the economy of the three-county study area over and above the impacts

during its 26-year “active” period. Permanent changes to the business community, to the labor market, to local governments and to many other aspects of the local economy would occur as a result of the mine development and operations of Rosemont. These changes will result in residual economic impacts in the Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz counties area. The forecast results indicate that the level of economic activity would be $52 million per year higher, area residents’ income $68 million per year higher, employment more than 300 higher and local government revenues $2 million per year higher than if the Rosemont mine had never existed. Annual figures for each

Economicactivity $122 $907/yearWages+nonlaborincome $45/year $218Localrevenues $6/year $32Totalimpacts $489 $19,000Grossregionalproduct $317 $11,000Personalincome $182 $5,000Governmentrevenues $23 $681 Employment Workersatmine 3,900person-years 2,900/year

Wagesincludessalaries. Nonlaborincomeincludesdividends,interest,rent,owner’sincome,netprofit.

Economic activity in Arizona as a result of the Rosemont Mine operation(data from Seidman Research Institute).

Construction Production/post (four-year period) (20+ years ) 2008 $millions 2008 $millionsEconomicactivity $568 $1,300Wages+non-laborincome $167 $387Localrevenues $53 $128/yearTotalimpacts $2,300 $27,000Grossregionalproduct $1,200 $15,000Personalincome $668 $8,000Governmentrevenues $210 $3,000

Employment 11,600person-years 3,000 Wagesincludessalaries. Nonlaborincomeincludesdividends,interest,rent,owner’sincome,netprofit.

Economic activity in the United States as a result of the Rosemont Mine operation (data from Seidman Research Institute).

Table 4

Table 5


of these measures for the 10 years after closure are listed in Table 6.

The REMI PI+ state-level forecast for years after the closure of the Rosemont Mine show that the Rosemont project would also have similar lasting effects on the Arizona economy. As for the three-county area, enduring changes to the business community, labor market, state government and other aspects of the Arizona economy would occur as a result of economic activity induced by the mine development and operation of Rosemont, and these changes would result in residual economic impacts within Arizona. The state-level forecast results indicate that the level of economic activity would be $111 million per year higher, the state residents’ income $96 million per year greater, employment

500 higher, and state government revenues $4 million per year higher than if the Rosemont operation had never existed. Annual figures for each of these measures for the 10 years after the end of operations are provided in Table 7.

Results from the REMI PI+ national forecast do not show similar lasting effects for the overall U.S. economy.

ConclusionThe data in this study concludes that, even

when a mining project in this area is terminated, there is a residual beneficial economic effect in the community, which lasts for a long period of time. It is not simply a case of all activities coming to a halt.

In addition, all mines have to present a plan

Residual impacts by year for Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz counties as a result of Rosemont operations (data from Seidman Research Institute).

Total* 518.4 382.3 675.6 22.9

Annual average 51.8 38.2 67.6 347 2.3

Year post closure

24 45.1 36.0 65.9 338 2.2

25 44.5 34.9 63.6 326 2.1

26 45.4 34.9 62.8 325 2.1

27 47.3 35.7 63.1 331 2.1

28 50 36.9 64.5 340 2.2

29 52.7 38.4 66.6 350 2.3

30 55.1 39.6 68.6 357 2.4

31 57.4 40.9 70.9 363 2.4

32 59.5 42.0 73.4 368 2.5

33 61.4 43.1 76.2 371 2.6

($millions 2008) Gross Local regional Personal government Output product income Employment revenues

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including intermediate goods as well as value added.Gross regional product is the dollar value of all goods and services produced for the final demands. It excludes intermediate goods and services.Personal income is the total income received by residents from all sources.*Total figures refer to the sum of years 24-33. Residual impacts would continue after year 33.Columns may not add due to rounding.


Table 6


of operations when requesting permission to develop a mine, which includes reclamation. Although some of the reclamation work may be completed concurrent to the mining, the rest is completed after mining ceases. This provides work and helps to taper the employment at the mine. Most mining companies subscribe to sustainable development principles and help to start other industries in the area prior to full closure.

The enduring economic strength of mining has not received the attention it deserves and should be borne in mind in public discussions of future mine development plans. n

AcknowledgmentsThe authors would like to thank the Rosemont

Copper Co. for the funding for this project and for

permission to publish this paper.

ReferencesL. William Seidman Research Institute, 2009, “An assessment of

the economic impacts of the Rosemont copper project on the economies of the Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz counties study area, the State of Arizona, and the United States,” Novem-ber, 57 pp.

M3 Engineering and Technology Corporation, 2009, “Rosemont Copper Project – updated feasibility study, NI 43-101 Techni-cal Report,” Vol. 1, (January, Amended March.), for Augusta Resource Corp., 177 pp.

Singh, M. M., 2009, “Economic impacts of the Rosemont Copper Project ” State of Arizona, Department of Mines and Mineral Resources, Special Report No. 26,” November, 58 pp.

WestLand Resources Inc., 2007, Mine Plan of Operations, Rose-mont copper project, for Augusta Resource Corp., July, 98 pp.

Residual impacts for the state of Arizona as a result of Rosemont operations (data from Seidman Research Institute).

Total* 1,111.6 655.6 956.4 43.7

Annual average 111.2 65.6 95.6 498 4.4

Year post closure

24 94.8 58.8 92.5 474 3.9

25 94.1 57.8 89.2 458 3.9

26 97.2 59.0 88.3 462 3.9

27 102.0 61.2 89.2 475 4.1

28 107.7 63.9 91.3 490 4.3

29 113.1 66.4 94.0 504 4.4

30 118.8 69.0 97.4 518 4.6

31 123.5 71.2 100.8 526 4.7

32 128.2 73.4 104.9 534 4.9

33 132.3 75.1 109.0 539 5.0

Outputisthedollarvalueofallgoodsandservicesproducedintheregion,includingintermediategoodsaswellasvalueadded(compensationandprofit).Grossregionalproductinthedollarvalueofallgoodsandservicesproducedforthefinaldemands.Itexcludesintermediategoodsandservices.Personalincomeisthetotalincomereceivedbyresidentsfromallsources.*Totalfiguresrefertothesumofyears24-33.Residualimpactswouldcontinueafteryear33.Columnsmaynotaddduetorounding.


Table 6

($millions) Gross Local regional Personal government Output product income Employment revenues


The unexpectedly quick recovery in world crude steel production in the second half

of 2009 was due almost entirely to increased production in China that began in late 2008. Previous peaks in monthly production in China were matched by April 2009. The rest of the world had still not reached pre-crisis production rates by May 2010.

Chinese production drives growth, but there has been some growth in most other larger crude steel producing countries as well, compared to production in 2009. If the production rate of the first four months of 2010 continues, the total output of crude steel in 2010 will be somewhere around 1,410 Mt (1.5 billion st), the same as in the record year of 2007.

World crude steel production decreased from 1,326.6 Mt (1.46 billion st) in 2008 to 1,219

Mt (1.34 billion st) in 2009, a dramatic fall of 8.1 percent. But while most of the world saw falling production, crude steel production in China increased by 13.5 percent, compared to the 2.3 percent growth the year before. China now accounts for almost half of the world production of crude steel (47 percent). In Europe, production fell by 24 percent and Africa experienced a decrease of 11

percent. In the Americas, production declined by 30 percent and in Oceania, production was reduced by 29 percent.

Revised Chinese iron ore production figuresWorld production of iron ore fell by 6.2 percent

in 2009 and did not quite reach 1.4 Gt (1.6 billion st). This was the first fall in production after seven years of consecutive growth. Output decreased in most countries, with a few notable exceptions such as Australia and South Africa. Developing countries accounted for a little less than 59 percent of world iron ore production in 2009 (down from 60 percent in 2008), the CIS republics for 12 percent and the industrialized economies for 29 percent. The increase for the industrialized economies was due almost exclusively to the growth in Australia. China produced 234 Mt (258 mill st) on a comparable grade basis. China, which used to be the largest producer, has now been pushed down to third place after Australia at 394 Mt (434 million st) and Brazil at 300 Mt (330 million st).

Chinese production is crucial to understanding the dynamics of world iron ore markets. However, the analysis is complicated by the fact that there are serious question marks about the reliability of Chinese data on iron ore production. Raw Materials Group (RMG) has recently decided to revise its method for estimating Chinese iron ore production. Whereas RMG had earlier used

Magnus Ericsson is professor of mineral economics at Lulea University of Technology, Sweden and cofounder Raw Materials Group, Anton Löf is analyst and Olle Östensson is senior advisor with Raw Materials Group, Stockholm 2010, www.rmg.se, e-mail [email protected].

Iron ore review2009/2010

by Magnus Ericsson, Anton Löf

and Olle Östensson

The Kiruna underground mine north of the Arctic

Circle in Sweden is operated by state-

owned LKAB.


Chinese production statistics as a basis, RMG has found that this method no longer yields reasonable results, probably because of shortcomings in the way that the statistics are collected and compiled. Instead, RMG now estimates iron ore production in China by calculating the iron ore content in the pig iron produced and deducting the iron content in imported ore to arrive at a figure for the need for domestic ore in terms of iron content. This method appears to be relatively safe from errors since both the production of pig iron and iron ore imports can be checked against other numbers. Most importantly, the pig iron production is included in statistics published by the World Steel Association and is checked through its procedures.

The change in methodology has significant consequences for RMG’s picture of how Chinese and world iron ore production has developed. In summary, RMG has concluded that Chinese iron ore production was underreported up to 2007 and overreported in 2008 and 2009. According to revised estimates, Chinese iron ore production increased from 133 Mt (147 million st) in 2000 to 363 Mt (400 million st) in 2007 (production converted to an iron content of 63 percent). In 2008 and 2009, it declined, probably in part because of lower profitability, and in part because of exhaustion of reserves. The revised figures for 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 Chinese production are 285, 356, 400 and 321 Mt (314, 392, 440 and 354 million st).

It is difficult to identify the reasons for the over- and undercounting without a detailed insight into the procedures used to produce the statistics. While one can speculate about reasons for double counting (two sources reporting the same production, for instance) or motives (taxes, access to government subsidies) for reporters to adjust numbers, little is known with any certainty. The number of iron ore mines in China is vast, and nobody, not even the Chinese themselves, is likely to have a good overview of the situation at any given time. What is certain, however, is that the gross figures provided are not consistent either over time or with other statistical parameters such as pig iron production. RMG intends to further refine its analysis of Chinese iron ore production in 2010.

Iron ore tradeDespite the recession, iron ore trade reached

a record level in 2009 as exports increased for the eighth year in a row and reached 955 Mt (1.05 billion st), up 7.4 percent. The increase was the result of higher demand in China combined with a fall in domestic production. Total iron ore exports have increased by 88 percent since 2000. Developing countries accounted for 49 percent

of total iron ore exports in 2009. Developed market economy countries accounted for 43 percent and the CIS countries for the remaining 7 percent. Australia is the largest iron ore exporting country at more than 360 Mt (397 million st) and an increase of 17 percent when compared with 2008. By contrast, Brazil’s exports decreased by 3 percent to 266 Mt (293 million st) in 2009. Indian exports grew for the 10th consecutive year and the country is now at 116 Mt (128 million st), the third most important exporter. Seaborne iron ore trade is estimated to have increased by 11 percent in 2009 to 895 Mt (986 million st). The increase was accounted for entirely by Chinese imports, which rose by much more than the increase in total trade. Other importers registered large declines. China is by far the largest importer and its imports grew by 41 percent in 2009 to reach 628 Mt (692 million st), which is 67 percent of total world imports. Japan is the second largest importer at 105 Mt (116 million st). This is a decrease of 25 percent to 105 Mt (116 million st). European imports (excluding the CIS countries), fell by 45 percent in 2009 to 100 Mt (110 million st), corresponding to 9.9 percent of world imports.

Benchmark prices are deadThe annual benchmark negotiation process

Iron ore

A ship is loaded in the Narvik ice free harbor in Norway, where most of the LKAB production is shipped.


died in early 2010. In spite of vocal opposition, mainly from Chinese steel companies, with strong support from Japanese and European steel industry organisations, there was nothing that could make it survive. When Chinese steel demand recovered surprisingly fast at the end of 2009 and early 2010 and iron ore spot prices soared, there was simply no real support for the old system. Baosteel and CISA, representing the Chinese steel industry, tried to hold out and even called for a boycott of the “big three.” But this proposal was more indicative of the powerlessness of the Chinese steel industry and its inability to change the course of events, than a real threat. A quarterly seminegotiated price is now the norm.

Iron ore

The new model has brought uncertainty and reduced transparency to the iron ore market. Prices are no longer announced like they used to be and the published series of spot prices are not still not 100 percent reliable. The spot price into China is used as a basis for pricing in all parts of the world and, although there are three main series available including Metal Bulletin, SBB and Platts, it is still not clear how representative these series really are and how secure against manipulations they are. At least one company, Swedish exporter LKAB, has negotiated annual contracts, but its model of pricing has not been published. There is still a long way to go before the iron ore prices are set as those of copper, nickel or other base metals are on a completely transparent exchange under full control against any type of manipulations. But, hopefully, this is the direction in which iron ore is moving. When looking back, it took between 5-15 years before aluminum and nickel moved away from so-called producer prices and became fully integrated and traded on the London Metal Exchange. There is really nothing stopping either an iron ore contract or using a steel contract as the basis for iron ore trade. The latter is the way that copper concentrates are traded.

The new model has resulted in price hikes in the second quarter of 2010 of around 100 percent compared to the 2009 benchmark. Australian haematite fines to Japan increased by 99.7 percent and there were

expectations of a further increase for the third quarter. Vale reached an agreement with its Japanese customers at an 86 percent increase for Itabira fines and 92 percent for Carajas fines.

Corporate concentration increasesThe three largest iron ore companies, Vale,

Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton, increased their control over global iron ore production to 35.4 percent in 2009 (Table 2). The market share of the “big three” increased for the first time since 2004. Brazilian Vale still holds the position as the largest iron ore producer in the world and, although it controlled some 255 Mt (281 million st), its position as the undisputed industry leader is seriously challenged. Not only has the volumes controlled by Vale decreased from a peak of

Country 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Sweden 23.3 23.3 24.7 23.8 17.7 Subtotal Europe excl. CIS 29.7 30.2 29.5 28.3 21.4 CIS 180.1 194.2 202.1 190.4 176.4 Subtotal Europe 209.8 224.4 231.7 218.7 231.7 Canada 30.1 35.0 34.1 32.1 33.0 USA 54.3 52.9 52.4 53.6 26.5 Brazil 292.4 318.6 336.5 346.0 299.8 Venezuela 21.2 22.1 20.7 21.5 14.9 Subtotal Americas 425.2 454.6 471.0 481.6 400.7 Mauritania 10.7 11.1 11.9 11.2 10.2 South Africa 39.5 41.3 41.6 49.0 55.4 Subtotal Africa 54.3 56.1 57.7 64.1 68.1 India 142.7 180.9 206.9 223.0 257.4 Subtotal Asia excl. China 164.7 205.4 237.2 254.5 291.4 China 1 284.5 356.1 399.7 321.1 233.7 Subtotal Asia 449.2 562.1 637.8 576.6 525.1 Australia 257.5 275.1 299.0 349.8 393.9 Subtotal Oceania 259.8 277.3 300.9 351.9 395.9 Totalworld 1311.5 1494.4 1664.0 1724.61587.7 1 Iron ore production is converted so that its iron content is about equal to that on average in the rest of the world. China ore production (unconverted): 420.5 588.2 682.5 824.0 880.2Source: UNCTAD 2010.

Ironore:worldproduction.

1311.5 1494.4 1664.0 1724.6

1311.5 1494.4 1664.0 1724.6

1311.5 1494.4 1664.0 1724.6

Table 1


308 Mt (340 million st) in 2007 while its closest rival, Rio Tinto, has increased its controlled production from 150 to 172 Mt (165 to 190 million st), but Vale’s market leadership has also been successfully challenged, primarily by BHP Billiton, the third largest producer. BHP Billiton has been in the forefront against the benchmark negotiating process while Vale has been its most fierce defender. Rio Tinto has been ambivalent. Many small Chinese producers reduced their output in 2009, and that, together with the quick ramping up of production in Australia after the slump in early 2009, resulted in an increased market share for the “big three.”

The trend over the last four years of decreasing concentration seems to have been broken. Against the background of the cut in production by Vale of some 50 Mt (55 million st), it seems most likely that corporate concentration will increase again in 2010 when Vale tries to recapture market shares. It is also likely that a continued fall in Chinese domestic production with widespread mine closures — the Great Chinese Shakeout — will continue during the next few years. As stated in last year’s review, these two factors will help catapult the total share of production controlled by the “big three” back to or even beyond the top levels of 2003-2005. It only happened much faster than anticipated.

To measure corporate control at the production stage underestimates the concentration of the iron ore sector since large parts of total production do not enter the market due to vertical integration. An alternative is to look at the share of the seaborne trade. Measured this way, the shares of the major companies are considerably higher. While it is true that Vale’s control decreased in 2009 from 33 to 26 percent, Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton increased their control and the three largest companies together still control 61 percent of the total seaborne trade of iron ore. This number is quoted by those who argue that the concentration risks leading to control by major producers over prices, particularly under the present benchmark negotiating system. While the proposed merger between BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto failed, it was announced in early June 2009 Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton had entered into a nonbinding joint venture agreement covering the entirety of both companies iron ore operations

and infrastructure in Western Australia. This agreement has also raised concern in some quarters about the growing bargaining power of the large producers. The trend on the part of steel producers toward creating a network of captive mines, both iron ore and coal, which started in the CIS, has strengthened. The largest steel producer, Arcelor Mittal, has built a strong holding in the iron ore sector and other steel works have followed suit.

Capacity boomNew iron ore mining capacity taken into

operation in 2009, as identified at the individual project level, reached almost 75 Mt (83 million st) globally. This is slightly lower than the 2008 figure of some 90 Mt (99 million st). The total

Iron ore

Controlling entity Country Controlled Share of total production world production (Mt) (%)1Vale(CiaValedoRioDoce) Brazil 255 16.02RioTintoplc UK172 10.83BHPBillitonLtd. Australia137 8.64StateofIndia1 India55.3 3.55AngloAmerican SouthAfrica43.8 2.86ArcelorMittal UK 37.7 2.47Metalloinvest Russia 35.5 2.28FortescueMetalGroup Australia 34.9 2.29SystemCapitalManagementUkraine27.0 1.710CliffsNaturalResources USA 23.9 1.5Total, 10 largest 822 51.8 Total, world 1588 100.0

1StateofIndiaincludesSAILandNMDC.Source:RawMaterialsData,Stockholm2010.

Corporate control in iron ore mining in 2009.

National Mineral Development Corp. (NMDC), an Indian iron ore company, produces 26 Mt/a (28.6 million stpy) of iron ore from five openpit operations, including this one pictured, in India. The company is looking for expansion opportunities overseas.

Table 2


project pipeline in May 2010 contains more than 685 Mt (755 million st) of new production capacity to come onstream between 2010 and 2012. Of this total, around 270 Mt (298 million st) falls into the category “certain,” 145 Mt (160 million st) “probable” and 270 Mt (298 million st) “possible.” Of the project labeled “certain,” 61 percent are in Oceania; Latin America has 19 percent and Africa 16 percent. RMG has been doing these types of estimates for a number of years and over this period an average of 75 percent of the total including certain, probable and possible categories have been recorded as

completed. In spite of the uncertainties of each individual project, it may with some degree of confidence be assumed that 400 to 500 Mt (440 to 550 million st) of new capacity will come onstream in the period to and including 2012. In the three-year period after 2012, more than 400 Mt (440 million st) of additional iron ore capacity is listed with a completion date. Given the present circumstances with extreme optimism in the market, most of the projects in the pipeline will be taken forward and many new ones will be announced. Were it not for the capacity of the “big three” to regulate the pace at which their projects will be taken into operation, the danger of an overcapacity developing would seem considerable particularly if there are any hiccups in the growth of steel production in the next three years.

OutlookThe World Steel Association’s short-term

forecast for world steel use, presented in April 2010, anticipates a rise in steel use by 10.7 percent in 2010. In June 2010, the iron ore market was tight and spot prices were approaching levels of around 1,200-1,300 RMB/t as Chinese steel production continued growing. Nevertheless, the events during the past year allowed two conclusions to be confirmed, both of them important for the future of the world market for iron ore:

• The Chinese economy is capable of changing direction toward endogenous growth and is in the process of doing so, which means that it will be less dependent on growing world demand for its manufactured exports.

• Domestic Chinese iron ore production is sensitive to prices and will probably not be able to increase output beyond present levels.

Meanwhile, the new pricing system gives the major iron ore producers more leverage. While the international steel industry is fragmented and does not act in a coherent manner, the three large iron ore producers do not have to collude in order to exercise considerable control over the market and ensure that they are pursuing mutually consistent strategies. Their objectives are obvious – maximizing profits — and their method of achieving the objective equally so: keep the price high enough to pay for new investment and low enough so that new entrants do not become realistic alternative sources of product. The control exercised by the “big three” will, thus to some extent, counteract the tendency to greater price instability that will result from the new pricing methods.

The world iron ore market will be characterized by tight conditions and the next few years will be characterized by a gradual adaptation of supply, by way of addition of new capacity, to a continuously growing demand. Accordingly, the Raw Materials Group believes that supply will gradually catch up and that prices will decline from the present extreme levels, but will stay at a higher level than in the period before 2008.

The background material for this article is extracted from “The Iron Ore Market 2009-2011,” published by UNCTAD in June 2010. This study is researched and compiled by Raw Materials Group (www.rmg.se) for UNCTAD, and can be ordered from: [email protected] or by fax from Amelie Zethelius Mermet at +41-22 9170509. n

Iron ore

Drill core from Sahavaara, Northland’s

Swedish core facility.


A new industrial mineral sand minenear Coos Bay, Oregonby Joseph D. Drew, Todd M. Lessard, Daniel F. Smith and Bill A. Hancock

New mine development

Joseph D. Drew, member SME, Todd M. Lessard and Daniel F. Smith, member SME, are director of geology, director of production and process engineering and chief operating officer with Oregon Resources Corp. Bill A. Hancock, member SME, is principal with Argo Consulting LLC & and president Zeroday Enterprises LLC, e-mail [email protected].

Oregon Resources Corp. (ORC) has devel-oped and permitted a new mining opera-

tion that incorporates a process design that will allow the unique paleo-beach placer deposits of southwestern Oregon to be extracted efficiently and economically, creating the only domestically mined source of a unique foundry grade chromite and specialty de-veining sand for precision cast-ing. The operation will also provide an additional domestic source of garnet and zircon.

Engineering design has been guided by the variable geology and mineralogy of the paleo-beach placer deposits as well as the need for a dry tailing scheme that resolves a lack of water resources at the placer locations and at the same time eliminates the need for slurry settling ponds, typical of paleo-beach placer operations in North America.

Metallurgical study of the placer material was grouped into four distinct samples based on ma-rine terrace deposition, geological facies and min-eralogy. Because the metallurgical samples rep-resented the extremes likely to be encountered in all future Oregon paleo-beach placers, the process design is highly dynamic and will successfully ad-just to meet the production needs.

Water availability at the mining area is sea-sonal and will not support a traditional placer operation’s water requirement needs for heavy mineral concentration. For this reason, ORC has developed a plan to construct the ore processing facilities near Coos Bay, where a municipal source of water is available. Raw ore will be transported from the mining sites approximately 32 km (20 miles) one way to the processing facility with re-turn loads hauling tailings back to the active pit. The requirement to haul and reclaim dry tailings and limit the amount of water being purchased from the municipality has driven the design of a unique water reclamation system.

BackgroundLocation and access. Economic concentra-

tions of “black sand” or heavy mineral (minerals with specific gravity greater than 2.85) have been recognized and studied in marine placers from Coos Bay to the mouth of the Rogue River, a dis-tance of approximately 121 km (75 miles) along the southern Oregon coast (Hornor, 1918; Griggs, 1945) (Fig. 1).

ORC will begin mining existing reserves ap-proximately 32 km (20 miles) south of Coos Bay in a region known locally as Seven Devils. Ore

Location map of southern Oregon with major sediment source rivers (Peterson et al., 1987).

will be trucked north to the processing site near Coos Bay on existing county and state roads, in-cluding U.S. 101.

The available facilities at the processing site include highway, rail, municipal wa-ter and electricity, natural gas and a deep-water port. At the time of this writing, the rail line had been aban-doned, but was being pur-sued by the International Port of Coos Bay. It is an-ticipated that this will be ser-viceable at some time in the future.

Figure 1


History. The southern Oregon marine placers have garnered the interests of miners since 1852, when present day beaches were exploited for gold. The beach deposits were small and irregu-lar in nature and were easily washed away by the major storms the coast endures during the winter months (Hornor, 1918).

In the 1920s, deposits at the beach were fol-lowed upstream to their paleo-beach terrace ori-gins (Pardee, 1934). These terrace placers were mined, but with little success, as the cost of min-ing and processing was greater than at the present day beach deposits.

The greatest effort to understand and delin-eate the paleo-beach terrace placers came during World War II. As the need for a domestic source of steel hardening chromite was evident, the heavy mineral bearing placers of southwestern Oregon were investigated by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), under guidance from the Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries, which began exploration drilling of the paleo-beach terraces in 1940 (Griggs, 1945). This work was part of the broader investigation of strategic mineral deposits and would ultimately supply much needed chromite for the war efforts.

The first mining efforts began in 1943 by Humphreys Gold Corp. and Krome Corp. (Griggs, 1945). Black sand concentrates averaging rough-


Detailed map of the study area with deposits. Cross section A-A’ de-picted (Peterson et al., 1987, with supporting data from Griggs, 1945). ly 25 percent Cr2O3 were produced at the mining

sites by wet gravity processes and trucked to the Defense Plant Corp.’s separation plant near Co-quille, OR, where the black sand was further con-centrated to approximately 40 percent Cr2O3.

Humphreys Gold Corp. developed and used the revolutionary helical spiral separator for the purpose of concentrating the heavy mineral of the Oregon paleo-beach placers (Allen, 1943). This methodology is still used in hundreds of mining applications from placer mining to coal process-ing.

GeologyRegional geology. As with any marine placer

deposit, one must understand the source of the economic minerals, the transport mechanisms, segregation and depositional systems, and preser-vation of the deposits.

The heavy mineral deposits of the south-western Oregon placers are sourced from the metamorphic and ultramafic rocks of the Klam-ath Mountains (Twenhofel, 1943). The Klamath Mountains are located in southwestern Oregon and northwestern California. Within the meta-morphic and ultramafic terrain exist alpine-type podiform chromite deposits. Several small op-erations have attempted to exploit these deposits with little success, given the podiform variability (Libbey, 1963).

Several major rivers including the Chetco, Rogue, Elk, Sixes and the Coquille drain from the Klamath Mountains to the Pacific Ocean (Kulm et al., 1968). Mineral grains in currently identified paleo-beach placer deposits have been chemically analyzed with ion microbe analysis to demon-strate that their sources are indeed the existing rivers whose watersheds begin in the Klamath Mountains and in the regions of the alpine-type podiform chromite deposits (Peterson et al., 1986).

Once the sediments reach the Pacific Ocean, predominant longshore currents transport the sediments northward. Headlands along the pa-leo-coastline reduced the energy of the currents and allowed for the preferential removal of dense particles according to Stokes Law (Peterson et al., 1986). Currently, deposits of heavy minerals are forming off the coast of southern Oregon, fol-lowing the same mode of deposition adjacent to prominent headlands (Cape Blanco) (Kulm et al., 1968). Another characteristic of the Oregon coast is the fierce storms and high-energy wave action that occurs along the beaches. This high-energy environment is sufficient to segregate the dense from light minerals and is amplified during storm events.

Finally, once the economic heavy minerals

Figure 2


are in place and concentrated, the deposit must be preserved. Such industrial mineral placers around the world typically show preservation by high sea level stands and subsequent regression, leaving behind the coastal remnant. The Trail Ridge deposit, which stretches from Florida to the Carolinas, represents such a depositional model. Economic heavy minerals have been mined from this ridge since the late 1940s to the present. It is suggested by Peterson et al., 1986, that the south-ern Oregon paleo-beach terraces were formed by a transgressive sequence that encroached ap-proximately 5 km (3.1 miles) inland from the present-day beach followed by regression, high sea level stand and a subsequent progradational beach forming sequence, thus forming the over-all geomorphology of the region into a stair-step sequence leading down to the present day beach (Peterson et al., 1987).

Terrace geology. Although several terraces exist, ORC’s operation currently is developing reserves within the Seven Devils and Pioneer ter-races (Fig. 2).

The Seven Devils terrace has been suggested to be 124,000 years old (Pleistocene) (Adams, 1984). The terrace has been uplifted to an eleva-tion of 75 to 85 m (246 to 279 ft) above present sea level and is inland 5 km (3.1 miles), roughly parallel with the current beach. The Seven Devils terrace can be traced from approximately 11.3 km (7 miles) south of Cape Arago to Cape Blanco to the south, a distance of approximately 50 km (31 miles). Griggs (1945) suggests that the terrace is truncated to the east by normal faulting, leaving a sharp contact between the terrace sands and an older Tertiary mudstone (weathered to clay in

most areas). To the west, the terrace is eroded by the subsequent formation of the younger Pioneer terrace (Fig. 3).

Peterson, et al., 1987, interpreted stratigraphic sections studied within the Seven Devils terrace to represent a transgressive sequence. Deposi-tion on the Seven Devils terrace represents the nearshore to inner shelf deposition of the trans-gressive sequence. Exploration drilling by Krome Corp. and ORC indicate the presence of addi-tional tensional faulting in the nearshore environ-ment that increased the thickness of the sediment package. As a result, typical nearshore orebodies (North and South Seven Devils) have mineral-


Generalized cross section of the southwestern Oregon paleo-beach terraces (Peterson et al., 1987).

Grain structure comparison (Hoyt, 2009).

Figure 3

Figure 4


ized sand depths from surface to maximum of 30 m (98 ft), while averaging 15 m (49 ft). Typical of the nearshore deposition, the delineated re-serves are characterized by a basal conglomer-ate of well-rounded rocks and agates overlaying the weathered Tertiary mudstone (Baldwin et al., 1983 and ORC drilling). Coarse sands overlay the conglomerate and include some of the highest concentrations of heavy minerals, in some cases up to 95 percent. These higher-grade units typi-cally reflect lags created under high-energy storm sequencing. Upsection, a general fining upwards exists, representing the transgressive nature of the ocean. Heavy mineral concentrations are re-corded throughout the entire sequence, but there is no doubt that as the transgressive sequence progressed and energy shifted from high breaker/swash zone to seaward energies, segregation and concentration waned. In stark contrast to the low-er zones of deposition, the upper zones typically contain 2 to 10 percent heavy mineral. Authigenic clays derived from feldspars and other weathered minerals exist within the deposits and represent 10 to 15 percent of the ores within the nearshore environment. Bioturbation does exist in the form of branching tubes typical of nearshore environ-ments (Hunter, 1980).

West of these deposits on the Seven Devils ter-race, ORC has further delineated the Westbrook (Sec. 4E), West Bohemia (Sec. 4E), and Section 33 deposits. These deposits are shallow in nature, located at or near surface to maximum depths of


9 m (30 ft) and averaging 6 m (20 ft). As is the case with the previously described North and South Seven Devils deposits, the western deposits along the Seven Devils terrace demonstrate a transgressive sequence, as suggested by Peterson et al. Similarities include the sequencing from basal Ter-tiary mudstones/clay and conglomerate unconformity followed by coarse sand deposition with higher con-centrations of heavy mineral continuing upsection to low-er energy sands. The primary difference between the two sets of deposits being the total depth of the deposited package of sand. The North and South Seven Devils de-posits are narrowly bounded by north-south trending faulting, whereas the west-

ward reserves on the Seven Devils terrace are broad, laterally continuous representations of full scale beach deposition and transgression.

The Pioneer terrace is the younger of the two terraces in which ORC has been delineating re-serves. The age of the terrace is approximately 103,000 years old and represents a progradational beach sequence formed at high sea level stand (Adams, 1984). The stratigraphic sequence of the Shepard deposit, the only reserve currently delin-eated by ORC on the Pioneer terrace, is similar to that of the Seven Devils terrace deposits and generally represents deposition at what would be the final stages of the transgressive sequence (Peterson et al., 1987). A basal conglomerate of well rounded rocks and agates exists above an unconformable layer with the same Tertiary mudstone encountered on the Seven Devils ter-race deposits, followed by a nearshore/swash zone depositional sequence of coarse sand and higher concentrations of heavy mineral. Once again, this higher energy zone served to concentrate the heavy mineral during periodic storm and wave events. Upsection is found in the same fining up-ward sequence along with lowered concentration of heavy mineral resulting from lower energy en-vironments associated with the transgressive se-quence. The Pioneer terrace deposit differs from the previous terrace deposits in that it is capped by aeolian dune sequences that represent the end of transgression and the early stages of beach pro-gradation (Peterson et al., 1987). While this aeo-

BulksampleID SH WB S7D N7DDrillhole samples 83 358 470 172Total bulk weight (lbs) 1,634 2,351 8,248 5,190Terrace represented Pioneer 7 Devils 7 Devils 7 DevilsDeposits represented Westbrook South 7 North 7 Shepard West Bohemia Devils Devils Sec 10, 33 % Heavy mineral (sg > 2.85) 62.3 21.9 43.4 34.8% Chromite 14.5 10.3 18.9 11.9% Garnet 10.1 1.0 6.0 1.7% Zircon 1.2 0.6 1.8 1.2% Epidote/clinozoisite 30.5 12.3 18.6 20.9% Staurolite 1.5 0.4 0.3 0.7% Ilmenite 1.0 1.1 4.3 0.5% Leucoxene 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.8% Rutile 0.2 0.2 0.5 0.4% Magnetite 0.0 0.1 0.4 0.1% Misc. Light “heavies” 3.6 0.4 1.0 0.9 SH = Shepard, WB = Westbrook, S7D = South Seven Devils, N7D = North Seven Devils

Bulksamplelocationandmineralinformation.

Table 1


lian sand does contain heavy mineral, it is not in econom-ic concentrations within the Shepard deposit study area.

Mineralogy and prod-ucts. Economic minerals from the southern Oregon paleo-beach placers cur-rently being marketed by ORC include chromite and zircon products for foundry applications and garnet for waterjet cutting medium. Other recoverable minerals include ilmenite, magnetite, staurolite, kyanite, silliman-ite, rutile, leucoxene, gold and platinum (Hornor, 1918 and Griggs, 1945). Ilmenite, leucoxene, rutile, magnetite and small amounts of chro-mite are combined into a fourth product called High-Iron, a foundry de-veining solution. Not only do the total concentra-tion of these economic minerals vary with depo-sitional facies, there is also a degree of variability found in overall assemblage between the Seven Devils and Pioneer terraces. Constant among all of the terraces, however, is the degree of spheric-ity and rounding as well as the natural sizing and sorting (Hoyt, 2006).

The deposits located on the Seven Devils ter-race (North and South Seven Devils, Westbrook, West Bohemia, West Section 10 and Section 33) contain higher concentrations of chromite and zircon in the heavy mineral fraction than does the Shepard deposit located on the Pioneer ter-race. Full ore reserve (not metallurgical bulk sampling) analysis performed by ORC indicates that concentrations of chromite within the Seven Devils terrace ranges from approximately 33 to 43 percent, in contrast to only 23 percent on the Pioneer terrace (Drew, 2008). The same can be said of zircon, which averages between 1.5 and 2.9 percent within the Seven Devils terrace and only 1.4 percent on the Pioneer terrace. Alternatively, the Pioneer terrace shows greater percentage of garnet, at 12.6 percent versus 4.6 to 9.8 percent on the older Seven Devils terrace (Drew, 2008). These differences in mineral assemblage reflects the differing sources supplying the system at the time of deposition. Peterson et al. (1986) has shown several unique river sources supplied the deposition at varying stages of terrace develop-ment, yielding the shifts in mineralogy.

Constant throughout both the Seven Devils and Pioneer terrace deposits is the general physi-


BulksampleID SH WB S7D N7D%pitoversize(4mesh,+4.75mm) 1.3 4.0 3.1 2.6%plantoversize(-4,+18mesh,-4.75,+1.0mm) 2.1 6.1 4.8 4.0%slimes(-230mesh,-63µm) 6.7 14.8 14.0 14.8%passingdeslimetogravitycircuit 89.9 75.1 78.1 78.6Screenanalysisofdeslimedgravitycircuitfeed 100 100 100 100 +20mesh(850µm) 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 -20,+30mesh(600µm) 0.2 2.7 0.8 0.4 -30,+40mesh(425µm) 0.7 8.4 1.9 1.1 -40,+50mesh(300µm) 5.6 28.3 6.9 8.1 -50,+70mesh(212µm) 26.6 29.4 29.1 41.2 -70,+100mesh(150µm) 43.4 17.8 33.7 30.7 -100,+140mesh(106µm) 18.9 8.1 20.5 13.0 -140,+200mesh(75µm) 3.7 3.3 5.5 3.7 -200,+230mesh(63µm) 1.0 1.0 1.7 1.9

SH=Shepard,WB=Westbrook,S7D=SouthSevenDevils,N7D=NorthSevenDevils

Bulksizing,deslimingandoversizedata.

cal nature of the heavy mineral. The chromite, garnet, zircon and High-Iron sand grains from the southern Oregon paleo-beach placers are highly rounded and moderate to highly spherical (de-pending on original crystal form) (Hoyt, 2006, 2009). The grains have also experienced a nar-rowing of particle size distribution by the wave action of the Pacific Ocean.

In direct comparison tests to market foundry grade chromite from the Republic of South Af-rica (typically angular crusher fines from ferro-chrome operations) the ORC chromite performs favorably:

• The rounded grain structure and natu-rally smooth polish of the ORC chromite grains reduces the total surface area that requires binders in the foundry mold. This lowers costs while maintaining the strength of the mold.

• The reduction in mold binder lowers the decomposition gasses and emissions dur-ing the casting process.

• The rounded grain shape and narrow par-ticle size distribution of ORC chromite allows for a tighter packing of grains in the mold. Increased grain-to-grain con-tact during binding yields superior ten-sile strengths and enhances the ability to transfer heat from the casting.

• Clay coatings eliminated during process-ing.

Oregon Resources Corp. chromite product

Table 2


met or exceeded the results of zircon in all found-ry tests as well, making it a viable, lower cost al-ternative. Currently, ORC has memorandums of understanding for product sales with HA-Inter-national, IGC Technologies and Possehl Erzkon-tor GmbH.

Process designBulk sample selection and preparation. A to-

tal of four bulk samples for metallurgical test work and plant design were collected by the ORC team (Table 1) and delivered to Outotec (USA) Inc. for characterization. Criteria for selection included marine terrace deposition, geological facies and mineralogy.

Upon selection, the bulks were collected using existing drillhole samples.

To accomplish the goal of creating a set of bulk samples that best represented the known minable resources, the ORC team divided the Seven Devils from the Pioneer terrace deposits. Based on pre-vious work by Griggs (1945) and Peterson et al. (1987), the mode of depositional (facies) changes between both terraces and the mineral sourcing variability present at the time of deposition was enough to warrant concurrent metallurgical inves-tigation of the two terraces.

At the time of bulk preparation, only the Shepard deposit within the Pioneer terrace had been delineated and drilled out, thus the require-ment for only one bulk sample. The Shepard de-posit on the Pioneer terrace also represents the largest shift in mineralogical assemblage, specifi-cally the Seven Devils terrace deposits, however, it included multiple deposits delineated and drilled out by ORC. A total of three bulks were selected within the Seven Devils terrace on the basis of, first, location relative to the eastern boundary of deposition, a north-south trending normal fault scarp described by Griggs (1945) to be the equiv-alent of a sea cliff. The North and South Seven Devils deposits are located at the base of this scarp and are notably thicker in total sand deposition


BulksampleID Screen SHWBS7DN7D+20 mesh (850 µm) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0-20, +30 mesh (600 µm) 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.0-30, +40 mesh (425 µm) 0.0 1.1 0.4 0.2-40, +50 mesh (300 µm) 3.1 8.6 0.8 2.1-50, +70 mesh (212 µm) 29.0 28.9 12.4 20.7-70, +100 mesh (150 µm) 39.5 34.3 39.4 39.3-100, +140 mesh (106 µm) 16.2 11.8 29.8 26.4-140, +200 mesh (75 µm) 12.2 13.9 16.2 10.9-200 mesh (-75 µm) 0.0 1.1 0.8 0.5

Heavymineralconcentratesizingfrombulks.than the Westbrook, West Bohemia and West Sec-tion 10 and 33 deposits. Secondly, the North and South Seven devils deposits were bulked separate-ly based on the relative amount of lower grade, un-economic sand deposited in the final stages of the marine transgression at maximum ocean depths. While both deposits would have contained such deposition, the South Seven Devils deposit was partially mined during WWII, thus removing the upper sections of deposition that is still preserved at the North Seven Devils deposit.

The Westbrook, West Bohemia, West Sec-tion 10, and Section 33 deposits are all part of the Seven Devils terrace transgressive sedimentary package that has been dissected by erosion and mass wasting. These deposits are represented by one bulk sample resulting from the drilling at the Westbrook deposit.

Bulk samples were collected by splitting 1.5 m (5 ft) drillhole interval samples previously collect-ed and warehoused by ORC. A small sample was retained, while the remainder was placed in 208 L (55 gal) drums. Samples for bulking were selected on the criteria that greater than, or equal to, 4 per-cent chromite be present in situ. This cutoff is typi-cally considered by ORC to be of economic value. Interbedded lenses of less than 4 percent chromite were included in the sampling, thus representing the realistically mined deposit (Tables 2, 3).

Mining and ore grade control. The sample characterization summarized in Tables 1, 2 and 3 were homogenous samples produced from a drill program undertaken in 1991 by ORC. The goal of the 1991 drill program was to verify the findings of previous drilling studies and not necessarily to define the vertical and horizontal economic pit boundaries. Subsequent exploration programs in 2007 defined vertical and horizontal economic pit boundaries. The most recent drill studies indicate that grade varies, not only by deposit, but also ver-tically within the same deposit. For example, the heavy mineral content of S7D can from vary from 10 percent at the surface to > 70 percent at the bottom of the deposit.

The heavy mineral variations dictate the first design consideration, ore feed, grade control. Grade control will be accomplished by mining method. Mining will begin by establishing a low point at the edge of the deposit. Bulldozers will push diagonally through the vertical plane, taking slices of material from the entire vertical plane (top to bottom) with each push.

Grade control is especially important in the wet process. The wet process incorporates spirals where slurry is pumped to the top of the spiral and flows down the spiral in a corkscrew fashion. While descending the spiral, the minerals sort

-70, +100 mesh (150 µm)

Table 3


into distinct bands of materials of similar densi-ties. Similar minerals are concentrated by split-ters, which physically direct like bands of material onto the next processing step.

Feed grade should be made as consistent as possible in order to keep the width of the bands as uniform as possible. The position of the split-ters is adjustable and the spiral circuit does have several reprocessing loops but the system would not be able to stabilize heavy mineral concentrate (HMC) recovery and grade with variations rang-ing from 10 to 80 percent (S7D). Figure 4 illus-trates a typical spiral cross section. Dense ma-terials, depicted by darker particles on the inside (right side), produce a distinct band. Stabilizing the feed grade produces a consistent band width of concentrate. The splitter would be positioned at the boundary between dense and non-dense material. Stabilizing feed grade stabilizes band width and makes maximizing recovery and stabi-lizing HMC grade possible.

Ore and tailings transportation. Typically, wet concentrators are located close to the deposit to minimize the transportation cost of getting ore to the wet concentrator and moving tailings back to the reclamation pits. Tailings are usually trans-ported to reclamation areas by pumps moving slurry at 30 to 40 wt percent solids.

The -230 mesh material (slimes), portion of tailings are usually difficult to dewater and, for this reason tailings, are frequently pumped to a series of settling ponds where heavy equipment is used to work the coarse and fine material back together. Handling tailings this way is often dif-ficult, as a series of collection ponds is usually re-quired to allow the suspended solids enough time to settle, so the water fraction can be reused as process water.

Due to high ore grade, topography, zoning issues and lack of existing utilities and available process water at the mine site, both the wet and dry processing facilities are to be located separate from the mine site. The processing facilities will be located approximately 32 km (20 miles) from the mine site.

Typical thickened tailings slurry (thickened slurry at 40 wt percent solids) could not be suc-cessfully trucked back to the reclamation site. Project success rests on ORC’s ability to dewater tailings so that it can be handled with standard, over the road, belly dump trucks.

Tailings dewatering and process water treat-ment. ORC, working together with FLSmidth Dorr-Oliver Eimco, has developed a unique solu-tion to the challenge of tailings dewatering. The goal of the test work was to produce tailings that


Typical spiral cross section.

contained no free water, could be successfully transported, off loaded and contoured immedi-ately.

Sample characterization and flowsheet devel-opment testwork by Outotec (USA) produced both fine and coarse tailings samples from each deposit. Dewatering testing at FLSmidth com-menced with sample characterization and a stan-dard flocculant screening matrix. The fine mate-rial was not difficult to flocculate using any floccu-lant with high molecular weight and low anionic charge density. Flowsheet development by Outo-tec, indicated the feed to the thickener would contain 7-10 wt percent solids. Static 2,000 mL (676 oz) cylinder tests were conducted using feed samples with 7-10 wt percent solids, as expected, results were poor. Feed conditions with solids of 7-10 wt percent, produced high flocculant dosage requirements, slow settling rates, poor superna-tant clarity and low underflow densities (45-50 wt percent). Subsequent tests were conducted where the feed solids were reduced to <5 wt percent. Re-ducing the feed solids also dramatically reduced flocculant consumption (on a lb flocc/ton dry sol-ids basis) and improved supernatant clarity. How-ever, settling rates and underflow densities were not dramatically improved. Next, coarse tailings were mixed with the fine tailings in ratios of 1:1 to 4:1 (coarse:fine), adjusted back to 5 wt percent, and static 2,000 mL (676 oz) cylinder tests repeat-ed. The result of mixing coarse and fine material, diluting the feed and using proper flocculant dos-ages was dramatic. The resulting flocculated par-ticles were formed at nearly their ultimate density and settled very fast. Additionally, underflow den-sities of 65 wt percent were achieved. The under-flow was essentially a paste. So to be sure it could

Figure 5


be pumped, rheology work was conducted. Yield stresses vs. solids concentrations were measured. Bingham yield stress values of ~100 Pa at 65 wt percent solids were considered to be acceptable. Supernatant quality was also excellent, averaging 70-90 ppm TSS but never exceeding 130 ppm TSS (very clean for process water at a mineral sands operation). Recovery at minerals sands opera-tions often suffers with dirty process water. Fine valuable mineral and dirty process water often re-sult in a smearing of the concentrate on the spiral and result in lower recoveries and HMC grades.

At 65 wt percent solids, the thickener under-flow is not acceptable for over the road transport in belly dump trucks, as it has the consistency of tooth paste and would fluidize in a moving truck and possibly leak. As a result, further dewatering is required.

Pressure filtration tests were conducted unsuc-cessfully on underflow samples containing less than 1:1 coarse:fines ratios (very slow filtration, low cake solids). Acceptable results were achieved when the coarse:fine particle size ratios approached 4:1. Vacuum filtration tests were also successful at the higher ratio. Vacuum filtration has the advantage of being a continuous operation, does not require intermediate holding tanks, multiple units or a pug mill for breaking up cake. It was determined that adding coarse dry mill tailings and additional flocculant to the thickener underflow, vacuum fil-tration would produce a dewatered tailing mate-rial suitable for transport and reclamation. Adding coarse material to the fines is not only crucial for thickener performance but also makes vacuum fil-tration possible by producing a more porous cake. The coarse material provides pathways for the wa-ter to migrate, much the same as body aid would. By adding coarse tailings, vacuum filtration pro-duced cake with a minimum of 82 wt percent solids and no free water. The dewatered cake at 82 wt percent resembles wet sand and passes paint filter tests, can be successfully transported and immedi-ately contoured at the reclamation site.

Figure 6 illustrates the approach to managing water and tailings. Fines from the desliming cy-clones are combined with coarse tailings from the wet mill and filtrate from the tailings filter, condi-tioned with flocculant, diluted using supernatant (internal, not shown) and fed to the thickener. The thickener overflow is recycled to the process water tank. The thickener underflow is conditioned with additional flocculant and mixed with more coarse material from the dry mill, and dewatered on the horizontal vacuum belt filter. The oversize sepa-rated at the wet screen is added to the cake and stacked as dewatered tailings ready for transporta-tion and reclamation.

Dewatered tailings will make operations at the

mine site much simpler. Because ORC will not place tailings by pumping slurry, there is no need for a complex system of tailings booster pumps or to build and manage a series of settling ponds. The operating mine footprint will be very small (one pit). ORC will be able mine and perform reclama-tion concurrently in the same pit due to the ab-sence of water. The water make up requirement at the process facility is very small. The only paths to lose water at the process facility is the difference in moisture contents of the feed and the tailings, and water vapor lost at the fluid bed dryers preceding the dry mill. The process water make up require-ment is < 3.15L/s (< 50 gpm).

A third piece of equipment, known as a hori-zontal vacuum belt filter, will be provided by FLSmidth and positioned between the spirals and HMC storage (Fig. 6). The HMC dewatering filter will increase the solids content of the HMC from approximately 80 wt percent solids, up to 95-98 wt percent solids. Usually, HMC is stockpiled on a concrete pad and allowed to drain. Solids contents of 90-95 wt percent are common with this method, depending on particle size distribution, process water viscosity and drainage time. Filtered HMC containing half the water content of typical HMC is expected to require approximately half the fuel (less efficiency losses). Fuel cost savings at 2008 natural gas prices are expected to pay for the cost of the filter in approximately 1.5 years. Addition-ally, if stockpiled HMC is low due to operational upsets, the dewatered HMC can be directly fed to the dryers without throughput or additional fuel requirement penalties.

Solid waste exemption. Tailings, even though being returned to their origin, required a solid waste exemption from the Oregon Division of Environmental Quality (ORDEQ). This exemp-tion details the composition of the tailings and designates the material as clean fill, thus permit-ting the reclamation of the tailings as previously described.

The only process chemical use planned was polyacrylamide flocculant for slurry thickening and final tails filtering. The Oregon DEQ ex-pressed reservations about the small amount of unreacted residual acrylamide (chemical formula: C3H5NO) in the flocculant remaining from the manufacturing process. Flocculants typically have residual acrylamide concentrations ranging from nil to a maximum 1,000 ppm. The ORDEQ’s con-cerns related to possible residual acrylamide con-centrations in drinking water that at some future date could flow through the tailings sand.

ORC retained Argo Consulting LLC (Wilson-ville, OR), a mining consultant, to support the de-velopment of an effective chemical oxidation route


Dewatered tailings will make operations at the

mine site much simpler. Because

ORC will not place tailings by pumping slurry, there is no need

for a complex system of tailings

booster pumps or to build and

manage a series of settling ponds.


that could be implemented in operation to reduce the residual acrylamide to non-detect levels.

Calculations at ORC’s estimated flocculant use rates and highest expect-ed residual acrylamide dosages showed that a maximum 72 kg/a (160 lb/year) of residual acrylamide potentially would report to the re-deposited tails, which will average 653 kt/a (720,000 stpy). This is a maximum of 46 µg/kg tails. For perspective, researchers have found that acrylamide naturally forms in fried foods at concentrations as high as 7,800 µg/kg (gingerbread). From a practical standpoint, acrylamide is carcinogenic as an acrylamide monomer product as used in industrial and manufacturing situations.

Health and food studies are under way in an attempt to establish whether the residual dietary acrylamide food levels are even a human hazard, as re-search to date has not found any car-cinogenic link to dietary acrylamide. Consider-ing that polyacrylamide flocculants are already approved for use in drinking water clarification, dewatering food plant waste that becomes ani-mal feed, agricultural field erosion control and a myriad number of other applications that can lead directly and indirectly to human acrylamide ingestion, the ORDEQ regulator’s concern at this point appears to be misplaced.

Acrylamide is a fairly reactive molecule and decomposes naturally in the environment by bac-terial action, ultraviolet light, iron, natural min-eral free radicals, organic acids (tannins, lignins), oxidizers, acids, bases and heat. There is a possibil-ity that the residual acrylamide molecules would not even survive to tailings deposition but ORC would be in a very difficult position to prove this point without extensive and lengthy studies.

Various chemical oxidizers were considered as well as bacteria/enzymic treatment. In the lab process simulation studies, it was found that hy-drogen peroxide dosed in the thickener and filter following flocculant solution addition at 0.025 percent w/w (slurry basis) dosage would reduce acrylamide to non-detect levels.

With these findings, the ORDEQ approved the permit with use of hydrogen peroxide to degrade acrylamide to nondetect levels. Hydrogen peroxide is readily available although it poses safety con-cerns that must be engineered into the system. An-nual use rates will be approximately 204,000 kg/a (450,000 lb/year) of 35 percent peroxide liquid.

Zeroday Enterprises will be supplying the hy-drogen peroxide and has been working with ORC


Process flow diagram.

on the system design installation with Solvay Chemicals support, which is providing the bulk storage tank. With the award of the process floc-culant business, Zeroday is also providing their Z ChemGear dry flocculant mixing-feeding system and assisting with flocculant system plant design and installation.

Characterization and circuit development. Con-siderable effort was made by ORC and Outotec to develop a robust process design. The goal of the de-sign work was to produce a process capable of pro-ducing 63 kt/a (70,000 stpy) of high quality chromite foundry sand as well as secondary products (high-iron, garnet and zircon).

Producing and characterizing representative samples for each deposit was critical for understand-ing the range of processing requirements necessary to reach design goals. Simply taking all the drillhole samples and combining them into one large sample for testing would have resulted in a design not suit-ed to any of the individual deposits

Table 1 demonstrates the wide variability of the presence heavy mineral, as well as finished products, by terrace as well as deposit. Table 1 illustrates that S7D contains almost twice as much HMC and chro-mite as WB. An inflexible design based on one de-posit would have been inappropriate when mining in the opposite deposit. For this reason, the solids handling systems and wet plant capacity have an operating range of 63 to 127 t/h (70 to 140 stph). Table 1 also illustrates that SH contains approxi-mately three times as much HMC as WB. A dry plant design based on an average HMC value would

Figure 6


not have the capacity required when processing ore from a deposit with a lot of trash heavy mineral. For this reason, the dry plant is capable of operating 18 to 36 t/h (20 to 40 stph). The design process included a plant-wide bottleneck analysis. The need for a bot-tleneck analysis can be seen in the garnet content shown in Table 1. If the solids handling capacity for garnet circuit were sized for WB, the entire process could be either choked when not in WB or would result in garnet being wasted, as the excess would simply be thrown to tails because the capacity was not present to process it.

The 1991 drill program used an reverse-circula-tion drilling rig. For this reason, it is believed the pit and plant oversize will be greater than the values

shown in Table 2. The design includes extra screen capacity for this concern.

Characterization results given in Table 2 dem-onstrate the need for a desliming circuit, as slimes contents that high would affect spiral recoveries as a result of the smearing effect previously men-tioned.

A pilot scale test was conducted in August 2007. During the pilot test, 31 t (34 st) of finished chro-mite foundry sand was produced. The wet process was completed at ORC’s facility. The dry processing was completed at Hazen Research in Denver, CO. Until the processing at Hazen was undertaken, the importance of the last two steps of the wet process-ing were not fully appreciated. Foundries require


Permits required for mining and processing.

Permit Permitted activity

Regulatory agency Type Application submitted

Permit received

NPDES 1200 C permit

Construction stormwater

OR DEQ Permit September 2007 October 2007

Conditional land use permit

Site development and use

Cross country Permit April 2007 August 2007

NPDES individual permit

Stormwater discharge OR DEQ Permit December 2008 December 2008

Mine operating permit

Ore processing DOGAMI Permit April 2009 November 2009

Air contaminant discharge permit

Air discharges OR DEQ, DOGAMI Permit February 2010 September 2010 (est.)

Permit Permitted activity

Regulatory agency Type Application submitted

Permit received

Radioactive waste exemption

Disposal of tailings OR DOE Exemption May 2007 June 2007

Conditional land use permit

Site development and use

Coos County Permit May 2007 February 2008

Water pollution control facilities permit

Stormwater management OR DEQ, DOGAMI Permit June 2008 September 2009

Solid waste exemption

Disposal of tailings OR DEQ Exemption September 2009 October 2009

Mine operating permit

Mining DOGAMI Permit June 2008 February 2010

401 certification Mining OR DEQ Certification February 2009 February 2010

Biological assessment

Mining NMFS Certification October 2009 February 2010

404 permit Impacts to wetlands ACOE Permit May 2008 March 2010

Removal-fill permit Impacts to wetlands OR DSL Permit May 2008 March 2010

Processing plant

Mine sites

OR DOE - Oregon Department of Energy OR DSL - Oregon Department of State Lands OR DEQ - Oregon Division of Environmental Quality

DOGAMI - Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Ind.ACOE - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers NMFS - National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA)

Table 4



The permitting process officially kicked off in 2006 with delineations of wetlands and surveys for threatened and endangered species. Concurrent with surveying activities, ORC applied for conditional land use permits in Coos County for the mining and processing sites.

that quality chromite contain less than 1.0 wt percent clay coatings. Clay content is critical be-cause it affects the binder requirement and mold strength. If foundries start with dirty chromite, the binder requirement is higher and the mold’s tensile strength is lower. The last two steps deter-mined by bench scale testing at Outotec were at-tritioning of the HMC and final rinsing and grade control using a Floatex hydrosizer. The attrition-er liberates the clay coating on the HMC grains and the hydrosizer flushes it away while provid-ing final grade control. When the pilot work was undertaken at Hazen, the exact pilot equipment to simulate the final steps in the wet process was not available and the final steps were simulated using alternative equipment. The chromite pro-duced had excessive clay content, which was un-acceptable for marketing purposes as the material had to be representative of full-scale production quality. Processing was halted until the appropri-ate equipment was available. The final material produced is low in clay (< 0.5 wt percent), has a low binder requirement and produces strong, high-quality casting molds that provide ORC a marketing edge over competitors.

Permitting and constructionOregon Resources Corp.’s management team,

along with consultants URS Corp. and attorney Stoel Rives (Portland, OR), successfully navigat-ed the complex and challenging task of successful-ly permitting a new mine and processing facility in three years (Table 4).

The permitting process officially kicked off in 2006 with delineations of wetlands and surveys for threatened and endangered species. Concur-rent with surveying activities, ORC applied for conditional land use permits in Coos County for the mining and processing sites. The mining sites are located in zoning for forestry, which in the Coos County Zoning and Land Development Ordinance, allows for outright exploration, but requires a public hearing in front of a planning commission to site a mining project. The planning commission can add conditions to the operation to aid in making sure it fits the intended land use. The processing facility is located on industrial zoned land, making the process fairly straightfor-ward, as the intended use fits the zoning. Oregon land use law allows for challenges of decisions, so an appeal of a proposed mining site was not expected (the processing facility land use permit was not appealed). This process involves several stages of appeal. The first is to the Coos County commissioners, an elected three-member board. At this stage, the land use permit had additional conditions added to it and accepted by ORC. The next stage of appeal is to a three-member land-

lawyer team at the state level referred to as the Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA). The LUBA affirmed the decision of the Coos County plan-ning commission and the elected commission-ers, thus ending the appeal process and granting ORC the necessary permit to continue. Overall, this process for the mining land use permit took 11 months. In contrast, the land use permit for the processing facility was not appealed and took five months to receive.

The Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries issues the Mine Operating Permit (MOP), which covers all aspects of mining. The Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries also works closely with OR DEQ, OR DSL, etc. to aid in the general permitting process within those agencies. An additional MOP was re-quired by DOGAMI to cover the processing facil-ity site, as it is interrelated and codependent with the mining sites.

Several exemptions and concurrences were crucial in obtaining all permits, an example be-ing the previously mentioned solid waste exemp-tion. Without the exemption, ORC would have to classify its reclamation (filling and recontouring the pits with tailings) as a landfill operation. The radioactive waste exemption from the OR DOE was required as part of the tailings characteriza-tion and was crucial for the solid waste exemp-tion. The biological assessment was required by NMFS, as the proximity to streams and potential Coho salmon habitat required further study.

The remaining permits are standard in the industry, including the Water Pollution Control Facility permit (OR DEQ), 401 Clean Water Act Certification (OR DEQ), 404 permit (ACOE), wetland and waters of the state removal/fill per-mit (OR DSL), and WPCF and NPDES (OR DEQ). The Air Contaminant Discharge Permit from ORDEQ remains outstanding, as issuance is being timed to coincide with the completion of the processing plant construction.

With permits in hand, construction began on the site in the first quarter of 2010. Heery Interna-tional was engaged as project manager for ORC while construction will be completed by West Coast Contractors (site prep and grading, piling, concrete work), Mid-City Steel (structure fabrica-tion), and CCC Group (structure erection).

ConclusionOregon Resources Corp. has successfully

navigated engineering challenges and permitting requirements and is on schedule to break ground at the mining sites in November 2010 and com-mission the processing facility currently under construction in January 2011. (References are available from the authors.) n


One of the most important process operations in a mining concentrator is the flotation cell

area. Profitability of the concentrator is largely attributable to this area of the process.

Older flotation cells use a displacement float below the froth layer to measure the pulp height. Pulp height is an extremely important process measurement, used to ensure that liquid pulp is not allowed to overflow to the launders. If pulp overflows, the flotation cell ceases to function effectively — this is costly to the process. The displacement float technique is limited in performance in a variety of ways: the float may at times stick, slurry builds up on the float mechanism changing the effective specific gravity tracked, they are affected by high agitation, etc.

Measure pulp heightHawk has developed a low frequency “acoustic

wave transmitter” that is nonintrusive and will penetrate through the froth to measure the pulp height. The Hawk sensor is mounted above the froth and pulp height, so it has no maintenance or mechanical problems. Typically, the transmitter can be mounted at walkway height for easy serviceability. The low frequency level transmitter can be supplied ready for connection to the typical two-wire loop power supply used for the

displacement float transmitter that it is replacing. Remote mounted transmitters are also an option.

Measure froth heightHawk also provides as an option a non-

intrusive transmitter to measure the froth height. Continuous measurement of the froth height, provided as feedback to the control loop for the inlet “dart valve,” allows a flotation cell to maintain constant overflowing of froth to the launder, even when the orebody type may produce variations to frothing consistency. Small changes in the pulp height to keep the froth overflowing at all times will increase the efficiency of the flotation cell and, consequently, increase profitability. Hawk transmitters will reliably measure froth height, even when froth density changes.

Measure froth density Hawk also provides a third type of transmitter

to measure relative froth density. Higher density froth will have greater entrainment of mineral going over the launder. Currently, density measurement is not widely used due to the degree of difficulty in making an effective online density measurement in each flotation cell. Bubbler type pressure transmitters have been commonly used, though they have high maintenance costs due to their intrusive installation. A nonintrusive transmitter that penetrates partly through the froth gives an output proportional to density. Data from the froth height transmitter is used with the froth penetration (density) information. Monitoring of the deviation between froth height and froth penetration allows the control system to track relative froth density — all nonintrusively. Relative density data can be used to control density through a feedback loop, regulating forced airflow into the flotation cell. Air input is currently largely controlled manually by onsite operators.

Self-cleaning transmitterHawk’s low frequency transmitters require no

maintenance due to their self-cleaning nature. The high-powered acoustic wave being transmitted will automatically clean the sensor face with every measurement pulse. Self-cleaning minimizes buildup on the sensor facing, which would otherwise prevent the sensor from measuring accurately. Buildup is a significant problem in the mining industry due to the dirty nature of materials being handled, and also the presence of moisture and dust in the environment. n

Optimizing flotation cells in the mining industry

Technology News


Technical Papers

Continuous miner spray considerations for optimizing scrubber

performance in exhaust ventilation systemsby J. Organiscak and T. Beck

Abstract n Amajority of continuousminingmachines employ awater spray systemand amachine-mounted flooded-bed scrubber to suppress and capture dust during coalmining.These machine-mounted dust control systems must be designed to function within thelocalizedfaceventilationsystemattheminingsectiontocontrolbothdustandmethane.Spraysystemscanimpedeorimprovethescrubbereffectivenessincontrollingdustormethaneattheminingface.Laboratoryexperimentswereconductedtoexaminetheeffectofspraytype,spraypressure,machinebodyblockingspraysandscrubberairflowondustandgas levels,whileusinga12.2-m (40-ft) exhaustventilationcurtainsetback from the face.Theseexperimentswereconductedwith theminingmachinepositionedat theendofasimulated6.1-m (20-ft)sumpandslabcut.Results indicate that thehollowconenozzleswithblockingspraysbestcomplement the flooded-bed scrubber performance in an exhaust ventilation system. Thisexternalspraysystemnotablyreduceddustandgaslevelsontheoff-curtainsideoftheminingmachineforboththesumpandslabcutcomparedtotheflatspraynozzles.Higherscrubberairflowsreduceddustandgas levelsonthecurtainsideand inthereturnof thecontinuousminingmachine.Theremoteoperatorposition,locatedontheoff-curtainsideandparalleltotheinletendoftheexhaustcurtain,sustainedthemoststableandlowestdustlevelsaroundtheminingmachine.

IntroductionCoal miner overexposure to re-

spirable coal and crystalline silica (or quartz) dust can cause pneumoconiosis and silicosis, respectively, which are de-bilitating and potentially fatal respira-tory lung diseases. Although significant progress has been made in the United States (U.S.) with the reduction of coal workers’ pneumoconiosis, severe cases continue to occur among coal miners,

especially within several geographic clusters of the Appalachian coal region (Antao et al., 2005). Mining also has some of the highest incidences of work-er-related silicosis, with mining machine operators being the occupation that is most commonly associated with the dis-ease (NIOSH, 2008).

The U. S. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) enacts and enforces mine worker safety and health standards to mitigate mine worker inju-ries and occupational diseases. MSHA’s permissible coal mine dust exposure limit is 2.0 mg/m3 during an eight-hr shift for coal mine workers, as defined by the Mining Research Establish-ment (MRE) Criteria (30 CFR 70-72, 74 2009). If more than 5% quartz mass is determined to be in the coal mine worker dust sample using MSHA’s P7 infrared method (Parobeck and Tomb, 2000), the applicable respirable dust standard is reduced to the quotient of 10 divided by the percentage of quartz in the dust sample. This reduced dust

standard, based on the percentage of quartz content, is intended to limit worker respirable crystalline silica (quartz) exposure to 0.1 mg/m3 or less for the shift.

Coal mine worker overexposure to coal and quartz dust continues to be a problem at underground coal min-ing operations in the U.S. Over 90% of mechanized mining units operating in U.S. underground coal mines are continuous mining machines (MSHA, 2009). The percentage of valid MSHA inspector dust samples for continuous mining machine operators from 2004 to 2008 that exceeded the respirable coal dust standard or the reduced dust standard was 7.2% and 19.5%, re-spectively (U.S. Department of Labor, 2009). Therefore, many continuous min-ing machine operators continue to be overexposed to coal and quartz dust.

The primary dust controls used on most continuous mining machines are water sprays and flooded-bed scrub-bers. Initially, flooded-bed scrubbers

J. Organiscak and T. Beck, members SME, are mining engineers at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Office of Mine Safety and Health Research, Pittsburgh, PA. Paper number TP-10-004. Original manuscript submitted January 2010. Manuscript accepted for publication May 2010. Discussion of this peer-reviewed and approved paper is invited and must be submitted to SME Publications by Jan. 31, 2011.


were used with blowing face ventilation systems in gassy coal seams to help remove dust being blown over workers at the mine face, while providing satisfactory face methane removal for curtain setback distances up to 15.2 m (50 ft) (Volkwein et al., 1985; Jayaraman et al., 1990). With the development of remote control technology for continuous mining machines, flooded-bed scrubbers were also adopted on exhaust face ventilation systems for use in extended-cut mining applica-tions (beyond 6.1 m or 20 ft of entry advance). Research has shown that positioning the operator away from the mining machine during extended-cut mining was a significant factor in lowering operator dust exposures on both blowing and exhaust ventilation systems (Fields et al., 1990). The best continuous miner operator position for blowing ventilation is in front of the discharge end of the intake curtain (Jayaraman et al., 1987; Goodman and Listak, 1999). The best operator position for exhaust ventilation is parallel to or outby the in-let end of the return curtain on the opposite side of the entry (Colinet and Jankowski, 1996; Goodman and Listak, 1999).

Since continuous miner operators cannot or do not al-ways stay at these optimum positions during mining, their dust exposure can notably increase at other positions around the rear of the mining machine (Goodman and Listak, 1999). Previous research on machine-mounted scrubbers in blowing face ventilation systems have shown that the lowest dust lev-els at the rear corners and return of the mining machine are achieved when the face ventilation-to-scrubber airflow ratio is at or slightly above 1 (Jayaraman et al., 1992). Another scrubber study with blowing ventilation showed that dust rollback at the rear of the mining machine was reduced when the face ventilation curtain setback distance was increased from 6.1 m (20 ft) to 12.2 m (40 ft) and/or when blocking sprays are used on both sides of the mining machine outby the scrubber inlets (Goodman, 2000). Machine-mounted scrubber research with exhausting face ventilation systems showed dust levels increased at the remote operator posi-tion outby the mining machine when using a larger curtain setback distance, 12.2 m (40 ft) versus 9.1 m (30 ft), external directional sprays and/or under boom sprays (Goodman et al., 2006). Although the external directional sprays redi-rected dust past the scrubber inlets and increased operator dust levels, these sprays noticeably reduced gas levels on the off-curtain side of the face. On the other hand, the under boom sprays showed increases to both operator dust levels and gas levels at the face.

In order to improve dust and gas control around a con-tinuous mining machine using a scrubber and external sprays with exhaust ventilation, the National Institute for Occupa-

tional Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducted additional experiments in its full-scale continuous miner gallery at the Pittsburgh Research Laboratory (PRL). The objective of these experiments was to examine external water spray con-figurations that are complementary to scrubber performance for exhaust ventilation systems. The experimental factors studied were spray nozzle type (hollow cone vs. flat), water spray pressure (550 kPa vs. 1,100 kPa or 80 psig vs. 160 psig), blocking sprays (off vs. on) and scrubber airflow (reduced vs. maximum). This paper describes the experiments conducted and the dust and gas level results measured around the min-ing machine.

Experimental designLaboratory experiments were conducted within a full-

scale continuous miner gallery as shown in Fig. 1. The gal-lery entry dimensions were 5.5 m (18 ft) wide by 2.0 m (6.5 ft) high, with a full-scale plywood mockup of a Joy CM14 continuous mining machine positioned at a simulated min-ing face. This mining machine was equipped with a flooded-bed scrubber, several banks of external spray nozzles and a 0.91-m (36-in) diameter cutting drum that rotates at 50 rpm. The flooded-bed scrubber utilized a 30-layer pleated stain-less steel filter wetted by three spraying system full-cone QPH-6.5 nozzles (Spraying Systems, Wheaton, IL) and was powered by a variable frequency ac drive speed-controlled fan. Scrubber inlets were located under each side and center of the cutter boom near the hinge point. External sprays con-sisted of 15 top-mounted boom sprays directed at the top of the rotating drum, three under boom throat sprays directed at the loading pan and three sprays on each side of the cutter boom directed at the drum’s end rings. Two blocking sprays were vertically mounted 7.6 cm (3 in.) apart on each side of the mining machine body, located two feet outby the scrub-ber inlets and two feet above ground level. These blocking sprays were oriented at a 15° angle away from the machine body toward the rib and were operated at the same pressure as the other external sprays.

Coal dust and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) gas were intro-duced in front of and along the length of the rotating cutting drum. Pulverized coal dust (Keystone mineral black 325BA, Keystone Filler & Manufacturing Co., Muncy, PA) was fed into the gallery at 25 g/min (0.9 oz/min) with a screw feeder (Vibra Screw, Inc., Totowa, NJ) and two LH-1/2 brass educ-tors (Penberthy, Prophetstown, IL) operated with 30 kPa (4 psig) of compressed air. One eductor discharged dust through a hose along the left front side of the drum and the other eductor discharged dust through a hose along the right front side of the drum. SF6 gas was also released from tub-ing at each end of the dust discharge hoses to mix in the gas with the dust. A model 1303 multipoint gas doser (California Analytical Instruments, Orange, CA) released the SF6 gas at a flow rate of 6 mL/sec (177 fl oz/ sec). The rotating drum ensured their mixing and simulated dust and gas emissions from the face during mining.

Respirable dust and SF6 gas concentrations were mea-sured at several locations around the mining machine, as shown in Fig. 1. Respirable dust concentrations were mea-sured with coal mine dust personal sampling units (CMDP-SU), comprised of an ESCORT-Elf constant flow air sampling pump pulling dust-laden air through a 10-mm nylon cyclone

Plan view of continuous miner gallery test setup.

Figure 1


Experimental parameters.

Experimental Sump cut, 9.1 m (20 ft) deep Slab cut, 9.1 m (20 ft) deep

Test factors Low level (-1) High level (+1) Low level (-1) High level (+1)

Nozzle type Hollowcone Flat Hollowcone Flat

Spray pressure 550kPa 1,100kPa 550kPa 1,100kPa

Blocking sprays Off On Off On

Scrubber airflow Reduced~20% Maximum Reduced~20% Maximum

(respirable dust classifier) and depositing the respirable frac-tion onto a preweighed 37-mm filter cassette (MSA, Pitts-burgh, PA). A pair of samplers (CMDPSU) were placed and operated at the remote operator (Oper) position, the right rear corner (RRC) of the mining machine, the left rear corner (LRC) of the mining machine and the return (Return) air course. Each pair of dust concentration measurements was averaged to determine the dust concentration at each sampling location. SF6 gas measurements were made using a California Analytical Instruments model 1312 photoacoustic gas monitor, which sequentially drew gas samples through tubing from the off-curtain side (OCS) of the cutting boom, the curtain side (CS) of the cutting boom and the Return air course. This data was collected with a computer-based data acquisition system and the gas concentrations at each loca-tion were averaged for the test.

Other operating parameters measured and recorded were water spray pressure, machine water flow, face return airflow and scrubber airflow. Water pressure and flow were measured with electronic instruments and recorded with a computer data acquisition system. Face return airflow was measured at the inlet end of the ventilation curtain with a handheld vane anemometer (moving traversely), with the scrubber off at the beginning and end of each test. Scrubber airflow was also measured with a handheld vane anemometer at the discharge end of the scrubber (moving traversely) at the beginning and end of each test. A moving traverse airflow measurement at the scrubber exhaust was found to be very comparable to a fixed-point traverse measurement within the scrubber duct.

For these scrubber/spray experiments, the continuous miner gallery was configured for exhaust curtain ventilation with a 12.2-m (40-ft) setback from the face as shown in Fig. 1. A 2-level, 4-factor experimental design was conducted and is shown in Table 1. Return airflow for these experiments was set to approximately 1.25 times the maximum scrub-ber airflow rate. The maximum scrubber airflow averaged 2.27 m3/s (4,810 ft3/min) and the return airflow averaged 2.90 m3/s (6,150 ft3/min) for these experiments. The water sprays tested were Spraying Systems 3/8-BD-3 hollow cone nozzles (77° spray angle @ 550 kPa or 80 psig) and Spraying Systems 3/8-TT-5006 flat nozzles (56° spray angle @ 550 kPa or 80 psig). These nozzles were chosen because their specifications showed comparable water flow rates at the same water pres-sures. All the external sprays, including the blocking sprays, used the same nozzle type during experimental comparisons. The flat spray pattern orientation was parallel to the roof for the top boom sprays and parallel to the ribs for the side boom and blocking sprays. The low and high operational water spray pressures averaged 560 kPa (81 psig) and 1,110

kPa (161 psig), respectively. An approximately 20% reduc-tion in scrubber airflow was also used to simulate a realistic decrease from material buildup on the filter screen during the shift. The reduced scrubber airflow was controlled by decreasing the fan speed with the variable frequency drive, yielding a 1.78 m3/s (3,780 ft3/min) average for these experi-ments. These experimental factors were examined for both a simulated 9.1-m (20-ft) sump and slab cut. All testing is limited to examining airborne dust captured around a con-tinuous mining machine and do not represent dust suppres-sion from coal wetting.

Each experimental factor combination in Table 1 was replicated for at least three tests. Experimental tests were blocked or separately conducted for the sump and slab cuts for experimental practicality. Experimental tests were also blocked by nozzle type. A test of random combinations of spray pressure, blocking sprays and scrubber airflow com-binations was conducted for each nozzle type before it was changed. The nozzle types were alternated to complete the three test replicates. All experimentally controlled test fac-tors were precisely maintained and had relative standard deviations (RSD = (standard deviation /average) x 100%) less than 3% of their measured average.

Experimental resultsTest replicate averages and standard errors were deter-

mined for respirable dust and SF6 gas concentrations at the multiple locations around the mining machine during these experiments. The averages and standard errors for the sump cut are illustrated in Figs. 2-4 and for the slab cut in Figs. 5-7. The tests without blocking sprays are presented on the left side of these figures and the blocking spray tests are present-ed on the right side of these figures. Their x-axes are labeled by water pressure in descending order and scrubber airflow in ascending order.

Stepwise regression analysis was also conducted on the experimental data to examine the significant test factor rela-tionships (at a 95% confidence level) with dust and gas con-centrations. The low and high experimental test factor levels were represented as -1 and +1, respectively, in the regression model. Regression analyses were separately conducted at each dust and gas sampling location during the sump and slab cut. Since the dust concentrations measured at the RRC and LRC locations exhibited an extensive data range, non-normality and unequal variances, natural logarithms of these concentrations were used to stabilize their regression model variance (Myers and Montgomery, 1995). The most signifi-cant experimental test factors are shown in Table 2, with a “+” symbol illustrating a direct relationship and a “–” symbol illustrating a negative relationship in the regression models.

Table 1


Since the operator position had minimal concentra-tion changes in these experiments and there were very few regression factor interactions at the other sampling locations, these regression results were not shown in Table 2 for simplicity.

Sump cutFigures 2 and 3 show the dust concentrations

measured for the sump cut on the off-curtain side and curtain side of the entry, respectively. The SF6gas concentrations measured for the sump cut are shown in Fig. 4. Table 2 shows the significant dust and gas relationships in these figures.

The most significant factors affecting dust con-centrations in the sump cut were the nozzle type and scrubber airflow. The hollow-cone nozzle ap-peared to exhibit very little dust rollback to the RRC of the machine, whereas the flat nozzle cre-ated significant dust rollback to the RRC. Block-ing sprays didn’t seem to have a significant effect on controlling dust in the sump cut with either of the spray nozzle types. The dust concentrations on the curtain side of the entry were most affected by scrubber airflow. Dust levels at the LRC and in the Return were significantly reduced with higher scrubber airflows. The remote operator position had the lowest and most stable dust concentrations observed for these sump cut tests.

The most significant factors affecting SF6 gas concentrations in the sump cut were nozzle type and blocking sprays. Figure 4 shows that the highest gas concentrations are at the OCS of the continuous miner boom with no blocking sprays operating. Hollow cone sprays achieved lower gas concentrations on both sides of the miner boom with no blocking sprays, compared to the flat sprays. The blocking sprays significantly reduced the OCS gas concentrations, especially for the hol-low cone spray nozzles. The decrease in OCS gas levels were somewhat offset by an increase in gas levels on the CS of the continuous miner boom. The increased gas concentrations at the CS location

Figure 3Sump cut dust concentrations on the curtain side of the entry.

Sump cut dust concentrations on the off-curtain side of the entry.

Figure 2

Significant dust and gas concentration relationships.

Sample location

Sump cut Slab cut

Nozzle type

Spray pressure

Blocking sprays

Scrubber airflow

Nozzle type

Spray pressure

Blocking sprays

Scrubber airflow

Dust-RRC + + + − −

Dust-LRC − + −

Dust-Return

− − −

Gas-OCS + − + −

Gas-CS − + + −

Gas-Return + − + −

Key: + and – symbols refer to direct and indirect relationships, respectively, at the 95% confidence level.

Table 2


with the blocking sprays were still lower than the concentrations at the OCS location without the blocking sprays.

Slab cutFigures 5 and 6 show the dust concentrations

measured for the slab cut on the off-curtain side and curtain side of the entry, respectively. The SF6 gas concentrations measured for the sump cut are shown in Fig. 7. Table 2 shows the significant dust and gas relationships in these figures.

All the experimental factors significantly af-fected dust concentrations at the RRC of the min-ing machine in the slab cut. Both spray nozzle types showed prominent dust rollback to the RRC of the machine with no blocking sprays operat-ing. The flat spray nozzles exhibited significantly higher dust concentrations than the hollow cone sprays at this RRC location. Lower water pres-sures and higher scrubber airflows significantly reduced this rollback effect. Application of the blocking sprays appeared to eliminate all dust rollback to the RRC location, reducing these dust concentrations to nearly Oper position levels.

The dust concentrations on the curtain side of the entry were most affected by water pres-sure and scrubber airflow. Dust levels at the LRC were significantly increased by higher spray pres-sures, while higher scrubber airflows reduced dust concentrations at the LRC and Return sampling locations. Similar to the sump cut, the remote operator position again had the lowest and most stable dust concentrations for these slab cut tests.

The most significant factors affecting SF6 gas concentrations in the slab cut were, again, nozzle type and blocking sprays. Figure 7 shows that the highest gas concentrations are at the OCS of the continuous miner boom with no blocking sprays operating. The flat sprays exhibited significantly higher gas concentrations on the OCS side of the miner boom with no blocking sprays, compared to the hollow-cone sprays. Blocking spray applica-tion again significantly reduced the OCS gas con-centrations, especially for the hollow-cone spray nozzles. The decrease in OCS gas levels was some-what offset by an increase in gas levels on the CS of the continuous miner boom. The increased gas concentrations at the CS location with the block-ing sprays were still lower than the concentrations on the OCS location without the blocking sprays.

ConclusionsLaboratory experiments were conducted to

examine the effect of spray type, spray pressure, machine body blocking sprays and scrubber airflow on dust and gas levels while using a 12.2-m (40-ft) exhaust ventilation curtain setback from the face. From these experiments the key ob-servations made include:

• The remote operator position had the lowest and most stable dust concentrations compared to the rear

corners and return of the continuous mining machine.• Hollow-cone nozzles exhibited less dust rollback

than flat sprays on the off-curtain side of the mining machine for both the sump and slab cuts.

• Blocking sprays notably reduced dust concentra-tions on the off-curtain side of the mining machine for the slab cut, with negligible dust changes for the sump cut.

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Sump cut gas concentrations.

Slab cut dust concentrations on the off-curtain side of the entry.

Slab cut dust concentrations on the curtain side of the entry.


• Higherwaterspraypressurewasmoredetrimental,increasingdustconcentrationsatthebackcornersoftheminingmachinefortheslabcut,comparedtothesumpcut.

• Hollow-conenozzlesandblockingspraysbothno-ticeablyreducedgasconcentrationsattheoff-curtainsideofthecontinuousminerboom.

• Higherscrubberairflowsreduceddustlevelsonthecurtainsideofthecontinuousminingmachine,andreducedbothdustandgaslevelsinthereturn.

Giventheseexperimentalobservations,itappearsthatthehollow-conenozzleswithblockingspraysbestcomple-menttheflooded-bedscrubberperformanceinanexhaustventilationsystem.Thisexternalspraysystemnotablyre-duceddustandgaslevelsontheoff-curtainsideofthemin-ingmachineforboththesumpandslabcutcomparedtotheflatspraynozzles.Usinglowerwaterspraypressuresnoticeablyreduceddustrollbacktotherearcornersoftheminingmachine(RRCandLRC),primarilyduringtheslabcut.Higherscrubberairflowsreduceddustandgaslevelsonthecurtainsideandinthereturnofthecontinuousmin-ingmachine.Finally,theremoteoperatorposition,locatedontheoff-curtainsideandparalleltotheinletendoftheexhaustcurtain,sustainedthemoststableandlowestdustlevelsaroundtheminingmachine.n

DisclosureThefindingsandconclusionsinthisreportarethoseof

theauthorsanddonotnecessarilyrepresenttheviewsoftheNationalInstituteforOccupationalSafetyandHealth.

ReferencesAntao,V.C.dosS.,Petsonk,E.L.,Sokolow,L.Z.,Wolfe,A.L.,Pinheiro,

G.A.,Hale,andAttfield,M.D.,2005,“Rapidlyprogressivecoalworkers’pneumoconiosisintheUnitedStates:geographicandotherfactors,”Occupational Environmental Medicine2005;Vol.62,pp.670-674.

CFR,2009,“CodeofFederalRegulations,”Washington,DC:USGov-ernmentPrintingOffice,OfficeoftheFederalRegister.

Colinet,J.F.,andJankowski,R.A.,1996,“Dustcontrolconsiderationsfordeep-cutfaceswhenusingexhaustventilationandaflooded-bedscubber,”SME Transactions,Vol.302,Littleton,CO:SocietyforMining,Metallurgy,andExploration,Inc.,pp.104-111.Fields,K.G.,Atchison,D.J.,andHaney,R.A.,1990,“Evaluationofacombinedfaceventilationsystemusedwitharemotelyop-eratedminingmachine,”in:Proceedings of the 1990 International Symposium on Re-spirable Dust in the Mineral Industries,pp.349-353.Goodman, G.V.R., 2000,“Using waterspraystoimproveperformanceofaflood-ed-beddustscrubber,”Appl. Occup. Envir.

Hyg.,Vol.15,No.7,pp.550-560.Goodman,G.V.R.,andListak,J.M.,1999,“Variationindustlevelswith

continuousminerposition,”Mining Engineering,Vol.51,No.2,pp.53-59.

Goodman,G.V.R.,Beck,T.W.,andPollock,D.E.,2006,“Theeffectsofwatersprayplacementforcontrollingrespirabledustandfacemethaneconcentrations,”Journal of the Mine Ventilation Society of South Africa,April/June,pp.56-63.

Jayaraman,,N.I.,Stritzel,D.L.,andJankowski,R.A.,1987,“Improv-inghealth,safetyandproductivitythroughtheuseofmachine-mountedscrubbers,”in:Proceedings of the 95th Annual Meeting of the Illinois Mining Institute,MountVernon,IL,pp.62-75.

Jayaraman,N.I.,Volkwein,J.C.,andKissell,F.N.,1990,“Updateoncontinuousminerdustscrubberapplication,”Mining Engineering,Vol.42,No.3,pp.281-284.

Jayaraman,N.I.,Jankowski,R.A.,andWhitehead,K.L.,1992,“Opti-mizingcontinuousminerscrubbersfordustcontrolinhighcoalseams,”Proceedings of the 121st Annual SME Meeting,Phoenix,AZ,Feb.24-27,pp.193-205.

MSHA,2009,InformationprovidedbyGeorgeNiewiadomski,HealthDivision,MineSafety&HealthAdministration,Headquarters,Arlington,VA.

Myers,R.H.,andMontgomery,D.C.,1995,Response Surface Method-ology: Process and Product Optimization using Designed Experi-ments, NewYork:JohnWiley&Sons,Inc.

NIOSH,2008,Work-Related Lung Disease Surveillance Report 2007,Volume1,DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices,CentersforDiseaseControlandPrevention,NationalInstituteforOccupa-tionalSafetyandHealth,DivisionofRespiratoryDiseaseStudies,DHHS(NIOSH),PublicationNo.2008-143a.

Parobeck,P.S.,andTomb,T.F.,2000,“MSHA’sProgramstoQuantitytheCrystallineSilicaContentofRespriableMineDustSamples,”SMEpreprint00-159,SocietyforMining,Metallurgy,andExploration,Inc.,Littleton,CO.

USDepartmentofLabor,2009,MineSafetyandHealthAdministra-tion,ProgramEvaluationandInformationResources,MSHAStandardizedInformationSystems,Arlington,VA.

Volkwein,J.C.,Halfinger,G.Jr.,andThimons,E.D.,1985,“Machine-mountedscrubberhelpsventilateface,”World Mining Equipment,Vol.9,No.2,pp.15-16.

Slab cut gas concentrations.

Figure 7


Technical Papers

Breaking the ice on the booster fandilemma in US underground coal mines

by A.L. Martikainen and C.D. Taylor

Abstract n Booster fans increase air pressure to overcome resistance, the objective beingto forceadequateamountsofair throughdistantworkings.Theyareused inareas thataredifficultoruneconomictoventilatewithmainfansalone.Boosterfansarecurrentlypermittedinundergroundcoalminesinsomecountries;theUnitedKingdom,SouthAfrica,AustraliaandCanadahavebeendefinedasmajorusers.BoosterfansarenotallowedintheUSbituminousand lignite coal mining operations at the present time due to safety concerns. This paperpresentsthehistoryofboosterfanuseincoalminesoftheUnitedStatesduringthelast90years.Changesinregulations,aswellasadvantagesanddisadvantagesofboosterfanuse,arediscussed.Researchandpetitionsforboosterfanusearehighlightedinordertobringthedebateintofocus.

IntroductionIn the United States, booster fans

are permitted in metal and nonmetal (M/NM) mining, as well as in anthracite coal mines. Legislation promulgated in 1992 specifically prohibits their use in underground bituminous and lignite coal mines (Federal Register, 1992).

Currently, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is beginning a new research program that will include an investiga-tion of booster fan use as an alterna-tive to using the belt entry to supply ventilation airflow to production faces. The aim of this paper is to present a his-torical review of past experience with booster fans and discuss the safety con-

cerns and issues that may affect their use in the future.

First, it is important to understand what a booster fan is and what it is used for. The most often-mentioned attri-butes that define a booster fan are:

• Installed underground.• Installed in the main airstream

or a split of the main airstream.• Operates in combination with

the main fan(s), even if physi-cally separated.

• Used to balance pressure drops, decrease leakage and/or increase pressure to overcome resistance.

• Handles airflow of either one or several districts of the mine.

• Not used as a face fan to venti-late blind headings.

Some definitions include installa-tion in a permanent stopping or a bulk-head.

Booster fans are used in other countries, as well as in M/NM mines of the U.S., to ventilate distant work-ings. Installing booster fans is the only alternative to building more surface connections when the usual ways to in-crease ventilation, such as adding intake and return entries, larger main fans or widening shafts, are considered imprac-

tical or uneconomical. A booster fan is typically installed to overcome mine environmental conditions in which the surface fan is physically incapable of meeting the airflow requirements or when these requirements can only be fulfilled at extremely high pressures, which can cause excessive air leakage (Calizaya et al., 1988).

Regulation for the last 90 years Early 1900s. Discussions concern-

ing the safety of booster fans in under-ground coal mines resulted in initial regulations in the 1920s and were influ-enced by several accidents, fires and ex-plosions related to their use. Research was performed to study booster and auxiliary fans for the purpose of for-mulating recommendations (Horsley, 1926; Smith, 1927). In December 1928, the Mine Safety Board recommended that auxiliary fans or blowers should not be used in coal mines as a substitute for methods of regular and continuous coursing of the air to every face (Mine Safety Board, 1928).

In 1937, booster fans were ad-dressed directly for the first time (Mine Safety Board, 1937). Their use was sug-gested only where it is not practical to put down a new shaft and when the air pressure required would be so high as to prevent proper operation of under-

A.L. Martikainen, member SME, is a research engineer and C.D. Taylor is an industrial hygienist at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Pittsburgh Research Laboratory, Pittsburgh, PA. Paper number TP-09-030. Original manuscript submitted June 2009. Revised manuscript accepted for publication May 2010. Discussion of this peer-reviewed and approved paper is invited and must be submitted to SME Publications by Jan. 31, 2011.


ground ventilating doors. The reason for this recommenda-tion was that recirculation of mine air was found in most investigated installations.

The use of booster fans was regulated a year later (Fed-eral Register, 1938).

These regulations stated, in part, that “Booster and aux-iliary fans may be used underground only with the written permission of the district mining supervisor under specified conditions. With a booster fan, these conditions include pro-tection against fire, and automatic starting and timing device to prevent a fan from starting after it has been stopped long enough to permit an accumulation of gas, and a recording device to show continuity of fan operation. Also, a booster fan shall not be operated where more than 10% of the air is recirculated by the fan.”

These guidelines were added to several state laws. In some coal mining states, utilization of booster fans was fur-ther restricted by additional safety requirements.

Late 1900s and early 2000s. The Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 (Coal Act) did not specifically prohibit the use of booster fans in underground coal mines. The requirement of main fans on the surface, however, acted effectively against the use of booster fans underground (Ra-mani, 1993).

In 1989, when the U.S. Mine Safety and Health Admin-istration (MSHA) published a new proposal for coal mine ventilation rules, it provided an opportunity for revising and updating the ventilation regulations issued almost two de-cades prior, although the final rule in 1992 still does not per-mit the use of booster fans in underground bituminous and lignite coal mines. Reasons cited by MSHA include existing approval criteria, established industry practice and several safety concerns associated with such issues as recirculation, fires, fan control, noise and dust. About coal mine fans, sec-

tion 30 CFR § 75.302 states: “Each coal mine shall be venti-lated by one or more main mine fans. Booster fans shall not be installed underground to assist main mine fans except in anthracite mines.”

Several members of academia presented their opinions in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Hartman (1987) said: “Why are gassy mines restricted from using booster fans? The ra-tionale is that main fans cannot be safely operated and ad-equately controlled when located underground in flammable atmospheres. While such a claim might have been valid 40 years ago, it has no bearing today, and within 15 years, will be totally discounted. I predict that booster fans in U.S. coal mines will be legalized in the near future. Arguments in their favor are compelling. Further, no new technology is needed — computerized, remote, automated control systems of high reliability are now available and in operation in other coun-tries. The exclusion of main fans underground compels venti-lation engineers to overregulate mines in an effort to balance disparate ventilation circuits — resulting in excessive energy waste, air leakage, insufficient air delivery to some working faces and generally less efficient and effective air distribution throughout our mines.”

McPherson (1991) continued: “At the present time, at-tempts to install booster fans in U.S. coal mines are effective-ly blocked by MSHA and proposals have been promulgated to render booster fans illegal. If this prohibition becomes law, then our underground coal mining industry would be de-nied a powerful and efficient means of improving the health and safety of mine workers — a means that has long been employed successfully in other coal mining countries. Where incidents have occurred historically, they have arisen from misuse or mismanagement of equipment.”

Ramani (1993) concluded: “The restriction on booster fan use reduces flexibility in mine system design and op-eration. As depths to coal seams increase, as panels become

Ventilation system of the North Goonyella Mine prior to booster fan installation (Marlborough, 2003).

Figure 1


larger and wider and as rates of productivity inch higher, the difficulty of designing coal mine ventilation systems with fans located only on the surface must surely increase. Without approval of booster fans in underground mines on an experi-mental basis, data and experience in U.S. coal mines will not be developed.”

Legislation in countries permitting the use of booster fans in underground coal mines. In the United Kingdom, where booster fans are commonly used in underground coal mines, the law requires booster fan installations to be examined every 30 minutes and to have basic monitoring information recorded every two hours. The Office of Health and Safety Executive (HSE) can issue exemptions from the require-ments and, in return, it may impose conditions (Leeming, 2008).

In South Africa, the regulation concerning main fans ap-plies also to booster fans. Monitoring and early warning of defective operation are required. Every booster fan has to be examined for effective operation at intervals not exceed-ing three months. Power supply has to be provided from two different sources. Booster fans have to be installed, oper-ated and maintained in accordance with a written procedure prepared and implemented for that purpose (van Zyl, 2008).

In Australia, the states have independent mine safety reg-ulations. The large underground coal operations with possible interest in booster fans are located mainly in Queensland and New South Wales. In Queensland (Queensland Consolidated Regulations, 2001), at least one methane monitor must be lo-cated near the fan to warn workers if concentrations exceed 1.25% and to shut the fan down if concentrations exceed 2.0%. Standard procedures for each fan include procedures to be followed when the fan activates an alarm. In addition to monitoring the fan’s static pressure, mine operators must be sure to continuously monitor other fan operating condi-

tions. Only specifically designated persons are permitted to start, stop or alter the fan. As an example, the ventilation system of the North Goonyella coal mine is presented in Figs. 1 and 2 (before and after booster fan installation).

The legislation of New South Wales (New South Wales government, 2006) states that the operator of an underground mine must ensure that any auxiliary ventilation fan used in the underground parts of a mine is located and operated in such a manner as to prevent recirculation of air through the fan. Also, installation of a booster fan is considered a high-risk activity and requires a three-month waiting period prior to use. Information that is required to be submitted includes the fan location and a ventilation plan that summarizes the risks and controls to be put into place to operate the fan.

Federal regulations in Canada are no longer in effect. Instead, individual Canadian provinces have regulations con-cerning booster fans. Current and potential underground coal mining operations are located in British Columbia, Alberta and Nova Scotia (Bonnell, 2008).

In British Columbia, a pressure quantity survey is re-quired to determine the necessity for a booster fan, the ex-pected performance range, an adequate location and the fan’s effect on the rest of the ventilation survey. Also, an employer must ensure that a booster fan is located in such a manner that, if it stops, the free passage of ventilating air to or from a main fan will be restricted as little as reason-ably practicable. These requirements are stated also in Nova Scotia’s regulations (Nova Scotia Regulations, 2009). In ad-dition to these regulations, booster fan controls have to be protected and sufficiently remote from the fan locations. Main fan, booster fan and associated equipment have to be inspected at least once a week. Main and booster fans with a capacity of 37 kW (50 hp) or more have to be inspected for overheating of bearings or fan failure at least every 30 minutes if the fans are not continuously monitored for these

Figure 2Ventilation system of the North Goonyella Mine after booster fan installation (Marlborough, 2003).


issues and at least every eight hours if they are continuously monitored. The competent person who inspects the fans and equipment must prepare a report of the inspection.

It is required by Alberta regulations that the free passage of air delivered by a main fan is not restricted if the booster fan stops. If the main fan stops, the booster fan must also stop.

The International Labour Office (ILO, 2009) presents several recommendations concerning the safe use of booster fans in underground coal mines:

• Fans must be installed and operated without detri-ment to the safety and health of employees.

• A ventilation survey by a qualified person is required prior to installation.

• The fan must conform to standards for inspection, monitoring, maintenance and use.

• The fan should be equipped with safety and opera-tional efficiency monitoring devices with alerts for reduced ventilation, air reversal, dangerous gases, fires or electrical disruptions.

• Fans must be approved by a competent authority.

In addition to these guidelines, it is suggested that the manager of the mine formulate booster fan rules, add them to the ventilation plan and post them at a conspicuous place at the mine. This step is recommended where national laws, regulations and standards do not provide, or provide ineffec-tive or outdated, guidance on ventilation.

Advantages and disadvantages of booster fansAdvantages of booster fans. There are several ways of

gaining advantage from the use of a booster fan. Even if booster fans are not suitable for every situation, they are capable of providing improvements in various underground environments when properly sized and located (Calizaya et al., 1988; Calizaya et al., 1990; McPherson, 2009). Booster fans can be used to:

• Improve the airflow distribution in the mine, espe-cially in difficult-to-ventilate areas.

• Increase flow rates in high-resistance circuits.• Provide air to areas with difficult surface conditions

(such as mining sections under water).• Reduce air pressure differentials between intake and

return airways.• Reduce leakage between intake and return airways.• Reduce overall power costs.• Reduce development costs.• Decrease main fan pressure requirements.• During mine fires, prevent smoke from entering in-

take airways.

As an underground coal mine becomes older or larger, a significant portion of the fresh air is short-circuited through leakage paths. In large mines, high pressure differentials required to move air to faces can result in considerable air flow losses through stoppings. However, air leakage in a mine can be controlled by the addition of pressure sources in the form of underground booster fans (Moll and Lowndes, 1994).

There are several ways to enhance the safety of booster fans. They can be equipped with electrical interlocks wired

directly to the surface fan power circuit to avoid inadver-tent recirculation caused by the stoppage of main surface fans while the underground fans are still operating. Modern monitoring systems can be used to collect data and to exer-cise booster fan control. The parameters monitored at or near a booster fan may include methane, carbon monoxide, air velocity and pressure, fan speed, vibration, motor and im-peller bearing temperatures and electric power (Calizaya et al., 1990). It is also possible to separate the fan and the motor from each other to reduce fire and explosion risks.

The usual guidelines followed in the mines to avert inci-dents associated with booster fans are based on Kumar and Sastry (1997):

• An effective mine communication system.• Well-planned emergency/ evacuation plans.• Continuous monitoring of mine environment.• Use of fireproof materials with the booster fans.• Simulation studies to assess the effects of stoppage

of fans in the mine and/or closure of airways due to roof falls.

• Proper selection and location of booster fans.

Disadvantages of booster fans. Section 75.302 of the 1992 regulations requires all main mine fans to be installed on the surface. According to an MSHA proposed decision and or-der (PDO) regarding a petition to allow the use of a booster fan in an underground bituminous coal mine, this regulation serves to protect main mine fans from fires and damage, so that in the event of an underground explosion ventilation can be maintained (Langton, 2003). Several other safety concerns are also listed in the mine-specific PDO regarding the pro-posed use of a booster fan:

• Booster fans reduce the ability to control recircula-tion of air underground.

• If an underground main mine fan is damaged, boost-er fans limit opportunities to restore ventilation to specific areas.

• If it is necessary to remove electricity from an area, ventilation can be interrupted.

• A fire or explosion can make it impossible to control the booster fan in order to adjust ventilation in spe-cific areas of the mine.

• Booster fans can also increase noise, respirable dust and float coal mine dust levels.

Other possible disadvantages, described by Calizaya et al. (1990) and Brake and Nixon (2006) include:

• Problems in case of main fan/booster fan stoppage.• Complexity of the ventilation system and its man-

agement.• Inappropriate use of a booster fan that may result in

increased operating costs and/or increased leakage.

Unplanned, uncontrolled recirculation is the most promi-nent potential drawback of booster fan utilization. When booster fans are not designed, installed, located or operated correctly, the possibility of uncontrolled recirculation exists. If the supply of fresh air is not maintained at a minimum


level, then uncontrolled recirculation may cause an increase of contaminant concentrations to unacceptable levels.

Another issue often mentioned is the question: What happens if the booster fan/main fan stops? The effect of these stoppages should be studied and taken into account in plan-ning. Minimum required airflows have to be maintained at all times. The consequences of either the main fan or the booster fan going into stall should also be studied during the initial design of a booster fan setup. Regulation concerning booster fans in M/NM mines in the U.S. requires interlocking, so stalling does not present a problem. A similar requirement for booster fans could be implemented in coal mines.

The overall capital costs of a combined surface-booster fan system may be greater than that of a larger surface fan alternative, due to the need for additional underground ex-cavation and a monitoring system. Also, a badly positioned booster fan can exacerbate leakage problems.

Research in the USResearch programs. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and

State University studied the optimization of multiple fan systems that included booster fans. A critical path-crashing technique to optimize multiple fan ventilation systems with booster fans was introduced first (Bhamidipati and Topuz, 1983). Further research by Wu and Topuz (1987, 1989) de-scribes other techniques, like linear programming, the out-of-kilter method and the network simplex method. Based on these studies, the optimal methodology is developed and examples presented by Wu et al. (1991). The authors reported that computer software based on the methodology would be developed, but no further studies were forthcoming. This may be due to the change in regulations that occurred in 1992.

The largest single effort to study booster fans in the U.S. was performed as a contract under a grant from the U.S. Bu-reau of Mines in 1985. The research started with an extensive survey on the use of booster fans. The study showed that 318 booster fan installations were located in underground coal mines worldwide, with the United Kingdom being the major user, followed by South Africa and Canada (McPherson et al., 1985). Also, a study concerning the attitudes toward the use of booster fans in the coal mining industry of the U.S. was conducted. It was found that out of the represented coal mines, 42% were interested in installing booster fans. Out of the uninterested operations, 52% considered the risk of re-circulation to be the primary reason for not taking an interest in using booster fans and only 6% pointed out other primary reasons (McPherson et al., 1985).

The study was expanded in the late 1980s to include booster fans and regulators at fixed locations and to minimize the overall power consumption. The problem was studied by Calizaya et al. (1987) using the commercially available ventilation simulator VNETPC. A computer program called MFSELECT was developed to determine the fans and regu-lators that would fulfill the airflow requirements of a mine and minimize the total power consumption. The application of the program was illustrated by a detailed solution of a sample problem based on the Jim Walter Resources’ No. 7 Mine. This solution described the basic requirements for the design and operation of booster fans and showed their potential benefits (Calizaya et al., 1987; Calizaya et al., 1988; Calizaya and Mousset-Jones, 1989; Calizaya et al., 1990).

Effect of longwall mining on booster fan research. What suddenly initiated this research in the 1980s after so many quiet decades? It can be speculated that the resurgence re-sulted from increasing longwall productivity in the U.S. in the 1980s and the increasing airflow requirements needed to control the resultant dusts and gases. The limited number of airways in longwall mining requires high ventilation pres-sures to overcome the resistance.

Nationally, longwall mines produced 126 Mt (139 million st) of coal in 1993, or 75% more than in 1983. In contrast, total underground coal production increased by only 17% throughout the same period. By 1993, longwall mines ac-counted for 40% of underground coal production (Fig. 3), up from 27% in 1983 (Energy Information Administration, 1995). In 2003, already more than half of the total under-ground coal production occurred in longwall mines (National Mining Association, 2008).

Petitions from industryPetition process. Under section 101 of the Federal Mine

Safety and Health Act of 1977, a mine operator may petition and the Secretary of Labor may modify the application of a mandatory safety standard, such as § 75.302, to a mine if the secretary determines that:

1. An alternative method exists that will guarantee no less protection for the miners affected than that pro-vided by the standard; or

2. that the application of the standard will result in a diminution of safety to the affected miners.

MSHA bases the final decision on the petitioner’s state-ments, any comments and information submitted by inter-ested persons and a field investigation of the conditions at the mine. In some instances, MSHA may approve a petition for modification on the condition that the mine operator complies with other requirements noted in the decision.

To date, there have been two petitions filed by mine op-erators to use booster fans in underground bituminous mines. In both cases, MSHA determined the proposals did not pro-vide at least the same level of protection as the standard.

No. 7 Mine, AL. In 1985, Jim Walter Resources Inc. (JWR) noticed that additional ventilation capacity was re-quired to mine a remote block of its No. 7 Mine in Alabama. Its personnel studied the situation and the review process indicated that either a 7-m (23-ft) intake airshaft or a 746-

Longwall mine production in the U.S. in years 1983, 1993 and 2003 (1000 short tons).

Figure 3


kW (1,000-hp) underground booster fan installed in the east main intake would satisfy the predicted airflow requirement.

A petition for modification to operate an underground booster fan was submitted to MSHA on June 11, 1986. It included safety features, such as electrical interlocking, in-dependent power supply and remote atmospheric monitor-ing and was based on references obtained from the UK and Australia. The potential for recirculation of air through the fan was given as a primary reason for denial of the plan after evaluation by MSHA.

JWR developed an improved plan. Various booster fan locations were simulated in search of a more suitable fan site. This defined a new location, in which a fan equipped with a 298-kW (400-hp) motor would fulfill the ventilation requirements. The simulations indicated that under normal operating conditions the pressure differentials would be from intake to return at all locations, so recirculation conditions would not exist. Events of booster fan failure and shutdown were also simulated with favorable results. The new plan was proposed to MSHA on June 2, 1987. Safety considerations, like fireproof housing of the motor, transformer and starter, and a fire-sensing system with dry powder extinguishers, were included in the plan. Also, the booster fan would have been attached to a separate power circuit from the surface through a borehole. It was also noted that the booster fan would be located in a main return, away from the working face and, thus, dust and noise were not considered to be a problem (Sartain and Stevenson, 1988).

The new plan was inspected by MSHA. Ventilation engi-neers from the MSHA Technical Support Center performed a detailed ventilation survey of the mine in November 1988. However, the plan failed to convince MSHA and the booster fan petition was later denied again (McNider, 2008).

Loveridge No. 22 Mine, WV. On Sept. 15, 2003, Consoli-dation Coal Co. filed a petition for modification of 30 CFR 75.302 at the Loveridge No. 22 Mine in West Virginia. The petition described an alternate method that would allow use of an auxiliary fan to prevent the freezing of the slope dur-ing the winter months. Safety considerations in the petition included fireproof housing, an automatic fire suppression system, CO, temperature and vibration monitors and daily inspection.

MSHA pointed out after the investigation that the auxil-iary slope fan would be used to improve or augment ventila-tion in a segment of the mine. Consequently, the auxiliary slope fan was in reality a booster fan. Simulations demon-strated that major ventilation changes occurred when the auxiliary slope fan stopped. Slope ventilation reversed and the intake at one of the shafts decreased by 53,000 cfm.

In addition, MSHA determined several safety issues that were not addressed by the plan, such as vulnerability to dam-age from a major mine fire, lack of an independent power cir-cuit and no means to start or stop the fan remotely from the surface. Also, MSHA pointed out a mine fire accident that had happened in early 2003, in which a similar fan installation had hampered firefighting efforts. For the reasons described above, MSHA concluded that the alternative method would

not at all times guarantee no less than the same measure of protection afforded the miners under 30 CFR 75.302, so the petition was denied (Langton, 2003).

ConclusionsIt can be seen that the interest in booster fan use in un-

derground coal mines of the U.S. has fluctuated during the last 90 years. Booster fan research essentially stopped in 1992, following the final coal mine ventilation rule that out-lawed booster fans. The booster fan issue was reopened in the search for alternatives to belt air during the Technical Study Panel meetings in 2007 (Anon, 2007). Use of booster fans was presented as one of the three recommended re-search topics in the Final Report of the Technical Study Panel on Utilization of Belt Air and the Composition and Fire Re-tardant Properties of Belt Materials in Underground Coal Mining (Mutmansky et al., 2007). The MSHA response to the report (Federal Register, 2008), released in June 2008, did not address the research recommendations. However, in the text MSHA noted the need to maintain the pressure differ-ential from the primary escapeway to the belt air course to prevent the leakage of contaminants to the escapeway in the event of a fire. This pressure differential could theoretically be achieved by using a booster fan.

Since the passage of the regulation in 1992, several safety improvements have become available. Use of separate pow-er circuits, AMS improvements and wireless communication technology can make a difference in the safety of booster fan use. Also, the research, experiences and regulations of other countries can present important comparisons for the potential application of booster fan use in the U.S.

However, under current regulations, booster fan research in the U.S. will be challenging, due to nonexistent options for field studies in coal mines. Computer simulations, labora-tory studies and comparisons to M/NM mine practices are expected to be the main research tools to evaluate booster fans’ possible safety advantages. These studies will include ventilation network simulations of underground operations to evaluate their ability to assist in defining the safest and most feasible locations for booster fans. Safety concerns will be addressed by comparing and evaluating current practices and fan monitoring systems. Finally, the impacts of existing domestic and international booster fan safety regulations will be reviewed for relevance to U.S. mining conditions. n

AcknowledgmentsAll companies and individuals who have provided infor-

mation are greatly appreciated. The authors especially wish to thank Mr. Tom McNider for valuable comments and Dr. Gerrit Goodman, Dr. Jürgen Brune and Mr. Chris Pritchard for providing feedback.

DisclosureThe findings and conclusions in this report are those of

the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Mention of any company or product does not constitute en-dorsement by NIOSH.


ReferencesAnon., 2007, “Transcripts of the public meeting,” Washington, DC, Heri-

tage Reporting Corporation, 381-572, http://www.msha.gov/Bel-tAir/hearingtranscript20070918.pdf.

Bhamidipati, S., and Topuz, E., 1983, “A critical path crashing technique to optimize multiple fan ventilation systems,” Preprint, SME-AIME Annual Meeting, Atlanta, Georgia.

Bonnell, G., 2008, Personal communication.Brake, D.J., and Nixon, C.A., 2006, “Design and operational aspects in

the use of booster, circuit and auxiliary fan systems,” Proceedings of the 11th U.S./North American Mine Ventilation Symposium, Penn State University, University Park, PA, pp. 543-553.

Calizaya F., McPherson, M.J., and Mousset-Jones, P., 1987, “An algorithm for selecting the optimum combination of main and booster fans in underground mines,” Proceedings of the 3rd Mine Ventilation Sym-posium, Penn State University, University Park, PA, pp. 408-417.

Calizaya, F., McPherson, M.J., and Mousset-Jones, P., 1988, “Guidelines for implementing a booster fan monitoring and control system in coal mines,” Proceedings of the 4th US Mine Ventilation Sympo-sium, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, pp. 382-391.

Calizaya, F., and Mousset-Jones, P., 1989, “The use of booster fans in underground coal mines,” Seventh Annual Workshop, Generic Min-eral Technology Center, Mine Systems Design and Ground Control, Blacksburg, VA, pp. 105-116.

Calizaya, F., McPherson, M.J., and Mousset-Jones, P., 1990, “The use of booster fans in underground coal mines,” Final Report, U.S. Bureau of Mines Grant No. G1125151, February, OFR Rpt. No.12-90.

Energy Information Administration, 1995, “Longwall mining,” DOE/EIA-TR-0588, Distribution Category UC-950, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/ftproot/coal/tr0588.pdf.

Federal Register, 1938, Vol. 3, Feb. 25.Federal Register, 1992, 30 CFR Parts 70 and 75, Vol. 57, No. 95 / Friday,

May 15 / Safety Standards for Underground Coal Mine Ventilation; Rule: 20867-20913. http://www.msha.gov/30cfr/75.302.htm.

Federal Register, 2008, Safety Standards Regarding the Recommenda-tions of the Technical Study Panel on the Utilization of Belt Air and the Composition and Fire Retardant Properties of Belt Materials in Underground Coal Mining; Conveyor Belt Combustion Toxic-ity and Smoke Density; Proposed Rules, Mine Safety and Health Administration, 34 pp.

Hartman, H.L., 1987, “Mine ventilation, the last forty years and the next fifteen,” Proceedings of the 3rd U.S. Mine Ventilation Symposium, Penn State University, University Park, PA, pp. 393-397.

Horsley, J.A.B., 1926, “Electrical Installations in Mines,” Iron & Coal Trades Review, Vol. 113, No. 940.

International Labour Office (ILO), 2009, “Safety and health in under-ground coal mines,” ILO Code of Practice, Geneva, 354 pp.

Kumar, G.V., and Sastry, V.R., 1997, “Selection of optimum combination of surface and booster fans,” Proceedings of the 27th International Conference of Safety, Vol. I, pp. 311-317.

Langton, J.F., 2003, “Proposed decision and order. Petition for modifica-tion in the matter of Consolidation Coal Company Loveridge No 22 Mine,” MSHA Docket No M-2003-069-C. http://www.msha.gov/readroom/petitions/2003-069.75.302%20with%20sol%20chang-es%2011%2021%2003%20.pdf.

Leeming, B., 2008, Personal communication. Marlborough, L., 2003, “The installation of underground booster fans at

North Goonyella coal mine,” ACARP Gas and Outburst Workshop, http://outburst.uow.edu.au/html/outburst_pres.html.

McNider, T., 2008, Personal communication. McPherson, M.J., 1991, “Booster fans and recirculation of air in coal

mines,” American Mining Congress Coal Convention And Longwall Usa International Exhibition And Conference, pp. 21-47.

McPherson, M.J., 2009, Subsurface Ventilation Engineering, Second Edi-tion, Fresno, California, Omnipress, 824 pp.

McPherson, M.J., Dhar, N., and Mousset-Jones, P., 1985, “A survey of booster fan use in underground mines,” 3rd Annual Workshop, Generic Mineral Technology Center, Blacksburg, VA, pp. 173-191.

Mine Safety Board, 1928, Recommendations of the Bureau of Mines on Certain Questions of Mine Safety, BuMines IC 609, 12 pp.

Mine Safety Board, 1937, Recommendations of the United States Bureau of Mines on Certain Questions of Safety as of October 1, 1936, Bu-Mines IC 6946, 46 pp.

Moll, A.T.J., and Lowndes, I.S., 1994, “Approach to the optimization of multi-fan ventilation,” Journal of the Mine Ventilation Society of South Africa, Vol. 47, No. 1, pp. 2-18.

Mutmansky, J.M., Brune, J.F, Calizaya, F., Mucho, T.P., Tien, J.C., and Weeks, J.L., 2007, “Final report of the technical study panel on the utilization of the belt air and the composition and fire retar-dant properties of belt materials in underground coal mining,” December, 131 pp. http://www.msha.gov/BeltAir/BeltAirFinalRe-port122007.pdf.

National Mining Association, 2008, “Most requested statistics - U.S. Coal Industry,” http://www.nma.org/pdf/c_most_requested.pdf.

New South Wales Government, 2006, “Coal Mine Health and Safe-ty Regulation 2006,” http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/viewtop/inforce/subordleg+783+2006+cd+0+N/?dq=Regulations%20under%20Coal%20Mine%20Health%20and%20Safety%20Act%202002%20No%20129.

Nova Scotia, 2009, Underground Mining Regulations, Occupational Health and Safety Act, S.N.S. 1996, c. 7, Booster fans, http://www.gov.ns.ca/just/regulations/regs/ohsmine.htm#TOC2_220.

Queensland Consolidated Regulations, 2001. “Coal Mining Safety and Health Regulation 2001,” Sections 231 and 358, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_reg/.

Ramani, R.V., 1993, “Current Issues in US mine ventilation,” Proceed-ings of the 6th US Mine Ventilation Symposium, Vol. 45, No. 10, pp. 1262-1265.

Sartain, T.L., and Stevenson, J.W., 1988, “Jim Walter Resources Inc.’s booster fan proposal – a case study,” Proceedings of the 4th US Mine Ventilation Symposium, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, pp. 363-369.

Smith, H.I., 1927, “Use and dangers of booster and auxiliary fans as applied to coal mine ventilation,” AIME Transactions, New York Meeting, Vol. 75, pp. 629-641.

van Zyl, K., 2008, Personal communication.Wu, X., and Topuz, E., 1987, “The determination of booster fan locations

in underground mines,” Proceedings of the 3rd Mine Ventilation Symposium, pp. 401-407.

Wu, X., and Topuz, E., 1989, “Comparison of methods for determination of booster fan locations in underground mines,” Proceedings of the 4th Mine Ventilation Symposium, pp. 355-362.

Wu, X., Topuz, E., and Karfakis, M., 1991, “Optimization of ventilation control device locations and sizes in underground mine ventilation systems,” Proceedings of the 5th US Mine Ventilation Symposium, pp. 391-399.


Coming Events

Upcoming SME Events

For additional information, Contact: Meetings Dept., SMEPhone 800-763-3132 • 303-948-4200 • Fax 303-979-3461 • E-mail: [email protected] • www.smenet.org

October 201024-27 • MEMO 2010Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON, CanadaPhone 514-939-2710 • Fax: 514-939-2714E-mail: [email protected]/calendar

26-27 • Fluorspar ‘10InterContinental Presidente Hotel, Mexico City, Mexico Phone: 440 20 7779 7999 • Fax: 440 20 7779 8294 E-mail: [email protected]

28-29 • SME/PCMIA Annual Joint MeetingHilton Garden Inn, Southpointe Canonsburg, PA, USAPhone: 412-835-7387E-mail: [email protected]/pcmia/pcmia_index.htm

November 20101-4 • 2010 Arizona Hydrological Society SymposiumWestin LaPaloma, Tucson, AZ, USAPhone: 480-270-4937E-mail: [email protected]/index.html

4-6 • Emerging Leaders Alliance US Capstone 2010Renaissance Stapleton, Denver, CO, USAE-mail: [email protected]

8-9 • Bio-Hydromet ‘10Vineyard Hotel, Claremont, Cape Town, South AfricaPhone: 44 7768 234121 • Fax: 44 1326 318352E-mail: [email protected]/biohydromet10

8-11 • Mineral Project Evaluation Techniques and ApplicationsMcGill University, Montreal, PQ, CanadaPhone: 514-398-4755 • Fax: 514-398-7099E-mail: [email protected]/mcgill/#Nov_8-11_2010

10-12 • Automining 2010Sheraton Santiago Hotel and Convention Center, Santiago, ChilePhone: 56-2 6521555 • Fax: 56-2 6521570E-mail: [email protected]

Arizona ConferenceDecember 5-6, 2010Hilton El Conquistador ResortTucson, AZ, USA

15-19 • Economic Evaluation and Investment Decision MethodsColorado School of Mines, Golden, CO, USAPhone: 303-273-3221, 800-446-9488 • Fax: 303-273-3314E-mail: [email protected]://outreach.mines.edu/cont_ed/econeval.shtml

18-20 • Manitoba Mining and Minerals Convention 2010Winnipeg Convention Center Winnipeg, MB, CanadaPhone: 800-223-5215, 204-945-6558 • Fax: 204-945-1406E-mail: [email protected]

22-25 • Quebec Exploration 2010, Creating Collective WealthFairmont Chateau Frontenac Hotel, Quebec, PQ, CanadaPhone: 418-627-6392 • Fax: 418-643-2816E-mail: [email protected]

23-26 • Mine Closure 2010Sheraton Miramar Hotel and Convention Center, Vina del Mar, ChilePhone: 56-2 652 1519E-mail: [email protected]

December 20101-3 • Mine Planning and Equipment Selection MPES 2010Esplanade Hotel, Freemantle, WAS, AustraliaPhone: 61 396586105 • Fax: 61 9662 3662E-mail [email protected]/MPES2010

4 • American Mining Hall of Fame and Museum BanquetTucson Marriott University Park Hotel, Tucson, AZ, USAPhone: 520-577-7519 • Fax: 520-577-7073E-mail [email protected]

8-10 • Procemin 2010Sheraton Santiago Hotel and Convention Center, Santiago, ChilePhone: 56-2 6521555 • Fax: 56-2 6521570E-mail: [email protected]

February 20117-9 • Arctic Technology ConferenceGeorge R. Brown Convention Center, Houston, TX, USA Phone: 888-945-2274 ext. 617E-mail: [email protected] n

Dreyer ConferenceOctober 10-12, 2010Westin Chicago River North HotelChicago, IL, USA

George A. Fox ConferenceJanuary 26, 2011Graduate Center City University of New York New York, NY, USA


SME NewsSME Foundation

SME Newscontents56YoungLeaders’MentorProgram

57KrumbLecturers

59NSSGACompetition

63Obituaries

McIntoshEngineeringscholarship;SME Foundation presents six scholarships


Robert Burns (r) receives a McIntosh scholarship check from R. Larry Grayson (l), professor at Penn State and SME student chapter sponsor.

In May of this year, the SME Foundation (SMEF) in-troduced the McIntosh Engineering Scholarship, a new

undergraduate scholarship made possible by a generous do-nation from Scott McIntosh and the McIntosh Engineering Group. The McIntosh Scholarship is awarded annually to up to six promising undergraduate students entering their junior year of an accredited undergraduate degree pro-gram in mining engineering with a focus on underground mining. The McIntosh Engineering Scholarship is a renew-able scholarship with total potential funding of $12,000 per student — $5,000 for the junior year and, subject to renewal approval, an additional $7,000 for the senior year. The selection of scholarship recipients and the approval of scholarship renewals are at the discretion of the McIntosh Engineering Scholarship Committee.

Scholarship recipientsRichard Boakye-Yiadom is a junior in the University of

Utah’s mining engineering program. He is from Ghana. His country’s long history in mining and the recent renewed activity there influenced his decision to become a mining engineer. He has interned with the Horizon coal mine near Price, UT, where he was the assistant surveyor and complet-ed timing studies on current and future working sections. He plans to specialize in mine administration and pursue graduate studies.

Robert Burns is a junior mining engineering student at The Pennsylvania State University. He has been active in the Penn State Mining Society SME student chapter. Dur-

ing the past two summers and school breaks, he worked with Consol Energy, primarily at the Enlow Fork Mine and on the Bailey Mine expansion. Upon completion of his un-dergraduate education at Penn State, he plans to further his education with an M.B.A.

Brandon Burton is a junior in the Southern Illinois University-Carbondale mining engineering program. Prior to beginning his studies, he served on active duty in the U.S. Navy from 2001 to 2006. He completed a summer intern-ship at Freeport-McMoRan’s mine in Morenci, AZ, where he worked with the slope stability department.

Andrew Goderwis is junior in the Mining Engineering Department at the University of Kentucky (UK). He is an officer in the Norwood student chapter of SME and the president of the UK Engineering Student Council. He has completed internships with Nally and Gibson, a crushed limestone operation in cen-tral Kentucky; at Consol Energy’s Bailey longwall operation in western Penn-sylvania and with Peabody Energy, where he worked throughout the Midwestern United States.

Paul Phillips is a junior majoring in mining and min-erals engineering at Virginia Tech. He spent a summer at Resolution Copper in Supe-rior, AZ where he performed technical engineering proj-ects, such as redesigning the

At the University of Kentucky, Rick Honaker (l), Mining Department chair and professor, and Andrzej Wala (r), professor, present a McIntosh scholarship to Andrew Goderwis (c).

By Tessa Baxter, SME Division and Section Coordinator


SME NewsSME Young Leaders


Student Mentoring Program;Be a part of the future

With SME’s 2011 Annual Meeting right around the corner, it is time for students and professionals to

sign up for this year’s mentor program. I was challenged by my peers within the Young Leaders Committee last year to be a part of the mentor program. I found it to be a rewarding experience and one that I look forward to being a part of this year, as well. I would like to fill you in on my experience.

I first participated in the mentor program when I was a sophomore in college majoring in mining engineering. I found that being matched with the right mentor was the key to having a valuable and educational experience. To find that match, you need to submit your student applica-tion early and take the time to think through in what sector of the mining world you would like your mentor to work. As a student at the meeting, I was there to experience all that the industry had to offer. I did not have any vendors to talk to about upcoming projects or any meetings to at-tend to further SME’s mission. I found that touring the conference hall, attending section meetings and just joining my mentor for dinner was a way to show me the value of attending the conference and being a member of SME be-yond college. It was also a great way to make contacts as a student and get information on potential employers.

As a professional submitting an application to be a mentor, I found that it was also important to submit the application as early as possible to allow time to match me

with the right mentoree. I had to take a little extra time to fill out one more page during registration, and it was worth it. I was able to take my mentoree around the hall and meet the vendors I deal with in the field. It also al-lowed time to discuss any questions that they had about what I do and about the transition to being a professional.

The Young Leaders arranged a group dinner with our mentorees that was a lot of fun. The group dinner al-lowed time for us to interact with other mentorees in the program and to share more about what our jobs were and what our companies had to offer. The mentor program is also a great way to look for a student who may be inter-ested in a summer internship with your company or even full-time employment in your sector of the industry. It was an experience that only requires as much time as you allow. And it can continue beyond the SME meeting and into the future.

The mentor program is a way for professionals to be involved with the students at the meeting and share the experiences we have with those who are new to SME and to our corner of the world. If you would like more infor-mation on the mentor program, please visit the mentor program page on the SME website, www.smenet.org/men-tor or contact Mona Vandervoort, Education Coordinator, at 303-948-4227, e-mail [email protected]. I am also available to answer questions at [email protected]. n

New student section at University of PittsburghBy Susan B. Bealko, chair, SME Pittsburgh Section

The SME Pittsburgh Local Section is pleased to an-nounce that a new student chapter has been founded

within the geographical boundaries of the section. The new University of Pittsburgh SME student chapter held its kick-off meeting on March 16, 2010 at the Pitt Student Union on the Oakland Campus in Pittsburgh, PA. This exciting event included a social hour with snacks, refreshments, a silent auction and a technical presentation on the Shoe-maker Mine renovation project given by four prominent engineers from Consol Energy. The speakers and topics were: Joseph C. Wilcox, P.E., introduction to the Shoemaker Project; Adrienne Carney, P.E., underground rehabilitation/

Consol Energy engineers share their knowledge and experiences at the University of Pittsburgh kickoff meeting for the new SME student chapter.

By Abram Woodward, Student Relations chair, SME Young Leaders Committee


SME NewsSME Krumb Lecturers

The Henry Krumb Lecture series was established in 1966 so that local SME sections could hear prominent minerals professionals speak on subjects in which they had recognized expertise. Henry Krumb, a 1897 graduate of the Co-

lumbia School of Mines, had an interest in engineering education and improving the status of the mining profession. He anonymously established an endowment fund “for any purpose that is for the benefit of the Institute (AIME).”

The 2010-2011 Henry Krumb lecturers are profiled below. To request a lecturer to speak at one of your local section meetings, visit www.smenet.org, click sections, click Krumb Lecture Series and fill out the lecture request form.

If you have any questions, please call Tessa Baxter at 303-948-4208.

SME announces the 2010-2011

HenryKrumblecturers

David Armstrong is an associate professor and chair of the Department of Mining Engineering at Montana Tech in Butte, MT. Prior to coming to Montana Tech, he worked for 36 years in the mining industry in a variety of engineer-ing and management positions. He began work as a systems engineer in the exploration group at Amax and moved up to chief mine engineer. Since leaving Amax, he worked in Tucson, AZ for Mintec, Magma Copper and BHP, and in Phoenix, AZ for Phelps Dodge. His primary experience is in mine planning and reserve estimation. He received B.S. and M.S. degrees in mathematics from the Colorado School of Mines and an M.B.A. from the University of Denver. He is a registered member of SME and a fellow of AusIMM. He has been on the SME Resources and Reserves Com-mittee since 1997. He is a licensed professional engineer in Montana.

DAVID ARMSTRONGDifferent Techniques for Classifying Mineral Resources

Different Techniques for Classifying Mineral Resources

One of the necessary steps in min-eral resource modeling and reporting is to classify the mineral resource into the classes of measured, indicated and inferred. This classification can be based on manual, mechanical or mathemati-cal methods. Practitioners have favorite methods of making this breakout so they can move on to feasibility reports and mine planning and, later, into reporting to regulatory authorities. The different methods give different results and these results can be substantial. This lecture presents the standard ways industry does this classification and discusses the advantages and problems of the many methods.

ARMSTRONG

Michael Karmis is the Stonie Barker professor in the Department of Mining and Minerals Engineering and the di-rector of the Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research at Virginia Tech. His expertise is in the areas of rock mechan-ics, health and safety, carbon sequestration and the sustain-able development of energy and mineral resources. He has written more than 150 scientific papers, reports, proceedings volumes and textbooks. He has directed 45 major research projects. He has also been recognized as an outstanding teacher and has received numerous Certificates of Teaching Excellence and other teaching commendations.

Karmis has been active in consulting with the minerals industry, consulting companies, government organizations and legal firms. He served as the 2002 president of SME and as the 2009 president of AIME. He was elected as the 2002 president of the Society of Mining Professors and has served as its secretary general since 2005. He is a Distinguished Member of the SME, an Honorary Member of AIME, a fellow of the Institute of Quarrying and a Fellow of the In-stitute of Materials, Minerals and Mining. He has received

MICHAEL KARMISCarbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Research: The Road to Deployment

numerous awards from scientific, profes-sional and industrial organizations.

Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Re-search: The Road to Deployment

Any reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to meet proposed or planned climate change will require the develop-ment and deployment of CO2 capture and storage technologies. Such technolo-gies are needed, in combination with other mitigation mea-sures, to achieve the necessary stabilization in anthropogenic emissions. National and global efforts in CCS research are intensive, multi-stakeholder and comprehensive, ranging from basic research to deployment scale demonstrations. In addition to technological developments, a number of other barriers to CCS are also addressed: legal, regulatory and financial barriers; availability of financial incentives; and public acceptance concerns. This lecture presents a status of CCS on the road to deployment.

KARMIS



MARK A. SMITHMolycorp Minerals, Mountain Pass Rare Earth Operations

Mark A. Smith is chief executive officer, a member of the board of directors and a shareholder of Molycorp Minerals headquartered in Greenwood Village, CO. The company owns and operates a rare-earth mine and pro-cessing facilities in Mountain Pass, CA, where it produces various forms of rare earth products for sale. Molycorp

John Shively first went to Alaska in 1965 as a VISTA volunteer. What start-ed as a one-year assignment, turned into a career involved in the issues that have shaped Alaska in the private and pub-lic sector. He worked with the NANA Regional Corporations on the develop-ment of the Red Dog Mine and served most recently as a Holland America Lines executive in Alaska. He has served two governors and is a former

commissioner with the Department of Natural Resources. Shively has been a trustee for the Alaska Permanent

Fund, a regent at the University of Alaska and served on numerous boards, including the Resource Development Council where he served as president for five years. In 2009, he received the Bill Egan Award from the Alaska State

Chamber of Commerce as the outstanding Alaskan of the year. He also received the Denali Award from the Alaska Federation of Natives. He currently leads the Anchorage-based Pebble Partnership as chief executive officer.

The Pebble Project, Southwest AlaskaThe potential for a mine at the Pebble Deposit located

in Southwest Alaska has captured the attention of the mining industry and nearly all Alaskans. This world class copper, gold and molybdenum deposit has brought a major public policy decision to the forefront in Alaska about min-ing, its legacies and its role in the modern economy. There is a well-funded, organized campaign to stop the develop-ment, but there is also equal interest in the opportunities it could bring. Pebble Partnership CEO John Shively will share his views about one of the most interesting prospects in mining today.

JOHN E. SHIVELYThe Pebble Project, Southwest Alaska

SHIVELY

RIMAS C. PAKALNISGround Support Methodology Employing Shotcrete for Underground Mines

Rimas Pakalnis, P.Eng., is an as-sociate professor in the Department of Mining Engineering at the University of British Columbia (UBC). He received his Ph.D. from UBC in 1982, special-izing in the field of rock mechanics. His research involved the development of empirical design tools for optimum stope wall design. The courses under his instruction include rock mechanics, rock fragmentation, mine design and mining

methods and equipment selection.During the past 20 years, Pakalnis has supervised two

Ph.D. candidates and 26 masters candidates. He has orga-nized and presented professional development courses for the mining industry in the design of mine openings and pil-lars, cable-bolt support, blasting, numerical modeling, geo-technical mapping, rock mass classification and bulkhead design. He has also served as an expert witness and as a consultant to Placer Dome, Hudson Bay Mining and Smelt-

ing, the County of Los Angeles, Inco, BHP Utah, Lynn Gold, Sherritt Gordon, Westmin, Dickenson and Echo Bay Mines. He is the co-author of more than 50 papers on mine rock mechanics design.

Ground Support Methodology Employing Shotcrete for Underground Mines

This lecture describes the research work conducted by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health’s Spokane Research Laboratory in the investigation of shotcrete within underground mines to applied design of ground support for the operator. It looks at the design methodology in terms of employing shotcrete as a fabric to confine the rock mass between the individual bolts as dic-tated by empirical charts. This is coupled with guidelines for safe entry in terms of cure times as well as understanding of the behavior of the shotcrete in terms of fibers and overall strengths that result with respect to the design of the mine openings. This enables the operator to better understand his workplace and thereby provide a safer work environment.

PAKALNIS

Minerals is also engaged in technology development con-cerning rare earth applications and has several patents in this regard.

Previously, Smith was the president and chief execu-tive officer of Chevron Mining, a wholly owned subsidiary of Chevron Corp. Chevron Mining operated five mines



essential to the clean energy and defense technologies on which our nation’s (and many other nations’) economy, secu-rity and future depend. As global RE requirements continue to grow at dou-ble-digit rates, fueled primarily by the development of green energy technolo-gies, China’s domestic demand is also soaring, and it has been forecast that the country’s production will soon match its internal consumption.

Molycorp Minerals has developed a mining-to-magnets business strategy and plans to produce 18 kt (20,000 st) REO per year by 2012, including up to 6.8 kt (7,500 st) of RE permanent magnets. n

and was engaged in a joint venture with Consol Energy to develop the Youngs Creek Mine, a surface coal mine in Wyoming. Smith also served as a vice president for Unocal, where he was responsible for managing the real estate, remediation, mining and carbon divisions. He worked for Unocal for more than 22 years.

Smith received a B.S. degree in agricultural engineer-ing from Colorado State University in 1981 and his Juris Doctor, cum laude, from the Western State University College of Law in 1990. He is a registered professional engineer and an active member of the state bars of Cali-fornia and Colorado.

Molycorp Minerals, Mountain Pass Rare Earth OperationsRare earths (RE) and rare earth permanent magnets are

SMITH

As the new academic year opens, SME and the Na-tional Stone Sand and Gravel Association (NSSGA),

have begun the 7th Annual Student Design Competition. The competition is the mining industry’s only academic competition of the year. The competition is a two-stage, team-based problem involving a technical design and an oral presentation. The first stage — technical design — takes place during the first semester of the school year on each team’s campus. It is designed to simulate an engineering project prepared by an engineering group for a company.

This year, the problem will focus on evaluating the purchase of permitted sand and gravel reserves. The problem will highlight the challenges of mine planning, plant design and reserve modeling. The second stage of the competition will be held at the 2011 SME Annual Meeting in Denver, CO. It will be an oral presentation given to the “board of directors” of the com-pany. In the past, the second stage has typically consisted of a financial justification of the first stage. The presenta-tions are open to anyone attending the 2011 SME Annual Meeting.

Students — if you would like to participate and can put together a team of six undergraduates, please contact the Student Design Competition Committee. The benefits

of participating in the competition include experience in engineering design, a chance to enhance public speaking skills and leadership experience in a team environment.

The competition is a great résumé builder and the sponsoring companies may be looking for new employees. Of course, there is always the prize money.

If you are not a student but are inter-ested in being involved with the youth of the mining industry, please become a sponsor of the competition. By becom-ing a sponsor, your company’s name will appear in front of a large group of the industry’s future employees. Each year, nearly 100 students from mining schools across the country participate in the com-petition. If you become a sponsor, any student seeking employment will have

the opportunity to contact you. The competition will also give you the opportunity to see your future employees in action. This is a perfect opportunity to invest in the future of our industry.

If you have any interest or questions about the 7th An-nual SME/NSSGA Student Design Competition, please contact the Student Design Competition Committee, Brady Johnson competition co-chair, e-mail [email protected], phone 916-855-8877. We are very excited about this year’s event and hope to see you in Denver. n

By Brady Johnson, co-chair, Student Design Competition

Studentdesigncompetitiongets under way


SME NewsSME Scholarships

The primary objective of the new Syd S. Peng Ground Control in Mining scholarship is to promote the science of ground control. Recent trends in mining engineering education indicate a possible future shortage of competent

ground control engineers. To remedy this situation, undergraduate or graduate scholarships will be awarded annually to encourage the development of ground control engineers and promote the ground control engineering discipline. View the complete guidelines and submit an application online at www.smenet.org/scholarships. All applications are due by Oct. 25, 2010. If you have any questions, please call Membership Services at 303-948-4208 or e-mail [email protected].

ANTHONY M. LeBARON is a graduate student and research assistant in the mining engineering department at the University of Utah. He is focusing his studies on rock mechanics, numerical modeling, subsidence and rock mass characterization. His thesis topic is on the coupled modeling of subsidence associated with block caving using numerical analysis and remote sensing. It is unique in that the numerical models will be calibrated and validated using subsidence data collected by means of differential inter-ferometric synthetic aperture radar.

LeBaron received a B.S. degree in mineral engineer-ing from New Mexico Tech. His senior design project was on the Questa molybdenum deposit in Questa, NM. As an undergraduate, he worked as a teaching assistant in the surveying class and plans to make teaching a part of his fu-ture career. For two summers, he worked as a intern at Lee Ranch Coal. He did GPS surveying and initiated a program to quantify haul truck performance using off-the-shelf GPS units. In 2009, he published a paper with J. Donovan at the 43rd US Rock Mechanics Symposium and 4th US-Canada Rock Mechanics Symposium entitled, “A comparison of photogrammetry and laser scanning for the purpose of automated rock mass characterization.” He is a member of SME. n

JEFFREY B. KERR graduated in May 2010 with a B.S. in mining engineering from Virginia Tech. Kerr plans to continue on to graduate school researching a topic in ground control and roof stability for underground mines. Because he was on the Dean’s List, Kerr was able to de-clare his major as a sophomore. He was on the dean’s list for all of the semesters that he was at Virginia Tech.

Kerr spent two summers working for Patriot Coal in West Virginia where he earned experience in underground surveying, environmental control, ventilation calculations and mine planning. He worked more than 60 hours a week to help pay for school. He also worked as a lab assistant for professor Mario Karfakis in the junior-level rock mechanics laboratory during the school year. His duties as a lab assis-tant include preparing core samples for uniaxial and triaxial testing and providing assistance to Karfakis during the lab sessions.

Kerr was a member of the Virginia Tech student chap-ter of SME, the Burkhart Mining Society. He has served as the director of student intramural sports activities and as a mentor to new sophomores coming into the mining depart-ment. He is also a member of the International Society of Explosives Engineers, and he has participated in the Appa-lachian Service Project.

Peng ground control scholarship issues call for applications

Syd S. Peng (r) presented a Peng Ground Control in Mining scholarship to Anthony Le Baron (l), University of Utah, at the SME Annual Meeting in Phoenix.

Syd S. Peng (r) presented a Peng Ground Control in Mining scholarship to Jeffrey B. Kerr, Virginia Polytechnic University and State University (l), at the SME Annual Meeting in Phoenix.


SME News

Engineering Consulting Services Inc. (ECSI) of Lexing-ton, KY received one of 16 Honor Awards given in the

American Council of Engineering Companies’ (ACEC) 44th Annual Engineering Excellence Awards competi-tion. The award was given for ECSI’s work at the Portal 31

Exhibition Mine in Lynch, KY. The ACEC is a Wash-ington D.C.-based business association representing ap-proximately 5,700 independent engi-neering companies throughout the United States.

ECSI worked with museum and exhibit designers to transform a deacti-vated mine portal

into a high-tech attraction that show-cases Kentucky’s coal mining heritage,

from the days of picks and shovels to modern equipment. Portal 31 is part of a series of attractions designed to bring

Portal31exhibitionminehonoredin engineering competition

J. Steven Gardner (r), president and chief executive officer, and Jamie Draper, marketing director, accepted the award on behalf of ECSI.

The Portal 31 exhibition mine visitors’ car begins its mine tour.

tourism to the state. The project is among 163 engineering projects that were recognized by ACEC as pre-eminent engineering achievements for 2009. Judging for the awards took place in February 2009 by a distinguished panel of more than 30 engineers, architects and representatives from government, media and academia. Criteria for the awards include uniqueness and originality, technical, social and eco-nomic value, complexity and success of the project in meet-ing goals. All winners were recognized at the Engineering Excellence Awards Gala held April 27, 2010 at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in Washington, D.C. n

MiningexhibitahitatTasteofColoradofestival

Thousands of attendees and hundreds of teachers learned about the importance of mining and minerals

in the 12.2 x 12.2 m (40 x 40 ft) exhibit tent at the Festival of Mountain and Plain — Taste of Colorado during the Labor Day weekend in downtown Denver. The Colorado Mining Exhibit Foundation of Lakewood, CO, a nonprofit education corporation, organized the event in Civic Center Park. About $30,000 was raised to fund the walk-through tent, which contained free gold panning, a free fossil hunt and about 100 industry volunteers to talk to people about mining.

Other displays included videos showing modern mining and reclamation technologies, large graphics showing how minerals are important to our high standard of living and tables full of free educational material for teachers, home schoolers, librarians, Scouts and parents. More than 500,000

people attended the festival and exit polls showed that thousands visited the mining exhibit.

Major sponsors who donated more than $1,000 included FMI/Henderson, Newmont, Arch/Mountain Coal, Peabody/Twentymile and Chevron Mining. Additional support came from the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, the Mining & Metallurgical Society of America, the Denver Gold Group, the Colorado Mining Association, the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, the SME GEM Committee, As-sociated Governments of Northwest Colorado, the Den-ver Coal Club and the Office of Surface Mining. Barney Guarnera and Stan Dempsey were personal contributors.

For more information on this proactive outreach proj-ect, contact Guy Johnson, Exhibit Coordinator, at 303-969-0365 or [email protected]. n


SME NewsMeetings

The 29th International Conference on Ground Control in Mining was held this fall in Morgantown, WV. The

conference, which began in 1981, was the vision of Syd S. Peng, professor at West Virginia University. His vision was to bring together the mining community to discuss and pro-mote technologies and strategies for ensuring the stability of surrounding rock formations during mining operations. Presenters and attendees at this conference represent a true who’s who of ground control for mining. This year, the conference had nearly 300 attendees who were treated to top-quality presentations from 45 well-known engineers and scientists. The attendees came from all regions of the United States and 14 foreign countries, including Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, Japan, Liech-tenstein, Mexico, the Netherlands, Poland, South Africa, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. As in past years, the topics covered encompassed nearly all areas of ground control, including mine design, roof bolting and numerical

Tom Barczak (l) and Steve Tadolini (r) talk to Australian visitor, Fritz Russell.

Many attendees took a post-conference mine tour of Consol Energy’s Robinson Run Mine near Shinston, WV.

modeling, to name a few. Each attendee received a confer-ence proceedings as a full-color, hard-cover book and as a flash drive. The 29th conference was coordinated under the leadership of Thomas Barczak and Steve Tadolini. They have been involved in the conference for decades and both studied under the mentorship of Professor Peng. They will continue to serve in leadership positions as the conference moves into its third decade and will have significant respon-sibilities for continuing this prestigious event.

The 30th International Conference for Ground Control in Mining is already being planned and additional details can be found at www.icgcm.conferenceacademy.com. Next year’s conference will include several special events as it will celebrate the 30-year anniversary of Peng’s vision. n

West Virginia hosts

29th ground control conference

Pittsburgh student chapter(Continued from page 56)

construction; Jim Mazzocca, overland conveyor installa-tion; and Chad Cunningham, preparation plant and harbor upgrades.

Student chapter president, Nicole Iannacchione, opened the meeting by welcoming more than 50 mining industry professionals. These included representatives from coal companies, mining contractors, state and government agen-cies, vendors, machine manufacturers, mining consultants, academia and SME members from the Pittsburgh Section. Many from these groups have provided donations to sup-port the new student chapter, the mining engineering pro-gram, student fundraising events, field trips and upcoming SME student activities.

The student chapter faculty advisor leading this ener-getic group of students is Anthony Iannacchione, P.E. He is the director of the Pitt Mining Engineering Certificate Program and former SME Krumb lecturer. Gary Takena-ka is the chapter industry advisor. He is general manager of applied improvements at Consol Energy. The new chap-ter members are eager to learn more, gain hands-on min-ing experience and enjoy what SME has to offer students. Please join me in welcoming the University of Pittsburgh student chapter to SME and an exciting mining career.

For more information about the University of Pitts-burgh student chapter, visit its website at http://pittsme.webs.com. n


SME News Necrology date name and city elected 1938 A. L. Barrett ** Virginia Beach, VA

1970 William J. Cavanaugh Barnegat, NJ

1992 Stephen W. Kline Russellville, AR

1973 Fredoon S. Watcha Mumbai, India

** Legion of Honor n

Obituaries

Jack Victor Desvaux died May 11, 2010 in Georgetown, TX. He was born in Kansas City, MO Oct. 26, 1919. He received a B.S. degree in mining engineering from the New

Mexico School of Mines in Socorro, NM in 1941. He was associated with Asarco for 35 years in a variety of technical and supervisory positions, from junior engineer to manager. Desvaux was mine superintendent at Ground Hog in Vanadium.

Following several promotions and transfers, Desvaux served 10 years as manager of the Eastern Division of the company’s Exploration Department, headquartered in Knoxville, TN. Prior to his retirement, he was an administrator in the Exploration Department in New York. His career included extensive traveling, and he lived in Arizona, New Mexico, Peru, Tennessee and New York. He joined SME in 1952 and was a member of the Legion of Hon-or. He was a professional engineer in New Mexico.

Desvaux retired to Silver City, NM in 1978. He enjoyed outdoor activities and was an avid fisherman. He was involved in many local clubs, including SME, and was a past member of the New York Mining Club. He was also a part-time consultant to the mining industry with assignments in Alaska and the Philippines.

Desvaux was preceded in death by his wife, the former Louise Sherwood of Silver City. He is survived by his daughter Jill Hubbs, his son Jay, and two grandchildren. n

Jack Victor Desvaux

SME MembershipMatthew Aikins, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaJenna Alexander, Safford, AZJohn Ayarbe, Albuquerque, NMBritt Babcock, Colorado Springs, CORon Babich, Glendale, AZKelly Bailey, Birmingham, ALMedhi Bakhshi, Tempe, AZEric Bella, Shavertown, PAJames Benda, Virginia, MNRobb Bigelow, Hibbing, MNWilliam Bond, Virginia, MNJoseph Bontje, Denver, COTerry Briggs, Greenwood Village, COAna Lucia Del Carpio, Lima, PeruCarlos Espinoza, Vina Del Mar, ChileGerald Eykholt, Madison, WIEric Fisher, Kingsford, NSW, AustraliaRichard Fredrickson, Hoyt Lakes, MNAntonio Gallovich, Williamsport, MDIgnacio Garcia, Grande Cache, AB, CanadaBaylor Gibson, La Crescenta, CA

Roberto Gonzalez, Col San Pedro de Los Pinos, DF, MexicoChristian Guerra Rojas, Lima, PeruDanielle Gunnell, Newport, VIC, AustraliaNick Hasche, Randwick, NSW, AustraliaCody Hildreth, Alledonia, OHZeshan Hyder, Blacksburg, VAJeff Johnson, Salt Lake City, UTPark Junhyeok, Seoul, Republic of Korea, Michael Keener, Canonsburg, PAJonathan Kolbe, Kittanning, PAJohn Krell, Blacksburg, VAMatt Lamoreaux, Alledonia, OHJean Lebire, Les Coteaux, PQ, CanadaAlexander Lemon, London, EnglandRalph Lestock, Rocky River, OHPhilip Lundman, Freedonia, WIChris Lynch, Thirlmere, NSW, AustraliaDaniel Magill, Webster, TXDarren Mathewson, Cameron Park, NSW, Australia

Steve Menden, Maple Plain, MNHans Meyer, Atlanta, GADonald Morrison, Hibbing, MNCraig Mort, Leichhardt, NSW, AustraliaPatrick Mukonki, Lubumbashi, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Alejandra Pesqueira, Safford, AZKevin Petz, Hoyt Lakes, MNTrevor Plote, Duluth, MNNirmal Prasad, Sahuarita, AZMajumdar Prithvi, Chennai TN, IndiaTim Quintero, Safford, AZOwen Riddy, Muswellbrook, NSW, AustraliaBenjamin Schmidt, Lakewood, COSantosh Stephen, Frisco, TXKirt Suomela, Washington, DCIsao Taniguchi, Tokyo, JapanAntonio Velarde, Pittsburgh, PARaul Villacorta-Iriarte, Winnemucca, NVKatherine Wood, Wheeling, WVMohit Yadav, Jaipur, India n

(Continued from page 55)SMEF McIntosh Scholarship

2009 mine layout to the 2010 footprint, geotechnical trace mapping and fault mapping. He is a member of Virginia Tech’s SME student chapter, and he also participates in the mining and mineral competition and Women in Mining.

Benjamin Sutton is a junior studying mining engineer-ing at the Missouri University of Science and Technology (MST). He completed a summer internship for the Doe Run Co. where he worked in underground metal mining. He is the secretary for the SME student chapter and also

serves as captain of the MST Black mine rescue team. This has inspired him to seek an emphasis in mine health and safety. Congratulations from the SMEF to all recipients.

More information about the McIntosh Engineering Scholarship may be found online at www.smenet.org/schol-arships or by contacting Tessa Baxter, Division and Local Section Coordinator, SME, 8307 Shaffer Pkwy., Littleton, CO 80127, 303-948-4208, e-mail [email protected]. Ap-plications for the 2011-2012 scholarships will be accepted beginning Jan. 1, 2011. n


New Products

The new line of Larox knife gate valves features an industrial cast-iron body and a heavy-duty stainless steel gate. Each valve is fully loaded and originally equipped with a flushing port, limit switch mounting, a locking gate and top and bottom stem protectors. The new knife gate valves have a heavier thicker gate and a J-ring seat design that is able to withhold higher pressures than the conventional C-ring design. Removable seats on both sides of the blade provide a bi-directional bubble-tight seal. No part of the metal is exposed to the slurry. Three types of Larox knife gate valves are offered for every process need — flanged, wafer and high-pressure. They are available with pressure ratings up to 300 psig and diameters ranging from 50.8 to 609.6 mm (2 to 24 in.)

When a knife gate valve is in the open position, the two sleeves seal against each other in the center. A full bore allows the slurry to travel through the valve without touching any metallic components. While closing the valve, the gate is forced progressively down as it nears the fully closed

Bucyrus diesel rubber-tire vehicles have been designed to work in combination with other equipment or independently in high-production underground coal mines. A crucial feature of Bucyrus diesel rubber-tire vehicles is that they deliver a high return on investment, since they are flexible, not task-specific and perform multiple functions. The design philosophy behind Bucyrus rubber-tire diesel vehicles is to have a commonality of parts across shared platforms. Major components are common with other units in the Bucyrus product line.

The three major types of Bucyrus diesel rubber-tire vehicles in underground coal mines are load haul dump (LHD) utility vehicles, material haulage transportation and

heavy-lift shield haulers. The shield haulers can be used to transport AFC drives and shearers. They are designed to be compact, with a minimum profile and roadway presence. A removable cookie plate and fixed fork tynes allow the shield hauler to supplement underground roof support installation and relocate transport equipment. They can also be used in other heavy-lift operations.

With a CHT-50 trailer, the LHD utility vehicle can be used in a longwall move transporting roof supports. With a reeler attachment, it can install AFC chains, conveyor belts and cables. With a jib crane, it can lift and locate components. The range of buckets allows the LHD to transport and load coal, rock or road base and cleanup

roadways. Bucyrus rubber-tire diesel vehicles offer either wet bath or dry scrubber exhaust systems. By combining low-emission engines and the wet and dry exhaust packages, Bucyrus addresses mine ventilation concerns in dissipating diesel-particulate emissions. The dry and wet exhaust systems cool and clean the exhaust gas before it mixes with mine ventilation air and use a catalytic converter to regenerate the exhaust gas and reduce the emissions.

www.bucyrus.com

Bucyrus offers underground vehicle flexibility

The Bucyrus FBL-10 LHD utility vehicle with trailer CHT 50.

Larox Flowsys introduces new knife gate valvesposition. At this point, the sleeves are sealed tightly against both sides of the gate, so that the line pressure is completely and efficiently contained.

There are two matching rubber sleeves in the valve housing that seal tightly against the gate when the valve is in the closed position. They suction

together when it is in the open position. This tight seal provides the high, internal line pressure, which, in combination with the double-seated sleeve design, permits a

perfectly tight shutoff. A variety of sleeve materials are available for different process needs.

Larox knife gate valves have elastomer secondary seals that replace the conventional gland packing. These elastomer secondary seals perform wiping and lubricating actions to the blade as it strokes down into the silicone-filled grease contours of the seal itself. This type of lubrication

allows easer actuation and movement. And there is no need to remove the valve from the line when a replacement is necessary.

www.larox.com


New Products

MagnalightaddsaportableLEDlighttowertoitsproductline

Larson Electronics announced the addition of a 14,400-lumen LED light tower to its product line. Dual 90-watt LED light heads are fixed to a removable mount head, supported by a 2.44 m (8-ft) collapsible tripod. The WALTP-2X90Y tower can be configured to project 180 watts of bright, white light in a long, narrow spot or wide area flood mode. In flood mode, the wet-area rated LED light covers as much area as a 1,000- watt metal halide light. The dual, 90-watt LED light head is removable from the collapsible industrial-grade aluminum tripod. Operators can collapse the tripod into a 0.92-m, 3.6-kg (3-ft, 8-lb) package for portability. The 4.1-kg (9 lb) LED light heads are easily stored as well. The tower can be operated from standard U.S. 110-volt power or 12/24-volt dc power, such as a standard U.S. wall outlet or a military vehicle. It is IP67 rated for outdoor use and can be deployed quickly.

Larson Electronics’ Magnalight line offers a selection of LED lighting, including vehicle-mounted lights, explosion-proof lights, intrinsically safe flashlights, replacement bulbs, PAR38 bulbs and standard bulbs. n

www.magnalight.com

Sioux Corp., a manufacturer of application-specific, specialty cleaning equipment, fluid heating systems and steam generators, offers a complete line of solution heaters for the mining industry. Sioux’s solution heaters are ideal for heating cyanide for the heap-leach process, in addition to many other solution heating applications. These units use 100 percent stainless-steel wetted parts, including the heating coil. This makes them ideal for use with caustic solutions, such as cyanide. The electrical enclosures are watertight NEMA 4 for improved reliability in wet environments, and the heating coil has had numerous improvements to increase performance, efficiency, reliability and ease of maintenance.

All Sioux products are backed by the company’s 20-year reliability guarantee, superior support after the sale and more than 70 years of experience.

www.sioux.com

Siouxheatersareidealforheap-leachprocess

CognisreceivesU.S.patentforsplitcircuittechnology

The Mining Chemical Technology Division of Cognis’ Functional Products Group has received a U.S. patent for its split circuit technology. This technology is particularly applicable to the agitation leach/solvent extraction circuits of copper ores. The split circuit configuration splits the leached solution into high- and low-grade streams, which, in turn, are treated separately in the solvent extraction process. The raffinate produced from the high-grade solution is returned to the leaching step to fully reuse the acid that has been generated. Raffinate produced from the low-grade leach solution, lower in concentration of metal species and acid, is used in the washing activity. A portion is ultimately bled from the circuit as the soluble loss fraction.

The configuration minimizes soluble losses. The economic benefits of the split circuit are apparent

once a detailed mass balance of both the metal species and acid is performed. The simplicity of the concept means that it can easily be incorporated into an existing flowsheet with a minimum of capital outlay. In areas of the world where the cost of acid and neutralizing agent are high, the operating cost benefits of the concept can be substantial. The split circuit concept has been implemented at five copper agitation leach/solvent extraction circuits and has been included in feasibility studies for other large-scale projects.

www.cognis.com

Solution heaters substantially increase gold recovery efficiency by using hot solution during the heap leach process.


New Media

Hoist & Haul 2010

Equipment Management Workbook2010, by Paul D. Tomlingson, published by SME, 8307 Shaffer Pkwy, Little-

ton, CO 80127, USA, phone 800-763-3132, 303-948-4225, fax 303-933-6269, e-mail [email protected], website www.smenet.org, 152 pp., ISBN-13: 978-0-87335-335-9, $69.

The Equipment Management Workbook is a companion to the acclaimed text, Equipment Management: Key to Equipment Reliability and Productiv-ity in Mining, second edition. The Equipment Management text is regarded as essential reading for mining professionals and outlines a proven and practical strategy for ensuring the profitability of mining operations through quality maintenance management. This workbook provides an easy, effective way for readers to review and confirm the valuable lessons presented in the original text. Its step-by-step approach focuses on the most critical aspects of a success-ful maintenance management program. Each chapter challenges the reader to recall the real-world experiences and recommendations from the text. Multi-ple-choice, true/false and yes/no exercises reinforce every key concept.

The reader will benefit from author Paul Tomlingson’s more than 35 years of worldwide maintenance consulting experience. Tomlingson’s textbook and workbook comprise a how-to guide that will enable mining organizations to implement a comprehensive equipment management strategy to ensure equip-ment reliability, as well as work force productivity. Sample chapters of the book include:

• Understanding Equipment Management• Applying the Principles of Equipment Management • Developing the Equipment Management Program

2010, Proceedings of the International Conference on Hoisting and Haul-age, edited by Peter Brokenshire and Susan Andersen, published by SME, 8307 Shaffer Pkwy, Littleton, CO 80127 USA, phone 1-800-763-3132, 303-948-4225, fax 303-933-6269, e-mail [email protected], website www.smenet.org, 344 pp, ISBN-13: 978-0-87335-337-3, $119.

Today’s mining professionals must meet the ever increasing challenges of larger, more efficient and safer ore-handling systems. New developments in technology have led to a host of different transport solutions. Design decisions are greatly influenced by these advancements, which can impact the financial requirements for new projects. Hoist & Haul 2010 provides the most current, cutting-edge insights into these important issues.

This book is a compilation of the papers delivered at the 2010 International Conference on Hoisting and Haulage. It provides a comprehensive update of major developments and lessons learned since the last industry gathering in 2005. From the handling of ore at the point of extraction to stockpiling on the surface, dozens of case histories document the latest trends in shaft hoisting, incline and drift hoisting, conveying, hydraulic hoisting, rail haulage, tramming and truck haulage. Experts involved in key mining projects throughout the world share best practices on the design of systems and components, operations and economic and safety issues.

Hoist & Haul 2010 is essential reading for anyone in the mine hoisting and underground material transport community, including operators, engineering and construction firms, equipment vendors, consultants, academicians and gov-ernment officials. Sample contents of the book include:

• Brakes and Brake Controls• Incline Shaft Systems• Shaft Guides• Innovative Systems

• Leadership in Equipment Management,• Work Load Versus Work Force • Improving Work Force Productivity. n

• Drives and Drive Controls• Hoisting System Elements• Health, Safety and Risk• Shaft Systems: New and Upgraded

• Underground Materials Handling• Horizontal Transport• Design, Operation and Maintenance of Ropes.

The challenges facing the coal preparation industry have never been more complex or daunting: China, India, and South Africa are experiencing unprecedented growth in the use of coal. India is expected to be the world’s largest importer of coal through 2030. New environmental regulations in the United States and elsewhere are forcing operators to be even more innovative and resourceful. How will the burgeoning demand affect global pricing? How can coal preparation companies employ more effective cleaning processes and technologies to reduce the environmental footprint of their mining facilities and waste storage areas?

You’ll find answers to these and hundreds of other critical questions in International Coal Preparation Congress: 2010 Conference Proceedings.

This 992-page book is a compilation of 118 state-of-the-art technical papers presented at the industry’s most prestigious gathering. A CD con-taining the full text is included. Read what coal preparation experts from 20 countries have to share on a variety of current issues, including:

•Water-based coal processing facilities and a review of plant designs and operations used throughout the world.

•Breakthroughs in dense medium separations, water-based separation processes, froth flotation, and de-watering.

•New wear-resistant materials proven to help plant operators reduce maintenance costs, elevate plant availability, and maintain a high level of process efficiency.

•Groundbreaking methodologies that maximize the amount of coal recovered while meeting the required product specifications.

•The processing and potential uses of waste.

•Innovative online monitoring and control methods and the latest on the application of modeling and simulation.

•Advancements in technologies that can upgrade coal without the use of water, including density-based, thermal, and optical dry cleaning.

•And much, much more.

Published every four years in concert with this authoritative gathering, International Coal Preparation Congress: 2010 Conference Proceedings is an indispensable resource for the global community of industry professionals, public policy makers, environmental advocates, as well as mining academics and students.

SectionS

international coalPreParation congreSS: 2010 conference ProceedingSEdited by Rick Q. Honaker Book plus CD

2010, 992 pages, 4 lbs ISBN-13: 978-0-87335-330-4 Book Order No. 330-4

$139 Member $109 Student Member $169 Non-Member/List

The Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc.8307 Shaffer Parkway, Littleton, CO 80127 USA

www.smenet.org/store

[email protected]

Local 303.948.4225

Toll-free 1.800.763.3132

Your most precious resource.

international coalPreParation congreSS

2010 conference ProceedingS

• Marketing and Utilization • Preparation Plant Operations • Screening and Classification • Dense Medium Separations • Water-Based Separations • Froth Flotation • Dewatering • Thermal Drying

• Dry Coal Cleaning • Low Ran Coal Upgrading • Environmental Management • On-Line Monitoring and Control • Modeling and Simulation • Waste Processing and Utilization • Research • General

Web DirectoryTHE BEST IN MINING PRODUCTS AND SERVICES


BETE Fog Nozzle, Inc.Manufacturers of spray nozzles for fire protection, conveyor and truck washing and dust control.Email: [email protected] www.bete.com

Call & Nicholas, Inc.2475 No. Coyote Drive, Tucson, AZ 85745Email: [email protected]

Cognis CorporationMining Chemicals TechnologySolvent Extraction Reagents2430 N Huachuca Drive, Tucson, AZ 85745www.cognis.com

Dawson Metallurgical Laboratories, Inc.an FLSmidth CompanyMinerals processing testing & consultingTelephone: (801) 596-0430Email: [email protected]/dawson

dnh search - HeadhuntersP.O. Box 277, Cambria, CA 93428Telephone: (805) 203-5878 Fax: (805) [email protected]

Downer EDI Mining - Mineral TechnologiesLeaders in fine mineral gravity separation with Reichert spirals. Reading magnetic separators & Kelsey Centrifugal Jig.Telephone (fax): (904) 827-1694 (1695)E-mail: [email protected] www.mineraltechnologies.com.au

EarthRes Group, Inc.Mining engineers and professional geologists, Mine exploration, permitting, planning and design, Hydrogeologic studies and compliance assistancewww.earthres.com

FLSmidthYour one source for the world’s largest installed base of original equipment including: Crushing, Grinding, Classifying, Flotation, Thickening, Clarifying, Filtration, Pyroprocessing, Material Handling, Parts & Service.Telephone: (801) 526-2000 or (610) 264-6900www.flsmidthminerals.com

FMC Technologies/Material Handling SolutionsSyntron® and Link-Belt Material Handling Equipment. Tupelo, MSTelephone: (800) 356-4898www.fmctechnologies.com/materialhandling

GIW Industries, Inc. “The Experts in Slurry Pump Design” 5000 Wrightsboro Road,Grovetown, GA 30813 Telephone: (706) 863-1011www.giwindustries.com

Hitachi Constructionand Mining Products Hitachi hydraulic excavators and haul trucks have built an excellent reputation for high productivity, low maintenance costs, and long-life reliability.www.hitachimining.com

ITT Water & WasteWater USA - Flygt ProductsPumps, mixers, monitoring and control products, pre-engineered, self-cleaning fiberglass pump stations.1000 Bridgeport Ave., Suite 402, Shelton, CTTelephone: (203) 712-8999www.flygtus.com

J. H. Fletcher & Co.Roof drills, long hole drills, mobile roof supports, prime movers, scalers, jumbos and other specialized underground mining equipment. Telephone: (304) 525-7811www.jhfletcher.com

Luff Industries Ltd. - CanadaManufacturer of quality conveyor components. Idlers, Pulleys, Impact Beds, Accessories. The most dependable conveyor products available!Toll-Free: 1-888-349-LUFF (5833)www.luffindustries.com

Marshall Miller & Associates, Inc.International Engineering Consultants ENERGY / ENVIRONMENTAL /ENGINEERING / CARBON Locations in KS, KY, LA, NC, PA, TN, VA, WV Telephone: 276.322.5467Email: [email protected] www.mma1.com

Naylor Pipe CompanyManufacturers of Spiralweld Steel Pipe and Fittings 4” to 102”, #14ga. to 1/2” wall.Telephone: (773) 721-9400Fax: (773) 721-9494 www.naylorpipe.com

Post Mixing Optimizationand SolutionsMixing Consulting; Audit, Optimize, Design Mixers, Copper & Nickel SX, Solvent Extraction, Biooxidation, Gold CIP/CIL, Agitated Leaching, and Autoclaves www.postmixing.com

Prep Tech, Inc.Cyclones, spirals, flotation, filter press, magnetic separators 4412 Rt. 66,Apollo, PA 15613 Telephone: (888) 447-7737www.preptech.com

Richwood Conveyor Belt Cleaners, Load Zone Protection, Material Containment, Pulley Lagging, and Wear Liners. Rely on Richwood Toll Free: (800) 237-6951www.richwood.com

Schaeffler Group USA, Inc.E1 spherical roller bearings, split spherical roller bearings, TAC11, seals, dragline, shovel and motorized wheel bearings. www.fag.com

Skelly and Loy, Inc.MINING ENGINEERS AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS449 Eisenhower Boulevard, Suite 300Harrisburg, PA 17111Telephone: (800) 892-6532 or (717) 232-0593www.skellyloy.com

TESSCO TechnologiesTESSCO is a value-added supplier of MSHA-approved products for wireless two-way communication from leaky cable, antennas, broadband wireless radios, power supplies and custom enclosures. www.tessco.com

Vibra-Tech/GeoSonicsBlast Consulting & Seismograph ManufacturingAllied Companies with 80 years experience.Telephone: (800) 992-9395 / (800) 233-6181www.geosonics.comwww.vibra-tech-inc.com


Classifieds

Missouri University of Science & TechnologyDepartment of Mining and Nuclear Engineering

PROFESSOR / ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR /ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF MINING

ENGINEERINGApplications are invited from qualified individuals to fill a senior faculty position at the rank of Professor of Mining Engineering, Department of Mining and Nuclear Engineering at Missouri University of Science and Technology (Missouri S&T). Depending on qualifications and experience, the position may be filled at the rank of Professor, Associate or Assistant Professor. The Department, which has a long history of educating engineers for the mining industry, has one of the nation’s largest and most respected mining engineering programs. It has strong ties with the domestic coal, metal, industrial minerals, stone and aggregate industries, as well as several international academic institutions and industries. In addition, the Department has a long history of teaching and research in the explosives field and has been expanding recently in this area.

The Department of Mining and Nuclear Engineering has over 400 undergraduate and graduate students in both Mining and Nuclear Engineering disciplines. The Department houses a 19-acre Experimental Mine on campus for research and teaching activities. Other research facilities associated with the Department include a Rock Mechanics and Explosives Research Center with associated Explosives Research Laboratory, Western Mine Safety and Health Training and Translation Center, Center for Energy Research and Development and a Nuclear Reactor. Missouri S&T, part of the land-grant University of the State of Missouri, is located in South Central Missouri in the foothills of the Ozark Mountains. There are approximately 6,300 students on the Rolla campus, of which about 85% are science and engineering students.

The successful applicant must (i) have earned doctoral degree in mining engineering or a related engineering field with relevant mining industry experience, (ii) be established as a researcher with successful history of research experience, and (iii) have a track record of funding with peer-reviewed publications. Candidates with strong background and research experience in underground mining, surface mining, mine design and/or energy-related issues are preferred. Responsibilities will include research, graduate and undergraduate teaching, and service. Rank and remuneration will be commensurate with qualifications and experience. This is a tenure track position.

The final candidate is required to provide official transcript(s) for any college degree(s) listed in application materials submitted. Copies of transcript(s) must be provided prior to the start of employment. In addition, the final candidate may be required to verify other credentials listed in application materials. Failure to provide official transcript(s) or other required verification may result in the withdrawal of the job offer.

Review of applications will begin on November 1, 2010 and continue until the position is filled. The successful candidate is expected to start on January 1, 2011. All application materials, including resume/vita, cover letter, reference letters, portfolio, etc., must be electronically submitted to the Missouri University of Science and Technology’s Human Resource Office using the following address: [email protected]. Acceptable electronic formats that can be used include PDF and Word. Hard copy, printed documents will no longer be accepted. Please remember to include the reference number listed with each job in your application

materials that you submit.

Human Resource ServicesReference 00031195

Missouri University of Science and Technology is an AA/EEO employer. Females, minorities and persons with disabilities are

encouraged to apply. Missouri S&T participates in E-Verify. For more information on E-Verify, please contact DHS at: 1-888-464-4218ww

w.Mining

Engine

ering

Mag

azine

.com

Heavy equipment back on a roll Resolution Copper’s mine a showcasefor Rio Tinto


AUGUST 2010VOL. 62 NO. 8

Freeport builds DMLZ Mine


Classifieds

J. DAVID LOWELL PROFESSIONAL PROGRAM IN MINERAL RESOURCESFALL 2010 COURSES

Credit or Non-credit • Non-credit Cost: $500

• September 24-25 Introduction to Engineering Contract LawIntroduction to the basics of contract formation, risk allocation and management, applied to a representative cross section of contract types.

• October 1-2 Modern Corporate Organizations in the Mineral IndustryIntroduction to the key issues in setting up and managing effective mining orga-nizations and will provide insight into the role of boards of directors and senior management of such companies.

• November 12-13 Basic Concepts in Mineral EconomicsOverview of the field of mineral economics, what it holds in common with other areas of economics, and the special requirements of the mineral resources sector.

For the MEng degree, if you work for a company that has a business presence in Arizona that employs engineers, you are considered

an Arizona resident and eligible for the resident tuition rate.

Courses available on-site, live via video conference, live and on-demand internet streaming.Registration form, course syllabi,instructor biographies, and required textbooks can be found at:http://www.geo.arizona.edu/imr/events/fall.html

For more information contactthe Lowell Institute for Mineral Resources520·621·5292 • [email protected]

Comply with regulationsReduce environmental liabilities

Lower life cycle costs

1.800.537.3073 www.bioteqwater.com

Water Treatment Specialists

SUBSCRIPTIONS$245 non-member

FREEto SME members

Subscribeor join today!

800-763-3132

www.smenet.org

CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING [email protected]

303-948-4243


Classifieds

603-431-5661 • www.concretebiz.com

American division of Wiggert+Co. and Würschum

SAVE 20%

Limited Time Offer20th Anniversary Special

Wiggert DWM 6750Twin Shaft Mixer

Wiggert DWM 6750Twin Shaft Mixer

6.0 cy true output • Maximum 230 cy/hrImmediate Delivery

Sustainable Design-Build

Solutions

When you need a quality building fast, ClearSpan is

the choice.Buildings

available up to 250' wide.

Low in cost per square foot.

Natural daytime lighting.

Easy to relocate.

Expandable.Call one of our ClearSpan™ Specialists at 1.866.643.1010 or visit us at www.ClearSpan.com. Please mention code CST1025.

FLEXIBLE FINANCE SOLUTIONSTERMS UP TO 10 YEARS RATES AS LOW AS 4.99% AS LITTLE AS 10% DOWN

ON FABRIC STRUCTURES & GREENHOUSES**Subject to credit approval.

Mining Engineering 3 Color.indd 1 4/8/10 8:34:59 AM

FUTURE SME ANNUAL MEETINGS

See You There!For Exhibitor Information: [email protected] • For Sponsorship Information: [email protected]

SEATTLE, WASHINGTONFebruary 19 – 22, 2012

DENVER, COLORADOFebruary 27 – March 2, 2011

Products and services are still a vital part of mining

business - even when budgets are tight.

Be certain your customers

can find you.

MINING ENGINEERING

Affordable,effective marketing tools:

[email protected]

Annual Meetingof the

ARIZONACONFERENCE

December 5-6, 2010Hilton El ConquistadorGolf and Tennis Resort

Tucson, Arizona

Technical ProgramEnvironmental

GeologyMexico

Mineral ProcessingMining

New Projects

Sponsorship OpportunitiesGain exposure, be recognized and show your support by becoming

an event sponsor.Various options are available!

To know more, contact:SME Meetings

Phone: [email protected]

www.smenet.org

SME/ARIZONA CONFERENCE REGISTRATION FORM(Photocopy this form if additional forms are needed)

Fax Form To: 303-979-3461 • Online: www.smenet.org orMail Form and Payment by November 5, 2010 to:

Meetings Dept. • Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc.8307 Shaffer Parkway, Littleton, CO 80127

Name ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Employer _______________________________________________________________________________________________

Address _________________________________________________________________________________________________

City__________________________________State__________________Zip_____________Country ____________________

Employer’s Phone______________________________________Employer’s Fax ___________________________________

E-mail ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

NO REFUNDS ISSUED AFTER NOVEMBER 5, 2010

REGISTRATION FEES Registration may be sent via fax if paymentPaid Registration Includes Monday Luncheon is by credit card. FAX 303-979-3461 Before AfterCheck One 11/5/10 11/5/10 Payment( ) SME/AIME Society Member M $95 $120 $ _________ ( ) American Express ( ) Discover( ) Author A $95 $120 $ _________ ( ) MasterCard ( ) Visa( ) Nonmember NM $115 $140 $ _________ ( ) Check or Money Order Enclosed( ) Student S $-0- $-0- $ _________

Registration Fee Total $ _________________SOCIAL FUNCTION - Monday, December 6, 2010 Social Function Total $ _________________# Tickets Grand Total $ ______________________ Attending Luncheon T ( ) Yes ( ) No_____ Adl. Luncheon Tickets L $45 $ _________ ( ) Check if you have any special needs._____ Student(s) S $30 $ _________ If so, please identify them. (1992 ADA)

Card Number __________________________________________________________ Exp. Date _____________________________________

Signature ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SME/ARIZONA CONFERENCE HOTEL RESERVATION FORM(Reservation Instructions)

• Submit only one request on each form. Additional forms may be obtained by photocopying this sheet.• All reservation requests must be processed through the Hilton El Conquistador Golf and Tennis Resort.• To change your arrival or departure date or the type of room requested, contact the hotel at 520-544-5000• Reservation must be made by November 5, 2010• Hotel rates subject to availability.• Rates subject to applicable taxes.• If you plan on arriving at the hotel after 4:00pm, please include a check for the first night’s deposit or your credit card number and expiration date to guarantee your reservations.

MAIL RESERVATION FORM TO:Reservations Manager • Hilton El Conquistador Golf and Tennis Resort

10000 N. Oracle Rd., Tucson, AZ 85704or FAX TO: 520-544-1224

or call: 800-325-7832 and ask for the SME room rate

Name ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Employer _______________________________________________________________________________________________

Address _________________________________________________________________________________________________


Arrival Date__________________Hour________AM/PM Departure Date_________________ Hour________AM/PM

Name(s) of person(s) sharing room _______________________________________________________________________

Check Type of Room and Rate:( ) Single $99( ) Double/Twin $99

Credit Card _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Signature ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

( ) Check if you have any special needs. If so, please identify them. (1992 ADA)

SME_Arizona_2010.indd 1 9/23/10 1:42 PM


Professional Services

COLORADO

ILLINOIS

LOUISIANA

PENNSYLVANIA

KENTUCKY

CALIFORNIA

NEVADA

ALASKA

ALABAMA

ARIZONA

MINERALS ADVISORY GROUP R&DResearch, Development and Testing Services

Martin C. Kuhn, PhD., P.E.Peter J. Crescenzo, P.E.

James F. Minno, VP OperationsOne W. Wetmore Rd. Phone: (520) 887-7357Suite #207 Fax: (520) 887-7420Tucson, AZ 85705 E-mail: [email protected]

MINERALS ADV REV SEPT 07.indd 1 8/16/07 2:12:24 PM

Grouting Systems

Making grouting profitable for over 45 years

ChemGrout systems offer you the widest selection of mixers, pumps and power options.

708-354-7112www.chemgrout.com

mAnalysis and Repair of Cracked and ErodedBall and SAG Mill trunnionsPhone 225-791-8900 • Fax 225-791-8965email: [email protected] Know It’s Cracked - How Do You Fix It?

ECRS Engineering Affiliate ofMETALOCK® CORPORATION

Engineered Casting Repair Service, Inc.

ECRS.indd 1 10/7/05 1:26:28 PM

TerraMins, Inc.Consulting Mining/Economic Geologists

Dinah O. ShumwayCalifornia Registered Geologist

Doug ShumwayMining Engineer / Registered Environmental Assessor

12277 Apple Valley Road, #184, AppleValley, CA 92308760-285-5801 TerraMins.com

ON-LINE EXPLORATION Services, Inc.

• Geological & Mining Consultants• Complete Services for the Mining Industry

James Adler, CPG Kerry Adler, CPG Kevin Adler, PE

11900 Industry Way, Unit M-10 Phone: (907) 345-4815Anchorage, Alaska 95515 Fax: (907) 345-1987

ONLINE_AD_2006_new.indd 1 2/2/06 4:37:19 PM

Consultant to the cement,limestone, alternate fuels & materials,

and industrial minerals industries.

www.goodhorizoncorporation.com

Frank W. Holcomb, P.G.Gadsden, AL • Ph: 256-490-1887

GROSVENOR ENGINEERING COMPANY

David E. Krebs, P.E.President709 West Littleton Blvd

Suite 206Littleton, Colorado 80120 Office (303) 798-0181

Mining & Geological Consultants

[email protected]

GROSVENOR_AD.indd 1 2/20/07 10:52:02 AM

R Squared IncorporatedEnvironmental and Engineering Services

Strategically Positioned - Technically Prepared

Serving theMining IndustryOffice: 303-832-7664

Fax: 303-832-7469 www.r2incorporated.com

PHYSICAL RESOURCE ENGINEERING, INC.

MINING, ROCK & CIVIL ENGINEERING • SURVEYING REMOTE SENSING • MICROPHYSICS • MAPPING • CONSTRUCTION

MATERIALS INSPECTION & TESTING • STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING

4655 North Flowing Wells Road, Tucson, AZ 85705(520) 690-1669 Fax (520) 690-1769

Mining Consultants

Three Church StreetP.O. Box 529 Tel 724-942-5894Lawrence, PA 15055 Fax 724-942-5897

EAVENSON, AUCHMUTY& GREENWALD

A Professional Corporation

Our 90th Year

Contact: Craig B. Clemmens C.P.G.S.

800-653-8119276 PA Route 366-Mamont

Apollo, PA 15613Telephone (724) 327-8119, Fax (724) 327-8120

SLIM HOLE LOGGING SPECIALISTSCOMPLETE LOGGING SUITES

• ABHTV• HP FLOWMETER• NUCLEAR• INDUCTION• THERMAL• SONIC

• BH GYROSCOPE• IMPELLER FM• COLOR BH VIDEO• FLUID CONDUCTIVITY• RESISTIVITY/S.P.• CALIPER

SLIM HOLE LOGGING SPECIALISTSCOMPLETE LOGGING SUITES

• ABHTV • BH GYROSCOPE• HP FLOWMETER • IMPELLER FM• NUCLEAR • COLOR BH VIDEO• INDUCTION • FLUID CONDUCTIVITY• THERMAL • RESISTIVITY/S.P.• SONIC • CALIPER

Craig B. Clemmens P.G.800-653-81195511 Greensburg RoadApollo, PA [email protected]

EnvironmEntalEnginEEring andSciEncE

Pipersville, PA Toll Free (800) 264-4553www.earthres.com

Effective Technical Solutions for the Mining Industry

• BeneficialReuse• IndustrialMineralsValuation• Multi-SiteEnvironmentalManagementSystems• GroundwaterModeling• HydrogeologicInvestigations• Mining&MineralProcessingManagement• MineDesignandPermitting• DewateringStudies

U nderground Min ing Cont rac tor

Experienced • Equipped • InnovativeNV License 46158 • CA License A-723890

www.magmineserv.com

Geological Consulting - Claim Staking - Soil SamplingMineral Surveys - Mine Hazard Fencing

Geology & Drafting Supplies - AutoCad & GISTemporary Employees in all Fields

Carlin Trend MiningSupplies & Service

369 5th Street, Elko, Nevada 89801(775) 778-0668 [email protected]

Mine • Geological • Hydrological • Environmental • Maintenance

Construction ManagementProject Management

Engineering

320 Poplar Drive, Elko, NV 89801-4508Phone: 775-777-7455 • Fax: 775-549-8949Cell: 775-397-2683 • [email protected]

Sacrison Engineering

sacrison.indd 1 10/12/07 1:53:02 PM

DARCO ENERGYMANAGEMENT CORPORATION

(Appraisal of All Mining Assets)

Roger Daugherty, PresidentCertified Senior Appraiser

Pikeville, Kentucky606-432-3393606-794-3234

[email protected]

Annual Meetingof the

ARIZONACONFERENCE

December 5-6, 2010Hilton El ConquistadorGolf and Tennis Resort

Tucson, Arizona

Technical ProgramEnvironmental

GeologyMexico

Mineral ProcessingMining

New Projects

Sponsorship OpportunitiesGain exposure, be recognized and show your support by becoming

an event sponsor.Various options are available!

To know more, contact:SME Meetings

Phone: [email protected]

www.smenet.org

SME/ARIZONA CONFERENCE REGISTRATION FORM(Photocopy this form if additional forms are needed)

Fax Form To: 303-979-3461 • Online: www.smenet.org orMail Form and Payment by November 5, 2010 to:

Meetings Dept. • Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, Inc.8307 Shaffer Parkway, Littleton, CO 80127

Name ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Employer _______________________________________________________________________________________________

Address _________________________________________________________________________________________________


Employer’s Phone______________________________________Employer’s Fax ___________________________________

E-mail ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

NO REFUNDS ISSUED AFTER NOVEMBER 5, 2010

REGISTRATION FEES Registration may be sent via fax if paymentPaid Registration Includes Monday Luncheon is by credit card. FAX 303-979-3461 Before AfterCheck One 11/5/10 11/5/10 Payment( ) SME/AIME Society Member M $95 $120 $ _________ ( ) American Express ( ) Discover( ) Author A $95 $120 $ _________ ( ) MasterCard ( ) Visa( ) Nonmember NM $115 $140 $ _________ ( ) Check or Money Order Enclosed( ) Student S $-0- $-0- $ _________

Registration Fee Total $ _________________SOCIAL FUNCTION - Monday, December 6, 2010 Social Function Total $ _________________# Tickets Grand Total $ ______________________ Attending Luncheon T ( ) Yes ( ) No_____ Adl. Luncheon Tickets L $45 $ _________ ( ) Check if you have any special needs._____ Student(s) S $30 $ _________ If so, please identify them. (1992 ADA)


Signature ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

SME/ARIZONA CONFERENCE HOTEL RESERVATION FORM(Reservation Instructions)

• Submit only one request on each form. Additional forms may be obtained by photocopying this sheet.• All reservation requests must be processed through the Hilton El Conquistador Golf and Tennis Resort.• To change your arrival or departure date or the type of room requested, contact the hotel at 520-544-5000• Reservation must be made by November 5, 2010• Hotel rates subject to availability.• Rates subject to applicable taxes.• If you plan on arriving at the hotel after 4:00pm, please include a check for the first night’s deposit or your credit card number and expiration date to guarantee your reservations.

MAIL RESERVATION FORM TO:Reservations Manager • Hilton El Conquistador Golf and Tennis Resort

10000 N. Oracle Rd., Tucson, AZ 85704or FAX TO: 520-544-1224

or call: 800-325-7832 and ask for the SME room rate

Name ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Employer _______________________________________________________________________________________________

Address _________________________________________________________________________________________________


Arrival Date__________________Hour________AM/PM Departure Date_________________ Hour________AM/PM

Name(s) of person(s) sharing room _______________________________________________________________________

Check Type of Room and Rate:( ) Single $99( ) Double/Twin $99

Credit Card _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Signature ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

( ) Check if you have any special needs. If so, please identify them. (1992 ADA)

SME_Arizona_2010.indd 1 9/23/10 1:42 PM



US GENERAL

US GENERAL

TEXAS

UTAH

GEOLOGICAL DATA SERVICE

• Resource Management • Property Valuation • Project Management • Exploration • Geology

• Data Maintenance • MappingServicing: • Coal, Trona, Limestone and other minerals

• Coal Methane Specialists49 East Gordon Avenue 801-288-8919 PhoneSalt Lake City, UT 84107 USA 801-288-8917 Fax

[email protected] with Mentor Consultants to offer PC/Cores, since 1994

Nearly FREEStress Relief

Call 1-800-Meta-Lax

Visit Us atwww.Meta-Lax.com

Bonal Technologies’ patented Meta-Lax process is the Effective Consistent Fast Alternative to Thermal Stress Relief.

LM GOCHIOCO& ASSOCIATES Inc.

Coal & Mining Geophysical Technologies

Detecting and imaging geologic anomalies, old mine works, abandoned mines & wells, seeps, and other environmental,

exploration, mine safety, & permitting challenges.

•NewBusinessDevelopment •Domestic&InternationalJointVentures •CBMandUCG

(832)647-0867,Fax(281)579-6308•Houston,Texas,USAEmail:[email protected];[email protected]

www.geonanotechnology.com

Harrison Western Constructionwww.harrisonwestern.com

800-638-8793Experience, Integrity, Performance

Mine DevelopmentUnderground Mine Construction

Mine Rehab & Repair

P.O. Box 10080 • American Canyon, CA 94503707-553-2772 • [email protected]

PETROGRAPHYORE MICROSCOPY

PROCESS MINERALOGY

SCHURER.indd 1 10/7/05 2:00:14 PM

F.M. LOCOTOS CO., INC.Mine and Roof Control Products

Complete line of Bolts, Plates, Resin, MatsWashers, Stratascope, and Specialty Items

On-site Testing and Evaluation(412) 257-8730 • Fax (412) 257-8738 • (866) 279-6507

www.fmlocotos.com

FM_LOCOTOS.indd 78 11/8/06 11:19:11 AM

ATLAS EQUIPMENT Co.Slurry Pumps

206-315-2950 • www.atlaseqco.comThe Warman® AH Pumps and parts are inter-changeable with the Battle Mountain pump Horizontal fully lined and Vertical Cantilever for harsh abrasive service.

Irrigation & Liquid Handling Solutions

Phone: 800-246-3685E-mail: [email protected]: www.schumacherirrigation.com

Since 1956Pipe • Hoses • Fittings

Weir Minerals provides the best slurry and mine-dewatering solutions for virtually any application, anywhere in the world.

www.weirminerals.com

412-856-9440 www.dappolonia.com

ENGINEERING TO THE MINING INDUSTRY

Refuse DisposalSite Development

Slope StabilizationGround Improvement

SubsidenceFoundations

Harrisburg, Pittsburgh and State College, PAMorgantown, WV • Hagerstown, MD

Phone (800) 892-6532 or (717) 232-0593, Fax (717) 232-1799www.skellyloy.com

“We Serve the Mining Industry Worldwide”

Since 1969

SKELLSKELLSKELLSKELLSKELLYYYYY AND AND AND AND AND LLLLLOOOOOYYYYYENGINEERS-CONSULTANTS

Harrisburg, Pittsburgh and State College, PAMorgantown, WV • Raleigh, NC • Hagerstown, MD

Phone (800) 892-6532 or (717) 232-0593Fax (717) 232-1799www.skellyloy.com

“We Serve the Mining Industry Worlwide”

CONTINENTAL PLACER INC.Geologic and Environmental Consultants

Brent Tardif, Senior Vice President2 Winners Circle • Albany, New York 12205

(518) 458-9203 • www.continentalplacer.comEXPLORATION / EVALUATION • ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING • MARKET STUDIES • MINERAL

APPRAISALS • EXPERT TESTIMONY • QUALITY & QUANTITY STUDIES • ACQUISITION DUE DILIGENCE • COMPUTERIZED MINE PLANNING • TOTAL BUSINESS VALUATIONS



A Kalenborn Company

www.abresist.com

Abresist CorporationToll Free: 800-348-0717Fax: 888-348-0717E-mail: [email protected]

� Wear resistantmaterial

� 40-500 mminternal diameter for pipes & bends

� Hoppers,chutes & cyclones

ABRESIST® Fused CastBasalt Liningsfor hydraulic & pneumatic conveying systems

Foam-in-place blast hole stemming and decking• Self-contained, single use system• Stem horizontal blast holes ° Increase pull ° Improve fragmentation• Air deck trim blasting ° Reduce overbreak ° Reduce scaling • Air deck presplitting (ADP)• VCR and drop raise blasting

1-800-556-9641www.foamconceptsllc.com

GeoTDR, Inc.Mine subsidence risk assessment, slope stability

720 Greencrest Drive, Westerville,OH 43081614-895-1400

A subsidiary of Geotechnical Consultants, Inc.www.geotdr.com

QSP Packers, LLCQuality - Service - Price

Serving Your Complete Packer Needs

� Inflatable Packers:Pressure Grout, Wireline, Water Well, Environmental,For 1.5” I.D. to 13” I.D. + Hole Diameter

� Mechanical PackersCall us with all your packer questions!!

Toll Free: 1-888-572-2537Fax: 253-770-0327

Email: [email protected] visit our WEB SITE:www.QSPPackers.com

Prompt Shipping in US & InternationalUsually in just one day!

SME ENDORSEDPROFESSIONAL LIABILITY PROGRAM

GENERAL LIABILITY PROGRAM

4015 Carlisle Blvd. N.E., Suite CAlbuquerque, NM 87107• Ph(505) 883-0220

CHAPMAN, WOOD& GRISWOLD, INC.

Consulting Mining Engineersand Geologists

Feasibility • Valuations • Worldwide ExperienceMetals • Industrial Minerals • Uranium

DAWSON METALLURGICALLABORATORIES, INC.

An FLSmidth CompanyProcess Development Testing

Precious Metals • Base Metals • Industrial Minerals

Philip Thompson, Director2030 North Redwood Road, Suite #70

Salt Lake City, Utah 84116Phone: 801-596-0430 • Fax: 801-596-0425

email: [email protected]

Mine Ventilation Services, Inc.1625 Shaw Avenue, Suite. 103, Clovis, CA 93611

Tel: 559 452 0182 - Fax: 559 452 0184Web: www.mvsengineering.com

We Specialize in:• Mine Ventilation Surveys• Computer Modeling

for Future Designs and Efficiency & Optimization Studies

• Software for Mine Ventilation & Cooling, Mine Fire Analysis

• Ventilation & Software Training Programs

• Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) Analysis & Control

Software Available from MVS: VnetPCTM 2007 VnetPCTM 2007 en Español ClimsimTM MineFireTM DuctSimTM

Full ServiceDPM Laboratory!

SV

M

US GENERAL

INTERNATIONAL

Language Solutions for your Global Market

Specializing in technical projects in 100 languages Including:*Brazilian Portuguese *Russian *Chinese

[email protected] Kanab,UTUSAwww.horizontranslating.comPh(435)644-2728



“Over 45 Years Experience”

For more information visit:

GeologyEnvironmentalHydrology

EngineeringConstructionManagement

www.tetratech.comclick on Study

(51)-1-4243228

INTERNATIONAL

Post MixingOptimization and Solutionswww.postmixing.com

Ever think that your process problemscould be related to your mixers?

MIXING EXPERTISEfor the

MINING INDUSTRYImprove production, yield,

purity and profi tabilityDirect Associates in:• USA• Mexico• South America• Canada• Europe

• Solvent extraction• CIP & CIL• Agitated leaching• Bio-oxidation• Autoclaves• Gold, copper, nickel, uranium, and others

The rest of the world is just a phone call or email away.

Tel: 585-507-4318, Fax 585-383-8788Email: [email protected]

POST_4INCH_MAR08.indd 1 2/16/08 9:34:55 AM

INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED EXPERTS IN:

• Gravity Sedimentation (Thickening & Clarification)

• Filtration (Pressure and Vacuum Applications)

• Rheological Properties Measurement

• Solids/Liquid Separation Systems Optimization

• Selection & Sizing for Solids/Liquid Separation Equipment

• On-site Troubleshooting and Process Consulting

SUPPLIERS OF EQUIPMENT INCLUDING:

• Thickeners and Clarifiers • Filter Presses

• Mixers • Vacuum Filters (Drum, Disk & Belt)

Glenn Welch • Mike Empey • Michael Wirthlin

Nick Newton • Ben Pocock

6188 South 300 WestSalt Lake City, Utah 84107, USA

(801) 265-9000Fax (801) 265-9852

www.pocockindustrial.com

POCOCK INDUSTRIAL, INC. SPECIALISTS IN SOLIDS / LIQUID SEPARATION

CONSULTING • TESTING • EQUIPMENT SALES

The Presto GEOWEB® is the ultimate environmental solution to challenging channel protection problems:

• Sustainable vegetation in appropriate environments

• On-site aggregate for limited access areas• Concrete for ultimate armor protection

Free preliminary projectevaluation service

PrEsTO GEOsysTEmsPh: 800-548-3424; 1-920-738-1336

www.prestogeo.com

ULTImATE CHANNEL PrOTECTION

When Your Data Matters

www.Techbase.com ~ 303-980-5300PO Box 1140, Morrison, CO 80465 USA

Maps, Sections, LogsReserves, 3D Visualization,

And everything else you needto develop your mining property

Software ExcellenceSince 1982When Your Data Matters

www.Techbase.com ~ 303-980-5300PO Box 1140, Morrison, CO 80465 USA

Maps, Sections, LogsReserves, 3D Visualization,

And everything else you needto develop your mining property

www.TechnoMine.net Front End Engineering • Bankable Feasibility Studies

Resource and Reserve Estimations Due Diligence • Expert Witness

Mine and Plant Optimization Advanced Control Systems

Salt Lake City, Utah - USA 801•944•1382 Office 801•733•6053 Fax Brazil Branch Office, Belo Horizonte, MG 55•31•9131•3474 Office

METALS, MINERALS, COAL ANDOIL SANDS CONSULTING SERVICES

WWW.MARSTON.COM314.984.8800

S T. L O U I S S A N A N T O N I O D E N V E R C A L G A R Y N E W C A S T L E

MININGMarston Ad. 4/color:MINING AD/2.125x2-2 7/16/08 11:28 AM Page 1

GROUND CONTROL CONTRACTINGSERVICES & EQUIPMENT

Pittsburgh, PA (412) 664-7788Fruita, CO (970) 858-0600

International Mining Consultants

Providing Mining Engineering Services in Support of Surface and Underground

Mining Operations Worldwide

ENERGYENVIRONMENTAL

ENGINEERINGCARBON MANAGEMENT

HEADQUARTERS534 Industrial Park Road / Bluefield, VA

(tel) 276.322.5467

www.mma1.com



SRK ConsultingEngineers and Geoscientists

Global Experience Global Solutions

RESOURCE GEOLOGY, DUE DILIGENCE,ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING,GROUNDWATER STUDIES, AND

DESIGN ENGINEERING

www.srk.com

International Manufacturer, Distributor and Service Groupfor Specialty Mining and Tunneling EquipmentMPI25 Allegheny SquareGlassport, PA 15045412.664.7788

www.mpiinc.info

Kappes, Cassiday& Associates

KCA

Specialists in the Testing and FieldApplication of Heap Leachand Cyanide Technology

Since 19727950 Security Circle, Reno, NV 89506

Phone: (775) 972-7575Fax: (775) 972-4567

www.kcareno.come-mail: [email protected]

• Buoyant Media Clarifiers • Carbon Retention Screens • Heavy Duty Drives • Horizontal Belt Filter

• Linear Screens • Paste Thickeners • Thickeners• Vacuum Filters

801.265.1000 westech-inc.com

Your source for mineral processing equipment

MINING SOFTWARE INFORMATIONMining Technical Systems Analysis

www.miningsoftware.comContact: Betty GibbsGIBBS ASSOCIATES

P.O. Box 706, Boulder, CO 80306(303) 444-6032 [email protected]

WINBELTFREE WINDOWS BELT CONVEYOR

DESIGN & COST PROGRAMVisit www.beltconveyor.com

CREATIVE ENGINEERING USA3513 Century Drive, Bakersfield, CA 93306TEL 661 871 2168 FAX 661 871 1798

www.CostMine.com

Tel: +1 509 328 8023Fax: +1 509 328 [email protected]

• Mining Cost Service

• Equipment Cost Calculator

• Coal Cost Guide

• Mining Compensation Reports

CostMine Division - InfoMine Inc. 2010www.infomine.com

Mining, Geology and Energy ConsultantsWeir International, Inc.

WEIR

Chicago Corporate OfficeTel: 630-968-5400 Fax: 630-968-5401

e-mail: [email protected]

Providing mining, geology, geotechnical, operational,

environmental, training and engineering services worldwide.

Serving the Mining, Mineral

and Energy Industries Since 1936CALL & NICHOLAS, INC.

Rock Slope Geological Mechanics Design Engineering

2475 N. Coyote Drive (520) 670-9774Tucson, AZ 85745 Fax: (520) 670-9251

email: [email protected]: www.cnitucson.com

Jerry MotzConsultant-Crushing

5446 S. 20th Street Tel. 414-281-8432Milwaukee, WI 53221 [email protected]

Crushing Performance • EvaluationPlant Design and Efficiency StudiesCrushing Performance • EvaluationPlant Design and Efficiency Studies

INTERNATIONAL

MINING INFORMATIONMINING SOFTWARE

COSMO LabMining Engineering

Mineral project evaluation techniques and applications: From conventional methods to real options

November 8-11, 2010, MontrealMichel Bilodeau, McGill University, Canada

Learn the basics of economic/financial evaluation techniques, as well as the practical implementationof these techniques to mineral project assessments.

• How to gain a practical understanding of economic/financial evaluation principles.• How to develop the skills necessary to apply these to support mineral project decisions.

2010 Professional DeveloPment seminar series

strategic risk Quantification anD management for ore reserves anD mine Planning

For registration and information

please contact:

Deborah FranklandDept. of Mining and

Materials EngineeringMcGill University

Montreal, Quebec

Email:[email protected]

Phone: (514) 398-4755,ext. 089638

Fax: (514) 398-7099

Upcoming 2011 Seminars• New - Certification in ore reserve risk and mine planning

optimization. Starts May 2011, Montreal Canada. Roussos Dimitrakopoulos, McGill University

For more details please visit- www.mcgill.ca/conted/prodep/ore/

• Theory and practice of sampling particulate materials - Part 1QA-QC, mine, and project audits - Part 2Dominique François-Bongarçon, AGORATEK, USA

• Strategic risk management in mine design: From life-of-mine to global optimizationRoussos Dimitrakopoulos, McGill University, Canada; Gelson Batista, AMEC, Canada; and Gerald Whittle, Whittle Consulting Australia.

• An introduction to cutoff grade estimation: Theory and practice in open pit and underground minesJean-Michel Rendu, Executive Consultant, Snowden, Australia

• Geostaistical mineral resource/ore reserve estimation and meeting the new regulatory environment: Step by step from sampling to grade controlMichel Dagbert, Geostat Systems Int, Canada; Jean-Michel Rendu, Consultant, USA; and Roussos Dimitrakopoulos, McGill University, Canada

www.smenet.orghttp://cosmo.mcgill.ca


Business Office8307ShafferParkwayLittleton,CO80127MainTel:303-948-4200•800-763-3132Fax:303-973-3845


ADVERTISING AND PRODUCTION/MEDIA MANAGERJohanna [email protected]

Sales OfficesHooper JonesCentral,NWU.S.847-486-1021•Cell:847-903-1853Fax:[email protected]

Marsha TabbEast,South,WestU.S.215-794-3442•Fax:[email protected]

Lewis BonderCanada514-485-3083•Fax:[email protected]

Patrick ConnollyU.K.andEurope441702-477341Fax:[email protected]

Gunter SchneiderScandin./Europe492131-511801•[email protected]

Johanna McGinnisAsia,Russia,UkraineAfrica,MiddleEastLatinAmerica,Australia303-948-4243•Fax:[email protected]

OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF SME

Index of Display Advertisers

FirestoneSpecialtyProducts 11

MinerElastomerProductsCorp 12

SiouxCorp 13

OntarioGov.Min.OfIntlTrade 3

PolysiusAG 5

CumminsInc/OffHighway-Industrial Backcover

WeirMineralsNorthAmerica Insidefrontcover

MINING ENGINEERING OCTOBER 2010

COSMO LabMining Engineering

Mineral project evaluation techniques and applications: From conventional methods to real options

November 8-11, 2010, MontrealMichel Bilodeau, McGill University, Canada

Learn the basics of economic/financial evaluation techniques, as well as the practical implementationof these techniques to mineral project assessments.

• How to gain a practical understanding of economic/financial evaluation principles.• How to develop the skills necessary to apply these to support mineral project decisions.

2010 Professional DeveloPment seminar series

strategic risk Quantification anD management for ore reserves anD mine Planning

For registration and information

please contact:

Deborah FranklandDept. of Mining and

Materials EngineeringMcGill University

Montreal, Quebec

Email:[email protected]

Phone: (514) 398-4755,ext. 089638

Fax: (514) 398-7099

Upcoming 2011 Seminars• New - Certification in ore reserve risk and mine planning

optimization. Starts May 2011, Montreal Canada. Roussos Dimitrakopoulos, McGill University

For more details please visit- www.mcgill.ca/conted/prodep/ore/

• Theory and practice of sampling particulate materials - Part 1QA-QC, mine, and project audits - Part 2Dominique François-Bongarçon, AGORATEK, USA

• Strategic risk management in mine design: From life-of-mine to global optimizationRoussos Dimitrakopoulos, McGill University, Canada; Gelson Batista, AMEC, Canada; and Gerald Whittle, Whittle Consulting Australia.

• An introduction to cutoff grade estimation: Theory and practice in open pit and underground minesJean-Michel Rendu, Executive Consultant, Snowden, Australia

• Geostaistical mineral resource/ore reserve estimation and meeting the new regulatory environment: Step by step from sampling to grade controlMichel Dagbert, Geostat Systems Int, Canada; Jean-Michel Rendu, Consultant, USA; and Roussos Dimitrakopoulos, McGill University, Canada

www.smenet.orghttp://cosmo.mcgill.ca

The Drift of Things


Coal versus natural gas

Colorado’s legislature, in April, passed H.B. 1365, a bill that required the state’s largest utility, Xcel Energy, to file a plan with the state’s Public Utilities Commission (PUC) outlining how it will reduce air pollution emissions from its electric generating plants.

The measure, dubbed the Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act, was signed into law by Gov. Bill Ritter. It provided Xcel Energy with incentives to replace 900 MW of electricity from

its coal plants with natural gas by 2017. At the time the measure was proposed, Xcel Energy voiced its opposition, saying the costs would be too great. However, once it became evident that the measure had a significant amount of support from state lawmakers, the utility changed its position to one of support.

Xcel’s plan is to spend $1.3 billion to retrofit several of its coal-burning units to natural gas. The utility claims its plan would promote economic development in the state and only add about 2 percent, or $14, to the average residential bill by 2020. However, Xcel also said that base rates through inflation could increase by 31 percent during the next 10 years, bringing the average annual residential bill to $934.

The plan is, of course, supported by the oil and gas industry, environmental groups and the governor, who has made it clear since his election that he wants Colorado to be known as a clean energy, clean jobs state. He is not running for re-election, by the way.

The Colorado Mining Association (CMA) and other opponents to the plan say the Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act was rushed through the legislature with little input from industry. CMA president Stuart Sanderson said the bill is “decidedly anti-coal.” In addition to significant job losses in the coal industry, energy consumers stand to lose in a big way, he said, “as the cost of natural gas exceeds that of coal by 300 percent.”

The coal industry in the state will suffer by Xcel’s plan. “It will hurt Colorado coal production,” Sanderson said. “Proponents erroneously contend that Colorado will not suffer major impacts as we sell coal on the export

market.” However, he pointed out that coal export sales (outside of the state), decreased by nearly 5.4 Mt (6 million st), or 27 percent, in a year. And the passage of H.B. 1365 means that 2.3 Mt (2.6 million st) of coal that is currently sold to two of Xcel’s Front Range plants will disappear.

Proponents of H.B. 1365 and the utility’s plan point to a study by the University of Colorado’s Leeds School of Business that showed a positive economic impact for the state. It projected that Xcel’s spending would generate up to $1.7 billion in economic activity and create 1,254 jobs in the construction industry between 2010 and 2026.

However, an analysis of Xcel’s plan by Roger Bezdek, an economist and national energy expert, went in the opposite direction. He said in testimony filed with the PUC that Xcel’s plan would cause electricity rates in Colorado to increase between 11 percent and 50 percent, contrary to Xcel’s 2 percent estimate. Bezdek also said the utility’s plan would result in:

• A reduction in Colorado’s gross state product (GSP) of between $2.8 billion and $12 billion annually.

• Annual job losses in range of 30,000 to nearly 120,000.

• Cumulative GSP losses from 2011 through 2020 of almost $117 billion.

• Cumulative job losses between 2011 and 2020 of 1.2 million.

• Cumulative costs to ratepayers during the same time period of up to $22 billion.

Another analysis of Xcel’s plan was performed by Harvey Cutler, an economist at Colorado State University. His analysis may be the most significant of the three in that it was performed for the PUC and could be the one the commission most relies upon. Cutler calculated that, over 10 years, Xcel’s planned move from coal to natural gas would cost Colorado residents about $89 million. And local and state taxes would be reduced by about $2.8 million.

Cutler’s analysis also determined that job losses associated with increased electricity rates could reach 2,459. This would include 882 jobs that are linked to the Clean Air-Clean Jobs Act.

Colorado’s PUC held hearings on the plan for two weeks during late October and early November. A final decision approving or disapproving the plan is due by Dec. 15. n

Steve Kral, Editor

New law hurtsColorado coal

For more information on the 2011 SME/CMA Meeting, contact:SME, 8307 Shaffer Pkwy, Littleton, CO 80127

www.smenet.org • [email protected] • 303-948-4200

2011 SME Annual Meeting & Exhibit& CMA 113th National Western Mining Conference

Shaping a Strong Future Through MiningFebruary 27 – March 2, 2011 • Denver, Colorado

The premier gathering of mineral professionals is not to be missed.Mark your calendar for the following:

PROGRAMCoal & Energy • Industrial Minerals & Aggregates • Environmental

Geology • Mining & Exploration • Mineral & Metallurgical ProcessingRobert Bates Symposium • R-H Yoon Symposium

Underground Construction Association of SME • Valuation

EXHIBITThe industry’s best market place. Plan on experiencing more than

400 of industry’s most innovative suppliers of products and services.

PLUS: Short Courses • Field Trips • Social ActivitiesStudent Activities • And much more!

MiningEngineering_Ad.indd 1 8/9/10 11:18 AM

With nearly 3,000 Tier 2 emissions-certified high-horsepower mining engines producing millions of

horsepower every day, Cummins is clearly the clean power leader. Our full line of engines from

31 to 3500 hp deliver greater levels of productivity, efficiency and durability for the lowest cost per

ton at every site. With over 80 years of mining experience and trained technicians at 500 distributor

locations in 190 countries, Cummins ensures your success – for years to come.

For more information, see everytime.cummins.com or call our 1-800-DIESELS™

(1-800-343-7357) Customer Assistance Center for a distributor near you.

©2010 Cummins Inc., Box 3005, Columbus, IN 47202-3005 U.S.A.

The Clean Power Leader.EveryTM Ton.

October Optimized 10

Documents

Transcript of October Optimized 10