Search Documents

The morning session opened at 9:00 a.m. and was presided over by George A! Nugent, President, Sheridan Wyoming Coal Company, Sheridan, Wyoming. The first speaker was Joseph E. Zatek, Product Specialist, Portable Instruments; Mine Safety Appliances Company, Pitts¬burgh, Pennsylvania. His presentation was illustrated by slides and subject, "Problems of Noise as Applied to Coal Mining." (See Index for printed text of Mr. Zatek's paper.) Mr. Zatek has been with Mine Safety Appliances Company for the, past 14 years) Prior to going with M.S.A. he was Indus!, trial Hygienist for Pennsylvania Department of Health, a position he held for 10 years He attended the University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and graduated with a B.S. degree in Chemical Engineering. He is a member of Air Pollution Control Association, American Society of Safety Engineers, Instrument Society of America and the American Industrial Hygiene Association. He is certified by the American,' Board of Industrial Hygiene in Compre¬hensive Practice of Industrial Hygiene and also by the Bureau of Mines to be an Instructor in Noise Measurement and Control.

Jan 1, 1971

MR. TESCHER (Disaster at Dawson) : I move that you appoint a committee of nine members of this Institute to draft a set of resolutions that we can send out to all members of this Institute, to the mine officials in all four states, that might go towards preventing these disasters; that we reach all men, all mining men, mine officials of all kinds. I think we have enough brains to carry out a few suggestions of that kind. I think you are fully familiar or know men who are fully qualified to act on this committee. The only qualification that I have is to ask that Mr. Harrington be appointed a member of this committee. PRESIDENT WHITESIDE: You have heard the motion, and I believe it was seconded. Is there any discussion? That is a subject that really needs a great deal of thought. MR. LAMB: Things like that can't be handled in a minute. What Mr. Tescher suggested is all right, but to my mind, going into a great many of these different properties, seeing the conditions, such things hit pretty close to home. I would suggest that you put this off; lay it over until such time as the people who had the disaster have some time to think these things over. It is too soon to offer even a suggestion. Suggestions are all right, but there are no nine living men in the United States who can stand up or sit down and talk it over and give you any reasonable answer, in one hour or six months. First, you would naturally have to go down there and converse with the men who were at the camp at the time. You are all operators; all you operators would -like to talk it over today. You realize that anything that is good for the camp is always acceptable in disasters of this kind. I say, do it gracefully and not by publication. MR. TESCHER: I feel that the men present know these suggestions by heart and they don't have to discuss them. They know them instinctively and they know they will apply to any mine. It must be understood that if these suggestions are not carried out, they ought to be; and there is a motion before the house. PRESIDENT WHITESIDE: Mr. Murphy, you started to rise to your feet a moment ago. Have you anything to say on the subject? MR. MURPHY: I have just returned from a visit to Mr. Brennan. Mr. Brennan and I have worked together for twenty years. The manager of our company asked me to go down there and express his sympathy. Those things come to all men if they live long enough, in the coal business, and he wanted me to express to Mr. Brennan personally his sympathy and deep regret. What I had in mind when I started to rise, was to suggest that the Institute as a whole express its sympathy to Mr. Brennan. I don't think there is a man in Utah, Wyoming, Colorado or New Mexico who has done more in safety' lines than Mr. Brennan, and it just seems bad luck that he had this disaster, and I am in hearty sympathy with the gentleman who spoke about not appointing this committee. I believe a resolution to Mr. Brennan would be very much better. JAMES DALRYMPLE: I am in sympathy with this gentleman here. I think it is going to hurt the feelings of those connected with the mines in which this disaster occurred. If you will give me the privilege for a few minutes, I will gladly express myself and the action that has been taken in the past by this Institute, and my opinion combined with a great many other opinions. And what I am going to say is going to be said by the-well, I am going to say it as I see it. I am going to say it not in an unfriendly spirit, but from a spirit of not undue criticism. I happen to be one of the original members who organized this Institute. I did what I could to obtain memberships. I remember very well when we had our first meeting that we had a very large membership. I think I have a photograph of the members which was taken on the steps of the Capitol building at that time. Our membership at that time was composed largely of underground officials. I mean by "underground" officials, the superintendents to some extent, the mine foremen, their assistants,

Jan 1, 1923

At 10 a. m. registration was commenced and completed. At 11:30 a. m. the meeting was called to order by the President, William Littlejohn. There was no unfinished business, new business nor reports of committees. The minutes of the previous meeting, as published in the proceedings, were approved. The report of the Treasurer was referred to the Auditing Committee who were auditing the report of the previous year. At 2 p. m., President William Little- john called the meeting to order for study session. Mr. J. Samuel Pyeatt, the new president of The Denver & Rio Grande Western Railroad, ad- dressed the Institute at length, expressing his pleasure at the opportunity of meeting the coal operators, pledging his cooperation toward the solution of the mutual problems that are arising. He reviewed the change in the Western Industrial situation; explained how the revenue of The Denver & Rio Grande Western Rail- road was being received from freight rates, only twenty-four per cent above the rates of 1914, yet laborers receive 97 per cent more, supplies cost 58 per cent more, showing that no reduction in rates can be expected unless other conditions are adjusted. He gave figures to show the immense sums, aggregating ten million dollars, that have been spent on improvements in the last ten years. The railroad is improving and will continue to improve. Mr. Pyeatt feels that the serious troubles of the railroad are over and that with the cooperation of the shippers, better service and more profits are ahead. He showed the increase in rates on farm products to be only 48 per cent, as against an average in- crease in price of farm products, them- selves, of DG per cent. The position of the farmer is not as serious, nor un- fair, as has been claimed. More equitable legislation is promised, and this is needed to offset the efforts of demagogues to deceive the people as to the actual facts. Much equipment has been put into the railroad, much new and powerful equipment, and ten of the largest narrow gauge locomotives ever built have just been ordered, engines that will do the work of three of the present locomotives. This ratio of improvement will be maintained throughout the narrow guage system, and the Rio Grande will not lag behind the shippers and the operators in co- operation. The President answered Mr. Pyeatt's remarks, and then called the meeting to order for discussion. The study sessions were held; papers were read by .J. H. Emrick, "Cutter Bits"; D. A. Stout, "Experiments in Mining Methods," and Harry Petersen, "Permissible Powder and Cushion Shooting." Tuesday, February 17, 1925 The meeting was called to order Tuesday morning at 10 a.m., and papers read by: F. C. Miller, "Safety Methods With The Colorado Fuel & Iron Company"; this was supplemented by a talk by 0. C. Irwin on "Automatic Mine Fan Control," illustrated by models of the apparatus used; Samuel Tescher, "The Operation of a Gaseous Mine."

Jan 1, 1925

By Hugh McLeod

To make the statement that coal mine operation has been entirely revolutionized within the last ten years is a mild statement. This has been entirely due, of course, to the almost universal introduction of mechanical loading in coal mines. Under the old system of contract loading too much was left to the individual miner's judgment and willingness to do the right thing. Each miner regarded the place in which he worked as "his place," and depending upon the judgment and ability of the miner, conditions as found in these places largely reflected that man's individuality or personality. Many men kept their places well timbered and in such condition that they were not only able to load their turn but were able to take advantage of any surplus cars that might be available in their particular entry. These men were often regarded as "coal hogs." However, these men's places were usually found to be well timbered and well maintained. Supervision under this old system in a strict sense of the word amounted to casual visits to the man's working place by the foreman or his assistant once each day as required by law.

Jan 1, 1938

The first session of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was called to order by Past President R. M. von Storch, who introduced the President, R. R. Williams, Jr., Manager of Mines, The Colorado Fuel & Iron Corporation, Pueblo, Colorado. His speech of welcome is as follows: "Members and guests of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute: It is my distinct privilege to welcome you to the fifty-fifth regular meeting of the Institute. We have again gathered to meet our treasured friends, to make new acquaintances, to hear important papers by outstanding authorities, and to generally enjoy ourselves in the setting of the beautiful city of Colorado Springs. It is the prerogative of your President to appear as optimistic as he desires in the opening remarks to this Institute. I must admit that I have had to cast aside some bare and significant facts to the contrary. However, there must be a great deal of optimism present in an industry that can survive the adversities that have confronted. the coal industry within recent years.

Jan 1, 1959

Jan 1, 1994

Allen & Garcia American Mining Congress American Steel and Wire Company Blue Blaze Coal Company Bogue Supply Company Brandenberger, L. Burke Company, J. J

Jan 1, 1929

The morning session opened at 9:00 a.m. and was presided over by Carlyle F. Gronning, Chairman, Industrial Commission, State of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah. The first speaker was John A. Fagnant, Vice President-Sales, Kemmerer Coal Company, Frontier, Wyoming. Subject - "Open Pit Coal Mining, Western States." Mr. Fagnant is a graduate of Colorado School of Mines, 1937 Degree, Metalurgical Engineer His career in the mineral industry began at the Arthur Mill of Kennecott Copper Company. For nine years he was with Allis Chalmer Company in Milwaukee, Wisconsin as a Sales Engineer in the Mining Machinery Division. Following five years in private business, he joined The Kemmerer Coal Company as a special projects engineer specializing in coal carbonization. He was assigned the job of Sales Manager in 1968 and promoted to Vice President of Sales in 1970. Member of A.I.M.M.E.

Jan 1, 1975

By David Scrymgeour

All low cost coal has been mined. Engineers are searching for a safe and effective way to mine coal seams' deep within the earth. The most modern of these is the RL, an acronym for Robotic Labor. Mining robots are programmed to do specific jobs but can think on their own during an emergency. MR's, or mining robots, usually have a same basic shape. A torso is mounted on treads. Designers chose treads because it gives the robot a great deal of mobility. The torso has two arms. One arm is equipped with a human hand. The other has a human-like hand. Mining is done underground. A small robot goes around punching holes in the coal. A small charge is inserted in the hole. The MR ignites the charge with his laser. It explodes after three minutes. The MR returns to the station where his battery is recharged. Mobile cement barricades are moved between the blasting area and other working MR's. After the charge explodes the barricades are moved to another area. The MR returns and cuts the coal chunks into pieces. Another robot comes and loads the coal and carries it to the loading bin. From there it is taken to the surface where it is weighed and shipped. The whole process was done by robots. Humans just supervise but help in an emergency or malfunction.

Jan 1, 1987

By R. Dawson Hall

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

Jan 1, 1922

Mr. Pickett's remarks were primarily concerned with the legislative aspects of the coal industry. Mr. Pickett stated that as a result of the 1952 election, only two senators and eleven representatives are now in the legislature who have ever served under a republican administration. He said there are 425 legislative issues now on the floor of Congress concerning the coal industry, but the coal industry has difficulty in legislation, because, although there are 31 coal states, only 11 states produce more than 5,000,000 tons per year, and 11 states produce between 500,000 and 5,000,000 tons of coal a year. In these states there are 44 senators and 195 representatives, less than a majority in either house, if all could be counted on to support the coal industry. An important committee to the coal industry is tile House Ways and Means Committee, composed of 25 members, 15 Republicans and 10 Democrats. Even with the support of the senators and representatives from these 22 states, legislative action is difficult.

Jan 1, 1954

By J. F. McDermott

The problem of converting our raw coal, and especially those coals that are not suited for long storage, in other words soft, into a fuel which would be at once clean; of a high B. t, u. content and low ash, is one that has occupied the minds of many able chemical engineers and hydrocarbon technologists during the past few years. Low temperature carbonization is the present outcome of this line of research, and many methods have been evolved of recent years to turn out a serviceable, useful fuel, and at the same time, save the by-products. As most of the research and data within my experience and knowledge pertains to lignite or sub-bituminous coals, I will confine my remarks to coals of that character and grade: I might say that Colorado coals, commonly called lignite, are not in reality true lignite, but are sub-bituminous, although I have in my possession an analysis of a Colorado coal which shows a moisture of 17 per cent, volatile 31.5 per cent, fixed carbon 28.8 per cent, and an ash of 22.7 per cent, and B. t. u. less than 8,000. Even this, though useless for domestic or indeed industrial purposes, could not be classified as true lignite. However, for the purposes of this paper I will refer to these coals as lignite. Two thousand pounds, or one ton, of raw lignite carries about 20 per cent moisture. This, of course, varies in some coals, but is, I believe, a fair average. For carbonization purposes this is usually dried to a 5 per cent moisture, therefore leaving but 1,700 pounds of coal to be placed in the retort. From present knowledge, and with the average process of carbonization, 70 per cent of this coal will come out carbonized, or 1,190 pounds, to which is added about 10 per cent pitch, which is fried out as the coal passes through the retort, and which is used as a binder, making a total of 1,360 pounds of coke or carbonized coal. This is usually in appearance a dark colored, rather porous coke of about the size of pea coal. It burns without smoke and have a very high B. t. u. content. According to most authorities on this subject, carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, sulphur and ash constitute the only elements on which carbonization value of a coal depends, and of these hydrogen is the most important. It is claimed the value of a coal for carbonization purposes may be roughly surmised from the hydrogen content. If this is promising, that is, showing an available hydrogen content of from 3 to 5 per cent, the coal should be given a careful ultimate analysis. Should the seam, as often happens in lignite coals, show varying bands of coal of different structure or appearance, samples should be taken from each band as well as a gross sample taken down the face of the seam in the usual way. This is in order to determine what part of the seam is most promising for by-product processes. A seam showing a high nitrogen content adds to the attractiveness of the coal in carbonizing as; if available nitrogen is 2 per cent or better, it should give a very high ammonia yield.

Jan 1, 1923

The twenty-fifth regular meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was called to order at 11 a. m. Monday, August 29, 1927, in the County Court House at Trinidad, Colorado, the Vice-President, F. L. Peart, presiding. After a few words from John F. Carmody, Editor of Goal Age, J. Q. McNatt, Division Engineer of the Colorado Fuel & Iron Company, read a paper on "Coal Geology." In the afternoon, Prof. C. B. Carpenter, of the Colorado School of Mines talked on the work in Fuel Engineering being developed at the Colorado School of Mines. W. C. Holman, of the Phelps Dodge Corporation, then read his paper on "Developing a Pit Car Design." L. M. Kuhns, Safety Engineer of the Gallup American Coal Company, read his paper on "Safety Methods at Gallup American No. 5 Mine." After discussion the meeting adjourned for the day.

Jan 1, 1927

PRESIDENT LITTLEJOHN: Before we open the discussion on the Utah mining laws, I want to bring out what I consider a slight misunderstanding on some of the things that I said this forenoon relative to our comparison of accidents. I did not mean to infer that we, as mine officials, are satisfied we have done the best we can to eliminate the accidents, when I was talking about a four-to- one comparison. I do not want any- one to get the idea in their heads that I do not think we are doing all we can. There is not any of us who can state that, even if we better these figures. It is the general understanding that these figures are based upon ratios per thousand man shifts and not upon the tonnage basis that we use. If it were based upon a tonnage basis, I think the figures would be pretty nearly reversed, for we are producing from two to four tons more per man than they do in Great Britain. The discussion will now be continued as I said this morning. There is a gentleman in the audience here that is as guilty of making these laws as I was, and I am quite sure when speaking he will confine himself to the subject of Utah Mining Laws and the prospective results. Before Mr. Monay starts with his paper, I want it understood that this discussion must be finished by 2:30 for the reason that we have still quite a lot of business before us this afternoon.

Jan 1, 1925

By Thomas Collier

MR. PRESIDENT AND CO-WORKERS IN THE COAL INDUSTRY: I was requested by our president to prepare a paper on Longwall Coal Mining, to be read before this honorable organization. There are three general systems of Longwall, Longwall advancing and Longwall retreating, and the Nottingham system which is worked in England and South Wales. In Fremont county, where I am employed, the Colorado Fuel and Iron Company are working their mines on the advancing system. The face is started generally from the bottom of the shaft or other mine opening, or, at the outside of the pillar left to support the shaft or slope-bottom and advances toward the boundary of coal area. As the roads in this system are maintained by pack walls, it is sometimes called gob-roads system, and by these means the mine is opened up rapidly and consequently early returns are secured from the capital invested. By this method, there is no expense for narrow work, and a minimum amount of timbering of the roads is required. Now what I call ideal Longwall work is where there is about eight inches of dirt mining-and four and one-half feet of coal, .and when the entries and rooms will gob themselves, so that there will be no rock or dirt to haul out to the surface. But this is not the case in the mine I am in charge of. The entries and rooms will not gob themselves, therefor we have to haul the rock and dirt to the surface, which runs up the cost of production. Now the ideal roof in Longwall is composed of tough elastic and pliable strata that yield gradually by bending when the coal is removed, and throwing a sufficient weight or roof pressure on the coal face to break the coal when the same has been mined or undercut. Timbering should be done systematically, the coal well spragged before the miner starts to undermine the coal. Cogs or cribs are alright in their place, but I am not a believer in crib in Longwall working because they are too strong for the roof and do not leave the roof to squeeze .down gradually and break the roof around the crib. Longwall work requires particular skill on the part of the miner, and a familiarity with the conditions affecting room and pillar work, and a good room and pillar mail may not be successful in. Longwall work. A good Longwall miner realizes more than any one else the importance of being regularly at his place every working day. A day lost causes his place to fall behind the others which makes his work harder, and his daily output is further reduced by the amount of small coal that is liable to result from the excessive pressure where the face falls behind. The bad results are also felt by the miner working on each side of such place, as the roof pressure is often insufficient and the coal does not break as well as when the face is kept in a uniform line.

Jan 1, 1921

The fifth Annual RMCMI Mine Rescue Evaluation was held June 29 through July 2 in conjunction with the 92nd RMCMI Convention. Eight teams from four states participated. They were: BHP La Plata Mine NM Capt. Jonathon Sorrell BHP Navajo Mine NM Capt. Ron Miller BHP San Juan Mine NM Capt. Albert Nelson Bridger Coal Company WY Capt. Ted Laughlin Coteau Properties Co ND Capt. Terry Davis Kerr-McGee Coal Corp WY Capt. Elvin Stanton Sabine Mining Company TX Capt. Spencer Thompson Solvay Minerals WY Capt. Ray Blaisdell Activities started with a Rope Rescue class taught by John Peleaux, from Innovative Access, at 1:00 p.m. on Saturday. The Mine Rescue Reception, Team Meeting, and Equipment Inspection was held Saturday evening. All participants received a T-shirt and cap. The Mine Rescue Evaluation started Sunday morning and ran until it was rained out around 3:00 p.m. There was a team swap meet Sunday evening at which teams bought extra caps and shirts. They also traded with other teams. [ ] The Evaluation resumed Monday morning and ran until mid-afternoon. The Evaluation was made up of seven stations. There were six scenarios and a written test. Teams were also challenged by a 14-foot confidence course wall to get their team over. The teams were evaluated by: Jack Knight Champion International, Pensacola, FL Becki Pickert Colorado Northwestern Community College, Craig, CO John Peleaux Innovative Access, Evergreen, CO Lynn Busskohl Kerr-McGee Coal Corp., Gillette, WY Lenny Altenburg Kerr-McGee Coal Corp., Gillette, WY Elvin Stanton Kerr-McGee Coal Corp., Gillette, WY Clarence Baker Kerr-McGee Coal Corp., Gillette, WY The victims for the scenarios were from the Kerr-McGee Mine Rescue-Team. They were: Dana Cooper, Doland Zink, Suzanne Ott, Mike Szuma, and Craig Moore. Also helping as a victim was Candy Cobb from Casper, WY. [ ] The program concluded Tuesday morning with the Awards Breakfast. A medical kit, donated by Strategic Supply, was given to the Solvay Minerals Team for the fastest time over the confidence wall. Engraved stone awards were given to the teams indicating the rating they achieved. Four teams received Level Ill (The highest rating) and three received Level II. The Kerr-McGee team also received an award for helping put on the evaluation. Additional stones were presented to Jack Knight, John Peleaux, Becki Pickert, and RMCMI President. Marcie Greenberg. The current plans for the 1997 Mine Rescue program are that Jim Andrews with Colowyo Coal will assume the chairmanship. Goals for next year are to increase funding and participation by establishing sub-committees or task groups. With the chair located in Colorado, coordination of the evaluation should be easier. Comments from all the teams were positive and they intend to return next year at Steamboat Springs. [ ]

Jan 1, 1996

Our presiding officer for this session is someone we are all proud to be associated with. One who is dedicated to Public Service and Safety in the State of Colorado, and known in the mining field and the Colorado Mining Association. We are very pleased to introduce Mr. Donald Haske, Chief Mine Inspector for the State of Colorado: Donald Haske: Officers, Members and guests. It is certainly my pleasure to be here today and an extra special pleasure to be presiding over this session. As some of you know, from natural up, heavy equipment is rapidly coming to the field of mining. This may seem a long way off at the present, but it certainly isn't. We are getting all the old annuals (Bi) together to be compiled for a guide and public attraction. However, we are unable to locate an (1894 panel). If any of you know of any of these please let us know.

Jan 1, 1967

By R. Dawson Hall

R. DAWSON HALL (The Coal Age, New York City) : Mr. Chairman and gentlemen: I do not feel that I have anything in particular to say. I have not prepared anything for an occasion such as this. I just came from New York City, and as one man said to me today, "That is not any recommendation in particular." (Laughter.) In answer to your request for a few remarks of a timely character I would say: One of the possibilities in the Rocky Mountain Region coal mines is the use of steel arches, posts and straps. The timber of the region seems unusually subject to dry rot and does not last long, especially in those places as in southern Wyoming, where the mine atmosphere is likely to contain a large quantity of carbon dioxide. It is true that, in many mines, much care is taken to drive out this gas and to arrange that the timber will have the fresh air that will prolong its life, but despite such provision much timber is subjected to speedy rot. Steel has made rapid progress in England, Germany and France and is recognized as an economy, not an extravagance. Frequent replacement of rotting wood and removal of broken rock are a source of great waste, risk and inconvenience in operation that together spell great cost. The very dryness of the mines and the lack' of acid water are favorable to the use of steel where support of roof or sides is necessary.

Jan 1, 1932

By Eugene McAuliffe

The subject of my few remarks addressed to the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute, "Guessing or Knowing! Which," may perhaps suggest but little to you here today. However, I am sure you will all agree with me when I say that in the conduct of a coal mining operation there should be no choice between guessing and knowing. The value of, and the results to be obtained from this Institute, its meetings and printed transactions, as well as those of other similar educational organizations, depend very largely on the mental attitude of those who constitute, through their pronouncements, the more active portion of the membership. Perhaps the most apt criticism that is now being made of the coal industry is that, to an extent possibly exceeding any other industry of similar magnitude and importance, it depends for its conduct altogether too much on "rule of thumb" and "tradition," rather than on proven practice and actual fact. The records of our coal mining association meetings bear expression of many conflicting opinions, the majority of which are sincerely put forth by those expressing same as representing the facts; the extremes expressed, however, frequently fix the question raised as one yet located in "no man's land." There are yet too many chances taken we are still "weighing pounds on railroad track scales" and measuring yards with the proverbial "bit of string." The actual expense of conducting any one of the several operations incident to the production of coal is rarely determined, and in many instances the general cost figures, prepared some weeks after the work is complete, are of that sweeping character that very little can be abstracted therefrom. Many coal companies are now making a daily cost sheet, showing the cost of labor and material in detail, as used in the several related operations,, and such is decidedly helpful, particularly to the mine superintendent and his foreman, who, without such, sail an uncharted sea; the auditor's belated monthly summary rarely ever seen by these men who are held responsible for the labor and material used. I have made reference to this situation as an accentuation of the fact that the coal industry contains more "serious minded, conscientious guessers" than does any other similar industry, although the annual cost of our product runs up well beyond the billion dollar mark, and what is more important, our industry is one that still continues to exact a heavy toll of human life. Now this brings me to the question of safety, the one question that should be, and which is, I know, uppermost in your minds. The coal mining world, engineering and operating, is now well sold on at least two things the theory of using permissible explosives and the elimination of the open light. Furthermore, the industry, particularly that portion which is located in Great Britain and the United States and Canada, are now planning vast extensions of the use of "rock" or "shale dust," both in the form of "dust barriers" and in "direct application" to entries and cross-cuts. This is well; however,, my study of past mine explosions has convinced me that the great majority of such had their very beginning in gas accumulations; frequently originating in restricted areas at the working face, in abandoned worked-out areas, or in some other certain place where ventilation is not, maintained as it should be; and that again leads me to the point where it can again be well said, that there is too much "rule of thumb," too much guessing now being done in regard to the volume of air required, and continuously furnished, in a given entry,, panel, room or area. Just to emphasize this situation, is it not a fact that the majority of mine inspectors express the ventilation conditions as measured by them, in terms of cubic feet per man employed, in each certain split, and does not the mining laws of many states yet demand a minimum of "100 or 150 cubic feet

Jan 1, 1924

Jan 1, 1925