Search Documents

Jan 1, 2008

At 10 a. m., Tuesday, November 12, 1912, the following members of the committee appointed by "Coal Age" to organize a Coal-Mining Institute for the Rocky Mountain region, met in the State Capitol, at Denver, Colo. : E. H. Weitzel W. J. Murray T. H. O'Brien W. B. Williams James Dalrvmple F. W. Whitksiie A. C. Watts David Griffiths The following members of the committee were not present: Frank Manley Allan French H. C. Williams Frank Cameron J. E. Pettit D. W. Brown C. H. Gibbs E. H. Weitzel acted as chairman of the meeting. This committee drew up a form of Constitution and By-Laws, to be recommended to the general meeting to be held on the following day; and, with the exception of two alterations, this Constitution and By-Laws, formulated by the Organization Committee, were accepted as a whole by the general meeting. With the exception of a general discussion of affairs that might be brought out by means of such an institute, no further business was done at this meeting of the Organization Committee, and it was adjourned.

Jan 1, 1913

Jan 1, 2004

By K. L. Marshall

A facetious title was purposely given this talk, so that a formal paper would not be expected. TWO or three days ago, while discussing with Mr. Dickinson some of the details of the dust explosion demonstrations we are planning for this coming Saturday, I remarked that we would like to have as many people as possible see some samples of 20 and 200 mesh dust, so they would more fully understand just what was causing the explosions. Mr. Dickinson requested that I bring samples and screens and in this informal manner, give you all a ".close-up" of coal dust which is considered in Explosion Hazard reports. While sampling mines, for road, rib, and roof dust, in connection with safety service and hazard reports which the Bureau of Mines Engineers make at the request of coal operators, I have often been assisted by under- ground mine officials or other men of many years experience and on almost every occasion, while we were carefully brushing the very fine dust from timbers or coal surfaces, they would make some remark such as: "never had noticed this kind of dust, didn't know it was here", or "well, that's the first time I really understood what all 'this dust talk was about." Such experience makes me believe that the much published terms, 20 mesh and 200 mesh are just numbers to the great majority of both miners and operators. We are now going to have lesson one in the primer of coal dust explosions and I want to say, in all sincerity that a complete course in the hazards of mining is deserving of a place in the curriculum of the best mining schools of this country. Sample No. 1 is fine coal and dust and is a fair sample of what can be found every where in rooms and entries of a mine, as it is too small to be gathered up with a shovel and is left in the ordinary mining at the faces and is spilled along the entries in haulage. In this you will see some quarter inch coal, much eighth and sixteenth inch coal, in fact those are the sizes I find many people have in mind when they are asked about the dust made in mining. Although the sizes mentioned are the ones which seem to almost entirely make up this sample, such is not the case, for from 10 to 20% of such a sample will usually pass this 20 mesh screen and in Sample No. 2 we have 20 mesh dust. Result of many tests, supports .the statement of the coal mining division of the Bureau, that it is quite probable that coal over 20 mesh does not take part in any but the most violent of explosions and that all dust under 20 mesh may take part in any explosion. The largest particles in this sample will not be over .03 inches in their largest dimension and a pound of dust to a foot of average heading is very easily found in most every mine I have visited and usually a great deal more can be readily gathered up. It was .found early that the finer the dust the more dangerous it was for a given coal. So for the early explosion tests conducted by the Bureau a commercial pulverizer was used and it turned out a 20 mesh dust of which about 75% would pass 200 mesh. Some men question whether the ordinary mining methods made such a dust and so doubted the explosibility of the dust in their own mines. The question was well taken, and hundreds of dust samples were taken by the field men of the Bureau to determine the kind of dust being made in all methods of mining and all classes of coal. The result of such sampling showed some coals. resisted breakage more than others and that actual mine road dust, through 20 mesh, would show from 10 to 20% through 200 mesh, and for actual rib and roof dust through 20 mesh, they would get from 20 to 40% of 200 mesh dust. In testing the

Jan 1, 1924

Jan 1, 1930

Jan 1, 1963

By Geo. B. Pryde

Dear Sir: Yours of July 23rd, relative to my appointment on the Safety Committee in connection with the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. As you say in your letter, "The duty of this committee is to draft suggestions as to safer mining practices with the idea of preventing disasters in coal mines." Much has been written and many suggestions made on this same subject, and it is very hard to put up further recommendations than have already been made. The disasters you mention in your letter unquestionably have direct reference to coal mine explosions, which from time to time still occur in this and other countries. As far as our Western mines are concerned, you know that sprinkling and shot firing by electricity have been very extensively carried out. Notwithstanding these precautions; we have had a few rather serious disasters in the past in these mines. I do not care to place any blame or responsibility on the companies having these disasters, but it is a fact that in each and all of them, after careful investigation has been made, that the human element has had more or less bearing on the accidents happening. From most reports that we gain, either directly or indirectly, it is very evident that investigation shows after an explosion that the rules governing one or both of the above safety measures have been somewhat carelessly or negligently carried out. Much has been written and read about rock dust sprinkling, but it is questionable if this method is doing a great deal toward the eliminating of disasters. While it is true it may have the effect of preventing propagation, still I do not believe anyone claims for it a sure preventative against initial explosions. I had occasion not long ago to visit a mine, after an explosion, in which dust barriers were supposed to be hung, and from indications it was quite evident that the dust barriers had been in operation, but they did not prevent the explosion from reaching. all open parts of the mine. It is also true that profuse scattering of rock dust throughout a mine would have a beneficial effect, but there is a question arises here as to whether the sprinkling by rock dust or the spraying by water, if available, is the most effective. I am satisfied that if all coal mines are kept well sprinkled and all open workings maintained in a thorough moist condition, that the biggest factor in a coal mine explosion is in this way eliminated. There is no doubt but what the use of permissible powder, particularly if shot by electricity, has had a very marked effect on the number of dis¬asters in mines, and if this method of shooting was energetically carried out there would be a difference in the number of explosions, both minor and Major, all over the country. Some of the recent explosions have taken place where no shooting was being done, but there is no denying the fact that the other ingredient, namely, coal dust, entered in the elements very extensively. We have read and heard of hydraulic cartridges and other patents (substitutes for powder) that were being worked out for the purpose of

Jan 1, 1923

By Christopher Blazek

Presentation Overview ?2005 Train Derailments ?BNSF Investigation and Remediation ?BNSF Test Program ?Test Results ?BNSF Dust Control Goals ?National Coal Transportation Study ?Comparison of Different Topper Agents ?What Constitutes a Topper Program

Jan 1, 2008

of our good friends and fellow members: William D. Brennan Charles Beuchat who left the world better for their having lived in it.

Jan 1, 1931

Public perceptions about coal remain neutral to negative But gains are slowly being made as the public becomes more aware of coal as ?abundant, affordable, and increasingly clean?

Jan 1, 2006

By J. A. Smith

The topic assigned me by the Chairman of the Institute, "Safety Practices in Franklin and Williamson Counties, Illinois," I fear will necessarily resolve itself into a paper on shale dust, its application and the results obtained. I returned .only last week from a three weeks trip through these counties at which time, through the courtesy extended me by the operators, I had ample opportunity to visit and inspect many of the largest mines in the field, some of which are among the largest in the United States. With the exception of shale dust and ventilation, I see but vary few instances where the Illinois mines are further advanced in safety precautions than the western mines, and in some respects I believe the operators of the West are further advanced in safety methods than their eastern brothers. Great care is exercised in handling of all ventilation currents. This is an aboslute necessity, as this field is quite gaseous, and the peculiar geological structure of the overlying and underlying strata makes airtight seals very

Jan 1, 1924

PRESIDENT MOSES.: The meeting will please come to order. Will you kindly state your names prior to making any statements, in order that we may deep the record straight? The first paper this morning is a joint one on vocational training, by D. W. Rockey, H. A. Tiemann and Wm. Moorhead. Mr. Rocdey. (Applause.) D. W. ROCKEY (State Superintendent, Industrial Education, Santa Fe, New Mexico) (Mr. Rocdey's notes not received in time for publication.) MR. TESCHER: I would like to ask you, Mr. Rocdey, you say you gave the Phelps-Dodge Corporation financial assistance; to just what extent was the State obligated, and how much assistance was given, etc.?

Jan 1, 1927

The twenty-ninth regular meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute was called to order at 11:30 o'clock a. m., Monday, May 26, 1930, President B. W. Snodgrass presiding: PRESIDENT SNODGRASS (condensed report): The meeting will please come to order. As President of your Institute, I take pleasure in welcoming you to this convention, and to those who come from outside of the city, I take pleasure in Welcoming you to the city of Denver. This is the first convention at Denver in fifteen months. I hope that the annual rather than the semi-annual meetings will prove satisfactory to all, and that no mistake has been made in that respect. We are gathered together here to discuss problems common to all of us, and I am sure that we will profit by such discussion. We have with us, outside of the membership of our organization, representatives of two other organizations, Mr. Callbreath of the American Mining Congress, and Mr. Huntress of the National Coal Association. We will be honored by having them with us, and we shall expect to hear from them during this meeting.

Jan 1, 1930

Jan 1, 1954

Article II of the RMCMI Bylaws reads: Section 1. Classes. The membership of the corporation shall be divided into three classes, consisting of active members, life members and senior members, who shall have such rights, privileges and qualifications as these bylaws may provide. The names of all active, life and senior members, together with current mailing addresses, follow. [ ]

Jan 1, 1985

Dear Member: The Proceedings for the Institute for the past year are enclosed. We hope you will read them, for there are some good ideas expressed, and the papers are far above the average. The job of publishing the Proceedings has always worried the Secretary. The Secretary, being at the same time the Treasurer, has to pay the bills, and this time he enlisted the co-operation of some of our friends. You will find this co-operation shown in the ads in the proceedings. Read the ads just as carefully, even more so, than you do the text. They carry messages from our friends. Don't forget the winter meeting in Denver, the last of February, the 26, 27 and 28. Another good paper to be read then will be that of A. L. Jones on the subject of "Power Problems of the Coal Mine." In the meantime you can do two things for the Secretary. Let the few who haven't paid their dues remit quickly so we can get our books closed. Also, when you know of a changed address of any of the Institute members, drop the Secretary a line. so he can keep the mailing list straight Very truly yours, THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN COAL MINING INSTITUTE By [ ] Sec?y-Treas. BS AHH

Jan 1, 1922

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

Jan 1, 1977

Jan 1, 1960

DM&E PRB Project [ ] DM&E HISTORICAL MILESTONES ?Start-up in 1986 (former C&NW). ?Colony Line acquisition in 1996 (from UP). ?PRB Project Announcement in 1997 ?IC&E Acquisition in 2002 (former CP/IMRL). ?FRA Federal Refinancing in 2003 (RRIF-1).

Jan 1, 2006

By George B. Pryde

Dear Sir: Yours of July 23rd, relative to my appointment on the Safety Committee in connection with the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute. As you say in your letter, "The duty of this committee is to draft suggestions as to safer mining practices with the idea of preventing disasters in coal mines." Much has been written and many suggestions made on this same subject, and it is very hard to put up further recommendations than have already been made. The disasters you mention in your letter unquestionably have direct reference to coal mine explosions, which from time to time still occur in this and other countries. As far as our Western mines are concerned, you know that sprinkling and shot firing by electricity have been very extensively carried out. Notwithstanding these precautions; we have had a few rather serious disasters in the past in these mines. I do not care to place any blame or responsibility on the companies having these disasters, but it is a fact that in each and all of them, after careful investigation has been made, that the human element has had more or less bearing on the accidents happening. From most reports that we gain, either directly or indirectly, it is very evident that investigation shows after an explosion that the rules governing one or both of the above safety measures have been somewhat carelessly or negligently carried out. Much has been written and read about rock dust sprinkling, but it is questionable if this method is doing a great deal toward the eliminating of disasters. While it is true it may have the effect of preventing propagation, still I do not believe anyone claims for it a sure preventative against initial explosions. I had occasion not long ago to visit a mine, after an explosion, in which dust barriers were supposed to be hung, and from indications it was quite evident that the dust barriers had been in operation, but they did not prevent the explosion from reaching all open parts of the mine. It is also true that profuse scattering of rock dust throughout a mine would have a beneficial effect, but there is a question arises here as to whether the sprinkling by rock dust or the spraying by water, if available, is the most effective. I am satisfied that if all coal mines are kept well sprinkled and all open workings maintained in a thorough moist condition, that the biggest factor in a coal mine explosion is in this way eliminated. There is no doubt but what the use of permissible powder, particularly if shot by electricity, has had a very marked effect on the number of disasters in mines, and if this method of shooting was energetically carried out there would be a difference in the number of explosions, both minor and Major, all over the country. Some of the recent explosions have taken place where no shooting was being done, but there is no denying the fact that the other ingredient, namely, coal dust, entered in the elements very extensively. We have read and heard of hydraulic cartridges and other patents (substitutes for powder) that were being worked out for the purpose of

Jan 1, 1923