OPEN F I L E REPORT 78
COST TO MINE COAL I N NEW MEXICO
DAVIDTABET
STEVEFROST
FRANKKOTTLOWSKI
NEW MEXICO BUREAU OF MINES
AND MINERALRESOURCES
(111
cow
'
TO XIXE COAL IN
NEW ~ X I C O , 1977
Thz c o s t of ninin3 coal varies with the
each operation.
.
gxeater than
Xining cosks for
underground and small strip mines a r e
for l a r g e strip nines.
The r a t i o of overburden t o seam
thickness, and t h e mining of a s i n g l e t h i c k
ca:;sss
differences in costs.
mining method ana w i t h
seam ormultiple
seam mining
,
Comparison with b7yoming an3 Montana coal-
mining costs. must t a k e i n t o account t h e i r t h i c k e r seams a t sha1lo.w' depths,
and t h e lower s u l f u r and ash content i n those northern
states.
. .
y o s t new
n i n e s i n Mew Mexico w i l l need t o add l a r g e c o s t s f o r c o n s t r u c t i n g r a i l r o a h s
to their mine s i t e s .
With ongoing i n f l a t i o n i n c o s t s
and reclamation (evea with larger
of c o a l ) t h e c o s t
of equipment, l a b o r ,
equipment arid mining of l a r g e volumes
of s t r i p mined c o a l i s n o t l i k e l y t o d e c r e a s e
.
from
$8.00 per ton.
A study done f o r t h e Energy Resources Boardby Paul weir Company
on s t r i p mined c o a l c o s t s gave t h e normal New Mexico operating conditions .
i n t h e San JuanBasin
as follows:
(1) subbituminous coalaveraging
9,500 Btu p e r pound; (2) l e n t i c u l a r bedsranging
but with the average
up t o 25 feet-. i n t h i c k n e s s
5 t o 1 2 feet, 'containing shale partings;
t o m u l t i p l e seam mining;
(4) s t r i p p i n g t o d e p t h s
little or no rehandlingofspoil;
burden and the coal;
loaders. Including
( 5 ) use o f
( 6 ) blastingtheover-
an8 (7) mining the coal with shovels
sone reclamation costs,
( 3 ) sinsle
from 30 to 150 feet
(depending on favorable overburden t o c o a l t h i c k n e s s r a t i o ) ;
draglineswith
akout. .
.
'
and frontend
and not calculating any profit&;,
they arrived a t a c o s t p e r t o n of $7 -53 o r 39.6C per mLllion Btu (for
9,500 Btu c o z l ) .
Nostof
the reclamation i n t h e a r e a ,
such a s a t t h e
Navajo Wine, r e q u i r e s i r r i g a t i o n , which adds about '30C per ton, for
a
t o t a l of (without profit) $7.83 per ton or 41.2C per million BtuI
The single pu5lic testimony
on c o s t s was given by P i t t s b u r g
Xidway Coal Mining Consany f o r t h e i r McKinleyMine:
ton, cost
G
1970 p r i c e $3.41 p e r
$3.21; 1971 p r i c e $3.46, c o s t $2.86; 1974 p r i c e $4.10, cost $4.88;
and 1975 p r i c e $7.27, c o s t $8.09.
Thecompany
noted t h a t t h e h i g h c o s t s
i n 1974 and 1975 were p a r t l y caused by gearing up for larger production.
The ad5ition of
heavy ezuipnent andexpanded
haulage syskem werc t h e most
expensisie 'of additional items.
The review of c o s t s b y the Federal PowerCommission
OztoSer1976
report, for
Zune 1976 (for stean coal
Zn t h e i r
15
fed t o t h e San Juan a n d ,
~.
-
~~
0
-2-
€om- Corner Porsierslants),gave
25.6C p"r.million Btu.
purchssed over
$4.80 perton(average
The Xzvajo ana San Juan blines use large equipnent
10 y e a r s ago, so t h e i r
a perio3.of time beginning about
c a p i t a l c o s t s a r e nilch lower than
f o r equipment c o n t r a c t e d f o r i n 1976.
t h e southern ind southeastern part
The F r u i t l a n d c o a l s i n
San Juan Basin, such
a s those near Star
$7.53 to $7.82 p e r t o n o r
and thus they vrould c o s t
43C t o 44.7C per million B t u t o mine.
of t h e S t a r
of .the
Lake, will more nearly average
5,750 Btu per pound on an as-received basis,
addition,thecoals
9,022 Btu/lb) or
In
.
Lake area w i l l probably.require washing
t o c u t down on the high ash content,
. .
and t h i s w+l1cost. $1.50 to $3.00
per ton depending mainly on -costs for obtaining the water from deep wells..
The c o s t of mining c o a l underground is far g r e a t e r t h a n t h a t of
strip mining.
cokingcoal.
I n New Xexico, theonlylarge
The expense of t h i s underground mining is compensated f o r
by the higher market value
of coking coal.
.
..
Coking c o a l beds i n Nev7 Mexico
(1) 4 t o 1 4 f e e ti nt h i c k n e s s ;
involvethefollowingparameters:
.
undergroand c o a l mine is for
(2)
l e n t i c u l a r b=ds t h i t are e s s e n t i a l l y h o r i z o n t a l b u t . i n t e r r u p t e d b y f a u l t s ,
r o l l s , andpinchouts;
( 3 ) v a r i a b l e roofranging
badly fractured shale;
and ( 4 ) contain sporadic
fronr hard sindstone
to
lenses of hardsandstone.
Zongwall mining p a n e l s f o r t h e underground mines, continuous mining units,
and a coal clean'ing plant are necessary cost
parameters f o r coking coal
production.
For cleaned coal, the
P a u l V7eir Company derived 4 d i f f e r e n t t y p e s
of operations depending on s i z e of t h e underground mine, type of opening
(shaft, slope, .or outcrop opening),
and type ofmining-
The combination of
o p r a t i o n parameters most similar t o t h a t o f t h e p r e s e n t
ground mine of Kaiser
of cleaned coal.
York Canyon under-
S t e d Corporation yielded a c o s t of $25.04 per ton
The l e a s t expensive mining c o s t t h e y c a l c u l a t e d was
$21.11 per ton.
Calculations by Paul Weircompany
c o s t of money ( i n t e r e s t ) f o r c a p i t a l
did not take
i n t o consideration
equipment, o r c o s t of r a i l f a c i l i t i e s ,
water sup2ly and otiner o f f - s i t e expenses.
Kaiser opms most of the reserves of coking c o
. a l . i n t h e Raton Field.
They also own and o p s r a t e t h e Sunnyside Mine near Price, Utah. This mine
..
.
-3has one of t h e best proCuction records i n 'ih.. country, thus
are lower thanthose
addition, the
for the underground YorkCanyon
mining costs
In
Mine near Raton-
Sunnyside lline i s about 500 miles by r a i l c l o s e r to the'
Fontana s t e e l p l a n t s of Kaiser i n California, and t h e r a i l r o a d
t i o n costs are less,
.
transports-
.
.
.
. _
David Tab&
.
Steve Frost
. .
Frank Kottloivski
New MexicoBureau of :-lines and Xineral Resources
d i v i s i o n of mew Mexico Tech
This brief review i s a su;nmary of material requested by t h e Xew
~~
Mexico Energy Resources Board t o e v a l u a t e c o s t s of coal mining i n Xew
Mexico.
Costs a r e based i n l a r g e p a r t on a r e p o r t by Paul F7eir Co,, Inc,
21 February 1977
..
..
M I N I N GC O S TE S T I h I A T E S
T Y P I C A LN I N E S( H Y P O T H E T I C A L )
STRIP ANDUNDERGROUND
S T A T E OF NEW I . E X I C 0
\
.
Paul Weir Company
Chicago, Illinois
YOIS NO. 2364
IJovember 29,. 1976
'
\p
..
x
TableofContents
,
P
a
g
e
..
I. . INTRODUCTION
11.
1
SUt*PGRY
' 4
Assumed C o n d i t i o n s
.
UndergroundHine(s)
S t r i p Mine
.
4
5
E s t i m a t e d Costs
UndergroundMines
6
C a p i t a l Costs ' [ I n i t i a l B r i n g Mine To F u l l
Capacity)
6
O p e r a t i n g( P r o d u c t i o n )
Costs
6'
S u r f a c e ( S t r i p ) Mines
7
C a p i t a l Costs ( I n i t i a l Bring Mine T o F u l l
Capacity)
7
O p e r a t i n g( P r o d u c t i o n )
costs
111.
7
.
UNDERGROUND MINES
8
C o s t Estimates, U n d e r g r o u n d & l i n i n g ,
Coments
10
*
IV.
Case A
Cases B, C,
. V.
19
COAL PREPARATION PLANT
&
19
20
D
STRIP XINE
t7
i
21
Table of Content (Continued)
Tables
.
1. Hypothetical Underground Mines7 . Metallurgical Reserves- New Mexico,
- Bring .
Initial Capital. Cost Estimate
Mine To Capacity(Thousands of Dollars)
2.
Hypothetical Underground Mines- .
Metallurgical Reserves- New Mexicor
Performance Statistics and Costs
of
Production
.
Page
. .
. .
.
.
.. .
.
12
.
.
13
~.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
\
Force
8.
Coal
(Unwashed)
Hypothetical Underground Mines
Metallurgical Reserves- New Mexicor.
Summary of Depreciation
Costs
,-
14
Hypothetical Underground MineMetallurgical Reserves- New Mexico,
Alternative (Case) A, Proposed
Labor Force
Hypothetical Undergroun-d MineMetallurgical Reserves- New MexicoI
Alternative (Case) B, Proposed
Labor Force
..
Hypothetical Underground Mine'Metallurgical Reserves
- New Mexico,
Alternative (Case) C r Proposed
Labor Force
Hypothetical Underground MineMetallurgical Reserves- New Mexico,
Alternative(Case) D, Proposed
Labor
.
.
18
Hypothetical Strip Mine- Steam Coal,
New Mexico, Estimate of Capital
Expenditures, 5,000,000 Tons Per Year Of
Raw
'
24
f.
..
ii
. .
..
.
.
.
.
Table of Content(Continued)
Tables(Continued)
-
9.
H y p o t h e t i c a lS t r i p Mine
Stezm Coal,
New Nexico, Estimated Cost of
Production, 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 Tons Per Year
10.
H y p o t h e t i c a lS t r i p Mine - Steam Coal,
New Kexico,Proposed
Labor Force
.
.
Flow Sheets
(pocket, back cover)
Conceptual
FlOW
Sheet
Conceptual Flow Sheet
- Case
.
-
.
A
Cases B , C , ti D
L
.
.
iii
.
MINING COST
ESTINATES
’.
TYPICAL M I N E S (HYpM”rlET1CAL)
STRIP AND UXDERGROLTND
STATE OF NEW NEXICO
%e Energy Resources Board (EP5), s t a t e of New Mexico, requestes
Paul WeirCompany
(Weirco) t o maketwo
studies of costs associated wLth
opening and operating new mines i n Eev7 Mexico.
One was t o r e p r e s e n t a
strip mine f o r steam coal; the second was t o r e p r e s e n t an underground mine
i n the Raton area for metallurgical coal.
These were not to be based on “site-specific“ conditions, but
.,
assumed conditions reasonably representative in our opinion
on
of t y p i c a l
conditions that might be expected, based on our general knowledge of c o a l
reserve characteristics-within the state.
.
Actual detailed m i n k layout (design)
was not required, norwere
t h e s t u d i e s t o include the degree of detail necessary for a c t u a l ’ impleinentation
or operation.
The objective was to provide preliminary order
of magnitude
c o s t e s t i m a t e s a ta confidence level of about 80 percent (4-20percent accuracy).
I
I
While t h e ass& conditions,
or combination thereof, obviously
would not be those actually encountered in every case,
we consider them to
k
be reasonablyrepresentative
are within the desired accuracy
and .we believe t h a t t h e cost estimates
.
based on t h e stipulated assumptions.
All c o s t estimtes a r e i n constant November,: 1976, dollars.'
.
Neither the sco-x of our assignment nor time
.
available prmitted
a cash flow type
a detailed econonic p r o j e c t a n a l y s i s p r t i n e n t t o
evaluation which would be relevant to, for instance, a s i t u a t i o n
vis-a-vis
t a analysis.
ofcashflowsbased
This would r e w i r e a . deta'iled yearly projection
onan
assmed sales realization figure.
our opinion (based on current industry practice),
producer today,
However, i n
we b e l i e v e t h a t a
t o p u t i n a new n i n e , would probably e x p c t a projected
for a s t r i p mine
15 percent return on equity capital after taxes
(sowwhat more predictable) and a comparative 20 percent return minimum
for an underground mine (less predictaSle conditions, particularly in the
Raton area of New Mexico).
W
e have assmd t h a t t h e r e would not be any coal.preparation
other than crushing for the strip-mined
steam coal, but t h a t a l l of t h e
underground-min>d c o a l k u l d be put through a preparation plant to
yield a product for t h e metallurgical market.
~
Our estimates are presentel d in
..I the
folic)wing sect i o n s of
this report.
Respectfully submitted,
PAUL VEIR COPlPAl9Y
.
Dated:
November 29, 1976
PAULW E I R CONPANY
0
.
11.
sun
Assumed Conditions
. .
Underground Mine( s )
Cases B,C,D ( 2 )
Case A (1)
Annual Production Rate, Raw Coal , Tons
750,000
2,000,000
. 20
Mine L i f e , Years
20
~8
8
Average Coal. Thickness, Feet
65
Mining Recovery, Percent
50
Tons/Acre-Foot,
In Place
1,800
1,800
Tons/Elcre-Foot,
Recoverable, Raw
1,170
900
9,350
7,200
Recoverable Faw Tons/Acre
Total Fecoverable
Reserves
P q u i r e d , Tons
40,000,000
Total Reserve Acres Required
. Depth t o Coal, Average, Feet
.
4,273.5
5,000
Say
'
Percent Clean Coal Recovery
(Through Washing P l a n t )
Annual Production, Cleaned Coal, Tons
Say
X5,000,000
2,083.3
3,000
600
600
80%
80%
1,600,000
.
'
.
Notes:
T L o n g w a l l (LW) and Continuous Miner (U.1) , Case A
( 2 ) TWO Examples: Continuous Miner Only, Cases B & C
. me Example: LW and C
M
, Case D
.?
600,000
Assumed Conditions
..
Strip Mine
Annual Production Rate, Paw Coal, Tons '
5,000,000
Mine Life, Years
30
Average Coal 'ihickness, b i p r Searr, Feet
8
Average Coal Thickness,ImierSeav,Feet
10
Average Interval Between Seams, Feet
40
Both Seams Contain Irregular Partings Averaging, Feet
Net FOX Coal Pecovery ( p i t loss
&
.
d i l u t i o n ) % of coal in place
2'
88.2
Tons per Acre-Foot, In Place
1,800
Dip of Coal Seams, Variable up t o , Eegrees
4
Total Recoverable Reserves l?equired,.Tons
X50,000,000
21 ,000
Total Area Disturbed by Ialining, Acres
Total Area For Exploration, Acres
say
Minimum Depth of Marketable Coal, Feet
30,000
30
Maximum B p t h of Mining, Feet
150
Virgin, Stripping Ratio, Yd.3 O\rerburden/TonCoal
.7
Portion of Overburden to be Rehandled, Percent
25.
Effective Stripping Patio, Yd.3 Overburden/Ton Coal
8.75
Average Length of Coal Haul, P i t to Truck Dmp, Miles
3.5
Type of Overburden: Shales, Siltstones and Sandstones
Requiring Blasting but providing
Relatively C 4 Slop Stability- for
Both Flighwalls .and SpoilNaterial
.
Wage rates: Approximately equivalent to International Union .
of *rating Engineers, current
rates a t
Navajo Mine, based on the latest information
we have.
k.
. .
5; :-.
...
._
e
PAULW E I R COXPANU
Estimated Costs
UndergrocndMines
Capital C o s t s . ( I n i t i a l
- Bring Mine To Full Capacity)
Case A
Mine
EQuipEent
& Facilities, Installed
Contingency,158
Sub Total
46,837,500
7,025,600
53,863,100
'
Preparation Plant (additional)
'
Case B
Case C
18,913,900
2,831,100
21,745,003
11,841,700
1,776,300
13,618,000.
12,000,000
Case I:
22,319,Z
3,347,9
25,667,1
3,600,000
3,600,000
3,600,O
.
.
etc.
Fnviromental &pact Studies,
200,000
150,000
150,000
including obtaining mining pernit
Lease Acquisition (Royalty Basis) --------see Reduction Costs, Section 111
&serve Evaluation (Exploration,
Testing I @tc.)
285,000
171,000
171,000
33.17
42.7841.47
.Per Ton, Rzw Coal (1)
TOTAL, CLEANED COAL
.
171,G
Case B
$15.42
$17.07
19.28
0.375
1.45
Costs
23.39
29.23
21e 34
0.30
1.60
Case C
.
$18.51
23.14
22
0.30
1.60
$24.10
$25.04
$23.24
$21.105
.
.
39-45
. 49.31
Costs
Case A
B r Ton, C l e a n Coal Basis (1)
G W
. 34.22
.
Opxating(Production)
Add Prep.
Ikpreciation
Plant
Add Prep. Plant *rating
----
66,348,100
25,666,000
17,539,000
29,588,l
G W D TOTAL
Cost Per Annual
Ton,
Xaw Coal
.Cost Per AnnualTon, Cleaned Coal
( @ 80% recovery)
I
150,C
.
Kotes:
m x c l u s i v e of preparation plant capital depreciation
Please refer to following sections for mre detail,
&
opratirig costs,
Case D
.
$17.76
* 20
0.30
1.60
'
PAULW E I R COXPAXY
e
@
EstimatedCosts
Surface (Strip) Bines
- Brinq
. Capital Costs ' ( I n i t i a l
Mine t o F u l l Capacity)
.
wine FQuipnent
&
Facilities, Installed
$
Contingendy, 10%
74,235,000
-7,424,000
Subtotal
Lease Acquisition (Royalty Basis)
..
..
800,000
- - - - -.- - - - -'See Production
&serve Evaluation (Exploration, Testing,
etc.)
Costs
3,920,000
Total
Raw C o d
,
-
81,659,000
. .
Enviromen&l mpact studies , etc. ,
Including
OStaining
Mining Permit
Cost Per Annual
Ton,
I
$ "84,379,000
s
,
.
*rating
16-88
.
.
(Prduction) Costs
..
Total Cost Per Ton of Raw Coal,
including Allowance for Percentage Ikpletion
$ -
7.53
1
Please refer t o following sections for m r e d e t a i l .
...,
PAULW E I R
COXPAKY
e
. .
a
The northern bundary of Colfax County in. the northeastern
p r t i o n o f New Kelexico forms p a r t of t h e New Nexico-Colorado S t a t e Line.
The coal-bearing 'area in' the north-central' section of t h e county,
. .
,
New Nexico portion
desiinated as t h e Raton f i e l d , coinprises a l l of
the
of t h e Raton &sa region. This region
is the sole source of p a t e n t i a l
underground metallurgical coal supply in the State.
..
Located i n t h e a b v e r e g i o n some 40 miles west o f t.h. e c i t y
of Raton and 1 0 miles south of, the Colorado border, Kaiser Steel
1
Cor?.
o p r a t e s t h e o n l y underground mine i n New Kexico a t t h e p r e s e n t time.
Ihe coal' seam being mined ranges from 1 4 feet t o less than 4. feet i n
The l e n t i c u l a r seam is relatively flat-lying
thickness.
L
but interrupted
by many f a u l t s , rolls and pinchouts, in an erratic indiscernable pattern.
A major j o i n t p a t t e r n running north-south
over the coal, the
i
.
imsiiate roof roaterial ranging frum strong sandstones
to badly broken s h a l e . T i e d i f f i c u l t
.
r e s u l t s i n massive roof blocks
.
mining conditions created by
unpredictable roof and f a u l t i n g a r e f u r t h e r aggravated by t h e v e r y h a r d bands of sandstone
t h a t occur sporadically within.the coal seam.
L
Early mining and exploratory data led Kaiser t o c o m i t t o bulk
extraction by the longwall method of mining rather than by.the more c o m n
L
( it nh e
U.S.A.)
rwm and p i l l a r methods.
Entry
developnent
employs
continuous miner u n i t s .
.
.
>::
PAUL \vEXR COMPANY
(I)
Tne known g e o l q y of the Faton Field suggests that. the Kaiser
experience might be typical
of the conditions t o be expected i n any-
underground nine developed within this f i e l d .
It may be possible,
however, i n c e r t a i n a r e a s t o i s o l a t e s m a l l e r b l o c k s o f r e s e r v e s where
. .
mre uniform conditions rjould permit a more regular and productive
.
performance.
.
...
mine size, therefore, 'might range from a
In our opinion,
small e f f i c i e n t 0.75, million-ton per-year highly productive olpration
i n uniform conditions t o a l a r g e r less efficiently productive mine i n
sporadic widely varying condftions
'
b u t with s u f f i c i e n t equipment capacity
t o s u s t a i n s a y 2 million tons per year annual production.
.
.
.
Lack of any
. %e estimates we presentconsiderbothcases.
d e t a i l e d or site-specific geological information
and
th2
short t h e
available for preparation of these estimates necessitate that the
..
estimates be.based on a s e t o f assumed conditions and parameters, generally
as f o l l o w :
1. The average mining heights will vary from 6 t o 14 feet, r e s u l t i n g in
anoverallaverage
2.
mining height of 8 feet.
.
Mining conditions w i l l be such t h a t t h e averageproduction
from a
*
continuous miner u n i t will be 500 tons of raw c o a l p c r u n i t s h i f t i n
the small, more e f f i c i e n t mine, and only 400 tons of raw c o a l when used
for development only i n t h e l a r g e r l e s s e f f i c i e n t m i n e (Case A).
9:
3.
Tne above conditions w i l l p e r s i s t over an area of reserves capable of
supporting a mine producing 2.0 million tons per year
0.75 million tons p r year (Cases
(Case A ) o r
B, C, D) for a period of a t l e a s t
. .
20 years.
.
.
.
4.
.
Access t o any of the minable seams will be obtained.through a slope or
. .
v e r t i c a l s h a f t s t o apgxoximately a 600-foot depth of cover except f o r
Case C
-
see below).
.
5.
within the confines
Cost estimates are liqited t o those costs incurred
of .the mine.
.
The cost estimate tables also footnote other exclusions
made in these estimates.
6.
Construction and e g u i w m t c o s t s r e f l e c t c u r r e n t
NovemSer, 1976 prices.
"here is no allowance f o r future inflation for replacenents of short-life
of
equipment or for extension
7.
mining facilities.
..
Current UEP?A wage rates and benefits have.been applied, including the
..
welfare fund, b u t blacklung
8.
CostEstimates,
k n e f i t s a r e excluded.
UndergroundMining,
'
Comments .
The estiaated capital costs are presented
Tne estimated oprating costs are
'
i n Tab& No. 1, following.
summarized i n Table No. 2.
In addition to
t h e two basic mine capacity alternatives ( 2 m tpy and 0.75m tpy), we have
attempted t o r e f l e c t i n a l t e r n a t e Case C t h e e f f e c t o f a more conservative
t.
.
.......
.
I
(continuousminer) u n i t s h i f t Brforrnance on t h e smaller (0.75 million ton
.
per year.) mine, where a l l mine openings t o t h e surface a r e t h o u g h o u t c r o p
openings ( a s a t t h e p r e s e n t Kaiser mine).
Case D is a f o u r t h a l t e r n a t i v e
which assumes a coinbination of longwall and continuous mining t o p r d u c e
t h e 0.75 million annual tons run-of-mine coal.
. .
for :
Table No. 3 is a depreciation schedule, inchding provision
replzcementof
. .
short-life items during l i f e of mine.
. .
Table Nos. 4, 5, 6 and 7 preseni manning tables. f o r Cases A, B,
.
C and D, respectively.
-
. .
C u r r e n t e x p r i e n c e i n ucderground coal mining i n New Mexico and i n
.
.
operations in Colorzdo suggests that while local high production performance
canan3 will he obtained, it w i l l not represent the
field average.
Any
.. ..: ..
high performance i n t h e p a s t h a s normally been'obtained by v e z y s e l e c t i v e
mining, leaving large reserve areas
with changing seam t h i c k n e s s and/or
'
varia3le mining conditions (roof and f l o o r ) f o r l a t e r mining,
From what is currently known of coal deposition in
t h e +ton
Field,
we believe that the adverse effects t o be expected as a r e s u l t of the many
..
v e r y l o c a l v a r i a t i o n s i n the coal seams and i n roof and floor conditions
a r e m r e l i k e l y t o result i n production costs that are closer t o t h e more
conservative projections (Cases Cor
D).
L.
'11;
Table No. 1
-
HYPOTNETICAL 1IE:DERCROUND MIXES- E l ~ T ~ ~ L L U R ~ I C A 1 , ~ R E S E R V NEIJPIEXTCO
I~S
INITIAL CAPITAL COST ESTII.IATE
- ]$RING MINE TO CAPACITY
(TIIOUSAWJS OF DOLLARS)
. ,
..
-A
CASE
0.75
2.0
AENUAL PRODUCTIO~RAW COAL (KILLIOX TOSS/YEAR)
-C
-B
.
.
0.75
.
-D
0.75
Item
NO
A
.
1
2-3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11-12
13 .
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Land A c q u i s t i o n t S i t eP r e p a r a t i o n
NineBuildings
& Facilities
Water
Supply
& Sewage Treatment
Surface. E l e c t r i c P o c eDr i s t r i b u t i o n
Intake A i r Shaft
Return A i r S h a f t
Emergency Man Hoisting
System
Mine Fan
Mine Slope
Mine SlopeEqsipnent
Mine SlopeMoistSystez
Surface
Nobile
Equipnent
Underground
Face
Equiprent
Main-Line
Underground
Conveyors
Underground Rock liandlinz
Equipaent
Underground Road :,:aintenence
Equipment
.
Underground Electrical Porier D i s t r i b u t i o n
Underground
Plain-Line
Tra-sport
Equipment
Underground Rock D u s t E q u i p l e n t
Underground
Comunicatibns
Equipment
Underground
Safety,
Rescue, F i r s t A i d
Underground
Water
Handling
Facilities
Rotary
Breaker
Preparation
Plant
seeseparateestinate
S t o r a g e L R . R . L o a d i n gs-esee p a r a t e e s t i m a t e
-
$
'
175.
700
150 '
850
1,500
1,500
450
300
2,750
1,500
650 .
500
27,700
1,500
160
150
500
600
170
60
250
200
GOO
200
$
150
500
120
600
1,500
1,500
450
150
2.750
$
-
-
.
.
-.
150
---
1;ooo
650
400
5,500
800
100
I00
275
275
80
30
100
100
200
:
400
6,600
1 .OD0
100
100
300
300
90
40
100
100
-
$17,330 .
.
Engineering (27. C o n s tC
r uocsttiso)n
Overhead t Adnin. (5% C o n s t r u c t i oCno s t s )
Total
875.5
2,188.7
$46,837.5
353.5
883.8 .
$18,913.9
$11,841.7
FSi eulpde r v i s i o n
Con
s tsst r u
Tcotteadl
(2% Direct Costs)
Contingency 15%
.
GRAND TOTAL (a)
.
CapitalCost/AnnualTon (MineOnly)(R.O.M.)
NOTES:
(b)
$10,850
346.6
217
$17,676.6'$11,067
7,025.6
2,831.1
353,863.)
$21,745.0
$26.93
-
$28.99
-
221.3
553.4
1,776.3
$13,618.0
$34.22
$18.16
=
( a ) Exclusive of c o s t o f money ( i n t e r e s t ) and i n f r a s t r u c t u r c s u c h a s rail
facilities;watersupply;
mainincoming power s o u r c e t o mine si'te;
h o u s i n go rw o r k e rt r a n s p o r t a t i o nt o
mine; r a i l r o a d to mine.For
costs
of exploration, environmental studies, mining permit
see Summary,
S e c t i o n 11.
(b) See Summary f o r A d d i t i o n a l C o s t s C a p i t a l i z e d .
>*:
-
$
-'
,150
500
120
GOO
1,500
1,500
450
150
2,750
1,000
650
400
8,300
1,000
100
IO0
300
350
90
40
LOO
100
. 200
$42,915
858.3
$43,773.3
T o t a l Direct Costs
I50
500
120
GOO
-.
$20,450
409
$20,859
417.2
1,043.0
$22,319.2
3,347.9
$75,G67.1
-
0
.
Table No. 2
HYPOTHETICAL ~'GZRCXOLIiiDMINES- METAL1,URCICALRESERVES
PERFORWXE
.
- NEW MEXICO
STATISTICS AND COSTS OF PRODUCTTON
n
' A
CASE
c
D
. A l l on Raw Coal Basis
Production,,
Tons
PlillioE
Annual
2.0
0.75
215
Annually
Days Operation
215
9,302
Production,
Tons
Daily
Average
-7
- .
6
. .
215
.
3,486
Unit Shifts ProductionIDay
11
0.75
215.
3,486
Continuous >liner
Longwall .
0.75
..
3,486
-
10
G
2
TonslonitShift
Continuous Hiner
Longwall
,.
400
814
350 .
.-
-
500
. .
..
320
81.4
Units of EquiDaent Recuired
Operatin; .
Continuous :.liner
Longwall
'
.
--
6
Spare
ContinuousMiner
Longwall
Total
Total
.I
-1
- ContinuousMiner
- Longwall
Daily Elan Power Required a t >line
'Average CostIXan-Day
.
-
--
1
-6
"
5
243
193
232
208
$100
$100
$100
$100
18.07
21.99
. 16.76
Ls.03
- Raw CoalBzsislTon
Labor
S u p p l i e s & Power
UEfW Welfare Fund
FacilitiesExtension
& Insurance
Property 6 OtherLocalTaxes
A d m i n i s t r a t i v e C o s t s a t :.line
Royalty
T o t a l Cash Cost of Production
D e p r e c i a t i o n - ( s e es c h e d u l e )
Depletion
T o t a l C o s t of Production
XOTES:
-
..
7
4
TonsfMan-Day
Cost of Production
5
G
3
.
,.
4.54
3.40
1.29
0.25
0.30
0.15
0.75
2.94
1.80
$15.42
5.53
4.15
1.40
. 0.25
0.30
0.20
0.75
,
0.20
0.75
5.9G
3.75
1.45
0.25
0.30
0.20
0.75
$12.58
$14.68
$12.G6
.
$10.68
li
-
6.65
5.00
1.53
'
0.25
0.30
2..69
1.80
2.03
1.80
$17.07
$18.51
. .
(a) I n c l u d e s d i r e c t wagesand
s a l a r i e s and a l l f r i n g e b e n e f i t s .
(b) Dbes n o t i n c l u d e :
(1) A d m i n i s t r a t i o n o r s e l l i n g c o s t s
away from the mine.
(2) T r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o s t s mine t o p r c p a r a t i o ~ ' p 1 a n t and
'
.
3.30
1.60
$17.76
Table No. 3
HYPOTHETICAL
UKDERGROUNDWTSES
- METALLURGICAL RESERVES -
N E W MEXICO
SUKMRY OF DEPRECIATION COSTS
Annual '
Iten YKS.
No. Life
"
1
2-3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11-12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
$
20
10
10
10
8,750
70.000
15;OOO
85,000
150.000
I50;OOO
22,500
30,000
137,500
150,000
32,500
100,000
3,957,150
125,000
. 22,S57
.
21,428
. 50,000
10
10
20
10
20
10
20
5
7
12
7
7
10
10
20
20
5
20
20
20
20
.
. ..
.S
--
D
7,500
50,000
12,000
60,000
x50,000
150,000.
22,500
.
.
X37,,MO
100,000
32,500
80,000 .
1,185,715
83,333
'
--
-
'
--
14,285
30,000
30,000
4,500
2,000
.,
5,000
10,000
-.
"
.
547,405
Total
DepreciationlTon, Raw
.
---
30;ooo
see separateestimate
see separate
estimate
7,500
$ ..7,50o
.50,000
50,000
12,000
12,000
60,000
60,000
150,000
150,000
22,500
15,00015,000
15,000
137,500
100,000
32,500
80,000
80,000
785,715
942,857
66,667
83,333
14,285
14,265
14,285
14,285
14,265
27,500
30,000
27,500
30,000
4,000
4,500
1,500
2,000
20,00020,000
20,000
5,000
5,000
10,000
10,000
'
8,500
3,000
$5,836,590
. -..
. . - ..
$
60,000
Supervision, Engineering
Administration Overhead
& Contingency
_. ..-
.Annual
Annual
c
Annual
A
220,750 260,855 138,400
$2,014,202
$2.94
-
-
....
..
$1,519,160$2,476,973
$2.03-
$3.3q
. .
Table No.
4
PROPOSED IADOR FORCE
Per
-
Facc(Continuous Miner)
Operator
Miner
Continuous
Continuous Miner Helper
Shuttle Car operator
Roof BoltingNachineOperator
Utility
Ventilation '
Mechanic
Total
Face
(Longwall)
Shearer Operator
Chock Man
Head & T a i l g a t e
Utility
Mechanic
To t a l
I-
-
Undercround
General
Supplies
Drainage & Water Supply
Ventilation
Maintenance
Extension of F a c i l i t i e s
Belt Patrol
Roadway Maintenance
,
Timbering
Rock Dusting
Day'Men (General P o o l )
Rock Handling
Fire Boss
Examiner
Tot81
-
I
L
L
Underqround
Supervision
General Mine Forenan
A s s i s t a n t MineForeman
2
S e c t i o n Foreman
Maintenance Superintendent
Maintenance Foreman
LongwallSuperintendent
S e r v i c e s Foreman
Total
Surface
Bathhouse Attendant
Hoist Operator
Lamp A t t e n d a n t
EquipmentOperator
Laborer b Miscellaneous
Shop
Total
SupervisionSurface (EachMine)
Mine Superintendent
Surveyors
Technicians
S u r f a c c Foreman
k'archouse
Clerical
Shop Forcman
To t a 1
TOTAL I'I'.OI'OSI:D
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
9
-
SShhi if ft t
-
3rd
-
. Shift
. .
5.
-.
'
Total
_
I
2
1
5
10
10
5
5
5
45
-
"
.
-
5
' 5
10
10
5
5
5
45
'
.Zn<
1st
Unit
-
'
12
11
22
24
11
2 '
4
I.
.I
..
'
11
105
"
4.
.
"
14
I
15. .'
'.
..
2
4
6
.
3
2
3
1
,
4 .
9
-
11
.
4
3
4
6
. 6
4
4
9
9
5
28
5
28
.
4
-
--
12
3
12
20
24
4
'
10 .
I. 2
3
- .
.
8
" 5
8
3
:
3
. 66
53
-
3
26
c
-
-
7
1
6
2
:3
-
.
.
9
8
10
10
20
8
9
145
-
10
2
.10
1
2
7
1
1
28
'
3
8
'
12
27.
15
84
5
12
5
. 6
.
12
:18
,
'
..
17
.
1
1
.
.
1
1
1
1
1
- 1
3
3
2
10
18
2
2
10
-
*
-
.
'
.
1
1
1
3
2
' 3
11
-
.."
3
' 3
3
9
6
15
39
1
6
4
1
1
..
x
15
L/&OI< >Oi;CE
..
1
1
1
3
1
3
3
2
20
-
_. -
Table No. 5
HYPOTIIETICAL UNDERCROIISD NINE
*
- METALLURCICAL RESERVES - NEW MI<XICO
ALTERNATIVE (CASE) D
PROPOSED LABOR FORCE
Per
Unit
Face
(Continuous
Miner)
Continuous Elin'er 0pera:or
Continuous
Eliner
Helper
S h u t Operator
t l e Car
Roof B o l t i n g Machine Operator
Utility
Ventiliation
1,lechanic
Total
1 st
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
3
3
3
27
-9
-
TOTAL PROPOSED LABOR
FORCE
9
3
2
4
3
4
-
12
7
. 2
4
6
4
6
1
-
2
31
-
S u p e r v i s i o n S u r f a c e (Each Mine)
Hinesuperintendent
surveyors
Technicians
S u r f a c e Foreman
Warchoune
.
Clerical
ShoIl Forr.:o:rn
,
ToLnl
9'
68
----
3
4
-
1
1
3
1
6
6
.
10
G
5
78
.-...
,l
3
8
1
---6
14
1
3'
1
3
1
1
1
2
' 6
12
-
L
.O
0
1
G
-8
- 22
i
1
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
2
1
10
-
86
.-
'
7
.
----
-
Surface
Bathhouse Attendant
Hofst Operator
Lamp A t t e n d a n t
TruckDriver
Laborer & Miscellaneous
Shop Labor
Total
14
16
7.
.-
L .
-
8
.. 7
6
Face
(Longwall)
Shearer Operator
Chock Nan
Head & T a i l g a t e
. Utslity
.
Mechanic
Total
Underground
Supervision
General MineForeman
'
A s s i s t a n t MineForeman
S e c t i o n Foreman
MaintenanceSuperintendent
Maintenance Foreman
LongwallSuperintendent
S e r v i c e s Foreman
Total
Total
3
3
6
_
.
Underground
General
SuDolies
Drainage & Water Supply
Ventilation
Elaintenance
Extension of F a c i l i t i e s
Belt. Patrol
Roadway Maintenance
Timbering
Rock Dusting
Day
Men
(GeneralPool)
Rock Handling
F i r e Boss
Examiner
Total
-
Shift
-
1
1
1
11
193
-
.
-.
c
. T a b l e No, G
IISPOTIIET
1:ST)T:RGROUSDI4JNE
- METALLllRGIChL
ERV‘ES
-
R i W NEXICO
ALTI:liXATIVE (CASE) C
PROPOSED LABOR FORCE
i
Face
(Continuous
Continuous
Eliner
Operator
2nd
Shift
1st
,
Shift
Miner)
1
Continuous
Miner
Helper
S h u t Operator
t l e Car
Roof BoltingNachineOperator
Utility
Ventiliation
.
Mechanic
45
Total
c
I
.
Per
-Unit
-
1
2
2
1
1
-19
5
. 5
5
5
.
10
2
-
. .
.
Total
12
10.
21
22
10
10
12
97
-
-5
-
I
. -
.
-
--
-2
1
10
10
5
5
10 .
5
5
5 .
45
---
(Longdall)
Face
Shearer Operator
Chock Plan
Head 6. T a i l g a t e .
Utility
Mechanic
Total
.
3rd
Shift
I
...
I
.
I
-
Undersround
General
Supplies
Drainage h Water Supply
Ventilation
tlaintenance
Extension of Facilities
Belt Patrol
Roadway P!aintenance
Timberinl
Rock D u s t i n g
Day
Men
(GeneralPool)
.
Rock Handling
F i r e Boss
Examiner
Total
,
9
3
6
12
8
6 .
4
8
6
10
-
2
35
.
8
2
15
-
35
5
85
--6
1
3
1
17
2
-
10
22
1
-
Undercround
Suoervision ’
General Kine Forezan
A s s i s t a n t Mine Foronan
S e c t i o n Foreman
MaintenanceSuperintendent
Naintenance Foreman
LongwallSuperintendent
S e r v i c e s Foreman
Total
~~
.
~~~~
Surface
.
Bathhouse Attendant
HoistOperator
Lamp A t t e n d a n t
Truck Driver
Laborer h I{iscellaneous
Shop Labor
Total
Supervi.sion Surface(Each
Mine S u p e r i n t e n d e n t
Surveyors
Technicians
S u r f a c e Foreman
Warchouse
Clcricnl
Shop I’orcraan
TO L a 1
..
‘
8
13
Mine)
TOTAL PROPOSED LMOR FORCE
1
3
2 .
1 ’
1
1
1
10
1
.2
5
.”
....
-
---
-
. T a b l e No. 7
HYPOTHETICAL U!!DERCKOUND EIINF.
'
-
*.
METAI,LUI<GTCAI. Rk.:SIdWES
- REU EIIIXICO
ALTERNATIVE (CASE) I)
PROPOSED
IAUOR
FORCE
Per
.-Unit
Face
(Continuous
Continuous
EIiner
Operator
Miner)
Continuous
Miner
Helper
O p eSCrhaurt totrl e
Roof B o l t i n g Machine Operator
Utilitv
Yentifiation
Mechanic
Total
-
. Total
7
1
3
1
2
3
6
6
6
3
3
13
2
1.
1
Face
(Longwall)
Shearer Operator
Chock Nan
Head & T a i l g a t e
Utility
Hechanic
Total
1st:
Shift
14
8.
6
.3
27
2
2
k '
3
2
3
2
3
1
11
3
1
6
k
9 .
.
.
_
.
-
Underground
General
Supplies
D r a i n a g e & Water Supply
Ventilation
Maintenance
Extension of Facilities
Belt Patrol
Roadway Naintenance
Timbering
Rock D u s t i n g
DayMen
(GeneralPool)
Rock Handling
Fire Boss
Examiner
Total
-
-
Underpround
Supervision '
General Hine Foreman
A s s i s t a n t MineForeman
S e c t i o n Foreman
MaintenanceSuperintendent
H a i n t e n a n c e Foreman
LongwallSuperintendent
S e r v i c e s Foreman
Total
Surface
Bathhouse Attendant
Hoist O p e r a t o r
Lamp A t t e n d a n t
EquipmentOperator
Truck Driver
ShopLabor
Total .
S u p e r v i s i o n . S u r f a c e (Each Mine)
Mine S u p e r i n t e n d e n t
Survcyors
Tec.hnicians
S u r f a c e Foreman
Warehouse
Clcrlcal
Shop I.'orcmnn
Total
'
TOTAL PI\OP&ED LABOR FORCE
8
62
-91
-
11
.
-.5
28
7
2 -
3
2
4
4
-
12
3
3
2'
5
4
.. 4
6.
. 6'
6
10
1
-
'4
4
.-1
30
3
70
- 1
1
1
3
4
10
.1
1
--E
1
1
3.
..
17
3
3
1
1
1
1
I
1
4
2
6
12
-
8
20
1
4
2
1
1
1
1
.4
1
11
. "-
99.
..
2
1
1
1
.
1
11
208
-
_. ..
10.
N.
COAL PREP?G?ATION PLANT
-
Preparation Plant Capital Cost Case A
2,000,000 Ton-pr-Year Mine, Fun-of-tline, (Underground Mining) .
750 Ton-pr-Hour Rated Capacity
Note: Rotary BreakerCost Under.Mining Costs
A.
.
Overall
Raw Cos1 Storage & Equi,ment (10,000 Tons)
Preparation
Plant
(750 Tons W L Hour)
Heat dryer
Clean Coal Storage (15,000 %ns)
fa1
and loadins
Unit. Train
Refuse D i s p s a l & i?ater Suppiy.
Total
$ 1,000,000
8,000,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
Note:
W i o t including Railroad trackage
SEE FMN SHEET
B.
.
.
- CASE
A
- ( I n pocket,
back cover)
CapitalDistribution
$
'ikkuipnent & piping
S t r u c t u r a l & Sidings
. Foundations & Site
Electricals
Refuse disposal & Water supply
.
Erection
Engineering @ 78
Two (2) trucks; One (1)bulldozer
'
4,000,000
900,000
260,000
-_
1,500.,000
500,000
'
mtal
3,600,000
840,000
400,000
$ T2,000,006
'
..
Fer Ton
Preparation
Plant
*rating
Costs
(Direct)
Clean Coal
Labor :
Lubricants
Materials:
reagents
37 men @ $lOO/day
& d i e s e l fuel
Flotation
Chemical flocculents and magnetite
Kaintenance
supplies
& replacement
Heat drver
fuel
I..
@ $20/ton
fuel)
for'
. .
Power @*6000 kwh
Clean Coal = 1,600,000 tons per year
@80%Yield from "of-Mine
2 Shift Operations, 1 S h i f t Maintenance/day, 215 days/year
$ 0.50
0.08
0.04
0.10
0.40
0.18
0.15
$ W
.
..-
.
Preparation Plant. Capital Cost - Cases E, C, and D
750,000 Ton-yxr-Year Hine, hn-of-Mine, (Underground Mining)
300 Ton-pzr-Hour Rated Capacity
Note: Rotary Breaker Cost Under Mining Costs
Overall
A.
'.
. .
Raw Coal Storage & Equipment (4,000 Tons)
Preparation
Plant
(300 Tons ger Hour)
Heat dryer
Coal
Clean
Storage & Handling (a)
Refuse Dispsal & V7ater Supply
'%tal
$
..
- CASES B,
C, D
-
..
-0.
'
400,000
200,000
$ ~,600,000
,
SEE FLOP1 SHEET
500,000.
2,500,000
(In pocket , back cover)
.
'
CapitalDistribution
B.
Ecpi-ment & piping
Structure & Sidings
Foundations & Site
Electricals
Refuse dis,psal & Water supply
Erection
hgineering
One (1)t r u c k ; One (1)bulldozer
$ 1,000,000
'
.
lbtal
75,000
100,000
975,000
200,000
800,000
225,000
-225,000
$ 3!600,0m
- .
Costs (Direct)
Preparation Plant *rating
Fer Ton
Clean Coal
Labor :
Materials:
23 men @ $lOO/day
Lubricents & f u e l
Flotation reagents
- .
'Chemicals & IMagnetite.
Maintenance suFplies & replaceaents
. Power @ 2,OCO
kwh
*
Clean Coal = 750,000 @ 80% = 600,000 tons per year
2 Shift Operations, 1 S h i f t Maintenance/day, 215 days/year
... . ....
. . . ..- .
~
.
~...
. .
. ..
. .. .
$ 0.60
0.10
0.05
'.
,
.
0.15
0.50
0.20
.
$m
'
V.
STRIP MINE
A few s t r i p mines are c u r r e n t l y o p r a t i n g i n t h e northwestern
portion of New Kexico.
Others have been proposed.
New t.Iexico will &cone an even
It is likely t h a t
more important source of .coal for eiectric
pwer generation and for processing .into synthetic fuels.
The c o a l s of t h e San Juan Basin are mostly sub-bituminous in
rank and are non-coking.
Tie beds are lenticular,, typically varying in
thickness from zero to 20 feet o r more. .Also typical is the existence
of one or more p a r t i n g s of variable thickness. Presently,
mjninq is
sometines i n a s i n g l e c o a l bed o r seam, sometines in.mu1tiple seams with
varying intervals
between seams.
Typicaloverburden c o n s i s t s of sandstones,
s h a l e s and s i l t s t o n e s i n d i f f e r i n g p r o p r t i o n s .
The strata o f t e n d i p
downward from o u t c r o p , with "average" dips of a few degrees, sometimes
locally steeper.
..
.
.
.
..
Coal near outcrops is p a r t i a l l y oxidized by weathering, sometimes
burned, t o average depths of some 25 t o 30 f e e t .
we have usually considered coal
For estimating purpses,
under less than 30 feet of cover to b e
non-merchantable.
Tne nature of the overburden and the relative continuity, of coal
deposits is such a s to be p a r t i c u l a r l y amenable to s t r i p mining with'large
..
dragline typ excavators.
With single-seam mining, a t depths of up t o
100 o r 120 feet,’ and with proper selection of equipmcnt, it can be
pssible t o remove the overburdenwith
material.
l i t t l e or no rehandling of
Mining might be feasible with draglines a t greater depths;
much qreater
however, t h e amount of rehandling of spoil increases
rate than the increase in virgin
overburden thickness.. -rating radius,
t o boom-length) aze
digging depth and dmping height (ali related
critical factors.
.Also i m p r t a n t , economically, is t h e s t r i p p i n g ratio.
per .recoverabble ton of coal.
u s u a l l y s t a t e d a s ‘cubic yards of overburden
Tne maximum depth of s t r i p mining could b’e determined by (a) economics, or
(b) p5ysical limitations of
‘factors. Tentatively,
machines., or (c) some conbination of those
150 f e e t is a Gracticable l i n i t ,
we f e e l t h a t &.but
although no dragline stripping of coal i n NewNeexico
reached that
depth
as yet. .
is known . t o have
. .
Mine s i z e could influence production costs,
We f e e l t h a t there
would be l i t t l e , i f any, economics of scale above 5,000,000 t o n s of coal
per yeas under conditions typical of t h e San Juan Basin.
. .
For purposes of estimating capital and o p e r a t i n g c o s t s o f a
hylpthetical strip mine, we have assumed conditions as l i s t e d i n t h e
On t h e b a s i s of those assumptions, t h e estimated capital costs
The estimated operating costs
are presented in Table KO. ‘8, following.
...
.
~.
. .
- . ..
The summary ofpersonnelrequirements
a r e summarized i n Table No. 9.
are presented i n Table Eo. 10.
It will & noted t h a t we show land reclamation cost
$0.30 per ton of coal.
The land affected wuld
year, so t h a t cost is equivalent
to
i
to be
be about 7OO'acres F r
$2,143 per acre.
Our estimate
for.
land reclavation includes returning the land to approximately
t h e original
type of t e r r a i n , p l a c i n g a t l e a s t a p r t i o n of t h e "topsoil" type
L
. .
material
on
.
the surface,
seeding,
fertilizing
If i r r i g a t i o n is required t o establish
erosion (not wind erosion).
vegetative cover, the cost
orderof
and controlling major
water
w i l l be s i g n i f i c a n t l y more, perhaps on t h e
$1,500 t o $2,500 p e ra c r ea d d i t i o n a l .a o s ec o s t s
mU1.d a t
.
least partly depend o n a v a i l a b i l i t y and location of a water supply, on
the cost of distributing the water,
and thelengthof
time irrigation
.
would k continued.
i
t
.
t
i
-
._"
.
__
..
.
."
..
.
__ ,.
.
.
. ..
.. ..
.
T a b l e No. 6
tNPOTlIETICAL STZIP N l X E
- STEAM COAL
N W MEXICO
ESTIEIATE OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURES
5,000,000 T O 3 PER YEAX OF R N (UWASHED) COiL
Years .
No.
Life
Rewired
-
Itea
-
15
3
Overburden Drills, for 12" t o 15" DiameterHoles
30
2
Loading
Coal
Shovels,
3
1
5
Front-End
Loader
C o a l Hauling T r u1c2kT0sr,-aTc t o r - T r a i l e r
L a r g e Eozers, E9 S i z e 0 $220,000 Each
0 5 S i z e @ $80,000 Each
Dozers,
Small
5 .
2
5
4
S c r z p e r s , 40 Cu. Yds.,
5
3
Motor C r e d e r s 0 $120,000
3
Coal Drills 0 $85,000
5
Trucks 3
5
2
5
and3
Water
1.
-
25,200
2,200
160
1,160
360
lX,OOo
and A c c e s s o r i e s
1,600
510
. 375
1,675
130
650
160
900
125
140
2,025
600
2so
550
2,750
1,200
0
900
0
I n i t i a l Hiae Roads and Grading
650
0
1,000
0
I n vI ne ni ttioarl y ,
-.
C o n t i n & e n c i eas n, d
.
255
EIettricsl
(Office, Buildings
30
800
5,600
300
Miscellaneous
30D i s t r i b u t i o n
-
5,050
Crane
Pit
G
3,2110
6,750
-.
Truck
0
750
'
@ SG5,OOO
.
Lube Trucks @ $60,000
Trucks @ $7,500
30P i c k uapnSG
de revniecrea l
.
360
,
.
2,100
2,400
6 Cu. Yds. @ $150,000
TrucXs
Explosives
5 (AVS.)
Warehouse) 30
Shop,
$125,000
s
. 2,100
,
550 HP, 0 $290,000
10
$43,800
~
@ $280,000
18
10
P10
mps
Stripping
( f o r u t i l i t y andcleanup),
5
3
System
coal), 15 C u . . Y d s .
(for
Front-End
Loader
Fuel
'
@ $700,00b Each
13 CU. Yds. @ $1,200,000
5
10
Equipxent
345' Boon @ $14,600,000 Each
D r a g l i n e s , 63 Cu. Yds.,
3
w.
I
3
30
Thousands o'f Dollars
Repl;vx:;wnts
Jni t i a l
L Extensions
Wer 30 Years
..
Supplies
Parts and
z,aoo
Preproduction
.
SC
t oocakl pR
i lei nc g
l aL
,Ti om
U
r aniidninitgn,g
Engineering
107.
3,424
$81,659
Total
D e p r e c i a b l eC a p i t a l
8,000
= $153,567,000 ( E x c l u d e s I n i t i a l I n v e n t o r y , P a r t s
$153 567 no0
hverage D e p r e c i a t i o n = 1 5 0 , 0 0 ~ , o oTons
~
= $1.024 P e r ' R e c o v e r a b l e Ton
NOTE:
Sec Somary for a d d i t i o n a l c a p i c n l i z c d i t c m s .
6. S u p p l i e s )
.
o
0
.
Table No. 9
.HYPOVIETICAL STRIPNINE
NEIi NEXICO
-
S T E M COAL
. .
ESTIMATED COST OF PRODIICTIOS
5,000,030 TOSS PLR YEAR
.
.
. DollarslTon of Coal
Fork Category
Labor
-
Bank Preparation
Overburden Removal
Coal Shootingand Loading and Parting Removal
Coal Hauling
Supplies
Power
Tota1
$0.19
$0.42
.$0.61 (a)
0.42
0.55
0.97 (6)
(r
0.19
0.26
0.45
0.23
0.36
0.59
Road Maintenance
0.08
0.04
Lend Reclawation
Shop-Garage (General Kaintenance)
0.14
0.16
0.20
0.11
0.31
Warehouse and Office
Coal Stockpiling, Reclaiming, Processing
NIne Supervision and Enginsering.
0.03
0;oz
0.05
0.07.
0.43
0.50
Subtotal
Contingency (5% of aboue)
Property and Local Taxss and Insurance
0.12
. 0.30
'
-
-
-
$1.78
$2.35
$4.13
$0.09
$0.12
0.23
0.23
0.21
.
Land, Legaland Outside Ensizeering
Royalty
Subtotal
- Cash Costs
Depreciation
Percentage Depletion
Xine .
.
Allowance
.
.
-
Total Costof Proeuction (? >line,
Including Percentage Depletion
NOTES:
'0.12
0.03
'.
(?
(c)
(a) Approximately equivalent Lo $0.09 per bank cubic yard overburden.
(b) Approximately equivalent t o $0.11 per bank cubic yard overburden.
( c ) Approxinately equivalent to $2,143 per acre of disturbed land. 'This
if required vouidbe an addilionnl cost
excludes irrigation which,
o f $l,SOO t o $2,500 per acre.
1.10
$5.59
.1.02
. -
0.92
$7.53
.
:
t
b
9
.
.
.
Table No, 10
-
HYPOTHETICAL STRIP MINE
STEAM COAL
NEW MEXICO
PROPOSED
LABOR
FORCE
Operating
Personnel
Work Category
Bank Preparation
Overburden Removal
.
Service and
Maintenance
Personnel
22
15
46
'
Total
-
37
83
Coal Shooting and Loading
24
37
-~13
Coal Hauling
30
16
46
Road Maintenance
10
18
5'
15
.
Land Reclamation
Shopand
.
.
Coal Stockpiling, Reclaiming,Processing
Mine Supervision and Engineering
Total
..
37
.
9
.
27
, .
Garage (General Maintenance)
Warehouse and Office
,
40
12
I
8
6
40
.. 1 2
14
-
40
-
-
.
. 40
210
241
351
I
1
f
j.
BASIC FLOW SHEET
2,000,000 T P.YR R 0 M ( 9,302 T.P D )
PLANTRATED
CAPACITY 750 T.P.H. RAW COAL
PREPARATION PLANT
R.O.M.
CASE A
_I
TRAMP ROCK
BIN
ROTARY BREAKER
41
-
I
I
EL
6"x 0
1
750-T
OPENSTOCK
PILE
1 0 , 0 0 0 T CAPACITY
W/TUNNEL 8
CRUSHER
c
I
k
T R A M P IRON
MAGNET
150TP H
600TPH
1
MAGNETITE
PULP
3 - 4 CELLCIRCUIT
I IO - H M
i
1
MAGNETITE
RECOVERY
4
*
I
FROTHFLOTA
CYCLONES
I
I
l
"I'
-?'
MAGNETITE RECOVERY
*
TlON C E L L S
120TPH
FI LTE
:RS
.a
TAILINGS
30TPH
&
F
l
J
BIN
REFUSE
DISPOSAL
BY TRUCK
b C L A R I F I E D WATER
V2"x 0
RECIRCULATED TO PLANT
9
HEAT
DRYER
FILTER
CLEANCOAL
I
4
600TPH
I
OPEN, 15,000 TONS
C L E A NC O A L
ENERGY
RESOURCES
BOARD
Nor€:
CLOSED WATER CIRCUIT
UNIT
STATE OF NEW MEXICO
T R A I N LOADING
@ 3,500 T P H
CONCEPTUAL
I
I
FLOW SHEET
NOVEMBER, 1976
DESIGNED BY
REZ
CHICAGO
ILLINOIS
R.O. M.
I
1-
TRAMP ROCK
ROTARY BREAKER
I
750,000 T P Y R R . 0 M ( 3,488 T.P.D. )
PLANTRATEDCAPACITY
300 T.P.H. R A W C O A L
PREPARATION
PLANT
I
I
3 0 0 T P H CAPACITY
I
6"x 0
300 T P H
OPEN
STOCK
PILE
STORAGE
4,000 T CAPACITY
WITUNNEL
a FEEDERS
PILE
CRUSHER
I 1/2" x 0
I v2" x 0
I
F P L A N TW A l
I
I PREWETSCREENS 1
I
7
c
TRAMPIRONMAGNET
240TPH
MAGNETITE
PULP
I
B,C,& D
BASIC FLOW SHEETCASE
i
I
.
ER
0 5mm x 0
+
WATER
60TPH
T
SUMP 8 PUMP
I
CIRCUIl
1-4 C E L L
I FROTH
FLOTATION
CELLS
t
1
*
MAGNETITE
RECOVERY
MAGNETITE
RECOVERY
SINK
SCREENS
TAILINGS
I
MAGNETITE RE
CIRCUIT
I.
7
3
1
V
THICKENER
I7
CENTRIFUGE
G
DISPOSAL
BY TRUCK
I
CENTRIFUGE
"-"---1240TPH
C L A R I F I E D WATER
RECIRCULATED TO P L A N T
FILTER
I
lc
ENERGY
RESOURCES
Nor€:
CLOSED WATER CIRCUIT
BOARD
S T A T E OF N E W M E X I C O
R A I L R O A D C'nR LOADING
NOTUNITTRAINCONCEPT
CONCEPTUAL FLOW SHEET
NOVEMBER, 1976
PAUL w
INCORP0MTED
DESIGNED BY.
R.E Z
CHICAGO
MPANY
lbLlNQlS