Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAtqasuk Coal Mine Project Phase III 1990NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH Planning Department CLP. / RELI. P.O. Box 69 Barrow, Alaska 99723 PROJECT ATQASUK COAL MINE PROJECT Phase III PROJECT REPORT ete September, 1990 (@S) ARCTIC SLOPE CONSULTING GROUP, INC. ’ | Engineers e Architects e Scientists e Surveyors NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH ATQASUK COAL MINE PROJECT - PHASE III RELI PROJECT # 13-127 PROJECT REPORT NSB Contract No 87-193 September 199¢ Prepared For: NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH P.O. BOX 6: BARROW, ALASKA 23723 (2 S ARCTIC SLOPE CONSULTING GROUP | Engineers ¢ Scientists * Surveyors Rick Sampson, Acting Deputy Director Planning Dept North Slope Borough P.O. Box 69 Barrow, Alaska 99723 Subject: NSB Atqasuk Coal Mine Project Phase III RELI # 13-127, Project Report Dear Mr. Sampson: Arctic Slope Consulting Group is pleased to submit herein our Project Report on the Atgasuk Coal Mine Project, Phase III and supplemental documents entitled, North Slope Borough, Atqasuk Coal fine Project Phase III - Project Installation Photographs and Checklists. The NSB Coal Project has built upon the results of the previous two Phases. Improvements were made in stripping and productivity. Two new types of stoves were installed. One with an attached hopper and a coal burning furnace. Although there are many steps to be taken concerning the development of the local coal resource in the areas of coal guality and coal handling, this demonstration has made significant advances towards that end. i syed working on this project and look forward to discussing results with you. Regional Manager vu O Ww oO don oO Ow Q oO asx to . FAX {907} 852- TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION List of Tables. List of Figures 1.@ INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background. —— 1.2 Project Objectives. 1.3 Scope of Work soe 1.4 Project Organization. . 2.@ MINING PROGRAM 2.1 General . 2.2 Mobilization. 2.3 Mining. . ... . 2. ee ee ee 2.4 Production and Equipment Schedule 3.@ COAL STOVE INSTALLATIONS 3.1 General Soe ee ee 3.2 Selection of Participants . 3.3 Equipment Purchase and Transport. 3.4 Installation. 4.@ COAL UTILIZATION 4.1 General ; 4.2 Observations. 5.@ PROJECT COST . 5.1 Cost Breakdown. 5.2 Mining Productivity 6.@ PROJECT WORK FORCE 6.1 General 6.2 Work Force Profile 6.3 Labor Cost 7.@ RECOMMENDATIONS. 7.2 Mining. Bee. HB PRR ee WNHNRPR NNNNN Cll si\@ PS a at OP RP RR WWWWWw PWNP Dob 1 Te | PRR a wow rot tot mre Be ' aoa hore be oO ' Sr) 1 RRR LIST OF TABLES 199@ Western Arctic and Atgasuk Coal Demonstration Programs Production Schedule. Project Cost Breakdown Mining Cost Data Project Personnel Employment List. Project Labor Cost LIST OF FIGURES Mine Plan. Drill Pattern and Delay Sequence Stratigraphy Section ii 1.@ INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background The high cost of fuel oil on the North Slope has created hardships amongst its residents and has suppressed economic development throughout the region. This problem has further been compounded by substantial decreases in state and local expenditures in capital projects which have provided cash income opportunities to many residents. Both the high cost of fuel oil and lack of cash income are the key factors that make up the energy problems prevalent throughout rural Alaska. Aware of this problem and in response to the villages’ request, the North Slope Borough (NSB) Assembly approved funds in June of 1987 for the NSB RELI Project 13-127, Atgasuk Coal Mine project. Upon u Cc a uccessful completion of the project the NSB Assembly on June 21, 1988 approved funding and subsequent Change Order for continuation of the Demonstration Project. e 1989, the Assembly again approved funding in the amount of $198,800 to continue with the project under the mayors REL Program In September the Mayor approved the Change Order to Contract 27-182 work conducted under Phase I and same area at the old Meade River 1 4 1.2 Project Objectives The overall objectives for the 1989/9@ Program were similar to those of the 1938/89 Program. The purpose of the Phase II Project is to maximize on the use of the Atqasuk labor force and to mine and deliver to the village a minimum of 250 tons of coal for use in a pilot program to test the use of coal for residential heating. The project yielded information on costs and operating requirements which will assist in the analysis of mining methods best suited to recovery of the Meade River coal and the benefits which can be derived from its use. Other tasks of the project included installation of ten additional coal stoves and monitoring of coal use. 1.3 Scope of Work The major project tasks undertaken by ASCG are presented below: Mobilization Planning of the mining operation and procurement of the supplies and equipment required for performance of the mining. Obtain all appropriate permits. Mining Using local labor and N heavy equipment excavate 250 ns o£ coal and stockpile at the gravel stockpile area ° adjacent to the village. Coal Utilization Devise a method for delivery of the coal to the residents which provides for a continuous supply and a method for measurement of coal used at each installation. 1.4 Project Organization Funding for this project was provided by the NSB. ASCG were the recipients of the NSB grant and were therefore responsible for the Management of the overall project, installation equipment rrocurement, installation supervision, mine planning and supervision and final report preparation. Local hiring, project coordination within the village, and selection of demonstration participants were performed in the & Project Coordinator residing in the community. ra 2.@ MINING PROGRAM 2.1 General The 199@ Atqasuk Mining Program called for an estimated 25@ tons of coal to be mined from the area in the same vicinity, of the old Meade River coal mine, as the 1987 and 1989 mining programs. The coal would be transported and stockpiled relatively close to the townsite in the village’s gravel stockpile area. The field activities began on March 13 with the arrival of equipment and supplies into Atgqasuk and ended on March 26 with the last load of coal hauled to the stockpile area. It was estimated 275 tons of coal were mined and stockpiled for the 1990 mining program. Both the Atqasuk and Western Arctic coal projects were performed together. The operating tasks and work sequence of the two projects are presented in Table 2-1. 2.2 Mobilization The 1990 Atqasuk coal mining program began with preparation and submittal of a mining license application, on behalf of the N.S.B., to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and obtaining a letter of non-objection from the Atqasuk Corporation. On February 5, ASCG received a letter of non-objection to conduct the 1990 program from the Atqasuk Corporation. On March 11, ASCG received a copy of the approved license to mine coal in Atqasuk. The license, number BLM FF-884753, is good for four years. On February 15, 1990 ASCG hired Mr. Steve Ranger as the mine supervisor for both the Atqasuk and Western Arctic Coal Projects. Mine planning and preparation continued to March 5. drilling equipment, explosives, and supplies were located in Anchorage and Fairbanks and transport plans to Atqasuk were arranged. Two Ingersoll-Rand 375 CFM compressors and on Ingersoll-Rand LM-100 air-track drill and associated materials were rented from Construction Machinery Inc. in Anchorage. The drilling equipment was transported via truck-road to Fairbanks to Everts Air Fuel lot at the Fairbanks International Airport. Explosives were purchased from Alaska Explosives Limited out of Fairbanks. Everts Air Fuel’s DC-6 flew into Atqasuk the drilling equipment, explosives and miscellaneous material on March 13. There it was unloaded and stored under the supervision on Mr. Leroy Gunderson, Village Project Coordinator. Steve Ranger, Mining Supervisor, arrived in Atqasuk on March 14. From March 15 to 17 efforts were made to start up the field activities in Atqasuk. Mr. Gunderson hired Mr. Jack Ahkivgak as general laborer and Mr. Walton Kittick as equipment operator. ho TABLE 2-1 199@ Western Arctic and Atqasuk Coal Demonstration Programs Operating Tasks and Work Sequence Investigation of DFS and Atqasuk mine sites for determination of supplies needed. Supply procurement and delivery to mine sites. Set-up at Atgqasuk and prepare mining equipment. Safety meeting at Atqasuk Fly in drill, compressor and explosives to Atqasuk. Drill and blast at Atqasuk. Move drill, compressor and explosives to DFS. Muck overburden at Atgqasuk. Load and haul coal from mine to Atqasuk. Demob from Atqasuk. Set-up at DFS and prepare mining equipment. Safety meeting/orientation at DFS. Drill and blast at DFS. Fly drill and compressor back to Fairbanks. Muck overburden at DFS. Deliver coal from DFS to port area. Demob from DFS. Heavy equipment for the project was obtained from the N.S.B. Municipal Services Department. The N.S.B. maintenance shop had previously prepared their equipment for our use on the project. The equipment used included a D-6 dozer, D-7 dozer with ripper, 966D front-end loader, and DE 25 ton off highway dump truck. A Chevrolet Suburban, rented from SKW was used for commuting between the mine-site and town. A snow bridge was prepared across the creek to transport the equipment to the mine site. A 30@ gallon fuel tank was obtained and repaired for use at the same mine-site. Since fuel could not be purchased during weekend periods, the tank was filled for use during this time. 2.3 Mining The mining plan is presented in Figure 2-1. A total sum of 1015 yd’ of overburden was removed by drilling blasting. In the past ripping with a D-7 dozer removed the overburden. The blasting method worked well and removed the overburden. The blasting measured approximately 49’ X 56’. The drill pattern is presented in Figure 2-2. Inclement weather on March 16-17 delayed drilling of the overburden until March 18. Drilling was completed on March 21. The blastholes were loaded with the shot fired at 7:30 p.m. on the same day. Approximately 64 holes were drilled that equaled about 630’. The D-7 dozer and 966D loader spent the following two days removing the fragmented overburden from the pit. A ramp was ripped with the D-7 dozer to facilitate easy access to the coal with the 966D loader. Upon completion of the overburden removal, two DE-25 ton haul-trucks were used to haul and stockpile the coal near town. OVERBURDEN! \\ ! eooeie \\ 56 FT. \ \ 1 \ | | \ 44 TA \ \ \ FUdNDOLS NAGYNEYIAO MO1d YSAIN JCVAN | ' | i i ARCTIC SLOPE CONSULTING GROUP PREPARED BY Engineers « Architects « Scientists + Surveyors 6700 Arctic Spur Rooe Tevepnone (907) 345-148 Fox. (907) 345-4213 Ancnoroge, Alosxe 99516-1550 i NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH Planning Department ATQASUK COAL MINE PROJECT 1990 Season MINE PLAN DATE: MAY. 1990 | JOB NO.: 3663 /FIGURE 2-1 i) 2 7’ x 10° PATTERN DEPTH 12° BACK ROW 7 x 8 PATTERN DEPTH 8° EMPTY HoLe J | | NOTES | DRILL GRID MEASUREMENT = 49° x 5€ 2 1/2" ® BLASTHOLES | FILLED TO 1° FROM COLLAR | AVERAGE DEPTH = 10 | = 1015 CUBIC YARDS BOREHOLE (ANFO ONLY) PREPARED BY ARCTIC SLOPE CONSULTING GROUP EACH HOLE CONTAINS 1 2” x 8” POWER PRIMER AND WR—-ANFO APPROXIMATELY 450’ OF LOADED 1.55 LBS. ANFO PER FOOT NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH Planning Department ATQASUK COAL MINE PROJECT 1990 Season 6700 arctic Spur Rood Anchoroge, Aiosko 99516-1550 Telepnone: (907) 349-5148 — Fox: (907) 349-4213 Engineers « Architects « Scientists « Surveyors DRILL PATTERN AND DELAY SEQUENCE | DATE: MAY, 1990 JOB NO.: 3663 | FIGURE 2-2) zZ- 6 The 66D loader loaded the coal into the trucks after the D-7 dozer ripped the coal. Each truck was loaded with approximately 7 tons of coal. Thirty-six loads were transported to the stockpile area. Measurement of the volume of coal removed from the pit and the volume of coal in the stockpile revealed that approximately 275 tons of coal were removed from the pit. A stratigraphy profile of the pit is shown in Figure 2-3. The upper 3 foot section of coal is lower quality with visible higher content of ash and sediments. A six inch parting separates the upper coal section from the much better quality lower coal section. The lower section revealed a more homogeneous and non-stratified coal mass structure. However after the coal was placed in a heated room and thawed, all the coal in solid blocks crumbled into smaller pieces. This is apparently a result of a high moisture content in the coal. 10° 10° -12° '.40° -12° WET Te ee et PUTTS taste eee ea eer Ee SAND meme LH LIE UF =U I LH Ti LH Ti Te Wl LL I lll LU Kw SW FU =U eer TT SIS 1H1 i i Fe ere UI LH HEH T= I iM | EH NN BLACK SHALE SO NORTH SLOPE BOROUGH Planning Department ATQASUK COAL MINE PROJECT 1990 Season 6700 ar tie Spur Rood Anchorage, Aske 99518-1550 STRATIGRAPHY SECTION | | DATE: MAY, 1990 JOB NO.: 3663 2 - 8 FIGURE 2-3) 1 Upon the removal of coal from the pit, a vertical sandstone rock dike was revealed on the west side of the pit-wall. The 2 foot thick dike was embedded with a poor quality coalshale section in the middle, with rock surrounding the coal on both sides. This sandstone dike was found only in the upper section of the lower quality coal. After completion of the coal removal, the excavated overburden was placed back into the pit and the ground was restored to the original contour. This marked the completion of the 199@ mining program at Atqgasuk. 2.4 Production & Equipment Schedule Production Schedule March 13-17 Mobilization March 18-21 Drilling and Blasting March 22-24 Overburden removal March 23 Freighted out drilling equipment to Pt. Lay March 24-26 Coal haul to stockpile March 27 Backfill pit and reclaim mining area N.S.B. Equipment Usage D-6 Dozer . 12.@ hours D-7 Dozer 45.2 hours 966D Loader 63.6 hours DJB #1 22.6 hours DJB #2 5.@ hours 3.@ COAL STOVE INSTALLATIONS 3.1 General All installations were done in accordance with NFPA 211. Selection of stoves for phase III of the project were based on results from phases I & II. Most new participants have had the benefit of seeing the previous project stoves in use, and already had a good idea which stove would fit their needs the best. The test results of Phase I & II of the project, showed that participants were generally the happiest with the Harman Mark Series stoves, manufactured by Harman Stove and welding in Halifax, PA. In July 1989 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) put strict emission standards on woodstoves and coal/wood combination heaters. These standards caused many manufactures to discontinue models of stoves that had specifications that were attractive for installations in rural Alaska. This lack of availability, along with the good results of past test burns of the Harman Mark series stoves lead to the decision to use only stoves manufactured by Harman Stove and Welding. The Harman stoves have an effective efficiency rating of 55% to 65%. This figure is relative and comparable to other units on the market. And the Harman is available ion a wide range of sizes and styles necessary to meet the variety of installations to be performed. In cases where households had small children, portable fences were installed to lessen the possibility of burns. A schedule of activities relating to the coal stove installations is presented in Table 3-1. TABLE 3 - 1 Production Schedule 12/04/89 Travel to Atqasuk (meet with Mayor Kignak). 12/4-5/89 Survey housing and select participants. 12/26-29/89 Prepare material list. @1/25/90 Bids due @1/08/90 Award bids 2/15-3/15/9@ Receive installation materials and prepare them for shipment to Atqasuk. @5/24/90 Travel to Atqasuk, hold employee safety meeting and organize installation materials. @5/26-06/02/90 Stove installations and build storage bins. @6/02/90 Travel to Pt. Lay. @6/14/90 Travel to Atqasuk and put finishing touches on installations that were missing materials on first visit. 3.2 Selection of Participants Residents of Atqasuk were notified of the project by the village coordinator by means of written notices posted in prominent locations throughout the village. Persons interested in participating in the coal project by having a coal stove installed in their home were requested to contact the village coordinator. The coordinator compiled a list of 17 interested persons. Unfortunately the budget only allowed for 1@ installations. The applicants were screened and 10 final participants were selected. The screening was done with the input of the village coordinator, the mayor and the Installation Supervisor. When screening applicants the selection was based on 1) anticipated participation; 2) economic need; and 3) desire. The final participants and the stove of their choice are listed below: 1. Jake Kignik, Sr. MK III 2. Johnny Nayukok SF 150@A 3. James Aiken, Sr. MK III 4. Amos Kippi MK III 5. Jenne Felder MK II 6. Matte Tunik MK II 7. Jimmie Ivanoff MK III 8. Whyborn Nungasak MK III 9. Lucy Aiken MK II 10. Caleb Nayakuk MK III A Harman Magna Stoker was installed in Leroy Gunderson’s, so it could be used by a participant that had prior coal burning experience. When installing this unit a Harman MK III that had been installed during Phase II was removed. this MK III was the overhauled and installed in one of the Phase III homes. 3.3 Equipment Purchase and Transport On the preliminary visit to Atqasuk the Installation Supervisor conferred with the participants and with them determined the best installation location, keeping in mind optimum heat distribution and space usage. The layout of most homes limited the choice of installation locations to one, and in some cases two areas. Once the stove and it’s location were decided on, a materials list was compiled. From the materials list a bid document was prepared. Because of the wide variety of materials needed the bid list was divided into seven sections. With prospective bidders encouraged to bid on all or any of the individual sections. Each of the seven sections received a minimum of two competitive bids and were awarded to the low bidder with the exception of Section 7 (Misc. Installation Materials), in which case there were four bids, none of which were complete. Thus, materials for this section were selected at the discretion of the Installation Supervisor using portions of the respective bids where applicable. Due to the similarities of the NSB Western Arctic Coal Demonstration Project and the NSB Atqasuk Coal Project, the Materials Bid Lists were combined and materials consolidated in Fairbanks for volume shipment to the respective villages. To standardize bids and simplify logistics all bids were F.0O.B. Fairbanks. It was determined the most economical way to deliver the installation materials to Atqasuk would be VIA Everts Air Cargo direct from Fairbanks. By consolidating installation materials and mining equipment shipments we received optimum freight rates. 3.4 Installation In some cases stoves were installed in locations that wood heaters were previously installed, thus having chimneys and in some cases full installations to contend with. This proved to be a detriment rather than advantage. Prior to April of 1987 NFPA Regulations allowed coal heating appliances to be installed on Class A chimneys. Coal heating appliances installed after this date are required to have a higher rating of U.L. STANDARDS - 103 HT, thus making it necessary to remove existing chimneys to install chimney with the U.L. 103-HT rating. All chimneys installed were Security brand model ASHT having U.L. 103-HT approved and were installed with the required minimum 2 air space. This 2’ air space is an area of definite heat loss, but necessary! To minimize heat loss all ceiling trim collars were therefore eliminating filtration heat loss. Chimneys were installed so that they terminated a minimum of two feet above the peak of the roof to minimize the possibility of down drafts. Chimneys that penetrated the roof line more than six feet were secured with a chimney brace. To connect the stoves to the chimney - Security double wall connector pipe was used. Securities double wall pipe far surpasses NFPA’s required standard 24 gage single wall stove pipe minimums and has many features that make it outstanding for the application: 1) Inner liner is stainless steel, all but eliminating the need for replacement; 2) Outer wall is aesthetically pleasing black finish and vented to allow cooling and heat distribution through convection; 3) Available in a selection of lengths and slip sections eliminating the need for cutting; 4) Reduced clearances to combustibles 6" rather than 18" for single wall;. 5) Unique twist lock for tight joints. (Although not required for twist lock pipe - three screws were placed on each joint.); and 6) Cool exteriors minimize the possibilities of burns to small children. Wall protection NFPA Standards state that the stoves clearances to combustibles may be reduced by 2/3 (from 36’ without protection, to 12" with protection) by installing a noncombustible material with one inch of air space behind it, provided that noncombustible spacers are used. All installation utilized this practice in order to minimize the loss of living space. In many cases installation would not have been possible without this practice. 24 gage galvanized sheet metal with edges hemmed was used as the noncombustible materials with hatchchannel spacers secured with screws. Floor protection was fabricated from 5/8" Homasoto (a commercial grade noncombustible material that meets FNPA requirement for floor protection) covered with 24 gage galvanized sheet metal. This protection extended a minimum of 16 inches in front of the stove door opening. Each participant was supplied with appropriate safety equipment for operation of his stove and instructed on the proper and safe use and maintenance of their stove. 4.0 COAL UTILIZATION 4.1 General This portion of the project involved the usage of coal by the selected demonstration participants. As part of the monitoring effort during this phase of the project, a fuel use monitoring report prepared by ASCG for the Western Arctic Coal Demonstration Project was utilized. These reports were used by the Village Project Coordinator to track performance of the stoves, amount of coal/oil consumed and comments of the participants. As in the past the consistency of monitoring was lacking, however, there were periods of consistency that makes the data valid. 4.2 Observations The following observations have been recorded: 1) All coal burning units selected for the demonstration performed well. 2) As in Phases I & II, the primary use of coal has been as a supplemental heating source to fuel oil. 4) Coal quality was improved over Phase II. This increased usage over last year. As in the past coal was used as a supplemental fuel to oil. This was due to the area heating limitations of the stand alone conventional coal stoves used on this project and the style of housing which utilizes forced air or hydropic heating systems in order to reach all the rooms in the house. installations in Atqasuk. Ten of which were e June of 199@ and therefore usage records are not the remaining twenty, four did not burn any coal during the demonstration period. From the fuel use monitoring reports the following examples give a representative picture of coal and oil use during the demonstration period from 8/05/89 to 05/26/9®. During that period approximately 54 tons of coal was delivered to sixteen participants. Approximately 4@ tons were burned in the homes. The coal burned displaced approximately 60@@ gallons of fuel oil. The participants average coal use was about 56% of the total energy consumed (coal & oil). One home consumed 23,100 pounds of coal and 865 gallons of fuel oil in a 294 day period. Coal use for that home represented 68% of the energy used for space heating. This example demonstrates the potential savings available to coal users even with the stand alone coal burning stoves used for this project. 5.@ PROJECT COST 5.1 Cost Breakdown The NSB demonstration project represents the third mining effort at the old Meade Rive Coal Mine. The project costs presented include the cost of stove installation, mining, coal distribution and project management. Total project costs were $163,584.29, or 86% of the original project budget of $190,000. The test mining cost category represented 31% of the total project budget. Table 5-1 presents the project cost breakdown. It should be noted the cost associated with all phases of the project except for the installation of stoves are not representative of cost conditions that would prevail under normal operating conditions. The project scale is to small to provide valid economic data to determine mining feasibility. Further, the field effort was a test mining one that contained non-productive costs that were necessary to get the field program up and running. Overall mining costs are lower compared to last year due to changing the stripping method from ripping with a D-7 Cat Dozer to drilling and blasting. 5.2 Mining Productivity The cost of mining on a per ton basis have dropped substantial since the initial project. In comparison the production cost of coal for the mining operation in Phase I was $616.42 per ton, Phase II was $262.60 per ton, and Phase III, $182.14 per ton. Mine cost data are presented in Table 5-2. Project Management. Administration Project Coordinator Expenses Mining Operation. . Field Supervisor Labor Travel Material Rental Coal Distribution . Labor Expenses Installation. ... Installation Supervisor Labor Expenses Materials Freight TABLE 5-1 Project Cost Breakdown $ 39,972 22,967. 1,483. -$ 64,423.59 25 63 71 -$ 50,089.76 00 50 +38 -0@ -$ 2,637.67 -5@ 17 -$ 43,700.57 -@@ -50 67 95 -@8 $ 163,584.29 TABLE 5-2 Mining Cost Data Mining Unit Phase Tonnage Cost (S$ Cost ($/ton) I 159 92.5K S$ 616.42 a 200 52.5K 262.68 III 275 50.1K 182.14 $122.14 per ton is equivalent to $1.26 gallon of fuel oil. lthough this price is equal to the current subsidized cost of fuel oil the following items should be taken into account: 1) the mining cost presented are field cost and do not include overhead operating costs; 2} the NSB has not charged for leasing their equipment over the years. If they did the cost per ton would increase to $279.69 per ton which is equivalent to a $1.93 gallon of oil; and 3) to date mining has occurred in a depression near the river. An ongcing operation would occur in an underground area. This means more overburden removal will have to take place increasing the unit 2 cost of mining. Despite these in Atgasuk can be a viable ill be Cependent on local demand. There is in the community t2 make such a venture & an minisg that aave occurred can be traced to the 3] -| |3 Drilling and blasting proved to be the best method for overburcen removal. Even so, further cost savings could be realized in this area if the future mine operator purchased a drill rig and compressor. On this project, the drill rig and compressor was leased for $3,575 for just four days work. Cost to mobe and demobe the rig came to $6,700. Total equipment cost for the drilling operation came to $19,275 which is 21% of the total mining costs. A similar used drill rig can be purchased for $15,00@ - $25,909. Such a rig capitalized over ten years and with a one time mobilization cost would substantially lower the annual cost for the drilling and blasting operation. 6.@ PROJECT WORK FORCE 6.1 General All labor requirements, except for field and installation supervision were obtained through hiring North Slope residents from the village of Atqasuk. The Project Village Coordinator (PVC) Maintained an employment list for the community. The PVC was responsible for selection of the workers when notified by the field supervisors that an employee was needed or a job became vacant. 6.2 Work Force Profile The NSB Atgqasuk Coal Mine RELI Project Phase III employed nine Atgqasuk residents and two Barrow residents from July 1, 1989 to June 3@, 1990. This project provided 1045.5 hours of work for the Atgasuk work force. The total hours are below the original proposed crew hour estimate of 135@ hours. This is due to the increased productivity of the mining effort due to the use of drilling and blasting techniques for sverpurden removal instead of ripping with a 3-7 Cat. he mining sector employed two there were employed four stove installers, {45 % of total), one project coordinator (11% of total), and two Personnel and rc oO - a TABLE 6-1 Project Personnel Employment List Village Project Coordinator Leroy Gunderson Coal Mining Employees Walton Kittick Jack Ahkivagak Village Installers Walton Kittick Turbic Shugluk Johnny Nayukuk Clayborn Tunic, Jr. Expeditors Carl Kippi Crawford Patkotak 6.3 Labor Cost lling and biasting in Jan Weamount of overburden depression area worked on. TABLE 6-2 Project Labor Cost Percent Major Cost Categories Task Cost Labor Cost Project Cost Management Fees an S$ 64,423.59 $ 22,567.63 14.0 Administration Cost and Mine Planning Hining and Stockpiling 5@,089.76 6,307.59 4.2 200 tons of coal Coal Distribution 2,637.67 1,237.5@ @.3 Housing Surveys 5,596.07 -@- @.9 Installation $40,837.20 $8,948.50 5.5 TOTAL S$ 163,584.29 S$ 40,061.13 24.5 w 56 - 7.1 7.2 7.@ RECOMMENDATIONS Mining 1) 2) 3) 4) Drilling and blasting proved the best method of overburden removal. A new pit away from the ground depression should be pursued. This will more accurately establish the mining operation and costs for an on-going operation. Coal removal for stockpiling should take place below the initial three to four feet of coal and six inches of sandstone rock. Below the sandstone layer the coal quality appears significantly better. If the program is to continue, purchase of a rock drill and compressor should be considered. The cost for rental, mobilization and demobilization of a drill made up 21% of the total mining costs. Congressional action is required to allow coal use within NPR-A for power generation and district heating purposes. This activity should be pursued in next year’s program. Coal Distribution A powered coal screening deck should be acquired to screen the coal at the stockpile prior to delivery to the households. This will better remove the fines which are now being removed by a stationary hand-built screen.