The Florida Institute of Phosphate Research was created in 1978 by the Florida Legislature (Chapter 378.

101, Florida Statutes) and empowered to conduct research supportive to the responsible development of the states phosphate resources. The Institute has targeted areas of research responsibility. These are: reclamation alternatives in mining and processing, including wetlands reclamation, phosphogypsum storage areas and phosphatic clay containment areas; methods for more efficient, economical and environmentally balanced phosphate recovery and processing; disposal and utilization of phosphatic clay; and environmental effects involving the health and welfare of the people, including those effects related to radiation and water consumption. FIPR is located in Polk County, in the heart of the central Florida phosphate district. The Institute seeks to serve as an information center on phosphate-related topics and welcomes infomration requests made in person, or by mail, email, or telephone.

Executive Director Paul R. Clifford

Research Directors G. Michael Lloyd, Jr. J. Patrick Zhang Steven G. Richardson Brian K. Birky -Chemical Processing -Mining & Beneficiation -Reclamation -Public Health

Publications Editor Karen J. Stewart

Florida Institute of Phosphate Research 1855 West Main Street Bartow, Florida 33830 (863) 534-7 160 Fax: (863) 534-7165 http://www.fipr.state.fl.us

RAIL-VEYOR BULK MATERIAL TRANSPORT SYSTEM FINAL REPORT

Merton F. Dibble, P.E. Principal Investigator with Julian Hazen Met Pro Supply, Inc.

RAIL-VEYOR TECHNOLOGY, INC. C/O MET PRO SUPPLY, INC. Bartow, FL 33830

Prepared for FLORIDA INSTITUTE OF PHOSPHATE RESEARCH 1855 West Main Street Bartow, Florida 33830 Project Manager: G. Michael Lloyd, Jr. FIPR Project Number: 98-01-152 May 2002

DISCLAIMER The contents of this report are reproduced herein as received from the contractor. The report may have been edited as to format in conformance with the FIPR Style Manual. The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed herein are not necessarily those of the Florida Institute of Phosphate Research, nor does mention of company names or products constitute endorsement by the Florida Institute of Phosphate Research.

PERSPECTIVE G. Michael Lloyd, Jr. Research Director, Chemical Processing The cost to transport the matrix from the mining site at the dragline to the washer where the sand and clay will be separated from the phosphate rock represents a major portion of the cost of mining. The traditional means of transport is to slurry the matrix with water and pump the slurry containing 30-40% solids to the washer using as many booster pumps along the line as is necessary, depending on the distance to be pumped. With the present practice of pumping longer distances than ever before, the cost of transporting the matrix has become even more critical. With Rail-Veyor the matrix will be transported as a solid containing perhaps 25% water using a series of interconnected cars running on a lightweight track that can be easily moved to accommodate the movement of the dragline as it mines through an area. Overall the cost to move the matrix by Rail-Veyor is significantly less than the presently practiced slurry pumping. One concern that has been expressed is the capital cost of replacing an existing pumping system with Rail-Veyor. This should not prove to be an insurmountable problem since any company operating multiple draglines will have to replace both piping and pumps that are likely to cost as much as a Rail-Veyor system each year as a part of their required pipeline maintenance program. Rail-Veyor could also be used to replace the sand tailings slurry pumping systems and it is possible that there would be circumstances where a single Rail-Veyor could be used to transport matrix to the washer and return sand tailings to the mine site for use in reclamation.

iii

ABSTRACT The phosphate industry has traditionally used slurry pipelines to move phosphate matrix from the mine site to the processing plant. As phosphate matrix grade decreases and transport distances increase, the transport cost per ton of product has significantly increased. These increased costs are forcing alternative matrix transport methods to be evaluated. The Rail-Veyor represents a possible replacement for slurry pipelines by combining the best features of a railroad and overland conveyor without the high capital cost requirements. The Rail-Veyor system can move phosphate matrix at a much higher percent solids than pipelines in a static, rather than dynamic, environment. The demonstration Rail-Veyor system operated successfully as it was able to load, transport, and dump phosphate debris is a very efficient manner. The system was able to operate continuously, with only the stationary drive units in physical contract with the 42-car 168-foot open trough train in operation at any time. The system operated at about 588 feet/minute (FPM), with energy required to move the train and load of about 0.3 KWH per ton-mile. The Rail-Veyor met the objectives of the project and offers potential as a costeffective, environmentally attractive bulk material transport system.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The principal investigators wish to acknowledge the Florida Institute of Phosphate Research for providing us the opportunity to convert a combination of ideas and engineering concepts into a successful, functional bulk material transport system. We would also like to acknowledge the management of Cargill Fertilizer Company, which generously provided us the site and utilities as well as encouragement at their Bartow Chemical Plant Works.

vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS PERSPECTIVE.................................................................................................................. iii ABSTRACT.........................................................................................................................v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................1 INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................5 METHODOLOGY ..............................................................................................................9 RESULTS ..........................................................................................................................11 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................13 APPENDIX A: Cost Studies........................................................................................... A-1 APPENDIX B: Practical Innovations Reports.................................................................B-1 APPENDIX C: Photographs ............................................................................................C-1

vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Florida Institute of Phosphate Research (FIPR) was approached by the principal investigator of the Rail-Veyor System working in conjunction with Met Pro Supply, Inc. of Bartow, FL. The Rail-Veyor System is a bulk material transport concept that represents a cost-effective, environmentally safe approach to moving a wide variety of materials. FIPR felt that the phosphate industry needed to actively investigate alternative methods of moving phosphate matrix from the mine site to the plant site. The present slurry transport system has been an extremely successful means of moving matrix and is the accepted standard of moving matrix. As with all good things, the high-grade phosphate rock from the historically rich Bone Valley Member has almost been completely depleted. The phosphate rock now mined from the Hawthorn Extension underlying and to the south of the Bone Valley is lower in grade, both as feed and product and does not have the abundant quantities of coarse pebble rock that did not require beneficiation. Historically it was not uncommon to recover over 60% of the phosphate matrix mined as product. Today the recovery of 25% of the total weight of matrix is considered acceptable. The present slurry transport system moves solids ranging from 30 to 35% solids. If the 35% solids contained only 25% by weight phosphate then every ton of material moved in a pipeline only contained about 0.09 tons of product per ton of slurry moved and 0.65 tons of water. Because coarse solids settle at low velocities sufficient speed of the slurry in the pipeline must be maintained to move material as large as 6 inch in diameter to avoid pipeline plugging. The high friction of moving slurry in such a dynamic environment leads directly to high-energy consumption. The other factor influencing the economics of slurry pipeline transport is the availability of water. Water used to provide the carrying agent for the slurry has to be recycled. This process requires the removal of water from waste disposal sites and pumping it to the mining site for highenergy matrix disaggregation and dilution of solids so they can be pumped as slurry. Once the slurry reaches the plant the waste clays are again separated in the washing stage at the plant site repeating the cycle. New water must be provided in all cases to supplement the water lost in clay disposal ponds and evaporation from the large surface areas of these ponds. Dry (+/- 80% solids) transport of phosphate matrix has been looked at sporadically over the past several years. Agrico Chemical Co. used the Rail-Haul system to move windrowed matrix in conventional bottom dump railroad cars successfully in the early 1980s. Brewster Phosphates installed an overland conveyor to haul dewatered phosphate matrix in the 1970s. The mining system was conventional with the dragline feeding a well. Pumped matrix was then locally dewatered and loaded on the conveyor belt. Constant breakdowns in belts, drives, and idler bearings hindered this system. By not being able to dewater to a high enough percent solids led to frequent spillages.

The Rail-Veyor concept evolved from earlier work by the French as well as Dravo Corp. during the 1960s. Flaws in these early systems had required significant modifications. The relatively recent development of inverter controlled SM cyclo gear drives allowing reversing and high torque start-up capabilities proved to be an important key to the commercialization of the system. The Rail-Veyor, after several years of design efforts by the principal investigator, resulted in a system felt to be suitable to be presented to FIPR. The system proposed for demonstration purposes was for a loop of 1/4 mile of 25#/yard track with 42 cars, four feet long, each consisting of a 10-inch radius 180degree trough and an overlapping dust flap of urethane. When connected these cars made a 168-foot long continuous trough that allowed articulated movement without spillage. The drives consisted of two opposing horizontal drive tires pressing against a vertical drive plate on both sides of a car. The rotary action of the drive tires provided forward thrust by the friction on the side plates. Sensors were located just before and after each drive station, that when activated either energized or de-energized the system. Each car had two wheels at the rear with the trailing car having a clevis blade that fit between two clevis blades of the car in front just behind the two wheels. This configuration supported each car except the front car at three points. The front car had a movable axle, which allowed both twisting and turning. The combination of gear reduction and tire diameter gave a maximum operating speed of 588 FPM. Each of the 8 drive stations (165 feet apart) had the capability of programmed acceleration and de-acceleration as well as startup under load capability. Once set up to the desired operating criteria the Rail-Veyor system was operated hands off, with a cycle time that did not vary. The dumping phase consisted of a double rail (encapsulating the wheel) outside loop of 12 feet in diameter. The train was operated at full speed at dumping which helped project the phosphate debris contents to a welldefined target point. With a dumping speed of 588 FPM loading also was 588 FPM because the only 40% of the train had been dumped when the loading station had been entered. By loading at a rate of 350 FPM, for example, or 29 seconds versus 17.1 seconds, the load rate for 8 tons would be 1,000 TPH versus 1680 TPH for 588 FPM. All phases of the test program operated successfully. Data collected indicated that the system concept would be applicable to much larger capacities. Operation of multiple trains on a single-track loop would allow more efficient use of the drives and loading rates. A cost estimate was made on a two mile (11,000 foot) 600 TPH haul distance with 22 drive stations for entire loop, three trains and a loading and dumping station tied to a radial stacker. The installed price for the entire system was estimated to be $218 per foot for 11,000 foot of haulage distance (includes all costs for the 22,000-foot loop). The capital cost for this 600 TPH capacity would be $4,000/TPH. By quadrupling this capacity, or 2,400 TPH (twelve trains), the capital cost per foot of haul distance would increase to $424 and decrease to $1,942 per TPH capital cost. In essence, increasing the capacity four times increases the total capital cost by a multiple of 1.94.

A new grass roots mining site at a six-mile distance from a plant site with a Slurry pipeline system compared with the Rail-Veyor offers the following potential economic advantages: Slurry Pipeline Total Capital Matrix Transport $12,264,000 Annual Power Usage @ $0.04 KWH 2,926,860 Rail-Veyor $9,605,000 $861,000 R-V Savings $2,659,000 $2,065,860

The Rail-Veyor system, because of the ability of adding additional trains, does not have capacity limitations that pipelines or overland conveyors have. Besides the energy efficiency offered by the unique drive system it also provides access to areas of phosphate rock not recoverable because of environment restraints on pressurized pipelines such as rivers, wetlands, highways and high density population centers. The potential for pipeline or pump casing breaking can lead to catastrophic failure not likely by static material movement in cars. By moving material such as dewatered matrix without dilution, eliminates the need for pipeline slurry dilution water being transported to the mining site. This may allow less restrictive regulation requirements when mine sites are located in different counties than disposal or plant sites.

INTRODUCTION The Florida phosphate industry has historically produced the lowest-cost phosphate rock in the world. Favorable ratios of overburden to matrix and concentration of matrix had made the Bone Valley Member of central and south Polk County the most cost effective source of rock. The substantial presence of pebble, coarse rock plus 1.0 MM that did not require beneficiation, also contributed to the cost-effectiveness of these large reserves. The success of the American agricultural industry has been profoundly influenced by the presence of these low-cost reserves. The phosphorus element is the one component of fertilizer that there is no substitute for. Fertilizer represents cheap land as it allows continuous use of land even after the exhaustion of the natural components present for growth. By providing very efficient farmland utilization, fertilizer has allowed the agricultural sector of the United States to feed the rest of the country with less than 5% of the labor force. This proportion is unprecedented in the world. The Bone Valley land pebble deposits were discovered in the late 19th century as outcrops in the river valleys. The original rock was the coarse pebble rock that did not require beneficiation. The mined rock was simply screened with the -1.0 MM rock discarded. As phosphate rock needs grew, the -1.0 MM rock containing significant quantities of phosphate sands required the development of flotation to separate these values from the waste silica sand material. With the growth of the flotation process the traditional simple sizing systems at the mine sites became obsolete. The beneficiation process required the development of centralized processing plants that were fed from several sources. Historically, water was readily available at the central Florida Bone Valley deposits. Since the process steps required to both size and clean phosphate sands required a low percent solids slurry, the transport system evolved simplified the process by disaggregation of the matrix at the each of a multiple of mine sites and transport it in the form of a slurry to the process plant. The slurry was elevated to a washer where the pebble and clay were removed. The water separated from the clays, after settling and the flotation tailings were recycled to again slurry new matrix. As with all good things, high-grade Bone Valley phosphate rock is a thing of the past. The present phosphate resources are now southern extensions from the Bone Valley and are primarily from the lower grade Hawthorn Extension. The present rock sources now have minimal or noncommercial pebble rock, significantly lower grade flotation feed grades and higher percentages of the -100 micron clays requiring larger disposal areas. Historically the overburden matrix ratios seldom exceeded 1:1. It was not uncommon to have feed grades of 30-40% BPL (bone phosphate of lime), with product grades exceeding 78% BPL. In addition, the coarse pebble could represent in excess of 40% of the final product weight and have grades in excess of 70% BPL. This product from this matrix slurry could have represented from 60 to 70% of the transported slurry 5

solids. The distances the matrix was pumped was usually less than 2 miles and rarely exceeded five miles. The present phosphate resources have matrix grades of around 20% BPL. Flotation feed grades of less than 15% BPL are not uncommon, with product grades running from 62 to 68% BPL. Stripping ratios of overburden to matrix can exceed 3:1 with matrix-to-product ratios from 4 to 5:1. Unfortunately, as the feed grades drop and the ratios of concentration increase, the transport distances from the mines to the concentration plants have also increased. Five-mile distances are not uncommon and distances exceeding 10 miles are expected in the future. To remain competitive, the Florida phosphate mining industry needs to explore all avenues to improve efficiency in producing a cost effective rock product. Beneficiation methods have been optimized to the point where recovery improvements are indicated in tenths of a percent. A great deal of future effort is not expected to produce significant improvements in product recovery. There are three areas, however, that represent significant potential to improve production costs of phosphate rock. These areas are listed as follows: With the increased overburden to matrix ratios dragline efficiency is an area that offers potential savings. A study funded by FIPR in October 1988 (FIPR publication #04-031-068, Assessment of Present Phosphate Mining and Beneficiation Practice & the Evaluation of Alternative Technology) concludes that by windrowing matrix rather than spot loading a matrix slurry well, dragline efficiency could be improved by 27%. Windrowed phosphate matrix allows the dragline to operate independent of the process plant. Windrowed matrix can be reclaimed and transported at a steady rate independent of the dragline building that windrow. By supplying a process plant at a steady tonnage from a site (or sites), operational variables are reduced and efficiently increased. Without having an umbilical cord (pipeline) from the dragline to the plant, each can be operated as well as maintained to provide maximum efficiency. The movement of phosphate matrix in a very dynamic environment such as a slurry pipeline in combination of 60 to 70% water is not energy-efficient over long distances. By moving matrix at high solids, 70 to 80%, from windrowed matrix with no other than free-rolling steel wheels on an iron track, very significant energy savings are evident.

The Rail-Haul system developed by Agrico Chemical Co. demonstrated that moving phosphate matrix at high solids from a windrowed matrix pile was successful. Conventional open-top, bottom-dump railroad cars were filled with front-end loaders from the windrowed matrix piles, transported to the process plant where high-pressure water washed the matrix through a grizzly screen into a conventional slurry washing 6

system. There were mechanical problems in the loader motors used that caused problems in reliability. The process concept proved to be sound, however. In addition to the Rail-Haul system, Brewster Phosphates installed an overland conveyor for matrix transport in the late 1970s and operated it intermittently for several years. The matrix was mined conventionally (not windrowed matrix) and pumped to a dewatering field site. The underflows from dewatering cyclones were loaded on the belts from two different draglines and then conveyed to the process plant at Fort Lonesome. Frequent mechanical failures with belt partings and the inability to achieve high enough solids in the cyclone underflows causing spillages in low points led to the shutting down of this system. The economic advantages of moving windrowed matrix are evident. The selection of the optimum transport concept to move this material is, at present, under intense study. The Rail-Veyor concept proposed to FIPR combined the best features of the Rail-Haul system and the overland conveyor. An experienced phosphate operator-consultant prepared an economic study for MET PRO (July 5, 1999) prior to demonstration plant construction, comparing a conventional slurry pumping system and a Rail-Veyor system. This study indicated that a grassroots pumping system for a six-mile distance would cost $12,264,000. The cost projected for an equivalent Rail-Veyor System was $9,160,000. This estimate was based on a double-loop system with a five-mile reversible track section between the loading and dumping loops. The capital cost difference was $3,104,000, or 75% of a new pumping system cost. The operating cost estimated in this study was $0.118 per yard/mile for the slurry pump system and $0.072 for the Rail-Veyor, or a $0.046 difference/yd-mile. No credit was given for the improved dragline efficiency of 27% noted previously. A proposal was made to FIPR to build a semi-works-scale Rail-Veyor system using a 1/4 mile track, with 8 equally spaced drive stations (165 feet apart) and moving a 4-foot-long, 20-inch-wide car in a 42-car open trough train. The resultant 168-foot train was to always be in contact with a drive station. Included with the system proposed was an outside loop dumping station and car loading hopper. Cargill Fertilizer Co. generously provided us a site adjacent to the Cargill Bartow Chemical Plant.

METHODOLOGY The Rail-Veyor design presented to FIPR incorporated the use of light rail (25 #/yard) without ballast, using 3- inch wide rail spacer plates every four feet. The rail bed selected was scraped and smoothed with a motor grader. No ballast or sleepers were used or required. The drive stations consisted of a fixed plate that provided for two opposing drives, each of which consisted of a 10 HP 480 volt motor driving a 21:1 SM-cyclo gear reducer. This motor/drive was mounted on a vertical post, which allowed rotational movement in a horizontal dimension. A drive tire was attached to the vertical shaft of the reducer that could provide horizontal pressure on the train. The tire selected had a low durometer (62) surface that provided excellent traction. This tire was filled with foam and was 26.5 inches in diameter. The opposing drive was identical to the first drive, with the exception that the rotational direction was reversed. Two additional posts were mounted on the fixed plate that provided for the side plate force by use of a jack to rotate the drive unit providing car side pressure. Each drive station with two motors had an inverter control system that provided forward or reverse rotation and allowed full load starting torque. These inverters also controlled deceleration or acceleration. The integration of drive controls from a central control station allowed overall control of the entire system. The 42 cars were designed and fabricated with a single set of wheels at the rear of the car with a single-blade clevis connection at the front of each car and a double-blade clevis at the back. The clevis connection was designed to allow movement in three dimensions, 15 twist, 5 of bend between cars and 45 in a vertical plane. Each car had a 3/16-inch thick trough rolled into a semi-circle with a 10-inch radius. Each trough was 47 inches long, which formed a minimum of a 1-inch gap between cars. A 3/8-inch thick urethane sheet was attached to the front of each car and overlapped the forward car, covering the one-inch gap during operation as well as the increase space which opened during the outside loop dumping cycle. These urethane sheets provided for sealing of the gaps between cars and prevented any material leakage. The car wheels were 7-7/8 diameter steel wheels with a single inside flange. Each wheel had dual thrust bearings that proved to be very successful. An early attempt to use bronze bushings proved to be a failure as no thrust forces could be provided and wear was significant. A set of steel side plates was attached to each car, outside the wheels, that was 6 inches wide 48 inches long and 1/2 inch thick. The leading and trailing edges of these plates were cut to allow relative movement between cars while maintaining continuity of contact with the drive station. The initial openings cut were too close to allow car rotational twisting after dumping and so were opened, which did not cause the expected roughness of transfer of cars through the drive stations. 9

The car configuration called for the drive plate to be symmetrical to the wheel, allowing operation in the inverted position with dual rails. The dumping system consisted of dual parallel rails rolled to a 12-foot diameter loop. The vertical spacing between rails was 8 inches, or 1/8 inch wider than the wheel and 1-1/2 inch less than the flange. This dual track system encapsulated the wheels, allowing rotation in an outside loop. With the completion of the loop and the cars in the inverted position a rotational twist was then applied which was 10 per 4-foot car length or 72 feet of the 168-foot train to return to the upright position. Space limitations required that the rotational phase be completed in the 72-foot distance with a 120-foot radius turn. This limitation forced the modification of the cars to prevent metal-to-metal contact of the drive plates and car frames during rotation. One-inch diameter steel rods were substituted for rail during this rotational phase. The train was operated at 588 FPM (1,780 RPM/21:1 ratio) x (26.5 inch diameter tire x 3.14/12 inches). The 42 cars, when loaded, contained about 8 tons of material. At 588 feet/minute with a 168-foot train, the loading time was only 17.1 seconds. This required a loading system that had the incremental capacity of 1,686 tons per hour to fully load the train operating at 588 FPM design speed. The proximity of the dumping station to the loading station did not allow speed reduction, as the dumping speed could not be reduced in the space available to operate the loading system at lower train speeds. Although the track was built to a length of 1/4 mile (1,320 feet), the effective dumping/loading system would only have been 1/8 of a mile. The cycle time for the train was 2.245 minutes, or 26.73 trips per hour.

10

RESULTS The Rail-Veyor train functioned very well, with smooth consistent operation. The variability of side pressure by the opposing drive stations reduced any slippage during startup to a minimum. The cycle time for the train was extremely consistent. The individual drive stations had light sensor controls that started that station just prior to the train arrival and shut down the drive after the train had passed. The feed hopper conveyor had the same control system so that the feeder started as the first car passed and shut down after an adjustable time interval just prior to the passing of the last car. A test was conducted to determine tire drive plate traction under adverse conditions. A highly viscosity phosphatic clay was smeared on both the drive plates and tires on a fully loaded train. The low durometer drive tire literally squeegeed the clay from the drive plate and startup was comparable to a normal to a dry tire/plate environment. This test was repeated several times. The full train effectively could carry 8 tons of material at 26.73 trips per hour, or 214 tons per hour. By expanding this track to 2 miles the capacity would be reduced to 26.7 tons per hour. The consistency of the drives and the controls built into the system would allow several trains to be operated on this same track. Each drive station is myopic and only recognizes the train in immediate contact. After the passing of a train it is immediately ready to accept a new train through its drive sensor system. The dumping phase was very successful, as the urethane sheets acted as individual chutes on each car allowing the carried material to slide forward and be projected outward by tangential forces. The impact point of the ejected material was very consistent and could have been removed by a relatively small hopper over a radial stacker. The drive stations with a loaded train only operated from 30 to 45% of the torque load. The drive units had the capacity of over 200% of full torque load during startup but rarely used more than 80% of full torque load during this phase. The energy consumed to operate this system indicated that the car and load of 16.5 tons was moved by 8.29 kilowatts of energy (at 50% torque load). Moving 26.73 tons/hour (one mile haul distance) of load at 8.29 KWH gave an incremental rate of 0.31 KWH per ton-mile. By increasing the load relative to the car weight by enlarging the cars, this rate will decrease. Using a cost of $0.05/KWH, the material transport energy cost would be $0.016 per tonmile.

11

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Rail-Veyor semi-works-scale plant engineered, built and operated for FIPR met all of the objectives of the original proposed program. The system proved the efficiency of the stationary drive stations and their ability to be controlled through the inverter system, allowing the drives to start from dead stop through maximum RPM with a fully loaded train. This function performed well even when a heavy load of clay had been smeared on both the tires and side plates. The controls also allowed power-off standby with rapid sensor-controlled startup and shutdown as the train entered the station and left the station. Energy was only required when the train was in contact with the drive unit. The lightweight rail (25 #/yard) did not require either sleepers or ballast and proved to be easy to move when required. The 3-inch wide spacer plates used to maintain rail spacing installed every 4 feet seems to be totally adequate for a train of this size. Angle iron anchors were provided and did supply some lateral support. Larger trains and rails subject to extensive use will require some type of site-specific anchor and possibly some sleeper support dependent upon the ground conditions. The open trough cars, when incorporating a urethane spill flap, proved to be virtually leak-proof when filled with wet sandy material, as well as dry material. After many loading and dumping cycles over a period of seven months there was no evidence of any spillage between the rails. The load pressed the flap against the tail end of the forward car, effectively forming a seal. The elasticity of the urethane allowed flexing and twisting of cars without loss of sealing integrity. During the dumping cycle the flap acted like a spout overextending the forward car. All of the car contents were projected forward beyond the forward car as the outside loop continued and no material fell on the forward car. This extension of the flap also allowed the flushing of any material trapped between the flap and the car from the tangential forces resulting from the outside loop. The ratio of the wheel diameter and the side plate, 7-7/8 and 6, was too low for the degree of twist to rotate back to the upright position. The degree of twist, 10 per car length of four feet, was too tight because of space limitations of the site but was corrected by a field modification of the side plates. The test site would not be a typical installation because under normal conditions the loading and dumping sites would be at opposite ends of the track system. The conclusions drawn from the test program are that there does not appear to be any limit as to the capacity of a site-specific design Rail-Veyor system. A hypothetical material handling system was cost-estimated to handle 600 TPH of wet sand over a twomile (11,000 foot allowing for curves and loops) distance. The system selected for this illustration was a 20-inch diameter by 5-inch sideboard car that was eight feet long and consisted of three 126-car trains. The weighted cost of the fixed components required, such as track (23% of estimated total cost); cars (32%); drives, drive stations, and controls (40%); and dumping station (5% of total cost), or a total of $2,400,000. Each of 13

the 126-car trains (1,008 feet each) was estimated to cost $255,000 and could each move 200 TPH. The stationary equipment was estimated at $1,635,000. Three of these trains could move the required 600 TPH at a capital cost of $765,000. Based on this capital cost estimate, a haul distance of 11,000 feet would be $218 per foot ($109 per foot of total loop). Increasing the capacity of the system to 2,400 TPH (incorporating 12 trains), the nine additional trains would cost $2,260,000, or a system cost of $4,660,000. The cost of four times the capacity would be $423 per foot of haul distance. At the risk of an over-simplification, a quadrupling of capacity results in a capital cost increase of only 1.94 times the base case. One of the very important aspects of a multi-train system is the effect on the loading system. The greater the percentage of time that train loading is conducted relative to a fixed time frame, the lower the incremental loading rate needs to be. The loading station feed rate in the 600 TPH case indicated above at 600 FPM = 13.96 minutes/hour (number of train load cycles per hour or 1,008 ft/600 FPM x 2.77 trips/hour x three trains = 13.96 minutes). The incremental rate would then have to be 600 TPH x 4.30 (60 min/hour / 13.96 minutes) or 2,580 TPH. Loading speed vs. operating speed limits the number of trains to the feeder design capacity. At 2,400 TPH the loader would be operating 93% of the time. Because it only handled +/- 8 tons per load in 17.1 seconds for a 168 foot train, our demonstration plant needed a loading rate of 1,680 TPH. The above cost analysis showing the effect of additional trains indicates the enormous capacity range the Rail-Veyor system offers over other material handling systems. All systems are directly affected by speed. The speed of the Rail-Veyor is a function of the motor speed, gear ratio and drive tire diameter. The gear reduction limitation is a direct function of torque. The higher the ratio, the lower the shaft speed and higher the torque. The lower the ratio, the greater the shaft speed with a lowering of the torque. By developing an optimum combination of gear reduction and tire diameter to allow full load startup in cases of power failure, the train speed can be fixed. Once the proper combination is developed, then system capacity is only a function of the number of trains operating in the system. The slurry pipeline for moving phosphate matrix is limited by the fluid dynamics of velocity as it affects friction loss, which directly relates to energy consumption. Increased velocity of the transported slurry can help improve capacity but directly limits pumping efficiencies (see following worksheet). Overland conveyors have limits as to the cross-sectional area of the material on the belt before unacceptable spillage losses can occur. Increasing the speed of conveyors to increase capacity also has limitations because of increased friction and energy losses. Capacity increases in established slurry pipelines or overland conveyors are relatively small increments of the design capacity, while the Rail-Veyor can represent increases of many multiples. The energy use of a slurry pipeline versus a Rail-Veyor system is illustrated in the following comparison:

14

Pipeline: Given a 20-inch pipeline moving 1,900 TPH at 35% solids = 17,000 GPM or 17.5 FPM. Friction loss 4.0 ft head/100 ft. or 211.2 ft head/mile. 17,000 x 1.25(s.g. 35%) /(3960 x 0 .7) = BHP of 1,619. BHP x 0.9 or 1,457 KW/1,457 KW / 1,900 TPH = 0.77 KWH/ton-mile. Using the same comparison, a pipeline moving 1,700 TPH at 35% solids = 15,300 GPM at 15.6 FPM. Friction loss 3.3 ft. head/100 ft. or 174.2 ft/mile. 15,300 x 174.2 x 1.25 / 3,960 x 0.7) = BHP of 1,202. BHP x 0.9 or 1,082KW/mile. 1,082/1,700 TPH = 0.64 KWH/ton-mile. Rail-Veyor: Given from test results 8 TPH x 2.26 minutes/cycle for 1/8-mile equivalent loop, or 212 TPH. For a one-mile haul distance (two mile loop) the rate drops to 26.5 TPH. The energy to move this train at 588 FPM was 8.29 KW. 8.29KW/26.5 TPH = 0.31 KWH/ton-mile. Published data from several sources indicate that an overland conveyor will typically use between 0.6 and 0.8 KWH /ton-mile. Handbook data on Off Road Trucks indicates a range of 0.9 to 1.2 KWH/ton-mile. The demo plant had a weight-to-load ratio of less than 1.0 (381 # load/car / 440 # car only). An industrial-sized Rail-Veyor system would have a greater load-to-car weight ratio, lowering the KW usage/ton-mile from the 0.31 KWH/ton-mile indicated above. With a car weight of 40% of combined car and load, the KWH/ton-mile usage drops to 0.262. Upon the conclusion of the test program and operational evaluation for the transport of phosphate matrix, the original pre-demo plant economic study was reviewed. The basis of this plan was for a 20,000 cubic yard per day operation for 350 days for a six-mile distance. The original plan of operating the Rail-Veyor train system with a reversible five-mile section was felt to be too complex and restricted the systems flexibility. By operating in a single large loop additional train units could be added to meet capacity change requirements. In addition, a single loop allows additional transport functions to be preformed if required. For example, dewatered flotation tailing and debris could be loaded on the cars after the matrix was unloaded and transported back to the general area of the mining cut, dumped and the train returned to the matrix loading site. No consideration was made in the economic analysis for this potential function. The large loop of 12 miles requires 33% more drive stations that would increase the capital cost accordingly. The pipeline/Rail-Veyor capital cost comparison mentioned in the introduction would be modified to the following:

15

Unit Description Matrix Boost Pumps (7) Drive Units Pit and Booster Equipment Reclaimer Matrix Loading Hopper Mining Stockpile Matrix and Hydraulic Pipe Rail System (12 miles) Unit Trains Dumping Station Power lines and Cable Miscellaneous Support Equipment Total Capital Matrix Transport Capital Savings, Rail-Veyor Operating Costs Power @ $0.04/KWH Annual Power Savings

Slurry Pipeline 3,850,000 ------2,973,000 ------------1,901,000 ------------------1,875,000 1,665,000 $12,264,000*

Rail-Veyor 300,000 2,940,000 400,000 1,500,000 150,000 10,000 1,315,000 2,250,000 150,000 350,000 240,000 $9,605,000 $2,659,000

$2,926,860

$861,000** $2,065,860

See Support data in Appendix, July 5, 1999 report. ** Includes Power for FEL and feeder plus slurry lift pump at washer The Rail-Veyor system was designed to be as simple as possible. The cars are simple, the rails are conventional and obviously simple, and the drives are effectively motor gearboxes that are an off-the-shelf type item. It is only the combination of these features that makes the Rail-Veyor system unique. The ease of replacing key elements in case of failure would indicate that the operating factor would well exceed 90%. This would be an additional cost savings over the slurry pump systems with pipeline wear, casing breaking and other high-maintenance requirements that are normally found with high-pressure, high-friction systems. There does not appear to be any capacity limitation up to a track totally filled with cars of an established Rail-Veyor system. The number of trains on a continuous-loop track could be potentially increased so that nearly all equally spaced drive stations would be simultaneously moving a train. The individual drive efficiencies are all relative to the pressure of the contact footprint of the drive tire and the drive plate. Multiples of drives can be packaged in sets of two to keep units as standardized as possible. In the case of phosphate matrix transport from a windrow, there does not appear to be any limit of car diameters.

16

The selection of car widths and shapes is influenced by the size of the carried material and transport distance. To simplify the drive controls, the number used is influenced by the length of unit trains selected. The live volume contained within a train and total loop time from loading to unloading and return all will impact the car size. The cross-sectional shape of a car can also influence its capacity. The possibility of a large multi-lobed loop serving several dragline windrows is also a possibility, with alternate trains picking up loads at different locations and dumping at a plant site. This concept would require a totally new approach to mine planning. Plant efficiencies and operating factors because of the blending and feed rate control offered by a multi-lobed systems plus waste sands and debris backhauling could significantly reduce production costs. The simplicity, capital and operational costs indicate that the Rail-Veyor system offers an alternative to conventional material handling systems. Although the thrust of our program was toward the movement of phosphate matrix, there did not appear to be any reason it could not be used to transport concentrate, tailings, dried gypsum or any other bulk material.

17

APPENDIX A COST STUDIES

RAIL-VEYOR CAPITAL COST COMPARISON - $ PER FOOT HAUL DISTANCE AND RETURN--INSTALLED Design based on a 600 TPH wet sand transport for a two-mile haul distance (11,000 feet). Capital cost of track, drives, controls and unloading system fixed. Capacity variable based on two trains each 1,008 feet long each with a capacity of 200 TPH. Track loop has 22 drive stations with potential of 18 to 20 trains running simultaneously. TPH 2,600

2,200

1,800

1,400

1,000

600

200 200 250 300 350 400 450 Dollars/foot Haul Distance Dollars/foot Haul Distance includes capital cost for entire functional loop including Dumping. Does not include backhaul potential offered by system.

A-1

APPENDIX B PRACTICAL INNOVATIONS REPORTS

Steve Olson Practical Innovations 1028 Brighton Way Lakeland, FL 33813 (941)646-8847 solson2@gte.net

Memorandum
To: CC: Mike Dibble Julian Hazen

From: Steve Olson Date: July 13, 1999 Re: Rail-Veyor Vs. Conventional System Costs as a Function of Distance

Summary A study was initiated that generated information that compared the Capital and Operating Cost of a Rail-Veyor and a Conventional Phosphate Matrix Transport System. The study was based on the work performed earlier that identified the expected Capital and Operating Costs for a situation in which the Conventional System transported 20,000 yards per day of Matrix in a 20 pipeline at 1500 YPH. This study shows that the Rail-Veyor System has lower Capital Cost than the Conventional System at distances of more than 2 miles. In terms of Operating Cost per Yard Mile, the Rail-Veyor has lower cost for systems that transport matrix two miles or more. In terms of savings, The Rail-Veyor shows huge potential as the transport distances increase. Following are graphs that depict those savings and an Appendix with details of the study.

B-1

Capital Distance: RV vs Conventional

$18,000 $16,000 $14,000 $12,000 $10,000 $8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Distance, Miles 9 10 Rail Veyor Conventional

Capital, $M

B-2

Operating Distance: RV vs Conventional

$0.450 $0.400 $0.350 $0.300 $0.250 $0.200 $0.150 $0.100 $0.050 $1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Distance, Miles 9 10 Rail Veyor Conventional

Oper., $/Yd-Mi
Oper., $

Operating Distance: RV vs Conventional

$8,000,000 $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Distance, Miles 9 10 Rail Veyor Conventional

B-3

Steve Olson Practical Innovations 1028 Brighton Way Lakeland, FL 33813 (941)646-8847 solson2@gte.net

Memorandum
To: CC: Mike Dibble Julian Hazen From: Steve Olson Date: July 5, 1999 Re: Rail-Veyor System Capital and Operating Costs

Capital and Operating Costs for a Rail-Veyor System and a Conventional Phosphate Matrix Pumping System were developed. The basis for development was the Conventional System delivered 20,000 cubic yards per day of matrix via a 20 pipeline at 40% solids over a distance of 6 miles. Both systems deliver the same amount of matrix from and to the same locations. Analysis shows the Rail-Veyor System to be at a significant advantage on both Capital and Operating Costs: Capital Cost Comparison Summary Phosphate Matrix Slurry Transport System(new equip.) Rail Veyor System(complete) Capital Savings Rail-Veyor Operating Cost Comparison Summary Phosphate Matrix Slurry Transport System(new equipment) Rail Veyor System(complete) Capital Savings Rail-Veyor $ 12,264,000 9,160,000 $ 3,104,000 $/Yd-Mi 0.118 0.072 $ 0.046

The Rail-Veyor in addition presents the potential for significantly reduced environmental risk in the transport of matrix over (or under) rivers, roads, and other sensitive locations.

B-4

The Capital Cost specifics have been assembled and are summarized following: Conventional Phosphate Matrix Pumping System Rail-Veyor Phosphate Matrix Transfer Transfer System Matrix Booster pumps(7) 3,850,000 Rail-Veyor Power Drive System 2,400,000 Pit Pump. motor, sled 660,000 Two(2) 3110 Rail-Veyor Trains 1,400,000 Light rail trackage. (8.81 miles) 1,400,000 Matrix Pipe, 20(6 miles) 1,584,000 Hydraulic Pipe, 24(1.5miles) 317,000 Power Lines, cables, transformers 400,000 Bolts, flexibles, gaskets 358,000 Matrix Field Reclaim System 1,800,000 Two(2) large Payloaders Substations, sleds 550,000 Pit Car System 800,000 One (1) feeder/breaker Pit Trap 40,000 Dumping Area Reclaim System 800,000 Stage Pump, motor, platform 175,000 Stage Booster pump, motor, guns, sled
Control Room, debris rejecter matrix & hydraulic pumps, guns

390,000 1,000.000 875,000 240,000 275,000 1,150.000 $12,264,00 Support Vehicles Contingency 100,000 860,000

Power Lines Power Cable Support Vehicles Hydraulic Ditch Heavy Equipment Total

Total

$ 9,160,000

The basis for comparison is a conventional mine situation in which a dragline produces 20,000 cubic yards of matrix per day. The Matrix is placed in a well by the dragline, slurried with high pressure water, and pumped to the Beneficiation facilities. The Conventional Pumping system has a rate of 1500 yards per hour at 40% solids in a 20 pipeline. The system operates for 13.33 hours per day, and is one of three such systems for that facility. The Rail-Veyor system has the dragline windrow the matrix on the bench(thus the separation for the balance of the process). The Matrix is reclaimed using two large payloaders, a feeder/breaker that breaks down +6 material, and regulates the rate at which the matrix is loaded into the Rail-Veyor. A Dumping Station at the Washer receives all three Rail-Veyor Systems products in a surge pile, slurries that matrix, and delivers it to the top of the Washer Three systems are used at the mine for a total of 60,000 yards per day matrix produced and processed as the result of 40 pit operating hours per day. The Rail-Veyor System is based on: Reclaiming matrix that was stacked in a windrow using large payloaders The payloaders haul the matrix a very short distance to a moveable feeder/breaker that reduces the ore to less than 6, and regulates the rate at which the Rail-Veyor is filled. Two Rail-Veyor Trains are used at the mine area, allowing one to be filled while the other is transporting, dumping, and returning. This reduced the loading significantly. The trains in this example are 3110 long (2 hours of matrix production)

B-5

The distance from the Mine Site to the Washer is 6 miles, but a loop is required at the mine face and at the Washer. The loops accommodate staging the two trains at the mine and dumping at the Washer and extend the total trackage to 8.81 miles. Loading speed is 127 per minute. Dumping speed is 500 per minute. Haulage speed is 20 MPH. The dumping Station involves a surge pile that dampens the matrix delivery rate to the Washer, and includes hydraulic and matrix pumps to deliver the matrix to the top of the Washer. Multiple gun stations are used to enhance the non-portable station. A debris extractor is included to remove trash and tramp material as it accumulates. Multiple drive stations are spaced along the system. The units are reversible along the main track that will accommodate travel in both directions

The Operating Cost specifics have been assembled and are summarized following: Conventional Phosphate Matrix Pumping Manpower 343,782 Support Equipment 455,960 Pump Maintenance & Pipeline Costs 1,439,791 Power 2,926,860 Total Total $/yard-Mile $ 5,166,394 $0.1 18 Rail-Veyor Phosphate Matrix Transfer Manpower 301,686 Support Equipment 1,914,940 Maintenance Power Total Total $/yard-Mile 455,000 491,930 $ 3,163,556 $0.072

Operating Cost Comments

Operating Costs were developed based on conventional matrix transport practices. Both systems include transport of dug matrix to the top of a Washer. The Conventional receives matrix directly dug by the dragline. The Rail-Veyor receives matrix that had been stockpiled in a windrow by the dragline. It is reclaimed by large payloaders hauling a very short distance to a portable feeder/breaker unit. That unit breaks up +6 lumps/particles, and regulates the rate at which the Rail-Veyor is loaded. The Rail-Veyor approach shows its primarily savings in power. Support Equipment increases (with 24 hour operation of the loading equipment), but is partially offset by a reduction in system maintenance(only one matrix pump, and conventional pit support equipment). The Appendix presents specifics for each system.

System Comparisons
Costs Conventional Pumping System Rail-Veyor System confidence level is high with much experience in industry Novel approach. Unproven in Phosphate Industry Pumps and Pipelines are major Capital expenditures. They require regular, and at times, unexpected replacement. All components are conventional, and offer significant potential for savings in both Capital and Operating Costs. B-6

Maintenance Maintenance is complex, challenging, and expensive if not done well. Maintenance is relatively simple, with small, quick change components. Operational problems can destroy near-new components(burst pump shells). Major breakdown has traumatic effect on both dragline and Windrow(Mine) and Surge Pile (Washer) of Matrix insulate both Dragline and Beneficiation facilities from transportation problems. Required Inventory is substantial. Required inventory is substantially less than the Conventional System Pump repairs are costly, and require whole pumping system to be off-line, or requires spare booster set-up and the time to swap in/out. Drive components are quick replacement items. Dragline and Washer continue to operate. Operational and Environmental Comparison Ore blending is minimal, with one or two matrix systems running and basically processing the matrix by the bucket as it is input to the system. Blending is enhanced in that two payloaders are feeding each loading station, and all three matrix systems would operate simultaneously, thus blending into the surge pile. Draglines productivity is increased by divorcing it from transportation and Beneficiation activities. FIPR study indicated a 27% improvement. No credit was taken for that benefit. Sealing water and high voltage power required at each booster pump location. Low voltage power required along the whole track. No water required. Conventional high pressure matrix pumping crossing rivers and roads are environmental risk as well as major expense items. They require specific design considerations and inspection commitments. Hauling matrix over (or under) a river or roadway is an action that is mimicked daily by literally hundreds of thousand railroad cars. Environmental risk is much lower.

B-7

Steve Olson Practical Innovations 1028 Brighton Way Lakeland, FL 33813 (941)646-8847 solson2@gte.net

Memorandum
To: CC: Mike Dibble Julian Hazen

From: Steve Olson Date: June 28, 1999 Re: Rail-Veyor Vs. Conventional System Costs as a Function of Distance

Capital Costs for a conventional Phosphate Matrix System have been assembled and are summarized: Component Matrix Booster pumps(7) Pit Pump, motor, sled Matrix Pipe, 20(6 miles) Hydraulic Pipe, 24(1.5 miles) Bolts, flexibles, gaskets Substations, sleds Pit Car System Pit Trap Stage Pump, motor, platform Stage Booster pump, motor, guns, sled Power Lines Power Cable Support Vehicles Hydraulic Ditch Heavy Equipment Total $M 3,850.00 660.00 1,584.00 316.80 358.00 550.00 800.00 40.00 175.00 390.00 1,000.00 875.00 240.00 275.00 1,150.00 $12,263.80

These data were produced from the development of a conventional matrix pumping layout (attached) that includes a six mile pipeline with rates at 1500 YPH, at 40% solids in a 20 pipeline. Conventional technology is employed and summarized in attachments. B-8

Details

Booster Pump (each): GIW 20x20 WBC 54, or equivalent Sled, guards, area preparation, etc motor, 2000 HP, 585 RPM sealing water system (deepwell or regulated Switchgear, incl control system Total Pit Pump: GIW 20x20 WBC 54 Sled motor, 2000 HP sealing water system Switchgear Total Pipe matrix pipe 6*5280* $50/ft hydraulic pipe I 5*5280*$40/ft Bolts, Flexibles, gaskets, etc. flexibles 2/pump @ $8000 bolts, etc @ $5/lin ft (6mi mtx & 1.5mi hyd) Total Substations, sleds two 10,000 KVA substations X4160V sleds & switches Total Pit Car Set Up pit car gun sled, incl guns, sled & hydraulics control system w/8 remotes Total Pit Trap

$, M $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 225,000 $ 25,000 $ 150,000 $ 550,000 $, M $ 75,000 $ 100,000 $ 225,000 $ 10,000 $ 250,000 $ 660,000 $ 1,584,000 $ 316,800 $, M $160,000 $ 198,000 $ 358,000 $ 400,000 $ 150,000 $ 550,000 $ 200,000 $ 350,000 $ 250,000 $ 800,000 $ 40,000

Stage Pump & motor & platform Pump motor platform Total Stage Booster & Motor booster motor guns (2), cylinders, controls sleds Total Power Line: 5 miles @ $25/ft, plus Power Cable: 2 miles @ $35/ft Support Vehicles float crew truck maintenance crew truck supervisor run-a-round Total Heavy Equipment rubber tired dozer 2 @ $350,000 bull dozer 1 @ $450,000 Total Hydraulic Ditch 50x10x10x3miles 300 ft sq cross section produces 11.1 cubic yards/ft # $1.00/yd

$, M $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 25,000 $ 175,000 $, M $ 40,000 $ 100,000 $ 150,000 $ 100,000 $ 390,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 875,000 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 $ 20,000 $ 20,000 $ 240,000

$ 700,000 $ 450,000 $ 1,150,000 $, M $ 275,000

GRAND TOTAL

$ 12,263,800

B-9

B-10

Steve Olson Practical Innovations 1028 Brighton Way Lakeland, FL 33813 (941)646-8847 solson2@gte.net

Memorandum
To: CC: Mike Dibble Julian Hazen

From: Steve Olson Date: June 14, 1999 Re: Conventional Matrix Pumping Costs

Conventional performance pumping costs are summarized: Component Manpower Support Equipment Pump Maintenance Pipeline Costs Power Total $/Yd.-Mi. $0.007 $0.008 $0.019 $0.014 $0.055 $0.104*

*industry range from $0.10 to over $0.20/yard-mile. These data were derived by combining typical industry performance with the specifics for comparison for the proposed Rail-Veyor System: a six mile pipeline with rates at 1500 YPH, at 40% solids in a 20 pipeline. The system operates 13.33 hours per day. Appended are comments towards the development of each component as well as an additional worksheet showing specifics.

B-11

Cost Component Comments Manpower. Current central Florida labor costs are used, with 50% overhead rates. Matrix pumping Manpower includes a Pit Operator, a Gunner, and a mobile support person. The situations presumes two crews on the payroll at all times for the three mine situation, and leads to the 67% distribution of their costs to this system. The Supervisor is presumed to spend his time with 10% to each dragline, 10% to reports, and the remaining 60% divided evenly among the matrix systems. A Float Crew spends 75% of their time in preparing for and moving the pits, and general pipeline repairs(replacement of failed fittings, rolling pipe, etc.). Non-matrix system efforts are directed at Tailings management. The four-person Float Crew is supplemented with one bulldozer and two rubber-tire forklifts. Maintenance is composed of daily PM efforts (one person 75% time), plus a three man pump crew that is presumed to be full time to the mine, and equally divided its time between the three matrix systems and the two tailings systems. Supervisors are diluted with other duties( 10% assignment to this matrix system). Support Equipment. Included is a Bulldozer, two Rubber tire forklifts, a Pit crew support truck, a Float Truck, the PM maintenance truck, and the Pump Crew truck. Excluded is crane support. Miscellaneous Float Crew supplies(gaskets, bolts, gloves, etc.) are listed. Pump Maintenance. Included is a projected average life of 1.5 years for matrix pump shells, 9 months for liner life, six months for impellers, and 10 sets of packing per year. An additional annualized total system motor repair cost and Hydraulic System maintenance costs are listed. Pipeline costs. The 20 pipeline is projected to have an average life of 3.5 years (25MM yards), and represents a cost of $50/foot. Hydraulic pipe at $40/foot, is defined as having a 10 year life. Pipeline fittings and flexibles were estimated at $50,000 per year. Power Costs. Included in the system was a total 2500 HP Hydraulic System (stage and booster). Each Matrix pump has 200 HP, and a 3-HP sealing water system. Utilization is placed at 100% which allows for offsetting periods of lower power consumption during start/stop periods that are not included as operating time. Power is $0.04/KWH.

B-12

Conventional Phosphate matrix Pumping System Description Group Pit Crew Identity $/Yd-Mi

Manpower

Float Crew

Maintenance Total Bull Dozer (excl Oper) Rubber Tire (excl Oper) Run-A-Round Truck(per week) Float Truck(per week) Float Crew Supplies(bolts, gask) Maintenance PM(per week) Pump Crew(per week) 1 1 life,years 1.5 0.75 0.5 0.1 Annual $ $300 $500 75% 20% $ 11,700 $ 5,200 $ 362,360 Total 1 2 1 1 1 $85 $60 $1,000 $500 $100,000 75% 75% 67% 67% 67% $ 132,600 $ 93,600 $ 34,840 $ 17,420 $ 67,000 $ 324,360

Pit Operator Gunner Run-A-Round Supervisor(Annual) Wrenchers Bull dozer Operator Rubber-Ture Operator Supervisor(Annual) PM Mechanic Pump Crew Mechanics Supervisor(Annual) 0.007

Number 1 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 1 3 1

Rate, $/hr $15 $12 $13 $40,000 $12 $17 $17 $38,000 $15 $15 $45,000

O'head % 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%

% of time 67% 67% 67% 20% 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 20% 10%

$/year $ 34,866 $ 27,893 $ 30,217 $ 12,000 $ 30,888 $ 43,758 $ 43,758 $ 42,750 $ 38,610 $ 12,870 $ 6,750

Support Equipment

0.008

Pump Maintenance

B-13
Total Matrix Hydraulic Fittings and flexibles Total Stage Booster Matrix Pump Sealing water Total Power Utilization factor Realized Power Consumed HP*0.7457*0.04*13.33*365 HP 1000 1500 2000 30 # of units 1 1 7 7 16710 100% 16,710 $1,584,000 3.5 $1,267,200 10 Cost@$0.04/ KWH Grand Total 1500 13.33 365 6 Matrix yd/hr Matrix yd/day Days/year Pipeline length, miles Matrix yardMi/Yr $/Yd-Mi

$16,667 $13,333 $20,000 $1,500 $200,000 $100,000 $150,000 $ 810,500 $ 452,571 $ 126,720 $ 50,000 $ 629,291 0.014 0.019

Pipeline Costs

Shells@$25K Wear Plates@$10K Impellar@$10K Packing@$150 Motor Repairs/System Hydraulic Pumps, Mtnce Hydraulic Ditching System Oper. & Mtnce 7 Pumps Cost(6*5280*$50/ft) Life, years Cost(1*5280*$40/FT) Life, years

Power

$ 2,425,066 $ 4,551,578

0.055 0.104

Matrix yard-miles

$ 43,789,050 $ 0.104

B-13

APPENDIX C PHOTOGRAPHS

C-1

C-2

C-3

C-4