No. 8814 IC ^^14 Bureau of Mines Information Circular/1980 Valuation of Potash Occurrences Within the Nuclear Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Site in Southeastern New Mexico By Robert C. Weisner, Jim F. Lemons, Jr., and Luis V. Coppa UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Information Circular 8814 Valuation of Potash Occurrences Within the Nuclear Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Site in Southeastern New Mexico By Robert C. Weisner, Jim F. Lemons, Jr. and Luis V. Coppa UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Cecil D. Andrus, Secretary BUREAU OF MINES Lindsay D. Norman, Acting Director Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Weisner, Robert C V'alualioii of potash )a iirreiues within the nuclear waste isolation pilot plant site in southeastern New Mexico. (Iniormation circular— li ircau of Mines; 8814) BiblioKraphv: p. H(l Supi. of Doc. no.: I 28.27 1. Potash deposits — New Mexico — (Carlsbad region. I. Lemons, Jim F., joint author. 11. Coppa, Luis V., joint author. IIL Title. IV. Series: United States. Bureau of Mines. Information circular; 8814. TN295.U4 [TN9191 622 .08s [553'.636'0978942] 79-607990 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 Stock No. 024-004-01959-0 ■^ ^ PREFACE This report was prepared during the period 1976 through 1977 to serve a specific need of the Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA), now a part of the Department of Energy. Subsequent broader interest in the report has demonstrated the need for publication. Some of the information presented on potash is now dated. The latest available statistics are published regularly by the Bureau of Mines in Mineral Industry Surveys, Mineral Com- modity Summaries, and Mineral Commodity Profiles. Readers needing current potash information can contact the Bureau of Mines commodity specialist: R. H. Singleton Bureau of Mines 2401 E Street, NW. Washington, D.C. 20241 Telephone (202) 634-1 190 TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS W/PP— Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. The WIPP site is the area within the boundaries of land proposed for with- drawal for the waste isolation facility. The site is subdivided into Zones I through IV. Zone I is the area of the proposed location of the isolation facility; Zones II through IV are located concentrically at approximately 1-mile intervals from center of the site. Ore zones is a term used to identify salt beds of minerals that locally contain potash minerals in commercial amounts. The Bureau of Mines study area includes lands in the WIPP site, and adjacent lands extending out for up to 2 miles (3 kilometers) from the site boundary. Mining Unit is a reasonable sized operating unit in terms of daily operating capacity and in lateral extent of workings for optimum ore handling, disre- garding any limits imposed by the current proposed WIPP site. Size limits also considered were (1) present and projected market size and (2) quantity of process water available. The unit values for the potash, determined for a Mining Unit, were then used to determine the total potash values within the WIPP site. K2O — by usage and for convenience, the concentrations of various com- mercial potassium minerals in ores, concentrates, and products are often stated as equivalent concentrations of potassium oxide (KjO). CONTENTS Page Preface _ i Terms and abbreviations ii Abstract 1 Introduction _._ _ 1 Acknowledgments 2 Survey of the domestic potash industry _ 3 History 3 Economic background 4 Market analysis and market projections 5 Location and description of study area 9 Geology of the WIPP area _____ 14 Regional geology ____ 14 Local geology _ 14 Stratigraphy __._ _ 22 Data collection and interpretation __. 23 Ore zones and marker beds in the Salado Formation 23 Potassium-bearing deposit estimation 23 Evaluation of potash mineralization 25 Current processing of potassium-bearing ores 25 Sylvite 25 Langbeinite __ 25 Mixed ore _ 25 Potassium sulfate _ 29 Current impurities treatment 30 Bench-scale metallurgical tests 30 Sylvite flotation tests 31 Sample AEC 7-5 32 Sample AEC 8-10 ____ 33 Langbeinite leach tests 33 Sample AEC 8-4A 34 Sample AEC 8-4B __ 34 Sample AEC 8-4C 34 Summary of metallurgical tests _ 35 Mineralization in the WIPP site from U.S. Geological Survey data _ 35 Financial analysis 51 Methods used __ 51 Cash flow estimates _._ _.__ 51 Investment estimates 51 Determination of commercial and subeconomic mineralization __ 52 Taxes and royalties 52 Federal corporation income tax 52 New Mexico corporation income tax 52 Resources, processors, and service tax 53 Page Severance tax 53 Property tax 53 Rents and royalties on Federal leases 53 Rents and royalties on State leases 54 Estimation of current mine and mill capital and op- erating costs ___ 54 Operations for WIPP study 54 13,000-ton-per-day mine-mill 54 7,000-ton-per-day mine-mill _._. 54 8,500-ton-per-day mine-mill _ 58 Mine capital costs ___ 59 Mine operating costs 59 Mill capital costs 63 Mixed ore plant 63 Sylvite ore flotation plant _ 63 Sylvite ore crystallization plant 63 Mill operating costs 63 Utility (infrastructure) costs ._ 64 Water 64 Electric power _ 64 Access to the area 65 Estimates of hypothetical mining units in the WIPP site 66 Mining unit A 66 Mining unit A— 1 66 Mining unit A-2 68 Mining unit A-3 _ __ 69 Mining unit B 69 Mining unit B-1 ___ 69 Mining units B-2 and B-3 70 Mining unit C 70 Mining unit C— 1 70 Mining unit C-2 71 Mining unit C-3 71 Mining unit D 72 Mining unit D-2 ____ 72 Mining unit D-3 72 Estimated mining unit capital investments and op- erating costs __ 72 Summary and conclusions 75 References.: 80 Appendix A. — Assumptions and estimations used for the economic analysis of the hypothetical Mining Unit B-1 (MU B-1) _ 81 Appendix B. — Financial evaluation of MU B-IA 84 ILLUSTRATIONS 1. Potash supply-demand relationships — 1974 __ ____ — - 7 2. Annual trend for 20-year span of U.S. domestic potash prices __ ____ — 8 3. Location map of the WIPP site _ _ __ — - -- -— 9 4. Map of surface and mineral ownership, leases, amd lease applications in the study area _ 11 5. Approximate location and size of WIPP zones within the study area _ ___ 12 6. Major Permian geologic features in the region ____ ___ 15 7. Stratigraphic column of consolidated rocks penetrated by site evaluation borings in Los Medanos area ___ 16 8. Approximate location of cross sections at the WIPP site _.__ _ -- 17 9. Approximate cross section through A-A' _ - 18 10. Approximate cross section through B-B' _ - -- 19 11. Approximate cross section through C-C _ — - - 20 12. Approximate cross section through D-D' - - 21 13. Stratigraphic column of the Salado Formation - -- Pocket Page 14. Diagram of sylvite flotation section __ ___ ___ ___ 26 15. Diagram of sylvite solution-crystallization section _ ___ ___ __ 27 16. Diagram of mixed ore section __ ___ ___ ___ 28 17. Diagram of a sulfate section ____ ___ ____ 29 18. Composite map of mineralization in various ore zones at 8 and 14 percent KjO as langbeinite and sylvite, respectively _ ____ ____ _ __ 48 19. Composite map of mineralization in various ore zones at 4 and 10 percent KjO as langbeinite and sylvite, respectively ___ ___ _ 49 20. Composite map of mineralization in various ore zones at 3 and 8 percent KjO as langbeinite and sylvite, respectively __ ____ __ 50 21. Generalized layout of 13,000-tpd surface plant ___ ____ ____ 55 22. Generalized plan of room-and-pillar mining system showing typical ventilation flow _ _ 56 23. Generalized plan of room-and-pillar mining system showing typical conveyor layout 57 24. Diagram of conventional mining sequence ____ ____ __ 58 25. Typical round dimensions for conventional mining _._ ____ 59 26. Generalized layout of 7,000-tpd surface plant __ ___ ___ 60 27. Generalized layout of 8,500-tpd surface plant ___ ___ 61 28. Diagram of mining sequence using continuous miners __ ___ 62 29. Approximate locations of mining units __ ___ ____ ___ 67 30. Product availability and market prices at which potash tonnages become commercial assuming fixed production costs __ 76 31. Approximate cost analysis of increased market prices at which potash tonnages become commercial __ 77 A-1. System diagram of hypothetical Mining Unit B-1 operation, with approximate minerals flow through the plants and estimated gross revenues ____ __ _ 82 TABLES Page 1. Potash supply-demand relationships, 1965-76 _ 5 2. World mine production and reserves _ 6 3. Domestic potash producers, yearend 1976 _ 6 4. Surface and mineral ownership 10 5. Chemical analysis of core samples used in Bureau of Mines metallurgical test _ 31 6. Approximate mineral content (wt-pct) of core samples used in Bureau tests 32 7. Chemical assay mass balance of sylvite flotation: test on sample AEC 7-5 33 8. Chemical assay mass balance of sylvite flotation: test on sample AEC 8-10 33 9. Chemical assay mass balance of langbeinite leach: test on sample AEC 8-4A _ 34 10. Chemical assay mass balance of langbeinite leach: test on sample AEC 8-4B .___ _ 34 11. Chemical assay mass balance of langbeinite leach: test on sample AEC 8-4C 35 12. Ore zone thickness and grade in test hole AEC-8 36 13. Calculated mineral content of selected samples from potassium-bearing intervals with summation of percent KjO as ore mineral 37 14. Summary of estimated mine capital investments _ _ 59 15. Summary of estimated mine operating costs _._ 63 16. Summary of estimated plant capital investments 63 17. Summary of estimated annual mill operating costs ____ 64 18. Comparison of fuel cost for a 3,000-tpd langbeinite wash plant 65 19. Comparison of capital investment: coal versus natural gas in a 3,000-tpd langbeinite wash plant ___ 65 20. Average K2O grade of sylvite and langbeinite deposits and total tonnage. Mining Unit A 68 21. Mineralogical compositions of sylvite and langbeinite deposits. Mining Unit A _ _ _ 68 22. Average KjO grade of langbeinite and total tonnage, Mining Unit B 70 23. Mineralogical compositions of langbeinite deposits, Mining Unit B .___ 70 24. Average KjO grade of sylvite and langbeinite deposits and total tonnage. Mining Unit C 70 25. Mineralogical compositions of sylvite and langbeinite deposits. Mining Unit C 71 26. Average K^O grade of langbeinite and total tonnage, Mining Unit D 72 27. Mineralogical compositions of langbeinite deposits, Mining Unit D 72 28. Summary of operating costs and capital investments for hypothetical Mining Units 73 29. Potash mineral resource evaluation data in ERDA's WIPP site 73 30. Mining Unit B-1 estimated potash values within the WIPP site that would be foregone 78 31. Summary of amounts and values of potash mineralization in WIPP site _ 79 32. Mining Unit product data and required market prices at which potash tonnages in the WIPP site become commercial at fixed production costs ___ _ 79 33. Mining Unit price components per ton of weighted-average product price assuming fixed production costs and a 15 percent discounted cash flow rate of return — _ 79 34. U.S. average market prices for potash products — f.o.b. plant ..._ 79 VALUATION OF POTASH OCCURRENCES WITHIN THE NUCLEAR WASTE ISOLATION PILOT PLANT SITE IN SOUTHEASTERN NEW MEXICO by Robert C. Weisner,' Jim F. Lemons, Jr.,^ and Luis V. Coppa^ ABSTRACT Current production costs and market conditions in the potash industry of the Carlsbad area were studied to determine the potential values of the potash mineral resource that would be lost or foregone if the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility is constructed on the proposed site in that area. The purpose of the WIPP project is to investigate the possibility of developing a nuclear waste disposal plant in the salt formations at the site. Analyses were made of all potash deposits determined to be in the site. Mining and processing under the most favorable recovery systems were considered. Value determinations were based upon estimated operating and capital costs of current mine-mill operations in the Carlsbad area. This study was made for the Energy Research and Devel- opment Administration (ERDA) by members of the Federal Bureau of Mines Minerals Availability System staff. INTRODUCTION The use of nuclear fuels produces radioactive waste that must be stored or disposed of in an acceptable and safe manner. A safe storage location has been determined to be in thick salt beds. ERDA requested the U.S. Geological Survey to indicate the location of known salt beds so that a study could be made to determine those most suitable for disposal or storage sites. Geological Survey recommendations included the Los Medanos area of Eddy County, N. Mex. In September 1976 ERDA asked the Bureau of Mines to quantify and evaluate commercial potash minerahzation in a proposed WIPP site in southeastern New Mexico. This information was necessary as one element in an environmental impact assessment by ERDA of the proposed WIPP project investigating the possibility of developing a nuclear waste disposal plant in the salt formations at the site. The Bureau of Mines therefore conducted a study first to determine the amount and likely methods of recovery of existing potash deposits within the Mining engineer. MAS Division, Intermountain Field Operations Center, Bureau of Mines, Denver, Colo. Metallurgist, Minerals Availability Field Office, Bureau of Mines. Denver, Colo. Mining engineer. Minerals Availability Field Office, Bureau of Mines, Denver, Colo. WIPP site and immediate vicinity, and second to determine the value of com- mercial potash mineralization, present and future, within the site and study area. As part of the study, an analysis was made to determine if any of the potash mineral occurrences are commercially recoverable by existing mining and proc- essing techniques. This task was assigned to the Bureau's Minerals Availability System (MAS) personnel, since this group routinely conducts studies to deter- mine the availability and cost to the United States of minerals and metals. This report presents the details and results of the study prepared for ERDA. Included in the report are discussions of the geology and geography of the study area, its potash mining history, and current and projected market conditions in the potash industry. Prerequisite to the economic analysis, the Bureau of Mines obtained resource evaluation data from the Conservation Division of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) on measured and indicated categories of potash de- posits in the WIPP site; their grades and tonnages were then reevaluated and modified to ascertain grades and tonnages that could be recovered in mining and processing operations. The Bureau of Mines used criteria consistent with industry practice in pre- paring its economic feasibility studies; it employed a method of potash ore reserve calculations using engineering design and economic analytical procedures, in- cluding discounted cash flow, to determine the tonnage of minable potash ore that will yield an assumed, commercially acceptable (15 percent) rate of return on total capital investment. The mining and beneficiation systems evaluated were based on current extraction and processing technology in the Carlsbad district and were the least costly systems amenable to the ore to be mined. This analysis isolated and estimated the values that exist in the unmined potash mineralization in the WIPP site and therefore determined a cost chargeable to the WIPP facility as losses that would result from constructing the nuclear waste disposal plant. This cost is the sum of lost taxes, royalties, and bonus bid amounts that would otherwise be generated by development of the potash mineralization to the maximum commercial extent — potash values that would be foregone due to the closing of the site to future mining operations. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors were assisted in this evaluation by the following personnel of the System Operations Group and the Domestic Evaluation Group, Minerals Avail- ability System, Intermountain Field Operations Center, Denver, Colorado: R. J. Minarik, W. L. Rice, R. L. Baer, L. B. Burgin, R. L. Davidoff, A. G. Hite, J. D. Lewis, C. M. Palencia, R. A. Salisbury, and R. C. Steckley. Data and assistance, especially helpful in preparing tables on worldwide and U.S. potash production, were given by R. H. Singleton, potassium commodity specialist of the Bureau of Mines Washington, D.C., headquarters office. Metallurgical testing was per- formed by personnel of the Bureau's Salt Lake City Research Center under the direction of Jerry L. Huiatt. The U.S. Geological Survey provided information on the amount, occurrence, distribution, mineralization, and grade of potash in the study area, and data interpretation, based on available information and data from ERDA exploration drill holes. Conversations with Charles L. Jones, who supervised the USGS core drilling within the WIPP site and authored the USGS report summarizing potash mineralization in the study area, were helpful in Bureau of Mines analyses. His geologic work, together with other USGS studies, provided the foundations for the geologic section of this report. Invaluable assistance was received from the potash industry in the Carlsbad area, utility companies, and State and local government offices. SURVEY OF THE DOMESTIC POTASH INDUSTRY HISTORY From early colonial times until 1860, the man- ufacture of potash from wood ashes constituted a significant chemical industry that met the needs of the United States and also provided an important commodity for export. This industry was seriously curtailed by the development of the Le Blanc process that provided a cheap source of sodium carbonate, which could be used instead of potassium carbonate for many industrial purposes. The end of this first potash industry came in 1861 when commercial mu- riate of potash was produced from deposits near Stassfurt in northern Germany. From 1861 to 1914, the potash industry was virtually nonexistent, and agriculture in the United States was almost totally dependent upon imported German potash (7).^ However, in January 1915, shortly after the onset of World War I, Germany placed an embargo on the ex- port of potash salts and the total U.S. supply was cut off. As a result, potash salts which pre- viously had sold at a normal price of $35.00 to $40.00 per ton ($38.58 to $44.09 per metric ton) were quoted at prices ranging from $350.00 to $425.00 per ton ($385.80 to $468.47 per metric ton) (6). These prices resulted in a burst of ac- tivity in the domestic potash industry. Methods of producing potassium compounds from kelp, wood ashes, lake brines, alunite, cement dust, sugar beet waste, blast furnace dust, and other sources were developed. By 1918 there were 128 producers of potash compounds with a total an- nual production of approximately 55,000 tons (49,896 metric tons) of K20(i9). With the resumption of German imports fol- lowing the end of World War I, the domestic potash industry virtually collapsed again (20). By 1920 the American Trona Corp. (subse- quently American Potash and Chemical Corp. and now Kerr-McGee Chemical Corp.) was the only significant producer of potash salts in the United States. Between 1920 and 1930 the United States was again dependent upon for- eign imports for more than 80 percent of its potash requirements. "■ Underlined numbers in parentheses refer to items in the list of references preceding the appendixes. The Federal Government in 1924 authorized the Bureau of Mines and the U.S. Geological Survey "to determine location and extent of po- tash deposits in the United States" (5). By 1931, these agencies had identified, by core drilling, saline beds in the Permian Basin of Texas and New Mexico ranging in thickness from l-'/2 to more than 8 feet ( '/2 to more than 2 meters) and containing 9 to 14 percent K2O (18). Interest in the Permian Basin area had been generated by potash showings from oil explo- ration. The most significant of these showings was in the McNutt No. 1 oil test, drilled by the Snowden and McSweeney Co. in February 1925. Additional exploration by the Snowden and McSweeney Co. generated further interest and eventually resulted in the formation of the American Potash Co. This company continued the exploration efforts initiated by the Snowden and McSweeney Co. The minerals sylvite, po- lyhalite, langbeinite, and carnallite were found in many of the core tests, and the continuity of the bedded deposits became reasonably well es- tablished. In December 1929, the No. 1 shaft of the American Potash Co. was begun, and the first commercial production of potash from an underground mining operation began on March 7, 1931. The name of American Potash Co. was changed to the U.S. Potash Co. in 1930. This company completed construction of its first potash refin- ery, a crystallization plant, and began produc- tion of muriate of potash on September 17, 1932. Its second mine shaft was completed in June 1933, which increased mining capacity to more than 2,000 tons (1,814 metric tons) of ore per day. U.S. Potash Co. was merged and be- came U.S. Borax and Chemical Co. in 1956. The Carlsbad potash properties were than sold to U.S. Potash and Chemical Co., a subsidiary of Continental American Royalty Co., in 1968. Subsequent sales of this property were to Te- ledyne. Inc., in 1972 and to Mississippi Chemical Co. in 1974 (5). Potash Co. of America (now a division of Ideal Basic Industries, Inc.) began potash production in the Carlsbad area in 1934. This company used the same room-and-pillar mining methods as U.S. Potash Co., but its refinery consisted of a halite flotation process to separate the sylvite and halite minerals. This company has been in continuous production since 1934. Its refining process has been converted from halite flotation to the more economical potash flotation method now in almost universal use. Union Potash and Chemical Co. (now Inter- national Minerals and Chemical Corp.) began mining both sylvite and langbeinite in 1940 (9). This refinery was the first commercial ap- plication of the potash flotation process (rather than halite flotation) for muriate of potash pro- duction. The langbeinite was refined by a leach- ing process. Commercial production of agricultural-grade potassium sulfate began shortly thereafter. Since the only known com- mercial deposits of langbeinite ore are in the Carlsbad area, this was the first commercial pro- duction of this mineral worldwide. During World War II, the production capa- bilities of the three Carlsbad potash companies, plus the production from American Potash and Chemical Co. at Trona, Calif., and Bonneville Potash, Ltd. (now Kaiser Aluminum and Chem- ical Corp.) at Wendover, Utah, prevented a se- rious shortage of potash in the United States. Potash production was classified as a defense industry, and appropriate priorities were pro- vided for personnel, materials, and equipment so that maximum production was maintained during the war years. Postwar expansion of the potash industry be- gan with the completion of the Duval Corp. (now a division of Pennzoil Corp.) plant near Carlsbad in 1951. This project was followed by the South- west Potash Co. (a wholly owned subsidiary of AM AX, Inc.) construction in 1952, and the Na- tional Potash Co. (a division of Freeport Min- erals Corp.) construction in 1957. All three of these operations used a potash flotation process to refine their sylvite ores. In 1964 Duval opened a new mine (Nash Draw) to produce langbeinite ore and increase its sylvite reserves. The Duval flotation plant was expanded at that time to include a langbeinite leaching process and to provide facilities for the production of potassium sulfate. Development of the first domestic under- ground potash operation outside the Carlsbad area was begun in 1961 in the Paradox Basin near Moab, Utah, by Texas Gulf Sulphur Co. (now Texasgulf, Inc.). Production of muriate of potash from this operation began in 1965, but mining problems made this operation uneco- nomic. In 1971 Texasgulf removed all equip- ment from the mine and started using another technique for potash recovery. Water is pumped into the mine from the nearby Colorado River and becomes saturated with potassium and so- dium chlorides; it is then pumped out of the "mine" to solar evaporation ponds. On evapo- ration, a mixture of sylvite and halite is depos- ited in the ponds. These salts are then harvested and refined in a conventional potash flotation plant to produce muriate of potash. The most recent domestic potash operation is Kermac Potash Co. (a division of Kerr-McGee Corp.), which began production of muriate of potash in 1965. Kermac is located a few miles east of the other six producers in the Carlsbad area. Because the characteristics of the Kermac ore made it very difficult to refine by flotation, a crystallization process was developed. This process makes a higher quality (K2O content) muriate product. During the 1960's a major expansion in potash production capacity occurred in Saskatchewan, Canada. As these large new operations came on- stream, the world supply of muriate of potash increased substantially and prices dropped. In- vestigation by the U.S. Government concluded that there was evidence of "dumping," and eco- nomic sanctions were proposed against some Canadian producers. Under the threat of these proposed economic sanctions, the Government of Saskatchewan in 1970 imposed production limitations and established minimum prices for Canadian potash. These actions by the Saskatch- ewan Government returned a degree of stability to the domestic potash industry (22). ECONOMIC BACKGROUND The world potash industry is regarded by some as an oligopoly (17). They contend there is a recognized interdependence in the market and high cross elasticities of demand. That is, from the buyer's viewpoint, potash is an undif- ferentiated product, equal in specifications from all suppliers, making market price virtually the only consideration in purchasing. Because po- tash is a comparatively high-bulk, low-value commodity, its marketing is affected signifi- candy by transportation costs that constitute a substantial part of the market price. Almost 50 percent of U.S. consumption is in Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Be- cause of the transportation cost, Saskatchewan producers maintain an advantage over the New Mexico producers in these markets (1 7). Prior to World War II, price leadership was the coordinating mechanism for determining price and market share in the industry. Since World War II, structural changes in both the selling and buying markets have progressively Umited the feasibility of collusion among potash- producing firms. In fact, during the late 1960's, price cutting became widespread and the entire price structure collapsed, resulting in severe fi- nancial losses. The aggregate demand for po- tash is generally regarded as relatively inelastic, mainly due to the minor position of fertilizer in total farming costs. About 1960 "bulk blending" of fertilizers be- gan. Natural gas is used in petrochemical com- plexes as the key ingredient for producing ammonia that is combined directly with phos- phoric acid to manufacture nitrogen-phosphate compounds. These nitrogen-phosphate com- pounds are then blended with potash prior to being sold as fertilizers. The implementation of this process had a threefold impact on the po- tash industry. First, some petroleum companies in the fertilizer business, because of their natural gas product, integrated vertically and horizon- tally by acquiring financial interests in the po- tash industry. Second, long-term contractual agreements for potash purchases were negoti- ated; and third, the number of potential buyers of straight potash fertilizer was greatly reduced. Entry into the potash industry by a new pro- ducer is difficult because of the lack of exploit- able deposits, the requirement of technological expertise, large capital requirements, and a likely cost disadvantage to a new firm as com- pared to an established company. MARKET ANALYSIS AND MARKET PROJECTIONS During 1975, United States consumption of potash (KgO) decreased 17 percent to 5 million short tons (4.5 million metric tons)(table 1). This decrease, the first since 1961, was mainly due to general resistance by the agriculture industry to high fertilizer prices. Of total U.S. potash production, 95 percent is consumed by the fer- tilizer industry. This reversal proved short-lived, however, as 1976 (estimated) consumption was up to 6 mil- lion short tons (5 million metric tons) repre- senting a 26-percent increase over the 1975 figure and exceeding the previous (1974) high by more than 300,000 short tons (272,000 metric tons). Lower prices and supplier discounting during the summer largely accounted for this increase. In 1976, domestic production of potash was approximately 2.4 million short tons (about 2.2 million metric tons), about 40 percent of do- mestic demand. By 2000, U.S. production is pro- jected to decline significantly, supplying less than 10 percent of the total U.S. consumption in that year (22). Domestic consumption is pro- jected to double to 12 million short tons (11 million metric tons) of KgO. This increased pro- duction represents a growth rate of 2.9 percent per year (76), a decline from the previous 6.3- percent annual growth rate. The decline is based on the assumption of increasing physical limi- tations on potash consumption. Examples of these limitations include the decline of available land for farming, more efficient use of fertilizer, new technology in the use of fertilizer, and a possible decline in the foreign market for U.S. food products, particularly in the developing nations. Production and consumption rates pro- jected for 2000 could be changed by such de- velopments as higher foreign prices for potash, thereby making the deeply buried beds in Mich- TABLE L- — Potash supply-demand relationships, (Thousand short tons of KjO) 1965-76 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976"^^ World production: United States 3,140 12.060 3,320 12,739 3,299 14,054 2,722 15,145 2,804 16,394 2,729 17,284 2,587 19,358 2,659 19,401 2,603 21,695 2,552 23,516 2,501 24,922 2,390 Rest of world 25,110 Total 15,200 16,059 17,353 17.867 19,198 20.0 1 3 21,945 22,060 24.298 26,068 27,423 27,500 Components of U.S. supply: Domestic mines 3,140 1,108 295 3,320 1,491 504 3,299 1,708 690 2,722 2,166 2,804 2,332 676 2,729 2,605 392 2,587 2,766 454 2,659 2,961 428 2,603 3,587 468 2,552 4,326 206 2,501 3,736 211 2,390 4,741 619 Total U.S. supply 4,543 504 648 3,391 5,315 690 621 4,004 5,697 863 693 4,141 5,751 676 735 4,340 5,812 392 700 4,720 5,726 454 544 4,728 5,807 428 564 4,815 6,048 468 764 4,816 6,658 206 889 5,563 7,084 211 787 6,086 6,448 619 759 5,061 7,750 Distribution of U.S. supply: Exports 891 Demand.. 6,359 U.S. demand pattern: Aericulture 3,174 217 3,771 233 3,913 228 4,101 239 4,490 230 4,516 212 4,566 249 4,538 278 5,261 302 5,792 294 - Chemicals and nit (20 lb) of K2O, f.o.b. Carlsbad (av- Total U.S. primary dem Price: Cents per short ton u standard 60 percent muriate. 3,391 39 4,004 39 4,141 34 4,340 29 4,720 25 4,728 33 4,815 34 4,816 34 5,563 35 6,086 49 5,061 73 6,359 72 'Estimate. igan and North Dakota economic, or the failure of the domestic agriculture market to develop as anticipated. Estimated U.S. exports in 1976 increased about 15 percent from the 1975 figure to nearly 900,000 short tons (8 1 0,000 metric tons) of KgO. North America produced about 25 percent of the world's potash in 1976. Estimated annual production capacity of potash in North America totals 10 million tons (9.1 million metric tons) of KgO, nearly three-quarters of which is in Sas- katchewan (table 2). About 82 percent of the 1976 domestic pro- duction was from the Carlsbad region in New Mexico; the balance was from Utah and Cali- fornia. Ten companies comprise the domestic industry. Nine companies have only one oper- ation, while one (Kerr-McGee) has a mine in New Mexico and a plant in California (table 3). About 15 percent of U.S. products are potas- sium sulfate or potassium magnesium sulfate. In 1975, U.S. production of these sulfates to- taled nearly 400,000 tons (360,000 metric tons). Sulfate compounds are produced both from langbeinite ore by two Carlsbad companies and from brines in Utah and California. However, the Carlsbad district is the only known source of commercial langbeinite mineralization in the United States. About one-third of the sulfate production is exported. Net potash imports have grown steadily to meet increasing U.S. consumption. In 1974, 96 percent of the imports were from Canada, 1 percent from Israel, the balance from the U.S.S.R., West Germany, and other countries (fig. I)(i5). Domestic potash reserves are estimated to be about 200 million short tons (about 181 million metric tons) of K2O recoverable at 1973 prices. These reserves include about 100 million short tons (about 90.7 million metric tons) in bedded deposits in New Mexico, 70 million short tons (64 million metric tons) in brines, and an esti- mated 30 million short tons (27 million metric tons) in Utah bedded deposits (14). In addition to the reserves, domestic potash resources include perhaps an additional billion or more tons of KjO, mostly in the extension of the Williston Basin southward into the Montana- North Dakota area and revised estimates of de- posits in the Paradox Basin in Utah. Large de- posits in Montana and North Dakota are now being studied by Kalium Chemicals, a subsidiary of PPG Industries, and others for possible re- covery by solution mining. Exploratory drilling was begun in 1976 in the Montana-North Da- kota area near the Canadian (Saskatchewan) border by two operators, Kalium Chemicals and TABLE 2. — World mine production and reserves (Thousand short tons of K^O) Production World mine production and reserves 1975 1976' Reserves United States: WIPP Site W W W W 6 000 Rest of United States 1 00 000 Total 2,501 5.992 309 2,298 2,450 789 160 506 50 12.368 2.390 5,400 300 2,300 2,200 700 160 500 250 13,300 206 000 Canada ___. Congo (Brazzaville) 20.000 100 000 Israel and Jordan (Dead Sea) 240 000 Italy _. Spain ._ _ Other market economy countries 250,000 World total 27,423 27.500 'Estimate. W Withheld to avoid disclosiiis company proprielarv data. TABLE 3. — Domestic potash producers, yearend 1976 AMAX Chemical Corp. New Mexico. Duval Corp. (subsidiary of I'ennzoil) ,\ew Mexico. International Minerals & Chemical Corp. (IMC) .New Mexico. Great Salt Lake Minerals & (;hemical Corp. L'lali Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. Utah. Kcrr-McC.ee Corp. .New Mexico. Cililornia. Mississippi Chemical Corp. New Mexiio National Potash Co. (subsidiarN of Kreepori Miiier.iK Co.) New Mexico. Potash Company of America (subsidiar\ of Ideal Basic Industries) New Mexico Texasgulf liali. jointly by the Burlington Northern Railroad and C. F. Industries. It is reported both parties are planning large investments in solution mining, contingent upon the outcome of current feasi- bility studies. These deposits are about 7,000 to 9,000 feet (about 2,134 to 2,743 meters) deep. During the first half of the 1970s (through 1975) the price in constant dollars for North American potash approximately doubled. In the same period, constant-dollar prices for phos- phate and ammonia nearly quadrupled and tri- pled, respectively. The rate of these price rises escalated during this period and was particularly significant in 1974 and 1975. The average 1975 quoted selling price for U.S. standard muriate grade potash was $77 per ton ($85 per metric ton) of K2O f.o.b. producers' plant site. The price increase trend for potash produced in the United States was reversed in June 1976 when the quoted price was lowered by the Potash Co. of America to $63 per ton ($69 per metric ton) of contained KgO f.o.b. Carlsbad, N. Mex. (fig. 2). In 1962, the United States became a net im- porter of potash. This was due largely to the tremendous expansion in the Canadian potash World production East Germany 3,158 United States 2,552 France 2,508 U.S.S.R. 6,700e Spain 546 Canada 6,072 4,164 People's Republic of China 375£ West Germany 2,888 Congo (Brazzavil le) 350e Israel 660e Italy 230e Other Imports 4,326 Industry stocks 1/1/74 206 Chile 29e World total 26,068e Industry s tocks 12/3}/ H U.S. 7 Supply 084 U.S. Demand 6,086 Exports 787 Agriculture 5,792 SIC 287 Chemicals 294 SIC Unit Note Key Estimate Standard Industrial Classification Thousand short tons of potash Includes only potassium muriate, potassium sodium nitrates, and potassium sulfate FIGURE 1. — Potash supply-demand relationships — 1974. industry. By 1968, the Canadians moved from a position of net importation and had captured 45 percent of the U.S. market (24). On Decem- ber 19, 1969, the Treasury Department issued a finding that Canadian, West German, and French firms were selling muriate of potash (KCl) on the U.S. market at less than fair prices, in violation of the 1921 Antidumping Act. In 1970, authority was given to the Tariff Com- mission (now called the International Trade Commission) to collect a dumping duty. How- ever, no duties have been collected because the Saskatchewan Government imposed restrictions on production, and prices of Canadian potash exported to the United States were increased. Nevertheless, firms seUing Canadian potash on the U.S. market have been subject to extensive reporting requirements, so that price differen- tials could be evaluated by U.S. Customs. Sub- sequent heavy demand and resulting price increases allowed the Saskatchewan Provincial Government to lift these controls in 1974. Most of the importers have been removed from the reporting list; several were dropped in 1974 and more on August 5, 1976. A complicated reserves tax was imposed by the Saskatchewan Government in October 1974, which, according to the Canadian Potash Asso- ciation, amounts to over 80 percent of gross profit after adding Federal, Provincial, and local taxes and levies. Members of the industry filed suit in Provincial court on the constitutionality of the reserves tax, and a lengthy litigation was promised by the Provincial Government through to the Canadian Supreme Court, if necessary. Legislation enabling acquisition of 50 percent or more of the Provincial potash industry was enacted by the Saskatchewan Government in FIGURE 2.— Annual trend for 20-year span of U.S. domestic potash prices. January 1976. The first unit, owned by Duval Corp., was acquired in October 1976 for $128.6 million, and the second, owned by Sylvite of Canada, Ltd., was acquired in April 1977 for $144 million. These facilities represent about 18 percent of the production capacity of the Sas- katchewan potash industry (14). The Antitrust Division of the U.S. Depart- ment of Justice met in early 1975 in Chicago to begin an investigation of the fertilizer industry. In June 1976, five U.S. producers were indicted and charged with restricting production and controlling prices in the United States and also with conspiring to coordinate United States and Canadian production for the control of prices of potash; they were also indicted on a charge of coordinating export of potash from the United States and the import of potash from outside North America into the United States. The potential fine is $50,000 per company, but more serious is the threat of customers bringing legal actions asking payment for damages sus- tained. Court trial began in Chicago in January 1977; all five producers were acquitted in May 1977. However, many class action civil suits seek- ing damages for overcharging are still pending. LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA The proposed site considered by ERDA for a waste isolation pilot plant is 25 miles (40 kil- ometers) east of Carlsbad, N. Mex., and occupies about 29.6 square miles (76.7 square kilome- ters), with its center at the intersection of sec- tions 20, 21, 28, and 29, T 22 S, R 31 E (fig. 3). A study area of roughly 64 square miles (roughly 166 square kilometers), including 34.4 square miles (89.1 square kilometers) outside the WIPP site, was examined to better understand the ge- ology and potash mineralization within the site. The study area consists of sections 1-2, 1 1-14, 23-26, and 35-36 in T 22 S, R 30 E; all of T 22 S, R 31 E; sections 1, 2, 11, and 12 in T 23 S, R 30 E; and sections 1-12 in T 23 S, R 31 E. Carlsbad is the nearest population center. The LEGEND Active mines Inactive shafts Refineries Abandoned refinery FIGURE 3.— Location map of the WIPP site. nearest potash operation is Duval Corporation's Nash Draw mine, about 2 miles (about 3 kilo- meters) west of the WIPP site boundary. Rec- ords indicate that four holes were drilled within the site for oil or gas; all were dry holes, and they have since been plugged and abandoned. Producing wells would be detrimental to ERDA objectives in that they could act as conductors of hydrocarbon gas or fluid and thus provide access of such hazardous materials to storage areas constructed in the site. Oil and gas pro- ducing formations are stratigraphically below the proposed site of the underground waste storage facility. The top of the salt beds is 750 to 1,500 feet (229 to 457 meters) below the sur- face. The beds range from 1,500 to 2,000 feet (457 to 610 meters) thick and dip gently to the southeast. The area is stable tectonically with no known active faults. The Federal Government owns most of the land surface and mineral rights in the area, but there are some State and privately owned inter- ests. The ownership and areas of land involved are listed in table 4. Within the study area, all State lands and part of the Federal potash mineral lands are either leased or under lease applications. Figure 4 in- dicates the leaseholders' names and lease num- bers along with the names of the prospecting permit applicants and their application serial numbers. The size and location of the WIPP site with zones within the study area are depicted on figure 5. Access is afforded by State Highway 128 and from the north by U.S. Highway 180. If an all- weather road were constructed into the WIPP site, it probably would be built south from High- way 180. This highway is better suited to heavy haulage than Highway 128 and provides more convenient access to Carlsbad and other centers. A rail spur built into the area would probably be serviced by the Santa Fe Railroad as an ex- tension of its lines. A spur could be built as an extension of the Nash Draw mine or the Kermac TABLE 4. — Surface and mineral ownership In the study area In the WIPP site Acres Per- centage Acres Per- centage Federally owned surface and mineral rights. State owned surface and mineral rights. Privately owned surface and mineral rights. Privately owned surface and federally owned mineral rights. Privately owned surface and mineral rights except oil and gas federally 35,440 5,120 80 40 280 86.5 12.5 .2 .1 .7 17,201.58 1,759.49 .00 .00 .00 90.7 9.3 Total 40,960 100.0 18.961.07 100.0 spurs (fig. 3). In either case, about 7 miles (about 1 1 kilometers) of standard-gage rail line would be required. The water supply for a new potash-producing mine-mill complex is a critical item. Possible sources of water considered for potash refining are the Pecos River and aquifers in the Capitan Reef, Rusder, and Ogallala Formations. The best quality water found in the region is pro- duced from the Caprock area of the Ogallala Formation, 25 to 30 miles (40 to 48 kilometers) to the northeast of the study area. This source presently supplies the potash industry with about two-thirds of its water and is being used increasingly by the industry. The water quality is good, ranging from 500 to 600 parts per mil- lion total dissolved solids. This study assumes that Caprock area-Ogal- lala Formation water will be available for a new refinery. Adequate water rights are available and well site leases are obtainable on most of the Caprock field. The producing area is owned largely by the State of New Mexico. Present wells are 200 to 250 feet (61 to 76 meters) deep and are spaced on about '/4-mile (0.4-kilometer) cen- ters. Each well, if properly designed and devel- oped, can produce 200 to 250 gallons per minute (756 to 945 liters per minute) for 30 to 40 years. It is estimated that a pipeline from the Caprock field to a new refinery in the study area would be 30 miles (48 kilometers) long. Natural gas for a potash refinery could be supplied by the Gas Co. of New Mexico. This company presendy supplies the Kermac refin- ery using a 6-inch (15-centimeter) line, which has sufficient capacity to supply an additional refinery and could be extended into the study area. Electric power is supplied by the Southwest- ern Public Service Co. A typical load for a potash mine and refinery is estimated to be about 6,000 kilowatts, with usage at approximately 4 million kilowatt-hours per month. All power supplied to the potash industry comes over 69-kilovolt powerlines. An exisdng 69-kilovolt line to the Kermac operation, capable of handling the added capacity required for a new mine and mill complex, could be extended into the study area. Loving and Carlsbad are the towns nearest to the study area, located about 20 and 28 miles (32 and 45 kilometers) respectively, from its cen- ter. Total population of the two towns is about 28,000, with about 20,000 people living in Carls- bad. Unskilled and semiskilled labor generally is available in the area. Trained miners and other skilled workers are presendy employed in the 10 R30E R3IE I I Potash leases, lease holders and lease numbers I I Potash prospecting permit application, applicants name and application number I I Federal surtace and mineral rights \''''\ State surface and mineral rights ^ ' J Private surtace some with mineral rights ^— Proposed WIPP site outline Zone boundary Lease boundary FIGURE 4. — Map of surface and mineral ownership, leases, and lease applications in the study area. 11 R30E R3IE I I Federal surface and mineral rights \.]]'/^ State surface and mineral rights ['.J Private surface and mineral rights F^ Private surface, all mineral rights owned ^^^ by Federal Government p^ Private surface and mineral rights, except ^'^^ oil and gas federally owned —^Proposed WIPP site outline Zone boundaries and areas provided by ERDA I - 58 acres n - 1,889 acres m - 6,201 acres m - 10,812 acres FIGURE 5. — Approximate location and size of WIPP zones within the study area. 12 potash industry; therefore, a new operation all construction sites and pond sites must have would require training programs for new em- archeological surveys. Once surveys have been ployees. conducted, salvage operations of the important Present Federal procedures require that ar- sites must be conducted by a certified archeol- cheological surveys be made along all pipelines, ogist. These archeological su: veys and excava- powerlines, access roads, and railroad rights-of- tions will add to our knowledge of the cultural way granted by the Federal Government; also, heritage of the area. 13 GEOLOGY OF THE WIPP AREA REGIONAL GEOLOGY The WIPP site is near Carlsbad, N. Mex., in the western half of two adjoining structural bas- ins of Permian age. The two basins, the Dela- ware Basin on the west and the Midland Basin to the east, together comprise the much larger regional Permian Basin (21). The Delaware Basin occupies an area in southeastern New Mexico and west Texas roughly 135 miles (roughly 217 kilometers) long by 75 miles (121 kilometers) wide (fig. 6). The basin is nearly sur- rounded by the large horseshoe-shaped Capitan Limestone that opens to the south. This reef grew on shallow platforms to the east and west and on the shelf area north of the Delaware Basin. Growth of the reef probably contributed to formation of the embayment in which potash salts were deposited. Capitan Limestone extends in subsurface eastward from Carlsbad to Hobbs and thence southeastward along the Central Basin Platform into Texas. To the south and west of Carlsbad, the reef is exposed as El Cap- itan Peak and forms a portion of the Guadalupe Mountains. Before Permian time the basin area was sub- merged, and a thick section of sedimentary rocks was deposited. Toward the end of Per- mian time, the reef growth was halted due to an influx of high-salinity seawater. The evaporite- bearing Castile, Salado, and Rustler Formations were then deposited on top of several thousand feet of Lower Paleozoic sedimentary rocks (fig. 7). The evaporite sequence was followed by the deposition of terrestrial sedimentary rocks known as the Dewey Lake Redbeds. Later terrestrial sand, clay, and sandstone were deposited, and in part eroded, into Quaternary time. Today, much of the land surface is covered by caliche and low-lying sane dunes (1). Several economic minerals are found in the area. Significant gas and oil are produced from the Pennsylvanian age Strawn, Atoka, and Mor- row Formations. Less important hydrocarbon production is derived from scattered reservoirs in the Middle Paleozoic section in the Delaware Basin. Some sulfur has been produced from an- hydrite caprock material in the Rustler and Sa- lado Formations in Culbertson County, Tex., and potash minerals are mined from several mineral-bearing zones in the Salado Formation. LOCAL GEOLOGY Geologic information on the WIPP area has been compiled largely by Charles Jones {10-12) and other personnel of the U.S. Geological Sur- vey (2, 4, 8). Lower and Middle Paleozoic rocks do not play an important role in the WIPP site geology and are not pertinent to this report; only the Permian and younger rocks are briefly discussed for this economic analysis. Thick sections of salt at the top of the Salado Formation and anhydrite within the Rustler Formation have been dissolved and removed by ground water action, resulting in the creation of many sinkholes and a general lowering of the land surface over much of southeastern New Mexico. The most pronounced topographic fea- ture near the WIPP area is Nash Draw, a depres- sion that contains several sink areas within its boundaries (25). The most pronounced depres- sion within Nash Draw is a salt lake called La- guna Grande de la Sal. The Salado Formation does not crop out in the area. The Rustler Formation crops out in several places west and northwest of, but not within, the WIPP area. The Dewey Lake Redbeds are ex- posed in Nash Draw and along the western pe- rimeter of the area. Younger rocks in the area include alluvial bolson deposits and windblown sand (dunes). Structural deformation in the Permian rocks is limited to a gently eastward-dipping mono- cline with some minor flexures as illustrated in cross sections (figs. 8-12). A few collapse struc- tures can be found in the evaporite sections. Many pre-Permian structures are reflected in the overlying beds. Such a feature is a localized structural trough opening southeastward from the southeast corner of Sec 8, T 22 S, R 31 E. This trough shows up in the 1 1th and lower ore zones and extends for more than 4 miles (6 kil- ometers). The cause of such a structure is un- known, but it is hypothesized that the trough could be the expression of an ancient drainage- way or collapse feature. The trough appears in east-west cross section B-B' through the north- 14 FIGURE 6.— Major Permian geologic features in the region. Source: (22). 15 Santa Rosa Sandstone Dewey Lake Redbeds APPROXIMATE THICKNESS FEET (METRES) 330 (100) (113) 1,100 (335) >1,000 (>305) GENERAL CHARACTER Sandstone Interbedded stone Slltstone and very fine grained sandstone Anhydrite (gypsum) interbedded with dolomite, siltstone, and sandstone Rock salt interbedded with anhydrite, glauberite, silty sandstone, and a variety of potassium-bearing rocks Anhydrite and seams of rock salt EXPLANATION ESI Anhydrite and (or) other sulfate rock §1 v c • s*s3 s: •H U -H 1-1 M m3 n > 3 O H -H 0) W •H to tH kl « rH 01 Z kl li CO U U Q. O U • Bm -H « • O a -a tB u « -H « o 3 s a-H o « 0(0 a c X 01 2$4i g H XI > B FIGURE 7. — Stratigraphic column of consolidated rocks penetrated by site evaluation borings sunk in Los Medanos area. 16 LEGEN D ' — ^ '-^— ' Natural gas pipeline A ^A' Approximate lines of cross sections © Potash drill holes B ERDA potosh drillholes I I Federal surface and mineral rights ^—— Proposed WIPP site outline \^^[['\ State surface and mineral rights Zone boundary d Private surface some with mineral rights FIGURE 8. — Approximate location of cross sections at the WIPP site. 17 ^ >. ■^ 5 11335 '3XBas XB3T3J;3A / ' / / / u / / / id I u o. Q. +j < c 1 QJ 1 en o U oi i^ QJ +-> Q. c OJ +j o 0) c +-> 4-> o E QJ QJ rO c QJ QJ I^ o re 0) O +-> u* o •=J- C ro QJ N O C QJ O) o T3 O -Q c c M CU 4-> cn QJ i z E o OJ 3 s- OJ 01 , — QJ _E , — QJ o (0 Q. i s. c 0) c c re 'i O) J3 0) "O •i fO O OJ SG 18 0=1 "1 1 1 r a / / / / Dl ■I- O) "O en > o SB2 19 IdBj. '9LG0S [bdl;j9a I 1 1 1 r- be o Q. O) +J ^\ *\ I -r- ID I ^ .^ B0 20 Idd^ 'aLBOs L^^j-^-'iSA o <^ i / -r- ^ Ol 4-> H0° +j o •>- 21 ern area. Structural features related to adorning effect from the possible hydration of gypsum are found several places outside the area. There are no known active faults within the WIPP site or study area. Rocks penetrated by drilling in the study area are from Late Permian to Late Triassic in age. STRATIGRAPHY The Upper Permian System in the WIPP area includes the Ochoan Series, which consists of four rock salt, anhydrite, and siltstone units; the Castile, Salado, and Rustler Formations; and the Dewey Lake Redbeds. The Salado Formation contains all the potash mineralization of eco- nomic importance (fig. 13, in pocket). The Ochoan Series overlies shaly siltstone and as- sociated limestone of the Guadalupian Series (Lower and Upper Permian) and is unconform- ably overlain by rocks ranging in age from Late Triassic to Middle Pleistocene. The Castile Formation is the deepest and old- est stratigraphic unit penetrated by test hole drilling in the WIPP site. In the ERDA No. 9 borehole at the center of the area (fig. 8), the top of the formation was penetrated at a depth of 2,836 feet (864.4 meters). Thickness of the formation is estimated to be between 1,280 and 1,740 feet (390 and 530 meters). Anhydrite is the main constituent along with a few interbeds of rock salt and a small amount of calcitic lime- stone. The upper contact of the Castile For- mation is conformable with the overlying Salado Formation where there is a lateral and vertical gradation from anhydrite to rock salt. The top of the Salado Formation in test hole ERDA No. 9 is at a depth of 860 feet (262 me- ters). No solution residue is at the top of the bed, indicating that it has not been affected by ground water as it has in other areas to the west. The formation thickness at this location is 1,976 feet (602.3 meters). The Salado Formation is divided into three members: lower; middle or McNutt potash zone; and upper. The members are similar in lithology but differ in potash mineral content. As it exists at test hole ERDA No. 9, the top of the lower member is at a depth of 1,741 feet (530.7 meters), and the member is 1,095 feet (333.8 meters) thick. Information available shows that this member consists mainly of rock salt with minor amounts of anhydrite, polyhalite, and glauberite. The middle member, the McNutt potash zone, contains the currently economic potash minerals, langbeinite and sylvite. Mineralization in commercial concentrations is not present in test hole ERDA No. 9. The top of the McNutt potash zone is at a depth of 1,362 feet (415.1 meters), and the zone is 379 feet (1 15.5 meters) thick. It is comprised of rock salt with interbed- ded polyhalite, minor anhydrite, and clay. The normal potash-bearing zone, barren at this point, is identified by a marker bed of anhydrite near the base and by a thin seam of silty sand- stone near the top. The upper member is 520 feet (158 meters) thick; the top is at a depth of 860 feet (262 me- ters). This member is mainly rock salt with a few interbeds of polyhalite, anhydrite, and brown sandstone. The upper boundary of the Salado Formation is a sharp but conformable contact between rock salt and siltstone of the overlying Rustler Formation. The top of the Rusder Formation is 550 feet (168 meters) below the surface, and the for- mation is 310 feet (94.5 meters) thick. The unit is composed of interbedded anhydrite, dolo- mite, salt, and fine-grained sandstone (fig. 13). The permeability of four beds in the Rustler Formation indicates that they may function as aquifers. These zones are a 24-foot (7.3-meter) dolomite section located at a depth of 608 feet (185 meters), a 15-foot (4.6-meter) anhydrite bed at a depth of 680 feet (207 meters), a 25- foot (7.6-meter) section of Culebra Dolomite at a depth of 714 feet (218 meters), and a 12-foot (3.7-meter) thickness of clay and minor silt 758 feet (231 meters) below the surface. A distinct reddish-brown mudstone marks the sharp, unconformable contact of the Rustler Formation with the overlying Dewey Lake Redbeds. The Dewey Lake Redbeds comprise a red-colored silty unit located 63 feet (19 me- ters) below the surface. It is 487 feet (148 meters) thick and is present throughout the WIPP site. The Dewey Lake Redbeds have been eroded in post-Permian time and vary greatly in thickness; in the WIPP site these beds occur as a repeated sequence of siltstone and very fine-grained sandstone. The Triassic Santa Rosa Formation, consisting of interbedded sandstone and mudstone, un- conformably overlies the Dewey Lake Redbeds. Nine feet (3 meters) of medium-grained, friable sandstone is present. The top of the formation is at a depth of 54 feet (16 meters). Overlying the Santa Rosa Formation is the Gatuna Formation, which consists of 27 feet (8.2 meters) of silty, calcitic sandstone. The Gatuna Formation is overlain by 5 feet (1.5 meters) of Pleistocene Mescalero Formation caliche, which is covered by dune sand. The lat- eral extent of the Gatuna and Mescalero For- mations is uncertain in the WIPP area because of erosion and mantling by dune sands. 22 DATA COLLECTION AND INTERPRETATION The U.S. Geological Survey recommended, as one of several sites suitable for a waste storage location, the use of thick salt beds in the lower member of the Salado Formation (fig. 13). Ex- ploratory holes were drilled to confirm the lith- ology, structure, mineralogy of the salt-bed sequence, and grades and amounts of potash minerals in the site area. For this purpose, 21 holes were drilled on about 1-mile (about 1.6- kilometer) centers, and the cores were analyzed. Conventional rotary drilling methods were used to penetrate to the top of the McNutt potash zone. When this horizon was reached, the drill- ing fluid was changed to saturated brine to pre- vent dissolution of the minerals and to allow for good core recovery. The interval was cored through the McNutt potash zone into the under- lying lower member of the Salado Formation. The cores were visually logged by a geologist and splits were sent to laboratories for chemical analyses. The analytical data were used for pre- liminary estimates of tonnage and grade of po- tash occurring in the WIPP site. devised a system for identifying the strati- graphic units in the Carlsbad district that seg- regated the potash-bearing rock units into economic and noneconomic types. The calcium sulfate rocks carried no economic values, whereas the mineralized chloride or rock salt beds did. A system of marker beds was devised to number and identify the noneconomic calcium sulfate beds within the Salado Formation, beginning with marker bed 100 near the top and ending with marker bed 143 near the base. The salt beds of economic importance were found to occur in the middle member of the Salado Formation now known as the McNutt potash zone. Eleven mineralized salt zones were identified which were numbered from ore zone number 1 near the base of the member to ore zone number II near the top (fig. 13). A 1960 open-file report by Jones, Bowles, and Bell pro- posed these new numbering systems for potash well logging and stratigraphic correlation pur- poses (13). The method was accepted by indus- try and is currently being used. ORE ZONES AND MARKER BEDS IN THE SALADO FORMATION During the late 1920's, the U.S. Geological Survey and the Bureau of Mines drilled the Carlsbad potash area. At that time, there was no geologic type section or nomenclature to delin- eate stratigraphic units or mineralized zones. As the drill samples were analyzed, chemists recognized various stratigraphic intervals con- taining high K,jO (potash) values. The potash usually occurred in argillaceous salt beds sepa- rated by calcium sulfate beds composed of an- hydrite and/or polyhalite and other barren rock salt beds. About 40 individual beds within the Salado Formation that contained some percent- age of K2O were numbered from the top of the formation downward in an effort to trace stra- tigraphic units and mineralized zones. Each po- tash company working in the area used a different type of nomenclature varying from let- ters to numbers or combinations of both to iden- tify beds and mineralized zones. In the late 1950's, the U.S. Geological Survey POTASSIUM-BEARING DEPOSIT ESTIMATION A triangular method to calculate potash ton- ages, using standards of a minimum bed thick- ness of 4 feet (1.2 meters) of 4 percent K2O as langbeinite [4 feet (1.2 meters) x 4 percent = 16 feet-percent) (4.8-meter-percent)], or 4 feet (1.2 meters) of 10 percent K2O as sylvite [4 feet (1.2 meters) x 4 percent = 40 feet-percent (12 meter- percent)], or the equivalent minimum feet-percentage product if thickness was less than 4 feet (1.2 meters). In other words, the thickness could be reduced below 4 feet (1.2 meters) if the grade were high enough to meet the above minimum feet-percentage criteria. Triangles drawn to connect adjacent test holes peripheral to the drilling network were pro- jected outward for distances considered prudent based on geologic interpretation. The rule of linear distribution was used to determine cutoff points between holes having insufficient thick- ness and/or grade and holes having mineral con- centrations at or above cutoff grade. In a few 23 instances, a circle of influence with a '/.'-mile (0.8-kilometer) radius was established around an outlying hole of significant grade when no other holes existed within a distance of l-V-i to 2 miles (2.4 to 3.2 kilometers). The areas thus established were weight-av- eraged by mineralized bed thickness and grade to determine an average grade-thickness value. The areas were then measured by polar plani- meter, and the results multiplied by the average bed thickness to determine volumes that were converted to short tons. The average thickness and grade within each triangle were multiplied by the area of the triangle, and these numbers were divided by the sum of the areas to achieve a weight-averaged grade and thickness. These data were then used to determine recoverable tonnage based on data supplied by the U.S. Geo- logical Survey. The weight-averaged grade and thickness, tonnages, values, or zone elevations, and potash-bearing areas were plotted on base maps. This method of ore reserve estimation is suitable for uniformly layered sedimentary de- posits. 24 EVALUATION OF POTASH MINERALIZATION The following is a discussion of current flo- tation and leaching technology, the expected effect of impurities, and a discussion of the tests made by the Bureau of Mines. CURRENT PROCESSING OF POTASSIUM- BEARING ORES Currently, ores containing sylvite (KCl), lang- beinite (K2S04-2MgS04), and mixed-sylvite-and- langbeinite minerals are being mined and proc- essed in the Carlsbad area. The ores are up- graded by heavy media, flotation, leaching, and crystallization techniques that separate the de- sired potash minerals from halite, clays, slimes, and other mineral impurities. Sylvite Sylvite ores can be beneficiated by either flo- tation or solution-crystallization techniques. Both methods are being employed in the Carlsbad area. In a flotation process, sylvite ores contain- ing between 13 and 23 percent K^,0 equivalent are crushed, deslimed, and floated in a series of pneumatic flotation cells after conditioning with selective collectors and depressive reagents. Fig- ure 14 is a generalized schematic diagram of this process. The conditioners often include an amine col- lector, which makes the potassium chloride hy- drophobic; a blinder which depresses slime flotation; and an alcohol which acts as a frothing agent. The floated sylvite mineral is then dried, sized, and stored for market consumption under the product name muriate of potash (60 percent KgO). Fines separated in the sizing operation are either compacted and sold or are used as feed to a potassium sulfate operation that will be de- scribed later. Brine and tailings from the flo- tation operation are separated, and tailings are discarded. The brine may then be directly re- turned to the wash desliming circuit, or it may first go to a crystallization circuit where more of the dissolved sylvite is removed. Typical KCl recoveries of 80 to 87 percent are achieved with such a sylvite flotation process. When the clay and slimes impurities in sylvite ores increase to the range of more than 3.5 to 4 percent, extensive mechanical desliming is re- quired, or the sylvite flotation recovery de- creases significantly. To avoid these difficulties and other liberation problems, one company is currently processing high-clay sylvite ore bv so- lution and crystallization methods. A schematic diagram of this process is shown in figure 15. The sylvite in the crushed and mechanicallv des- limed ore is leached in hot [185° to 200° F (85° to 93.3° C)] unsaturated brine. The svlvite product, muriate, is crystallized from the preg- nant leach liquor by vacuum cooling, then dried and stored for market. Typical KCl recoveries of 80 to 85 percent are achieved. Langbeinite Figures 16 and 17 illustrate a generalized be- neficiation method for langbeinite ores. These ores, typically containing 7.5 to 10 percent K,,0, are crushed and sized. The impurities are then water-leached from the less soluble langbeinite. Then, the lapgbeinite is dried, sized, and stored for market consumption under some form of the name sulfate of potash-magnesia (22 percent KgO). Typical langbeinite mill recoveries are 85 to 90 percent. Fines from the sizing operation are used as feed to a potassium sulfate opera- tion. Mixed Ore Langbeinite may occur associated with sylvite in amounts such that both minerals can be re- covered. Currently, a mixed ore of sylvite (8 to 10 percent KjO) and langbeinite (2 to 3 percent KjO) is being beneficiated in the Carlsbad area. A schematic diagram of this operation is shown in figure 16. After crushing, sizing, and me- chanical desHming of the ore, the two potassium minerals in the coarse (plus 20 mesh) ore are separated by a two-stage, magnetite-heavy-me- dia separation process. The denser langbeinite is separated as the sink product from the lighter sylvite and halite min- erals in the first heavy-media stage. In the sec- ond stage, the media specific gravity is readjusted and sylvite is separated as the float product from the halite. The separated sylvite joins the mill 25 OvJ Ol (O o o • r- (O TO - o -^ to ^ (U c ' — +-> o ;z to -e 4- CJ) , en c .c C\J s- o en 01"= ^ (1) -1- c O CD E ' CD fO ^ iddl- cree ctio oo ^1 ro Si T3 C to CT) + i o -o [11 _ ^^ ^ i -^ ta cu s- >- oo C ^ 7— ^ ^ ie CU S- o •4-) o +-> c t. C r--,- •.- en tc •.- S- 3 +-> +-> n3 (O ^ E «+J -t^ '^"'|| :3 o o u s: s- .- cu .— r— (J fO Ml dry compac Sec e ^ CLn O S- ro 0) s- •.- OJ S- +-> cu -r- C fO cnc .:^ s ro.° +-> 3 OJ s_ tu +J-l-> _?; O O U 13 r- r- S- c s: u 1 — cu M-CT) s_ to cu s- -t-J C ■!-> to c I/) cu cu 0) Ij c c ul r Brine recovery rom slime Section 8 ;z CO Co ■+- 26 Ore X Crush Section Brine -3 mesh ^ Deslime Section 2 Brine Solids Hot Leach Section 3 Tail ings Tailings Brine Debrine Section 4 Leach Clarification Section 5 Solution Tailings discard Tailings discard Brine Crystallization Section 7 Crystal lization Debrining Section 8 Muriate Dry, Size, Compact, Storage Section 9 Key Section identifications refer to equipment lists for specific tonnage throughput FIGURE 15. — Diagram of sylvite solution-crystallization section. 27 314-720 0-80-5 . >, m 1 £ Langbeinite dry, size, storage Section 16 "[I _] o QJ OJ C ° ™ ai ro c OJ II - s 5 '-^ Secti Taili disca on i dentil jipment li 3e through * l^§ Langbeinite Flotation Section 17 fo-^ r Key Secti to eq tonna LO ^ Langbeinite sizing Section 15 1 ^r g Muriate Coarse Flotation Section 14 TO § c O 1 s ° Magnetite-Heavy media input recovery and specific gravity adjustment circuit ^ 2 Stage heavy media separation Section 14 Muriate sizing Section 8 i Rod mills sizing Section 9 c ' 1 ^ Middlings Rescreening Section 6 i ^ ^ ^ ' , 1 1 Dry crush and size Section 1 1 " Scrub and size Section 2 ^ s Desl ime Section 3 Muriate Rougher Flotation Section 4 ^^^ c J ion er ,rate Muriate Dry, Size, [Z ••-' 1 5 J 1 >-M u °= 1 E Muriate Cleaner Flotation Section 5 ro ro c • I s OJ c si 5 S- (D ^ 55£ U- o m 1 Brine eparation from otation tailings Section 12 ^1 i' ill s CO ^ E i = 28 feed ore fines (minus 20 mesh) in a standard sylvite flotation circuit. The floated sylvite is dried, sized, compacted when necessary, and stored for market consumption as muriate of potash. The flotation tails are separated from the brine and combined with the langbeinite fines recovered from the heavy-media opera- tion. These langbeinite fines are then floated, dried, and stored for use as feed to a sulfate operation. The langbeinite sands recovered from the heavy-media operation are dried, sized, and stored for market. Typical recoveries of 60 to 70 percent langbeinite and 70 to 80 percent sylvite are achieved. Potassium Sulfate Langbeinite product fines are typically com- bined with the necessary amount of sylvite prod- uct fines to produce the marketable product Langbeinite Fines Muriate Fines \f Pulverizing Section 1 Dissolution and Clarification Section 2 r Sulfate reaction Section 3 Mixed salts \ f Debrine Section 4 Brine _ Evaporation, crystallization and filtration Section 5 1 Sulfate dry, size, storage Section 6 Waste liquor discard Section identifications refer to attached equipment lists for specific tonnage throughput Langbeinite and muriate fines are concentrate products from the langbeinite leach and sylvite flotation circuits. FIGURE 17. — Diagram of a sulfate section. 29 potassium sulfate; figure 17 is a schematic dia- gram of this operation. In this base exchange reaction, dissolved muriate reacts with pulver- ized langbeinite to form soluble potassium sul- fate and magnesium chloride. The potassium sulfate is then crystallized from the solution under controlled conditions as the temperature decreases. The potassium sulfate product (50 percent K^O) is then separated from reaction liquor, dried, and stored for market. Mixed po- tassium salts remaining in the reaction liquor, including potassium chloride, are then re- covered by vacuum crystallization and are re- turned to the feed input. Then the brine, which still contains the magnesium chloride and other noncrystallized salts, is discarded. Typical re- coveries of potassium sulfate range between 70 and 80 percent. Current Impurities Treatment Other potassium-containing minerals and clays associated with the sylvite and langbeinite ores can drastically affect recovery and concentrate grades. The impurities, if not removed, can make the product not marketable, and their re- moval can greatly increase the capital invest- ments needed to recover a marketable product. The effect of clays and slimes in sylvite re- covery has already been discussed as one of the major processing difficulties. Companies proc- essing high-clay ores by flotation have found it necessary to increase desliming and brine clar- ification circuits and to increase the addition of flocculant and blinder reagents. Even with these modifications, as much as 7 to 8 percent greater loss of K2O has been noted in processing some high-clay ore. New processing techniques aimed at increasing potash recoveries from high-clay ores have been studied by the Carlsbad com- panies and by the Bureau of Mines, but none of these studies has progressed to the commer- cial stage. Sylvite ore recovery can also be affected by the presence of kieserite (MgS04-H20). If the kieserite is fine grained and interlocked with the potassium chloride, it may be impossible to lib- erate the two minerals except at very fine sizes. This fine size will affect the product grade and the KjO recovery that can be achieved in the flotation circuit. The presence of kieserite in a crystallization circuit may cause the formation of glaserite [K3Na(S04)2], which will precipitate in the lines and hamper recovery of sylvite. Maximum SO4 concentration in ore being proc- essed in a dissolution circuit should be 3.5 to 4 percent. Carnallite (KCl-MgCl2-6H20)impurities can also affect sylvite recovery. In the flotation proc- esses, carnallite affects the viscosity of the brine and may cause the formation of fine-grained potassium chloride. This fine-grained KCl can be lost during flotation without careful control of the flotation circuit. One company experi- encing high carnallite impurities (5 to 6 percent) has modified its circuit to include additional cleaner steps in fines flotation in order to elim- inate this problem. In a crystallization circuit, the presence of carnallite can affect the Mg^^ ion concentration in the brine leach, causing sig- nificant KCl losses. To avoid this, a preleach circuit for carnallite is necessary, followed by a recrystallization stage to recover the KCl that dissolves in the preleach. Kainite (MgS04-KCl-3H20) is an impurity in sylvite ore that can affect the sylvite product con- centrate grade. In flotation, the kainite will also float and be recovered as an impurity in the concentrate. In langbeinite ores, polyhalite (K2S04-MgS04-2CaS04-2H20) is an impurity that cannot be leached from insoluble langbein- ite because of similar solubility characteristics. The recovery of polyhalite in the langbeinite concentrate will thus be comparable with lang- beinite recovery. Required market grade for langbeinite is 22 percent KjO with a maximum of 4 percent impurities. It is difficult to make the required grade if polyhalite impurities are high. Clay and slimes can also affect langbeinite ores if sufficient desliming is not included in the process. It is not unusual to expect 20 percent of clay and slimes in the feed to report to con- centrate. Therefore, control must be maintained to lower this amount to meet market grade. Theoretically, kieserite should be water leach- able and thus not affect the recovery of lang- beinite. Plant experience, however, seems to indicate that the kieserite does not completely leach and may report to the concentrate, thus lowering the grade. BENCH-SCALE METALLURGICAL TESTS As noted previously and shown in table 5, many of the potash impurities that affect lang- beinite and sylvite recovery are present in the WIPP site ores. To understand the effect of the impurities on recovery, the Bureau of Mines Salt Lake City Research Center conducted prelimi- nary sylvite flotation and langbeinite leach tests on two core samples taken from drill sites near the WIPP area. The primary purpose of these tests was to determine if any ore characteristics would preclude beneficiation by current flota- 30 tion or leaching technology. The tests were de- signed to estimate the range of potash grade and recovery expected for the ores tested and to determine concentrate grades ancPimpurities. No attempts were made to reclean concentrates or to include secondary ore-desliming steps in the metallurgical tests. The addition of such procedures could make the concentrates higher in grade, with a possible decrease in recoveries, but such tests are beyond the scope of this pre- liminary study. The tests performed, however, could indicate where such recleaning would be necessary. The results of these metallurgy tests, in conjunction with previously discussed current technology and known impurity problems, were used to estimate the expected metallurgical characteristics of the WIPP site ore. The core samples used were AEC-7 and AEC-8; these cores were obtained from a pre- vious drilling investigation in the area, which was reported in a U.S. Geological Survey open- file report {10). These core samples were used because they provided a larger amount of ore for brine makeup and metallurgical tests than would have been available by using the 2-inch ERDA drill cores from this investigation. Table 5 summarizes the chemical analyses made by the Salt Lake City Research Center on portions of the core used in the tests. The table also shows a calculated chemical analysis based on the uses report for these same core portions. Var- iations between the two analyses are due to slight differences between core sample splits. Because of the close comparison between the Bureau of Mines sample analyses and those made by the U.S. Geological Survey, the mineralogy ex- pected for the Bureau of Mines samples should be comparable with that determined in the USGS analysis. The author of the USGS open- file report (10) on the two core samples, C. L. Jones, also supervised the core drilling within the WIPP site for this evaluation. Discussion with C. L. Jones confirmed that the mineralogy shown in the USGS report could be assumed to be the mineralogy of the Salt Lake City test ores. Further, he indicated that the test ores were rep- resentative of ores found in the WIPP area. Table 6 shows the assumed mineralogy. Sylvite Flotation Tests Sylvite flotation tests were performed by the Bureau of Mines Salt Lake City Research Center on two ore samples, shown as AEC 7-5 and AEC 8-10 in tables 5 and 6. The laboratory proce- dure included the following steps: 1. The ore at minus 10 mesh was scrubbed for 15 minutes in a 50-percent solids saturate brine. 2. The scrubbed ore slurry was diluted to 30 percent solids and then decanted over a 150- mesh screen. This desliming operation is sim- ilar to the laboratory procedure used in the Carlsbad potash industry. The oversize (plus 150-mesh) fraction was diluted (22 to 33 per- cent solids) and deslimed again. The under- size (minus 150 mesh) was discarded. Commercially, the undersize would be thick- ened and discarded and the separated brine recycled. TABLE 5. — Chemical analysis (percent) of core samples used in Bureau of Mines metallurgical test (approximate chemical analysis based on U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 75—407 included for comparison) AEC 7-5 AEC 8-10 AEC8-4A AEC8-4B AEC 8-4C2 Ore used 5th ore zone AE07 10th ore zone AEC-8 4th ore zone AE08 4th ore zone AE08 Core AEC-8 Depth, feet _ 1726.5-1741.5 1589-1594.5 1753-1756.5 1752.0-1756.5 1753.0-1756.7; KjO: USBM 1752-1753 13.4 13.1 12.6 9.50 3.70 USGS 15.75 13.4 12.8 10.74 4.56 Calcium: USBM .42 .20 <.20 <.20 <.20 USGS .42 .21 .05 .06 .07 Magnesium: USBM 2.10 3.40 6.60 5.27 1.92 USGS 2.80 3.70 6.36 5.00 2.20 Chlorine: USBM 44.70 40.60 24.38 31.90 45.60 USGS 44.92 41.56 26.41 33.53 48.30 so,: USBM 12.50 14.90 39.50 29.70 12.15 USGS 12.51 13.70 38.122 29.94 13.05 Water-insoluble matter: USBM .80 4.50 .70 1.20 2.50 USGS .81 5.53 1.104 1.18 1.33 Water loss, 60°-200° C: USBM (') (') o n n USGS. 1.34 1,73 .64 .53 .299 ' Tables used in calculation from USGS open-file report (9). ' Sample AEC 8-4C is a synthetic sample consisting of 1,500 grams of sample AEC 8-4A (depth 1752.7-1756.7) mixed with 3,200 grams of ore from core AEC-8, 4th ore zone (depth 1752-1753). Water loss analysis not conducted by the Bureau of Mines (USBM). 31 TABLE 6. — Approximate mineral content (weight-percent) of core samples used in Bureau tests. Mineralogical analysis calculated from data reported in U.S. Geological Survey Open- File Report 75-407' Mineral Chemical composition Test AEC 7-5 Test AEC 8-10 Test AEC8--1A Test AEC8^B Test AEC 8-4C2 Sylvite KCI K2SO4 ■ 2MgS04 MgS04 • kA ■ Sh,o K2SO4 • MgS04 • 4H2O K& ■ MgCl2 • 6H,0 K^04 ■TvlgS042CaS02 NAcf CaS04 21.65 .28 7.91 10.52 3!09 55.11 .06 .83 20.0 18.87 4.20 .31 50.2 .60 5.52 0.05 51.77 1.04 2.31 .34 43.23 .09 1.08 0.10 43.14 1.00 1.93 .29 :3i 54.88 .07 1.16 29 Leonite Bloedite _ Kieserite _.. Carnallite 1.29 .74 .11 .33 Halite ___ 78.91 Water-insoluble matter 1.31 Tables used in calculation from USGS open-file report (9). Sample AEC 8-4C is a synthetic sample and does not represent a particular ics of very low langbeinite. t does, however, give an indication of leaching characteris- 3. The deslimed sample is then conditioned prior to flotation. The plus 150-mesh solids were diluted to 23 percent solids, and then the reagents were added in two steps. Com- mercially, conditioning could be done in a tumbler at a higher percentage of solids, and such conditioning would then use less re- agent than laboratory tests because of the smaller dilution and possibly greater contact. a. In the first stage, a blinder reagent is added to the slurry which is then condi- tioned for 2 minutes. The blinder keeps insoluble slimes from absorbing amine and floating. The portion of feed and re- agent used are as follows: 0.2 pound (9 1 grams) MRL 20 1 ' for tests with core AEC 7-5 0.3 pound (136 grams) MRL 201 for tests with core AEC 8-10 b. In the second stage, additional flotation reagents were added to the slurry, which is then conditioned for 2 minutes. Both core samples used identical amounts of the following reagents per ton of feed: 0.2 pound (91 grams) of Armeen T. D., an amine collector 0. 1 pound (45 grams) Barretts oil 634 0.018 pound (8.17 grams) Hexanol frother 4. The conditioned sample is floated for 2 min- utes to produce a rougher concentrate. 5. The rougher concentrate is then recondi- tioned prior to any cleaner flotation. This additional conditioning step was found nec- essary in the laboratory, possibly due to di- lution of the sample, or due to impurities present in the ore. Commercially, only initial conditioning (step 3) is needed. In condition- ing, the rougher concentrate is diluted to 23 percent solids (for AEC 7-5 sample) and 24 ' Use of specific brands of reagents does n of these reagents in preference to simila 'agents sold by other companies. percent solids (for AEC 8-10 sample), and is conditioned for 2 minutes with the addition of 0. 1 pound (45 grams) of MRL 201 blinder per ton of original feed. 6. The conditioned rougher concentrate is then floated for 2.5 minutes to produce a cleaner concentrate. 7. The first cleaner concentrate is then condi- tioned for 2 minutes by adding the following reagents per ton of original feed: 0.05 pound (23 grams) Armeen T. D. 0.024 pound (11 grams) Barretts oil 634 0.01 pound (4.5 grams) Hexanol 8. The conditioned cleaner concentrate is then floated for 1.5 minutes in a slurry of 10 per- cent solids. The concentrates and tailings are then analyzed. A discussion of the test results for each ore sample follows. Sample AEC 7-5— Sylvite (USBM analysis): 13.4 weight-percent K^O equivalent This sylvite ore sample analysis, as shown in tables 5 and 6, contains both kainite and kies- erite. In addition, the KgO content in this sample is slightly lower than that in Carlsbad ores cur- rently used for sylvite recovery by flotation. The kainite in the sample would be expected to float, thus lowering the recovery and concentrate grade of the sylvite. The kieserite can also affect the concentrate grade, since it is often inter- locked with sylvite and cannot be liberated. In this sample, however, microscopic examination of this sample indicated that kieserite is not en- trained in the sylvite, and thus the two might be separated. The flotation results are shown in table 7. A recovery of 8 1 . 1 percent of the potash value was achieved, but the KgO concentrate grade was only 55.26 percent rather than the market grade of 60 percent. Analysis of the con- centrate, as expected, did indicate the presence of kainite. Because of this kainite, which could 32 not be mechanically separated from the ore, re- covery of market grade sylvite by flotation may not be possible. Kainite may not affect a solution crystallization circuit as detrimentally, and thus sylvite may be recoverable from this material by solution-crystallization methods. Extensive so- lution and crystallization tests were not con- ducted due to the limited scope of these preliminary tests. Sample AEC 8-10— Sylvite sample: 13.1 weight- percent K^O equivalent This sylvite sample, as shown in tables 5 and 6, contains kieserite and, in addition, the KjO content is slightly lower than those currendy used for sylvite flotation recovery. The kieserite can affect recovery and the concentrate grade of the sylvite since it is often interlocked with sylvite and cannot be liberated. However, mi- croscopic analysis indicates that kieserite is not entrained with the sylvite and should not affect flotation. Sample AEC 8-10 has no kainite im- purities but has a very large insoluble content. The flotation results are shown in table 8. A recovery of 73 percent of the potash value was achieved, but the KjO concentrate grade was only 54. 14 percent rather than the market grade of 60 percent. Analysis of the concentrate in- dicated the presence of schoenite, with occluded halite, fine halite, and insoluble slimes. It might be possible to further upgrade this ore by re- cleaning to meet market specifications, although such recleaning would reduce Motash recovery. Sylvite from this type of ore may also be re- coverable by solution and crystallization meth- ods, where the insolubles can be more effectively removed. Langbeinite Leach Tests Langbeinite leach tests were performed by the Bureau of Mines Salt Lake City Research Center on three samples, shown as AEC 8-4A, AEC 8- 4B, and a composite sample AEC 8-4C in tables 5 and 6. The laboratory procedures were based on similar laboratory leach methods used by the Carlsbad potash industry. The tests included the following steps: 1. The sample is separated into a plus 14-mesh and minus 14-mesh fraction. 2. The coarse material (minus 4 to plus 14 mesh) is leached with cold water in an agitator for 2 minutes. Leach water requirements were calculated to give a 12 percent chloride brine if 100 percent of contained halite dis- solved during leaching (steps 2 and 4). 3. The leach liquor is decanted and filtered from the insoluble coarse product. 4. The fine material (minus 4 mesh) is leached TABLE 7. — Chemical assay mass balance of sylvite flotation: test on sample AEC 7-5 (Weight-percem) Product Percent of total input tonnage K^G Insol- ubles Magne- sium SO, Sodium Chlor- Cal- Feed: Coarse Slime (discarded) 85.9 14.0 14.06 9.34 0.23 4.28 2.02 2.61 11.90 16.16 22.41 17.36 45.58 39.27 0.38 .66 Toul feed 100.0 20.5 19.66 13.4 53.01 55.26 .80 .18 .14 2.1 .85 .76 12.5 5.17 4.76 21.7 2.51 1.55 44.7 42.52 42.64 .42 Rougher concentrate .08 Cleaner concentrate .07 Tailings: Rougher 65.5 .90 1.87 4.22 .25 .89 2.38 2.9 14.01 14.0 28.64 23.3 46.54 39.77 .47 Cleaner .44 Total tailings 66.4 1.90 .26 2.39 14.01 28.57 46.45 .47 TABLE 8. — Chemical assay mass balance of sylvite flotation: test on sample AEC (Weight-percent) 8-10 Product Percent of total input tonnage K^O Insol- ubles Magnes- SO,, Sodium Chlor- Cal- Feed: Coarse... Slime (discarded) 80.9 19.1 13.38 11.92 1.06 19.06 3.06 4.8 13.23 21.96 20.40 13.61 43.94 26.67 0.12 .10 100.0 19.8 17.7 13.1 49.79 54.14 4.5 1.12 3.4 .88 .61 14.9 3.70 2.50 19.1 4.75 2.76 40.6 44.77 45.04 Cleaner concentrate .04 Tailings. Rougher Cleaner... 61.1 2.1 1.58 13.13 1.04 2.37 3.77 3.18 16.32 13.94 25.47 21.56 43.67 42.46 .14 .19 Total tailings 63.3 1.96 1.08 3.74 16.22 25.30 43.56 .14 33 for 1 minute with the unsaturated leach liq- uor separated in step 3. 5. The leach liquor is then decanted and filtered from the insoluble fine product. The leach liquor and products were analyzed. A discussion of the test results for each sample follows. Sample AEC 8—4A — Langbeinite sample: 12.6 weight-percent K^O equivalent This langbeinite sample analysis, shown in ta- bles 5 and 6, has a higher KgO content than Carlsbad ores currently used for langbeinite leach recovery. The impurities that affect leach- ing, polyhalite and other insolubles, occur in small quantities. The leach results are shown in table 9. A recovery of 91 percent of the potash value was achieved, but only a 21.27 percent KgO grade was made. This grade is close to minimum market requirements of 22 percent KjO. Because analysis of the concentrate indi- cates that most of the impurities are insoluble slimes, a recleaning of the concentrate should increase the concentrate grade. In plant prac- tice, ores similar to AEC 8-4A should be proc- essable with recoveries in the range of 90 to 91 percent. Sample AEC 8-4B — Langbeinite sample: 9.5 weight-percent K2O equivalent This langbeinite sample analysis, as shown in tables 5 and 6, has a KgO content comparable or slightly higher in grade than Carlsbad ores currently used for langbeinite leach recovery. The impurities that affect leaching, polyhalite and insolubles, occurred in small quantities. The leach results are shown in table 10. A recovery of 89.8 percent of the potash value was achieved, but only a 21.5 percent KgO grade was made. Because analysis of the concentrate indicated that most impurities are insoluble slimes, a re- cleaning of the concentrate should increase the concentrate grade. In plant practice, ores similar to AEC 8-4B should be processable with recov- eries in the range of 88 to 90 percent. Sample AEC 8—4C — Langbeinite sample: 3.7 weight-percent K^O equivalent This sample analysis, listed in tables 5 and 6, is a composite and does not represent a specific deposit found in the area. It does, however, give some indication of the possibility of leaching 4- percent KjO-equivalent langbeinite. The im- purities, polyhalite and insolubles, are in low percentage, but the low grade would make any TABLE 9. — Chemical assay mass balance of langbeinite leach: test on sample AEC 8-4A (Weishl-percent) Product Percent of total input tonnage K.p Insol- ubles Magnes- SO, Sodium Chlorine Feed: 61.1 38.9 13.4 11.3 0.43 1.11 6.84 6.22 42.41 34.93 14.88 16.47 Fine 26.66 100.0 12.6 .70 6.60 39.50 15.50 Concentrate: Coarse Fine __ 35.81 18.16 21.4 21.0 .21 .97 11.1 11.2 69.0 68.8 .12 .21 Total concentrate Brine solution __ 53.97 46.03 21.27 2.43 .47 .97 11.13 1.29 68.93 4.99 .08 33.58 .14 52.80 TABLE 10. — Chemical assay mass balance of langbeinite leach test on sample AEC 8-4B (Weight-percent) Produ Feed: Coarse _ Total Concentrate: Coarse Total concentrate Brine solution Percent of total input 34 impurities in the concentrate detrimental to making market grade. The leach test results are shown in table 11. A recovery of 87 percent of the potash value was achieved, but only a 19.48 percent KjO grade was achieved. An analysis of the concentrate indicated the presence of im- purities; however, more than 80 percent of the impurities were already leached in the test. It is doubtful if deposits of this grade could be beneficiated unless it contained virtually no po- lyhalite or insolubles as impurities or unless these impurities were concentrated in certain size fractions that could be discarded. Summary of Metallurgical Tests The tests conducted by the Bureau of Mines Salt Lake City Research Center confirmed the problems expected in ores found in the WIPP area. The WIPP ore types seem to behave sim- ilarly to ores currently processed in the Carlsbad area. High percentages of polyhalite and insol- ubles can lower the concentrate grade of lang- beinite ores. If the langbeinite ore has a very low KjO content, impurities may be large enough to require recleaning processes, or the impuri- ties may not be removable, resulting in an un- marketable product. High impurities of kainite, kieserite, and insolubles in sylvite ores can affect the KjO recovery and grade of concentrate and, in the extreme, can make it difficult to reclean concentrates to meet market specifications. MINERALIZATION IN THE WIPP SITE FROM U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DATA The principal ore zones in the study area are the 10th and 4th; subordinate ore zones in the area include the 8th, 3d, and 2d. The ore zones dip gently to the east-southeast at approximately 100 feet per mile (about 19 meters per kilo- meter). The mineralized zones comprise lenticular bodies lying between anhydrite and/or thick salt beds. Normally, seams of clay and salt occur at the top and bottom of these lenses. In several places, however, potash mineralization occurs above or below the designated ore zone, and experience dictates that these occurrences are localized and not laterally persistent. This situ- ation may exist within the WIPP area; where these spotty occurrences are present, they have not been included in the ore-reserve estimate (figs. 18, 19, and 20). The designated ore zones occur as laterally persistent beds of halite and argillaceous halite that locally contain complex potash minerals in various concentrations. The zones are persist- ent, but commercial grades within the zones oc- cur at irregular intervals. Thus, these persistent beds which are, by usage, called ore zones occur over large areas, including areas where potash mineralization is not present in commercial con- centrations. The occurrence of potash minerals in the ore zones is typically massive, coarsely crystalline, fairly even-grained, and mineralogically com- plex. The mineralized bodies contain halite and one or more potassium minerals as major con- stituents, at least one magnesium mineral, and small amounts of clay, silt, polyhalite, and/or anhydrite. An example of KgO occurrence is il- lustrated in a list of minerals and grade by ore zone for test hole AEC-8 in table 12. Grades and tonnages of potash mineralization supplied by the U.S. Geological Survey were divided into three basic grade categories, which include both measured and indicated amounts. The criteria for the three categories were (1) highest grade, a minimum thickness of 4 feet with a minimum grade of 8 percent K2O as lang- beinite, 14 percent KjO as sylvite, or mixed ore of comparable grade; (2) medium grade, a min- imum thickness of 4 feet (1.2 meters) with a minimum grade of 4 percent KjO as langbeinite, 10 percent K2O as sylvite, or mixed ore of com- parable grade; (3) lowest grade, a minimum thickness of 4 feet (1.2 meters )with a minimum grade of 3 percent KgO as langbeinite, 8 percent TABLE 11. — Chemical assay mass balance of langbeinite leach test on sample AEC 8-4C (Weight-percent) Product Percent of total input tonnage K2O Insol- ubles Magnes- ium SO4 Sodium Chlorine Feed: Coarse - Fine - 74.8 25.2 2.88 6.18 2.47 2.60 1.49 3.21 9.31 20.59 32.62 22.2 50.06 32.37 Total 100.0 3.7 2.5 1.92 12.15 30.0 45.6 Concentrate: Coarse _ Fine 9.98 6.53 19.2 19.9 2.09 2.28 10.2 10.1 66.1 67.1 1.08 .5 1.37 .33 Total concentrate Brine solution 16.51 83.49 19.48 .58 2.17 2.57 10.16 .29 66.50 1.40 .85 35.76 .96 54.43 35 TABLE 12. — Ore zone thickness and grade in test hole AEC-8 (After C. Jones, 1975) Ore Depth (feet) Thickness (feet) KgO distribution by minerals' Syl Lan Lee Kai Car 11th... __ 1.521.8-1,523.1 1.3 1.5 0.5 10th 1,589.7-1,594.7 5.0 13.6 1.1 9th 1,604.3-1,607.7 3.4 3.9 3.4 8th 1.636.6-1,638.1 1.5 11.9 .9 7ch 1,666.5-1.671.0 6th 1,681.9-1,683.3 5th 1,688.7-1,697.0 4th 1,753.4-1.757.4 4.0 il.o 0.6 0.5 3d 1,766.0-1,767.0 1.0 3.4 .6 .5 2d 1,781.*-1,782.6 1,796.0-1,810.5 .7 1st ' Syl = Sylvite; Lan = Langbeinite; Leo = Leonite; Kai = Kainite; Car = Carnallit( KjO as sylvite, or mixed ore of comparable grade. Mineralized areas, as determined by the U.S. Geological Survey and fitting the preceding criteria, are shown in figures 18-20. Exploration drill hole sample analyses, thicknesses, and depths are listed in table 13. 36 TABLE 13. Calc ulat ed mineral content of selec ted samp les trom pot assium-bea ring Intervals wi th summa tlon of perce nt K as ore mlr era 1 Drillhole No.: Drillhole designations; P, E FC, Farm Chemical Res. Dev. Corp; IMC, Int NFU, Farmers Edu . and Coop. Union of Ameri U, U.S. Potash Co. , Inc. irch and Development Administ Minerals and Chemical Corp; il Sulphur and Potash Co. ; Calculated Mi C, carnallit Le, leonite; ler headings: Arc. arcanit glauberite; Ka , kainite; jite, Va, vanthoffite Bl, bloedite; LUhole Ore No. Zone Thicknes (feet) 1440.47-1441.35 1441.35-1442.30 1442.30-1443.50 1627.15-1628.35 1628.35-1629.52 Calculated minerals pr (weight percent) Halite Sylvite Langbeinite 0,88 0', 9,5 1.20 1363.70-1365.00 1.30 1365.00-1366.72 1.72 1366.72-1368.05 1.33 K.O as Weighted average ore K^O as ore mineral (percent) by ore zone (feet and percent) 5 1802 70-1804 00 1 30 6 1804 00-1805 00 1 00 7 1805 00-1805 85 85 8 1805 85-1806 30 45 I 1833 08-1834 00 92 2 1834 00-1834 50 50 3 1596 30-1597 60 1 30 4 1597 60-1598 70 1 10 5 1598 70-1599 53 83 34 2 1572 60-1574 97 2 37 3 1574 97-1576 17 1 20 4 1576 17-1577 77 1 60 5 1577 77-1578 69 92 6 1546 69-1548 65 1 96 7 1548 65-1549 66 1 01 8 1549 66-1551 40 1 74 9 1551 40-1552 75 1 35 12 1476 00-1477 45 1 45 13 1477 45-1478 37 92 14 1478 37-1480 00 1 63 18 1510 50-1511 32 82 19 1511 32-1512 10 78 20 1512 10-1513 05 95 2 1479 73-Ut;i 20 1 47 3 1481 20-1483 00 1 80 4 1483 00-1483 48 hS 76 86 15.0 4.4 Tr/Ka-' 3.4/L 1.0/L 79 14.0/Kj Tr/Bl-' 95 2.34 0.53/L 79 17.07 3.87/L 39 39.9 1.9/Ka 5.0/Le 9.05/L 46 43.1 2,6/Ka 0.5/Le 9.78/L 39 80 38.0 12.9/Ka 8.6/L 89 60 20.0 4.0/Ka 3.7/Le 4.54/L 79 4.4 1.9/Ka 3.14/L 38 --- 52.9 0.5/Ka 12.0/L 72 -_- 24.7 0.5/Ka 5.6/L 62 18 , 6 0.5/Ka 4,22/L 38 23.4 5.31/L 56 46.0 ... ... 29.40/S 64 27.6 17.48/S 86 7.0 4.32/S 64 28.0 --- ... 17.46/S 65 28.0 ... ... 18.28/S 76 60 13.3 21.0 ... --- 8.42/S 13.41/S 65 14.5 ... ... 9.14/S 74 22.0 1.0/Ki 5.01/L 83 2.0 8-0 6.0/Ki 1.90/L 1.26/S 84 12.0 2.78/L 37 2 54.0 6.0/Ki 12.31/L 53 42.0 9.65/L 79 3.0 1.0 8.6/Ka 0.19/L 65 1.0 ",:> ... 6.53/L^ 89 2.0 0.75/L 69 2.0 3.8 5.7/Ka 1.0/Le 1.0/Bl 3.8/L 52 29.0 25.0 18.45/S 5.62/L 46 3.0 45.0 4.0/Ka 2,0/Le 10.3/L I.65/S 86 -_. 14.0 .-- 3.23/L 2.37-9.41/L 3.60-3.67/L 1.42-6.26/L 3.23-5.06/L 6.09-18.41/S 6.06-13.2/S 2.55-6.98/L 3.75-3.41/L 35 35 6 6 74/L 17/S 35 i equivc -9.2/L 37 TABLE 13. - Calculated mineral cont f selected samples iOtassium-bearing intervals with summation of percentK.O as ore mineral Drillhole No.: Drillhole designations; FC, Farm Chemical Res. Dev. Corp; IMC NFU, Farmers Edu. and Coop. 1 U, U.S. Potash Co. , Inc. Energy Research and Development Adminis nternational Minerals and Chemical Corp; f America; D. Duval Sulphur and Potash Co.; Calculated Minerals Present C, carnallite, Gl . glaserit Le, leonite; Lo , loeweite; nd other headings: Arc, arc ; Gu , glauberite ; Ka , kaini , sylvite , Va , vanthoffite Lte; Bl, bio L, langbein Calculated Drillhole Ore Sample No . Zone No . Thickness (feet) Polyhalite Halite Sylvite Langbeinit K as Weighted average ore K as ore mineral Other minerals for intervals preceding minerals (percent) by ore zone (feet and percent) 1522.56-1523.41 1523.41-1524.07 1524.07-1524.70 11 1524. 70-1526. 0« 12 1526.04-1526.74 1703, ,65- ■1705, ,23 1.58 1705 .23- -1705, ,65 0.42 1650 ,38- -1651, ,22 0.84 1651, .22- -1652 ,03 0.81 1562 ,03- -1653 ,83 1.80 1653, .83- -1654 ,58 0.75 1601, ,90- -1603 ,56 1.66 1603, ,56- -1604, ,64 1.08 1604, ,64- -1605 38 0.74 11 4 10 7 1670.70-1671.84 10 8 1671.84-1673.42 10 9 1673.42-1674.70 1868.67-1870.28 1.61 1870.28-1871,10 0.82 1871,10-1872.30 1.20 71 19.0 66 10.0 71 16.7 1688.72-1689.60 0.88 3 76 22.0 1689.60-1690.89 1.29 1 64 36.9 1690.89-1691.95 1.06 1 71 21.3 1691.95-1693.28 1.33 2 92 2.0 1840.60-1842.35 1.75 1 58 ___ 1842.35-1843.40 1.05 4 76 5.0 48.0 0.67/Ka 4.73/S 10.8/L --_ 3.0/Ki 0.96/S 63.37 4.42/S 14.37/L 1.10 0.24/L 31.31 7.1/L 4.18-5.63/L 2.14-3.48/S mixed ore equivalent 4.18-6.34/L 28.70 6.51/L 6.80 3.0/Ka 1.55/L 2.00-5.47/L 1.0/Ka 1.13/S 2.0/Ki 3.83/S 1.0/Ki 4.85/S 3.45-3.70/S 3.60/Ki 3.34/S 1.0/C --- 31.0/Ka 3.0/C 1.48/S 7.0/Ka 2.20/S 2.0/C 3.48-2. 52/S 8.0 1.0/Ki 12.0/S 1.82/L 18.0 1.0/Ki 6.32/S 3.98/L 1.0/Ki 10.53/S 13.74/S 23.30/S 4.00-9.29/S 2.72-3.07/L mixed ore equivalent; 4.00-14.51/5 2.0/C 13.43/S --- 1.0/C 1.24/S 4.56-12.73/S 40.0 5.0/Ki 9.14/L 4.9 1.11/L 2.98/S 2.80-6.0/L 60.0 2.0/Ki 13.65/L 45.0 1.0/Ki 13.53/L 58.3 8.0/Ka ,13.24/L 3.63-13.49/L Tr/Bl&Lo-' Data provided by U.S. Geological Survey. 38 Calculated mineral content of selected samples from potassium-bearing Intervals with summation of percent K.O as ore mineral Drillhole No.: Drillhole designations; P, Energy Research and Development Administrati FC, Farm Chemical Res, Dev. Corp; IMC, International Minerals and Chemical Corp; NFU. Farmers Edu . and Coop. Union of America. D, Duval Sulphur and Potash Co.; U, U.S. Potash Co. . Inc. :alculated Minerals Present and other headings: Arc. arcanite; Bs , bischofite: Bl , blc C. carnallite. Gl , glaserite; Gu , glauberite ; Ka , kainite; Ki , kieserite; L, langbeir Le, leonite; Lo , loeweite; S, sylvite, Va , vanthoffite K^O as Weighted average Drillhole Ore Sample Depths of Thickness ore K.O as ore mineral No. Zone No. interval (feet) Other minerals for intervals preceding (feet) Polyhalite Halite Sylvite Langbeinite minerals (percent) by ore zone (feet and percent) lly 1344.97-1345.27 0.3 4 36 62.3 1345.27-1345.90 0.63 10 24.0- 3 1345.90-1346.95 1.05 1 59 18.0 4 1346.95-1348.90 1.95 3 64 18.0 5 1348.90-1349.91 1.01 7 44 22.0 6 1349.91-1350.80 0.89 3 67 17.0 1392 66 1394 29 1.63 1394 29 1394 90 0.61 1520 00 1521 55 1.55 1521 55 1522 39 0.84 1533 50 1535 05 1.55 1535 05 1535 59 0.54 1.0/Ki 39.38/S 59.0/Ki 15.08/S 18.0/Ki 11.39/S 19.0/Ki 11.36/S 17.0/Ki 14,06/S 1.0/Ki 10.69/S 5.83-13.57/S 9.77/S 4.12/S 6.47/S 22.42/S 4.71-8.24/S 23.0 45.0 9.0/Ki 14.47/S 10.13/L 7.0 6.0 16.0/Ka 1.44/L 49.0 --- 7.0/S 8.59/L 8.0 1.0/Ki 1.80/L 0.62/S 3.51-5.98/L 1535.59-1537.01 1.42 2 47 10.0 21.0 --- 4.72/L 3.51-5.74/S 6.32/S 1549.79-1550.65 0.86 1550.65-1551.29 0.64 1551.29-1551.61 0.32 5.0 2.42/L 0.54/L l.O/I^^ Tr/Le- 15.93/L 21 5.0 30.0 18.0/Ka 19.0/Le 17.0/Bl 12.48/L 1.82-8.05/L 1 46 49.5 --- --- 31.32/S 1 62 17.0 2.0 15.0/Ki 10.92/S 3 97 1 30 20.0 10.0 30.0/Ki 12.6/S 3.85-14.67/S 10.0/Ka 2.27/L 2 82 2.0 9.0 3.0/Ki 2.03/L 1 63 --- 33.2 0.4/Le 7.53/L 3.53-4.06/L 1 64 --- 7.0 7.0/Bl 1.59/L 3 8 1493.23-1493.88 0.65 2 86 --- 7,0 --- 1.59/L 3 9 1493.88-1494.58 0.70 --- 15 --- 53.0 --- 12.06/L 3 86 --- 10.0 --- 2.21/L 2.27-5.07/L 4.00-2.88/L-' 2 67 30.2 --- --- 19.13/S 8 80 9.14 --- --- 4.97/S 2.05-11.74/S 29 1318 02-1319 00 0.98 30 1319 00-1320 22 1. 22 3^^^/ 1320 22-1320 88 0.66 1320 88-1321 87 0.99 2 1480 20-1481 73 1.53 3 1481 73-1482 78 1.05 4 1482 78-1483 73 0.95 8 1493 23-1493 88 0.65 9 1493 88-1494 58 0.70 10 1494 58-1495 50 0.92 21 1359 65-1360 63 0.98 22 1360 63-1361 70 1 07 39 TABLE 13. - Calculated mineral content of selected samples from potassium-bearing intervals with summation jf percent K„0 aE Drillhole No.: Drillhole designations; P. Energy Research and Development Admini FC, Farm Chemical Res. Dev. Corp; IMC. International Minerals and Chemical Corp NFU, Farmers Edu. and Coop. Union of America; D. Duval Sulphur and Potash Co.; U, U.S. Potash Co. , Inc. Cal ated Minerals Present and other headings: Arc, arcari rnallite; Gl, glaserite; Gu, glauberite; Ka , kainite ;onite; Lo, loeweite; S, sylvite, Va . vanthoffite :hofite; Bl . bloedite; Lte; L, langbeinite; Drillhole Ore Depths of interval (feet) Calculated minerals pre (weight percent) Halite Sylvi Weighted average K.O as ore mineral for intervals preceding by ore zone (feet and percent) 9 37 1336.38-1337.32 9 38 1337.32-1338.64 2 1255.24-1255.64 3 1255.64-1257.56 4 1257.56-1259.07 5 1259.07-1260.15 L260. 15-1261, 1440.79-1441. 19 1441.98-1442.84 20 1442.84-1443.98 1443.98-1444.61 1364.44-1366. 1366.11-1367.86 1367.86-1369.26 1.56 0.94 1476 76- 1478 40 1 64 1478 40- 1478.95 0.55 1490 12- 1491.00 , 88 1491 00- 1491.56 0.56 1491 56- 1492.64 1 08 1402 54- 1493.89 1.25 1371.94-1372 81 87 6 76 1372.81-1374 77 1 96 89 1374.77-1375 80 1 03 9 64 1399.66-1400 33 72 3 64 1400.38-1401 51 1 13 78 1301.94-1302 57 63 3 93 1302.57-1303 91 1 34 3 79 1303.91-1304 39 48 --_ 61 --- --- 1,12/S 21.99/S --- — 2.41/S 3.82-6,7/S ... — 36.03/S 36.06/S Tr/Kai/ 8.84/S 18.0 3.99/L 22.0 4.36/S 4,88/L 16.0/Ka 6.21/S 5.81-18.47/S 2.59-4.36/L mixed ore equivalent 5,81-23.33/S 38.5 — 8.74/L 3.99/S 23.0 Tr/Le 5.22/L 2.0/Ka 2.53/S 11.0 ... 2.50/L 3,82-4,69/L 3.19-2,39/S 15.0 1.0/Ka 3.35/L 3.00/S 19.0 Tr/KaY 4,3/L 13.0 Tr/Kai' 3.03/L 4,82-3.60/L 1.67-3.0/S mixed ore equivalent 4.82-4. 02/L 25,0 5.59/L 4.0 .-. 1.00/L 28.0 -- 6.30/L 3,86-3,45/L 32,0 4.0/Ka 7.18/L 17.0 3.0/Ka 3,0/Le 4.28/L 1,85-5,41/L 4.0 0.47/S 0.89/L 21.0 4.77/L 34.0 8.1/Ka 8.0/Le Tr/Kii' 7.77/L 2.45-4.63/L 53.0 Tr/Ka&Le-' 12 01/L 1.26/S 8.7 1.98/L S:;i' 4.94/L 4.40/L 4.12/S 12.0 2.75/L 31.0 6.0/Le 7.05/L 2.0/Ka 2.09/S 5.96-6.61/S Data provided by U.S. Geological Survey. 40 TABLE 13. - Calculated mineral content of selected samples from potassium-bearing intervals with summation )f percent K as ore mineral Drillhole No.: Drillhole designations; P, Energy Research and Development Adminis FC, Farm Chemical Res. Dev. Corp; IMC, International Minerals and Chemical Corp; NFU, Farmers Edu. and Coop. Union of America; D, Duval Sulphur and Potash Co.; U, U.S. Potash Co. , Inc. Ca ed Minerals Presen C, carnallite; Gl , glaser Le , leonite; Lo . loeweite and other headings: Arc, arcanite, Bs , bischofite; Bl , bloe 5; Gu. glauberite; Ka , kainlte; Ki , kieserite; L, langbeini 3. sylvite. Va , vanthoffite .Ihole Ore Sample Depths of ). Zone No. interval Thicknes (feet) Weighted average K.O as ore mineral Dr intervals preceding by ore zone (feet and percent) 2 19 1526 90-1528.00 1.10 2 1365 60-1367.20 1.6 3 1367 20-1368.45 1.25 '' 1368 45-1369.70 1.25 4 8 1542 90-1543.68 0.78 4 9 1543 68-1544.46 0.78 2 18 1591 39-1592.71 1.32 2 19 1592 71-1594.21 1.50 2.0/Ka 9.05/L 1728.40-1728.78 1728.78-1730.45 1730.45-1731.49 1731.49-1732.29 68.8 15 61/L 12.6 2.0/Ka 2 87/L _-_ 6.64 30.0/Le 9.0/Ka ' 51/L ... 38.0 13.0/Le Tr/Kai' 8 62/L ... 53.0 3.0/Le 12 03/L 46.0 1.0/Ka 10 46/L 2.4 2.0/Ka 53/L 3.0 35.0 22 7 83/S 94/L 9.0 5 61/S 0.72 45/S 0.81 --- _._ 51/S 4.10-7.43/L . 56-10. 33/L 3.89-4.86/S 0.38-7. 94/L 3.89-6.8/S 7 1741.80-1742.35 0.55 8 1742.35-1743.72 1.37 9 1743.72-1745.09 1.37 10 1745.09-1746.00 0.91 21 1925.20-1925.90 0.70 22 1925.90-1926.70 0.80 23 1926.70-1927.94 1.24 1956.40-1957.36 0.96 1957.36-1958.71 1.35 1958.71-1959.21 0.50 0.5 1725.00-1726.15 1.15 1726.15-1728.10 1.95 1728.10-1729.62 1.52 1729.62-1731.48 1.86 398.80-1900.45 1.65 900.45-1901.77 1.32 901.77-1903.35 1.58 36.0 ... 4.23/S 8.24/L 59.0 ... 1.20/S 13.39/L 15.0 ... 0.62/S 3.40/L 30.0 8.4/Le 2.0/Ka 9.21/L 11.0 12.0/Ki 2.50/L 57-P 2.0/Ka 9.0/Ki 12.93/L 3.6 5.0/l^a Tr/Le-' 0.82/L 16.0 15.0/Ki 3.74/L 65.0 Tr/Kai' 14.83/L 25.0 Tr/Ka-' 5.72/L 2.74-4.79/L 2.81-9.42/L 4.42/S 8.01/L 17.69/S 1.95-8.01/L 21.48/S 6.51-14.03/S mixed ore equi 6.51-20.03/S 8.35/L 0.30/L 4.0/L 4.55-4.5/L 41 Calculated mineral content of selected samples from potassium-bearing intervals with summation of percent K as ore mineral Drillhole No.: Drillhole designations; P. Energy Research and Development Admini FC. Farm Chemical Res. Dev . Corp; IMC, International Minerals and Chemical Corp NFU, Farmers Edu. and Coop. Union of America; D, Duval Sulphur and Potash Co.; U, U.S. Potash Co. , Inc. Calculated Minerals Present C, carnallite; Gl, glaseri Le , leonite; Lo , loeweite; id other headings: Arc, ; Gu, glauberite; Ka , ka , sylvite, Va , vanthoffi schofi Ki, kieseri , anhydrite ; Bl, bloedit langbeinite; Depths of Thickness interval (feet) (feet) Halite Sylvite Langbeinit K.O as Weighted average ore K as ore mineral Other minerals for intervals preceding minerals (percent) by ore zone (feet and percent) 2 14-' 1925 08-1926 30 1.22 2 15 1926 30-1927 75 1.45 10 2 1644 03-1644 84 0.81 10 3 1644 84-1646 00 1.16 10 4 1646 00-1646 33 0.33 10 5 1646 33-1647 20 0.87 10 6 1647 20-1648 22 1.02 10 7 1648 22-1649 23 1.01 8 15 1685 17-1686 48 1.31 8 16 1686 48-1687 20 0.72 8 17 1687 20-1688 24 1.04 8 18 1688 24-1688 77 0.53 8 19 1688 77-1690 19 1.42 8 20 1690 19-1691 26 1.07 8 21 1691 26-1692 40 1.14 8 22 1692 40-1693 34 0.94 4 24 1809 90-1811 50 1.60 4 25 1811 50-1811 82 0.32 4 30 1815 51-1816 10 0.59 4 31 1816 10-1817 25 1.15 1589.10-1589.70 1589.70-1591.70 1591.70-1592 20 1592.20-1594.50 1594.50-1594.70 1594.70-1595.50 1752.70-1753.40 1753.40-1754.00 1754.00-1755.00 1755.00-1756.70 2.00 0.50 95 0.88 ... 2/L 61 35.5 ... 8 05/L 2 67-4. 46/L 80 17 10 82/S 81 11 26/ $ 2.0/Ki 7 46/S 28 20 42.0/Ki 12 76/S 41 25 18.0/Ki 16 14/S 62 29 1.0/Ki 18 66/S 64 31 3 -- — 19 81/S 5 20-14. 37/S 55 45 > ... ... 28 4/S 83 6 3 72/S 92 3 1 95/S 95 8 52/S 86 9 9 6 24/S 90 1 75/S 65 33 21 16/S 65 13 ... ... 8 18/S 8 17-10. 24/S 1.0 3 0^ 64.0 2.5/Ka 3.9/Le 14 60/L 1 92-14. 69/L 00-7.05/L-' 18 5 54.66 9.0/Ka 15 12/L 4 10.60/Le 51 5 27.0 9.0/Ki 6 08/L 42 5 44.0 8.0/Ka 9 95/L 1 74-8. 64/L 85 5 5/Ki 2/An 2 97/S 43 16 40/Ki 10 32/S ' 37 24 6/C 30/Ki 1/An 15 16/S 49 32 -r- 7/C 9/Ka 0.8/ An 20 31/S 38 4 51/C 9/Ka 1/Ki 2 34/S 0.1/An 85 3 4/C 2/Ki 9/Ka 0.9/An 18/S 6 4-12. 33/S 95 .. 4 ... 86/L 69 2 33 3/Ka 7 39/L 33 2 68 2/Ka 13 90/L 24 -- 69 3/Le 15 38/L 4 11.27/L 42 Calculated mineral ;lected samples potassium-bearing intervals with summation of percent K as ore mineral Drillhole No.: Drillhole designations; P. Energy Research and Development Administration; FC, Farm Chemical Res. Dev. Corp; IMC, International Minerals and Chemical Corp; NFU . Farmers Edu. and Coop. Union of America; D, Duval Sulphur and Potash Co.; U, U.S. Potash Co. , Inc. Calculated Minerals Present and other headings: Arc, arcanit C, carnallice; Gl , glaserite; Gu, glauberite; Ka , kainite; Le, leonlte; Lo , loeweite; S, sylvite, Va , vanthoffite Bs, bischofite , kieserite; L, Bl, bloedi Langbeinite Drillhole Ore Sample Depths of No. Zone No. interval (feet) Polyhalite Hal 1377.67-1379.00 1.33 1379.00-1381.00 2.00 1381.00-1382.00 1.00 r,." Weighted average K as ore mineral for intervals preceding Other minerals minerals (percent by ore zone (feet and percent) 20.0/Ki 7.11/S 1.0/Ki 24.72/S 3.0/C 12.29/S 4.33-16.4A/S 3.0/Ki 1391.50-1393.00 1415.08-1415.75 1415.75-1416.50 1416.50-1418.00 1418.00-1419.50 1419.50-1420.42 1420.42-1421.50 1466.00-1467.58 0.67 0.75 1.50 1467 58 1469.00 1.42 1469 00 1469.67 0.67 15?9 92 1531.42 1.50 1531 42 1532 42 1.00 1564 17 1564.92-' 0.75 1564 92 1566.13 1.21 1566 13 1567.38 1.25 70 25 89 2 97 1 ... Tr/Ki^ Tr/Kii' 16 10/S 1 35/S ... 1.0/lfa Tr/Kii' 5//S 1.0/I^a ' 62/S 10 04/S ... 1.0/Ka 10 21/S 19.6 4 43/L 40.7 9 22/L 24.2 ... 5 49/L 52.6, , 33. 0^' ... 11 93/L 7 42/L ... 2.0/C 23 16/S ... 4.0/C 9 71/S 6.1 10.0/C 5 62/S 38/L 3.67-6.48/L 2.5-10.13/L 3.21-11.26/S 3.21-0.54/L Lxed ore equivale 3.21-12.61/S 1687 00- 1688 21 1.21 1688 21- 1689 46 1.25 1712 88 1714 46 1.58 1714 46 1715 46 1.00 1715 63 1716 00 0.38 1541 42 1541 79 0.38 1541 79 1542 29 0.42 1542 29 1543 96 1.67 1543.96-1544.50 1613.42-1615.08 1615.08-1615.92 74.0 4.0/lfa Tr/Vag Tr/Va^' 16 71 67.0 15 31/L 56.0 2.2/Le 12 7/L 30.3 3.0/I^a 6 9/L 42.8 Tr/Le^/ 9 71/L 72.2 2.0/Le 6.0/C 16 34/L 7.2 I 63/L 49.8 4.0/Lo 20.9/C Tr/Lei' 11 3/L 20.0 '* 54/L 63.0 9.3/l^i Tr/Loi' 14 3/L 12.8 17.7/Le 12 0/Ki 2 9/L 2.46-16.0/L 3.96-10.4/L 2.5-10.52/L 43 314-720 TABLE 13. - Calculated mineral content of selected samples from potassium-bearing Intervals with summation of percent K.O as ore mineral drillhole No.: Drillhole des FC, Farm Chemical Res. Dev. NFU, Farmers Edu. and Coop, U, U.S. Potash Co. , Inc. Lgnations; P. Energy Research and Development Admin Corp-. IMC, International Minerals and Chemical Cor Union of America; D, Duval Sulphur and Potash Co.; alated Minerals Present and other headings: Arc, arcanit :arnallite; Gl . glaserite; Gu , glauberite; Ka. kainite; leonite; Lo , loeweite; S, sylvite; Va . vanthoffite bloedite; beinite; Drillhole Ore Sample No . Zone No . Calculated minerals present (weight percent) K^O as ore ^2" Other minerals for intervals preceding Polyhalite Halite Sylvite Langbeinite minerals (percent) by ore zone (feet and percent) Weighted average K.O as ore mineral 1624.33-1625.58 1625.58-1627.00 1.42 1627.00-1627.75 0.75 L712. 25-1712. 66 L712. 66-1713. 18 1715.75-1715.75 1.00 19 1715 .75-1716.33 0.58 tO 1718.66-1719.42 0.75 a 1719.42-1720.75 1.33 i2 1720.75-1722.00 1.25 43 1722.00-1722.58 0.58 44 1742.75-1743.25 0.50 45 1743.25-1744.25 1.00 46 1744.25-1745.00 0.75 1604.92-1606.04 1.12 1606.04-1606.50 0.46 1606.50-1606.75 0.25 57 1740.66-1741.58 0.92 58 1741.58-1742.25 0.66 59 1742.25-1743.25 1.00 60 1743.25-1744.08 0.83 61 1744.08-1745.00 0.92 62 1769.42-1770.08 0.66 63 1770.08-1771.42 1.33 J 65 1772,08-1772.58 5 n.it.i orovic'ed b\- r.S. leolooical Survey. 31.1 3.5/Bl 3.7/Ka 7.06/L 29.9 0.6/{ Tr/Bli' 6.78/L 62.2 14.H/L 5.0/Gl 3.42- -8.49/L 50.0 11.0/Ka 7.5/Le 6.0/Ki 11.35/L 5.0/Ka 3.4/Ki ... 64.6 5.0/Ki 14.66/L 58.7 5.0/Ka 1.3/Ki 13.32 47.0 5.0/l^a Tr/Gui' 10.66 4. 08- ■11.3/L 54.0 6.2/Ka 4.0/Gl 1.2/Ki 12.25/L 8.0 3.0/Ka 9.0/Bs 1.82/L 59.5 13.5/L 37.08 Tr/Gu 3.4/Bs 8.41/L 13.5 0.4/Ka 6.0/Bs Tr/Gu-' 3.06/L 3.91- -8.08/L 62.0 8.8/|^ Tr/Va-' 14.07/L 30.5 10.0/Ki 10.0/Va 6.92/L 1.0 3.2/Ka 10.1/Ki 24.0/ya Tr/Gui' 0.73/L 2.25- •6.44/L Si; Tr/Ci; 29.0/S Tr/ci' 31.0/S 1 5.7/C 18.5/S 1.83- -28/S 46.7 10.6/L 61.0 13.85/L 61,2 0.1/Ki 13.89/L 61.3 13.91/L 48.8 1.8/Ki 11.07/L 4.33- ■12.6/L 55.4 3.0/Va 12.57/L 45.7 2.0/Va 1.0/Arc 10.37/L 33.0 17.0/Va 8.0/Ki 1.0/Gu 7.49/L 1,5 14.0/Va 0.34/L 3.15- ■8.64/L 1,0/Gu 44 TABLE 13. - Calculated mineral conte of selected samples from potassium-bearing intervals with summation of percent K„0 as ore mineral Drillhole No.: Drillhole designations; P, Energy Research and Development Adminis FC. Farm Chemical Res. Dev. Corp; IMC, International Minerals and Chemical Corp; NFU, Farmers Edu. and Coop, Union of America; D, Duval Sulphur and Potash Co.; U, U.S. Potash Co. , Inc. Calc Pre headings : Arc , auberite; Ka . ke 3, Va, vanthoffi :hofite; Bl , bloedi Lte; L, langbeinite d minerals present ight percent) Halite Sylvite Langbe ther nerals ^re minerals (percent) K as ore mineral for intervals preceding by ore zone (feet and percent) 1 7/Ki 3/Ka 35/Le 0.46/L 0.44/S 1.46/L 0.63/S 2.4-0.88/L 2.4-0. 51/S 2 2 1 0/Ka 0/Le 0/Ka 1.50/L 3.0/L 1.3/S 2.5-2.46/L 1.5-1.3/S 24.3/S 0.1/S 0.26/S 7.1/S 4.0-7,52/S 1 0/Le 0.63/L 11.65/L 0.25/L 3.7-6.5/L (4.0-6.03/L)-' — 19.67/S 3.92-19.67/S ... 11.96/L 2.33-11.96/L 9.1/S 4.0-9.1/S 13.1/L 4.2-13.1/L ... 0.8/S 4.08-0.8/S ;;; 31.63/S 10.4/S 7.34/S 4,2-15.3/S 13.8/S 2.2-10.7/S ... 0.5/S 2.2-7.5/L mixed ore equivalent: 2.2-29.45/S 4.0-11/S 4.0-2.1/L (visual estimate) 9.26-17.37/S 2.0-8.8/L 1430.70-1432.10 1 40 6 1432.10-1433.10 1 00 13 1627.90-1629.00 1629.00-1630.50 1 1 10 50 2 4 1427.00-1427.70 1427.70-1428.30 1428.30-1429.20 1429.20-1431.00 1 7 6 9 1 2 1528.00-1528.90 1528.90-1530.90 1530.90-1531.70 1536.25-1540.17 1646.75-1649.08 1479.80-1483.80 1598.50-1602.70 1441.08-1445.17 1248.30-1249.30 1249.80-1251.10 1251.10-1252.50 1419.60-1421.30 1421.30-1421.80 10 10/ 1236.60-1240. 10/ 1280.52-1289.78 10/ 1414.20-1416.20 3.92 2.33 4.00 4.20 4.08 1.50 1-30 1.40 1.70 0.50 9.26 2.00 provided by U.S. Geological Su 45 TABLE 13. - Calculated mineral content of selected samples from potassium-bearing Intervals with summation of percent K as ore mineral rillhole No. : Drillhole des FC, Farm Chemical Res. Dev. NFU, Farmers Edu . and Coop. U, U.S. Potash Co. , Inc. .gnati Corp; Unior )ns , P, Energy Research and Development Adminis IMC, International Minerals and Chemical Corp; of America; D, Duval Sulphur and Potash Co.; Calculated Minerals Present and other headings: Arc, ai C, carnallite; Gl, glaserite; Gu , glauberite; Ka , kair Le , leonite; Lo , loeweite; S, sylvite; Va , vanthoffite Bl, bloedit langbeinite; Calculated minerals prese Drillho Le Ore Sample Depths of Thlckne No. Zone No. interval (feet) (feet) K as Weighted ore K^O as or Other minerals for inter minerals (percent) by or (feet s preceding percent) .33 1533.10-1533.50 0.40 34 1533.50-1533.80 0.30 35 1533.80-1534.40 0.60 36 1534.40-1534.70 0.30 37 1534.70-1535.00 0.30 38 1535.00-1539.80 4.80 1.51/1, 2.43/L 0.50/L 0.85/L 0.14/L 0.85/L -0.90/L -22.74/S ore equivalent : 10 10 24 25 1358.60-1359.60 1359.60-1360.20 0. 10 10 > 1360.20-1360.60 1360.60-1361.20 0. 0, 10 10 28 29 1361.20-1361.80 1361.80-1362.30 0. 0. 10 .30 1362.30-1363.10 0. 47 1545.90-1546.30 1546.30-1546.66 1546.66-1548.00 1548.00-1548.60 52 1552.20-1553.00 53 1553,00-1553.20 54 1553.20-1553.60 55 1553.60-1554.00 56 1554.00-1554.80 1.40 0.60 32.0 73.2 2/Ka 3.34/S 2/Ka 3.34/S 0.25/L 6/Ka 0.31/L 5/Ka 3.79/S 3.70/L 2/Ka 2.04/L 7/Ka 3.34/S 2.31/L 1/C 2.66/S 4.5-2.54/S 3/Ka 2.7-1.8/L mixed ore eq. 4.5-5. 24/S 0.74/Le 7.2/L 9.0/Ki 16.6/L 3.8/Le 6.89/L --- 12.4/L 2.7-9.24/L 1.05/L 2.0/Le 9.41/L 3.59/L 1.32/Le 11.19/L 2.0/L 0.9/S 2.6-3.94/L, 1340.40-1341.70 1341.70-1343.20 1343.20-1344.00 1344.00-1344.70 1344.70-1346.40 1.30 1.50 0.80 0.70 1.70 6.0-5.5/S 3.2-4.71/L 6.0-11.78/S 1391.10-1392.00 1392.00-1395.30 1395.30-1396.30 1519.99-1522.88 5.2-10.8/S 2.9-9.4/L 46 Calculated mineral content of selected samples from potassium-bearing Intervals with summation of percent K.O as ore mineral Drillhole No.: Drillhole designations; P, Energy Research and Development Adminis FC, Farm Chemical Res. Dev . Corp; IMC, International Minerals and Chemical Corp; NFU, Farmers Edu, and Coop. Union of America; D. Duval Sulphur and Potash Co.; U, U.S. Potash Co, , Inc. Calculated Minerals Present and other headin C. carnallite; Gl , glaserite; Gu, glauberit Le, leonite; Lo , loeweite; S, sylvite; Va , chofite; Bl, bloedite; Ite; L, langbeinite; Drillhole Ore Sample Depths of No. Zone No. interval (feet) ;d minerals present 5ight percent) Polyhalite Halite Sylvite Langbeinit K.O as Weighted average ore K as ore mineral Other minerals for intervals preceding ninerals (percent) by ore zone (feet and percent) -104 3- 3 1527.50-1528.90 1.40 1528.90-1530.50 1.60 1539.50-1540.20 1.20 1319.58-1321.25 1.69 1321.25-1322.83 1.58 1361.10-1362.18 1.08 1362.17-1364.50 2.33 1364.50-1366.50 2.00 1366.50-1367.42 0.92 5 5 5 1406.75-1409.42 1409.42-1410.00 1410.00-1411.66 2.66 0.58 1.66 4 1471.66-1474.00 2.33 3 3 3 1484.91-1487.33 1487.33-1490.30 1490.25-1491.33 2.42 2.92 2.0/Ka 0.7/C 3.79/S 12.5/Ka 17.22/S 14.44/L 8.03/L 7.05/L 2.9-11.4/S mixed ore equivalent: 2.9-6.66/L 3.27-10.28/S 3.6/L 1.86/L 8.7/L 3.41-11.6/S^ (4.0-10.0/S)- 4.9-11.2/L 2.33-8. 54/L Data provided by U.S. Geological Survey. 1/ Trace amount; equals to 2.0% II Incomplete dissolution of sample 3/ 5.97. Insolubles, by weight 4/ Incomplete or unreliable assay 5/ Grade adjusted to 4 foot interva 6/ High insoluble content 7/ 7.1% Potassium Assa 8/ Outside of the ERDA 9/ Raw data unavailabl 0/ Company interval da feet , included du company figures 47 R30E R^^ DATA PROVIDED BY USGS CONSERVATION QIMC-448 DIVISION ANDERDA LEGEND © Potash drill holes a ERDA potash drill holes p^ Measured and indicated mineralization I I Federal surface and mineral rights l,',l'i State surface and mineral rights F.'^J Private surface and mineral rights F^ Privote surface, all mineral rights owned ■^•^ by Federal Government c^ Private surface and mineral rights, except ^^■^ oil and gas federally owned ^— Proposed WIPP site outline Zone boundaries and areas provided by ERDA Measured and indicated mineralization are at a cut off of 8 % K2O as langbeinite or 14.0% KgO as sylvite or equivalent grade of mixed langbeinite-sylvite occurring in a minimum 4 foot interval Zone I - 58 acres n -1,889 acres in - 6,201 acres m - 10,812 acres FIGURE 18. — Composite map of mineralization in various ore zones at 8 and 14 percent KgO as langbeinite and sylvite, respectively. 48 R^^ DATA PROVIDED BY USGS CONSERVATION &IMC-448 DIVISION AND ERDA LEGEND @ Potash drill holes la ERDA potash drill holes Kyi Measured and indicated mineralization I I Federal surface and mineral rights t,,','i State surfoce and minerol rights r,"!^ Private surface and mineral rights P^ Private surface, all mineral rights owned ^^^ by Federal Government FT^ Private surfoce and mineral rights, except ^ oil and gas federal ly owned ^—Proposed WIPP site outline Zone boundaries and areas provided by ERDA Measured and indicated mineralization are at o cut off of 4 % K2O OS langbeinite or 10.0% KgO as sylvite or equivalent grade of mixed langbeinite-sylvite occurring in a minimum 4 foot interval Zone I - 58 acres n -1,889 acres m - 6,201 acres nr - 10,812 acres FIGURE 19. — Composite map of mineralization in various ore zones at 4 and 10 percent K2O as langbeinite and sylvite, respectively. 49 R30E m^ DATA PROVIDED BY USGS CONSERVATION OIMC-44B DIVISION AND ERDA LEGEND © Potosh drill holes B ERDA potash drill holes p^ Measured and indicated mineralization I I Federal surface and mineral rights m State surface and mineral rights r,.,l Private surface and mineral rights p-i Private surface, oil mineral rights owned ^^^ by Federal Government p?^ Private surface and mineral rights, except ^''^ oil and gas federally owned ^— Proposed WIPP site outline Zone boundaries and oreos provided by ERDA Measured and indicated mineralization are at a cut off of 3% KgO OS langbeinite or 8.0% K2O as sylvite or equivalent grade of mixed langbeinite-sylvite occurring in a minimum 4 foot interval Zone I - 58 acres n -1,889 acres nr - 6,201 acres nr - 10,812 acres FIGURE 20. — Composite map of mineralization in various ore zones at 3 and 8 percent KgO as langbeinite and sylvite, respectively. 50 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS METHODS USED Present value analyses were used to determine the worth of the potash mineralization in the WIPP site. These are the values that would be chargeable to the WIPP facility if it were built and the potash products were not recovered. All reserves (presently commercial) and presently subeconomic resources of potassium mineral deposits were examined. Incomes, costs, and in- vestments are assumed to occur as discrete amounts over the life of the project. For eco- nomic evaluation purposes and to compare equivalent values that have been adjusted for the time value of money, these amounts are con- verted (discounted at an appropriate discount rate) to equivalent values (1977 dollars) at one point in time (project initiation date). Present value of a mineral deposit is defined for these analyses as the present worth of the cash flows from a hypothetical potash operation minus the present worth of the investments (23). The po- tash values are taxes, royalties, and bonus bid amounts that would be generated from potash product sales and paid to the several levels of government. Such taxes, royalties, and bonus bid amounts (or their equivalent value) will not accrue to the governments if the potash deposits are not developed. All other values of produc- tion and investments originate when projects are initiated, or when capital is invested, and there- fore are not a loss if the unmined, commercial potash is not developed. Cash Flow Estimates The cash flows are the gross revenues minus all direct, indirect, overhead, and front office production costs. These do not include book- keeping charges for depreciation, depletion, amortization and extraordinary charges to cap- ital reserves that are not actually paid out. Cash flows of the project are the gross reve- nues minus (1) mine operating costs; (2) mill operating costs; (3) all overhead costs, including front office charges; (4) all Federal and State royalties; and (5) all Federal and State taxes. Cash flows are the project's total self-gener- ated cash after costs and are the amounts that provide for the return of the original investment plus the interest on that investment. The cash flows are a production-cost element, in dollar amounts generated by the project, that return the investment plus sufficient interest on the investment to induce investors to provide the capital for the project. Investment Estimates The total investments include (1) exploration and engineering study; (2) acquisition costs (in- cluding any lease bonus payment); (3) mine preparation; (4) mine plant investment; (5) mine equipment; (6) mine reinvestments in capital items during project life; (7) mill plant invest- ment; (8) mill capital reinvestments during proj- ect life; (9) all working capital; and (10) startup and break-in costs. The cash flows and investments are dis- counted by continuous discounting (versus dis- crete discounting) at an interest rate ( 1 5 percent) suitable to investors in the potash industry. A lower interest rate (return on investment) is as- sumed to be unacceptable and would divert the capital to more attractive investment opportun- ities. The values in the commercial potash deposits that would be foregone in favor of the instal- lation of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant include the amounts of bonus bids that could be paid by potash investors to the Federal and State gov- ernments for potash leases. In addition to these amounts are the present values of Federal and State royalty payments and taxes that would have been generated in the production of the potash products. To estimate the present value of the taxes and royalty payments, these amounts were discounted at 8 percent interest from the year in which they would have occurred to 1977 dollars. The total values that would be foregone are (1) bonus bid amounts, (2) present value of tax amounts, and (3) present value of royalties. In the event the WIPP installation was built, and if the government-owned potash in the site were under lease, these values would be fore- gone to the government entities. In addition, the lessee would lose any amounts, including interest, that have been paid out for acquisition 51 of the property, for exploration, for develop- ment engineering studies, for legal fees, etc. If presently commercial potash deposits are leased, the lessee will also lose a potash investment op- portunity in addition to the aforementioned out- of-pocket amounts spent. Determination of Commercial and Subeconomic Mineralization When the sum of cash flov/s, discounted at 15 percent interest, equals or exceeds the sum of the investment discounted at 15 percent interest, both to 1977 dollars, the project is considered to be commercial; and the potash deposit is class- ified as a reserve or ore. When the sum of the discounted cash flows is less than the sum of the discounted investments, the project is not com- mercial, and the potash deposit is considered to be economically submarginal and is classified as a resource. These potash resources may become ore at some future time when potash becomes more valuable relative to costs of production. When the cash flows will return the original investment in a mine-mill complex and more than the acceptable 15-percent interest rate, the potash deposits being examined have a present value or worth in excess of all other investments. In this case, the owners of the potash (in the WIPP site, the Federal and State governments) could require payment of the present value or worth in the form of a bonus bid amount for a lease to produce the potash (designated an ac- quisition cost in this report). To examine the potash resources (presently subeconomic deposits), the market prices of the products were increased, without increasing the costs of production, until the deposits became commercial. This analysis provides a guide to the potential value of the potash resources within the WIPP site. An estimate of the time at which these increased potash values might occur is so speculative it is not made in these analyses. An analysis of the impact of the loss of the potash reserves and resources, such as the effect on the gross national product and balance of payments, was not made because it was beyond the scope of this study. Taxes and Royalties Taxes are a major cost item, and a discussion of applicable New Mexico State taxes is in- cluded. New Mexico potash operations are sub- ject to the following taxes: Federal corporation income tax; New Mexico corporation income tax; resource, processors, and service tax; sev- erence tax; property tax; and in lesser amounts — franchise tax, corporate organization and qual- ification fees; motor vehicle registration fees; motor carrier fees; and other indirect taxes. The State Corporation Commission adminis- ters and collects the corporation annual report filing fees, the corporation and qualification fees, the franchise tax, miscellaneous motor car- rier fees, and the pipeline companies tax. The Bureau of Revenue administers the resource excise tax, the severance tax, and the gross re- ceipts tax; the Property Tax Department ad- ministers and collects the mining property tax. Federal Corporation Income Tax Federal income tax for corporations is based on gross income minus certain deductions. These deductions in general are costs of oper- ations and include compensation of officers, sa- laries and wages, repairs, bad debts, rents, taxes, interest, contributions, amortization, deprecia- tion, depletion, advertising, pension, profit- sharing, and employee benefit programs. Fed- eral income tax rates for corporations are 20 percent on the first $25,000 of taxable income, 22 percent on the next $25,000, and 48 percent on all taxable income over $50,000. New Mexico Corporation Income Tax The New Mexico income tax is based on the Federal corporation income tax. The State in- come tax is 5 percent of the net taxable income within the State of New Mexico. If the corporation operates exclusively in New Mexico, interest on U.S. obligations, to the ex- tent that they are included in Federal taxable income, and interest on amounts taxed as in- come to another member of an affiliated group of corporations are listed as nontaxable income and are deductible. If the corporation operates both within and outside the State, the taxable income for the State of New Mexico is estimated by dividing the nonbusiness and business income between New Mexico and elsewhere. Nonbusiness income includes dividends, in- terest, rents, royalties, profit or loss on the sale of nonbusiness assets, and partnership income. The nonbusiness income is allocated to New Mexico in three ways: (1) to the extent that it is generated in the State; (2) if the nonbusiness income was earned from the sale of property, if the property is located in New Mexico at the time of sale; and (3) if New Mexico is considered the commercial domicile of the corporation. The division of all business income is appor- 52 tioned to New Mexico by a three-factor formula: (1) the property factor is the average value of real and tangible personal property owned or rented and used in New Mexico divided by the total real and tangible property owned, rented, or used by the corporation. The average value of the property owned is determined by aver- aging property values at the beginning and the end of the year; the value of property rented is eight times the net annual rental rate; (2) the payroll factor is the amount paid as compensa- tion by a corporation to its employees in New Mexico divided by the total compensation paid by the corporation in the tax period. Compen- sation means wages, salaries, commissions, and other forms of remuneration for personal serv- ices except wages paid to independent contrac- tors; and (3) the sales factor is determined by dividing all gross receipts of the corporation from transactions and activity in the regular course of business in New Mexico during the tax period by the total sales of the corporation in the same period. Sales in this context exclude nonbusiness income. The three factors are then averaged to determine the percentage of the corporation's business income that is applicable to New Mexico taxes. Finally, that portion of the nonbusiness in- come allocated to New Mexico is added to the apportioned business income to determine the net taxable income for a corporation operating in the State. Resources, Processors, and Service Tax Resources, processors, and service tax are mutually exclusive, that is, only one of the taxes is imposed on the potash produced. The resource tax applies to unprocessed products sold. The amount taxable is deter- mined by subtracting from the gross value of the products sold (1) gross sales to any govern- ment entity, (2) government royalty payments, and (3) any service charge on which a service tax is payable. This taxable value is then mul- tiplied by one-half of 1 percent to arrive at the resource tax payment. The processors tax is based on all processed products sold. The taxable value is determined by subtracting from the gross value of the proc- essed products sold, the same deductions ap- plicable to the resource tax. This value is then multiplied by one-eighth of 1 percent to arrive at the processors tax payment. The service tax is imposed on a corporation that either mines or processes New Mexico po- tash owned by another company or not other- wise taxed with a resource or processors tax. The rate applied is the same as the rate used to calculate the resource or processors tax. Severance Tax The New Mexico severance tax is an excise tax based on an adjusted gross value of potash at the first marketable point. The adjusted gross value is 33-'/* percent of the proceeds realized from the sale of muriate of potash and sulfate of potash magnesia, in terms of standard grades, and 33- '/a percent of products consumed in production of other pot- ash products. The taxable value is equal to the adjusted value minus all royalties and up to 50 percent of expenses incurred. In the case of mine-run salt that has a posted market price at the point of production, the tax- able value is 40 percent of gross value minus all royalties and expenses incurred in hoisting, crushing, and loading. The tax rate is 2- 'A percent of the taxable value. Property Tax Property tax is imposed on all property used in connection with the production of potash. The tax is based on the property value of im- provements and production. The property value of improvements, for tax purposes, is deter- mined to be equal to the gross value of the prod- ucts sold minus any royalties paid. The property value of the orebody, for tax purposes, is de- termined to be one-half the gross value of the products sold minus any royalties paid. The sum of the property value of improvements and pro- duction is then multiplied by a 33-'/3 percent assessment ratio to determine the taxable value. The taxable value is multiplied by the mill levy of the district in which the property is located to determine the property tax due the county. The mill levy assessment for the Carlsbad School District, Eddy County, was 19.8 mills in 1976. Rents and Royalties on Federal Leases Royalties on Federal land leases are negoti- ated on an individual case basis prior to issuance of the lease. Royalty rates range from 2 to 7- '/2 percent of the gross value of production. Current lease agreements require a payment of royalty on a minimum annual production be- ginning the sixth full calendar lease year. Rental for potassium leases is 25 cents per acre (62 cents per hectare) for the first calendar year; 50 cents for the second, third, fourth, and fifth 53 year; 1 dollar for the sixth and succeeding years. The rent is credited against the first royalties paid during the year for which rent was paid. In any one State, a lease may not exceed 2,560 acres (1,036 hectares). Also, holdings in leases may not exceed 25,600 acres (10,360 hectares) in one or more mining units. If conditions warrant, the Secretary of the In- terior can reduce the rental or minimum royalty. Rents and Royalties on State Leases Royalties on State lands are payable on a ne- gotiated basis but not less than 5 percent of the sale value of the minerals produced then deliv- ered to the nearest shipping point. Rental charge is negotiated but not less than 10 cents per acre (25 cents per hectare), with a minimum first year rental of $100. ESTIMATION OF CURRENT MINE AND MILL CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS In the financial evaluation of mineralized langbeinite and sylvite zones found within the WIPP site boundaries, the costs for three types of currently operating potash mining properties were estimated. The capital and operating costs estimated were then extrapolated to estimate costs of mines and processing plants of a size and design best suited to recover the deposits determined to be in the WIPP site. Personnel of the System Operations Group (SOG) and the Domestic Evaluation Group of the Minerals Availability System (MAS) toured seven bene- ficiation plants and underground potash oper- ations in the Carlsbad area to evaluate potash mine and mill operations. From the information gathered, operating and capital replacement costs of current potash mining and milling properties were estimated for operations applicable to WIPP site ores. Con- sideration was given to the economics of (1) us- ing existing mill complexes with a new mine operation and (2) building a new mine-mill com- plex. Operations for WIPP Study Cost estimates were developed for a 13,000- ton-per-day (11,794-metric-ton-per-day) oper- ation, a 7,000-ton-per-day (6,350-metric-ton-per- day) operation, and an 8,500-ton-per-day (7,- 711-metric-ton-per-day) operation. A brief dis- cussion of these three operations follows. 13,000-ton-per-day Mine-Mill Estimates were made of a mining operation with a design capacity of about 13,000 tons per day (11,794 metric tons per day) to extract mixed ore (sylvite-langbeinite) and langbeinite ore (fig. 21) using a room-and-pillar mining sys- tem (figs. 22 and 23). Conventional mining (figs. 24 and 25) is used because of hardness of lang- beinite and polyhalite minerals. Entry is by vertical shafts with connecting drifts. Mobile trackless equipment is used to drill, load, and haul the ore to a conveyor system near the working areas. The blasting agent used is ANFO. Ore is transferred by conveyor to the production shaft and hoisted to the surface. This operation includes a beneficiation system that recovers sylvite and langbeinite from 10,000 tons per day (9,072 metric tons per day) of mixed ore by heavy media separation and sylvite flotation. The mill is designed for ore having a clay content of 1 to 1.5 percent. In addition, the operation includes recovery of langbeinite from a 3,000-ton-ore-per-day (2,722-metric-ton-ore- per-day) langbeinite wash circuit. Sylvite and langbeinite fines are then used as feed material in the production of potassium sulfate (fig. 17). The sulfate plant was designed for an output capacity of 500 tons per day (454 metric tons per day) of product (fig. 26). 7,000-ton-per-day Mine-Mill The 7,000-ton-per-day (6,350-metric-ton-per- day) room-and-pillar system includes the mining of two separate mineralized zones, one sylvite and the other langbeinite (fig. 27). The sylvite mining operation has a capacity of 4,000 tons per day (3,629 metric tons per day), while the langbeinite operation has a 3,000-ton-per-day (6,350-metric-ton-per-day) capacity. Vertical shafts and connecting drifts provide access to each mineralized zone. Both mines utilize conventional room-and-pillar mining methods; drilling, blasting, and loading are done by mobile trackless equipment. A con- veyor-belt system transports the ore to the pro- duction shaft. The ore is then hoisted to the surface and transported to the mill. Sylvite is recovered from the low-clay (1 to 1.5 percent) ore by flotation, and langbeinite is beneficiated from its ore by water leaching of the impurities. Sylvite and langbeinite fines are then used as feed material in the production of potassium sulfate (fig. 17). This sulfate plant has an output design of 225 tons per day (204 metric tons per day) of product. 54 Crushing & sizing 100 200 400 liinl I I FIGURE 21.— Generalized layout of 13,000-tpd surface plant. 55 o o o .-. "O T- ^11 1 n rnrnr 3 PS tinnnnn • > ^ > > > > ij 56 pn/D nnn n D DO-QO-n 57 2-boom jumbo, 1 man, 10-foot hole depth, 1-3/4-inch-diam hole, 45 min/round DRILLING KKKKKKKK^^^^ VSSVsSSSSSSSSVsSSS'C UNDERCUTTING 1 man, 10-foot length, 6-inch thick across floor of panel, 45 min/round 1 man, 16 primers, 16 caps, and 65 lb ANFO, 30 min/round LOADING AND BLASTING 1 loader operator 2 shuttle-car operators 45 min/round LOADING fa 1 operator 5 roof bolts/face //////////////// ///y ////// ////////////y ROOF BOLTING Approximate dimension of round - 5'xl0'x26', thickness of bed varies. Tonnage - 88.6 tons/round, varies as thickness of bed. FIGURE 24. — Diagram of conventional mining sequence. 8,500-ton-per-day Mine-Mill The third operation is an 8,500-ton-per-day (7,700-metric-ton-per-day) room-and-pillar mine (fig. 27) using, in part, a continuous mining sys- tem (fig. 28). The processing system is amenable to sylvite ore with a low langbeinite and poly- halite content. Approximately 75 percent of the mine output is extracted by continuous mining methods. In the continuous mining method, boring machines are used to extract and load the ore into shuttle cars which transport the mined ore to a conveyor system. The conveyor system transfers the mined ore to the shaft area to be hoisted to the surface. The remaining 25 percent of the ore is mined by conventional mining method (fig. 24) much in the same manner as described previously. The beneficiation system will recover sylvite from the ore by solution-crystallization methods (fig. 15). The ore is assumed to contain approx- imately 4 percent clays. 58 FIGURE 25. — Typical round dimensions for conventional mining. Approximate dimensions of broken round — 5 by 26 by 9.5 ft (hole length 10 ft, breaking length 9.5 ft); volume, about 1,235 cu ft; 16 holes per round; hole diameter, iy4 in; about 7 ft of ANFO per hole; 2 delays — and 1 millisec; tonnage 90 tons/round, assuming a powder factor of 0.7 lb explosive per ton of ore; 0.82 lb of ANFO per foot of drill hole = 90 lb of ANFO per round; primer — 1- by 8-in 70-percent gelatin. Mine Capital Costs Mine capital investments are those costs as- sociated with bringing an operation into pro- duction. The estimate is based on 1977 dollar values and is the cost for new (replacement) mine-mill complexes. Mine capital investments include exploration, development, mine plant, mine equipment, and working capital. Exploration investments include the cost to define the mineralized zone in size, tonnage, and grade. This is done by estimating the cost of the drilling program and of a geologic and engineering analysis of the data obtained in the study area. The development costs include all invest- ments involved in preparing the operation for production. This includes the cost of construct- ing roads and railroads and providing utilities to the study area. The development costs also include all investments related to sinking of shafts, development of main haulage drifts, and preparing the working areas for full production. Mine plant costs include all investments as- sociated with permanent structures such as buildings, shops, and permanent systems such as ventilation and hoisting. These costs are con- sidered to last the life of the operation. Mine equipment costs include all costs asso- ciated with mobile underground equipment as well as support equipment on the surface. Other items such as tools, personnel-carrying vehicles, and an inventory of mining supplies are also included in this investment. Working capital is the amount of money needed to account for all operating expenses between the time of first production and the time of initial revenue from the products. This cost was estimated to be equal to 6 months' op- erating cost for each mining system. A summary of the estimated capital invest- ments of the three potash operations is given in table 14. Mine Operating Costs Mine operating costs are the expenses in- curred in extracting the ore and waste rock from the deposit. Operating costs are subdivided into three basic subcategories: (1) direct, (2) indirect, and (3) fixed costs. Factors that influence op- erating costs include hardness of rock, mining thickness, and variability of mineralization. Direct costs are the investments related to the actual mining output. These costs include direct TABLE 14 . — Summary of estimated mine capital investments Mine Plant cost Equipment Exploration and development cost Working capital Total investment 13,000 tpd $6,093,500 9,015,200 5,712,500 $ 8,114,400 9,817,900 11,691,300 $13,248,300 15,079,400 10,278,100 $3,906,200 4,330,600 4,659,800 $32,362,400 7,000 tpd 8,500 tpd 38,243,100 32,341,700 59 Production shaft and mine head frame Service shaft and mine D headframe Scale, feet FIGURE 26. — Generalized layout of 7,000-tpd surface plant. 60 Change room A 1 1 Mine and ^^^ ill hoist \/ y \ ./ Hoist house X ^o' ■^Ore hois Scale, feet FIGURE 27.— Generalized layout of 8,500-tpd surface plant. mine labor and supervision, maintenance labor and supervision, maintenance supplies, and material and utilities costs. Indirect costs are related to support functions such as administrative technical labor, mainte- nance of the surface facilities, and general over- head. The direct and indirect costs would be affected by fluctuations in mine output, varia- bility in rock and mineralized composition, and external economic factors. Local taxes and insurance make up the fixed costs. These costs remain relatively constant and are not affected by physical or economic changes to the mining system. A summary of the estimated operating costs for the three typical potash operations is shown in table 15. 61 O 2 i s- S- CQ I ^ ° C sl-s c/5 3 £ 2 u u 3 S dj S c 3 .£ ■?i oJ "a; S o.S-^ 55 ^ u o i 2 bog (J o-§ C bC°- « C |2 "3 bC =2 id -^ j= 1^ -if 3 ^ ="ii >^ bo2 =" 5 'S jj c o w^ >- ii o G OS O ^ °2 (M a, ° . , o -2 . D-3 _ 39,18$ 39.182 49.265 41.469 ' Costs of obtaining sufficient sylvite (where sylv langbeinite mining and milling. J Added to mine operating costs. Added to mill operating costs. not mined at the operation) to process langbeinite fines for sulfate produ 73 m £2l5' .SI mu i i s. g = " s. s lis iii I til ^. til til til ^- til i til ! Ij 1 ! 1 li I • i I III " H i« S«5 Sf Stl i i i 74 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The Bureau of Mines evaluation of potash deposits in the WIPP site and subsequent eco- nomic and financial analyses of hypothetical mining and processing operations show that one of the 12 Mining Units — Unit B-1, parts of which are in the site — is commercial at current mining and processing costs and at present mar- ket prices. These deposits are thus ore and are classified as reserves. Potash deposits included in these Mining Units occur in various ore zones accessible from proposed shaft locations. The mining and be- neficiation systems evaluated are based on cur- rent extraction and processing technology in the district and are the least costly systems amenable to the ore mined. An economic evaluation of the mineralization determined to be in the site near its western boundary was made considering mining recovery through an existing shaft in addition to recovery through a new shaft. The grade of the mineralization and deleterious min- eral content determined from drill core samples indicate that this mineralization is not commer- cial using current Carlsbad technology. This analysis isolates and estimates the values that exist in the unmined potash mineralization in the WIPP site and, therefore, determines a cost chargeable to the WIPP facility. These val- ues are items of costs and capital investments (taxes, royalties, and bonus bid amounts) that would be generated from potash product sales and would be paid to the several levels of gov- ernment. They are losses because the tax and royalty revenues and bonus bid amounts, or their equivalent value, will not accrue to the gov- ernments if the potash deposits are not mined and produced. Unlike taxes, royalties, and bo- nus bid amounts, all other items of production costs, investments, and values are created when the projects are initiated (when capital is in- vested) and, therefore, are not a loss if the un- mined, commercial potash is not developed. Loss to the owners (other than government) would be royalty payments and a value deter- mined for the unmined potash (equivalent to the bonus bid amount due the governments). The taxes that would have been generated if the potash were produced from privately owned potash would be a loss to the governments. These values (taxes and royalties — because they are estimated to occur in a series of lump sums over the life of the project — and the bonus bid amounts) are converted (discounted at an ap- propriate discount rate) to equivalent values at a single point in time (usually project initiation). In this analysis, it results in an amount in current dollars or the present value. The present or cur- rent value (as commonly used in economic anal- yses) of the unmined potash (bonus bid amount) is the dollar amount that the gross revenues ex- ceed the sum of the (1) costs of production, (2) return of the investment, and (3) interest on that investment; all items discounted at a future worth factor of money. The present value is the amount that an investor would be able to pay for the unmined potash and still receive (1) the return of his total investment and (2) an ac- ceptable rate of interest on his total investment including the amount he pays for the unmined potash. In this analysis, for those government- owned deposits that are commercial, the present value amount is added to the investments as a lease bonus bid (a dollar amount paid as a bonus to obtain a lease). Items such as the return of the original in- vestment and interest on that investment as well as all direct and indirect costs of production must be provided from gross revenue in a prof- itable operation. This can be expressed as fol- lows: The gross revenue from the sale of all potash products equals all direct and indirect costs including (1) materials, (2) labor, (3) sup- plies, (4) utilities, (5) taxes, (6) royalties, and (7) other costs plus the interest on the investment plus return of the investment for (1) explora- tion, (2) development, (3) mine plant, (4) mill plant, (5) bonus bid amount, and (6) all other capital required. The major portion of the dollar amounts of gross revenues is used to purchase goods and services required for potash production. One group of the highest grade deposits, des- ignated as Mining Unit B-1 and occurring par- tially in the site, was determined to be commercial. About 20.2 million tons (about 18.3 million met- ric tons) of potash products could be produced 75 140 126 112 :^ 98 CTi - 84 o =3 O ^ 70 56 y 42 28 14 Prices include 15-percent return on invested capital Sulfate Sylvite r" Langbeinite 6 9 12 15 PRODUCT, million short tons 18 21 FIGURE 30. — Product availability and market prices at which potash tonnages become commercial assuming fixed production costs. 76 90 81 72 63 54 45 36 27 18 \ / y/\ Mine operating cost ^^^^ Mill operating cost |^\\^^ Tax and royalty costs I I R^ I 1 in Return of investment and terest costs 7 14 21 28 35 42 ADDITIONAL POTASH PRODUCTS, million short tons FIGURE 31. — Approximate cost analysis of increased market prices at which potash tonnages become commercial. 77 from the 48.46 million tons (43.95 million metric tons) of ore in these reserves. The value lost (dollars that would not be generated from po- tash production) in terms of current dollars for an acquisition cost, for taxes payable on esti- mated revenues, and for royalties payable to the owners of the potash, is about $51.8 million. The gross market value of the products is about $1.03 billion which, less operating costs other than taxes and royalties, less the return of the investment other than the acquisition cost, and less interest on the investment limited to 15 per- cent, is the $5 1 .8 million value chargeable to the WIPP project. The procedure used to calculate an estimate of the values that will be foregone if the WIPP installation goes forward is shown in table 30. The amounts of potash products that could be recovered from potash reserves and re- sources in the WIPP site, at specific market prices and associated costs, are illustrated in fig- ures 30 and 31 and in tables 31, 32, and 33. Evaluation data are summarized in table 29. An additional 169.1 million tons (153.4 mil- lion metric tons) of lower grade, paramarginal potash resources in the site contain 25.5 million tons (23.1 million metric tons) of products if today's operating costs did not increase and market prices were increased until the deposits become commercial. The dollar values of these subeconomic resources are speculative; how- ever, if the relationship of actual losses to gross market values exists as in the commercial de- posits, the value lost at some future time when they become commercial is about $75.4 million from a gross market value of products of about $1.5 billion. Recent market prices are shown in table 34. Products that meet market standards cannot be produced, using current Carlsbad processing techniques, from the remainder of the miner- alization determined to be in the site. This mi- neralization is considered to be a submarginal resource. An option is being considered that would al- low commercial recovery of potash products in WIPP Zone IV. Zone IV is a comparatively large area — 10,812 acres (4,376 hectares) that con- tains much of the mineralization in the WIPP site. For this reason, the estimated amounts and values of potash product that would be foregone if mining operations were prohibited only in Zones I, II, and III are 13.3 million tons (12.1 million metric tons) of ore (commercial miner- alization) containing 5.5 million tons (5.0 million metric tons) of potash products (table 31). The value lost in terms of current dollars is about $14.3 million. The gross market value of the products is about $282.4 million. The gross mar- ket value of the products is about $282.4 million. Paramarginal resources in 51.37 million tons (46.59 million metric tons) of potash minerali- zation contain 7,640,500 tons (6,931,400 metric tons) of potash products. The ratio (the same as for the commercial resources) of value lost to gross product market value is about $17.5 mil- lion from a gross market value of $346.3 million. TABLE 30. — Mining Unit B-1 estimated potash values within the WIPP site that would be foregone Tonnage: Total in deposit Total in Mining Unit B-1 operation' Part of Mining Unit B-1 in WIPP site Total of B-1 in WIPP site on State lands (all in Sec 16, Total of B-1 in WIPP site on Federal lands 1,000 short Im of ore 79.780 65,250 48,460 7,753.6 40,706.4 Mining Unit at 8 percent over 50 years Va ($1,000) J lue, /st WIPP Taof Revenues lost ($1,000) Item State Govt. Federal Govt. "^'t^;^ --:-::-:::: 19,021 2;383 5,060 19,632 23,325 29 29 29 04 08 30 36 36 36 40'706.4 7,753.6 48,460 48,600 48,460 40706.4 7,753.6 5^962 2,249 1,938 3,877 2791 5"962 State State income taxes Severance taxes' Federal income taxes 14"5"38 federal::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: State 14,654 Total 69,421 __._ 16,757 35,094 $51 851 the s was calculated l)v iiuiltiplviiiL' anruial piodu assigned to total tonnage in llic deposit, ederal royalties are divided 50-50 Iwtween the l-ederal and Stale governments, axes include severance, property, and priKessors ia.\es. 1 used to derive 78 TABLE 31. — Summary of amounts and values of potash mineralization in WIPP site Products 1.000 short tons Value, $1,000 Mining Unil Recoverable Recoverable ore in WIPP site Product inW^Pp Price" that provtdes Gross revenue of products inside the WIPP site Gross' revePieof addiuonal products 'v^l^e"' foregone in WIPP site B-1 Langbeinite Sullate 79,780 57',600 87,930 98,320 57.190 140,270 70,640 135,020 48,460 27;4i0 23,570 5r86o 36.490 42.450 52370 73,770 14.175 5,998 4.936 3,769 1.598 7.791 5,527 5,724 2,767 7,293 9,743 35.00 88.50 52.04 36.51 92.31 61.73 61.74 42.26 106.86 67.52 70.28 496,125 530,823 256,869 1,026,948 256,869 137,606 147,511 176.239 341.237 82.618 124,919 119,240 137.165 51.851 D-2 .0 Langbeinite .._. Sulfate Muriate :::: D-3 C 3 Langbeinite Sulfate Muriate A-3 Muriate Market price produ Estimated weighted f.o.b.. Garlsbad, N. Mex.. used for ' Product amounts that would be recovered lower grade Mining Units (A-2. etc.). ligher grade Mining Units (A-l. B-1. C-1) are subtracted from product : uld be recovered i Present values at Increased potash products market prices of resources foregone in WIPP site were not estimated because the time and conditions at which they Lild become commercial are too speculative. For this study, the 1975-1976 weighted average prices received for potash products in the Carlsbad area were used estimate the values of commercial potash deposits (ore). TABLE 32. — Mining Unit product data and required market prices at which potash tonnages in the WIPP site become commercial at fixed production costs Market price a (1.000 short ons) Price' that Total Total Net provides a 15 percent ifoR^ Mining Unil product tonnage product additional Cumulative Mining Unit Products tonnage in WIPP product tonnage product tonnage B-1' L.ng^..te .................... ...... $35.00 19,086 14,175 14,175 14,175 88.50 8,077 5.998 5,998 20,173 A-l Muriate 52.04 9,967 4.936 4,936 25,109 D-2 Langbemitc Sulfate 36.51 12,840 3,769 3,769 28,878 92.31 5,446 1,598 1,598 30,476 A-2 Muriate . 61,73 14,578 7,791 2,855 33,331 C-2 Muriate 61.74 8,914 5,527 5,527 38,858 D-3 Langbeinite Sulfite 42.26 11,783 5,724 1,955 40,813 106.86 5,697 2,767 1,169 41,982 C-3 Muriate 67.52 9,550 7,293 1,766 A-3 70.28 13,715 9,742 1,952 For this study the 1975-1976 weightecl-average prices received for potash prodi deposits. ^ Rate of return. ' Commercial at recent weighted-average annual prices. costs. Estimated weighted average annual price per ton of product, f.o.b., Carlsbad, New Mex., used forevaluation. 'the Carlsbad area were used to estimate the values of commercial potash TABLE 33. — Mining Unit price components per ton of weighted-average product price assuming fixed production costs and a 15-percent discounted cash flow rate of return Mining Unit B-1 A-l D-2 A-2 C-2 D-3 C-3 A-3 Product, short tons: Annual _ Additional within WIPP _ 905,400 20,173,100 622,900 4,935,900 831,100 5,367,300 520,600 2,854.600 524,300 5,526,900 582,700 3,124,300 477,500 1.765,900 457.200 1,951,700 Cost per ton product: $13.55 17.48 6.80 13.08 $22.71 14.84 3.60 10.89 $20.11 19.15 4.65 9.22 $27.18 17.75 16,56 10.24 $26.98 17.63 5.15 11.98 $24.44 22.89 5.65 10.33 $29.63 19.36 5.85 12.68 $30.94 Mill operating cost 20.22 Taxes and royalties Interest and amortization of 6.46 12.66 Total _-_ 52.04 52.04 53.13 61.73 61.74 63.31 67.52 70.28 TABLE 34. — U.S. average market prices for potash products — f.o.b. plant' (Dollars per short ton) 1973 1974 1975 1976 Product 1st 6 mo. 2d 6 mo. 1st 6 mo. 2d 6 mo. Muriate, all grades, at 61 percent KjO: Per tonko ...._ .___ 36.39 22.20 82.68 42.17 88.41 19.45 52.50 32.03 110.79 56.50 119.41 26.27 75.19 45.87 163.39 83.33 149.73 32.94 76.56 46.70 181.63 92.63 155.73 34.26 70.91 43.26 177.00 90.27 149.27 32.84 59.81 36.48 Sulfate, at 51 percent K2O: 224.02 114.25 Langbeinite, at 22 percent KjO: 154.77 Per ton of product _ — 34.05 ' Product market prices vary considerably from month to month and from company to company. The potash market and product prices have been seasonal and, in addition to the usual market supply-demand fluctuations, have been subject to discounting, inventories, buildup pressures, and product grade variations. 79 REFERENCES 1. Bachman, G. D. Surfical Features and Late Cenozoic History in Southeastern New Mexico. U. S. (ieol. Sur- vey Open-File Rept. 4339-8, 1973, 32 pp., illus., maps. 2. Brokaw, A. L.. C. L. Jones, M. E. Clooley, and W. H. Hayes. Geology and Hydrology of the Carlsbad Potash Area, Eddv and Lea Counties, N. Mex. U. S. Geol. Survey Open-File Rept. 4339-1, 1972, 86 pp. 3. Coons, A, T. Potash: Mineral Resources of the United States, 1930, BuMines, pt. 2, 1932, pp. 59-67. 4. Cooper, J. B., and V. M. Glanzman. Geohydrology of Project Gnome Site, Eddy County, N. Mex. U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 712-^A, 1971, 24 pp. 5. Eilertsen, D. E. Potash. BuMines Minerals Yearbook 1968. V, 1-2, 1969, pp. 943-944. 6. Gale, H. S. Potash. Mineral Resources of the United States, 1916, U. S. Geol. Survey, pt. 2, 1919, pp.74, 104. 7. Gale, H. S., and W. B. Hicks. Potash: Mineral Resources of the United States, 1917, U. S. Geol. Survey, pt. 2, 1920, pp. 425-426. 8. Gard, L. M., Jr. Geologic Studies, Project Gnome, Eddy County, N. Mex. U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 589, 1968, 33 pp. 9. International Minerals and Chemical Corp. Potash, the Mineral With a Future. Northbrook, 111., 1968, 28 pp. 10. Jones. C. L. Potash Resources in Part of Los Medanos Area of Eddy and Lea Counties, N. Mex. U. S. Geol. Survey Open-File Rept. 75-407, 175, 37 pp. 11. Jones. C. L., M. E. Cooley, and G. D. Bachman. Salt Deposits of the Los Medanos Area, Eddy and Lea Counties, N. Mex. U. S. Geol. Survey Open-File Rept. 4339-7, 1973, 67 pp. 12. Jones, C. L,, and B. M. Madsen. Evaporite Geology of the Fifth Ore Zone, Carlsbad District, Southeastern New Mexico. U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1252-B, 1968, 21 pp. 13. Jones, C. L., C. G. Bowles, and K. G. Bell. Experimental Drill Hole Lagging in Potash Deposits of the Carlsbad District. N. Mex. U. S. Geol. Survey Open-File Rept., I960, 25 pp. 14. Keyes, W. F. Potash. Ch. in Mineral Facts and Problems. BuMines Bull. 667, 1975, pp. 855-869. 15. . Potash. BuMines Minerals Yearbook 1974, v. I, 1975, pp. 1097-1109. 16. . Potash. BuMines Commodity Data Summaries, Washington, D. C, 1976, pp. 128-129. 17. Koepke, W. E. Structure, Behavior, and Performance of the World Potash Industry. Mineral Bull. MR 139, Mineral Development Sector, Dept. of Energy, Mines and Resources, Ottawa, Canada, 1973, 98 pp. 18. Lewis, R. W. Potassium. Ch. in Mineral Facts and Prob- lems. BuMines Bull. 650, 1970, p. 1158. 19. Nourse, M. R. Potash. Mineral Resources of the United States, 1920. U.S. Geol. Survey, pt. 2, 1923, p. 109. 20. . Potash. Mineral Resources of the United States, 1921, U.S. Geol. Survey, pt. 2, p. 54. 21. Silver, B. A., and R. G. Todd. Permian Cycle Strata, Northern Midland and Delaware Basin, West Texas and Southeastern New Mexico, Bull. AAP(i, v. 53, No. 11, 1969, pp. 2223-2251. 22. Sondermeyer, R. V. The Mineral Industry of New Mex- ico. BuMines Minerals Yearbook 1972, v. 2, 1974, p. 488. 23. Stermole, F. |. Economic Evaluation and Investment Decision Methods. Investment Evaluations Corp., Golden, Colo., 1974, 350 pp. 24. U.S. Bureau of Mines. The United States Position and Outlook in Potash, BuMines IC 8487, 1970, 47 pp. 25. Vine, J. D. Surface Geology of the Nash Draw Quad- rangle, Eddy County, N.Mex. U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1141-B, 1963,46 pp. 80 APPENDIX A.— Assumptions and Estimations Used for the Economic Analysis of the Hypothetical Mining Unit B-1 (MU B-1) The operation is treated (for economic anal- ysis) as a separate company, not a subsidiary where losses could possibly be used for tax cred- its. A system diagram, showing approximate materials flow and gross revenue, and a com- puter printout of the investments and revenues analysis are included. It is assumed that two operating, competing companies in the Carlsbad area would form a third company to mine and process (through a mine complex and langbeinite wash plant) the ore determined to be in the area, provided a reasonable return on this investment could be expected from the project. A portion of this ore is located under the WIPP site. Sufficient ore exists outside the WIPP site to support a com- mercial potash operation, so that only the ore within the WIPP boundary is charged to the WIPP project. A langbeinite wash plant could be constructed at the mine site, and langbeinite product sold at the plant site; langbeinite fines produced would be shipped to two existing sulfate plants. Sylvite required at one of the sulfate plants (Sulfate Plant No. 2, fig. A-1 ) would be provided from its ongoing sylvite processing operation. MU B-1 is charged for mining and processing costs for sylvite fines produced in the normal processing operation. Sulfate processing costs are charged to and the sulfate revenues are cred- ited to MU B-1. Sylvite for the other sulfate plant (Sulfate Plant No. 1, fig. A-1) is provided from a mixed ore. The amounts of sylvite and langbeinite from the ore, plus the langbeinite fines from MU B-1, are estimated to provide capacity op- eration of this sulfate plant. This amount of syl- vite required results in a small excess amount of langbeinite from the mixed ore. Mining and processing costs for the mixed ore are charged to and the sulfate and excess langbeinite reve- nues are credited to MU B-1. Capital requirements include construction of (1) a langbeinite wash plant at the mine site; (2) the necessary storage and loading facilities to handle the langbeinite product and to ship the langbeinite fines produced to two existing sul- fate plants; (3) a mine including two shafts, un- derground facilities, and surface structures; and (4) reinvestment of some shorter life equipment in the sylvite ore, mixed ore, and sulfate plants. The capacity of Mining Unit B-1 is estimated to produce langbeinite fines in an amount ap- proximately equal to the present langbeinite fines feed to the existing sulfate plants. The ore deposits within this study area are estimated to contain a total of 79.78 million short tons (72.37 metric tons). In addition, an un- known amount of recoverable ore is estimated to occur outside the study area, contiguous to the deposits in the area. Of those deposits within the study area, 65.25 million short tons (59.19 metric tons) would be required for MU B-1, of which 48.46 million short tons (43.96 metric tons) are within the WIPP site. The 79.78 million short tons (72.37 metric tons) of recoverable ore are in a minimum thickness of 4.5 feet, contain langbeinite in an average grade of 9. 1 1 percent KgO equivalent, and exist within reasonable mining distance of the approximate location of a production shaft. The 65.25 million short tons (59.19 metric tons) of ore deposits were used for the MU B-1 economic analysis. It is assumed the construction of the WIPP, with the consequent unavailability of the 48.46 million short tons (43.96 million metric tons) that exist within the WIPP site, would not make the recoverable ore (outside the WIPP site and within the study area) uneconomic. Discounting the cash flows yields a rate of return on the estimated investment in excess of 15 percent. For this reason, a lease bonus bid amount (ac- quisition cost) was added to the other total initial investments. The amount of the lease bonus bid was determined so that, when added to all other investments, the project will provide a return of 15 percent on the total investment. The amount of the lease bonus bid is also termed a present value. In other words, the producers could make an acceptable profit, arbitrarily assumed to be 15 percent on their total investment, when that investment includes a sizable bonus bid amount for leases in addition to all other investments required for MU B-1. 81 ^ ^ O Z Si i iji c rt n li- C 1 =tr5S= s s]- ?■ I il 5 :3 f re £ X o a a ttlflli ll sgu^s';;' s-g 82 The hypothetical MU B-1 plant is designed to handle a capacity of ore equivalent to 5,959 short tons per day (5,406 metric tons per day) 365 days per year. The average grade of the ore is 9. 1 1 percent K,,0 as langBeinite. The wash plant has an overall recovery of 87 percent. The plant produces about 21 percent fines; the bal- ance (89 percent) provides about 1,696 short tons per day ( 1 ,539 metric tons per day) of lang- beinite marketable product which, at $35/short ton, is $59,360 gross revenue per day. The hy- pothetical operation then produces 450.85 short tons (409.00 metric tons) of langbeinite fines for processing in the two sulfate plants. It is further assumed that about 179.0 short tons (162.4 metric tons), or 40 percent of the 450.8 short tons (409.0 metric tons) of lang- beinite fines, is shipped to Sulfate Plant No. 1, where the sylvite-langbeinite ratio required for sulfate production is about 0.8927, indicating that 159.8 short tons (145.0 metric tons) of syl- vite is required to combine with the langbeinite for sulfate production. This sylvite is provided, at mining and processing costs, from the current mining operation at the sulfate plant. With a sulfate plant efficiency of about 80.6 percent, this provides about 218 short tons per day (198 metric tons per day) of sulfate. At $88.50/short ton, this provides $19,293 gross revenue per day. The balance of the langbeinite fines from the MU B-1 plant are shipped to Sulfate Plant No. 2, where the sylvite fines are provided from a mixed ore with a grade of about 9.2 percent K.^O as sylvite and 2.6 percent KgO as langbeinite. Mining Unit B-1 is charged mining and proc- essing costs for sufficient mixed sylvite and lang- beinite ore (the sylvite is combined with the langbeinite fines from MU B-1) for capacity operation of that sulfate plant. This results in a small excess of langbeinite, the gross revenue of which is credited to MU B-1. The 3,997 short tons per day (3,626 metric tons per day) of mixed fines normally produced in processing 9,608 short tons per day (8,716 metric tons per day) of ore at 9.2 percent KjO sylvite grade with a sylvite recovery of 71.9 per- cent, would provide 440.68 short tons per day (399.78 metric tons per day) of sylvite fines. The 3,997 short tons (3,636 metric tons) of ore is considered to be sylvite fines only, for the pur- pose of determining the costs to be charged to MU B-1. At 2.6 percent grade, 283.43 short tons (257.12 metric tons) of langbeinite is pro- duced with a langbeinite processing recovery of about 60 percent; 230.29 short tons (209.91 metric tons) of this langbeinite is combined with the 271.85 short tons (246.62 metric tons) lang- beinite fines from MU B-1. These combined tonnages result in the production of about 519.56 short tons (471.33 metric tons) of sulfate per day from this plant, which has an overall recovery of 69.3 percent. At $88.50/short ton, this provides a gross revenue of $45,981 per day. In addition, the 53. 1 3 short tons (48.20 metric tons) of langbeinite from mixed ore not needed in sulfate production are considered a credit, the "cost" charged to sylvite fines production. At $35/short ton, this provides a gross revenue of $1,859 per day. 83 en in cr» in !3" -J O Q 2 r^ o tr < ll nj rn Ol < ^ o o o '^ 2 > S Z t- 2 "-< - K •-. 2 2 3 >— cn 2 a a H :- < lU 2 G H-.-^ UJ 2 ■ . > , <-i • 3 z O - K h- Dl U oo o r- o LT (XI n o or- _i -< (- (J < CJ n -H CXi < c: a 3 G U UJ D3 IT" -. n ^ o in - IJJ a CC U O 2. C CO m n vi- CO ta lj a. cr •-' 111 (s. ^ n O -. CO _l 1- c o a. tn h- o UI rj cfi ca o (^ H _J 2 UI o q: O li- Q. oof^?^ q!_. ^ ^$5§< x^^ si3 •t trj •-< 5 3 < D-_J u < < CK S- _l 3UJ< f o > en o a: 3> o u u I- d LU 3 CO X IL iL h- 3 cnS^;^ LU C X r- oz CO UJ ^ z X 5 > W < O n: _i cn u K u tnHU K^ Q < U bJ X 2 > < fE £ h- 3 CT > X < U Q < 1- 2 U -ICQ. §gg? H O 2 O 05 U U - 3 :20 1 2 _i uJ c:: UJ iT <: >-. o < UJ < D. LU i- IJ I U H- • >■ £ ^ r- > o > < a o'j > Z U1 33o:lJOc:L!Jt-u< D -• m HuuuacrcLOitou-UHu in x in 3 < t < 8k ■ o c < li. ^ -; z o o I- K CO Z D !-• i-< Lil Z CTi O i-H I- h- CI. UJ '-• ;j '.o. COOO mcC LOOO -lOO ooo cooc o m r- o rr\ . OOOO noo UlOO '-•OO 00 ■ UJ q: > u u Z C:: < -i UJ o r- LT .000 O CO o o o CO do o o ru o o ui ts rj o . o' r- LH .000 o c 88 o o 88888 88 o o o rn 1 J 6 T-. 3 ru o o o o o a" -^ d 000 . P nj o . . . m -. p LI o o o n uj tj -I 000000 0000 < • ■ 888888 00 or-00 00 0000 ^^SS 0000 00 000 O O O 01 '^ -t • 000 . ru Td ( m coomr-ooooooooNO o m ui o Q lti o ra uT o m 01 oj 01 ..0...0...0.... ooo-^oooooooooco O rn LI o o LTi o o o . ■ O O O in o o Da o n O O O LH c O Ki o m ^ N O o lij 01 O LT in r^ d '-i o ru o o o o o 88 o o 0000 . . . O O O O CO T-. o 000 ■ rji -d O . . . LI -H (Ti LT o o o m kij uj -1 li' OJ rn oj nj nj 000000 00 0000 000000 00 0000 ■ . ■ 000000 00 00 Oh-{^ ru I UI D O I Q u Z < Uj O i a lii HQ ' I- UI : _i IT :^o |g, c: DT LJ UJ Q H I ce: a _l UJ D UI z u z E H- o u o ; I u z o z o ; > UJ U O U.I \ IT UI o u a: o tr in UI D U Z (- H <: UI D c: c; 2 w _i ITEOUIUIUIOLJ C I Z UJ UI cr 1-1 i cr i- UJ u d: UI HH I- UJ < > z _i tr z o Q DIJ u UJ -. z o D u cr en 0) H 1- c: UJ I O IE I ih- UJi Z Z UI CD O HEh-h-uSlOOE 86 ° El - i-" rj 01 W N o i d -< c^ ru d d ra r^ d, d n s m no P O iT, o Q »X> CO o ru w CO m : _yj lii o <: z E X UJ < UJ _l til > tr z d: < .J. ui z cn cz o u > o M X d; U. I- < a: I- i U i^ IJJ tr O < D Lil X K ! E < to Z Id O U M E U E O 2 K uj tj M cn -J Z D X UJ cr < f- <; Q cn til _i < m cn D cn cn tu < a cn LU u Q > cj (- cr > H UJ LJ liJ H z <. 1 5h^ u. on < - I 1^ s^™ Ld m UI <»■ il^sliis ■<:%'■ sii ' ii'4' • ■li'i^ iJ (^ > ■ ijj □: > ■ _i G cn UJ _i t3 on u _i o on u 87 lOO en O O O Q o o o o o o o o o o o o oooooo oo oooo o o o o o o S8SS8§ a :-j "^ o d S o r- o o o rj rj o O ca o -' n in Cr^OOOOOOOOOOOOOO-iC O Q O O O O OOOOOO o o rj o o o L-1 M rj o ■ o r- uT .000 O CO c o o do d d O O O rn o o ^ rj rd 00 ^666 o o o • o o o i.n I o ta o n oooooo 00 0000 oooooo o o 88 o o 00 en o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o O o O rn ui o - ..©■■.■0"-.0...0.... 00 ffi 00000 Koooooooorao lTi O O (Ti o O 01 O . .* cri > . rri 1 m O -*■ 01 O O 01 Ul N ul LI OOOOOO 00 0000 oooooo 00 ca o o O o o n ui li T-i mOOOOOi-iOOOOOOOO-'O ui o o ca o o iji u:j . o m . . ca m o m r-1 o o vjj m n o -t ^ O LTI (Ti I m oooooo 00 0000 UT CO RJ o ■ o r- LH .000 o CO o o o oooooo oooooo u o o o o o 00 o o o o nj oj 00 00 K) O . cr> O o o o ■ 000000001 I o o o o o 00 caoo ooooocarj 00000000 pjo oooooo o ca o o 66 6 o o 5 o o o d m lit w o t^ o o O PJ rjl rj rj 00 o yj>ij J O I _UJ|- 1-1 < UJ LJQ . . Q LU D w < < 2 ' << ■ ^ w . c: D. 01 g: Q. ■-I LU _3 LU L" LD D. UJ cn LH O cj Z El U U >-< Q UJ LJ ujccn zzq: ZZ QCOUlZ^-l^HD.Z,-,^-, > c <: z □ o >-i > Z (J cr K ►H z > I- < o I O < Ci' lU U > I _i c n. I- _l 'I t- o ►- > ex > a. < oi a c: c: CL (.0 _i z _1 ( Z E -I UJ I J I E S fi I _l _/ -> D g: Ul t crj >-< E ui ui cn z I ui : < UJ ZUI t- >o: > LJ> w I tr K O y O Z ; CI UJ ^ UJ D a c: cc cn _i CCiUUUIUJOUl D (J (- t- z I UJ . ! _l -J _J -1 (- LU .J _l U UJ L. . •IC'-'t-tS-EUCL iL o E £ uT cn cc o O O O LI ^ * -I o o o . rj ru li • . ■ (SI 01 o m o o o CO iT, , j CO uj rj io nj la -« uj o CCl Q n r J 3 o o o -H n r- U5 no LT ru u.-) O I N Ki o o lt 1^1 rn . in rj ^r, O n o ! LT Ijj Ij i-1 O n I rj (- pj ^ ^ O O o o o o o o o o o o o . . . O O O LTl rf <)- -H O O O . 01 nj uj . • ■ K) PJ O CO O O O K cr, O CO uj rj ixi ru w-i n rn ru ^ Q PJ ^ » ru i.;i 1 n iTj n CO P"! o rj o pn en PI -1 ru rt liV P I- uj * rj t-. LT n m i lH o o f^ "^ I O P f'l O LT : n rji ^ m -I ixi -I PJ o o o o o o o c ooo . . . o o o LP rt -a- ^ ooo . rj rj uJ ■ ■ . CO rj o CO O O O CO {Ti Uj K) o rj u) PJ CO <-! LP rj o ra m th n 3 '^ O ru y-i o < a. D " z -> I- X Z (- >-< (J H CE > O Z O LU til l-Z . M _1 UJ CE Q, CC < I- < 3 W O LJc;(-nuc:OZ_J CL IJ lil h- U _l IJ > <: O U- Cl. K IP CPCiUZI-liJ XOU LU a Ul " LP Ll I U I- _J : D iLl : I 1-1 X I I _l I CL lU I U U I : Q z ; I < I ;il D Z ) 1^ LP -I 2 X U EC < ■I K U H < O X U) U) C I- Q LP §5g( H U LilUJ I- U (E ■ ■ Z C CLlL D < I.P OP tP tP 3 3 3 3 cn e _j _i .J ijj LU CL Cl L _l Z ca 90 •-1 liJ Zi cj (J Z LU <: I cr > U 1^ Ld Q G. _J I- IL 0- _l H uj < CO i-i uj <; Lo Q m ui _i o (jt u ij c > . u c: > . n UC-ll-lLC-ll-Z -< U <: I'l •- LJ •£ LT _l Q OT U _l Q C;-) CU Z LU LT L'l I I Q l_l U I I 3 cr q: ! ! Q « u Lo cp [L Q. < on n-i iLj' U '-I <: U D : a- u I I lii z . ; z K i I 1-. CL I CC p " I- !^df big: oo: i o q: c: tr en _J i-i -in c;i o: in o cr IT bJ o h- U lU Z O HZ >-< tn r < z H-i D s: -I z (J X z u en o Q n cc u M <: \ n H CE u (;n s 'aj o o 1- u _i u >-' -< > a H lij cr z w 111 'C (T a. D c: Q l_ O o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o nji o ■ o rj .000 3S o o 0000 ■ . . o o 6 '"■ nj rj 3 • • • ra rj o (a O O O CO P O CO o C' o o i"n n on o n ci m ri o ^T "J o - i- o nj C-\ r J ij' r- li n uT n o o o r-i l^?;^3- !- rj 11 Fi o r- o tn rj e ( r- o r-i LT n o o o n S LT n -H n p I-- n o I -- pj o o I r- kjj LT ! 'j m en I ru o r- o o o o o 00000 o o o o o o o 88 c o o K o o a -. n rn r- m o O (Ti Kl iT,i n is\ L-i ^ rj o o 00000 0000 o 00000 r-i LT o • o rj .000 (-00 o o o o o ss O O O ■ rj rj . . . CX! rj o O O O D3 (Ti O I il' rj rj C3 P O rj o ui rj 00000 n L- o ■ o ru ■ o o o r- o o o O O O L-i ^ -i M LT o o o o o p-1 LT O . O rj .000 COO . PJ PJ o . . . ca pj o 03 o o c Kl Fi o ra PJ Kl - LH PJ o PJ r^ o iZ< t^ PJ r, o I- o Ln r- Ci > I UJI-; Q >Ci>bJ>-ii i-^ZO( K I- o ij o z tn CT h- 1 U Z (J Z O D r ! H > IJ u o ill ■-- c; c LD o c; ( O ■ J 12 U K LT U yj O H U I U 5 r:l C C (:'■ _1 S " -J _) ' c: O Ul Lii U O LJ Ll ■ _! UJ I z u < U .J 1- > [^ o D u u <: c^ U c: D. O U [;l O _l O CL Z I;T E i~' Li > DHLii^ i i V -J- L.ILiH< t L L.I US u ^-^ tn f J 1- _) 111 1- uJ Li cy c. _J _i J c: t- > Li. CT h . en < 1 Ll Zl 1,0 " I- < O D U a 2 ! o _J tn ^ O H < O z c: <: UJ o K t Z LI HI -I coo o o o oooooooooooooocoo l/i O o o '(Ti 6 6 c oo ooo ooo noo ooo ooo c^ o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 6 o o ui d O rU O L:l . . . r- m r- o -• rj o o o o o o o ru o LI . .o ■ . .o ■ • .o . . .o ■ . -o ■ ■ -o ■ ■ ■ -o . . -o ■ • -o ■ . • ■ oo ooo ooo moo ooo ooo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ^ LT o o o 88: o ra 1 o o _ _ _ _ o o o o o o o o m o o o ooo o o oo ooo ooo moo ooo ooo o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o ooo • . 8S8^^° -t N O O kjj ru O ui OOOOOOOOOO-'O O O LJ1 d 6 f~ OOO.. o o o tn o o ra o m oooooo oo o o ooo O O ' lOo ooo ooo O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o s s I lil D 1- UJ 3 I o z < o o z I C UJ < LL C _l H L. CL , O (J z m < 2 3 □ _J E •-1 <: ui " Lil rj (J O 2 [ q: > . I Z D 1 H _i Q tn UJ _J CE > UJ < en ►-H lil < CJ-J >- U -I LT DWUJ_JDti1UJ_IQU)UJZi > > > < _ „ UJQ >-< UJ D I -i< I t-^-i< I !-►-■•- d: > Q. D Ul < I * U lU H ■- g^ - < Q O o <: cr <: UJ UJ > CE _i tr a. K w Ul _J <: K o i-- z _J I- Q UJ " « O en . D tt s: e: t- I- u z o D ^1 CE > I- o Z O UJ UJ (J e: o c: ixi UJ UJ ui -Jw _l D E O it I UJ u. : z UJ 1 I UT e I 92 o o n liio -^ o o o o o o 388888 a ru ^'. o d o o r- o o o runj o o o o d d o o o . ai 01 ijj • • ■ ta nj o CO O O O CO d ij) CO ^^ c ffi rn LT nj o r-i r- o ieSf^° r- en n o CO liJ in iTl ^ S9 S^ 3^3 If; ^.^ ^M loM ^ffiS 1 cn^no 1 6d ij5 -< 5 ^Hj rn o n in Ln rj 1 ~j- tn rj LI L-i ru ii' o r- o n LH rt o 2R2 r-omo I LHr-iruoo r- Ln m i ra r- u'l lt -■ rn .71 1 CO ii> m o t^ n o I rj rj o r- iD r.ri en I (Ti r- 111 o ra m ui 1 (ti uj th ^ o o o o o o 888888 lii o o o o o Ln m Ln o ■ o CO nj . o o o O N O O O do 6 6 O O O Ln W 4- r-l o o o . rj oj li) . . . CO nj o ra ooo . . . o o Ln -. m ! h un n o rn ' "^ ' ' Ln ai o -H 1^ I <)■ Ln r^ 4- rri O isO lit Ln nj ai O Ln m o 2RS >■ en m o r- Ln m w rn en O -H ui -< ru o o K) r- i3 in CO ij> m en pj ru o h- cTi r- m o o o . ru o . . Ln ^ 01 Ln o o m ixi lij -H rn lij o oi ru IT, pj rj ru O O PI liJ uj '-< PJ 01 iD I PJ o CO ( P iJJ 03 Ln m o '-I r- o -t in 1^ •4- (no i£nr< nj Ln ru cr E o I ::5§ U U- \ < LiJ Z U h- d: > U > 1-1 ; I- Q o O Z LJ en o Q u : I uj <: I ; D u. I D lil U lil > ■^ £ O O lil (X 1 IE UI tn (- I- cc y « : Ln o c a h- o H lOHlilU-iMO 1 ZZ) : o H z z liJ en o Ln I _i _j K. D a: UJ ;-< , ■ _J III Ll \ D K _l iLn>-> tr Z cc <: a D UJ UJ « D- > O LI Q: CL O UI O CC - O _JQCC D. O UI Z D z Ln o < o o _J er _l 5f^x o u < en I- Ln H -J < en en Ln D en eri Ln o E z 5^8g O Z H Ul iJ 1-1 W _i z n m 1-1 _J ►-) < < Q X U CC - o LJ^O I 93 ■ O LI CO rn m LJx z: xtliJO <: H t tj I- DZ 1 Ul IJ >-< 3 j>- o z 5 ->!- Z "-J _I - -CCLJ < L. cL-i-JDZ-lUJcrljJD: LUD3ULJ-Es: >>o>