Skip to main content

Underground Mine Disaster Survival and Rescue An Evaluation of Research Accomplishments and Needs (1981) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

Appendix II: The USBM-MSHA Procedure for Ranking Proposed Research Projects
Pages 107-116

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 107...
... THE USBM-MSHA PROCEDURE FOR RANKING PROPOSED RESEARCH PROJECTS. The following material has been extracted from a memorandum sent by the Director, Minerals Health and Safety Technology, Bureau of Mines, to the Directors of the Bureau's 10 research centers, on January 4, 1980.
Read the entire page →
From page 108...
... The majority of the MS HA research chairmen and Bureau coordinators were satisfied with the FY 1980 procedures, and only a very few comments requesting changes were offered. These were minor in nature and did not represent a consensus view.
Read the entire page →
From page 109...
... If the committee members Individually rated each proposal, the final rating is determined by averaging the individual project ratings. If the committee rated each proposal on a group consensus basis, this arrived at rating is the proposals final rating.
Read the entire page →
From page 110...
... In those Instances where the projects selected for funding follow a prioritization other than that shown on the ranked list of projects, a detailed rationale for such changes will be submitted to Bureau management, MSHA research liaison, and the Bureau and MSHA chairmen of the evaluation committee.
Read the entire page →
From page 111...
... Fourth, the committee will complete forms A, B and C according to the FY 81 Procedures for Ranking Project Proposals dated January 1981.
Read the entire page →
From page 112...
... N M i • eo u hi or hi hi w « 22 s 0 S "& 3: ! Queation X 41 <9 X U IM i i 1 « M e « u • • l' j f.
Read the entire page →
From page 113...
... 1 fH Chi .C <0 C O -H O 5 3 -rt o B » a hi hi 4i a -H -a f-l (I >.
Read the entire page →
From page 114...
... u B° « O -H M 9 > « « « 0 0 090 41 hi iH hi Q i 5 i hi -a w v 41 O o r-i o -a 0 hi 0 0 > a • hi 0 O « -a u & J= CO 41 «o e hi C -r-l P
Read the entire page →
From page 116...
... U o o -o a i u • X •" -H « TH 1M U iJ 00 41 1rl • c to « u « • a> -- -« .c c • -a a -o M -HBO a > -H SJ 41 01 fci X M «•« £ 52 .sW X O M O j *
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • ranked list
  • project proposal
  • project list
  • ranking project
  • safety project

  • final rating
  • dated january
  • evaluation meetings
  • evaluation committees
  • project score

  • final project
  • ranked project
  • individual project
  • master project
  • evaluation committee

  • project ratings
  • bureau coordinators
  • ranking proposed
  • proposals final
  • consensus basis

  • committee reach
  • described evaluation
  • evaluation forms
  • committee develops
  • manager responsible

  • remaining duplicative
  • msha chairmen
  • requesting changes
  • memorandum sent
  • projects resulting


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.