Search Documents

Lead Tariff.--The full House Ways and Means Committee approved H.R. 6089 which will have the effect of reducing the tariff on unwrought lead to 3% ad valorem, with a floor duty of 1.0625 cents per pound, compared with the currently effective rate of 3.5% ad valorem. Consideration is also being given to tariff rates on imports of red lead and litharge from Mexico. A consortium of domestic producers has appealed to the Office of the Special Trade Representative (STR) requesting a return to tariff schedules which were in effect prior to the concessions made effective on January 1. Mexican producers have filed a proposal in favor of lower duties, and the matter now awaits a ruling by the STR. Ferrous Scrap Exports.--After holding public hearings and receiving public comments in May, the Department of Commerce announced that it would not institute formal monitoring of ferrous scrap exports, as requested by the Ferrous Scrap Consumers Coalition. The Department said, however, that it would follow the trend of scrap exports and prices. Ferrous scrap prices are currently low and supplies are reported to be adequate.

Jan 1, 1980

Antitrust Investigation Dropped. - The Department of Justice announced that it was dropping its 5-year investigation of the aluminum industry. The investigation was over whether the aluminum companies were acting as if they were a shared monopoly. Deep Seabed Mining. - The Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has established an Office of Ocean Minerals and Energy which will be responsible for implementing the Deep Seabed Nard Minerals and Energy Act and the Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion Act. It will establish licensing and regulatory programs.

Jan 1, 1980

Tax for Toxic Waste Cleanup. - The Superfund Act of 1980 became effective April 1, and provides that producers of certain metals and chemical substances are to be taxed in order to fund toxic waste cleanup. Industry will provide 88% of the 5-year, $1.6 billion fund. The Environmental Protection Agency will administer the Act, but the Internal Revenue Service will be responsible for collection of the industry tax. Under the Act, nickel companies, for example, will be required to pay a tax of 0.225 cents per pound on pure nickel products produced or imported into the United States. Standard for Exposure to Lead. - The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSPA) has announced a stricter standard on the test of a worker's exposure to lead. Effective May 15, in all lead intensive occupations with the exception of those at primary and secondary lead smelters, a worker would have to be removed from his work station if the level of lead in his blood tests out at 60 micrograms of lead per 100 grams of blood, instead of the previous standard of 70 micrograms. In the case of primary and secondary lead smelters, the ruling has been stayed until June 1, 1981, to allow time for further study.

Jan 1, 1981

Metals From Oil Shale. -A Geological Survey News Release in mid-January indicated that a surface sample analysis of oil shale in central Montana found a ton of shale to contain up to 13 pounds of zinc, 2 pounds of nickel, 1.8 pounds of molybdenum, 16 pounds of vanadium oxide, and nearly a quarter pound of selenium. It might be possible to recover some of these metals economically on a byproduct basis. The shale in central Montana was also estimated to contain 180 billion barrels of synthetic crude oil, which compares to estimated oil reserves in the Middle East of 360 billion barrels. Merchant Fleet Dwindles. -The National Maritime Council reports that although the U.S. is the world's largest trading power and that well over 90% of its foreign trade is conducted by shipping, the U.S. fleet is tenth in absolute numbers and less than 5% of its foreign trade is carried on U.S. ships. In 30 years, the U.S. fleet has dwindled from over 4,000 oceangoing vessels to about 600. U.S. ships carry less than 2% of imported iron ore, bauxite, and tungsten, and only 3% of oil imports.

Jan 1, 1981

By Evan Just

Government aid, regulation, and participation in the mineral industry are not new; they date back to the time when man first adopted communal living. Even in primitive tribal life, the obtaining of arrowhead or ceramic materials, washing of gold, or mining of copper were specialized activities, under tribal sponsorship. Later, when kingdoms, dynasties, and hierarchies developed, titles to mining properties were held by the sovereign or the state, work usually being done by slaves. Title acquisition through denouncement developed in Europe in the late Middle Ages and spread to the Western Hemisphere with the Spanish and Portuguese empires. Denouncements still recognized the rights of the sovereign in the requirement to pay royalties, which practice continues in many places today. Thus, anyone who views government participation in mineral activity as "encroachment" has no historical perspective. Only in a few countries and for a few generations have private interests enjoyed the right to exploit mineral deposits without the specific consent of the sovereign or without payment-of-royalty. Governments and the mineral industry have been linked together by other factors. Governments have had special interest in metals and minerals as stores of value and for armaments. Spanish conquests in the New World were energized by the lure of gold and silver. Pursuit of gold led to the American seizure of California in the days of the Forty-niners. The strategic importance of minerals in our own times has called for special steps to stimulate production in national emergencies and to prevent the enemy from acquiring mineral supplies. Our export controls to deny certain minerals to unfriendly countries, purchases for Government stockpile, and subsidies for domestic production are examples. Production regulation by state governments of oil and gas has become a well established routine. In brief, the mineral industry has never lacked aid, regulation, and participation by governments. The entrepreneur who wishes to explore for or develop minerals must deal with governments in most areas before he can begin, because mineral rights are reserved by them. He can proceed through discovery and de-

Jan 1, 1959

By Evan Just

Government aid, regulation, and participation in the mineral industry are not new; they date back to the time when man first adopted communal living. Even in primitive tribal life, the obtaining of arrowhead or ceramic materials, washing of gold, or mining of copper were specialized activities, under tribal sponsorship. Later, when kingdoms, dynasties, and hierarchies developed, titles to mining properties were held by the sovereign or the state, work usually being done by slaves. Title acquisition through denouncement developed in Europe in the late Middle Ages and spread to the Western Hemisphere with the Spanish and Portuguese empires. Denouncements still recognized the rights of the sovereign in the requirement to pay royalties, which practice continues in many places today. Thus, anyone who views government participation in mineral activity as "encroachment" has no historical perspective. Only in a few countries and for a few generations have private interests enjoyed the right to exploit mineral deposits without the specific consent of the sovereign or without payment of royalty. Governments and the mineral industry have been linked together by other factors. Governments have had special interest in metals and minerals as stores of value and for armaments. Spanish conquests in the New World were energized by the lure of gold and silver. Pursuit of gold led to the American seizure of California in the days of the Forty-niners. The strategic importance of minerals in our own times has called for special steps to stimulate production in national emergencies and to prevent the enemy from acquiring mineral supplies. Our export controls to deny certain minerals to unfriendly countries, purchases for Government stockpile, and subsidies for domestic production are examples. Production regulation by state governments of oil and gas has become a well established routine. In brief, the mineral industry has never lacked aid, regulation, and participation by governments. The entrepreneur who wishes to explore for or develop minerals must deal with governments in most areas before he can begin, because mineral rights are reserved by them. He can proceed through discovery and de-

Jan 1, 1964

By Paul M. Tyler

MUCH has been said in print, and much more that was unprintable, about burdensome controls, taxation, and multiplying restrictive, regulatory, or taxing activities of the Federal Government, but not so much has been said about ways and means whereby the Government can and does render economic assistance. Economics has been defined as the study of men earning a living, and economic assistance to industry as well as to individuals properly should take the form of helping enterprisers to help themselves rather than charity. Proposals to have the Government play Santa Claus must be examined carefully if -only to avoid undue favoritism to politically important persons and downright venality by potentially crooked public officials. Thomas Jefferson is credited with the remark that the best government is the one which governs least. Paternalism is abhorrent to most Americans.

Jan 1, 1947

By Andrew E. Nevin

The government of India convened a precedent-setting meeting in New Delhi on Nov. 12, 2001.The meeting brought together regulators and the mining industry in an attempt to fix the industry’s mine development problems in that country. More than 150people attended the all-day session. Ram Vilas Paswan, Minister of Coal and Mines, chaired the meeting. Ravi Shankar Prasad, Minister of State for Coal and Mines, was also present. The secretary of the Department of Mines and the Joint Secretaries and Additional Secretary also participated. The Department of Mines’ mandate is for economic growth: to get new mine development going and to make investment in mining attractive for both domestic and foreign-owned companies.

Jan 1, 2002

By AIME AIME

ENGINEERS in the past have been largely associated with private enterprise and there has been a considerable tendency on the part of some members of our profession to depreciate government service for engineers. We engineers must change our mental attitude about employment in government service, particularly in view of the present most friendly attitude of the U. S. Civil Service Commission toward engineers for major posts in our Government. We must also take a much more active interest in public affairs. It must be realized that the national-defense program, which we are now organizing, will require for its effectiveness large numbers of engineers skilled in a wide range of technical and administrative services. In fact, the success of this undertaking will depend largely upon the extent to which our Government can command expert engineering talent to serve during the emergency. There is an acute shortage of technical and supervisory engineering personnel not only in the industries concerned with national defense but also in the Army, Navy, and other defense agencies of the Government. By an Act of Congress, approved on Oct. 9. 1940. $9,000.- 000 was turned over to the U. S. Office of Education, the regular defense agency of the Government which has co-operated with higher education for

Jan 1, 1941

By Allan F. Lawrence

"I AM SURE you do not expect from me any learned dissertation on the problems and opportunities of the mining industry. Y our program committee must have recognized my limitations when issuing the invitation to speak to you, because they very thoughtfully left the subject wide open.With the leeway thus granted, I hope that you will bear with me for a few minutes while I try to clarify the impressions of the mining industry that I have gained in the very short time I have held the Mines portfolio and some of the parts that government bas or should have in furthering its development.As I see it, it is the duty of the Mines Department, as an arm of the provincial government, to balance the proprietary rights of all the people against the interests to whom the privilege of developing our resources are, in a s e n s e, leased. To strike a fair balance is not always easy, nor is it possible always to satisfy both sides. Still, under the free enterprise democratie form of government to which I think we al! subscribe, no better way of handling the problem has yet been discovered."

Jan 1, 1968

Throughout history, many of the world's achievements, conflicts and problems can be traced to the demand for minerals. With the rapid expansion of our industrialised society in recent years the demand for minerals has grown to such an extent that uncertainties about availability and cost have arisen, especially in the case of energy minerals.Minerals have acquired a new dimension for governments as the availability of these resources is interwoven with the ability of governments to achieve their developmental goals on national and international levels. Accordingly, the supply of minerals will increasingly be affected by social and political factors.

Jan 1, 1986

Congress has authorized the President to control the supply and distribution of the following: Antimony, arsenic, ball clay, bismuth, bromine, cerium, chalk, chromium, cobalt, corundum, emery, fluorspar, ferrosilicon, fullers' earth, graphite, grinding pebbles, iridium, kaolin, magnesite, manganese, mercury, mica, molybdenum, osmium, sodium, platinum, palladium, paper clay, phosphorus, potassium, pyrites, radium,

Jan 12, 1918

By Richard L. Gordon

THE PROBLEMS AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS Toward the end of the 19th century, American industry began a drastic reorganization. The many, small, often-regional firms were supplanted by large national corporations-often produced by mergers among the existing firms. Giant companies appeared throughout American industry and many of them were engaged in the mineral industries.a The largest combines, by far, to emerge during the period were United States Steel and Standard Oil. Long before the restructuring had run its course, widespread concern arose over the process of concentration. Efforts were made to control, if not stop, the transformation. The concern produced the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 and the first of many federal regulatory agencies-the Interstate Commerce Commission (see Refs. 24, 31, 42). The basic objectives of these policies remain unclear to this day. The crucial issue is whether the goal is primarily to insure development of a more competitive economy or to preserve a social structure leaving more scope for small businesses. Complications arise from difficulties in agreeing upon the meaning of these terms. Studies of the early years of the antitrust movement suggest that it involved no particular concern over the mineral industries. Objections were directed at big companies in general. To be sure, the conservation movement arose in roughly the same period and did stress the evils of monopoly control of minerals. However, direct, continuing influence of conservation policy on antitrust is not apparent. Many of the most important antitrust cases, nevertheless, involved minerals. This, of course, may be sheer coincidence; the choice of cases has never followed any obvious pattern. Certainly, no simple hypothesis can explain the interest consistently. Once it may have been true that mineral industries were more likely than other sectors to be dominated by a few large companies. Yet, often sharp reversals of such tendencies -e.g., in oil and aluminum-have not removed antitrust interest. The importance of minerals to the economy cannot satisfactorily rationalize antitrust interest. The equally

Jan 1, 1976

I have spent most of the past 35 years working as an economic geologist in the area of exploration and development of base and precious metals. Most of this period has been as an employee of Trans-National-Corporations (TNC's). I presently act as a consulting geologist to a joint venture company, bringing together two such TNC's: Anglo American Corporation and affiliated companies De Beers (Diamonds) and Minorco (Metals mining outside of Southern Africa), and Normandy Mining Limited ofAustralia. Normandy is presently through its gold arm PosGold, Australia's largest gold miner and Anglo American can claim to be the world's largest gold company producing over 280 tonnes of gold a year, more than twice its nearest rival Gold Fields of South Africa. In addressing this topic, the role that Government can, and should play in mineral development, I will be drawing heavily on some examples from these and other TNC's experience in recent offshore mining investment.

Jan 1, 1995

I have spent most of the past thirty-five years working as an economic geologist in the area of exploration and development of base and precious metals. Most of this period has been as an employee of Trans-National-Corporations (TNC's). I presently act as a consulting geologist to a joint venture company, bringing together two such TNC's: Anglo American' Corporation and affiliated companies De Beers (Diamonds) and Minorco (Metals mining outside of Southern Africa), and Normandy Mining Limited of Australia. Normandy is presently through its gold arm PosGold, Australia's largest gold miner and Anglo American can claim to be the world's largest gold company producing over 280 tonnes of gold a year, more than twice its nearest rival Gold Fields of South Africa. In addressing this topic, the role that Government can, and should play in mineral development, I will be drawing heavily on some examples from these and other TNC's experience in recent offshore mining Investment.

Jan 1, 1995

By Van Dusen M

The involvement of concerned parties in all aspects of the Lihir Project from an early stage has promoted good relations between all groups. Activities involving landowners, the Lihir community, the New Ireland Provincial Government (NIPG) and the prospective developer include the Lihir Liaison Committee, Lihir Working Group, Environmental Planning Committee, Provincial Mining Task Force and the Lihir Mining Area Landowners Association (LMALA). With modifications, the Lihir Liaison model may be of use in promoting good relationships among parties in other mineral developments.

Jan 1, 1991

By Thomas R. J

Following asmallnumberofpollutionincidents involving the death of cattle from ingestion of cyanide that had escaped from gold processing plants, the Queensland Government undertook to develop competent guidelines addressing this problem. These guidelines, "Queensland Government Guidelines on Prevention of Water Pollution from Cyanide Use in Gold Ore Processing", issued by the Department of Environment and Heritage, Department of Resource Industries and Water Resources Commission, cover hydrology and general house-keeping intended to reduce the likelihood of significant impact from a spill or unintentional dis- charge of contaminated material. There are three major advances for Queensland embodied in this Guideline: ò the use of a design approach that gives site specific standards rather than trying to give a multitude of standards broad enough to cover all situations, ò the use of hazard assessment and a "critical period" hydrologi- cal design technique, and ò new monitoring and reporting requirements. The guideline is presented here in a summary form:

Jan 1, 1991

By Richard W. Smith

Why are we losing our liberties? (1) . . . because our local chambers of commerce come to the National Chamber's annual meeting, vote for a policy on federal economy, and then go to Capitol Hill and ask for a federal project for their area. (2) ... because our mining men ask for a subsidy to mine submarginal deposits that can't be economically mined in a free economy. (3) . . . because 18,000 men and organizations all over the country recently wired or wrote a Congressional committee asking that the Army Engineers be exempt from the President's power to reorganize the Executive Branch of the government under the recommendations of the Hoover Commission.

Jan 1, 1949

The Secretary of the Treasury, in a recent ruling, allows 18 months from date of discharge within which former service men may reinstate their Government insurance policies lapsed f or non-payment of premiums. The point just now confronting the Bureau of War Risk Insurance and all those who are interested in the immediate and the future welfare of the young men who offered their lives for the flag and the country is that they be kept mindful that the provisions of the War Risk Act were not solely war measures, but that the framers of the Act provided insurance protection for all time to come for the boys in uniform and all dear to them. Under this ruling those making application for reinstatement will be required to pay only the premium on the amount of insurance to be reinstated for the month of grace during which they were protected, and for the current month. When the men are mustered out of the service, the insurance continues in force for one month and they are fully protected during that period even if their premium has remained unpaid. In reinstating, that month's premium will be required as well as the premium for the month in which reinstatement is effected. The ruling also stipulates that when applying for reinstatement the man must be in as good health as at the date of discharge, and so state in his application. After complying with these simple requirements, a Government insurance policy may be made as sound as on the day it was written. The Bureau of War Risk Insurance is now searching out its delinquent policy holders and offering them this renewal of Government protection. It needs the assistance of public spirited, patriotic, business and professional men everywhere, for the sake of our former service men, who must be given the information about its privileges to which they are entitled.

Jan 9, 1919

By Michael Robert Hodson

The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do no necessarily reflect those of CRU. The Extent of Government Involvement In 1982 national governments in the Non-Socialist world owned at least some equity share in an estimated 49 percent of the bauxite mining capacity located in their own countries.* By comparison, as Figure 1 shows, in the same year governments owned at least part of an estimated 33 per cent of primary aluminium smelting capacity. In other industries, national, or state governments in 1982 held at least part ownership of mining capacity in 42 per cent in the copper industry, 34 per cent in the tin industry, 23 per cent of the zinc industry, 15 per cent of the lead industry and 11 per cent in the nickel industry. Thus while within the aluminium industry attention has focussed on the share of government ownership in the primary aluminium sector, national government involvement through ownership is larger in the bauxite sector. Moreover, ownership by government is more widespread in the mining of bauxite than in the mining of all other principal non-ferrous base metals. Yet while the equity participation of governments in the bauxite sector is widespread, it is but one of many forms of government involvement. In addition to direct ownership or equity participation domestic government involvement has taken the form of legislation to protect the environment, controls on the level of production, insistence on the export of ore, pressure to maintain levels of employment, controls on the type of fuel used, foreign exchange *Capacity which is owned in whole or in part is included within the state sector, but capacity in one country which is owned by a wholly or partly owned government company in another company is not included in the state sector; e.g. the capacity of the Trombetas mine is included in the state sector but the capacity of Delphi bauxite would not be included.

Jan 1, 1984