Search Documents

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

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 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

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

The subject of government involvement in industry is, to say the least, a touchy one. For many it conjures up thoughts of socialisation or nationalisation. For others it is a desirable objective and is seen as a means of social reform by giving government a greater say in the control and distribution of human, financial and natural resources for the betterment of the community. Whatever your point of view, it is difficult to deny that government involvement exists to lesser or greater degrees in all industries. The mining industry is no exception and the degree of government involvement is probably greater than it is in other industries. I think it is important to remember when talking about government involvement in industry to recognise that there are different types of involvement and that all governments have a right, if they so desire, to become involved in whatever way they choose. The decision of a government to increase its direct or indirect involvement must, of course, be taken in the national interest. Governments, if we are still old fashioned enough to believe in ministerial and electoral responsibility, must make up their own minds about whether their actions are in the national interest and they must be prepared to accept the consequences of that action, good or bad. For instance, they must decide

Jan 1, 1975

Important chemical and other technical engineering work necessary, for the prosecution of this war is being carried on by the Bureau of Mines Experiment Station, at Washington, D. C. The services of trained men of the following classifications are urgently needed Bacteriologists Instrument makers Biologists Laboratory Assistants Chemists, Inorganic Laborers Chemists, Organic Machinists Chemists, Physical Physiologists Chemists, Electro- Plumbers Chemical Engineers Steamfitters Draftsmen Stenographers. Electrical Engineers Skilled labor of various kinds If your training fits you for any of these occupations, send to the Bureau of Mines, American University Experiment Station, . Washington, D. C. for blank forms. When properly executed and returned by you, these forms will be placed on file, and when a vacancy occurs you will be considered for it and will be notified if your services are desired. If you are a registrant in the draft, and have not yet been- ordered to camp, it may be possible to have you immediately inducted into the service for work here. If you are not in the draft, but feel that you wish to serve your country in the present crisis, you can enlist, or serve as a civilian. Serve your country where you can serve it best. VAN H. MANNING, Director.

Jan 6, 1918

By Richard L. Gordon

Minerals long have been important commodities in international trade. As an inevitable result, the governments of the world have employed a wide variety of programs that affect the flow of trade. Roughly speaking, we may distinguish between the desire of more developed countries (MDCs) like the United States, western Europe, and Japan to control imports of minerals and the concern of less developed countries (LDCs), like India, about exploiting and exporting their minerals. The terminology used to describe different countries and the classification of specific countries into groups is unsettled and often changing. The poorest countries have been characterized as backward, undeveloped, underdeveloped, and developing. The problem seems to be in selecting a term that is both accurate and polite. Less developed seems, for reasons outlined by Hagen [pp. 51-57], the most convenient term. The borderline between an LDC and an MDC is always open to dispute. Objective measures are difficult to develop because of deficiencies in basic data, and enormous conceptual problems arise in making valid comparisons from even good data [see Hagen, pp. 7-28]. Thus, policies of the MDCs can be evaluated chiefly by using a few basic arguments for protectionist attitudes towards international trade. In dealing with the LDCs, a more far-ranging evaluation that covers general economic policy goals, the role of foreign investment, and the indirect effects of trade is required. This duality breaks down when trying to deal with the depressed areas in an MDC; here the issues are more akin to those associated with problems in an LDC. Similarly, variants of arguments used in LDCs appear in debates about foreign investments in MDCs. The whole discussion of minerals in LDCs, moreover, has obvious implications for MDCs like Canada and Australia. They, too, must face problems about the best utilization of their resources. THE RESTRICTION OF MINERAL TRADE BY DEVELOPED COUNTRIES[a] At least to some extent, the world's leading industrial nations have intervened to control the inflow of minerals. Such regulation is particularly pronounced for energy. Both the United States and western Europe employ

Jan 1, 1976

By Thomas V. Falkie

Of the various critics of federal energy and minerals policy we are hearing these days--and they are legion--few make their points more vividly than our fellow SME member and eloquent spokesman for the mineral industry. Mr. Eugene Guccione. In a moment of comparative mellowness. Mr. Guccione recently characterized Washington's time-honored legislative and bureaucratic machinery as a case of "...scientific illiterates asking the incompetents to do the unnecessary." I hope the prevailing industry view of government is not quite that harsh, and yet one cannot deny that government intervention is indeed pressing in on the mineral industry with increasing force. What is happening today in Washington and in state capitols will have enormous impact--both short and long term--on the future of coal and mineral production in the United States. Symptoms of this trend are everywhere. In the first place, there is a sentiment, widely held and still spreading, that the government must become involved-- that no matter what the problem, the solution lies in more government intervention. Free enterprise versus statist, reflex reaction organizations. When it cones to regulation in the resource field, there is too often a tendency to start out by assuming guilt on the part of the mineral industry. This can lead to laws governing mineral recovery that are more punitive than constructive...laws drawn up with little research into the scientific or economic considerations involved.

Jan 1, 1975

By Arne Paus-Jenssen

The potash industry in Saskatchewan has recently been the focus of much new legislation at the provincial level and, along with other mining industries in Canada, also subject to changes in tax legislation at the federal level. As a result, the industry presently operates under (a) provincial production controls, a prorationing scheme; (b) a new provincial reserve tax on potash only and; (c) a new federal income tax applicable to all mineral industries. The prorating scheme dates back to 1970 and emerged as public policy because of the excess supply situation faced by the international potash industry towards the end of the sixties. This caused special problems for new mines in Saskatchewan and the provincial government decided to intervene. The new tax legislation at provincial and federal levels, both introduced within the last four years, reflects a belief that insufficient revenues accrue to the public sector from natural resources. All mining industries in Canada, including the potash industry, have had their tax positions completely reversed during these four years. Traditionally the mining sector in Canada has been a recipient of substantial tax incentives and has enjoyed low tax rates. This has changed and the mining sector is now one of the most heavily taxed sectors in the economy. In addition, the mining sector has moved from a situation where its rapid development was favoured by governments to a situation where this is no longer the case.

Jan 1, 1976

By C. Y. Chen

In order to put an end to the uneven environmental standards and enforcement established by various coal mining States in the United States, the Congress passed and the President signed the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (Public Law 95-87 or the Act) on August 3, 1977. Within one year after passage, the Secretary of the Interior was directed to promulgate permanent program regulations implementing Title V provisions of the Act. These regulations were to form the basis for State regulatory programs under the Act and to allow States to assume primary regulatory responsibility. In order to implement the underground mining provision of the Act, the Secretary is directed in section 516(a) of the Act to promulgate rules, but ones which take into consideration the distinct differences between surface coal mining and underground coal mining. The regulations developed by the Secretary and promulgated on March 13, 1979, with respect to subsidence control, included (1) a subsidence control plan as part of the permitting process, (2) substantive provisions establishing performance standards for subsidence control, and (3) provisions providing for the prohibition of mining under perennial streams, impoundments larger than 20 acre feet, and certain public facilities and urban areas.

Jan 1, 1985

By Rajesh K. Mishra

The person in charge of Environmental Affairs in a small business has many higher priority projects (such as making money to meet the employee? payroll etc.) than filling out and filing the regulatory forms. It is but. natural to think that these affairs can be managed? by playing ignorant until audited by the regulatory -state and federal agencies. Truth is to. the contrary; generally, it is too late by then. The fines and legal costs even for failing to file the regulatory forms could deliver a serious blow to the financial well-being of a small business. Forms and reports under SARA Title III are not hard to complete., but they are time consuming. In this paper we will discuss the information and data compilation procedures, simplification of some legal terminology into simple technical language, and tips that help in filling out the forms?. Some actual case 'histories of EPA fines will also be reviewed.

Jan 1, 1992

By Thomas V. Falkie

In bygone days, the mineral engineer spent most of his/her time on the technical aspects of designing, building, and managing mineral operations. In the last few decades, mostly since the 1960s, increasing amounts of engineering man power and time are spent dealing with federal, state, and local government agencies, laws, and regulations. It is not possible to plan, design, build, or operate mines, mills, smelters, or even office buildings without detailed consideration of government regulations and permitting requirements dealing with environment, worker health and safety, etc. The four chapters of this section provide an overview of the social, legal, political, environmental, and health and safety aspects of mineral enterprise. The section sets the stage for the working engineer/geologist in industry, government, consulting, or academe and points the direction for more detailed study in each of these areas.

Jan 1, 2008

Government geoscience may be categorised by objective under three headings: Applied Research for Geoscientific Framework Studies, Resource Inventory, and Technical Advice. In Queensland, the Department of Resource Industries is active in all three categories. Under the program-based management system adopted in 1987, three Programs, namely, Geological Survey, Mineral Resources Development, and Energy Resources Development and Utilisation, have geoscience responsibilities.Prime responsibility for geoscience resides with the Geological Survey Program, which provides a geoscientific framework for mineral and energy exploration and the development of the State. Simply stated, the Program goal is to provide geological information when and where it is required. Geological Survey work also encompasses aspects of resource inventory and technical advice, complementing the work of the other two Programs. This role has a 122 year long tradition, for geoscientists of the Geological Survey have been engaged in investigations designed to facilitate the identification and utilisation of the mineral, water and energy resources of Queensland since 1868.

Jan 1, 1990

In spite of our deep conviction that it would be wrong for the United States to enter World War II, when, after Pearl Harbor, we were actually in it, I felt that I must do all I could to help. The country had been so good to me that I could not decently stay on the sidelines. My first thought was that I might help with supply and administration in the Air Force, as in World War I. So on the evening of Pearl Harbor I wired the chief of our Air Force in Washington saying that I had been on Gen. William Mitchell's staff in World War I and was offering my services again. I received a noncommital answer, but after a couple of weeks was told to take my physical examination. I passed it, but nothing further happened. After helping to make plans for the wartime operations of Summit King and Desert Silver, Dorothy and I went to New York to spend Christmas with Molly and Peter, both of whom were in college in the East. I had to complete a report on the Argonaut mine in California first, though the war made my recommendations of dubious validity. Before Christmas I received wires from Temple Bridgeman, Phil Wilson, and other friends who had taken positions with government agencies responsible for securing mineral products needed for war use. They urged me to join them. It was evidently a case of not whether but how I could be most useful. After six uncertain days with the family in New York I took the night train to Washington on the 28th of December. I had a hectic day there. First I saw Arthur Bunker and Phil Wilson at what became the Aluminum and Magnesium Division of the War Production Board. Their office was in an old converted barracks. They asked me to examine magnesium deposits in Nevada at once, and then to look at other magnesium and aluminum properties. After leaving

Jan 1, 1976

Keeping the sediment on the mine site and out of the water course is essential from the regulatory, environmental and sustainability perspectives. Regulation of this aspect of mining is embedded in environmental legislation and government receiving water quality standards, and government control has apparently been considered to be the most appropriate method to define mine site discharge standards and the environmental implications of sediment in downstream watercourses. A literature search for guidelines for the site specific design and operation of sediment ponds treating mine site runoff to remove total suspended solids, turbidity and flocculant-induced toxicity, revealed little information on the mining industry?s and government?s roles in defining the ?how to achieve? related to sediment pond design. Is there a need or reason for an industry-driven leadership to clearly define the ?how to? keep the sediment on the mine site and out of the water course? Currently, this issue is addressed in Canada by a federal mining regulation for metal mines which specifies discharge quality for sediment. This paper focuses on the method used in British Columbia, Canada, to regulate and provide a scientific methodology to control the discharge of sediment from mine sites. Management plans relative to this topic are discussed and are considered to have value from the exploration, construction, operation and the onset of closure phases. In addition, the balance and linkage between the erosion control management plan and the sediment pond management plan are discussed in terms of how they may be designed to complement each other to lower the risk of exceeding discharge and receiving water quality standards. If there were an industry-driven standard, or guidance document relative to addressing sediment release, it would benefit mining companies by eliminating the repetitive analysis of this topic for each new mine, mine expansion, and mine modification; also, government may often replace certain aspects of permitting with a regulation, if there is a government/industry established standard defining Best Achievable Technology (e.g. the Canadian Metal Mining Effluent Regulations).

Aug 1, 2013

By DONALD H. McLAUGHLlN

Few factors have had more influence in maintaining the strength and stability of the United States than our persistent habit of providing .checks and balances to the dynamic powers of free enterprise on the one hand and to the controls and guidance exercised by the State on the other. .Indeed, it is this same concern for matching forces against each other that has given our republic its ability -to preserve a democratic basis of life for its citizens, and yet maintain a ,government that is able to protect the rights of all and to resist and minimize the danger of excessive concentration of authority. Our current efforts to clarify the nation's mineral policies and to define more clearly the role that the governmental agencies should play in conjunction with the functions of private -enterprise again reveal the desirability and advantages of maintaining our traditional controls. At times, the equilibrium has been temporarily disturbed by too great enthusiasm for one or the other of these basic concepts. Sooner or later, however, the balance has been restored by the healthy opposition that is always created by excesses of one sort. At the current stage in our history, the swing toward undue enlargement of the powers of the State seems to have gone dangerously far and we would be untrue 'to our traditional behavior if the group that must demonstrate the virtues of free enterprise did not rally to its support with the utmost earnestness.

Jan 1, 1949