Search Documents

By L. E. Young

IT has been said the British Empire was built on British Coal. In all the postwar planning for Great Britain the necessity for producing cheap coal and the prosperity of the coal industry are given first consideration. On Jan. 23, 1945, there was released in London a "Report to the Colliery Owners" which had been awaited with great interest. This was entitled "A Plan for Coal" and was the recommendation of Robert Foot, chairman of The Mining Association (Colliery Owners), prepared at their request. Presentation of the "Plan" at this time is particularly significant as it is an answer to the demand for nationalization of the coal industry by the Labour Party and at the same time is a carefully considered program for postwar reconstruction, prosperity, and stability. In the words of Mr. Foot, If the coal industry for the first ten years after this war is to find itself in a situation similar to the one it occupied for the ten years following the last war, with its record of disputes, strikes, stoppages, short-time working, unemployment, and, with it all, a completely insufficient margin of profit, and all the insecurity and instability in our basic industry that was brought with them, it is goodbye to any real prospect of full employment, social security, and high standard of living. To present an elaborate review of the conditions which have brought to a crisis the unfortunate situation in the British coal industry is here unnecessary, but certain of the salient points

Jan 1, 1945

Editor?s note: Each year, Mining Engineering features an industrial minerals review. Several people put in a fair amount of time in developing the material for this issue, all the while doing their own jobs. Thank you to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division technical committee chair and vice-chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles. Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor. Rajesh Raitani, member SME, of Cytec Industries Inc., is chair of the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division?s Technical Committee. The technical Committee vice chairs include: ? Vishal Gupta, member SME, of FlSmidth, Agricultural Materials. ? Candace Trimble, member SME, of Oil- Dri Corporation of America, and Bradley Van Gosen, of the U.S. Geological Survey, ceramics and refractory materials. ? Stanley Krukowski, member SME, of the Oklahoma Geological Survey, chemical raw materials. ? Russell Winn, member SME, of R.E. James Gravel Co., chemical raw materials. ? Justin Zdunczyk, member SME, of Plum Creek, construction materials. ? Jerry Gauntt, member SME, of Golder Associates, fillers and pigments. ? Michael Cheshire, member SME, of Los Alamos National Laboratory, sorbents, filters and process aids. ? Rajesh Raitani, member SME, of Cytec, Industries Inc., specialty minerals. Their help makes possible this June industrial minerals issue. On behalf of ME readers, the editors thank them.

Jul 1, 2013

"Editor’s note: Each year, Mining Engineering features an industrial minerals review. Several people put in a fair amount of time in developing the material for this issue, all the while doing their own jobs. Thank you to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals and Aggregates Division technical committee chair and vice chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles.Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor.Vishal Gupta, member SME, of EP Minerals LLC, is chair of the Industrial Minerals &Aggregates Division’s Technical Committee.The technical committee vice chairs include:• Vishal Gupta, member SME, of EP Minerals LLC, Agricultural Materials.• Joe Garska, member SME, of Imerys, ceramics and refractory materials.• Stanley Krukowski, member SME, of the Oklahoma Geological Survey, chemical raw materials.• Russell Winn, member SME, of R.E. Janes Gravel Co., chemical raw materials.• Justin Zdunczyk, member SME, of Pike Industries, construction aggregates.• Jerry Gauntt, member SME, of Golder Associates, fillers and pigments.• Ebrhaim K. Tarshizi, member SME, of the Michigan Tech, sorbents, filters and process aids.• Daniel T. Eyde, member SME, of St. Cloud Mining, specialty minerals.Their help makes possible this July industrial minerals issue. On behalf of ME readers, the editors thank them.Virta, R.L. U.S. Geological Survey, National Minerals Information CenterFour companies - H.C. Spinks Clay Co., Inc., Imerys, Old Hickory Clay Co., and Unimin Corp. - mined ball clay in four states in 2013. On the basis of preliminary data, production was 1 Mt (1.1 million st) with an estimated value of $47 million. Production increased by 3 percent in tonnage from 973 kt (1.1 million st) with a value of $45.1 million in 2012. Tennessee was the leading producer state accounting for 64 percent of domestic production, followed by Texas, Mississippi and Kentucky. About 67 percent of total ball clay production was airfloat, 22 percent was crude or shredded and 11 percent was water-slurried.ConsumptionIn 2013, domestic ball clay producers sold clays to the following markets: ceramic floor and wall tile (44 percent); exports (21 percent); sanitaryware (18 percent); miscellaneous ceramics (9 percent); fillers, extenders, and binders, and unspecified uses (4 percent each), based on 2012 end use patterns and current markets. Other markets accounted for less than 1 percent of the remaining ball clay sales or use. Sales reported for the manufacture of fiberglass or most filler, extender, and binder applications were likely to have been mainly kaolin mined or purchased by the ball clay producers.PricesThe average value of domestically produced ball clay was approximately $47/t ($43/st) in 2013 compared with $46/t ($42/st) in 2012, on the basis of a preliminary survey of domestic ball clay producers. The unit values of exported and imported ball clay were $126/t ($114/ st) and $373/t ($338/st), respectively, in 2013, compared with $62/t ($56/st) and $314/t ($285/st), respectively, in 2012. Unit values for most large export shipments increased in 2013, and a larger number of low-tonnage, high-value export shipments were shipped in 2013 than in 2012, resulting in a doubling of the average export value. Two low-tonnage, high-value shipments in 2013 accounted for the increased value of imports."

Jan 1, 2014

By J. W. Thompson

OIL AND GAS AS MINERALS. Oil and gas within the ground are minerals and the fact that they have attributes not common to other minerals because of their fugitive nature or vagrant habit, and the disposition to percolate, and the possibility of their escape from beneath one part of the surface to another, does not remove them from the class of minerals. Texas Co. v. Daugherty (Texas), 176 Southwestern, 717, p. 719, May, 1915. OWNERSHIP OF TAILINGS-ABANDONMENT. A corporation engaged in milling- and the reduction of ores deposited the tailings therefrom upon a portion of its own land lying in a gulch through which water flows at times in great volumes and with great force' and notwithstanding all reasonable efforts by dams and otherwise to retain its tailings, the tailings eventually were forced upon the lands of an adjoining owner; these tailings were valuable and their retreatment, intended by the mill owner, profitable; and the fact that the tailings were so washed down upon the lands of the adjoining owner and permitted to accumulate and remain for some considerable time is not sufficient to show an abandonment on the part of the owner of the tailings, where it is clear that the owner had no intention of so doing, but on the contrary, always intended to conserve and retreat the tailings.

Jan 1, 1916

By S Watson, L Martinez

Mine projects are complex opportunities that demand a constant assessment of uncertainty, ie risk and upside potential. This is because the value of a mine project is typically influenced by many underlying economic and physical uncertainties, such as metal/mineral prices, metal/mineral grades, costs, schedules, quantities, and environmental issues, amongst others, which are not known with much certainty at the beginning of the project. But, is uncertainty an enemy or an ally of the mine planner/analyst? To answer this question, this paper first assesses and elaborates upon the general concept of uncertainty. It then looks at the different sources of uncertainty in a mining project, such as the orebody, costs and product price uncertainties, and their effect on the final project value. Next, a general?review?of current mine evaluation techniques highlighting their limitations when dealing with uncertainty is made. Finally, an extended evaluation and risk management framework that addresses the existing uncertainty in the (greenfield/brownfield) mine evaluation process is proposed. One important characteristic of this framework is that it uses and manages uncertainty in order to generate additional value to the project; this is done through operational and managerial flexibility, which allow mine planners to minimise/maximise project risk/upside-potential giving a more realistic estimate of the projectÆs market value - this is shown in practical and simple examples occurring at different stages of a mine project, such as exploration and operation. Final conclusions are provided at the end.CITATION:Martinez, L and Watson, S, 2012. Uncertainty - An important source of (additional) value for mine projects, in Proceedings Project Evaluation 2012 , pp 131-140 (The Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: Melbourne).

May 24, 2012

By Arthur Notman

THE raw material men in all industries, and copper is no exception, are accustomed to think of them- selves as the whole show, and not without justice, for if there were no copper mines the world would have no copper. Nevertheless, many different things costing money and resulting in profits must be done to their product before it is ready for the world's use. In other words, they are making the frequent mistake of Chinking in terms of partial costs. Nobody really uses electrolytic copper. Possibly that is why nobody seems willing to pay anything for it. The manufacturers, being canny, do not buy any more electrolytic than they feel that they can work up and sell profitably, although they like to make the raw material men Chink that they will take all that can be produced. This is a state of affairs that has aroused my sympathy and curiosity, and has induced me to study the financial history of the copper wire and brass industry of the country or such portion of it as publishes any records readily available to the curious minded. About 60 per cent of the electrolytic copper used in this country is drawn into wire and consumed by the electrical industries. The remaining 40 per cent is

Jan 1, 1926

By K. J. Ladwig

The Bureau of Mines conducted a field investigation of the water quality in inundated underground coal mines in the Northern Anthracite Field, eastern Pennsylvania. Water samples were collected at multiple depths from nine abandoned mine shafts in the Wyoming Basin, ranging from 68 to 650 m (223 to 2,132 ft) in depth and intersecting as many as seven mined seams in a single shaft. The shafts were also monitored for fluid resistivity, fluid temperature, Eh, and pH using downhole instrumentation. The monitoring program showed that the formerly highly acidic mine water is now slightly alkaline. Sulfate concentrations decreased as much as 74 pct in the flooded workings and 54 pct at a mine water discharge from values reported in 1964 and 1968, respectively. These data are consistent with the inhibition of pyrite oxidation and gradual flushing of oxidation products in flooded mine environments. The monitoring program also revealed significant vertical stratification in water quality in five of the nine shafts, each characterized by two easily recognizable zones. The transitions between zones were sharp, marked by rapid changes in Eh, pH, and ionic composition, the upper zones being less contaminated than the lower zones. The development of stratification appears to be a function of shallow localized flow conditions, arising primarily from the relative positions of mine openings and structural features of the coalbeds.

Jan 1, 1984

Production sharing and cost apportionment in joint ventures is commonplace in Australasia today and elsewhere. It is a recognised convention that, with the exception of a free carry situation, joint venture participants usually share the proceeds of the joint venture in direct proportion to their respective participating interest, after having first paid its respective cash calls, in advance, to cover the projectÆs ongoing operating and capital cost requirements.In surface mines, the parties simply pay their way and take their proceeds in this manner. In underground mines, the situation is no different, though treatment of capital, depreciation and tax may differ between the parties. A common feature in many cases is the creation of a joint venture entity to conduct the business. This entity then collects cash from the parties, banks it, employs the staff, runs the operation, provides reports and pays out the proceeds. This convention appears to be relatively simple in application. In practice, it has been known to be complicated in the situation where the participants take their product at the mine gate and undertake their own marketing and selling arrangements. A more complex situation presents itself where the joint venture tenement boundary with an unrelated third party straddles an economic deposit. In this scenario, both the joint venture parties and the third party may wish to mine the deposit, sharing some infrastructure and costs, yet taking their own product as it is produced. A case study outlining such a situation is presented in the paper, outlining firstly how the major cost categories were identified and treated for cost apportionment purposes. Secondly, a mechanism for the equitable apportionment of product is suggested. Finally, issues such as timing and cost reporting are dealt with, together with a checklist of points which should be considered when a similar situation might arise in the future.

Jan 1, 2002

By R. L. Virta

Ball Clay -- Four companies - H.C. Spinks Clay Co. Inc. (owned by Lhoist Group), Imerys Group (formerly Kentucky-Tennessee Clay Co.), Old Hickory Clay Co. and Unimin Corp. - mined ball clay in four states during 2010. Production, based on preliminary data, was 910 kt (1.11 million st) with an estimated value of $42.9 million. That was a 10-percent increase in tonnage from 831 kt (916 million st) with a value of $37.7 million that was produced in 2009. Tennessee was the leading producer state with 61 percent of domestic production. It was followed by Texas, Mississippi and Kentucky. About 70 percent of production was airfloat, 20 percent was crude and 10 percent was water-slurried.

Jan 1, 2011

By R Razanatsimba, A Galli

A mining company has entered into contractual commitments to supply certain quantities of its product to clients in each time period. Failure to fulfil its obligations would damage its reputation as a reliable supplier. The planned production would normally be sufficient unless major problems such as highwall failures, roof falls, natural disaster, or strikes that interrupt production or delays in obtaining environmental permits, occur. To overcome these difficulties, the company may be able to obtain more of the commodity: from its strategic stockpile (if there is sufficient there); by buying it on the spot market; or for some commodities such as gold and uranium, by leasing it. Two sources of uncertainty, the spot price of the commodity and the occurrence of serious incidents that interrupt production, are considered. For simplicity it is assumed that the commodity price follows a geometric Brownian motion, that productions incidents have a binomial distribution, that they are independent from one time period to another and that they do not affect prices. A branching tree structure is used to model the joint evolution of prices and production incidents. The aim of this research project was to evaluate the companyÆs options for fulfilling its contractual commitments. When evaluating these options, multi-stage stochastic programming with recourse was used to solve this problem because in addition to providing the dollar value of the project, it gives decision-makers the æroadmapÆ to reach the optimal value. That is, how much material should be bought/sold on the spot market, how much to add to/subtract from the stockpile, how much to lease and in the worst case what the shortfall would be, for each time period as a function of the current spot price and breakdown status. A case-study over a five-year period is used to illustrate the proposed procedure. In this study the production would be sufficient to cover the companyÆs contractual commitments unless production incidents occur. Focus is on evaluating the impact of the quantity initially in the stockpile on the value of the project when the commodity market is tight, that is, when only small quantities can be bought on the spot market or by leasing.

Sep 26, 2011

By John D. Wiebmer

First, a definition of a small scale miner is in order. The US Bureau of Mines classifies him as one who produces 360 t/d (400 stpd) of ore or less. In Canada, he would be refered to as a "junior company." Mexico identifies the small scale miner as one whose gross income from operations is less than $880,000 per year. A small surface mine in India employs less than 400 people, and a small underground mine employs less than 150. Peru considers a small scale miner one who produces less than 54 000 t/y (60,000 stpy) of ore. Obviously, the term is relative. What may be a small mine in one country is a medium or large mine in another. This lack of agreement is understandable since small scale mining does not often cross national boundaries. Rather, its effects are felt at the regional and local levels within each nation. Its importance doesn't lie with any huge contribution to the GNP or balance of trade. Instead, its value is as a local employer and as a frontrunner in geologic exploration.

Jan 2, 1979

By Sidney Katell

This report covers the period January 1964 through December 1964; it is a continuation of the series that began with the publication of Information Circular 7516 in October 1949. Also, it is the sixth in a series of reports prepared under a cooperative agreement between the Bureau of Mines and the American Association of Cost Engineers. The agreement provides for the publication of an annual cost bibliography with the work load involved in the preparation shared equally. The abstracted articles, concerned with all facers of cost engineering in the field of chemical and petroleum. plants and related subjects, are from the following sources: 1. American Association of Cost Engineers Bulletin. 2. Bureau of Mines Information Circulars. 3. Bureau of Mines Reports of Investigations. 4. Chemical Engineering. 5. Chemical Engineering Progress,

Jan 1, 1965

By Sidney Katell

This report covers the period January 1964 through December 1964; it is a continuation of the series that began with the publication of Information Circular 7516 in October 1949. Also, it is the sixth in a series of reports prepared under a cooperative agreement between the Bureau of Mines and the American Association of Cost Engineers. The agreement provides for the publication of an annual cost bibliography with the work load involved in the preparation shared equally. The abstracted articles, concerned with all facers of cost engineering in the field of chemical and petroleum. plants and related subjects, are from the following sources:

Jan 1, 1965

By W. N. Hoskins

This report covers the final results of a two-phase contract study conducted between July 1974 and October 1976. A comprehensive summary of the initial phase of the study is included. Phase I of the study involved the investigation and evaluation of all potential candidate underground systems for mining the deeper deposits of oil shale and associated minerals in the Piceance Creek basin of northwestern Colorado. Phase II called for the refinement and the detailed technical and economic analysis of the most promising system, or systems, thus disclosed. Of the several systems initially investigated and evaluated, four showed considerable merit for exploiting the deeper deposits: (1) chamber and pillar mining with spent shale backfill, (2) sublevel stoping with spent shale backfill, (3) sublevel stoping with full subsidence, and (4) block caving mining using LHD's. Final refinement and analysis of these four systems indicated their technical feasibility over at least part of the range of conditions expected in the deeper deposits. Their economic feasibility also was indicated under certain operating and market conditions. A variety of engineering, production, and cost information is provided on each of these systems.

Jan 1, 1976

By Donald L. Siebert

This profile study of the commercial secondary aluminum industry examines not only the elements that form the industry but also the technological contributions of each toward industrial growth. Concise descriptions of processing methods trace aluminum scrap from generating sources to marketable industrial and consumer goods. Economic and marketing appraisals are used to illustrate the impact that recent technology has had upon the secondary aluminum industry. Price, supply, demand, competition, and substitutes are selected as components of an economic model of the secondary industry and are used to illustrate the aggregate effects of technological changes. The final section is a conceptual look at the future in which sensitive economic indicators (such as die casting in the automotive and appliance industries) are examined as well as the problems of conserving mineral resources by retrieving secondary aluminum from solid waste.

Jan 1, 1970

By James L. Ash

This report contains the results of a technical and economic evaluation of conceptual systems for the underground mining, rubblization, and in situ retorting of deep oil shale deposits. Study efforts were first directed towards evaluation of the applicable geology, associated minerals, rock mechanics, in situ retorting, access mining, ventilation, rubblization, safety, and environmental impact factors. Conceptual systems were synthesized and then evaluated against these factors from both a technical and limited economic viewpoint. The results of these evaluations were then analyzed and, based upon this analysis, the following two systems were selected for further study: System II: Room and Pillar-Vertical Drill and Blast System IV: Tunnel Boring-Horizontal Ring Drill and Blast Due to the large number of variables to be considered, a computer program was developed and utilized to provide data for the cost trade-off studies and economic analysis. Results of the early computer runs indicated the value of the tool available? in the computer program and led to an extension in the contract to determine the sensitivity of the systems to several of the more apparent significant variables. These results in turn led to a refinement in the design assumptions and a better understanding of the technical and economic options available to an owner-operator of a Vertical Modified In Situ Shale Oil Extraction System. This report is submitted in fulfillment of the requirements of Contract Number 50241073 by Fenix & Scisson, Inc. to the Denver Mining Research Center, United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines. Work was completed as of November, 1976.

Jan 1, 1976

By Jack Bedder

"Editor’s note: We would like to thank those who make this annual issue possible. A special thank you goes out to the industrial minerals annual review editor, to the Industrial Minerals & Aggregates Division Technical Committee chair and vice chairs, and to the authors of the individual commodity profiles.Jim Norman, member SME, of Tetra Tech, is the industrial minerals annual review editor.Ebrahim K. Tarshizi, member SME, of Michigan Tech, is chair of the Industrial Minerals &Aggregates Division’s Technical Committee.The technical committee vice chairs include: • Hyunjung Kim, member SME, of Chonbuk National University, agricultural materials.• Xihui Yin, member SME, of Kemira, ceramics and refractory materials.• Nikhil Gupta, member SME, of Virginia Tech, chemical raw materials.• Jasson Giddens and Swadhin Saurabh, members SME, of Oil Dri Corp of America and Mill Creek Engineering, respectively, chemical raw materials.• Snehamoy Chatterjee, member SME, of the Michigan Tech.• LeDeana Roberts and Shubham Verma, members SME, of Imerys and U.S. Oil Sands, respectively, fillers and pigments.• Thomas Hilderbrand and Kaiwu Huang, members SME, of Thiele Kaolin Co. and Virginia Tech, respectively, sorbents, filters and process aids.• Rhaghav Dubey and Edgar Blanco, members SME, of Outotec and FL Smidth, respectively, specialty mineralsAntimony generally occurs along with gold, lead, copper and silver. There are more than 100 antimony minerals, although the sulfide mineral stibnite is the main one.Antimony enters the supply chain either as a result of mining (primary production) or recycling (secondary production). China has by far the largest antimony resources and is, as a result, the world’s center for antimony mine production. In 2016, it accounted for more than three quarters of the global mine supply out of a world production figure of 130 kt (143,000 st), according to the U.S. Geological Survey. The biggest, and most high-grade deposits are found in southern China, with the largest mines located in Hunan, Guangxi and Yunnan provinces. Tajikistan, Russia, Australia and Bolivia are the largest mine producers outside China. A new antimony project in Oman made progress in 2016, producing first metal in April 2016 in test facilities, and then ordered three furnaces for a 26 kt/a (28,600 stpy) antimony metal and oxide smelter that is due on stream in late 2017.Antimony ingot production is not as widespread as is antimony mine production, owing to the high levels of pollution that are associated with antimony smelting. It is for this reason that smelting has been largely confined to China and other Asian countries, where environmental legislation is less stringent.Antimony oxide production is undertaken on four continents with China being the biggest producer. There is also a considerable amount of oxide production in Europe — which relies on imported feedstock, mostly from China. Antimony also enters the supply chain through recycling. Lead containing antimony is produced in a number of countries, mainly in secondary lead smelters. Typically, a blast furnace charge containing used or discarded battery plates, type metal or bearing metal is reduced to lead bullion, which is refined in reverberatory furnaces and melting pots. In the main, the antimony recovered is consumed in metallurgical applications. China was the biggest secondary antimony producer in 2016, and accounted for 25 retardants and lead-acid batteries. Flame retardants accounted for roughly 50 percent of consumption in 2016 with batteries representing about 25 percent. Other end uses include plastics and heat stabilizers, ceramics and glass and a variety of metallurgical applications. Demand has been sluggish since the global financial crisis, mostly because key markets failed to recover strongly from the downturn, particularly in Europe."

Jan 7, 2017

By Yasser Ghobara

Phosphorus is a problematic impurity that has challenged steelmakers for decades. Steel producers have developed specific technologies to eliminate phosphorus prior to and during steelmaking. These process technologies reduce phosphorus to various degrees and increase the cost of making steel. The state-of-the art dephosphorization technologies are described and operating costs compared for each of the established technologies. Costs are discussed in terms of price penalties for high P iron ore and selling premiums for low P steel. From this, strategies to control P in a cost effective manner are described.

Aug 17, 2017

By Karl J. C. Harries

"8.1. INTRODUCTIONThe purpose of this chapter is not to provide precedents or examples of provisions, but rather to offer some comments that may be worth considering in the negotiation or review of an agreement. These comments are not intended to be exhaustive. It must also be noted that, although the chapter is written in the context of a common law joint venture, the concepts and concerns for the most part apply equally to a corporation that is owned by only a few shareholders for the purpose of participating in the project held by the corporation.The corporation has the advantage of having much of its organization established by local corporate law, but the particular wishes of the shareholders will appear in a shareholders’ agreement. The principal differences will be surprisingly small, save for the acquisition provisions that appear in a farm-in agreement1 and the substantial portion of the joint venture agreement devoted to creating and organizing the joint venture entity. Where the joint venture agreement refers to venturers and committees, the shareholders’ agreement will refer to shareholders and the board of directors, but both will have to deal with such basic matters as decision-making, default, dispute resolution, first refusals, funding, and carrying out work on the project. For convenience, this chapter usually refers to “venturers”, which may be taken to include shareholders.Negotiations give rise to many varying circumstances and concerns, and the main asset of the negotiator is an open and flexible mind. A desired result can often be accomplished indirectly in circumstances where the other side has adopted an inflexible position on a suggested approach. As precedents and standard forms tend to focus a negotiator’s thinking, they can be counterproductive. It is after the deal has been agreed to that a precedent can be of great assistance to the draftsman.The concepts are arranged in alphabetical order for convenience, not to suggest their sequence or position in an agreement or their relative importance. An agreement should adopt a progression of subjects in what the parties consider a logical sequence to read and work with. However, experience has indicated that it is best to set out in a single article the substance of the deal (i.e. the terms relating to the farm-in and what the acquiring party has to do to acquire his interest), preferably near the beginning of an agreement. The acquisition of the interest is, after all, the first order of business. The joint venture provisions will then follow in a reasonable sequence. It is also worthwhile to devote a single article to any special provisions that may apply during the earn-in period. For example, it may be provided that, although all work is to be done by the acquiring party as operator (with the duty of care, liability, and reporting requirements as set out in the joint venture sections of the agreement), but during the acquisition period, the acquiring party, acting as operator, may be at liberty to do such work as he wishes, without the need for any committee or other approvals, and committee meetings may be suspended.2An agreement is divided into paragraphs and articles to make it easier for the parties to read and understand, and to assist a party in finding “that provision” when the need arises. A comprehensive table of contents will also assist the parties who must work under an agreement. An added benefit of a table of contents is that in preparing it, the draftsman sees the overall structure of the agreement and will often catch and correct flaws."

Jan 1, 2003

By AIME AIME

A COMMITTEE, representing a number of the larger oil companies in California, met in San Francisco on Nov. 12, 1919, for the purpose of discussing the depletion deductions to be allowed in computing the Federal income taxes under the Internal Revenue Act of 1918. It was the general sense of the committee that a system based on sound engineering principles should be formulated for estimating the value of oil properties, so that better and more uniform results might be obtained by the various companies in filing their returns with the' Bureau of Internal Revenue. A subcommittee, consisting of five petroleum engineers, was thereupon appointed to collect information and draft a report. The committee consisted of G. C. Gester, Carl H. Beal, J. H. G. Wolf, E. G. Gaylord, and E. D. Nolan; this report is the work of that subcommittee.

Jan 1, 1920