Miners are individualists; and in this we pride ourselves; but our individualism has not saved our tungsten mining industry from chaos. Our first great need is you as a member, and from there on out your cooperation and participation in our activities. Please let us have your membership, your $10, and your suggestions. Sincerely yours, H. A. SAVAGE, President. Mr. H. A. SAVAGE, DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU OF MINES, OFFICE OF THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR, REGION III, President, American Tungsten Association, Fresno, Calif. DEAR MR. SAVAGE: I can think of nothing that has given me so much pleasure as your first letter, dated February 16. 1950, as president of the American Tung. sten Association. I congratulate you on having been made president of the association, as there is no one better qualified in every way to handle the many matters that will have to be taken care of to attain the objectives sought by the Nation's producers of tungsten. Your preorganization dinner was the most interesting meeting that I have ever had the pleasure of attending, and it didn't take me long to conclude that an organization composed of such superior operators as were present that evening had everything in its favor provided they were properly organized for doing something of lasting benefit to the tungsten industry. I like the name that the corporation has adopted, and your bylaws show that you have given studied thought to your corporate set-up. Your letter to all tungsten mine owners and producers of America carries the appeal that cannot be ignored by any one in the business of mining and producing tungsten. The major objectives which are summarized in that letter are well taken and by no means unreasonable. I am sure that the fairness of your objectives will be a big help in your effort to improve the position of the tungsten producers in the national economy. As a technical organization, the Bureau of Mines is very ready to be of help on the technical problems of your group, and this office and our Washington office also will welcome your calling on us at any time as to matters of mutual interest. With kindest regards, I am Sincerely yours, H. C. MILLER, Regional Director, Region III. American Tungsten Association Mine Address Active members Aavestrud & Weller. El Oso Tungsten Mine. Gabbs Exploration Co. Kittle, Otis A. Milovich, Mijo. Morris, R. D. Morse, Harold. Nevada Scheelite, Inc. Peterson, A. H. Pacific Metallurgical Co.. Savage, H. A.. Spittler, Joe. Stone, Sheridan L. Tomlinson, John G. Tungstar Corp. MUNITIONS BOARD, Washington, D. C. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION, DEFENSE MINERALS ADMINISTRATION, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: I have been requested by H. A. Savage, president of American Tungsten Association, a nonprofit corporation, to give to you some information and data in relation to specifications and refining of tungsten. This memorandum is made in accordance with that request and in the further hope that it will be of some benefit in connection with the defense effort. Following the end of World War II foreign importations and low demand for tungsten created marketing conditions under which only the large low-cost domestic producers could survive. Even these, in 1949, were forced to shut down or curtail their operations. They were enabled to continue only when the General Services Administration stepped up stockpile purchases and gave contracts for the output of the mines. The price offered was too low for most of the small producers, and the specifications were so rigid that only a few of the domestic producers could meet them without paying prohibitive purification charges. The specifications used in the purchase contracts issued by the General Services Administration were patterned after those of the tungsten purchasing schedule used by Metals Reserve Company during World War II, but did not contain the provisions of the Metals Reserve Company's contracts permitting the purchase of tungsten concentrates which failed to meet the ideal specifications in some minor respect. Metals Reserve Company recognized the fact that tungsten seldom occurs in a state pure enough to meet the standard set up as an ideal that would meet the requirements of nearly all industry. They, therefore, announced a price and a standard specification, but went on to arrange for the purchase of concentrates not meeting the standard at a slight reduction in price based on a system of penalties. The General Services Administration did not use this penalty system. Thus it was that producers, who had sold their tungsten during World War II to Metals Reserve Company at a negligible price reduction, were forced to ship their product to an eastern refining plant to be purified at great expense before it could be delivered to the national stockpile. This cost, coupled with the low selling price, put some producers out of business. The impurity that has caused the greatest difficulty and expense to domestic producers is molybdenum. This is due to the fact that most tungsten mines in the United States are of the contact-metamorphic type and it is characteristic of these deposits that the tungsten is contaminated with a small amount of molybdenum. In some uses molybdenum is definitely detrimental, but in other large uses it does no harm whatsoever. In fact, in the manufacture of some products molybdenum and tungsten are mixed together in proportions far exceeding the content of molybdenum in the original tungsten product. In such cases the user would only need to know the molybdenum content of the tungsten concentrate, make a simple calculation, and then add a proportionately smaller quantity of molybdenum to make the desired product. If this system were used, a great deal of the unnecessary expense and difficulty of removing practically all molybdenum from all tungsten concentrates produced from domestic mines could be eliminated. Further, the elimination of the purification cost would make the difference between profit and loss, operating or not operating, at some marginal mines. The development of domestic mines has been retarded by low price, competition with low-cost foreign producers, and the lack of facilities in western United States for upgrading and purifying low-grade and impure concentrates. Suitable facilities were constructed at Salt Lake City during World War II by the Defense Plant Corporation but these installations were sold and dismantled after the War. The Salt Lake plant was a chemical digestion plant and was designed to handle low-grade flotation concentrates as well as low-grade middling products from gravity concentration plants. It could also handle a limited quantity of high-grade crude ore. There is a definite need for a plant similar to the Salt Lake City chemical refining plant for tungsten concentrates if the mines in the western United States are to be operated at maximum efficiency. This is because, as stated above, most of the large low-grade deposits in the West are of the contactmetamorphic type and in these the tungsten occurs as small crystals of scheelite in a hard silicate matrix. In crushing and grinding this rock to liberate the tungsten mineral the softer scheelite crystals are often pounded into an unpalpable slime which is impossible to recover on the old-fashioned gravity table. Often as much as 50 percent of the tungsten was lost. This led to the application of the flotation process to the treatment of tungsten ores and in many plants recoveries as high as 85 or 90 percent are achieved. Unfortunately, however, the concentrates produced by flotation are seldom of marketable quality and some form of chemical upgrading is usually required. Even so, this combination of flotation and chemical treatment has been exceptionally successful and has resulted in the production of a very desirable high-grade product and a recovery of 20 to 25 percent more tungsten from the original ore than could have been extracted by the old gravity methods. There is also a need in the West for a central buying depot for the purchase of high-grade gravity products. Numerous small mining and milling operations are not financially able or are too small to install roasting and magnetic separation plants for the removal of sulphur, iron, and garnet from these products. Respectfully submitted. DAVID D. BAKER, Technical Adviser. "Resolved: That this meeting go on record as favoring an act by Congress or directives of top executives which will place in one corporation similar to Metals Reserve, Inc., as created and used in World War II to handle advances of money and purchases of minerals. It is our belief that the present system of divided responsibility will not work. It has not produced results and unification of authority is essential." The above resolution was unanimously adopted by 23 tungsten miners at Bishop, Calif., on March 31, 1951. Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Savage, the principal source of tungsten during World War II was China, was it not? Mr. SAVAGE. Yes; that is correct. And one other accident that arose by virtue of core drilling, that is at the Yellow Pine Mine in Idaho, they were drilling for antimony and they discovered the greatest deposit of tungsten in the United States, which furnished about $25,000,000 worth of tungsten purely out of the blue sky. Mr. SAYLOR. But up until that discovery, China was the principal source of tungsten? Mr. SAVAGE. That is true, and after the war it has been 75 percent China and the world supply is practically all outside of the United States in the hands of the communists. Mr. SAYLOR. And that source of supply has been cut off as far as the United States is concerned? Mr. SAVAGE. Entirely eliminated. Mr. REGAN. Thank you, Mr. Savage. If you wish to file any further statement, we will be glad to have the benefit of your views. We will proceed with the staff of the Office of Price Stabilization. I believe Mr. Ewing, Chief of the Metals Branch, is with us. Mr. Ewing, you have a prepared statement, I believe? Mr. EWING. It is a rather short one. summarize it. I will read it for you or Mr. REGAN. If you care to summarize it-do all the members of the committee have a copy of Mr. Ewing's statement before you? If you prefer to summarize it, it will be quite in order. For the benefit of the reporter, will you give your name and position? (SUBCOMMITTEE NOTE.-The prepared statements of OPS witnesses given below were presented in response to the following letter from the committee chairman :) LETTER TO THE DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PRICE STABILIZATION, REQUESTING APPEARANCE OF OPS OFFICIALS AT HEARINGS AND INFORMATION DESIRED FROM EACH MR. MICHAEL V. DISALLE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS, Director, Office of Price Stabilization, Economic Stabilization Agency, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR MR. DISALLE: The Subcommittee on Mines and Mining of this committee has scheduled hearings on the defense minerals production program for April 4, 5, and 6. The purpose of the hearings is to determine, among other things (a) What has been accomplished and is being done or proposed under the Defense Production Act of 1950 to stimulate the exploration, development, and production of strategic and critical minerals and metals from domestic sources; (b) The reasons for the delays in executing the necessary programs; (c) The authority and responsibilities of each unit of the Government having any jurisdiction over various phases of the defense minerals production program; and (d) The policies formulated and decisions rendered by each unit of the Government in reference to such program. The ceiling prices established for minerals and metals by the Office of Price Stabilization will have a considerable effect on the mining, minerals, and metals industries and the type and degree of assistance that may be rendered these industries by the Defense Minerals Administration under the Defense Production Act of 1950 to increase or maintain the production of strategic and critical minerals and metals. Therefore, it is respectfully requested that you and the members of your staff named below appear at the hearing to be held in room 1324, New House Office Building, on the morning of April 5 to furnish information desired by the subcommittee. It is expected that the witnesses will be called in the order named, commencing at 10 a. m., with your testimony to be heard last. Testimony is desired from the following members of your staff: 1. Sam Mann Ewing, Chief, Metals Branch. 2. Samuel Lipkowitz, chief economist, Metals Branch. 3. C. O. Jacoby, Acting Chief, Ferro Alloys Section, Metals Branch. 4. Leo Halpern, Acting Chief, Lead-Zinc-Tin Section, Metals Branch. 5. Carl Lenz, Acting Chief, Copper and Brass Mill Products Section, Metals Branch. 6. Chester Wasson, economist (in charge of the mica program), Metals Branch. Please have each witness designated above, including yourself, prepare and submit a written statement for the record, with the subject matter given ap propriate headings and subheadings for easy reference. Each statement should contain a brief résumé of the witness' employment during recent years and give his present title, duties, and responsibilities. In addition, the statements should contain the information requested below: 1. The statement submitted by Mr. Ewing should include information as to(a) The functions, responsibilities, organization, activities, and accomplishments of the Metals Branch of OPS; (b) The general procedures followed in determining ceiling prices for min. erals and meta's and their ores and concentrates; (c) The identity, by name and most common form(s) or type(s) of each strategic and critical mineral and metal, including ores and concentrates and the most common grade of each ferroalloy, but excluding brass mill and other fabricated products, for which price ceilings (i) have been established and (ii) are being proposed. Give the established or proposed price ceiling for each material and indicate in each instance whether the ceiling price is intended (i) to be increased or decreased in the near future and if so, explain why, or (ii) to be kept at the present level for the duration of the price-control program. Also state whether the ceiling price for each commodity has been or will be established at a one-price level or at multiprice levels which are based upon the price re ceived by each producer during a designated base period or date; (d) The prices (in table form) of the most common form (s) or type(s) of the following minerals and metals, including ores and concentrates and the most common grade of each ferroalloy, as explained below: Prices are desired for (i) January 1, 1950; (ii) April 1, 1950; (iii) July 1, 1950; (iv) October 1, 1950; (v) January 1, 1951; (vi) the start of the Korean War; (vii) the date of enactment of the Defense Production Act of 1950; (viii) the date OPS was established; (ix) the date a price freeze or ceiling was established for each commodity; (x) the price on March 26, 1951, and indicate whether such price is a free market, freeze, or ceiling price; and (xi) the av erage for 1926-where this is not available give the price for the end of 1926. Beside each price figure show in parentheses, and otherwise clearly identify, the price of each commodity adjusted to the Bureau of Labor Statistics Wholesale Price Index of All Commodities (1926 = 100). Also give the current foreign market prices for each commodity, measured in United States currency, where such prices exceed the ceiling or freeze price at which such commodity may be sold in the United States; and (e) The effect established or proposed price ceilings have or may be expected to have on (i) the future production of antimony, bauxite, chromite, cobalt, copper, fluorospar, lead, manganese, mercury, mica, tungsten, and zine from marginal and submarginal mines and deposits in the United States and (ii) imports of the minerals and metals named in item (d) above. If the ceiling price is or will be such as to inhibit production from domestic marginal and submarginal properties or curtail imports, state what mechanisms may best be employed to increase the flow of minerals and metals from such sources. 2. It is desired that Messrs. Lipkowitz, Jacoby, Helpern, Lenz, and Wasson also present the determinations that each has made, if any, and the bases |