operations, and ventilation problems. There has been relatively little expense for equipment. We have a small portable compressor costing about $4,000, a mine car, rails, drills, and drill steel, and a few other tools. Mr. O'NEAL. It will be expended in the operation? Mr. HEDGES. In the operation of driving the tunnel. Mr. O'NEAL. Is a large part of that work for the benefit of the coalmining companies themselves? Dr. FINCH. Not at all. Mr. O'NEAL. I mean the mining companies; that is, for the benefit of the mining companies to a large extent other than the safety of the miners. Dr. FINCH. It is for both. Mr. O'NEAL. Do they contribute in any way or pay anything for the service furnished to them as a result of your association or is it merely a contribution the Government makes toward the cause of mining in this country? Dr. FINCH. That is what it is. DUPLICATION OF WORK OF OTHER BRANCHES OF THE GOVERNMENT (See p. 431) Mr. RICH. Do you prepare an annual report of your findings during the year, or do you issue bulletins of the various discoveries? Dr. FINCH. In very brief form. Mr. RICH. You may use your judgment as to whether or not you care to put this in the record. I refer to the duplication of effort, for instance, at experimental stations, such as the Tennessee Valley Authority or any other stations. What work are you doing that other branches of the Government are duplicating? Dr. FINCH. I will think that over for just a moment. Mr. SCRUGHAM. That is a very important question, and it is one of the functions of this committee. First we wish to know what the Guffey coal organization wishes to spend and what the Bureau of Mines is going to undertake to prevent duplication of effort. If you are not prepared to answer now, I suggest a recess so that you may study the question. Secondly, you are doing work and probably the Tennessee Valley Authority is doing certain work that overlaps. I regard much of the Tennessee Valley Authority experimental work as something that should be under the Bureau of Mines. It is a responsibility of this committee to stop overlapping of functions insofar as it is within our power to do so. We will now adjourn until Monday morning, March 29, if agreeable, at which time we will go into this question more thoroughly. In addition to those now present from the Bureau I shall ask Mr. Fieldner, of the Technological Branch, Mr. Jackson, of the Mining Divison, Mr. Dean, of the Metallurgical Division, Mr. Cattell, of the Petroleum and Natural Gas Division, and Mr. Keisling, who is responsible for the Mineral Yearbook, to be present at that time. MONDAY, MARCH 29, 1937. STATEMENT OF ALFRED G. WHITE, CHIEF ECONOMIST, OIL FORECASTS OF DEMAND Mr. ONEAL. I would like to ask a question with reference to the protests coming from some oil companies against forecasts issued by the Bureau of Mines, relative to oil production and similar matters. Mr. WHITE. I think that the bulk of the protests that have been received really come from the Independent Marketers Association and not from oil companies, and their general protest is in the nature of a statement that the forecasts tend to produce less abundance of oil and freeze up the source of material for the independent marketer. The bulk of their real protests goes back to any regulation of the o industry, which, primarily, is under State laws and counties at the present time. Our point of view in our forecasts is that we are no concerned with the regulation. We are furnishing informational data which the States need to determine their programs, and they follow our estimates on forecasts of demand as they see fit. They may follow them or they may raise them. In other words, the rea factor lies in the hands of the State control agency. Mr. O'NEAL. What is the purpose of the forecast as you give it? Mr. WHITE. The primary purpose is to give the picture 1 month in advance of what the coming demand for oil is going to be; how much crude, under current refinery conditions, is going to be required from the different States to meet the market demands. Mr. RICH. Why would the small independent producers be objecting to that phase of your program? Wr. WHITE. I do not believe the small independent producers as s group do object. It is the marketers who like the most abundant of supply at the cheapest price, so that it is available for speculation by any marketer. The producers seem to enter into the State programs and cooperate. Mr. RICH. It is just the retail jobbers of oil rather than the producers of oil who object? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir; that is my understanding. They, of course. would get along best under the conditions where you had the most abundant oil, the cheapest crude oil, whether it was good conservatic: or not. Mr. O'NEAL. Is there anything further, Mr. Rich, you wanted to ask on that? Mr. SCRUGHAM. We will resume, now, if you will take the chair. Mr. O'Neal. Mr. O'NEAL. When we concluded our hearings a few days ago there were one or two questions which had been propounded to Dr. Finch. and Mr. Hedges. They are now prepared to answer those questions Is it your wish that we proceed to those questions now, before gorg ahead with the bill? Mr. SCRUGHAM. Yes. Mr. O'NEAL. Doctor, we shall be very glad to have you refer t those questions. I believe they were asked by Mr. Rich. Dr. FINCH. One was asked by Mr. Rich and the other was su gested by Governor Scrugham. DUTLICATION OF WORK BETWEEN OTHER GOVERNMENTAL DEPARTMENTS AND THE BUREAU OF MINES (See p. 429) We were asked for a statement regarding the duplication of work between other departments of the Government and our Bureau. We had a very thorough discussion of this subject with all the chiefs of our different divisions, and I believe we have arrived at an answer. In general, there is very little duplication by other governmental agencies of work that is being done by the Bureau of Mines. To be sure, there are other agencies also at work in the fields of technical research, health and safety, or economics, and at first glance such work might appear to overlap; but when examined closely it proves, as a rile, to be collateral rather than coincident. For example, the National Bureau of Standards and the Bureau of Mines both are interested in the beneficiation and processing of nonmetallic minerals, but the interest of the former is from the viewpoint of the fabrication or construction industries and deals with such raterials as lime, plaster, cement, and so forth; the interest of the Bureau of Mines concerns itself with clay, iron ore, coal, and similar materials that are more closely related to the mining or metallurgical industries. Even the narrow field of gas utilization, in which both Bureaus are interested, is broad enough to permit work on distinct and separate problems that are selected by mutual agreement and cooperation, none the less real because informal. The Bureau of Chemistry and Soils of the Department of Agricultre is also interested in the processing of nonmetallic minerals but its interest lies in the production of fertilizers. Here, too, conferences and informal agreements of long standing have prevented duplication of effort, even when both Bureaus have dealt with the same raw raterials. Dust explosions are investigated both by the Bureau of Mines and the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils. However, the Bureau of Mines' studies of dust explosibility are confined by mutual agreement to metallic and mineral dusts, such as coal dust, for example, while those of the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils relate to agricultural and organic dists, such as those of grain or flour. The Bureau of Mines investigates explosions of gases of mineral origin, such as natural and manufactured fuel gas. The Department of Agriculture has investigated the use of oil burners for house heating, a subject within the field of fuel research which is one of the major problems of the Bureau of Mines. Mr. SCRUGHAM. Interrupting a moment, Dr. Finch, is the Department of Agriculture expert on explosives, who investigated the Texas hool disaster, connected with the development of oil burners for household use or something like that? Dr. FINCH. No; as I understand his status, he is connected with the investigation of agricultural organic dusts, and as I stated, the work core in Texas, we believe, belonged in the Bureau of Mines. They Lave investigated, as I say, the use of oil burners for household Here, duplication has been avoided by deliberate lack of Bureau work on the subject. 189751-37-pt. 1-28 MONDAY, MARCH 29, 1937. STATEMENT OF ALFRED G. WHITE, CHIEF ECONOMIST, OIL FORECASTS OF DEMAND Mr. ONEAL. I would like to ask a question with reference to the protests coming from some oil companies against forecasts issued by the Bureau of Mines, relative to oil production and similar matters. Mr. WHITE. I think that the bulk of the protests that have been received really con e from the Independent Marketers Association and not from oil companies, and their general protest is in the nature of a statement that the forecasts tend to produce less abundance of oil and freeze up the source of material for the independent marketer. The bulk of their real protests goes back to any regulation of the oil industry, which, prin.arity, is under State laws and counties at the present time. Our point of view in our forecasts is that we are not concerned with the regulation. We are furnishing informational data which the States need to determine their programs, and they follow our estimates on forecasts of demand as they see fit. They may follow them or they may raise them. In other words, the real factor lies in the hands of the State control agency. Mr. O'NEAL. What is the purpose of the forecast as you give it? Mr. WHITE. The primary purpose is to give the picture 1 month in advance of what the con ing demand for oil is going to be; how much crude, under current refinery conditions, is going to be required from the different States to meet the market den ands. Mr. RICH. Why would the small independent producers be objecting to that phase of your program" Wr. WHITE. I do not believe the small independent producers as a group do object. It is the marketers who like the most abundant oil supply at the cheapest price, so that it is available for speculation by any marketer. The producers seem to enter into the State programs and cooperate. Mr. RICH. It is just the retail jobbers of oil rather than the producers of oil who object? Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir: that is my understanding. They, of course, would get along best under the conditions where you had the most abundant oil, the cheapest crude oil, whether it was good conservation or not. Mr O'NEAL. Is there anything further, Mr. Rich, you wanted to ask on that” Mr SCRUGHAM. We will resume, now, if you will take the chair, Mr. O'Nel Mr O'NEAL. When we concluded our hearings a few days ago there were one or two questions which had been propounded to Dr. Finch. and Mr Hedges. They are now prepared to answer those questions Is it your wish that we proceed to those questions now, before going ahead with the bill" Mr. SCRUGHAM Yes, Mr. O'NEAL. Doctor, we shall be very glad to have you refer to those questions. I believe they were asked by Mr. Rich Dr FINCH. One was asked by Mr. Rich and the other was suggested by Governor Serugham. DUPLICATION OF WORK BETWEEN OTHER GOVERNMENTAL DEPARTMENTS AND THE BUREAU OF MINES (See p. 429) We were asked for a statement regarding the duplication of work between other departments of the Government and our Bureau. We had a very thorough discussion of this subject with all the chiefs of our different divisions, and I believe we have arrived at an answer. In general, there is very little duplication by other governmental agencies of work that is being done by the Bureau of Mines. To be sure, there are other agencies also at work in the fields of technical research, health and safety, or economics, and at first glance such work might appear to overlap; but when examined closely it proves, as a rule, to be collateral rather than coincident. For example, the National Bureau of Standards and the Bureau of Mines both are interested in the beneficiation and processing of nonmetallic minerals, but the interest of the former is from the viewpoint of the fabrication or construction industries and deals with such materials as lime, plaster, cement, and so forth; the interest of the Bureau of Mines concerns itself with clay, iron ore, coal, and similar materials that are more closely related to the mining or metallurgical industries. Even the narrow field of gas utilization, in which both Bureaus are interested, is broad enough to permit work on distinct and separate problems that are selected by mutual agreement and cooperation, none the less real because informal. The Bureau of Chemistry and Soils of the Department of Agriculture is also interested in the processing of nonmetallic minerals but its interest lies in the production of fertilizers. Here, too, conferences and informal agreements of long standing have prevented duplication of effort, even when both Bureaus have dealt with the same raw materials. Dust explosions are investigated both by the Bureau of Mines and the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils. However, the Bureau of Mines' studies of dust explosibility are confined by mutual agreement to metallic and mineral dusts, such as coal dust, for example, while those of the Bureau of Chemistry and Soils relate to agricultural and organic dusts, such as those of grain or flour. The Bureau of Mines investigates explosions of gases of mineral origin, such as natural and manufactured fuel gas. The Department of Agriculture has investigated the use of oil burners for house heating, a subject within the field of fuel research which is one of the major problems of the Bureau of Mines. Mr. SCRUGHAM. Interrupting a moment, Dr. Finch, is the Department of Agriculture expert on explosives, who investigated the Texas school disaster, connected with the development of oil burners for household use or something like that? Dr. FINCH. No; as I understand his status, he is connected with the investigation of agricultural organic dusts, and as I stated, the work done in Texas, we believe, belonged in the Bureau of Mines. They have investigated, as I say, the use of oil burners for household heating. Here, duplication has been avoided by deliberate lack of Bureau work on the subject. 139751-37-pt. 1-28 |