Search Documents

Jan 1, 1941

Jan 1, 1941

The Joint Committee (consisting of the chairmen of the several society committees), formed under the authority of the five societies, in order to facilitate the carrying out of the organization of an engineer reserve as part of the military forces of the United States, for which work it was appointed, now begs leave to report as follows: .The Committee has been in personal communication with the Secretary of War, the officers of the General Staff, the officers of the War College, and with the Hon. George E. Chamberlain, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Military Affairs, and the Hon. James Hay, Chairman of the House Committee on Military Affairs. As the result of these interviews there has been incorporated in the draft of the legislation proposed by the Secretary of War and included also in the bills drawn by the committees of the Senate and of the House a provision for the organization of an officers reserve on broad lines, including an engineer reserve. As now drawn these bills provide that an officer shall be commissioned for a period of five years with rank up to and including that of major, after passing such requirements of character and qualifications as shall be prescribed by the President. The bill also provides that a certain amount of duty with pay shall he performed each year by the officers in the reserve. . The Committee is waiting for the Navy Department to formulate its plans for the increase in the naval forces, and as soon as a decision has been reached by that Department and the Committee is in possession of the facts, the Committee will take up the question of the organization of an engineer reserve for the navy, similar to that contemplated for the army.

Jan 2, 1916

Jan 1, 1935

Jan 1, 1914

Executive A R LEDOUX, Chairman ARTHUR S DWIGHT CHARLES F RAND E P MATHEWSON J V W REYNDERS Membership E DEGOLYER, Chairman W Y WESTERVELT, Vice-chairman WILLIAM H BASSETT H G MOULTON C MINOT WELD Finance WALTER H ALDRIDGE, Chairman GEORGE D BARRON GALEN H CLEVENGER Library GEORGE C STONE,' Chairman JOHN H JANEWAY ALEXANDER C HUMPHREYS, ROBERT LINTON FREDERICK F SHARPLESS

Jan 1, 1923

Jan 1, 1916

Executive A R LEDUC, Chairman ARTHUR S DWIGHT R V NORRIS EDWIN LUDLOW E L DEGOLYER Membership J V W REYNDERS, Chairman E L DEGOLYER R M RAYMOND EDGAR RICKARD W Y WESTERVELT Finance WALTER H ALDRIDGE, Chairman GALEN H CLEVENGER J V W REYNDERS Library Chairman JOHN H JANEWAY GEORGE C STONES ROBERT LINTON ALEXANDER C HUMPHRLYS, - BRADLEY STOUGHTON

Jan 1, 1923

Executive ARTHUR S DWIGHT, Chairman B THAYER CHARLES F RAND P MATHEWSON J V W REYNDERS Membership WILLIAM H BASSETT, Chairman W Y WESTERVELT Vice-chairman P MATHEWSON H G MOULTON F T RUBIDGE Finance WALTER H ALDRIDGE, Chairman GEORGE D BARRON GALEN H CLEVENGER

Jan 1, 1923

STANDING COMMITTEES Executive A, R. LEDOUX, Chairman HERBERT HOOVER EDWIN LUDLOW ARTHUR S. DWIGHT CHARLES F. RAND Membership J. V. W. REYNDERS, Chairman J. V. N. DOER W. H. ALDRIDGE EDGAR RICKARD R. M. RAYMOND Finance MARK L. REQUA CHARLES F. RAND, Chairman J. V. W. REYNDERS Library E. GYBBON SPILSBURY, Chairman ALEXANDER C. HUMPHREYS GEORGE C. STONE JOHN H. JANEWAY BRADLEY STOUGHTON Papers and Publications BRADLEY STOUGHTON, Chairman

Jan 1, 1923

Jan 1, 1918

Member ship L P MATHEWSON, Chairman GEORGE D BARRON LOUIS D HUNTOON JOHN A CHURCH, JR H N SPICER Alternates LEWIS W FRANCIS WILBER JUDSON F T RUBIDGE Increase of Membership JOHN A CHURCH, JR, Chairman Other members to be appointed

Jan 1, 1923

Executive A. R. LEDOUX, Chairman GEORGE D. BARRON SIDNEY J. JENNINGS J. V. N. DORR J. E. JOHNSON, JR.¬ Membership J. E. JOHNSON, JR., Chairman KARL EILERS F. F. SHARPLESS R. M. RAYMOND LEWIS W. FRANCIS Finance J. V. N. DORR, Chairman CHARLES F. RAND J. V. W. REYNDERS Library E. GYBBON SPILSBURY,' Chairman ALEXANDER C. HUMPHREYS GEORGE C. STONE' JOHN H. JANEWAY BRADLEY STOUGHTON Papers and Publications BRADLEY STOUGHTON, Chairman

Jan 1, 1923

Jan 1, 1947

Jan 1, 1947

Jan 1, 1943

Jan 1, 1943

The traditional form of project financing for resource related projects has involved project financings structured with either recourse to the project sponsor(s) or commercial banks accepting the project's risks, usually after project completion, subject to, inter alia, the nature of the project, geographical location, quality of the projected cash flows and commodity price outlook. However, the concept of commodity-linked borrowings hasadded a new dimension for borrowing opportunities for resource-oriented projects and or companies.

Jan 1, 1985

By James M. Barker

No commodity agreements now exist for sulfur and a lack of reference to sulfur commodity agreements exists in the literature. Law (1975) made a passing reference to sulfur as one of a group of commodities where "there have been additional control efforts of various types." Clearly, sulfur was a candidate, at least conceptually in the past, for some form of commodity agreement and the following discussion centers on the world sulfur market of the early 1980's in this context. GENERAL THEORY OF COMMODITY AGREEMENTS The upsurge in demands for commodity agreements seen in the last decade or so stems largely from agitation by the less developed countries (LDC) for better economic treatment by more developed countries (MDC). Several economic factors, real or imagined, adversely affect the LDC's as follows (MacAvoy, 1977): 1) variable demand in MDC's causes wide fluctuations in commodity prices which hurt the economies of commodity producers, who are often LDC's although consumer economies may also benefit from more predictable prices; 2) a general decline of commodity prices relative to the price of manufactured goods which hurts commodity producers in their balance of trade while their stocks and overcapacity rise; 3) instability of LDC economies enhanced by the above factors lowers internal stability, inhibits foreign investment, and retards economic growth; and 4) a lack of self respect when dealing with developed countries o, following the OPEC lead, LDC producers want the stature related to cartel market power.

Jan 1, 1985

By D. G. Keefe, I. C. Robinson

In this paper the authors present their views on the actual and potential role of commodity analysis in mining industry. Owing to the dominant influence of the economy on all commodity markets, it is essential that individual commodities are studied not only in depth but within the broader context of economic influences. A commodity unit, which monitors market developments in a wide range of commodities, is well placed to provide the broader perspective in the study of commodity markets. This paper describes some of the specific functions of such a unit. Some of the methods used for price forecasting are described, and the results of price forecasts by different forecasting methods are compared.

Jan 1, 1980