All 1953 figures are preliminary and are subject to revision. Includes small tonnages of steel made in Egypt, Greece, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, Southern Rhodesia, and Thailand. Production in 1949 was estimated at 44,092 net tons. There is no later information. It seems probable that facilities in operation in 1949 have since been severely damaged if not destroyed. 1 Not available. All of the 1953 data is estimated (usually on the basis of 9 or 10 months' reported production except for the tonnages marked with an asterisk (*) which, although preliminary, report full 12 months' output. JUNE 4, 1954. Memorandum to: George W. Auxier, Executive Secretary. 1. An important chemical firm (Diamond Alkali Co.,) sent a representative to Washington to obtain information on the potential market for substitute vegetable tanning materials. Considerable data was furnished to show the growing shortage of domestic supplies and increasing dependence upon imports. The company knew that some of the natural vegetable extracts were being stockpiled, which indicated to them the importance of the commodity. They were interested in the extent of consumption, potentials during normal, as well as emergency periods, types of leather for which the substitute materials could be used, and price ranges for the important types of natural materials now used. We not only supplied the data mentioned above but also suggested other sources such as the Leather Research Laboratory in Ohio for specific technical information. We believe that the data we supplied saved the company considerable time, effort, and money and would enable them to make a decision as to whether this would be a profitable field. 2. Many tanners, including one of our very close contacts (Howes Leather Co. of Boston, the largest sole leather producing company in the world), were concerned over the amount of space being taken up by the maintenance of records resulting from operations under ESA regulations which became effective in 1951. The space thus being used could be used more advantageously but they did not want to violate any prevailing regulations. They asked us to ascertain if it were permissible to destroy the records. Contact was made with ODM and we were informed that under a regulation effective March 1953, it was necessary to keep the records until April 1955. This information was furnished to the tanners who informed us that obtaining it saved them considerable embarrassment and possible penalties. 3. Several American firms had expressed to us their interest in obtaining some trade with Korea, particularly that resulting from the rehabilitation plan endorsed and supported by the United States. The president of one such firm (Lenape Trading Co. of New York) with long years of experience in importing, as well as exporting, came to Washington to discuss this with the Director of the Leather, Shoes, and Allied Products Division. After ascertaining that he was interested in buying from as well as selling to Korea we contacted the proper official in FOA and arranged for a discussion on the subject with our contact. After that meeting he returned to our office and explained that he was making immediate preliminary contacts with firms in Korea and felt that some business could be developed. 4. Considerable interest had been developed in California on the possibility of establishing a shore factory there in view of the substantial supplies of hides and skins being produced in that State. Representatives of interested parties (the Washington representative of the West Coast Meat Packers Association and a representative of the Oakland Chamber of Commerce) visited the office for a discussion on the subject. We were able to furnish pertinent data and the names of executives of several companies which had shoe factories scattered throughout the country and who might be interested. It is our understanding that conversations on the topic are still in progress. 5. The American consul general in Zurich made a definite appointment for a visit from representatives of the Swiss Independent Shoe Retailers Association to discuss footwear markets in the United States, distribution methods, markups, seasonal effects on volume, markdowns, and general trade practices. This delegation, made up of 14 individuals, was interested in exchanging ideas with American firms in retailing methods, displays, ratio of clerks to store volume, cooperative buying and advertising, and they also indicated some interest in types of American shores, especially for men, which would be competitive on the Swiss market. For more than an hour the Director of the Division answered their specific questions then arranged with the president of the Hahn Shoe Stores in Washington for a discussion with him and also gave them letters of introduction to shoe manufacturers, shoe retailers, and shoe wholesalers in Chicago and St. Louis, and a letter to our district manager in San Francisco requesting him to make arrangements for them to visit some retail outlets in that city. The head of the mission expressed his sincere thanks for the courtesy, information, letters of introduction, and told me he was amazed at the amount of information and assistance his group was able to obtain from Government sources in this country. 6. Owing to the marked interest of the Department of Justice in the number of mergers in the shoe industry, large manufacturers and chains have been concerned over the potential risks in any additional amalgamations. In many cases these mergers have resulted from the desire of smaller producers or retailers to either leave the field entirely or to protect their estates because of a lack of junior executives in their operations, many being "one-man" businesses. In order to make certain that the Government is informed of all factors leading to the proposed merger, the transaction itself, and other pertinent factors, one of the largest shoe firms (General Shoe Corp.) through their president, has had considerable discussion with this Division on the problem. When they were requested by the Department of Justice to supply some data regarding the relative position of their production to total output, the share of the total retail sales enjoyed by their company as compared with all retail shoe sales, they sent a representative to this office to obtain the total data which they claimed they were unable to get from any other source. We believe that the ultimate result of having the information available has been helpful to both Government and industry and quite possibly saved the latter considerable embarrassment. Prior to January 1 we had supplied information on the shoe industry in much greater detail to representatives of the Department of Justice who were then looking into the merger of two other important firms (International Shoe Co.; Florsheim Shoe Co.). 7. Indications that many well-established firms recognize the fact that it was necessary for them to show greater sales efforts and to develop new markets were expressed by the visits we had from many companies in this regard. To illustrate this, a representative of an important Delaware firm (Hercules Powder Co.) spent considerable time in the Division discussing the variety and quantity of various chemicals used in the leather industry. They were interested in ascertaining the kinds customarily used by the different branches of the leather industry and in the trend of operations in order to determine a growing or declining market. As a result of records maintained during periods of controls and allocations we had data available for branches, as well as for the industry as a whole that was probably not available from any other source. Since the figures were totals for the entire industry and was not obtained from restricted sources, its direct value to industries catering to the leather trade is very important. 8. Leather exporters have complained for some time over their difficulty in selling to European countries because of the restrictions prevailing on dollar expenditures. They were advised by their German agents early in 1954 that a list of products was being put on the "free list," i. e., no import permit required, and requested our help in having leather included. With the cooperation of BFC appropriate presentations were made to the German Government. We were told that the first list was already made up and leather could not be included but were assured of definite consideration for this commodity on the second list. I feel that a commitment was made that at least some varieties will be included later. 9. One of the outstanding exhibits of products ever shown in the lobby of the Commerce Department was that of the Leather Industries of America. Displayed were not only the numerous types of leather available but also wellknown and newer items made of this commodity. Thousands of visitors attended the display and hundreds of retail clerks came to the Commerce Department auditorium to see the showing of a color, sound film on leather. The Division received numerous requests for information from many who visited the display who were interested in local stores who would have for sale some of the many items shown in the lobby. The success of the leather show in Washington spurred the industry on to make it a national event and both the movie and part of the display were shown on numerous TV stations of the major broadcasting systems. JUNE 21, 1954. To: Mr. George W. Auxier, Executive Secretary. Pursuant to your memorandum request of May 26, 1954, there follows the major items of Service to Business performed by the Metalworking Equipment Division during the past 6 months. 1. Pursuant to a request of the Machine Tool Industry Advisory Committee, we made a comprehensive study of the import and export data on metalworking machinery. The advance copies of this study were transmitted to the Renegotia. tion Board, the Bureau of Foreign Commerce and the National Machine Tool Builders' Association. As a result of the publicity given to the study, numerous requests for specific information have been received and answered. The response from industry has been enthusiastic. We are now preparing to print the data for general release. Other industry groups have inquired as to the availability of comparable data for commodities of their manufacture, and are exploring the possibility of requesting BDSA to make studies in their area of interest. Industry's uses of this study reflected the need for more uniform commodity grouping among the several government agencies involved. As a result of this experience we have undertaken to have the responsible agencies establish uniform commodity groupings which will permit direct comparison and evaluation of the data. 2. Several manufacturers have complained of instances where the military services were procuring equipment on obsolete specifications. In each instance this office has contacted the procuring activity and succeeded in having the procurement stopped and readvertised on a modern up-to-date specification. In some instances we have aided the procuring activity in determining the proper specification to be used. These efforts have aided both industry and Government. Industry is not required to build obsolete equipment for which they no longer have patterns, tooling, etc., and Government obtains the most modern equipment available. 3. To satisfy the increasing volume of individual requests for marketing and distribution, information on the machine tool industry, we initiated a quarterly report on metalworking equipment. This report was based on information submitted monthly by the industry. It has been enthusiatically received. We have had numerous requests for copies from all segments of the industry, the Federal Reserve Board and other Government agencies. The Renegotiation Board requested a special supplement to the report, in order to evaluate the trend of business in this industry. As a result of this and other data developed by the Division, the Renegotiation Board is now in a position to make objective evaluations of the particular needs of this industry. 4. Numerous spot business services performed are exemplified by the following incident: A manufacturer of a newly developed drilling machine called on this Division for advice on "How to get my machine listed in the Federal Supply Catalog." He was convinced that once his machine was listed, he would have no further sales effort to make in selling to the Federal Government. We provided him with information on how to accomplish his mission and made the necessary appointment for him. We then informed him of the importance of selling his equipment to the individual agencies having use for that type of equipment. We pointed out the importance of creating the demand from the user, the need for showing the advantages to be gained from his equipment, etc. We then provided him with the names of the individuals in each procuring agency to contact. As a result of this, he has avoided many months of fruitless waiting, and is now well organized in handling Government procurement. 5. The metalworking industry has taken a firm stand against nondefense leasing or wholesale disposal of facilities owned by the Government. We have presented these views to the Department of Defense and the Office of Defense Mobilization. As a result of the policies adopted, only a few instances of leasing of quipment for nondefense use have been approved. Comprehensive procedures for carefully screening disposal of facilities are being established with industry being fully consulted on all phases of the problem. 6. The Department of Defense had requested extension of funds ($250 million) appropriated in fiscal year 1954 for purchase of reserve tools and facilities. The funds were not expended in fiscal year 1954, due to a lack of definitive programing. The House committee recommended deletion. When this became known, the industry requested the assistance of the Metalworking Equipment Division in presenting their views to Members of Congress. A comprehensive report was prepared by this Division showing why it was in the national interest from both an economic and defense standpoint, to restore this appropriation. This information was presented personally to members of the House and Senate Defense Appropriations Committees. To date the Senate committee has recommended restoration of the full amount. Joint committee hearings have not been concluded. However, indications are that at least a part of the request will be included in the fiscal year 1955 appropriations. JUNE 15, 1954. To: Mr. George W. Auxier, Executive Secretary. From: H. B. Sharpe, Deputy Director, Miscellaneous Metals and Minerals Division. Subject: Industry Division activity in service to business—January 1 to June 1, 1954. ORDER M-107 1 At the request of the titanium producers and fabricators industry advisory committee, this Division, together with counsel, drafted and obtained departmental clearance on order M-107, which was issued May 19, 1954. This order, by limiting the acceptance of rated orders for titanium-mill products, permits the producers of those products to accept up to 10 percent of their total production in unrated orders. This action was deemed necessary in order that the producers of titanium-mill products could investigate possible industrial markets for titanium, and in so doing be able to assure their customers of delivery of unrated orders. Development of the use of titanium in chemical, petroleumrefining, and food-processing uses is considered inevitable because of its corrosion-resistant properties. Other possible civilian applications include marine equipment, civilian aircraft, truck, and automotive equipment, etc. TIN INDUSTRY CONFERENCE Representatives of 28 tin-consuming, trading companies, and associations met February 25, 1954, with the Business and Defense Services Administration, United States Department of Commerce, and officials of other Government departments and agencies to discuss the International Tin Agreement proposed at Geneva, Switzerland, United Nations Conference December last. The consensus of opinion was that the United States should not sign the agreement nor have any objection if other countries decided to bring the agreement into force. Stepped up publicity on the functions of BDSA relative to services to business has resulted noticeably in the increased industry contacts (personal, phone, and letters) seeking information on a variety of subjects; operation of the tin smelter, tariff legislation on zinc and lead, current statistics and trend in usage and production of the metals and materials under the jurisdiction of this Division. BERYLLIUM COPPER MASTER ALLOY The producers of this metal have been requesting that the stockpile specifications covering beryl ore be amended to permit a portion of the objective to be in the form of beryllium copper master alloy. This Division has been in agreement with the industry request and has spent some time in explaining to other Government agencies the advantages of having this material in the stockpile. The proposal was discussed at an ODM Nonferrous Metals Advisory Committee meeting at which time a recommendation was made to the Interdepartmental Materials Advisory Committee that this material be stockpiled. It is my understanding that the IMAC has approved the recommendation. MERCURY Owing to the scarcity of mercury for industrial consumers and the skyrocketing prices, this Division recommended that exports of mercury be controlled. Mercury was placed on the positive list with an open-end quota, effective June 5, 1954. JUNE 8, 1954. To: Mr. George W. Auxier, Executive Secretary. We compile statistics for a steel producer (Lukens Steel Co.) to give them their potential market for steel plates. We did this by giving them the number of fabricators in each State and the approximate total tonnage consumed in 1952 by the fabricators in each State. |