InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 30
Posts 3717
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/06/2011

Re: None

Saturday, 01/21/2017 12:49:20 AM

Saturday, January 21, 2017 12:49:20 AM

Post# of 47603
Looks as never bothered to read at all as staff comments are revealed very early due to requests from mining state elected reps to Congress on chilling effects of very poor and non- existent standards. Most well defined thing of all as much of rest is pure nonsense to fill some space and appear official.

"(c A north arrow on the maps"

What is proclaimed here as the new federalese gospel has it entirely backwards. Purpose is not to make more difficult but to bring into more acceptable world stds. And in addition all wrong as to what makes a miner which ranges from simple exploration to 1st point of sale with all after while it may add value is NOT mineral extraction because that's what defines mining. But it does NOT define 'mineral' as yet by the way since one man's gold may be another's potash or coal of quite a different color.

"Consistent with current staff guidance, we are proposing to define “mining operations” to include all related activities..... "from exploration through extraction to the first point of material external sale."

.. quotes mine ...

" We believe that including all activities up to the point of first material external
sale is appropriate because all such activities are necessary to convert the mineral resource to
saleable product, which generates the registrants’ revenues. This definition would, however,
exclude all activities subsequent to the first point of sale. Although such activities may add
value to the saleable mining product, they are not necessary to convert the resource into a
saleable product. For example, an aluminum producer who has material bauxite mining
operations and material external bauxite sales would not include any subsequent refinery
activities (such as processing the bauxite into aluminum) in the scope of its mining property
disclosure. We also note that, because this approach would be consistent with current staff
guidance, it is not expected to significantly alter existing disclosure practices. "

Operative is "NOT ALTER significantly" just revise mineral stds to rest of world's use of how good and how much .

Quite proud of own assist of Comstock's Lode restart where it ALL began 1860's Lincoln's war chest with NO Industry 7 study start up. Again was among first there using msg bd financing and we decided late 2003 to go mine Hartford Hill again FDR shut down in WW2 as not war essential. What a change from Abe!!! thinking on today's inauguration. Guess who won 1865 AND 2010? Then GoldSpring problems were just with legal jawboning dragging PPS to .00015 as result by 2007. Last I checked with 3:59:06 buy? MXSG Ask is .14.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/federalese