NMFRC
 

NCMSCompliance Assistance Centers

Funded by EPA
through a Cooperative Agreement

EPA

Disclaimer
The information contained in this site is provided for your review and convenience. It is not intended to provide legal advice with respect to any federal, state, or local regulation. You should consult with legal counsel and appropriate authorities before interpreting any regulations or undertaking any specific course of action.

Historical Articles

November, 1953 issue of Plating

 


EDITORIAL


THE BUSINESS and Defense Services Administration, U. S. Department of Commerce, revoked effective, November 1, 1953, its order M-80 and its schedules under which nickel has been regulated by the government for more than two years. End-use restrictions die with Schedule 1 of the order, much to the relief of the hard-hit electroplating industry.

However, the action is only a ”hunting license” in that it allows platers to use the metal on any products; it does not provide for additional allotments of nickel to the industry. The supply of nickel for the civilian economy will be that remaining after the requirements of the military and the Atomic Energy Commission are fully met. Thus, the order’s revocation results in a ”robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul” situation. More articles can be plated with nickel, but no more nickel is allocated.

Admittedly, it was unfair to the plating industry of this country to continue controls while foreign competitors were free to merchandise articles that domestic companies were forbidden to manufacture. On this account alone, the relief produced by the order’s revocation was long overdue.

The arithmetic necessary to arrive at the answer to the supply situation of the metal in the foreseeable future is now being worked out. That there will be some adjustments in favor of the plating industry is hoped for. Bright spots may be noted in the picture from the words of (1) the Director of Defense Mobilization ... ”it is not illogical to expect that supplies of nickel made available to the United States will increase upon removal of end-use restrictions”; and (2) a spokesman for a major producer who stated that his company would continue to ship to suppliers and distributors on a fair and equitable basis.

Al Korbelak




| Compliance Assistance | Regulations | Directories | Resources | Hot Topics | News | Ask the Experts | Library | Online Training | About NMFRC | Search | Home |

NMFRC