Laserfiche WebLink
IBLA 94-421 <br />4. Materials Act--Mining Claims: Generally--Mining Claims: <br />Abandorarnnt--Mining Claims: Lands Subject to--Mining <br />Claims: Location--Mining Claims: Relocation--Mining <br />Claims: Rental or Claim Maintenance Fees: Generally <br />When BLM establishes a casrmu~i.ty pit on land formerly <br />anbraced by mining claims that became abandoned and <br />wid, any rights arising fran subsequently located <br />claims are subordinate to the camiuu.ty pit. BIM <br />properly may preclude a mining claimant frog conduct- <br />ing mining operations within the pit area until the <br />pit designation is tPTTT~in~ted, and if mining opera- <br />tions are allowed, BIM can require a mining claimant <br />to establish that the mineral mined from the claims is <br />to be sold for qualifying uses. <br />APPEARANCES: Robert Delaney, Esq., Glenwood Springs, Colorado, for Appel- <br />lants; Dwell L. Madsen, Esq., Office of the Regional Solicitor, Lakewood, <br />Colorado, for the Bureau of Land Management. <br />OPINION BY ALYKIlVLSTRATIVE JUDGE PRICE <br />Mid-Continent Resources, Inc. (MCR) and Pitkin Iron Corporation <br />(Pitkin) have appealed frtm a February 25, 1994, letter (hereinafter L~ci- <br />sion) issued by the Glenwood Springs, Colorado, Area Manager, Bureau of <br />Land Manage~rent (BI.M), in response to receipt of Notices of Location for <br />the Calcite No. 1 through 7 placer mining claims (CHIC 246344 - Q`QC 246350) <br />dated January 28, 1994, which MCR filed on February 22, 1994. The seven <br />Calcite claims cover essentially the same ground as the Lion Nos. 2 through <br />4 and Lyme Nos. 3 through 6 mining claims (Q~IC 38073 - CMC 38075 and CMC <br />38090 - QNC 38093), which were declared atx~ndoned and wid when no rental <br />fees were sukznitted by August 31, 1993, as required by a provision of the <br />Depamn=nt of Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for Fiscal <br />Year 1993 (the Act), Pub. L. No. 102-381, 106 Stat. 1378-79 (1992). ~ <br />The Calcite claims encutpass the limestone quarry and three stockpiles <br />of limesto~~e that load i]ezll quarried and processed while the Lim and Lyzx; <br />claims were valid. BLM determined that two of the three stockpiles con- <br />tained locatable li.trestone, while the third did not. The stoGq~iles con- <br />sist of material that is 1/4 inch or less in size (fines), material that <br />is less than 1 inch but not ttnre than 1/4 inch in size, and material that <br />is less than 3 inches but more than 1 inch in size. Grab samples fxcm <br />the stockpiles were i*+~~*+~pntly assayed. The results of the assay showed <br />that the fines contained slightly less than 95 percent total cam -tes, <br />while the two rprrv~;n;ng stodq~iles contained total ca~x~ates that exceeded <br />that standard. In making its determination that one stoc}q~ile did not <br />~ The claims were declared abandoned and wid by a decision dated <br />Oct. 22, 1993, fmn which no appeal was taken. <br />148 IBLA 371 <br />