Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />materials are situated, the Calcite Nos. 1 through 7 mining <br />claims. See Attachments 12 through 18. Hence, regardless of <br />what Pitkin alleges in the appellants' SOR, its conduct clearly <br />demonstrates that it has abandoned whatever interest it may have <br />had in the mineral materials on the land covered by the abandoned <br />Tiger, Lynx, and Lion claims. Having been abandoned by Pitkin, <br />those mineral materials became part of the real estate upon which <br />they are situated, real estate owned by the United States. <br />The appellants allege that the BLM could not establish <br />a community pit in the quarry area because it is "not based upon <br />a `deposit' of mineral materials, but rather upon stockpiles of <br />previously extracted valuable minerals that are not a common <br />variety." SOR at 6. The BLM has concluded that the limestone in <br />two of the three separate stockpiles of mined limestone on the <br />lands embraced by the recently located Calcite claims is of an <br />uncommon variety. However, the limestone in the third, and <br />largest, stockpile is a common variety limestone. <br />The Act of July 23, 1955, popularly known as 'the <br />"Common Varieties Act," 30 U.S.C. § 611, removed from the <br />category of mineral deposits subject to location under the mining <br />law, among others, deposits of common varieties of stone. By <br />regulation based upon the legislative history of that Act, the <br />Department has defined what is not a common variety limestone. <br />"Limestone suitable for use in the manufacture of cement, <br />11 <br />