My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV99681
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV99681
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 3:23:32 AM
Creation date
11/22/2007 12:29:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1982121
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
8/25/1994
Doc Name
MID CONTINENT RESOURCES INC PITKIN IRON CORP
Type & Sequence
SO1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
T <br />• • <br />three stockpiles of limestone that had been mined and processed <br />by Pitkin before the Tiger, Lynx, and Lion claims were abandoned. <br />The limestone quarry and the three stockpiles are shown on <br />Attachments 3 through 10. The BLM has concluded that two of the <br />three stockpiles are composed of locatable grade limestone which <br />MCR may sell, but only for qualifying_usea if the Calcite claims <br />are otherwise valid. However, the third, and largest stockpile <br />is the "waste" stockpile to which the appellants refer on page 1 <br />of their Statement of Reasons (SOR). There is, apparently, some <br />demand for the material in this stockpile. The demand is, <br />however, for uses which do not imbue the materials with uncommon <br />characteristics, and the BLM has determined that the materials in <br />this stockpile are otherwise not uncommon. <br />The BLM's February 25, 1994, letter advised MCR that it <br />had established a Community Pit on the lands where the quarry is <br />situated, and that, although the establishment of the quarry did <br />not prevent MCR from locating mining claims on the same lands and <br />extracting therefrom locatable grade limestone, it could not <br />appropriate and sell any of the waste rock, rock not subject to <br />location, on the claims regardless of how it was generated. The <br />BLM warned MCR that any sales by it from this waste stockpile <br />will be considered to be a willful trespass. <br />The BLM does not, at this time, have reason to believe <br />that there are not deposits of an uncommon variety of limestone <br />subject to location under the mining laws within the boundaries <br />of the seven Calcite mining claims. It does have serious doubts <br />2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.