2005-01-27_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - M1983052

Home Browse Search

p4/9 Demand for Jury Trial:(con't) I request that the jury find, after being provided with all the facts, and after due deliberation, that the factual basis of the BLM Notice of Noncompliance at the Ace#7 Mine as well as at the Joker MIll were based on inspections that were insufficient in duration and depth of inspection to arrive at an informed con- clusion as to whether either site was in compliance or non-com- pliance. While I do not know the amount of time spent at the Joker Mill, I do know that the sum total of time actually spent in "in- spections" at the Ace#7 Mine during the last seven years was less than 3hrs 45minutes for all seven years. Many of the statments i? made in the inspection reports are false statments, in my opinion intentionally made to cause damage to the mining industry in the area(see Ref 4, Nov 27,2004 letter to U.S. Attorney General). Many of the statments made in the BLM inspection reports were pre-arranged, "canned" stat6nts about equipment that "was unused", that there was a "long history of inactivity", or that process or equipment was "inappropriate". Whether equipment is in use or not is a matter to be determined by the owner of the property not by a poorly-informed bureaucrat. And whether the equipment or process is appropriate, or the scale of operations is adequate is not a matter that is any business of the BLM whatever, that is strictly up to the owner of the mine, since the mine is, after all, private property in the fullest sense of the word(see U.S. v Shumway). Such "canned" statments and phrases were common to the inspection reports at both the Ace#7 Mine and at the Joker Mill. This was very apparant to me after reading through both. Recommendations for complete destruction were also contained in both supposedly to achieve "reclamation" following abandonment. ii