MINERAL REPORT NMC 633137 Surface Use and Validity … · 2010. 10. 6. · MINERAL REPORT Surface...

Form 3060-1 (July 1984)

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT

MINERAL REPORT Surface Use and Validity Determination

For The Yellow Jacket #1, Yellow Jacket #2,

Yellow Jacket #5 and Yellow Jacket #6 Mill Site Claims

(Title)

LANDS INVOLVED Clark County, Nevada

T. 14 S., R. 66 E., MDM Section 19, SW',4SE',4NW1f4, SE',4SW1f4NW',4

Consisting of 20 Acres

Prepared by: _--,=&:~."",. !L'Lltl"""",,"A£<4.--,_,.L.dz~UL,""''''''0=W\~===-. __ (Signature)

Minerals Specialist (Title)

Au ust 31 2000 (Date)

Certified

(Date) I

Serial Number NMC 633132 NMC 633133 NMC 633136 NMC 633137

Technical Approval: \ ~anageme~c owledgment:

~~ ~ .\ (Signature)

k J~<>< +. ,,-. (Title) (Title)

~/7/MdQ \\ - ''=-\- &"V (Dat ) (Date)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Summary

II. Conclusions

III. Recommendations

IV. Introduction

V. Lands Involved and Physiographic Data

VI. Environmental Considerations

VII. Inspection History

VIII. Geologic Setting

IX. Site Geology

X. Mining History of the Vicinity

XI. Mineral-in-Character Determination

XII. Analysis of Surface Uses

XIII. Bibliography

Attachments: Maps, Documents and Photographs

2

pg. 3

pg. 3

pg.5

pg.5

pg. 5

pg. 8

pg. 8

pg.11

pg. 12

pg. 12

pg.13

pg.13

pg. 15

I. Summary

The Yellow Jacket # 1, Yellow Jacket #2, Yellow Jacket #5 and Yellow Jacket #6 mill site claims are owned by Jerry C. Henderson. The mill site claims are each 5 acres in size. Temple Summit Financial Properties, Inc. was the previous owner of the mill sites. While under Temple Summit's ownership, the mill sites were dependent on two unpatented placer claims located north of the mill sites. The Yellow Jacket placer claims, located in T. 13 S., R. 65 E., sec. 34 are still in the ownership of Temple Summit Financial Properties, Inc. None of the placer claims are currently being mined. Only the Yellow Jacket #1 and #2 mill sites have any developments on them. The operations taking place on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site claim consists mainly of non-mining related occupancy. A large metal building houses a lab area, office, and storage area. Equipment potentially related to mining and milling operations is either not functional, shows little sign of use or is not set up for operation. There are no stockpiles of mateIials for processing on site. The site is enclosed by a chain link fence. A portion of the fence is located on the Yellow Jacket #2.

The subject lands are not located in a mining district. During the field investigation, locatable minerals, or indications thereof, were not observed on the subject lands, nor are there any reported occurrences in the literature.

The subject lands are prospectively valuable under the Mineral Leasing Act for oil and gas, sodium and potassium.

The site is located in an area of fine grained materials. The potential for the production of saleable minerals is considered to be low. The subject lands were determined to not be mineral in character.

Lands encumbered by the Yellow Jacket claims are identified for disposal and segregated from the Mining Law. A segregation for land exchange, N-61968, was noted in Bureau of Land Management records on October 1, 1997.

II. Conclusions

Based on the inspection of ApIi120, 2000, one on October 28, 1999 with Mark Chatterton, and inspections prior to that, it is our professional opinion that activities on this site do not meet the requirements of 43 CFR 3715.2,3715.2-1 or 3715.5.

1) No milling or mining operations are taking place on the mill sites that would require the level of occupancy which is taking place.

2) Activities on the site do not constitute substantially regular work.

3

3) Activities and equipment on the site can not be reasonably calculated to lead to the extraction and beneficiation of minerals.

4) Operations do not involve observable on-the-ground activities that BLM may verify under Sec. 3715.7.

5) The primary use of the mill site is not for mining or milling purposes. The equipment present that could be reasonably incident to a theoretical operation is inoperable or inappropriate for the purposes to which the mill site is actually put, and could not be adapted for actual mineral production or mining operations. There are no mining operations taking place on the site.

6) Since no valuable minerals are exposed, the present occupancy is beyond that needed to protect exposed, concentrated or otherwise accessible valuable minerals from theft or loss.

7) The occupancy is not needed to protect from theft or loss appropriate, operable equipment which is regularly used and cannot be protected by means other than occupancy. All items could be removed and stored off-site.

8) The occupancy is not needed to protect the public from appropriate, operable equipment which is regularly used, and if left unattended, creates a hazard to public safety.

9) The occupancy is not needed to protect the public from surface uses, workings, or improvements which, if left unattended, create a hazard to public safety. The occupancy and storage of inappropriate or inoperable equipment and non-mining related items or junk creates a hazard to the public. Removal of the occupancy, inappropriate or inoperable equipment and non-mining related items would eliminate any perceived need for the occupancy.

10) The site is not located in an area so isolated or lacking in physical access as to require the mining claimant, operator or workers to remain on site in order to work a full shift of a usual and customary length. The site is within a short travel distance of Moapa, Nevada and several other rural communities.

11) Having equipment, machinery and other personal property on site that is inoperable or inappropriate for the purposes to which the mill site is actually put, and could not be adapted for actual mineral production or mining operations causes unnecessary and undue degradation of the public lands and resources.

12) Lands encumbered by the claims are segregated from the Mining Law. A segregation for land exchange, N-61968, was noted in Bureau of Land Management records on October 1, 1997.

4

III. Recommendations

Based on the field examinations of October 28, 1999 and April 20, 2000, the Bureau of Land Management should issue a complaint to initiate a contest action on the Yellow Jacket mill site claims. The charge used in the contest complaint should state that:

liThe Yellow Jacket #1, Yellow Jacket #2, Yellow Jacket #5 and Yellow Jacket #6 mill site claims, NMC 633132, 633133, 633136 and 633137, are not being occupied for uses that are reasonably incident to, or necessary for, prospecting, mining, or processing operations under the mining laws as provided for by 43 CFR 3712.1 and Section 4(a) of the Act of July 23, 1955.

IV. Introduction

On April 20, 2000 an examination of the Yellow Jacket #1, Yellow Jacket #2, Yellow Jacket #5 and Yellow Jacket #6 mill sites, NMC 633132, 633133, 633136 and 633137, was made by Edward Seum, a geologist, and Joel Mur, a Natural Resource Specialist, from the Las Vegas Field Office. Charles and Robert Langrill, of Temple Summit Financial Properties, Inc. were present during the inspection. The claims are located on public land in Clark County, Nevada.

The purpose of the examination was to determine the validity of the mill sites, and to determine if the surface uses are reasonably incident to prospecting, mining, or processing operations within the meaning of 30 USC 612(a) and 43 CFR 3712.1 and 43 CFR 3715 (BLM Manual 3891, 1987).

The purpose of this report is as described above and should not be used for any purposes other than that for which it was prepared.

V. Lands Involved and Physiographic Data

The Yellow Jacket #1, Yellow Jacket #2, Yellow Jacket #5 and Yellow Jacket #6 mill site claims, NMC 633132, 633133, 633136 and 633137, are located northwest of Moapa, Nevada (Maps 1 & 2, Aerial Photo). Physical and legal access is provided by utilizing the road and highway system of Clark County, and the State of Nevada.

To reach the site from Las Vegas, Nevada, take Interstate Highway 15 north to the Moapa exit. Turn west on State Route 168 and go approximately three miles and turn north onto a dirt road. Travel approximately a quarter mile to the mill sites.

Both the surface and mineral estates are in Federal ownership (see MTP) and under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management. There are no rights-of-way encumbering the Yellow Jacket #2, Yellow Jacket #5 and Yellow Jacket #6 claims.

5

The following encumbrances are located across the southeast comer of the YeHow Jacket #1 claim:

A 10 foot pipeline right-of-way, N-ll028

A 50 foot power line right-of-way, Nev-044096

A segregation for land exchange, N-61968 was noted in Bureau of Land Management records on October 1, 1997. Lands covered by the segregation are identified for disposal by the Las Vegas Resource Management Plan and removed from entry under the Mining Law and include the Yellow Jacket #1, Yellow Jacket #2, Yellow Jacket #5 and Yellow Jacket #6 claims.

The legal description of the Yellow Jacket #1 is:

Meridian: Township: Range: Section: Acres:

Mount Diablo 14 South 66 East 19, WY2SEl,4SWl,4NWl,4

5.0



Mount Diablo 14 South 66 East 19, ElhSE%SWl,4NWl,4

5.0


Melidian: Township: Range: Section: Acres:

Mount Diablo 14 South 66 East 19, W1hSWl,4SE%NW% 5.0



6

Mount Diablo 14 South 66 East 19, WlhSWl,4SE%NW% 5.0

Claim History

The Yellow Jacket #1, Yellow Jacket #2, Yellow Jacket #5 and Yellow Jacket #6 mill site claims, NMC 633132, 633133, 633136 and 633137, were located September 4, 1991. They were relocations of mill site claims that were allowed to lapse in 1989 and 1991. The claims were located by Jerry C. Henderson in 14 S., R. 66 E., sec. 19. Jerry C. Henderson quit claimed the claims to Temple Summit Financial Projects, Inc. on September 9, 1995. The transfer was filed with the BLM State Office, in Reno, Nevada on October 2, 1995. Temple Summit quit claimed the claims back to Henderson on March 23,2000. The transfer of interest was not filed with the BLM till April 26, 2000. Jerry C. Henderson is the claimant of record as of the date of this report.

The mill sites were dependent on the Yellow Jacket group of placer claims. The Yellow Jacket placer group used to consist of a number of claims located in T. 13 S., R. 65 E., secs. 34 and 35. The group now consists of two 160 acre, unpatented claims, the Yellow Jacket #4 and Yellow Jacket #5, NMC 630192-3, located in T. 13 S., R. 65 E., sec. 34. The placer claims were transferred by Henderson to Temple Summit in February of 1997. Temple Summit is the claimant of record as of the date of this report. No mining is taking place on the placer claims.

Activities conducted on the Yellow Jacket claims under the 43 CFR 3809 regulations have been tracked under Notice N54-89-004N, filed on November 15 1988. The claimants were listed as Jerry C. and Helen V. Henderson, and Doris Travis. Henderson's company, Complex Metals Research & Development, Inc. was the operator. Under the Notice, operations were to take place on the YeJ]ow Jacket #1 and #2 mill site claims and the Yellow Jacket #2 placer claim (located in T. 13 S., R. 65 E., sec. 35). Proposed operations consisted of constructing a testing plant to process 5 tons of ore per day and sampling the placer claim at 4 sites. Total size of the sampling sites together would not exceed 40,000 square feet. A building, ponds and pilot plant, to be used to develop a recovery process for metals, was to be placed on 2.5 acres of the mill sites. In late 1989 the site was taken over by the International Resource Management Corporation (lRMC) who had contracted with Henderson to develop the site. In August of 1991, IRMC updated the existing notice. The mill operation was to consist of laboratory analysis while a road leading to the placer claims was to be upgraded.

In August of 1992, the claims went back into the hands of Jerry Henderson and remained with him till March of 1993. At that point the mill sites were taken over by Hans Rasmussen. Mr. Rasmussen intended to use the site for processing ores from the Key West Mine, located southwest of Mesquite, Nevada. The ore would be processed through a pilot plant at a rate of 10 tons per day. That level of operations was to be maintained for 6 months and then go up to 60 tons per day. In January of 1994, Jerry Henderson notified the BLM that Rasmussen was no longer involved with the Yellow Jacket mill sites.

7

On February 14, 1994, Henderson submitted an update to the Notice showing that he was the owner/operator. A list of equipment that was to be placed on the mill sites was received along with a flow sheet. In July of 1996, Temple Summit Financial Projects, Inc. submitted an update to the Notice showing themselves as claimant and operator. Acti vities included removal of 1,000 yards of placer material and storing the material on the mill sites. The materials were to be loaded into 50 gallon barrels and shipped to various testing facilities.

VI. Environmental Considerations

The area is not located in a Mining District. No cultural features associated with past mining are known to be on the site. Reviews of the Notice by a BLM Archaeologist did identify the potential for prehistOlic and historic cultural resources to be near, but not on the property.

The site is located within low density desert tortoise habitat. The desert t0l10ise is listed as a threatened species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Within the area disturbed by this operation tortoise habitat no longer exists. No mitigation fees are required for lands disturbed under a Notice. The operator clllTently has no take of desert tortoise under the Endangered Species Act.

Operations on the site should not degrade either surface or ground waters of the State. No hazardous materials or substances were found during the exam. The pump on the water well is used to pull water from the Moapa water system. The water well does not go to ground water.

The site is not located in a non-attainment area. CUITently no excavating or processing of materials is occurring. Reclamation of the site, by either the operator or claimant, is required by the 43 CFR 3809 Regulations. There are no other environmental considerations associated with this site.

VII. Inspection History

Inspections on this site have been perforrned by the BLM at various times. A table showing the dates of inspection, inspector and picture numbers (attached to this report) is shown below.

Inspector

04-30-90 Mark Chatterton 1-4

09-11-91 Gary Beckman 5-8

11-07-91 Gary Beckman

8

05-01-92 Glen Miller/Joel Mur 9-14

07-23-92 Glen Miller/Joel Mur 15-21

07-29-92 Joel Mur

08-05-92 Glen Miller



02-04-93 JoelMur

05-06-93 JoelMur

07-01-93 Joel Mur

09-14-93 Dale Kuntz 22-23

12-02-93 Joel Mur

04-12-94 JoelMur

04-26-94 Joel Mur

06-10-94 JoelMur

03-20-95 Joel Mur

08-16-95 Joel Mur

11-08-95 JoelMur

01-08-96 Joel Mur

10-06-98 Joel Mur 24-27

10-28-99 Edward SeumlMark Chatterton 28-33

04-20-00 Edward Seum/J oel Mur 34-50

On April 30, 1990 an inspection was made of the above listed claims. Mark Chatterton found the site to be clean, well maintained and built to design specifications. Bromine

9

and hydrochloric acid were stored in the mill building. International Resource Management Corporation was the operator on the site.

On September 11, 1991 an inspection by Gary Beckman found no one on the site and the gate locked. Miscellaneous equipment and drums were on the area but the site was still neat. The inspection report also indicated that a Water Pollution Control Permit had been applied for, but not issued due to the need for additional information. As a result of the inspection a letter was sent to the operator requesting that a key be supplied to the BLM. In response to the letter, Norbert Reinhart called Beckman and stated that a metallurgist lived in one of the trailers on site and had a key. He also stated that no processing had been done for some time and that startup of operations was tenuous.

Beckman performed another inspection of the site on November 7,1991. He found a leaking, unmarked drum, scattered trash and tumbleweeds inside the fenced area. A trailer seen during the previous inspection had been removed. No chemicals were on site and no processing was taking place. The metallurgist was still living on site. As a result of the inspection a letter was sent to the operator to clean up the site.

An inspection completed by Glen Miller and Joel Mur in May of 1992 found that empty barrels and chemicals were being stored outside. Ground contamination by fuel was found in several areas. The trailer where the metallurgist stayed was empty and the site had not seen any use for some time. A letter requiring clean up of the site was sent to the operator.

A July 23, 1992 inspection by Miller and Mur found no one on site and that the lock on the gate had been changed. A loader and trailer had been removed from the site. The building was open and chemicals were still stored on site.

An inspection on July 29, 1994 by Mur found no change in the site. Mur was accompanied by Tom Card from the State of Nevada, Department of Environmental Protection. No State Water Pollution Control Permit existed for the site. One was required to have chemicals on the site.

An inspection on August 5, 1992 found the site was not in use. Jerry Henderson had posted a sign showing that he now was back in control of the site. On October 16, 1992, Miller found that the site was being cleaned up. Trash had been picked up and some of the equipment, fuel tanks and plastic chemical tanks had been removed. The subsequent inspection of November 22, 1992 found that clean up was still taking place.

An inspection of the site on February 4,1993 by Mur found that no operations had occurred for some time and that chemicals were still stored on the site. A letter was sent to Henderson requiring notification of when operations would startup and updating of the Notice. A letter stating that Hans Rasmussen would be taking over the site was received in reply.

10

An inspection on May 6, 1993 by Joel Mur found the site to be a little cleaner but no operations were taking place. Another inspection by Mur on July 1, 1993 found no change in the site. An inspection by Dale Kuntz on September 14, 1993 found a hopper blown over onto the fence and a barrel spilled onto the ground. A barn owl was found to be inhabiting the metal building and Kuntz estimated that no operations had occurred for several years. The inspection of December 2, 1993 found no activity and chemicals still stored on site. A letter requiring removal of the chemicals was sent as a result of the inspection. In a reply to the letter, Jerry Henderson stated that the chemicals had been removed.

Inspections performed by Mur from April of 1994 through August of 1995 found no activity on the site. The inspection of November 8, 1995 found Jim Langrill of Temple Summit Financial Project, Inc. on site. Temple Summit was taking over the mill site and associated placer claims. Some samples had been taken to be shipped off for testing. The January 1996 and October 1998 inspections again found no activity.

During an inspection on October 28, 1999 Edward Seum and Mark Chatterton found no activity taking place. The large metal building was locked, ponds were dry, no equipment was stored on site, and no materials were stockpiled for processing. There were no signs of any traffic going into the site.

No mining or milling operations ever occurred during any of the inspections listed above. No maintenance of mining or milling equipment was being done during any of the inspections.

VIII. Geologic Setting

Regional Geology

The site sits east of the northern end of the Arrow Canyon Range, and the southern end of the Meadow Valley Mountains, on alluvium of Quaternary age. The alluvium is probably underlain by Tertiary sedimentary deposits of the Muddy Creek Formation, which outcrops east and west of the site (see attached geologic map). Topography in the area resembles that of the Mormon Mesa. Drainage enters the Muddy River, to the south, which flows into Lake Mead.

The Arrow Canyon Range trends in a northerly direction for 32 miles and is separated from the Meadow Valley Mountains by an imaginary line paralleling U.S. Highway 93. The Arrow Canyon Range is composed of rocks ranging in age from Ordovician to Permian. The rocks are mainly carbonate and occur in the upper part of the Bird Spring Formation. The Muddy Creek Formation occurs on the flanks in the adjoining basins. North striking faults in the range show large displacements, while faults with smaller displacements strike northwest.

1 1

The Meadow Valley Mountains extend about six miles southward into Clark County from Lincoln County. The eastern part, of the southern extension, of the Meadow Valley Mountains is composed of carbonate rocks of the Bird Springs Formation. This area is cut by a number of faults and also contains some small folds.

IX. Site Geol01:Y

A field examination of the subject lands was conducted on April 20, 2000. The land surface where the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site claim is located, has been disturbed by activities conducted by the operator. The rest of the area has a very sparse cover of vegetation.

According to a geologic map of the area the site is located on Quaternary age alluvium. The subject lands are not located in a mining district. During the field investigation, locatable minerals, or indications thereof, were not observed on the subject lands, nor are there any reported occurrences in the literature. No samples for locatable minerals were taken.

The subject lands are prospectively valuable under the Mineral Leasing Act for oil and gas, sodium and potassium.

During the field investigation, surficial deposits of saleable minerals were not observed on the subject lands. Surficial materials appear to be mainly in the clay and silt range and are probably not very thick. The potential for the production of saleable minerals is considered to be low.

X. Minin1: History of the Vicinity

The lands do not occur in one of the metallic mining districts. The Copper King District in the Virgin Mountains is the closest district. Small amounts of metallic minerals were produced in the past from Precambrian age rocks. Greatest production from the district was for copper and lead. Minor amounts of gold, silver, nickel, platinum and palladium were also produced. No known occurrences of locatable minerals have been reported within the valley fill.

Some industrial minerals have been produced from areas to the east of the subject lands. Limestone used for landscaping is mined from an area near Glendale, Nevada .. Small amounts of limestone and clay are also mined near Glendale for use in a local cement plant. Silica sand is produced by Simplot Silica from an area south of Overton, Nevada. The sand is mainly used for glass and refractory purposes. The subject lands are considered to be prospectively valuable under the Mineral Leasing Act for oil and gas, sodium and potassium.

12

XI. Mineral in Character Determination

The subject lands are not located within the boundary of a mining district. During the field investigation, locatable minerals, or indications thereof, were not observed nor are there reported occurrences in the literature. Likewise, there is no reason to suspect their existence based on the geology of the area.

The Mineral Leasing Act resources classification maps, prepared by the Division of Mineral Resources, Nevada State Office, Bureau of Land Management, indicate the subject lands are prospectively valuable for oil and gas, sodium and potassium. The lands are not known to be valuable for other Mineral Leasing Act minerals.

During the field investigation, surficial deposits of saleable minerals were not observed on the subject lands. Surficial materials appear to be mainly in the clay and silt range. Based on the literature, this analysis and geologic inference the land is not mineral in character.

XII. Analysis of Surface Uses

Mill Site Development

On April 20, 2000, Edward Seum and Joel Mur went to the Yellow Jacket mill sites. Charles and Robert Langrill, of Temple Summit Financial Properties, Inc. were present during the inspection. According to the Langrill's, they had quit claimed the Yellow Jacket mill sites back to Jerry Henderson on March 22,2000, but retained the Yellow Jacket placer claims. However, as of the date of the inspection, no transfer of interest for the mill site claims had been filed with the BLM.

The following items are located on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. A large metal mill building (photo 1,5,6,9, 15, 16,24,25,27-30,34) is on the site. A lab area (photo 35) and some miscellaneous equipment (photos 36, 37, 38) are located in the building. The mill building has electricity and water. Sewage is handled by septic tanks but it was not possible to verify this during the inspection. Water is obtained by using a pump (photo 39) to draw water from the Moapa water system.

Several large metal tanks are located adjacent to the metal building (photos 40, 43). Barrels of mineral materials (photos 40, 42) are stored on a cement pad on the east side of the metal building. Six asphalt lined ponds (photos 44, 45) sit on the east side of the claim. An empty fuel tank (photo 47) is located on the south end of the site. A fence (various photos) encloses the disturbed area. The eastern part of the fence line is on the Yellow Jacket #2 mill site claim.

The following summarizes Robert Langrill's oral statements, made to examiner Seum about the site, during the inspection.

13

L The mill sites were dependent on placer claims located north of the mill sites. Other than sampling, no mining is taking place on the placer claims.

2. It would cost between $200,000 and $300,000 in upgrades to meet environmental considerations for Temple Summit to use the mill site claims. This would include replacing the pond liners which had absorbed cyanide during use plior to Temple Summit coming onto the site.

3. All of the large tanks on the site were empty and most had only held water.

4. The placer claims showed values of 0.1 to 0.15 ounces of gold per ton.

5. There has been no production on the mill sites while they were in Temple Summit's hands.

Surface Use Evaluation

Surface operations and occupancy on and associated with mining claims are regulated by the BLM through 43 CFR 3715 and 43 CFR 3809 to prevent undue or unnecessary degradation. A mining claimant or operator is entitled to use the surface of their mining claim for purposes reasonably incident to prospecting, mining, and processing operations.

Development of a mill site to process ores for extraction of valuable minerals by a prudent operator will normally take place in conjunction with development of a mine. Prior to outlays for capital improvements to a mill site, the ore samples will undergo numerous physical and chemical tests. Physical disturbance of the proposed mill site is not required at this point. The tests will determine the types of equipment and chemicals which might be needed to extract the valuable minerals. Equipment is then brought in to set up in the proper circuits for processing ore. This will take extensi ve testing to make sure that proper sizing and treatment of the ores will occur. Other facilities such as ponds, leach pads and laboratories are put in place. Many times these facilities are fenced off to reduce hazards to the public. These improvements and facilities are likely to remain during temporary shutdowns under the care of a watchman or maintenance crew who reside on the site.

It is possible to determine the phase a mill site claim is in through inspection. Operations that are actually taking place are key to the determination, not the equipment or personal property that may be present. The presence of primarily inappropriate or inoperable equipment or personal property indicates that the mill site claim is not being worked by a prudent operator in usual, customary and proficient operations. This can constitute unnecessary and undue degradation of the public lands.

14

No operations are taking place on the Yellow Jacket #1, #2, #5 and #6 mill sites. In the July 1996 update of Notice N54-89-004N, filed by Temple Summit Financial Properties, Inc., work was to consist of removing 1,000 yards of placer material and storing the material on the mill sites. The materials were to be loaded into 50 gallon barrels and shipped to various testing facilities. No continuous operations were proposed or have taken place.

None of the placer claims that supported these mill sites has provided "ore" for the mill sites beyond testing. The placer claims are not currently being mined. On October 1, 1997 the subject lands, where the mill site claims are located, were segregated from appropriation under the General Mining Law of May 10, 1872, as amended (17 Stat. 91). Other than the occupancy on the Yellow Jacket #1 and #2 claims, there was no development of the mill sites prior to segregation. No development of the mill sites has taken place post the segregation either. There is no showing of good faith efforts to develop the sites. These sites are not being used or occupied for mining, milling, processing or beneficiation within the meaning of30 USC 612 (a) and 43 CFR 3712.1.

XIII. Bibliography

Garside, L. J., R. H. Hess, K. L. Fleming and B. S. Weimer; Oil and Gas Developments in Nevada; Bulletin 104; 1988, Reno; Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology.

Johnson, Maureen G., Placer Gold Deposits of Nevada; Geological Survey Bulletin 1356; 1973, Washington D.C.; United States Government Printing Office.

Longwell, C. R., H. Pampeyan, Ben Bower and R. J. Roberts; Geology and Mineral Deposits of Clark County, Nevada; Bulletin 62; 1965, Reno; Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology.

Vanderberg, William 0.; Placer Mining in Nevada; Bulletin 27; 1936, Reno; Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology.

Lands Valuable for Oil and Gas (Nevada), revised 1983, 1:500,000, U.S. Geological Survey, Conservation Division, Western Region, Office of the Area Geologist.

Lands Valuable for Sodium and Potassium (Nevada), revised 1980, 1:500,000, U.S. Geological Survey, Conservation Division, Western Region, Office of the Area Geologist.

1 5

11/99 E. Seum 1/2"

Wildlife

CLARK , SHf£PK

ELV20FT.

Range

10 miles

lofl

6 km E of Moapa Valley National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada, United States 11 Sep 1994

E",.,,,W!Y'

0'1....-----1._----1._-----" 200M o L-I ----'-----'---------"'--'1 200y d

Image courtesy of the US Geological Survey.

8117/00 9:38 AM

1 of 1

6 km E of Moapa Valley National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada, United States 01 Jul1983

~USGS ............ --::..r-'" \ > ....-::->"" . .r-- i / /\. - /

.... .... . - . .. -

... .-- ... - -

i

r-J- c·-'-/ .. f I I .

J

~)( --p...,.;;~-- -.I~-+---'----- + --..-

~.' .---.~ --...........

\ I ,~aT" " ... " I I ",14 S, .--. -r- -,-.-

I •

, I

I , I

\ ... ...

ii

"

OIL' _-'------'L---L_--l', SKm

Image courtesy of the US Geological Survey,

,;:,- -. w. . / .: .,'

~'::.r , y

\J\S •• • I,.

"- - -, ... - -.. ~ - . " .' -. ,1 /-' ...

N

8/17/008:35 AM

Geology of the Moapa Area

Legend

AI FauRs

D Twnshpmg

N Railroads

N Roads

Fonnations DOs DM~'" D Oep D PPMb D PPMc

Pkt

CJPzt D QaI

SI

Dlb DTh

Tko DTmc D Trcm

N

s Created 8/23/00 by E. Seum

, •.• -1 7 8 9 10 II

18 1\ \ +.

, lI.n

1 :11 •• ;1 CLAIMS

'23

DIABLO MERIDIAN t NEVADA

12

13

24

25

_.- ... -

~n .. ~ Tk ........... ___ • .........,. - r..w.. --- ........................

::~~~~"'~~Y='= __ --... _ "",-.I _ J" _ _ .................... _

STATUS Of PU8UC DOMAIN LAND AND MINERAL TITLES

.lNOf:lC TO SEGREGATE

w,·,rep ,-,.,., 1!7PCI!MIt' BJt" q 4fW!C'naM MIlfJWS r4TDP MOm! tlflCIf".1: I'fI'rJlZS.. IIEl'P' TD'IIRX Q£ MSXl'M'J'ktf MQKn~

.. ':';'-, --"XZ-X;:-;;'c;i':«j -- ,,: M_ !!tr_Ml ...... ., ...,. __ ,.,. __ .

lerl!~ __ ~;"""Hrt ......... - ""';';"-'CN 1'/nt"IH!';>;, .,., .

II,M (l C1 .,....,..... 0<,

s..., • MI

Ii« 1(1 . "VZ_V4. SC"""f.V4, S"I/<I

&t IS IIIf/Z.lWil!!!.!£:!J.VlH'!" f« if .lIIfCL8!Jt!.,"~HJC.4 •

$'£ IT 11£1/4 NltlItWV-1. &"Vf!( • .!L4."S-"V,~Z,-__ _ ~.~IIIG::!!..!tiL1.I£V:!.CtOSCII""~~

s..., .1'0 (I,/ilKy! .. ' 5'« zi1-;$ln':'Y;~:'-;'~:'<::·;\.':',·

m rz .CV'UIItIIfII4 N""f!,tIIlflfO'!tIJI!"'l!Ia~ ... ra IIfttl KIt'f ClIlllfrV1 glt!!.G'l.N( V~ srVfSCJ/1 #(l_VYS1rf(fSCi!LJt£.uf-~_

S£V"$WII'!SCJl!J1tIH·(1~~r.£I"",

"'Vt-V!K'tH{V!·WI.KJt!:!..1j!L~ __ _ _ ~ IL~~ _______ _

5~Ii!.ilZILZ.KV" IIltzInlflH 1S£lI'I_~ _____ SI''''' rv:.mtctt1. rlliHI/1

$f( IF $"'V!-II'!.S.lIl".N"'f/"NIC~t'!!... _____ .SVlNlCV4SWI/4 $(V4,"'<I7""'SL~,I£¥4

___ _ S"'_"V'#,,-,-::.;SE:.II'::..;.4 __ ~ ___ _

:it' 1#!t£V! IIV'tItftt/! Kl/ftlqVY..lt!!lt!Lst'~~ --.itt. 11- N£,,',,"'.,,4"'M .. C.,V'#"'-____ _

~...!.:!-_""I/~C""'MC(,AII •• I./7Jf/L"'"

$« J'~ N{llWtI!{V41t.I('.fSfl7""Y!."~ S6/,/¥

Su-JI ..vz; ,. .. «tV gUt

$#e .1"'-cv:rCt/7 SCV.IIMl.('!:;c '.!"': ~J/r~~~I/<f NCI/"_I/HCI/4, '/1

eN"". ~ _ ,.,. .. lUll r,.,. .fI.c#IHI " _'H~

~iI: ~. ,."..,. ~ f!!!!!~r !!!:!....!!..I!!""",,-

'SHiP ;4

Photo #1 - Taken 4/30/90 by M. Chatterton. Looking northwest at entrance and large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #2 - Taken 4/30/90 by M. Chatterton. Looking northwest at large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Mineral material stockpiled at center of picture.

Photo #3 - Taken 4/30/90 by M. Chatterton. Looking southwest on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Shows some processing equipment and stockpiled materials.

Photo #4 - Taken 4/30/90 by M. Chatterton. Looking north on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Shows ponds and trailer.

Photo #5 - Taken 9111191 by G. Beckman. Overview of operations on the Yellow Jacket # 1 mill site. Looking northwest.

Photo #6 - Taken 9111191 by G. Beckman. Looking north at the large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Shows some stockpiled materials.

Photo #7 - Taken 9111191 by G. Beckman. Looking northwest on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Ponds in foreground.

Photo #8 - Taken 9111/91 by G. Beckman. Looking at entrance

...,.i-t gate to the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Placards for chemical hazards stored on site on the gate.

Photo #9 - Taken 5/1/92 by G. Miller. Looking northwest at entrance and large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #10 - Taken 5/1/92 by G. Miller. Looking northwest at the large metal building, ponds and processing equipment on the Yellow Jacket # 1 mill site.

Photo #11 - Taken 5/1/92 by G. Miller. Shows tromme1, containers of chemicals and backhoe on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #12 - Taken 5/1/92 by G. Miller. Looking southwest on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #13 - Taken 5/1/92 by G. Miller. Looking northwest at ponds on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #14 - Taken 5/1/92 by G. Miller. Looking north on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #15 - Taken 7/23/92 by G. Miller. Looking northwest on the Yellow Jacket # 1 mill site.

Photo #16 - Taken 7/23/92 by G. Miller. Close-up of the area shown in photo #15.

Photo #17 - Taken 7/23/92 by G. Miller. Looking north on the west west side of the metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #18 - Taken 7/23/92 by G. Miller. Looking south on the Yellow Jacket # 1 mill site.

Photo #19 - Taken 7/23/92 by G. Miller. Looking north along the metal building on the Yellow Jacket # 1 mill site.

Photo #20 - Taken 7/23/92 by G. Miller. Looking southeast on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Shows miscellaneous equipment.

Photo #21 - Taken 7/23/92 by G. Miller. Looking south on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Shows miscellaneous equipment.

Photo #22 - Taken 9/14/93 by D. Kuntz. Shows hopper blown over onto the fence on the Yellow Jacket # 1 mill site.

Photo #23 - Taken 9/14/93 by D. Kuntz. Shows barrel of mineral materials spilled on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #24 - Taken 10/6/98 by 1. Mur. Looking northeast at entrance to the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #25 - Taken 10/6/98 by 1. Mur. Looking northeast at large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #26 - Taken 10/6/98 by J. Mur. Looking west ponds and building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #27 - Taken 10/6/98 by J. Mur. Looking northeast at the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #28 - Taken 10/28/99 by __ ---- E. Sewn. Looking northwest at

\._.-- ------j the large metal building on the

~~~ •. ~~~~-=~:=:·~~=:~~~C::::~J Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #29 - Taken 10/28/99 by E. Sewn. Looking south at the large metal building on the Yellow Jacket # 1 mill site.

Photo #30 - Taken 10/28/99 by E. Seum. Looking west. Shows ponds and large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #31 - Taken 10/28/99 by E. Seum. Looking west at the north end of the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #32 - Taken 10128/99 by E. Seum. Looking at empty water tank on the north end of the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #33 - Taken 10/28/99 by E. Seum. Shows broken pipeline outside the north end of the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #34 - Taken 4/20100 by E. Seum. Looking north at the large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site claim.

Photo #35 - Taken 4/20100 by E. Seum. Shows the lab area inside the large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site claim.

Photo #36 - Taken 4/20100 by E. Seum. Shows miscellaneous equipment stored in the large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site claim.

Photo #37 - Taken 4/20100 by E. Seum. Shows small table and gold pan stored in the large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site claim.

Photo #38 - Taken 4120/00 by E . Seum. Shows small drill stored in the large metal building on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site claim.

Photo #39 - Taken 4120/00 by E. Seum. Looking west at the entrance to the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Blue box in center houses pump.

Photo #40 - Taken 4120100 by E. Seum. Looking at east side of the metal building. Shows empty storage tank and barrels stored on site.

Photo #41 - Taken 4/20100 by E. Seum. Shows solution holding area below tank shown in above picture.

Photo #42 - Taken 4/20100 by E. Seum. Close up of barrels shown in

. photo #40. All are filled with mineral materials.

Photo #43 - Taken 4/20100 by E. Seum. Looking northwest at empty storage tanks on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Were used for water storage.

Photo #44 - Taken 4120/00 by E. Seum. Looking north across ponds on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Photo #45 - Taken 4120/00 by E . Seum. Looking east at ponds on the Yellow Jacket # 1 mill site. Area beyond ponds shows non-development of other mill sites.

Photo #46 - Taken 4/20100 by E. Seum. Looking southeast across the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site. Area beyond fence shows undeveloped mill sites.

Photo #47 - Taken 4/20100 by E. Seum. Looking south at empty storage tank on the Yellow Jacket #1 mill site.

Date post:	05-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times