CHAPTER 11 THE MINERAL EXAMINATION IRON AND URANIUM ORES

• Jurisdiction: United States

Mineral Patenting Procedures
(Feb 1975)
CHAPTER 11
THE MINERAL EXAMINATION IRON AND URANIUM ORES
W. C. Ackerman, Mineral Specialist
U. S. Bureau of Land Management
Denver, Colorado

This paper is an informal introduction into the procedures of mineral examinations; standards imposed and requirements to be met, woven into an exampled insight into the nature of an iron ore examination followed by a few basic guidelines for uranium ore evaluation. In reviewing mineral patent applications, the mineral examiner assumes that all other matters of the adjudicative process are proper and he is therefore ready to conduct the mineral examination. The technical review by the mineral specialist, who undertakes in a sense a quasi-judicial role must make a determination to confirm or refute the allegations of the patent applicant. The evaluation and appraisal of mineral properties has become more comprehensive and sophisticated as case law developed. It has been interpreted that the intent of Congress with regard to disposition of mineral lands did not intend that the United States pass title to public lands merely because someone anticipated the mineral material would become marketable or additional markets would be developed at some future date.

STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS

Standards and requirements in essence are broad and may vary in their interpretations and result in different meanings, however it is the duty of

[Page 11-2]

the mineral specialist to examine each mining claim in order to recommend whether a valid discovery has been made as required under 43 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) Parts 3831, Location of Claims; 3851, Assessment Work; and 3860 and 3862, Mineral Patent Application. He must make a determination of the quality and quantity of the mineral material under the prudent man rule which must be substantiated within the limits of each claim as alleged by the applicant. That rule holds a claim valid where mineral is found in such quantity and quality as would warrant a prudent man in the expenditure of his labor and means in an effort to develop a paying mine. These requirements are enunciated in keystone decisions, Castle v. Womble, 19 LD 455 (1894) and upheld by the United States Supreme Court in 1902 in Chrisman v. Miller, 197 U.S. 313 (1904). Under this rule it must be demonstrated that there is a sufficient showing of a mineral to validate a discovery but not if there is only sufficient showing to warrant further prospecting or exploration in the hope of making a discovery. Geological inference no matter how strong or convincing cannot be used as a discovery in lieu of showing a mineral in place. The prudent man rule was subsequently complemented by the marketability test, United States v. Coleman, 390 U.S. 599 (1968). In summary it must be demonstrated that the deposit can be extracted, removed and marketed at a profit.

These tests have been sustained in the courts and it is within these guidelines that the mineral examiner must make the best effort and use judgment to determine whether or not a mineral claimant has qualified himself under the law. This is predominantly a factual determination. The gathering and detailed noting of these facts are the purposes of the mineral specialist's

[Page 11-3]

examination upon the ground, his interviews and consultations with operators and persons engaged in the particular industry, and his review of publications pertinent to the case. It is his task to observe, to examine, to analyze and to deduce facts which tend to prove or disprove the mineral character of the land, the extend of occurrence of minerals, the limiting extent of these facts which the man of ordinary prudence would use with common sense to warrant further expenditure of his labor and means in the reasonable expectation of success in developing a paying mine. With the facts at hand, it is the mineral examiner's function as an expert to apply the standards recognized by law, and to give an opinion as to whether the lands under mineral examination meet the standards.

In so doing the mineral specialist must act within the limitations of statutes, case law precedent, and budget. Therefore it is incumbent that he is aware of the context of precedent setting decisions within which he must conduct his examinations. If it is the examiner's conclusion that the proper standards have not been met, and if those conclusions are concurred with by the reviewing officials, the foundation for a Government contest has been laid.

IRON ORE EVALUATION

Iron ore deposits differ in size, geometry, grade, mineralogy and hardness. For the purposes of discussion into the nature of the examination and what may be expected of the applicant, a low grade iron ore or taconite type ore is proposed as an exercise in problem definition to provide some

[Page 11-4]

insight to iron ore evaluation. The problems of evaluating a taconite type iron deposit from the mining through the concentrating and agglomerating stages are complex. Taconite is defined as any iron formation in which the ore mineral of iron is principally magnetite contained in a rock which must be ground to a fine size for liberation—ordinarily about 90 percent passing through a 325 mesh screen (44 microns). The desired product to be produced will be assumed to be a high grade pellet assaying about 66 percent iron. It is a result of an upgrading or concentrating process followed by agglomeration or pelletizing. This pellet is subsequently shipped to a facility for smelting into iron and steel.

PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION

The examination of any mineral patent application requires a certain degree of research, collection of evidence, review of the literature on the subject. Publications relating to the geology and mining history of the area to be examined are reviewed. Usually this information is contained in publications by the U.S. Geological Survey and Bureau of Mines. State publications of the same nature are also examined as well as trade journals and scientific periodicals. Low grade taconite type iron ore deposits require an evaluation on the method of beneficiation or upgrading and therefore the standard practices of ore dressing metallurgy are reviewed.

A review of the patent applicants data is also conducted to determine if there is sufficiency of information relating to the alleged discovery. The regulations provide...