Glenn H. Allcott, Chief 

Office of Mineral Resources 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Reston, Va. 

Kenneth G. Arne, Consultant 

Western Gold Exploration and Mining Co. 

Golden, Colo. 

WH1iam C. Bagby, Geologist 

Deputy Chief, Office of Mineral Resources 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Reston, Va. 

Aldo Barsotti, Chief 

Branch of Minerals Availability 

U.S. Bureau of Mines 

Washington, D.C. 

Larry Bauer, Deputy State Director, Minerals 

U.S. Bureau of Land Management 

Phoenix, Ariz. 

James D. BJiss, Geologist 

Branch of Resource Analysis 

U.S. Geolopcal Survey 

Tucson, Ariz. 

Kenneth G. Broadhead, Resource Supervisor 

U.S. Bureau of Mines 

Reno, Nev. 

James K. Crowley, Geophysicist 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Reston, Va. 

James Crowther, Mining Engineer 

U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Phoenix, Ariz. 

Debra Daniel, Hydrologist 

Hydrology Section 

Arizona DeJ?artment of Environmental Quality 

Phoenix, Ariz. 

Walter E. Dean, Chief 

Branch of Sedimentary Processes 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Denver, Colo. 

John C. Dohrenwend, Geologist 

Branch of Western Mineral Resources 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Menlo Park, Calif. 

Daniel F. Eyde, Consultant 

GSA Resources, Inc. 

Cortaro, Ariz. 

Ted H. Eyde, Consultant 

GSA Resources, Inc. 

Cortaro, Ariz. 

Larry D. Fellows, Director and State Geologist 

Arizona Geological Survey 

Tucson, Ariz. 

Michael P. Foose, Geologist 

Deputy Chief, Office of Mineral Resources 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Reston, Va. 

COVER 

WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS 

John Gutierrez, Mining Engineer 

U.S. Forest Service 

Phoenix, Ariz. 

J. Dale Nations, Professor of Geology 

University of Northern Arizona 

Flagstaff, Ariz. 

Nyal Niemuth, Mining Engineer 

Arizona Department of Mines and Mineral Resources 

Phoenix, Ariz. 

Greta J. Orris, Geologist 

Branch of Resource Analysis 

U.S. Geolopcal Survey 

Tucson, Ariz. 

PhH1ip A. Pearthree, Research Geologist 

Arizona Geological Survey 

Tucson, Ariz. 

H. Wesley Peirce, Principal Geologist Emeritus 

Arizona Geological Survey 

Tucson, Ariz. 

James R. Perry, Urban and Regional Planner 

The Planning Consultants 

Phoenix, Ariz. 

Ken A. Phillips, Chief Engineer 

Arizona Department of Mines and Mineral Resources 

Phoenix, Ariz. 

Stephen J. Reynold, Research Geologist 

Arizona Geological Survey 

Tucson, Ariz. 

Michael J. Rice, Geologist 

Nonrenewable Resources and Minerals Section 

Arizona State Land Department 

Phoenix, Ariz. 

Michael F. Sheridan, Professor of Geology 

Arizona State University 

Tempe, Ariz. 

Gary D. Slusher, Natural Resources Manager 

Arizona State Land Department 

Nonrenewable Resources and Minerals Section 

Phoenix, Ariz. 

PaulK. Theobald, Jr., Geologist 

Branch of Exploration Geochemistry 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Denver, Colo. 

Senator Doug Todd 

Arizona Senate 

Phoenix, Ariz. 

Edwin W. Tooker, Geologist 

Workshop Coordinator 

Branch of Western Mineral Resources 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Menlo Park, CA 

Barry N. Watson, Regional Exploration Manager 

U.S. Borax 

Tucson, AZ 

An enhanced Landsat Thematic Mapper Satellite image of the Gila Bend, Arizona, area on June 2, 1984. The 

image enhancement, sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, was processed at the 

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, using the direct band ratioing technique of 

Crippen, Blom, and Heyada (1988). Rocks in blue are relatively high in ferric iron, those in green are generally 

high in ferrous iron. Red denotes high clays and (or) carbonate in rocks. Vegetation is also red. The image 

is about 90 x 90 km. 
Arizona1

s Industrial Rock and Mineral 

Resources-Workshop Proceedings 

E.W. TOOKER, Compiler-Editor 

Prepared in cooperation with the Arizona Geological Survey 

Presentations and discussions at a workshop 

held May 17-18, 1988, in Tempe, Ariz., 

on problems encountered in, and recommendations 

for improving, current and potential industrial 

rock and mineral resource availability in Arizona 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1905 
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

MANUEL LUJAN, JR., Secretary 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

Dallas L. Peck, Director 

Any use of trade, product, or firm names 

in this publication is for descriptive purposes only 

and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1989 

For sale by the 

Books and Open-File Reports Section 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Federal Center, Box 25425 

Denver, CO 80225 

Library of Congress Catalog-Card No. 89-600747 
CONTENTS 

Introduction, by E.W. Tooker 1 

Industry overview, by H.W. Peirce 5 

Introduction 5 

Geologic occurrence 5 

Cement and lime 6 

Clay 6 

Gypsum 7 

Volcanic materials 9 

Saline deposits 9 

Stone products 9 

Sand and gravel 9 

Other industrial-mineral resources 10 

Conclusions 10 

Potential growth for the industry, by T.H. Eyde 11 

Introduction 11 

The marketing factor 11 

Resource specifications 12 

Environmental and political factors 12 

Conclusions 13 

Critical problem areas, E.W. Tooker, moderator 15 

Effective data access and management 15 

Arizona Geological Survey and U.S. Geological Survey, 

by S.J. Reynolds 15 

U.S. Bureau of Mines, by A.F. Barsotti 15 

Arizona Department of Mines and Mineral Resources, 

by K.A. Phillips 16 

Participants' discussions of the data problem 16 

Unified computer data system 16 

Other available sources of resource data 17 

Upgrading existing data 18 

Summary 18 

Analytical-laboratory and industrial-testing capability and availability 18 

Industry viewpoint, by D.T. Eyde 18 

U.S. Bureau of Mines capabilities, by K.G. Broadhead 19 

U.S. Geological Survey capabilities, by P.K. Theobald, Jr. 19 

Participants' discussions of the analysis and testing problem 20 

Availability of analysis or testing services 20 

Setting standards and specifications 21 

Recognition of "future" resource materials 22 

Improved testing and specification procedures 23 

Conclusions 24 

Land access and availability 24 

U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs, by James Crowther 24 

U.S. Bureau of Land Management, by L.P. Bauer 25 

Arizona State Land Department, by G.D. Slusher 27 

Participants' discussions of land problems 27 

Contents Ill 
Critical problem areas-Continued 

Land access and availability-Continued 

Participants' discussions of land problems-Continued 

Federallands 27 

State lands 28 

Geotechnical research applications, M.P. Foose, moderator 29 

Applications of geophysical research, by J .K. Crowley 29 

Gamma-ray spectroscopy 29 

Electromagnetic systems 29 

Spectral reflectance 29 

Participants' discussions of geophysical research 30 

Applications of geochemical research 30 

Geochemical exploration technology, by W.E. Dean 30 

Direct geochemical tools for industrial-minerals exploration, 

by P.K. Theobald, Jr. 31 

Participants' discussions of geochemical research 32 

Applications of geologic research 33 

Concealed resources in the Basin and Range province, 

by J.C. Dohrenwend 33 

Neotectonic domains 34 

Thematic mapping 36 

New scientific and technical data useful in the development of resource 

materials, by M.F. Sheridan 36 

Centralized data base 36 

Thematic-mapping 36 

Establishing resource criteria 37 

Expanding the application of existing technology 37 

Exploration models 37 

Participants' discussions of geologic research 37 

Neotectonic domains 37 

Thematic mapping 38 

Geographic Information Systems 38 

Conclusions 39 

Application of resource-occurrence models 39 

Industrial-rock- and mineral-resource-occurrence models, by G.J. Orris 

and J.D. Bliss 39 

Introduction 39 

Resource assessments 39 

The three-part method 40 

Models applicable to industrial minerals 40 

Spatial models 42 

Summary 43 

Geologic model of a Cenozoic basin in Arizona, by J.D. Nations and 

W.D.R. Ranney 44 

Participants' discussions of resource models 48 

Resource-occurrence models 48 

Geologic models 51 

Meeting information needs, L.D. Fellows, moderator 55 

A legislative point of view 55 

Current political realities for the resource industry, 

by Senator Doug Todd 55 

Introduction 55 

Impact of legislation on resources 55 

Impact of voters on legislators 56 

The political facts 56 

IV Contents 
Meeting information needs-Continued 

Industry needs for data and the results of applied research, 

by B.N. Watson 56 

Data needs 57 

Applied research needs 58 

Legislative needs 59 

Participants' discussions of industry needs 59 

State and Federal Government needs 60 

State land-management needs, by M.J. Rice 60 

Participants' discussions of State land-management needs 60 

State environmental-quality needs, by Debra Daniel 61 

Participants' discussions of environmental-quality needs 61 

Federal land-management needs, by L.P. Bauer 62 

Participants' discussions of Federal land-management needs 63 

Geologic data and research needs of the Indian tribes, 

by James Crowther 65 

Participants' discussions of Indian tribal needs 65 

Local Government needs for urban land-use planning and zoning, 

by J.S. Perry 65 

Participants' discussions of local-planning needs 68 

Summary comments and recommendations, T.H. Eyde, moderator 71 

Introduction 71 

Industry comments, by B.N. Watson 71 

Federal land-management agency comments, by L.P. Bauer 72 

State land-management agency comments, by M.J. Rice 72 

Academia comments, by M.F. Sheridan 72 

Recommendations of the participants, E.W. Tooker, compiler 73 

Data acquisition and management 73 

Resource analysis and testing 74 

Land-availability and permitting information 74 

Geotechnical research 75 

Meeting the need for resource information 75 

Closing comments, by G.H. Allcott 76 

References cited 77 

Appendixes 

1. Program for the 1988 Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources Workshop 83 

2. Partial list of analytical and testing laboratories 86 

3. Indian agency and tribal-council officials, Phoenix area 87 

4. General requirements for Indian mineral-resource development 88 

5. U.S. Bureau of Land Management mining-claim reports 89 

6. U.S. Forest Service's proposed resource classification 92 

FIGURES 

1. Chart showing some industrial rock and mineral products and their 

uses 2 

2. Chart showing production history of nonmetallic minerals in Arizona, 

1895-1988 6 

3. Map of Arizona, showing geologic provinces, locations of major industrialminerals operations, and some undeveloped deposits 7 

4. Chart showing distribution of nonmetallic rocks and minerals in Arizona by 

age and physiographic-geologic subdivision 8 

5. Map showing U.S. Bureau of Land Management areas in the conterminous 

United States 26 

Contents V 
6. Bar chart showing number of active mining claims in the United 

States 27 

7. Map of part of the Tonopah 1 o by 2° quadrangle, Nev., showing structural 

configuration of Big Smoky, Monitor, and Little Fish Lake valleys 35 

8. Descriptive model for bedded barite deposits 41 

9-14. Plots showing: 

VI Contents 

9. Grade-tonnage model for bedded barite deposits 42 

10. Grade-tonnage models for disseminated flake and amorphous 

graphite deposits 43 

11. Contained-materials model for feldspar in pegmatite deposits 44 

12. Contained-materials model for travertine-marl in deposits along streams 

in Virginia 44 

13. Contained-materials model for diamonds in placers 44 

14. Spatial model for bedded barite deposits in the Slaven Chert, given tracts 

(cells) of different sizes 44 

15. Physiographic diagram of Arizona, showing Miocene to Holocene 

topographic features, major drainages, and locations of major cities 46 

16. Chart showing chronology of Tertiary rocks in Arizona 47 

17. Sketch map of Verde Valley, showing outcrop limits of the Miocene to Pliocene Verde Formation and Tertiary sedimentary rocks older than the 

Verde 49 

18. Axial cross section in the Verde Basin, showing facies relations in the Verde 

Formation 50 

19. Cross section across southeast end of the Verde Basin, showing facies relations in the Verde Formation 51 

20. Axial cross section in the Tonto Basin, showing basin-fill and facies relations 

of Cenozoic rocks 52 
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 

ACEC 

ADEQ 

ASLD 

ADMMR 

ADT 

ADWR 

AEG 

AGIS 

AICP 

AMT 

ASTM 

ASU 

AZMILS 

AZGS 

BIA 

BLM 

CAD 

CD ROM 

CUSMAP 

DOT 

EDAX 

EIS 

EM 

EPA 

FEMA 

PIA 

FOB 

GIS 

MILS 

MIO 

MRDS 

NSF 

OSHA 

PC 

RMP 

SEM 

TM 

T/R/S 

UNA 

USBM 

USDA 

USPS 

USGS 

VLF 

WSA 

XRD 

area of critical environmental concern 

Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 

Arizona State Land Department 

Arizona Department of Mines and Mineral Resources 

Arizona Department of Transportation 

Arizona Department of Water Resources 

Association of Engineering Geologists 

Arizona Geographic Information System 

American Institute of Certified Planners 

audiomagnetotelluric 

American Society for Testing and Materials 

Arizona State University 

Arizona Mineral Industry Information Location System (ADMMR) 

Arizona Geological Survey 

U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (Department of the Interior) 

U.S. Bureau of Land Management (Department of the Interior) 

computer-aided design 

compact-disc read-only memory 

Conterminous United States Mineral Assessment Program (USGS) 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

energy-dispersive analysis, X-ray 

environmental-impact statement 

electromagnetic 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

Federal Insurance Administration 

free on board 

Geographic Information System 

Mineral Industry Information Location Systems (USBM) 

Minerals Information Office 

Mineral Resource Data System (USGS) 

U.S. National Science Foundation 

Occupational Safety and Health Administration 

personal computer 

resource-management plan 

scanning electron microscope 

thematic mapping (Landsat) 

township, range, section 

University of Northern Arizona 

U.S. Bureau of Mines 

U.S. Department of Agriculture 

U.S. Forest Service 

U.S. Geological Survey 

very low frequency (EM) 

wilderness study area (BLM) 

X-ray diffraction 

Contents VII 

Introduction 

By E.W. Tooker 

Industrial rocks and minerals are an oftenoverlooked, but nevertheless economically important, 

part of the resource base in Arizona. This volume 

presents information and recommendations from a May 

17-18, 1988, workshop for improving public and private 

understanding of this resource base; the workshop was 

held in Tempe, Ariz., jointly sponsored by the USGS and 

AZGS. This workshop was partly an outgrowth of recommendations made during a 1987 Tucson, Ariz., workshop on unconventional metallic-mineral resources 

(Theobald and others, 1987). 

Several recent publications highlight industrialmineral issues, including those by the Northwest Mining 

Association (1986), Coope (1987), and Peirce (1987b ). 

The consensus is that industrial rock and mineral resources historically have had a low commodity profile and 

that their economic and utilitarian importance has not 

been fully recognized. In Arizona, these resources are of 

vital interest because access to present resources and the 

development of new resources are hampered by restrictions on for land use, owing to Government land withdrawals, pollution controls, and urban zoning. 

A precise, all-inclusive definition for industrial 

rocks and minerals is difficult because of the many 

unrelated types, sometimes involving materials with specialized properties or performance characteristics, and 

their broad and diverse range of uses (fig. 1); thus, the . 

grouping of these resources must be marked by flexibility 

in contrast with sharply defined metallic-mineral resources. The World Bank (Noestaller, 1987) defines them as 

all nonmetallic, nonfuel minerals extracted and processed for industry end uses, some metallic-mineral 

materials consumed in nonmetallurgic applications, and 

consolidated and unconsolidated rock materials (for 

example, sand, gravel, crushed rock, and dimension 

stone) and manufactured products (for example, cement 

and refractories). The Mining Journal (1988) classifies 

these materials into three economic groups: (1) lowprice, large-volume commodities, such as sand, gravel, 

and construction materials; (2) medium- to high-price, 

large-volume commodities, such as chemical and fertilizer minerals (for example, salt, sulfur, and potash); and 

(3) high-price, small-volume commodities, such as feldspar, fluorspar, talc, and barite. The low-price, largevolume materials are mainly used in areas close to their 

source, and generally achieve maximum use during the 

population growth and economic development of an 

area. The high-value-added, small-volume materials are 

used in the more industrialized nations and often are 

traded internationally. A measure of industrial maturity, 

according to the Mining Journal (1988), is achieved when 

the value of nonmetallic-mineral resources materials 

exceeds that of metallic-mineral resources. (For example, this point was reached in the United States early in 

the 20th century, but has just been reached in Australia.) 

Industrial rock and mineral materials represented 

72 percent of the world's nonfuel-resource production in 

1987 and 40 percent of its value (Mining Journal, 1988). 

The nonfuel-mineral production of the United States in 

1987 totaled $25.5 billion, of which $18.0 billion was 

from the industrial minerals, in contrast to $7.5 billion for 

metals, on the basis of U.S. Bureau of Mines data 

reported in the Skillings Mining Review (1988). The 

value of nonfuel mineral resources in Arizona in 1987 

was $1.8 billion, or 7 percent of the national production 

of these materials. However, metals output in Arizona 

accounted for 84 percent ($1.5 billion) of this total value; 

copper accounted for more than 75 percent, and gold 

production increased sharply over previous years (Skillings Mining Review, 1988). In a region of rapidly expanding population such as Arizona, the production of industrial rocks and minerals can be expected to increase in 

the direction observed elsewhere in the Nation. Anticipating this need, the Tempe workshop was convened to 

consider (1) what these resources include and the status 

of their availability, (2) the problems impeding expansion 

of the resource base in Arizona and adjoining States, and 

(3) what role State and Federal efforts should play in the 

research on these resources. 

This workshop provided a summary of industrial 

rocks and minerals currently being produced in Arizona 

and the potential for expanding the industrial-mineral 

Introduction 
c 

:z: 0 

"' "' £' z I: a: u c c z: z > "' :z: w z: ~ 4 "' "' ~ ... w .. c .,. L) ., z .. • z: 

USES u ., 0 c ... .. u 0 ... z 4 ... a: ., .. z: 0 c 0 c 4 - 4 J 

"'4 ... 0 .... "' L) ~ 4 J 

.... ., "' c u ... ... .,. "'"' .... u .... 0 > z: .. ............ c z: .... .... ! ... .. - w § § § .... "' "' .... z: .,. I: 

~ "' u z c 

"' c "' c 

~ PRODUCTS 

~~ .. ... I: 

E 0 "' w w "' :> ... c a: w _, ., c "' .. c ., .. "' .... 

c u 

z 0 "' ... ... ., ~ ~ .. 

c .. 

c .. a: u -

~ "' :a 

ASIESIOS • • • • • • AIIOALUSII[ • AIIOIIfHOS II[ 

IUIUII CARIIOIIAI[ • • • • • • • lAilY I[ • • • • • • • • 1[11101111[ 

ILASIIIIC Cllll •• • • • • • • • • 

• IOROII MINERAL • • • • CALCIII£0 IAUUT£ • ~ CALC INtO CLAYS 

CAlC I NED DIASPORE • • • • CAlCINED SAND • • CAlCIUII CARBONA![ • • • • • • • • • • •• • • CAlCIUM SUlPHA![ • • • • CAlUIIIl[ • CEUIIIC CLAZ£5 & PAIN IS • • • CERAIIIC KilNS & IDOLS • • CHRDIII 1£ • • • • • CHROII II [ SAND • CDL DUR[D SAND • • CRISIOBALII£ flOUR • • • • • • CRISIOBAlll[ flOUR r IN[ • • • • • CRISTOBAl IT[ SAND • • • • DIAIOIIACCOUS EARTHS • • • • • • • OOLOIIII£ • • • • • • • rnosPAR • • r lll(R SAND • • rL INI I'(IIBL£5 • • • HUDRSPAR 

rusto SILICA flOUR • •• • • • • • rUS£0 SiliCA flOUR r IN( • • rusco SILICA SAND • • CRAPH11( • • • • • • • IRON 01 IDE • • • IADLIN • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • KYAN II [ • • • • liiHIU11-AlU111NIU11 SiliCA![ • • • • liiHIUII CARBONA![ • • • • IIANCAN( 5£ 0 I OliO£ • • • • • • MAN CAN[ 5[ SUL I'HA I[ • • • MICA • • • • • • • • MUlll T[ • OL IV IN[ 

I'II[I'AII(O BODY CLAYS • • I'UIIIC( ••• rTIIOPH ILL II[ • • • • IUTIL[ • • • • • • • • • • $[I' lOLII£ • • • • • • 

• • Sll£1 liNINC llOCICS 

SiliCA HOUR • 

• • ~· • • • ~ • • • SiliCA HOUII rtN[ 

SiliCA CIIAV[l • • • • • • • • 

• • SILICA SAND 

SlllctOUS [AIIIH • • • • • • •• • • 5 Ill! MAN II[ • • • • • SLAI[ I'DIIDU • 5UirAC[ JII[AI£0 CIISf08Al II[ •• • • SUIIrAC[ UUT(D fUSED SiliCA • • • SURrA([ IR(AI(D MIN[IIALS • • 

SUUAC( • • TIUICD UllCA 

tAlCUM • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • IIOll AS TON II ( • • • • Z !IlCON • • • • • • • 

Figure 1. Some industrial rock and mineral products and their uses (from Coope, 

1987). 

2 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
resource base, followed by extended discussions of (1) 

current and emerging problems for the search and evaluation of these resources; (2) recent geotechnical 

research that may assist the search, evaluation, and 

development of the resource base; (3) political realities 

of the resource climate in Arizona; and ( 4) recommendations for State and Federal basic and applied research 

to meet the needs of users of Arizona resource information. An important objective of the workshop was to open 

lines of communication among the originators and users 

of industrial rock and mineral resource information so as 

to develop a better and more readily available data base. 

This report is intended to so inform users, to initiate a 

continuing dialog, and, where possible, to stimulate 

active collaboration among academia, industry, the 

Indian Nations, and Federal, State, and local Government agencies with respect to the recognition, assessment, exploration, development, and use of Arizona's 

industrial rock and mineral resources. 

An organizing committee developed the workshop 

agenda (see app.l) and selected participants to represent 

constituencies that are connected with the issues selected 

for informal open discussion. This report documents the 

substance and tenor of the workshop proceedings. 

Acknowledgments.-The workshop committee 

gratefully acknowledges the encouragement, participation, and support of the USGS and AZGS in developing 

the meeting program and selection of the participants. 

Members of the organizing committee who materially 

contributed to the planning and conduct of the workshop 

include: H. Wesley Peirce, AZGS, retired (Tucson, 

Ariz.); Ted H. Eyde, GSA Resources (Cortaro, Ariz.); 

Barry N. Watson, U.S. Borax (Tucson, Ariz.); Paul K. 

Theobald, Jr., USGS (Denver, Colo.); Michael P. Foose, 

USGS (Reston, Va.); L.D. Fellows, AZGS (Tucson, 

Ariz.); and E.W. Tooker, USGS (Menlo Park, Calif.). 

The committee, in turn, greatly appreciates the interest 

and spirited involvement of the participants, whose 

insights and contributions are represented in the following pages, and the technical assistance of Susan Garcia 

(USGS, Menlo Park, Calif.) and Pamela Detra (USGS, 

Denver, Colo.) in making arrangements and conducting 

the workshop. 

Introduction 3 

Industry Overview 

By H.W. Peirce 

Introduction 

Instead of thinking that the expression "stone age" 

is an artifact of the past, Bates and Jackson (1982) 

admonish us to acknowledge that modern civilizations 

are largely products of a modern stone age. Indeed, in 

Arizona we have been using basic nonmetallic materials 

at a rate of approximately 13 tons per person per year. 

We do this without fanfare as a matter of everyday 

business. The average citizen knows little about the basic 

material factors that are an essential part of its physical 

growth and the maintenance of civilization. Among cities 

in the United States of more than 1 million population, 

Phoenix has been the fastest growing. If we think of 

Phoenix or any other large city as an organism, it can be 

likened to an octopus with a great many tentacles of 

varying lengths, each of which has a function; together 

they serve the central body with its material needs. 

Indeed, the whole system is so complex that few persons, 

if any, can comprehend how it works in detail. To further 

complicate matters, resource-seeking tentacles from 

other States extend into Arizona; these are exports. 

Commodities exported from Arizona range from basic 

raw materials, such as special sands, clays, or zeolites, to 

fabricated or processed materials, such as vitrified sewer 

pipe and salt. 

The nonmetallic-minerals industry in the State 

traditionally has assumed a low profile because it is 

overshadowed by a very large metal-mining industry, 

which is dominated by a single commodity, copper. The 

value of nonfuel-mineral production in 1985 exceeded 

$1.5 billion (Burgin, 1985), about 84 percent of which 

was derived from the metallic-mineral production and 

about 16 percent from nonmetallic-mineral resources. 

The value of the nonmetallic-mineral component of this 

production is estimated at about $250 million, an amount 

that would place Arizona in the bottom third of the 25 

most important producers of industrial minerals (by 

value) in the United States. In terms of all nonfuelmineral production in Arizona, the value of sand and 

gravel is second only to copper. Within the nonmetallicmineral group itself, sand and gravel, cement, and lime 

made up more than 90 percent of the dollar value in 

1985. The remaining $25 million is attributed mainly to 

gypsum, clays, salt, zeolites, volcanic-rock products such 

as cinder, pumice, and perlite, stone (other than that 

used in making cement), and miscellaneous other mineral materials. 

Arizona is one of the Sun Belt States, the sixth 

largest in area and the sixth least populated. Since 1980, 

however, population has increased steadily, with a concomitantly increasing demand for many of the industrialmineral resources produced in or imported into Arizona. 

The continuity, or discontinuity, in the production of 

several nonmetallic-mineral commodities is shown in 

figure 2. 

G~eologic Occurrence 

No two places on Earth are geologically identical, 

whether in the United States, in Arizona, or in any of its 

15 counties. Geologic diversity generates a broad spectrum of geologic habitats that, in turn, potentially harbor 

a diversity of useful earth materials, including 

nonmetallic-mineral resources. Geologic maps of the 

State constitute the basic tools for evaluating geologic 

environments that prevailed in the past, with which all 

resources are necessarily associated. Although these 

maps are two-dimensional, it is essential to interpret the 

nature of the third, or "downward," dimension to evaluate the potential for hidden resources. 

Arizona can be subdivided into three basic 

physiographic-geologic provinces or regions, each with its 

own contrasting geology: (1) the Colorado Plateaus, (2) 

the transition zone, and (3) the Basin and Range province. These three provinces, each with its own unique 

geologic attributes, may be expected to contain contrasting suites of resources. Figure 3 depicts the geographicgeologic distribution of selected industrial minerals in 

Industry Overview 5 
Arizona. More than 90 percent of the State's population 

reside in the Basin and Range province, where the large 

and growing urban areas (Phoenix and Tucson) are 

located. Tentacles from these growth centers reach out to 

many localities to secure various of nonmetallic rawmaterial supplies. 

Highlights of some of the industrial rock and 

mineral resources found in Arizona are considered in the 

following sections. The occurrence of useful Arizona 

rocks and minerals by geologic age and geologic province 

is summarized in figure 4. 

Cement and Lime 

High-calcium limestones are a fundamental ingredient in the manufacture of cement and lime. The more 

important limestone resources in Arizona are associated 

with carbonate rocks of Mississippian age. Though buried in the Colorado Plateaus, the Redwall Limestone 

rises to the southwest and crops out along a northwesttrending belt in the transition zone. This formation 

constitutes an important source of both lime and cement 

and contains abundant resources for future use. It supports Arizona's largest lime plant near Peach Springs, in 

northwestern Arizona (fig. 3). This plant serves the 

copper industry, which uses the lime to control the 

chemistry in copper-mill flotation circuits. Much of this 

lime, however, is exported to California. One of Arizona's two cement plants is located on this outcrop belt at 

SALT 

ZEOLITE 

PUMICE-CINDERS 

CEMENT 

PERLITE 

MICA 

-- -

the north end of the Verde Valley, near Clarkdale (fig. 

3). Originally, the plant was constructed to supply cement 

for the Glen Canyon Dam. The plant is now owned by a 

consortium of Indian interests from the Phoenix area. 

The State's largest cement plant is in the Basin and 

Range province, near Tucson, in southern Arizona (fig. 

3). Again, high-calcium limestones of Mississippian age 

provide important resources of carbonate rock. Remnants in fault blocks contain exposures of the Escabrosa 

Limestone. These exposures are nearly exhausted, and 

most of the reserves are buried below the adjacent desert 

surface, where they are being mined by open-pit methods. The Central Arizona Project (CAP), designed to 

transport Colorado River water into southern Arizona, is 

utilizing large volumes of cement made from these 

important limestone formations. 

Clay 

Clay, a complex group of minerals, has long been of 

direct use to man. Its versatility continues to result in new 

products. One of the newer industries in Arizona is the 

manufacture of vitrified sewer pipe of widely ranging 

sizes. For many years, this pipe was imported from 

California. After an exhaustive search and many trialand-error attempts, materials were located that, when 

blended, make a high-quality pipe. High plasticity and 

refractoriness are provided by kaolinitic shales from the 

Upper Cretaceous strata along the edge of the Colorado 

... ··-------- BENTONITE 

FELDSPAR 

ASBESTOS 

GEMSTONES 

SAND+GRAVEL 

LIME 

GYPSUM 

STONE 

------------------------- • 

- ------------. ---------------- CLAYS~-----------·--------------------------------

FLUORSPAR 

DIATOMITE 

BARITE 

----- • • -

• ·-• -

Figure 2. Production history of nonmetallic minerals in Arizona, 1895-1988 (modified from Reynolds and Peirce, 

1988). 

6 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
Plateaus in east-central Arizona (fig. 3). Material is 

trucked to the plant near PhoeniX during the summer 

months, after the snows at 7,000-ft elevation are gone 

and the product has dried out. Another component is 

clay of Quaternary(?) age near Dewey, in the transition 

zone (fig. 2). This product, blended with more refractory 

clay, fuses at a low temperature, forming an impervious 

glasslike binder (Morris, 1987). 

Clay in the form of relatively pure calcium montmorillonite known as the Cheto bentonite deposit is 

mined on the Colorado Plateaus in east-central Arizona, 

LEGEND 

CJ Exported 

0 In-State 

D Exported and In-State 

C:J Industry Shut Down 

6 Solut1on Cavity Storaoe 

near Gallup, N.Mex. (fig. 3). These deposits of Pliocene 

age have been mined continuously since 1924. Currently, 

the raw product is exported for processing into highvalue-added desiccants, acid-activated bentonites, thickeners, and gellants (Eyde and Eyde, 1987b). 

Gypsum 

Although gypsum is of comparatively low dollar 

value, it nevertheless is essential in the manufacture 

I 

(Pipe)' 

1-34° 

OTHER SYMBOLS 

BE~TONITE Plant nearby 

BENTONITE Crude source only 

8EIITOIIITE Plant distant 

0 Unexploited 

u Underoround 

Figure 3. Arizona, showing geologic provinces and locations of major industrial-mineral operations and some undeveloped deposits (from Peirce, 19187). 

Industry Overview 7 
GEOLOGIC ARIZONA PROVINCES 

TIME Basin 8 Range Transition Colorado Plateau 

Quaternary Sand and Grovel Sand and Grovel 

-<.9 

.~dS EU) 

::J 

Special cloy CL~ 

Pliocene Cloy (vitrified pipe) (.) 

Peridot E Q) 

.. 0 

::J.~ Zeolite Specie I sand -~a:: (/)- c ,.. 

Halite, Perlite, a.O Gypsum 0~ 

>.Q) (.)Q) 

>- Miocene <.9N - "'0 Cinder, Pumice, oc 

0:: Zeolite, Rock Rock >u 

<( 

- Oligocene Cloy, Grovel Grovel 1-

0:: 

w Eocene Grovel t- ------

Paleocene Formation of 

kyonite etc. and 

marble by Not Cloy (vitrified pipe) u Cretaceous Up mtomorphism I--

- Low l Lime Not recognized 0 

N 

Jurassic Kyonite etc. 0 Sandstones 

(/) protolith Present 

w Gypsum occurrences Rock, Gypsum, 

~ Triassic Petrified wood, 

in western Arizona Cloy (bentonitic) 

Permian Gypsum Gypsum Flagstone, Gypsum, 

Halite, Potash 

£. 

u ·-- Pennsylvanian 0 - - Limestone and Shale 0 0 

L.. 

N Lime a. 

c ~ Not generally 0 Mississippian Q) _a E L.. w Q) 0 Rock, 

...J u ~ 

Cement, Lime <( 

a.. Devonian I exposed 

I 

Cambrian Quartzite (flux), Locally 

Phosphatic (Abrigo) 

~ Younger Quartzite (rock 8 flux) Asbestos ( chrysotile) Asbestos ( chrysotile) Quartzite (rock) 

Older Si lice, Granite, Granite, Pegmatite, Granite (rock) Feldspar Stone (schist) 

Figure 4. Distribution of nonmetallic rock types and minerals in Arizona by age and physiographic-geologic subdivision 

(after Reynolds and Peirce, 1987). 

8 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
of wallboard and portland cement in Arizona. Additionally, gypsum is used in the State as an agricultural 

product to assist in minimizing the accumulation of 

sodium in arid soils. The center of gypsum mining 

currently is in the Basin and Range province, northeast of 

Tucson, in the San Pedro Valley. The resource occurs in 

strata of Pliocene age (fig. 3); the gypsum-bearing 

sequence is about 300 ft thick. Although significant 

gypsum occurrences are numerous elsewhere in Arizona, 

many are in areas relatively remote from development 

centers. 

Volcanic Minerals 

Products of volcanism in Arizona, largely Cenozoic 

in age, include perlite, cinders, pumice, and various 

basaltic to rhyolitic rocks. Perlite is mined, ground, and 

dried at plants in Superior, east of Phoenix, in the Basin 

and Range province (fig. 3), and shipped out of the State. 

Cinders are abundant in numerous cinder cones associated with volcanic fields along the southern margin of the 

Colorado Plateaus (fig. 3). The cinders are used in 

landscaping, road covering, and the manufacture of cinder block. The more durable volcanic rocks commonly 

are crushed and used as aggregate in highway construction. Interest has been shown in the use of pumiceous 

rhyolite in the making of lightweight, portland-cement 

concrete (Bryan, 1987). 

Saline Deposits 

Large deposits of bedded salt are widely distributed in Arizona's subsurface strata. Deposits of Permian 

age occur in the Holbrook Basin in the Colorado Plateaus of east-central Arizona (fig. 3). These deposits 

were first penetrated during petroleum exploration in the 

1920's, and later drilling and core logging demonstrated 

the existence of sylvite (potassium chloride) within the 

larger salt basin. Several hundred exploration holes failed 

to outline an economically viable potash deposit. If, 

however, the USBM's prediction (Searls, 1985) of future 

restrictions on the availability of potash supplies is borne 

out, this Arizona occurrence could again attract attention. Presently, solution cavities in the nearly horizontal 

salt beds are being utilized to store propane and butane 

along the Santa Fe Railroad (fig. 3). 

Since 1950, large salt bodies have been discovered 

by drilling. These occurrences, once controversial as to 

their origin, are now generally believed to represent 

evaporites indigenous to the sedimentary basins in which 

they occur. Both drilling and geophysical data indicate 

that anhydrite and halite sequences are thousands of feet 

thick. In 1968, drilling in the Luke salt body near 

Phoenix, which was located at the center of a gravity 

anomaly identified on a USGS geophysical map (Peterson, 1968), penetrated halite at a depth of 880ft beneath 

a cotton field (fig. 3). This salt deposit, exploited by 

solution mining and solar evaporation since 1970, was 

acquired by Morton Salt in 1985. An adjacent operation 

stores propane and butane liquids in solution cavities in 

the halite. 

The search for cheap underground storage in 

halite, as well as the possible occurrence of rarer evaporite minerals, should stimulate ongoing interest in Arizona's closed basins of Cenozoic age. The presently known 

deposits may represent the thickest, youngest bedded 

evaporite deposits in the world. 

Stone Products 

Rock materials, other than those used for common 

rip-rap and aggregate, find beneficial use in Arizona. 

These include decorative facing stone, flagstone, grass 

substitutes in landscape design, and white marble sand. 

Precambrian foliated rocks from the transition zone are 

used as decorative facing stone, whereas decomposed 

porphyritic granitic rocks of similar age are finding 

inereasing use in landscaping, in place of grass. The 

Capitol Building grounds in Phoenix are a good example 

of this application. Nearer Tucson, the Precambrian 

Oracle Granite of Peterson (1938) is a popular landscaping amenity after light crushing, screening, and sorting by 

co1or. Recently, the fines have been used in making red 

clay tennis-court surfaces at various localities in the 

southwest. White marble, near Tucson (fig. 3), is crushed 

and screened for use in white swimming-pool plaster, and 

as an animal food. The famous Permian Coconino Sandstone of the Grand Canyon region (fig. 3) is of eolian 

origin, and its large-scale foreset strata make an excellent 

flagstone that is exported, as well as widely used within 

the State. 

Sand and Gravel 

Arizona's sand and gravel production is second 

only to copper in total annual dollar value. Most of the 

sand and aggregate essential in making concrete for the 

large metropolitan regions, such as Phoenix and Tucson, 

comes from modern riverbeds. Although this is the 

cheapest and generally closest source for these essential 

materials, pressures are mounting to restrict the locations of sand and gravel operations. Construction on 

flood plains, building of large bridges, and channelstabilization projects combine to restrict the locations of 

sand and gravel mining. Governmental-policy development regarding this resource should begin to recognize 

(1) the necessity of an active sand and gravel industry and 

(2) the need to locate and protect those resources needed 

for the future. 

Industry Overview 9 
Other Industrial-Mineral Resources 

Arizona's storehouse of useful industrial rocks and 

minerals includes other products, some of which are 

currently being produced and some that once were 

produced. Zeolite, special sands, diatomaceous earth, 

and gem stones are being produced, whereas barite, 

beryllium, fluorspar, quartz (for abrasives), mica, feldspar, and chrysotile asbestos are not currently being 

produced. At any given time, economic and (or) political 

conditions may influence the production of any particular 

commodity. 

The Bowie chabazite (a zeolite) deposit in southeastern Arizona (fig. 3), which is an alteration product of 

a late Cenozoic vitric ash, has yielded the most tonnage of 

any natural zeolite deposit in the United States (Eyde 

and Eyde, 1987a). Crude chabazite is exported and made 

into a high-price activated molecular-sieve product. On 

the Colorado Plateaus in east -central Arizona, special 

sands used as a propping agent in oil and gas wells are 

produced from the Miocene and Pliocene Bidahochi 

Formation (fig. 3). A diatomaceous-earth deposit in San 

Pedro Valley, northeast of Tucson, is being processed for 

use as a filler product, which is exported. Finally, Arizona 

leads the States in the production of such gem stones as 

turquoise, petrified wood, chalcedony, agate, jasper, 

amethyst, clear quartz crystal, peridot, pyrope garnet, 

marekanite (Apache tears), and onyx marble. 

Conclusions 

Even though about 13 tons of nonmetallic-mineral 

materials is produced yearly per Arizona resident, the 

importance of these resources remains generally unappreciated, in contrast to those of the metallic-mineral 

commodities. Many nonmetallic-mineral products are 

relatively cheap, dollarwise, but they have high utilitarian 

value. Although we no longer make many of our tools out 

of stone, a sophisticated civilization relies heavily on a 

continuous flow of an increasing array of useful 

nonmetallic-mineral materials. 

The size and scope of Arizona's heritage of useful 

nonmetallic rocks and minerals are directly related to the 

diversity of geologic habitats found in the Colorado 

Plateaus, transition zone, and Basin and Range province. 

For reasons that are basically geologic, both people and 

mineral resources are unequally distributed within this 

framework. Though constituting about half of the State, 

more than 90 percent of both the population and value of 

all mineral production are associated with the geologically diverse Basin and Range province. 

Because growth and maintenance in urban areas 

require consumption of large amounts of earth 

resources, and most growth is associated with the 

octopus-like, resource-devouring urban regions, there is 

active competition for use of the land in and peripheral to 

the urban regions to satisfy the demands for useful 

nonmetallic rocks and minerals, and for environmentally 

preserved growth space. Transportation costs for mineral 

materials are an important marketability factor that 

inevitably is linked to the proximity of these resources to 

urban centers, which, in turn, often leads to conflicts in 

the form of pleas to restrict the associated bothersome 

environmental intrusions. Zoning, often promoted to 

restrict obtrusive land use, needs to be applied to all the 

legitimate but conflicting interests involved. Responsible 

zoning, therefore, should include provisions for protecting resources for the future. 

This zoning, in turn, leads to the ongoing need to 

acquire information about where important reserves of 

these earth materials might be located. It should be the 

task of natural-resource-related agencies, both State and 

Federal, to gather and disseminate the appropriate information. Resource discovery and development opportunities must be identified if the State and Nation are to be 

continuously supplied with the mineral-rock ingredients 

that form the foundation of modern civilization. 

10 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
Potential Growth for the lndus•try 

ByT.H. Eyde 

Introduction 

Nationwide, as Wes Peirce has pointed out, industrial minerals contribute $18 billion to the U.S. economy, 

in contrast to $7 billion for the metallic-minerals industry. The reverse is true in Arizona, which produces about 

$1.5 billion in metals and only about $0.3 billion in 

industrial materials. One of the curious aspects of USBM 

statistics is that materials like clay are valued as crude 

materials without any value added, whereas for copper, 

gold, silver, and other metals, value added is the basis for 

the market price of the metal. If we consider the market 

price of industrial minerals, particularly for the performance or specialty minerals, they are probably worth two 

or three times the value of the crude material. 

Expanding the use of industrial-mineral resources 

is based on three factors: (1) the marketplace, (2) the 

specifications of the materials, and (3) the political and 

environmental scene. Most performance or high-valueadded minerals are relatively insensitive to transportation costs. Geology actually plays a subordinate role in 

the economic development of these resources. Arizona is 

a rapidly growing State, with a population now passing 

the 3 million mark. It is adjacent to California, a huge 

State that has the sixth largest economy in the world. 

California also has the most stringent environmental laws 

of any State in the West. This location may mean that 

Arizona will be a prime area for developing the industrial 

materials which now cannot be produced in California. In 

the following sections, I present some examples of the 

response of industrial-minerals production to marketing 

(production of high value from formerly common minerals and rocks), specifications (requirements for special 

product response), and the political/environmental climate, and the effect of these factors on the future of 

industrial-mineral operations in the State. As you will 

soon note, however, these factors are not mutually exclusive, and considerable overlap remains. 

The Marketing Factor 

Arizona bentonites are produced principally in the 

northeast corner of the State. They have become performance clay materials used for clay desiccants, selling 

from $650 to $1,000 per ton. Bentonites are also used as 

acid-activated bleaching clays to clarify nearly all edible 

oils, including olive oil, safflower oil, and corn oil. These 

processed clays sell in the range $200-400 per ton. The 

bentonite bed is in the Tertiary Bidahochi Formation. 

This is the same bentonite on which the military specifications for desiccants are based-approximately 18.5 

weight percent water adsorbed at 40-percent humidity. 

Another clay produced in Arizona is hectorite. 

Production is small, but there are only three productive 

deposits of this clay mineral in the United States. Hector, 

Calif., produces approximately 12,000 tons per year. The 

deposit at Lathrop Wells, Nev., produces from 400 to 500 

tons per year, and the Kirkland Junction, Ariz., deposit 

about 150 tons per year. These specialty clay products 

have a high value added as a final washed product, which 

at Hector, Calif., sells for $1.50 per pound or about 

$3,000 per ton, FOB at the plant. The air-float material, 

which sells for about $0.75 per pound, translates into 

about $1,500 per ton. The plant at Hector is a $40-

m:illion-per-year operation. These specialty clay products 

are used as thickeners and viscosifiers in a whole range of 

products, such as paints, greases, cream rinses, shampoos, rouge, eye shadow, mascara, and lipstick, in which 

they form a stable gel. 

Gypsum has been produced in Arizona for many 

years for wallboard, cement retarder, and soil conditioning. At present, the Nevada and New Mexico producers 

can satisfy the demand beyond Arizona's productive 

capacity. Mexico fills much of the additional demand for 

gypsum raw materials along the west coast in California. 

Zeolites are used mainly in ion-exchange applications and as adsorbents. The Bowie chabazite deposit in 

Potential Growth for the Industry 11 
Cochise and Graham Counties may be the best known 

deposit and the largest producer in the United States on 

a sales basis. Because of its specialty applications, the 

price of the processed products are in the range 

$2.50-7.50 per pound. The deposit is mined by eight 

people, usually Apache Indians, who mine the chabazite 

with one front-end loader after the surface waste material is stripped. In 1988, more than 4,000 tons was 

produced, equaling 8 million lb sold at a composite price 

of $2.00 per pound, and generating $16 million in sales. 

Resource Specifications 

One surprising fact is that some ordinary industrial 

materials are becoming performance minerals as the 

specifications for them are made more stringent. For 

example, the common material aggregate has been produced in Arizona mainly from streambeds of the Salt 

River at Phoenix and the Santa Cruz River and Pantano 

Wash in Tucson. In outlying areas, much sand and gravel 

production comes from alluvial fans and dry streambeds. 

But for some uses, sand and gravel is no longer a 

common material. For example, prudency audit at the 

Palo Verde nuclear powerplant questioned the $178 

million cost of aggregate that was shipped from the San 

Gabriel Mountains to the reactor site. Why was this 

source of aggregate used? The Salt River gravels contain 

Cenozoic volcanic rocks with inclusions of opaline silica 

and other minerals, which because of their reactivity 

would not be appropriate for use in a containment vessel 

at the reactor. An inspection by an intervenor would have 

required the structure to be replaced. 

A new magazine, Materials Edge, published by the 

Metals Bulletin (London), notes that one of the most 

serious construction problems today is reactive concrete. 

A good example can be seen in the deterioration of the 

railings and the structural cracking and crazing of the 

Tempe Bridge across the Salt River. Since the introduction of such materials as calcium chloride into aggregate, 

the development of structural cracks have been so serious in Great Britain and Europe that many structures 

have had to be torn down. Thus, aggregate is becoming a 

performance material with stringent standards set by the 

ASTM, the DOT, and even local Governments. Aggregate must bond well, so that the filler materials in asphalt 

and cement lend strength to the final road mix. Architectural aggregates have also become a high-value-added 

material. In California, where they are used widely in 

terrazzo, precast concrete, ground cover, and roof granules, the price ranges from $25 to $45 per ton, FOB at the 

plant. Stricter performance standards have increased the 

price and quality of these materials. 

Several years ago, I was an expert witness in court 

where the ASDL contended that the brick clays of the 

Pantano deposit were a common mineral material. Nevertheless, the ASDL's expert witness conceded that these 

clays represented the widest range of colors he had ever 

seen. Moreover, he said that it was the only high-alumina 

clay deposit in the State suited to making good-quality 

facing brick. It is a performance material that is mixed 

with clay filler from the Talleson deposit, west of Phoenix. The Pantano specialty clay is hauled from Pantano to 

Phoenix, a distance of 140 mi. Are there other highquality clays like the Pantano to be found? 

Environmental and Political Factors 

A feldspar deposit was operated near Kingman for 

many years. The feldspar came from pegmatite dikes. 

The operation was closed when the feldspar deposit was 

mined out. Later, the operators attempted to produce a 

finely ground quartz for scouring compounds. This operation could not meet emission standards and was closed. 

The old White Picacho district may be reactivated for 

feldspar production and processed in a milling facility 

near Wickenburg. There may yet be a future for the 

production of Arizona feldspar. 

Of the two perlite producers in the State, one, 

Silflow, has recently been purchased by Nord Resources 

to add perlite to their existing extender-filler product 

line. Not only is perlite a good extender-filler, but also the 

industry has by attrition milling been able to make 

acicular particles that have high aspect ratios (fiberlike 

structure) greater than 10-20 to 1. These crystals are 

used in engineering plastics. There is another reason why 

perlite is a valuable material. In August 1987, the International Association for Research on Cancer, in its 

monograph volume 42, determined that it is no longer 

safe to go to the beach. The mineral quartz, Si02 , has 

been placed on the list of potential carcinogens! Because 

perlite may be substituted for diatomite, which is composed entirely of Si02 , in filtration media and filler 

applications, demand for perlite may increase. This circumstance is particularly important because Arizona 

perlite is remarkably white, after processing, and is an 

excellent filler-extender. 

Salt is generally considered a common mineral, but 

this is not true of all salt. Luke salt differs from the 

bedded salt deposits elsewhere in the United States and 

from the salt evaporated from seawater. A unique characteristic of the salt from the Luke deposit is that it is low 

in magnesium and calcium, which means that it meets 

certain purity and environmental specifications. For 

example, Georgia Pacific manufactures chlorine from 

salt. Any excess magnesium or calcium ends up in their 

spent brine. Disposal of this brine in a hazardous-waste 

site costs more than production of the salt entering the 

plant. Southwest Salt washes all the sand, dust, or clay 

12 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
that blows into the evaporation ponds, and disposes of 

the waste products in injection wells. This procedure 

saves Georgia Pacific the cost of disposing of the spent 

brines that would have been derived from using sea salt. 

Luke salt can also be used effectively in steam flooding in 

the heavy-oil fields in California, because salt containing 

magnesium and calcium ions tend to block the permeability and transmissivity of the producing horizon. Such 

a salt commands a premium price of $40 per ton, FOB at 

the plant, in contrast to about $8.00 per ton for most 

solar salt. 

Bowie chabazite, which has a 5-p.m size, also has a 

high silica-to-alumina ratio. Chemists have not been able 

to synthesize this zeolite mineral, which has applications 

in the treatment of sour gas (gas with a high hydrogen 

sulfide content). These sour gases have a low pH; chabazite can absorb all the moisture, hydrogen sulfide, and 

carbon dioxide to produce a pipeline-quality gas. The 

most profitable application however, is in ion-exchange 

products: Bowie chabazite ion-exchanges and removes 

cesium-137. The activated extrudates produced from the 

chabazite have been described as a sandlike product. 

They were used to fill the canisters used in the submersible ion-exchange system at the damaged Three Mile 

Island nuclear reactor; the chabazite removed strontium90 and cesium-137 from the liquid-reactor effluent. Such 

hazardous-waste applications make natural zeolites an 

important and useful industrial mineral of the future. 

c~:>nclusions 

The ever-changing needs of an industrial society 

will demand new mineral raw materials. Thus, we may 

soon be leaving the metals age and entering the ceramics 

age. The raw materials needed for these new and exciting 

products are not yet known or recognized, but the 

specifications for mineral raw materials certainly will be 

increasingly stringent, and so the minerals may also 

command a premium price. If we continue the present 

practice of withdrawing access to public and private lands 

and restricting the development of natural resources, we 

will greatly increase the possibility of inadvertently overlooking important and valuable resources. No nation can 

afford to depend on foreign sources of strategic raw 

materials. 

Therefore, the transition from the common materials of greatest need in today's economy will inevitably 

be to small-volume, high-value-added, specialized, hightechnology industrial-mineral resources. Arizona is 

known to have some of these resources, but the availability of many more remains to be determined. Therein lie 

the future challenges for explorationists. 

Potential Growth for the Industry 13 

Critical Problem Areas 

E.W. Tooker, Moderator 

Three of the many factors that may inhibit industrial rock and mineral resource search, discovery, and 

development in Arizona were chosen as a focus for the 

workshop: (1) data availability, access, and effective 

management; (2) availability and comparability of chemical, petrographic, and mineralogic analyses and 

materials-specification testing; and (3) State and Federal 

land availability, access, and permitting. 

Effective Data Access and Management 

Access to resource information and its management have become serious problems. The amounts of 

data are staggering when broadly defined to include 

geologic, geochemical, and geophysical information, as 

well as drill-core records-or even the skeletonized drill 

cores themselves. What kinds of data are available, and 

where? What valuable data are unavailable, and how can 

they be captured? What kind of data format and management system will best meet the needs of most users? 

The discussion leaders, who represent the main available 

sources of data from the State and Federal geological 

surveys and bureaus of mines, provided some answers to 

the first question; the other questions were considered by 

the workshop participants in the discussions that follow. 

ARIZONA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

By S.J. Reynolds 

Let's begin by listing some of the sources of Arizona industrial rock and mineral resource data available 

through the AZGS and USGS. Several published indexes 

list sources of geologic-map coverage and book publications by the AZGS and USGS. The AZGS also has an 

index of unpublished maps by survey and industry geologists. These maps, which were used in the compilation 

of the 1969 State geologic map, are available for inspection. A new State map (1:1,000,000 scale) is available 

from the AZGS. Geology in 1 o by 2° quadrangles 

(1:250,000 scale) is being compiled jointly with the 

USGS; the Tucson quadrangle, one of this series, is 

currently in review. AZGS and USGS staffs currently are 

mapping bedrock and Quaternary terranes in some of the 

less well known areas in the State that are considered 

important potential resource areas. The AZGS has a 

library in Tucson (which contains USGS and USBM 

maps and reports), and USGS libraries are in Menlo 

Park, Calif., Denver, Colo., and Reston, Va.; all are 

available for public use. A summary compilation of 

Arizona resource information was prepared jointly with 

the USGS in 1969 as a Senate Document and reprinted 

by the AZGS as Water and Mineral Resources of Arizona. 

The AZGS is commissioned as a repository for well 

logs, cuttings, and cores. Cuttings from every oil well 

drilled in the State and from some water wells are 

available. Some cores are also preserved, and electrical 

logs and chip descriptions from these wells provide a 

wealth of subsurface information. 

Presently, data on the geology of Arizona mineral 

deposits are being computerized. These data include a 

computer listing of AZGS library records, well cuttings, a 

bibliography of sources of information about metallicmineral districts, and radiometric-age determinations 

(AZGS Bulletin 197). The AZGS has printouts for 

inspection of the USBM's MILS file and the USGS' 

MRDS file (formerly the CRIB system). These files 

provide a large variety of information on the geology, 

resources, production, reserves, and mineral-resource 

development in the State. 

U.S. BUREAU OF MINES 

By A. F. Barsotti 

The USBM's Information and Analysis Directorate includes statistical and commodity specialists who 

dea:l with about 90 commodities, 40 of which are industrial minerals. Commodities like titanium, commonly 

considered a nonferrous metal, are really industrial minCritical Problem Areas 15 
erals. Mineral-commodity specialists provide information and statistical data on both domestic and international production and consumption. USBM publications 

include the annual Minerals Yearbook and Mineral Commodity Summaries, and the periodic Mineral Industry 

Survey, Mineral Facts and Problems Bulletins, and Information Circulars. 

The Resource Evaluation Division's Mineral Land 

Assessment program, in collaboration with the USGS, is 

directed toward resources on Federal lands managed by 

the USPS, BLM, and BIA. Commodity geologists, mining engineers, and economists located in three field 

centers focus on resources. In Arizona, there are 26 

published reports and 14 open-file reports on USPS 

lands, 32 open-file reports on BLM lands, and 13 administrative reports on 19 Indian reservations for the BIA. 

These reports provide information, maps, and data on 

known mineral lands and those considered favorable for 

the occurrence of resources. 

The Mineral Availability Program is responsible 

for the minerals-availability data base, part of which is 

the MILS. The MILS file consists of about 200,000 data 

records, mostly in the United States, that include information on the identity and location of plant sites, ownership, status and type of operation, principal and other 

commodities present, and their marketability. For 10,000 

of the 200,000 records, additional data exist on geology, 

mineralogy, and resource-quantity estimation. For 5,000 

of the 10,000 records, additional data exist on mining, 

processing, and capital and operating costs. 

The USBM field center responsible for Arizona 

activities is the Denver Intermountain Operations Field 

Center, where information is gathered and entered into 

the data base. These data are available to the public on 

request in reports, electronic printouts, and overlays. 

There are approximately 8,000 records on Arizona in the 

MILS. The BLM is currently working with the State of 

Arizona to add an additional 3,000 records to the MILS 

and to update the dynamic data in each record. The 

Minerals Availability System also provides data on mining costs and on capabilities to measure the economic 

potential of known mineral resources. Capital- and 

operating-cost models and feasibility-analysis models 

(discounted cash-flow rate of return) for mines are 

available, in addition to the base data that permit estimating cost of production. Program products include 

availability appraisals (worldwide) for 34 mineral commodities, including 12 industrial minerals. 

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF MINES AND 

MINERAL RESOURCES 

By K.A. Phillips 

The ADMMR is charged with aiding in the promotion and development of the State's mineral 

resources, primarily by educational seminars, collection 

of data from all available sources, visits to mining properties, advice to prospectors, and information to potential 

mineral-resource consumers. Offices are in Phoenix 

(headquarters) and Tucson. The Arizona Mineral 

Museum is located in Phoenix at the State Fair Grounds. 

The staff consists of mining and geologic engineers who 

have industry experience ranging from claim staking to 

financial management and money raising for major mining corporations. The ADMMR publishes directories of 

current industry activity, industry consultants, and combined statistical analysis/discussion reports on industries, 

particularly the copper industry, and has published a 

book on the industrial-mineral occurrences in the State 

(1,400 occurrences, still incomplete). 

Three groups of data bases are available through 

the ADMMR. (1) The AZ MILS, an adaptation of the 

USBM's MILS file for Arizona, organizes and indexes 

11,000 mineral properties and occurrence sites. These 

data are on a PC. Included are map plots of the occurrences, maps at a scale of 1/2 in. per mile, and a set of 

indexes that provide the primary name( s) of properties, 

latitude and longitude, T/R/S, commodities present, and 

a bibliography. (2) A set of mine files covers more than 

4,000 properties in the State. Files may range from a 

one-line rumor to voluminous data, including consultant's reports, underground and surface assays and geologic maps, historical-operational data, information from 

technical journals and newspapers, and field contacts 

with operators, prospectors, and promoters. (3) The 

museum's mineral collection, which contains about 

12,000 mineral specimens, many of which are on display, 

ranges from choice specimens to common rock types. 

The AD MMR can supply examples of mineral materials 

to metallic- and industrial-mineral prospectors from this 

collection. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF THE 

DATA PROBLEM 

Unified Computer Data System 

• State and Federal agencies have made disparate, 

yet not unrelated, efforts to collect resource data and 

make them available to the user community. Some 

obvious redundancy exists, and possibly some gaps in 

these efforts. Is there any attempt to develop a unified 

information system in Arizona, a single place where a 

user can go rather than to four (or more) separate 

agencies? 

Replies and comments: The AZGS endorses a 

unified data concept, agrees that it would be a logical site 

for such a beneficial unified data system, and offers the 

following suggestions. This system should have access to 

the MILS, MRDS, ADMMR, and AZGS files of collective knowledge. The difficulty is that these files will take 

16 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
a big computer system, and more time and manpower 

than are now available to the AZGS, to enter these data 

into a central file and to manage that system efficiently. 

Could this be accomplished as a cooperative program 

located in the AZGS or nearby, and funded by those who 

contribute to and use these data? 

The USGS and USBM recently announced the 

opening of a Minerals Information Office (MIO) in 

Washington, D.C. (Interior Building), that will have 

access to all Federal data bases. The intention is to 

expand that office in the Western States. One of these 

expansions will be a small branch in Tucson, in collaboration with the AZGS and whoever else is interested. 

Part of that effort will be devoted to dissemination of 

minerals data by a USGS Public Information Office, 

selling topographic maps and all the book products of the 

USGS and USBM. The hope is to network this office 

with Arizona water-resource data (State and Federal), 

the USGS' geochemical and MRDS data, and the 

USBM's MILS data. The Tucson MIO may be a step in 

the direction of a one-stop resource-information center. 

It will be a growing effort to better meet local user needs. 

Industry makes effective use of resource data files. 

These data provide information about locations, as well 

as about commodities of interest. The major disadvantage at present is the cost of acquiring these data, sorting 

them by hand, and locating the separate commodity 

occurrences of interest on the topographic base. In spite 

of this disadvantage, these files are most useful, and the 

probability of exploration success is enhanced. 

One of the new mechanisms for communicating 

ideas is by PC's and modems in a laboratory linked to 

data bases. Some data handlers require a minimum level 

of data, and it would be most useful to obtain specific 

data without getting the whole data set. Electronic mail, 

which has been used by volcanologists to obtain petrographic and analytical data, may be a vehicle to obtain 

specific amounts of information from a data base. MRDS 

data are already available in this form, and other data 

systems could be made available in this format, if needed. 

The goal of a national resource data base on 

industrial minerals will require the establishment of a 

compatible unified data system in all of the States. This 

project has begun in a several States that have adopted 

the MRDS and MILS. The interstate exchange of information and technologic expertise will be useful to industry, as well as to Federal, State, and local users, both in 

avoiding costly duplications of effort and in meeting the 

requirements for more effective regional and national 

resource planning. 

Other Available Sources of Resource Data 

• University theses, both completed and in 

progress, are a useful source of data. Are indexes of 

theses available and kept current? 

Reply: The AZGS tries to keep an index listing of 

theses concerned with Arizona geology. The reliability of 

that index is fair for the Arizona universities, but records 

of theses from out-of-state universities is quite spotty. 

Efforts to fill this gap are encouraged. 

• Computerized mining-claims data are being completed by the BLM because such data are too expensive 

to be developed independently, over and over again, on 

maps. 

• Well-drilling data are required by the Arizona Oil 

and Gas Commission; any wells drilled for oil, gas, or 

geothermal energy must have information on file. Do any 

other State agencies have similar requirements for filing 

well data? 

Replies and comments: Holes drilled on State trust 

lands must be recorded by industry operators, and the 

ADWR requires some information that may not always 

be of a type needed for industrial-minerals exploration. 

Most company drilling, however, is done on Federal 

lands, and many of the managing agencies do not have 

such requirements. 

Filings are required on Federal (BLM, USPS) and 

Indian (BIA) lands for leasable minerals, oil and gas, and 

coal. Copies of logs and some samples are required. Oil 

and gas data are open to public view unless specifically 

requested to be held proprietary by the company. Nearly 

all leasable data are assumed to be proprietary. On a few 

acquired lands, all minerals are leasable. Hard-rock, 

locatable, or salable mineral products are not regulated. 

The location of these data varies; some data are in State, 

some in district, offices. The BLM is now seeking to 

resolve the location problem. 

The ASLD requires filings of drill logs by legislation passed in 1974-75 but specifically excludes things 

like assays and interpretative data. This information is 

largely useless because some companies regard everything as proprietary information, even formational 

breaks or notations on mineralogy. 

In contrast, the Midcontinental States require filing 

of core records of non-ore intercepts. Thus, core data can 

be effectively used in making broad, regional geochemical studies. 

Until the ADMMR can obtain the legislation making mandatory the filing of drill-core information from 

leases, voluntary donation of such information to that 

office is urged and encouraged after the confidentiality 

period has expired. The State Geologist has a statutory 

obligation to maintain a core-cuttings library. The 

ADMMR is required to maintain the prospect and 

mineral-occurrence information used by the BLM. The 

BLM and other land-management agencies also draw on 

the satellite AZ MILS. Whereas many people may consider the MILS a somewhat static information file made 

10 years ago, the ADMMR has continued to add to and 

update the individual property files in that system. 

The ADMMR has a small computerized system operatCritical Problem Areas 17 
ing and would like to obtain data, even in abstract form, 

to add into this information file. 

If a company or a Federal Government project on 

private property or mining-claim groups can't turn data 

back to the public sector, the data can be turned back to 

the owner. Encourage the owner to turn it in to the 

ADMMR. The Canadians are accustomed to doing this, 

and when they work down here, they follow through and 

file their data with the ADMMR. 

The USBM once had a core repository, but it was 

transferred it to the University of Minnesota. The core 

library, which lists the core samples, currently makes the 

list available to each State, as well as any cores they may 

want. The list for the Eastern United States is complete, 

and that for the Western States is in preparation. The 

ADMMR may be interested in these records and cores; 

I'm not sure how many files or cores are from Arizona. 

• Industry data acquisition is problematic because 

what is discovered today may not be economic, although 

it may become economic at some future time. Most 

companies have extensive files on what has been drilled, 

and they consider these data to be proprietary. 

Replies and comments: An exploration manager 

who misses something that someone else later recognizes 

as an overlooked resource, after the data are released, 

understandably will be reluctant to give out such important information the next time around. But the owner of 

private land can, and commonly does, require that the 

data be made available to him. 

Mandated release of data on lands that continue to 

be of interest to a company may not be in the best 

interests of that company. Yet if lands are abandoned by 

a company, there should be an obligation to release any 

geologic information collected, including core-drilling 

and assay data, to a State or Federal data-base repository. 

However, the interpretations derived therefrom need not 

be turned over! This idea may not be acceptable to 

old-line companies, but opinions in the mining industry 

are changing. For example, the oil industry has long held 

this philosophy. 

Upgrading Existing Data 

From time to time, the contents of existing data 

systems need to be examined and upgraded. Many industrial minerals have unique properties, and their uses are 

driven by those properties. Some minerals are important 

only in the area where they are consumed. A few years 

ago, sand and gravel deposits were in that category, but 

no longer. The city of Houston, Tex., for example, 

imports crushed stone aggregate from Scotland; it is 

cheaper to buy crushed stone from Scotland than to get it 

from San Antonio, 300 mi away! Here, one critical piece 

of information about marketability is the cost of transportation. Costs for rail transport in the United States are 

highly unfavorable for the movement of resource materials from mine to user. This kind of information 1s 

absent in the MILS data at present. 

Summary 

There is a general consensus that resource data are 

a significant problem for which some kind of unified 

solution is overdue. Exploration data are expensive to 

obtain and should be preserved and available, if possible, 

to forestall having to rediscover them again and 

again-as often happens. A one-stop, unified, State-wide 

data storage and management system is desirable; such a 

system also should be compatible with those in adjoining 

States and the Nation. Active collaboration in preserving 

resource data between State and Federal agencies, universities, research institutes, and industry (where possible, as when a company leaves an area) is necessary to 

assure continuing support of resource development in 

the State and Nation. 

Analytical-Laboratory and Industrial Testing 

Capability and Availability 

Chemical and petrographic analyses and testing 

facilities for the physical properties of industrial materials are relatively scarce, and these services are generally 

expensive. Marketability of a mineral product depends 

heavily on these data, for which few published standards 

and nonproprietary specifications are available to the 

resource entrepreneur. What types of analytical services 

are needed to meet identification needs and industrial 

specifications, and what are their availability from public 

or private facilities? 

INDUSTRY VIEWPOINT 

ByD.T. Eyde 

Industrial minerals can be divided into two types: 

chemical minerals and physical materials. Each type has 

a fairly specific analytical requirement. Examples of 

chemical minerals include borate, salt, trona, limestone, 

and, possibly, silica sand (in some applications). These 

minerals have fairly standard analytical chemical tests to 

characterize their composition and determine their specific uses. For example, the arsenic level in a borate may 

limit its applications. In contrast, many physical-mineral 

products are aggregates or mixtures of minerals. The 

analytical report from a laboratory is commonly a semiquantitative XRD analysis used to determine mineralog;y. Indirect tests of properties may be used, including 

ion-exchange capacity, pore size, and adsorption, as well 

as physical tests of the mineral grains or crystals. Each 

material of interest may have some specific properties 

requiring extensive evaluation. 

18 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
A serious problem is the expense of these tests. A 

one-sample XRD mineral analysis by a private laboratory may cost $120, with a turnaround time, if it's a 

well-organized laboratory, of 2 to 3 weeks. If a large 

company has its own analytical facilities and many samples are submitted, the costs are unknown, but the 

turnaround time may be as much as 6 months. An even 

more serious problem is that there are relatively few 

independent testing laboratories. Owens Corning has 

one; the Ontario Research Foundation of Canada also 

provides such services, and Miles Industrial Minerals 

Research is also available (see app. 2). 

Considering the useful applications for these minerals, there is another problem. Each customer for a 

given mineral has a different set of test specifications, and 

sometimes these tests are considered proprietary. Usually, the customer will not reveal the analyses used to 

characterize a clay-for example, the evaluation tests. A 

fundamental problem is the absence of standard tests; 

each laboratory }.las its own methods for testing. For 

natural zeolites, there are at least five types of ionexchange or cation-exchange analyses. Generally, each 

company uses the test that gives it some competitive 

advantage. If a company uses their test, their product 

appears better than their competitors' because of the way 

the material tested reacts under the specific conditions of 

the test. The test itself then becomes a marketing tool. 

One example of indirect analyses is the Bowie 

chabazite deposit. Union Carbide used the measurement 

of oxygen absorption as the basis for their estimates of 

the chabazite content. They compared the Bowie material with a chabazite standard from the Reese River, Nev. 

Because the Bowie material absorbs about 80 percent of 

the oxygen absorbed by the standard, the Bowie chabazite content was assumed to be 80 percent of that of the 

Reese River standard. Though technically accurate, this 

test had inherent limitations because the rate of adsorption was not considered. A test of the cation-exchange 

capacity found that some of the material, running 70 

percent chabazite by the oxygen-absorption test, had 

twice the cation-exchange capacity of material that had 

an oxygen absorption of 110 percent of the Reese River 

standard. This result was obtained because the oxygenabsorption test failed to account for the different 

exchangeable cations in the mineral sieve that blocked 

the sites for oxygen absorption. Although the test was 

reproducible, it did not accurately characterize the samples. 

There are no accepted XRD industrial-mineral 

standards. We use Cheto clay as a standard for calcium 

montmorillonite. The Mud Hills clinoptilolite, Union 

Pass mordenite, and Bowie chabazite are good zeolite 

standards. Instruments are calibrated for these materials 

to give semiquantitative results. Materials with different 

crystal sizes, or distributions of crystal sizes, may have 

different data sets, and so they cannot be compared 

directly. Commonly, results from different laboratories 

cannot be compared; each data set is unique. Although 

the data are a useful guide to the objective of the survey, 

comparison of data from different laboratories can be 

misleading. 

Other physical analyses, such as size distributions, 

are helpful; however, there are no standards for size 

distributions. A geologic engineer will set up distribution 

curves one way, but a sedimentologist's curves will trend 

in a different direction, and a user of mineral products 

may require a different size distribution. Hardness, density, and color also may be useful and important factors. 

One tendency that must be avoided is to collect a single 

sample, believing that it accurately characterizes the 

whole deposit. It may not even be close! Surface samples 

generally differ from those collected beneath the surface. 

A drill core back away from the outcrop may not be 

affected by chemical modifications from surface weathering. 

U.S. BUREAU OF MINES CAPABILITIES 

By K.G. Broadhead 

The USBM does not have a publicly available 

testing service. We can analyze samples, but our capacity 

is quite limited because the USBM is forbidden to make 

commercial assays. If an employee member of the 

USBM is involved in a cooperative research program, a 

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) may be prepared to consider the problem of mutual interest. 

There is no central USBM laboratory facility. Each 

regional installation has good, but only limited, analytical 

facilities-for example, in Reno, we have XRD, fluorescence, inductively coupled plasma, atomic-absorption, 

emission, electrochemical, and microprobe instrumentation. 

U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CAPABILITIES 

By P.K. Theobald, Jr. 

Standardization has long been a problem for chemical analysis. About 30 years ago, Mike Fleischer (USGS) 

obtained two standard rock samples, W-1 and G-1. He 

split them carefully and sent samples to laboratories all 

over the world for standard rock analysis, using 99.9 

percent as a total. He then compared the results 

from these laboratories. There was an extraordinarily 

large variation in silica, to say nothing of the minor 

components. You cannot establish absolute standards. 

You have to accept the fact that different laboratories 

produce different results, even when using the same 

techniques. 

In USGS analytical laboratories, we have a mission 

to supply chemical information necessary to the proCritical Problem Areas 19 
grams across the USGS' Geologic Division. We do not do 

materials testing. We have just produced Bulletin 1770, 

which details the analytical methods currently used in 

USGS laboratories for the more precise chemical analyses needed for geochemistry. These analyses are relatively expensive, ranging from neutron-activation to colorimetric methods. USGS Circular 948 describes the 

simpler exploration-geochemical procedures, mostly 

semiquantitative, which produce large numbers of data at 

a lower cost and are useful for most applied geochemical 

problems. 

A second part of the USGS program includes a 

whole series of custom analyses that require a research 

chemist to do the work. Some of these analyses are also 

standardized-for example, coal analysis, which differs 

from conventional rock analysis. There are a series of 

analytical techniques for available metals; these techniques are used mainly by environmental geochemists to 

identify elements that are in the soluble part of the soil 

environment. A whole series of partial-dissolution techniques are also available-not total metals but, for example, the exchangeable arsenic in clays. Is that arsenic 

available when the clay is used to make dishware for use 

in the home, or is it locked up and will not contaminate 

food in the dish? These tests were designed primarily for 

exploration geochemistry for metals-for example, which 

metal is tied up with iron oxide, manganese oxide, 

sulfides, or in a silicate lattice (and thus not of exploration significance). These techniques also have strong 

application in environmental geochemistry, where its a 

matter of availability of metals rather than absolute 

amount of metal. 

A third area of USGS research is the development 

of new analytical techniques and the testing of new 

instrumentation. For example, infrared analysis is based 

on determination of the molecular bonds between atoms 

rather than of actual atoms. Extensive tests over a 

15-year period provided few applications for this technique in mineral exploration; it is being replaced now by 

Raman spectroscopy, which does a similar type of analysis but promises to be more useful. Another research 

area concerns how a metal gets into the system, that is, 

the geochemical cycle. Deposit modeling is a research 

area that depends heavily on stable- and radiogenicisotope analyses and fluid-inclusion petrography and 

analysis. This technique is not of great interest to the 

nonmetallic-mineral industry at present, but there is a 

potential for future applications. Finally, paleohydrologic 

studies of ore-fluid movement are being done. In the 

Midcontinental States, an area from the Ozark uplift in 

the south northward into Illinois is being studied. Similar 

studies are being done for the low-temperature preciousmetal systems. A nonmetallic-minerals program involving basins in the Basin and Range province could use this 

sort of study. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF THE ANALYSIS 

AND TESTING PROBLEM 

Availability of Analysis or Testing Services 

• The ASTM continues to set up mineral standards for analysis. Their testing procedures are identified, 

and the tests are discussed and modified at the time the 

standards are established. The type samples used in 

testing are available from the ASTM. Other commercial 

sources of prepared mineral standards are listed in most 

scientific journals. 

• Chemical and mineralogic properties of 

industrial-mineral materials generally are readily agreed 

on, but such physical properties as density or durability 

are difficult to determine, commonly because of the 

absence of specific tests. For example, the density of 

pumice, which is less than 1, has no ASTM test. 

• There is a continuing need to identify rock or 

mineral species. Generally, commercial laboratories are 

not available for that purpose. The State geological 

surveys provided that service for many years; there was a 

State Mineralogist whose primary job was to identify 

rocks and minerals. The current AZGS geologic staff 

may do this for the public, and the ADMMR engineering 

and museum staffs try to help. Is there a place where 

such materials can be identified? 

Reply: The geologic publication Geotimes lists 

some of the commercial laboratories that provide petrographic and mineralogic information (see app. 2). The 

USGS and AZGS do it occasionally as a courtesy, but 

their facilities are mainly for internal use. The USBM will 

also do this, but as a Federal organization, it is not 

supposed to be in competition with the private laboratories. 

• Industrial-mineral development, as seen from 

the perspective of the ADMMR, depends on the availability of numerous persistent prospectors and the technical wherewithal for effective prospecting. Right now, 

there is no geologic model, and there are no stain tests to 

identify the wide range of materials in the field and to 

find markets for them. The ADMMR tries to help by 

indicating where resources were found in the past, provides samples of materials, suggests appropriate field 

methods and field tc.sts, and so on. 

• The modified and altered marketed material 

may include only a small fraction of a specific industrialmineral material. For special-purpose clays, sometimes 

only 30 percent of the clay is recovered from the mined 

ore as a salable product; the rest is discarded as waste 

magnesite, dolomite, or calcite impurities, which are 

regarded as contaminants. Wollastonite ore at the mine 

may include 30 percent silica and 20 percent garnet, both 

of which must be removed. These impurities provide the 

industrial-mineral entrepreneur with a serious analysis 

problem for evaluation and marketing. 

20 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
Setting Standards and Specifications 

• There needs to be some sort of taxonomy for 

industrial-mineral materials from the perspective of the 

end user rather than just the mineral-processing user. 

What are the specifications and needs? This problem 

should be worked on, so that we know when we have a 

deposit and whether it meets the requirements of any 

user out there. 

• In consideration of standards, we are often comparing apples and oranges. A distinction should be made 

between mineral properties and marketing properties. 

Whereas the former are usually well documented, the 

latter-for example, ion exchange-are the more persistent unanswered problems. Ordinarily, marketing properties are not considered in the USGS-USBM resourceassessment exercise. Do not compare what industry uses 

as a product with what is being looked for to mine; they 

are two different things. For zeolite, a standard test could 

be proposed; but for a mineral like talc, which is used by 

a competitive cosmetics industry, the specific properties 

or tests used by industry as a basis for the marketability 

of talc are proprietary and would never be released. 

• The USBM publication Minerals Fact and Problems has a section on specifications for every commodity. 

This report provides a good-quality basic guide for each 

commodity. Analysis is the basis of composition, and 

specifications may include tests for anything from composition to behavior. There are fields in the MILS data 

base for marketability-for example, the phosphate rock 

description says that the presence of manganese or 

magnesium affects marketability. There are things that 

could and should be done to improve the MILS information, so that when you look at an industrial-mineral 

resource, you get a ballpark idea of whether that material 

has potential marketability. The Raw Materials Index also 

gives a good idea as to the color, particle size, water 

absorption, and so on, for filler and extender minerals. 

To standardize specifications and make the assessment of 

industrial minerals by the Department of the Interior 

more responsive to present and future needs, it is recommended that industry and Government surveys 

(under the lead of the USBM) jointly prepare improved, 

consolidated guidelines for the evaluation of industrialmineral materials and establish procedures for testing 

them. 

The USBM's widely recognized research on gold 

extraction is a prime example of the type of research 

that ought to be focused on industrial-mineral materials. 

USBM research also is underway for borehole mining 

and secondary recovery of high-technology materials 

from Florida phosphate deposits, and there may be other 

industrial-mineral research underway. These types of 

activities ought to be reported in one place on a regular 

basis, as a public service. 

• It may be time to stop writing off the standards 

problem by saying that the definitive tests are all proprietary. There are published analytical procedures, such as 

those established by the ASTM, to evaluate the direct 

and indirect properties of materials. 

Reply: The proprietariness of the tests used for 

industrial source or product materials is a serious and 

complex problem. Producers of mineral-based products 

will not divulge the test information that they use to 

evaluate raw materials. They may use a specific product 

and a specific test to make their product, which is sold for 

a profit. In trying to sell industrial minerals, you may have 

difficulty_ trying to break into the supply system because 

the producer usually has a source of material that works 

for him. A mineral like talc is used in a dozen products by 

different industries, all of which have different tests that 

are specific for the product-whether as a filler for tires 

or for use in cosmetics. In spite of this apparent standoff, 

Government land and resource agencies are responsible 

for evaluating resources, and so an evaluation method 

must be developed, including definitive tests of source 

materials. 

• An example of the problems in developing specifications for a resource material is the coatings industry. 

Coatings (or paint) made for aluminum house sidings 

must meet stringent exposure requirements because the 

siding is guaranteed for as long as 20 years. Thus, 

because of liability,. before any batch of paint is made up, 

samples of the raw materials to be used, including 

titanium dioxide, chrome, iron oxide, and other mineralderived pigments, as well as calcium carbonate, talc, and 

barium sulfate fillers or extenders, along with the appropriate resin polymers and solvents, are tested in 

laboratory-size batch mixes to see whether the desired 

characteristics can be achieved. Standards would include 

color, gloss, viscosity, adhesion, curing rate and time, film 

hardness, and impact resistance. If the laboratory-batch 

characteristics meet the standards, the paint batch is 

made up, and the paint product is delivered to the siding 

manufacturer. Even then, sample panels coated with 

material from the plant batch are prepared, coded, and 

set out for exposure at "paint farms," where they are 

checked periodically. This provides a backup to the batch 

integrity, should there be surface problems with aluminum siding during the warranty years. 

On one occasion, the backup panels from a batch 

of paint that had met quality-control standards gave 

evidence of chalking or rapid loss of gloss retention after 

only a 6-month exposure. Because of the tremendous 

liability involved, an array of laboratory test batches were 

made, varying both the raw-material sources and the 

processing and application techniques, to identify the 

cause of the poor gloss stability. After considerable 

investigation, it was determined that at a certain ratio of 

iron oxide yellow (a mineral material) to titanium dioxide 

Critical Problem Areas 21 
(Ti02 from ilmenite and anatase minerals) pigments, an 

incompatibility developed between the two pigments 

during the grinding and dispersion stages of the processing. In addition, it was discovered that this incompatibility occurred only when the iron oxide yellow from one 

supplier was used with the Ti02 from another supplier. 

Both pigments individually met the quality-assurance 

specifications, but it could not be determined which of 

the two pigments contained the unknown characteristics 

that caused the failure. Suffice it to say that both suppliers were rejected as sources for the particular coating 

product. Such cases occur frequently, and so for many 

raw materials, including industrial minerals, it is almost 

impossible to know all the characteristics to test for, 

much less to look for, in seeking out economic deposits. 

The ultimate acceptance test will most likely be its 

performance in the final product. 

• The USFS' Coronado Forest zone office has 

published a document that defines how they plan to 

dispose of such mineral materials as petrified wood, 

common varieties of sand, gravel, stone, pumice, pumicite, cinders, clays, and other similar materials. This 

proposed rule making would clarify which mineral materials or common varieties are subject to disposal by the 

Secretary of Agriculture under the Mineral Materials 

Act of 1947 (see app. 6). 

• Production of industrial minerals is a marketdriven, not a resource-driven, business. Product standards vary from place to place. Not all wollastonite deposits, for example, are the same. A New York deposit is 

composed of highly acicular, beautiful long pinkish-white 

crystals of a purity such that it requires no processing; it 

is particularly well suited for ceramics and paint. The 

Willsboro deposit contains garnet, calcium carbonate, 

and silica, and so it has to go through a flotation process, 

and generally the fibers do not have the characteristics 

suitable for ceramics and paint. Nonetheless, the material is competitive in the plastics industry. Any producer 

who starts out in the West, where there is a market for as 

much as 20,000 tons of wollastonite per year, is going to 

have to be able to make a product acceptable to the 

ceramic, paint, and plastics formulators, that is, comparable in quality and color to the deposits in the East. 

You can start a gold mine, once you locate the 

deposit, and get the financing. The deposit can be put 

into production because there is a ready market for the 

product, and you can sell all you want. Usually, it's just a 

matter of price. That's also true for copper, lead, zinc, 

molybdenum, and many other metals. When you get to 

industrial minerals, that's no longer true-a market has 

to be developed. That factor has its limitations, but the 

good news for the specialty products is that the producer 

sets the price rather than the buyer. Also, because there 

are many consumers who use relatively small amounts of 

product, the industrial-minerals business is not so vulnerable to depressions. 

• The changeover of technology to advanced 

ceramics is going to revolutionize the material needs of 

the United States. If any of these so-called new materials 

or wonder materials come into the mass market, higher 

and higher purity materials will be needed. It will become 

a chemical-processing problem to get the raw material in 

the grain size needed, particularly for extremely high 

purity materials. Specialty minerals with low contaminants will become a valuable part of the industrialminerals group. As raw-material needs change from 

metals to extremely strong cast ceramics, as in jet -engine 

turbines and advanced fibers and reinforcements, materials needs are going to change. We have no way of 

assessing these needs at present. It is uncertain who is 

going to look ahead to identify these presently high purity 

common resources, such as silica or alumina. 

• Sometimes, the testing procedure fails to recognize the existence of a resource. For example, an industry 

representative recently took USGS evaluators into the 

field and pointed out a saponite deposit, which is a rare 

and unique resource-possibly the most valuable material in the area being evaluated. The material was tested 

for its refractory characteristics in a USBM laboratory. 

The clay was not refractory, it failed the test, and the 

deposit received a two-line mention in the WSA report. 

Clearly, the management system was not adequately 

addressing the industrial-mineral-potential problem, in 

spite of the fact that an effort was made to test the 

material. The problem of selecting the proper test for a 

material should be resolved as soon as possible. 

• Research on the surface activity of fibrous or 

acicular minerals is something which the State and Federal geological surveys and the universities may be 

equipped to study and for which they may have the 

required mineralogic expertise. From an environmental 

standpoint, it is important to know why some of these 

materials may not be carcinogenic and perfectly safe to 

mine, because so many of the metallic- and nonmetallicmineral industries have to deal with particulate-material 

problems. 

Recognition of "Future" Resource Materials 

• The standards problem has hindered examination of WSA's for industrial-mineral potential by the 

USGS and USBM. Potentially marketable industrialmineral resources are difficult to define and recognize. 

The Nation has gone from the metals age into the new 

stone age of ceramics, composites, and advanced materials, yet resources are being locked up whose uses are 

not yet recognized. Once legally unavailable, it will be 

difficult, if not impossible, to unlock such resources in 

(low or no resource potential) land classification. A 

resource can't be recognized and assessed unless there's 

a way of evaluating it. 

22 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
• How do the USGS and USBM deal with the 

industrial-minerals-assessment problem to make sure 

that materials are not placed in some classification 

whereby they will be unavailable 20 years from now? 

These agencies have been less than confident in their 

assessments of materials like sand and gravel. A statement in a report may say that there is a resource present, 

but there is a lot more of that material available in many 

other places. So, they write it off in the report, and the 

BLM rates it as having a very low potential. 

Reply: The materials should be tested in appropriate laboratories or evaluated as to the type and quality of 

the aggregate. 

• The Government must evaluate the resources on 

Federal lands by 1991 (congressional mandate); the 

USGS and USBM cannot ignore this mandate. The 

Government needs to have help from industry and academia in resolving issues concerning resource identification, particularly for the potential future types. Recommendations are needed for what industrial-minerals 

producers feel would be responsive actions by the Federal agencies in their consideration of industrial-mineralresource potentials on Federal lands. The land-managing 

agencies (USPS, BLM) would welcome such information 

that is generated in a positive sense, and they would use 

it positively. What are some criteria we all can agree on 

that would identify a material as a potentially valuable 

resource? 

• Resistance to the discovery and development of 

new industrial-mineral deposits may result from a reluctance of consumers to change suppliers. There was a 

recent failed effort to assist a local plant processing 

vermiculite for potting soil. They should have bought 

1,500 tons per year in Arizona at a low rate, instead of 

importing vermiculite from Virginia at $160 per ton in 

freight cost alone. The marketer was an expert in processing and selling soil, but not in mining industrial 

minerals. Furthermore, he had no concept of landacquisition problems or mining methodology for mineral 

development. Consumers prefer to go to a purchasing 

agent for a trademark product that meets their needs. 

They resist moving capital plants from one part of the 

country to another, even though markets are developing 

there. 

• In the opinion of one participant, a significant 

deterrent to industrial-mineral development in Arizona 

is that land-management agencies seem to favor land 

preservation over mineral development. The classification of many industrial minerals as common varieties 

under the mining laws makes it more difficult to obtain 

rights to them. 

Improved Testing and Specification Procedures 

• One problem is that "weighting standards" are 

used by land managers in determining whether a deposit 

is valuable or not. Mineral potential has a lower "weight" 

in the EIS than many other, more readily quantifiable 

values, such as like recreation, esthetics, or animal habitats. The argument commonly used is, "Yes, this is an 

occurrence of talc, but there are deposits of talc elsewhere. Therefore, this particular one is not needed." In 

truth, it cannot be argued that any one talc occurrence is 

more valuable than another, because each deposit is 

unique. The argument that a deposit in a WSA has 

unique and specific properties which make it valuable for 

an as-yet-unknown application is not considered valid. 

However, if this deposit has characteristics that are 

definable and for which there is value attached, it no 

longer is a common material. It is inexpensive to prove 

that a resource material is not valuable on the basis of a 

resource survey, when there is little or no information 

about the third dimension or grade of the occurrence, but 

it's very expensive to prove that it is valuable. 

• Those making Government resource assessments need to know how to best represent industry's 

interests (in the national interest), so as to ensure that 

companies are not abused by a management system that 

doesn't recognize their special needs. Clearly, resourceassessment methods must be improved or developed to 

properly represent industrial-mineral producers. Industry seems to have the choice of helping to develop usable 

assessment tools for the industrial minerals, or saying 

that such tools can't be developed. In that case, industry 

will continue to be underrepresented in resource assessments. 

Replies and comments: Returning to the diopside 

example mentioned earlier, the material certainly has or 

will have some value. Proving that value to a land 

classifier is not easy because there is no comparable 

massive diopside deposit in the United States. In the last 

analysis, it will be necessary (but impossible in the time 

frame available) to build a market for the product from 

scratch. Nevertheless, from an industry perspective, the 

occurrence should not be included in a WSA. What 

practical steps will be useful to prove the uniqueness of 

the deposit? Why not divide industrial materials into two 

groups-one that is so specialized that it presents unique 

problems which must be dealt with individually, and a 

second, broad group comprising the bulk materials, those 

that have common associated specifications? Then, a set 

of widely recognized basic parameters associated with 

the second group, permitting their routine testing and 

examination, can be defined. These materials can be said 

to meet certain basic criteria that, while not proving 

ultimate value, minimally ensure their recognition as 

known or potential resources. This procedure may facilitate assessment and solve a part of the recognition 

problem. Participation in the classification procedure will 

require close collaboration between industry, resource 

assessors, and land managers. 

Under current regulations, the prudent-man test 

Critical Problem Areas 23 
must be met in some acceptable way. Few productive 

operations of industrial materials function at maximum 

capacity. Changes or fluctuations in the market may also 

affect the operation. Is a 2-ton supply in a celestite 

deposit worth preserving, when the world market is only 

about 12,000 tons? Value is difficult to prove unless a 

producer can make a useful product out of the material 

at a profit. In a sense, it may be a resource of the future. 

Nonetheless, does it make sense to leave such a material 

out of a WSA report when the technology to make use of 

it does not exist at the present time and the potential 

resource cannot be produced at a profit? 

Another way to look at this classification problem 

is to segregate those materials that require strict quality 

controls from those that have lesser quality-control 

requirements. Some materials will require more attention from applied geologic research and chemical analysis. Will the end user pay for the effort of quality control? 

Some industries have quality-assurance programs, 

in which the company sets the standard, and the suppliers 

agree to meet those standards. Thus, you can go through 

the array of industrial minerals and categorize them. 

Which ones call for more stringent quality than is justified by usage in the market? Some of these materials, 

such as fluorine, titanium dioxide, or iron oxides, have 

fairly standard specifications for some industries. 

• Assessment of WSA's could be improved by 

having the evaluators go to the local producers of 

industrial-mineral materials and discuss the resource 

potential of an area. For example, if a WSA area that is 

partly in a basin is evaluated and the evaluator anticipates 

the presence of borates, then the evaluator should consult a borate producer to determine the resource potential for borates in that area. It should be recognized, 

however, that the company will not be required to divulge 

its trade secrets or specific exploration models. An 

obvious ancillary problem is the fairness issue-if there is 

more than one company operating in the area that could 

be approached, which one do you choose to contact? 

That may be difficult, but there are a lot of industry 

experts who could provide input to the assessment of the 

resource potential of an area. A meeting between industry and Government resource experts is recommended to 

consider these problems, to propose possible mechanisms and eliminate possible conflicts of interest. 

Conclusions 

Consideration of the analysis and testing problems 

facing industry lead to concern for their effect on 

resource assessments by Federal agencies. Although no 

definitive answers were derived, some suggestions were 

made that merit more detailed consideration. The main 

problem for industrial rock and mineral resources, which 

depend heavily on their marketability, is the absence of 

accepted standards by which many of these materials can 

be compared. For individual pure minerals, the problem 

is not as serious as determining the specifications of 

components in aggregates or commercially prepared 

materials, for which standards are generally proprietary. 

Even if tests and specifications were established, 

only a few commercial testing laboratories are available 

(see app. 2), and as has been noted, the analytical rEsults 

on the same materials by competing service laboratories 

are generally not comparable. The USGS, USBM, and 

State survey laboratories do not provide public testing 

services. The USGS has published the standards and 

rapid chemical-analysis methods it uses. 

Government agencies (USGS, USBM) need help 

from industry and academia in developing a useful and 

acceptable resource-evaluation methodology to identify 

industrial-mineral materials in WSA's, so that 

nonmetallic-mineral materials receive equal treatment 

with metallic-mineral resources. If such advances in 

assessment technology can be attained, land managers 

will be more able and willing to ''weigh" resource values 

equally with competing environmental values in Federal 

and State land-use classifications. In particular, the term 

"common materials" needs to be reexamined. 

Land Access and Availability 

Access to available Federal, State, Indian, and 

privately owned lands is a subject area of tangled and 

often poorly known or understood regulations and constraints for those conducting exploration and development for industrial resources. Session leaders from the 

BIA, BLM, and ASLD describe their mission objectives 

and methods for classification of public-land resources, 

and review the methods for obtaining access to explore, 

evaluate, and produce minerals. A discussion and clarification session by the workshop participants follows. 

U.S. BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS 

By James Crowther 

Before considering access to the resources on 

Indian lands, it seems appropriate to explain the organizational structure of the BIA. The Phoenix area office 

covers a three-state area-Arizona, Nevada, and Utah, 

as well as parts of California, Idaho, and Oregon. A total 

of 13 agencies, or field offices, are located on reservations within that region, 9 in Arizona (see app. 3). A total 

of 19 tribes in the State are under BIA jurisdiction, 

exclusive of the Navajo Tribe, which has its own area 

office and is not served by the Phoenix area office. 

Because these Indian lands, as well as the resources on 

them, are owned by the tribes, access to the reservations 

is through the tribes; they control access to the land and 

its minerals. It is hard to consider the BIA a land24 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
managing agency in the usual sense because the tribes 

have so much responsibility in dealing with their 

resources. However, because the Federal Government is 

trustee for the Indians, the BIA approves any contracts 

made between the tribes and mining companies. The 

BIA's role is to determine whether the contract is in the 

best interest of the Indians and to go through the 

environmental- and cultural-resources procedures. 

As far as access is concerned, it starts with the 

tribes (see app. 4). Any companies wanting to do business on Indian lands to develop minerals (or anything 

else) must deal with the tribes and their attorneys. In 

many cases, a BIA specialist may be called in to assist in 

negotiations. The main BIA role is to give technical 

assistance to the tribes, to evaluate, and to approve or 

disapprove contracts between the tribes and the mining 

companies. BIA relations vary from tribe to tribe, just as 

the tribes differ one from another. All the tribes are 

interested in having companies come in and develop their 

resources. It may not appear that way, in some cases, 

because any opposition reported in the press is taken as 

general opposition to mineral development. This is simply not true. A fair and equitable mining proposal is 

rarely, if ever, turned down. Similarly, because Indian 

land is not Federal land, although the Federal Government does have legal title to it, the economic aspect of a 

mineral operation is of utmost importance and carries a 

heavy weight in negotiations. A contract price for a 

mineral commodity on public or fee lands might not be 

acceptable to the Indians. 

Since 1975, the BIA has been involved in a 

mineral-inventory program, now called the Indian Mineral Assessment Program, covering all the Indian reservations in the United States. Through contracts with the 

USBM and USGS, the BIA has performed studies on all 

reservations. These studies are divided into phases. A 

phase 1 study inventories existing resource information, 

which is cataloged in an administrative report that is 

available to anyone who wants copies. Phase 2 consists of 

field studies to gather new information; this information 

is confidential to the tribes and is available to the public 

by tribal permission only. A few phase 3 studies have 

been implemented on reservations where drilling was 

done to verify geologic information; the drilling is not to 

make a discovery or to block out an ore deposit. 

U.S. BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

By L.P. Bauer 

The BLM is probably the largest landlord in the 

Nation, managing some 300 million acres (fig. 5). In 

Arizona, the BLM manages 12 million acres plus an 

additional 12 million acres of mineral estate managed 

jointly with the USFS. Access to minerals on Federal 

mineral lands may be obtained in one of three ways: (1) 

leasing, (2) locating, or (3) buying under the Mineral 

Materials Act. Leasing applies to minerals not usually 

considered industrial materials-oil and gas, coal, oil 

shale, tar sand, and sodium. Locatable minerals include 

everything else except for those handled under the Mineral Materials Act, such as sand and gravel and the 

"common varieties" of materials (see app. 5). The leasing 

is done by application and is strictly a discretionary act on 

the part of the Secretary of the Interior. Under the 1872 

mining law, primary access to locatable minerals is by 

staking and filing a mining claim with the appropriate 

county recorder and the BLM within 90 days (fig. 6). 

There is a requirement for an annual filing of assessment 

work or intention to hold the claim. Under the Mineral 

Materials Act, the BLM sells the material on application. 

The BLM's policy is that unless the land is withdrawn 

from mineral entry in consideration of other values, it will 

be available for mineral development. Recently, a decision by Judge Pratt in a National Wildlife Federation suit 

placed a cloud over many withdrawal revocations made 

since January 1981. The Judge said that the Reagan 

administration had moved too precipitously in making 

withdrawal revocations, and the Judge moved the time 

clock back, so that all withdrawal revocations since 

January 1981 have been reversed and the withdrawals 

put back into place. The impact of the decision, retroactively, is unclear on those claims and leases already 

issued. The BLM is presently taking many actions right 

up to the final decision point and placing them on the 

shelf until a final settlement of the suit. 

WSA's in BLM lands are an outgrowth of the 1976 

Federal Land Policy and Management Act, in which the 

BLM was directed to inventory its lands for consideration 

of their inclusion into the wilderness system, under the 

Wilderness Act. The wilderness land characteristics specified in the act, which include natural beauty, opportunities for recreation, and solitude untrammeled by man, 

were required to be assessed in the evaluation by the 

BLM. The converse is that land areas meeting these 

criteria have not been extensively explored, mined, or 

developed for agriculture. Almost by definition, all the 

areas that have not been developed were studied for 

designation as wilderness areas. About 70 WSA's are still 

under consideration in Arizona. The BLM has made 

decisions and is recommending that many of these 

WSA's be dropped from further consideration; many 

others are being recommended for modification. Where 

there is reasonable information, the BLM is adjusting 

boundaries. The point has nearly been reached where 

final recommendations will be submitted to the Congress 

and final negotiations will take place at the congressional 

level. The BLM's Phoenix office has prepared maps and 

charts of each of the WSA's for use by congressional 

delegations in making the final decisions. Draft WSA 

reports, available for public inspection in the BLM's 

State office, contain these maps and charts. 

Critical Problem Areas 25 
1\) 

en 

~ N. 

0 

::l 

Dl 

0~ 

:; 

a. 

c 

~ 

!: 

::0 

0 

(') 

...... 

Dl 

::l 

a. 

s: 

s· 

CD 

!. 

::0 

CD 

0 

0 

~ (') 

CD 

0 

I 

~ ;. 

0 

=r 

0 

"C 

-a 

0 

(') 

CD 

CD 

a. 

s· 

(Q 

0 

0 

o• '''t~ 

• • 

... . .__, __ ......... __ -- ...... ,_ --~ 

---:1~~ . I!IILUNGs 

• 

• 

DICKINSON 

. 

CANON CITY 

.... 

I 

~-

---------~ MILWI>UKEE 

I 

TULSI> e 

-~... + _, ......... ., ............... + 

'It 

• 

,'\:-____ _ 

j 

/ I 

I 

\_i 

I 

__ .. ' --J·-· 

,,..· ,- ____ J--~_,-- "- \ .... __ 

J 

" I 

~ 

r- --;-

1 

_.~ J,t.CKSON 

) . ~ 

LEGEND 

Waahlngton Office 

State Office 

Dlatrlct Office 

Dlatrlct Boundarlea 

' I 

\ 

- BLM State Office Admlntatratlve Bounderlea 

_... Landa Admlnlatered 

Br Same Office 

Figure 5. U.S. Bureau of Land Management areas in the conterminous United States. 

(\ rl ' 

r ............ . ( \ I . ., 

·, i I 

•. ·.l r 'r·-

~~---~ 

I 

11/17 
For many years, mining-claim information has 

been available at BLM offices on microfiche (see app. 5). 

The microfiches are organized by Arizona Mining Claim 

(AMC) serial number, the name of the claim, the name 

of the claimant, or the geographic location by T/R/S. This 

record is updated several times per year. There are about 

286,000 mining claims in Arizona (fig. 6), of which 

approximately 148,000 are active. Current information 

on mining-claim activity is commonly required to make 

decisions involving land title and resource uses. 

Land and mineral information are being automated in the BLM in the Automated Land and Mineral 

Record System (ALMRS). The Mining Claim Recordation System can now provide current information on 

mining claims (see app. 5). A serial page can be printed 

by a specific AMC number; it includes information on 

the name of the claim, the name of the claimant, the 

location of the claim, and any actions that have happened 

on that specific case. A report is also available by T/R/S 

that includes information on all claims in the specified 

area and includes the name of the claim, the name of the 

claimant, the status of the claim (active/closed), the type 

of claim (placer/lode/millsite ), the date of location, and 

the date of latest assessment. These computer reports, 

which are current to the previous day's activity, are 

available at all BLM offices in Arizona. 

ARIZONA STATE LAND DEPARTMENT 

By G.D. Slusher 

State-trust lands cover about 9 million acres, 

approximately 13 percent of the total acreage within 

Arizona. The ASLD was established to administer these 

trust lands and given the responsibility to manage them in 

a manner that protects the best interests of the trust and 

its beneficiaries. 

One of the primary responsibilities of ASLD is to 

generate revenues for the trust beneficiaries (primarily 

schools), through a multiple-land-use policy that involves 

leasing State-trust lands for mineral, agricultural, grazing, and commercial uses. Sales of State-trust lands 

through public auction are also an important part of the 

revenue-generating process. 

The ASLD's minerals section is responsible for 

issuing and administering mineral and mineral-materials 

leases and sales. Natural resources in Arizona are 

divided into two categories, locatable and salable. Separate procedures exist for dealing with each group; distinctions are based on the commodity, as well as on its 

intended use. 

Rights to locatable minerals (for example, gold, 

silver, copper) are mostly obtained through prospecting 

permits, which give an applicant the right to enter upon 

State-trust lands and conduct approved exploration activities so as to establish the potential for discovering 

economic-mineral deposits. Prospecting permits are 

good for as long as 5 years but are subject to annual 

renewal. Within this 5-year period, prospecting permits 

can be converted to mineral leases if substantial evidence 

supports the potential for economic-mineral discovery. 

Mineral materials (common minerals, for example, 

sand, gravel, clay) fall into the salable category. Rights to 

these commodities are obtained through the filing of a 

mineral-materials application. Application can be made 

for a lease term of as long as 10 years. During the 

evaluation process, minimum royalties, surface rents, 

and production guarantees are set. Once the application 

is approved and its terms accepted by the applicant, a 

notice of public auction/sale is advertised in two newspapers for 10 consecutive weeks. The highest bidder at the 

auction is awarded the sales agreement, which confers 

the right to remove, process, and sell the material products. 

Geothermal, energy, timber, and oil and gas 

resources are another part of the ASLD's naturalresource program. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF LAND PROBLEMS 

Federal Lands 

• How long is it possible to comment on or object 

to the ELM's land classifications, particularly with 

respect to potential resources in a WSA? 

Reply: Intervention is possible at several points 

during WSA consideration with the BLM, USGS, and 

USBM staffs, as well as the congressional delegations. 

These agencies can also help if it is believed that the 

future of industrial minerals is being compromised. In 

addition to BLM/USFS lands (32 million acres, or 44 

percent of State acreage), Indian lands make up about 18 

million acres, or 25 percent of the State; large additional 

0 

! 

joj 

~ 

~ 

0 

<Thousands) 

400, 

300 

2QQ ;::::"] 

lQQ~ I 

L I 

Q r:j 1 

n i I 

I n i I i -i n tl 

n r·l 

!' '! ! l I l 

1

.· '') 

f""1 i 

r-:1 

ti 

n !:J n 

AJ< AZ CA CO ES ID MT NM NU OR UT WY 

STATE OFFICE 

Figure 6. Number of active mining claims in the United 

States. AK, Alaska; AZ, Arizona; CA, California; CO, Colorado; ES, Eastern States; ID, Idaho; MT, Montana; NM, New 

Mexico; NV, Nevada; OR, Oregon; UT, Utah; WY, Wyoming. 

Critical Problem Areas 27 
acreages are devoted to fish and wildlife areas, national 

parks, and military reservations. 

• If someone should ask where the 148,000 claims 

in the State are located, how they relate to BLM lands, 

and whether they are associated with industrial minerals 

or precious metals, how could the question be answered? 

Reply: BLM claims records are sorted by T/R/S on 

microfiche, as well as being stored in the Mining Claims 

Records data system. This system is interactive: Data can 

be retrieved by the public. However, the claims are not 

sorted by mineral-material content. There is no comparable retrieval system for State or Indian lands. 

• How can someone get an overview of what are 

tied up, withdrawn, or allocated to the BLM, national 

parks, or to military reservations? 

Reply: The USBM has a publication that gives this 

information, but it is a one-shot, dated report. For an 

up-to-date search, you would have to go to the ASLD, 

BLM, or BIA individually to find this information. 

• How many patents were issued on the 148,000 

claims last year? 

Reply: Since June 1987, the BLM has granted at 

least one, but the agency doesn't have many patent 

applications to consider. 

• It is extremely difficult to bring an industrialmineral deposit to patent because of the need to demonstrate marketability or to show a contract for sales, and so 

on. 

Reply: We recognize that this is a problem, but the 

BLM has to follow its classification guidelines. 

• There was a program for the BLM and ASLD to 

join their split surface and subsurface estates. Is this 

program still going on, or is it complete? 

Reply: It is still going on. Three-quarters of a 

million acres of Federal land in the State has been 

transferred to the ASLD, and the BLM has acquired 

about 940,000 acres from the State. Land-use planning is 

being completed in some areas to facilitate the exchange 

program. It is anticipated that the program will take 2 

more years to complete. The BLM also has been negotiating with the Santa Fe Railroad to clean up some of the 

private minerals under Federal surface, and with the 

State, so that Federal minerals under the State will 

become private minerals under the State. 

• How are these exchanges made, and what information is used when no data base exists? 

Reply: It is difficult to manage a split estate. In spite 

of the risk of inequality, it is worth the effort to consolidate. From the industry point of view, it is probably better 

to deal with only one Government land-management 

agency. Each decision is made on the basis of available 

information. In the absence of drilling or geochemical 

data, a decision has to be based on a best professional 

estimate. The decision is made. There have been no 

exchanges of lands on which there are mining claims. 

• Government agencies have to recognize that a 

long time may elapse from drilling to production of an 

industrial-minerals product. This is true for an existing 

company with marketing know-how and the laboratories 

to do the required work. For example, in the case of paint 

pigments, the time is measured in years. 

State Lands 

• How many lease applications under the State 

system are awarded to small companies? 

Reply: If we consider all the applications received 

by the ASLD, small companies would account for 

approximately 15 percent. Only a few large, major producers account for 10 percent of the total applications; 

the ADT accounts for the other 75 percent. 

• Does anyone have the right to go in and test a 

deposit before it goes to auction? 

Reply: We issue rights-of-entry or special-use permits for testing purposes. Most materials testing is for 

aggregate (sand and gravel). There has not been a lot of 

interest or demand for other materials, such as building 

stone, decorative rock, boulders, and so on. 

• If a highway is being built somewhere, does the 

ADT make application for borrow-pit materials for the 

road? 

Reply: They file applications based on an ongoing 

program to test and identify material resources around 

the State. 

• Does the ADT have an active exploration program for these materials? 

Reply: Yes, but major highway projects are contracted out and require the contractor to assure that the 

materials used meet the prescribed job specifications. 

The ADT used to specify the material sites to be used. As 

a result of some litigation, they no longer dictate material 

sites; however, they continue to acquire material leases. 

• Is it true that most industrial minerals on State 

lands are classified as salable-for example, barite or 

bentonite, which are not usually considered salable? 

Reply: Again, the ASLD determines the appropriate lease for the commodity of interest on the basis of its 

intended use. For example, a marble used for its chemical properties (cement) would fall under a mineral lease 

(locatable). However, if the marble is intended to be used 

for decorative purposes or as decorative stone, it comes 

under the category of salable materials. So, two opposing, 

overlapping leases based on the same natural product but 

with divergent uses are possible. 

28 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
Geotechnical Research Applications 

M.P. Foose, Moderator 

As was the case for WSA's on Federal lands, the 

assessment of industrial rock and mineral resources by 

the USGS in the 1 o by 2° quadrangles of the Conterminous United States and Alaska mineral-resource program (CUSMAP, AMRAP) has been a mixed success 

(Richter and others, 1975; Goldsmith and others, 1986). 

In part, the unevenness of assessment for industrial 

minerals was due to the problems peculiar to these 

commodities. Some of these problems have been considered previously during this workshop. However, some 

new, developing, and in some cases not fully tested 

geoscience technology offers methods for improving the 

resource assessment of industrial materials. The following presentations led to discussion by workshop participants. 

Applications of Geophysical Research 

By J. K. Crowley 

Several advanced geophysical techniques may have 

applications for industrial-mineral-exploration problems, 

including gamma-ray spectroscopy, EM systems, and 

spectral reflectance. 

GAMMA-RAY SPECTROSCOPY 

Gamma-ray spectroscopy measures the natural 

radiation emitted by potassium, uranium, and thorium as 

those atoms decay. A contour map showing gamma-ray 

emission in Arizona is being compiled by the USGS; it 

should contain important information. Because the 

gamma radiation does not penetrate much soil cover, 

only emissions by surficial deposits are detectable. Contours of K, U, and Th may be displayed singly or in 

combination. One possible link to industrial minerals 

might be in detecting rocks that contain zeolites, which 

commonly concentrate uranium. 

ELECTROMAGNETIC SYSTEMS 

EM systems include various geophysical techniques that can be either ground based or airborne. In 

the simplest system, electrodes are placed in the ground, 

and electrical current is run into the ground through 

electrodes. Response is measured and recorded from 

other electrodes at several different spacings to obtain an 

idea of the resistivity of rock and soil units beneath the 

surface. Sounding looks at the vertical layering beneath 

the measuring point, whereas profiling looks for contrasts 

along a traverse. Audiomagnetotellurics (AMT) is one of 

the best sounding methods; it is a ground-based system 

that uses a natural "controlled" source (for example, 

lightning strikes in the Tropics). These strikes generate 

low-frequency EM waves. Waves of different frequencies 

penetrate to varying depths along different paths. These 

measurements give depth information and indicate areas 

of differing resistivities. In the Basin and Range province, 

alluvium is relatively conductive; it generally overlies a 

more consolidated, less conductive bedrock. Because of 

this contrast in resistivity, AMT soundings can be used to 

determine the depth of alluvial cover. One important 

profiling method uses very low frequency (VLF) EM 

waves broadcast by powerful radio transmitters. For 

example, a series of VLF traverses might be used to 

delineate a clay body surrounded by gravel, where the 

clay is more conductive than the enclosing material. 

SPECTRAL REFLECTANCE 

Spectral reflectance of minerals in rocks can be 

measured with a portable field spectrometer that measures detailed reflectance spectra in the visible and 

near-infrared wavelength range. Many different minerals 

can be identified by their reflectance spectra. Calcite and 

dolomite, for example, can be readily distinguished, and 

the method is also sensitive to ferric and ferrous iron. 

Thus, iron impurities in industrial minerals could be 

detected and, possibly, quantified. Several other indusGeotechnical Research Applications 29 
trial minerals have distinctive spectral bands that could 

be useful in exploration. Many clay minerals are easily 

distinguished. 

Remote-sensing applications of this technique are 

now available that permit detailed spectra to be obtained 

from an aircraft scanner. For example, talc-rich soil areas 

in Montana could be distinguished by using remotely 

sensed data. Field or airborne measurements can be used 

to determine mineral distributions and to make rapid 

estimates of certain impurities. Minerals that are concentrated in soils may provide surface clues to buried 

deposits. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF 

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH 

• A Chinese-Russian exploration technique combines EM and conventional geochemical exploration. If 

you pump electricity into the ground through electrodes, 

metallic ions migrate to a collector electrode. Metallic 

ions like zinc and copper, which occur in the rocks 

between the input and output electrodes, can be moved 

and collected on the electrodes. The Russians have used 

large energy input to penetrate hundreds of meters. The 

Chinese, with smaller portable sources of energy, have 

been able to replicate the process on a smaller scale. 

Depending on the polarity of the electrodes, cations or 

anions can be moved and collected. Sodium, potassium, 

and lithium should be amenable to this technique. We 

may need to get geophysicists and geochemists together 

to look at this method in the Basin and Range province. 

• What is the cost per mile for airborne spectral 

reflectance? 

Reply: A commercial airborne high-resolution 

spectral system, Geophysical Environmental Research, 

Inc., in New York, charges about $200 per flight kilometer and provides images that cover about a 6-km width. A 

1:62,500-scale quadrangle would cost about $34,000. 

These costs may be coming down. 

• Have Landsat TM data (see cover) been used for 

exploration of industrial minerals? 

Reply: Not to my knowledge, but they certainly 

could be. For hydrothermally altered rocks and associated metallic-mineral deposits, considerable research 

using TM data has already been done. 

• Have geophysical techniques been used for 

industrial-mineral exploration by industry? 

Reply: Yes, seismic techniques have been used with 

limited success for borates, and gravity and aeromagnetics have been used for determining structures. 

• Concerning the possible value of gamma-ray 

data, K-metasomatism may occur in altered tuff units 

where high potassium concentrations may be detected. 

One aspect of the metasomatism is the creation of 

adularia and the displacement of other elements, such as 

strontium. During this process, what is lost, and where do 

they go? Is a strontium deposit the distal product of 

K-metasomatism whose potential could be predicted 

from analysis of the potassium gamma-ray map? 

• It is sometimes not known beforehand how an 

EM technique will work in a particular situation. A good 

approach is just to try several EM methods-for example, to trace a known unit in the subsurface. Clearly, 

much could be done to test the use of various geophysical 

methods for industrial-mineral exploration and assessment. 

• How much exploration for industrial minerals is 

going on in Arizona? 

Reply: Probably very little at the moment, although 

there's a bit of secrecy involved in the exploration business. To give an idea of exploration costs, since 1981 one 

consultant probably has spent or overseen the expenditure of nearly $1 million on clays in Arizona, equivalent 

to about $150,000 per year for an exploration budgetsufficient for one person plus drilling expenses. 

• Regarding the need for improved analytical techniques, spectral-reflectance measurements are excellent 

for differentiating clay species. At least 100 spectra per 

day can be recorded without difficulty, making reflectance much faster than X-rays for distinguishing clays. 

However, spectral reflectance will not measure cationexchange capacity. I understand that oil companies have 

used spectral reflectance to study drill cores, probably to 

assess the type of cement and clay content. 

• Could you use low-altitude spectral images to go 

on a "fishing" expedition over WSA's? 

Reply: Possibly, but it would cost money and manpower. Also, deposits sometimes can't be picked up, 

particularly where there is moderate to heavy vegetation 

cover. Arizona would be a good place to test the feasibility of spectral data for wilderness assessments, if there 

were money available to support it. 

• The overall conclusion of this discussion was that 

geophysical exploration technology is mostly only a 

potential. Applied research to develop and field-test 

specific methods and to verify their applicability is essential for advancing the exploration state of the art for many 

industrial minerals, particularly for the large WSA's 

whose industrial materials heretofore may not been have 

been adequately assessed. Once these methods are perfected, routine operational costs may not be prohibitive. 

Applications of Geochemical Research 

GEOCHEMICAL EXPLORATION TECHNOLOGY 

ByW.E. Dean 

I suggest that an understanding of chemical processes in sedimentary environments of ore deposition can 

enable us to evaluate the resource potential of geologic 

30 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
terranes. This is one of the goals of the USGS Branch of 

Sedimentary Processes, with which I am associated. In 

particular, this branch is interested in how various chemical resources accumulate in sedimentary environments. 

In addressing these issues, we use models of processes 

and occurrences to attempt to locate where new deposits 

might be found. The following are some examples of the 

types of information that can be used in developing 

geochemical exploration models for some industrialmineral chemical deposits. 

Anoxic basins are my first example. These are of 

personal interest to me, and I've just spent 3 weeks 

looking at this environment in the Black Sea. One type of 

deposit that forms in anoxic basins is bedded phosphates. 

These deposits develop when phosphorus dissolves in 

anoxic water and then precipitates where that 

phosphorus-rich water mixes with overlying or underlying oxygenated waters. Chemically, manganese should 

behave similarly and thus should also accumulate as 

bedded deposits near the margins of anoxic zones. 

Waters in the oxygen-poor zones may be enriched in both 

phosphate and manganese, and deposits of manganese 

and phosphorus may form where these waters impinge 

on overlying or underlying oxygen-rich water. The continental margin of Peru is one area where bedded phosphate deposits of this type occur. Other areas include the 

Santa Barbara Basin, the Guaymas Basin, the Gulf of 

California, and the Black Sea. 

We decided to test this model in the Black Sea, 

where the boundary between the oxygenated surface 

water and anoxic bottom water occurs at about 180m 

below sea level. We took a series of core samples along 

the margin of the Black Sea to find out what happened as 

the zone of anoxic water migrated upward during postglacial times. Below the surface laminated sedimentary 

rocks, a zone was observed in which the sediment is 

enriched in both phosphate and manganese. Manganese 

appears to be replacing the sediment nearly parallel to 

stratification, thus forming an incipient bedded manganese deposit. These observations support the model of 

bedded-manganese-deposit formation. 

This model may also partly apply to another type of 

deposit that is found in modern marine sediment. Bedded barite in organic-carbon-rich, hemipelagic, deep-sea 

sediment is commonly associated with unconformities on 

the sea floor and thus seems to be deposited during times 

of slow sedimentation. Barite also is associated with 

organic matter and commonly occurs immediately below 

a black shale. This type of barite seems to be deposited at 

the contact between a suboxic zone and an anoxic black 

shale zone within the sediment. Many questions remain 

about these deposits, such as where the barium source is. 

Some of the major resources of Arizona are zeolites, used mainly in pollution control and for agricultural 

applications. Zeolite minerals form in lacustrine deposits 

that are rich in volcanic ash. Commonly, these deposits 

are part of a chemical zonation in this ash. For example, 

the Jurassic Brushy Basin Shale Member of the Morrison 

Formation in the Four Corners region contains distinctive zonation of the zeolites clinoptilolite and analcime 

that are associated with a chemical gradient imposed on 

the sediment of this formation as it was deposited in a 

Jurassic lake. Another example is in Lake Tocoba, Calif., 

where lacustrine tuff deposits contain phillipsite and 

clinoptilolite formed by chemical zonation within a 

closed basin in an arid environment. These deposits can 

be quite thick. The large chabazite deposit at Bowie, in 

southeastern Arizona, is one of the most economically 

important zeolite deposits in the United States. 

Alteration in arid, closed lacustrine basins may also 

form lithium minerals. Although spodumene in pegmatites has long been a main source of lithium, the clay 

mineral hectorite may also be considered a source. It 

forms in sedimentary, tuffaceous, lacustrine rocks that 

have been altered by lithium-bearing ground water in a 

closed basin. 

Finally, another geochemical exploration tool for 

industrial minerals is the use of bromine in an evaporite 

deposit. This element can be used to locate potash 

accumulations because the bromine content indicates the 

salinity of the water that formed a rock-salt deposit. 

Bromine concentrations in evaporite minerals increase 

with increasing salinity in the original basin, and thereby 

point in the direction of possible potash-salt accumulation. 

DIRECT GEOCHEMICAL TOOLS FOR 

INDUSTRIAL-MINERAL EXPLORATION 

By P.K. Theobald, Jr. 

Over the past 30 years of metallic-mineral exploration, using exploration geochemistry, serendipity has 

caught up with me enough times that I can make some 

suggestions for direct exploration possibilities for 

nonmetallic-mineral materials. One direct geochemical 

approach is the analysis of near-surface materials, such 

as rocks, soils, stream sediments, and vegetation, for ore 

elements or ore-associated elements. A stream collects 

materials from the soils throughout its drainage basin. 

The soils are weathered components of bedrock; thus, 

the stream sediment represents a whole drainage area, 

whereas the rock sample represents just one spot. If you 

are examining a large area, it is not possible or economical to collect enough rock samples to represent the 

whole area. Stream-sediment samples integrate a somewhat larger area and provide an ideal direct chemical 

measure of what is in that drainage basin. An anomalous 

stream sediment, for example, may be composed largely 

of white, angular rhyolitic pebbles in a matrix of coarse 

wulfenite sand, and may contain as much as 20 weight 

percent Pb and 7 weight percent Mo. 

Geotechnical Research Applications 31 
Barium provides an example of the application of 

these methods to industrial minerals. Stream sediments 

from Sonora, Mexico, have a single mode for barium at 

about 500 ppm. Almost all of that barium is a minor 

component of a major mineral in the rock system, such as 

barium in feldspar. In heavy-mineral concentrates from 

stream sediment, there is one mode at about 1,000 ppm, 

probably as barium in a mineral like apatite. A second 

mode is greater than 1 weight percent Ba. The high mode 

is for barite. White, clean barite occurs in veins and as 

gangue peripheral to the porphyry systems in northern 

Sonora. By comparing the barium in stream-sediment 

samples with the barium in heavy-mineral concentrates, 

you can distinguish the barium in an economic mineral 

from the barium in a rock-forming mineral. 

In a similar data set from the National Petroleum 

Reserve in Alaska, the stream sediment has a mode at 

500 to 700 ppm Ba that is tied up in feldspars in the 

clastic sediment. The frequency distribution for stream 

sediment makes a second mode in the range 1-2 weight 

percent Ba. Here, heavy-mineral concentrates contain so 

much barium that the data are of little use. The upper 

mode in stream-sediment samples, or the barium in 

heavy-mineral concentrates, is derived from black, fetid 

(full of organic debris) barite, which smells like an anoxic 

sediment. There is so much barium that the upper mode 

is easily seen in the sediment. It has to be derived from a 

massive source like bedded barite. This is the bedded 

barite associated with massive sulfide deposits in the 

Brooks Range. At least for barite, there is a direct 

geochemical method to distinguish a small amount in 

hydrothermal veins from the large accumulation that 

might be an economic barite deposit. 

Here in Arizona, using similar techniques, there 

seems to be a constant association of barium and strontium, although the ratio of the two varies. Among the 

areas studied in the Ajo 2° sheet is a celestite deposit 

south of Gila Bend. The same geochemical pattern as 

seen in Alaska exists, except that it's for strontium. 

Heavy-mineral concentrates are almost wholly celestite, 

the strontium analog of barite. At the deposit south of 

Gila Bend, from descriptions made when the pits were 

still open, the celestite is associated with gypsum. I've 

seen this same association, high-celestite concentrates 

associated with the gypsum in deposits, south of Winkelman, in the San Pedro Valley. As far as I know, no one 

has found any celestite in these occurrences. In at least 

two other areas in Arizona, the same association is found 

in stream sediment. Although there may be only a limited 

market for celestite, there is a good way to find it. 

Biogeochemistry provides another direct geochemical exploration method in an arid environment, such as 

Arizona. In this environment, ground water is not easily 

obtained. There is a group of plants called phreatophytes, 

of which mesquite is the best known. They always have 

their deep roots tapping ground water directly or the 

capillary fringe above ground water. In the metallicminerals area, the Sol deposit (porphyry copper), east of 

Safford, was discovered on the basis of mesquite through 

approximately 100m of transported gravel cover. These 

methods have not been tested for industrial minerals, but 

mesquite in Arizona also collects both boron and lithium 

and gives a direct indication of a source for these 

elements in the root systems of the plant. If these 

elements are present in the mesquite but not in the soils 

or shallow-rooted plants, for example, greasewood, then 

you know the source has to be at depth. These are only 

three examples of direct geochemical exploration technology in the search for chemical resources. More exampies could be generated if the necessary research were 

directed toward exploration geochemistry for nonmetallic minerals. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF 

GEOCHEMICAL RESEARCH 

• If we look at where we are today and then project 

5 to 10 years into the future, what should we be doing to 

improve our ability to use geochemical and geophysical 

techniques, to improve our ability to assess industrial 

mineral resources, and to discover new deposits? 

Reply: Both geophysical and geochemical techniques are anomaly generators. An anomaly does not 

mean that there is a deposit. One in a hundred or one in 

a thousand anomalies, depending on where you are and 

what commodity is being looked for, is going to result in 

something economic. I think we need to develop a better 

understanding of what anomalies are and what causes 

them. This may reduce the odds to 1 in 10. 

• In that context, do you see a systematic Statewide program of data collection to focus on this assessment? 

Reply: In part, yes. There is a larger geochemical 

data base that is being put on CD ROM. A geochemical 

atlas of Arizona would be most useful; however, to date 

we don't have the data base to make one. The existing 

data base has all of the available geochemical data from 

Arizona in the USGS system and will be computer 

accessible. However, you should be careful not to 

attempt using these data without going to the individuals 

who collected and entered them. This caution is necessary to find out exactly what the data represent. Each 

data set must be checked because it was collected for a 

specific purpose, almost all of which are different (for 

example, a quadrangle, a wilderness report, or a 2° sheet) 

The National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) 

aerorad data were pretty good for a 2° sheet, but there 

are problems when trying to put these data together for 

the whole State. Therefore, a geochemical atlas cannot 

come from the existing raw-data base; there will have to 

be an interpretative intermediate version. 

32 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
• One problem with collecting geochemical data 

on most industrial-mineral commodities is that their 

chemical breakdown is not readily distinguishable from a 

normal soil profile. For example, an analysis of silicates 

and carbonates (unless it's a strontium carbonate) is not 

going to show many differences. The minerals of economic interest for their physical properties are mostly 

used because they are inert, nonreactive, and don't 

contain anything unusual. Maps showing zoning of materials like lithium might be useful as guides to exploration, 

such as looking for hectorite clays, and mineralogic 

zoning patterns appear to work better than chemical 

patterns. Lithium, for example, is not an abundant chemical species. If we can find lithium at all, then we can 

worry about whether it's in clay or in brine. 

A second problem is one of scale. A good-size 

specialty clay operation might produce 2,500 tons of 

product per year; a good size limestone operation might 

produce 15,000 to 20,000 tons per year, or even 250,000 

tons per year from a really big one. So, the same cost 

margins do not exist in these operations as in a 200,000-

ton-per-year copper operation. 

• Are there any inexpensive techniques that could 

be used to actually identify the minerals in heavymineral, heavy-metal concentrates in stream sediments? 

For example, in a study of a granite in western Arizona, 

it was discovered that mineral separates from the rock 

contained zircon needed for the dating, but the rock also 

contained twice as much scheelite. This was a new find, in 

a mountain range in which there is a WSA. It would have 

been an important contribution if the heavy-mineral 

samples could have been run through a spectral-analysis 

system and every 100th grain discovered to be scheelite. 

Of course, black light would identify the scheelite, but 

what about other interesting minerals, like kyanite? 

Would it be possible to automate the procedure, so that 

kyanite in a USGS stream-sediment sample would be 

detected? 

Reply: If the kyanite is present in an abundance of 

about 10 percent or more, it can be detected; if only 

about 1 percent, probably not. 

• If we can identify these minerals from space, we 

ought to be able to do it on the Earth. 

Reply: In the USGS laboratory in Denver, we are 

examining the spectra of a large variety of materials, and 

we believe that within the not-too-distant future, we will 

be able to sit across a canyon and shoot the other side and 

tell not only what is there but also what the grain sizes 

are. These methods are called inplace measurements. 

Lots of other techniques are available that we have tested 

in geochemistry, but we don't use them because they are 

too costly. For example, much phase chemistry is available, and it is used in such cases as biogeochemical 

exploration using mesquite, where we do not use standard geochemistry. Such expensive, nonstandard methods also are probably useful for some of the industrial 

materials, but we have not seen a great demand for such 

work. 

• Part of the answer to the mineralogic problem is 

that the USGS has only a few persons who know how to 

analyze minerals routinely. We need to develop a rapid 

technique for mineralogic analysis, and we can do so if we 

specify the element to look for. For example, tin in 

cassiterite can be identified by a spot test after chemical 

treatment of the grains. By simple solution chemistry of 

stream-sediment samples, some mineralogic analyses 

may be possible. 

• It might be well to clarify the USGS and USBM 

roles in resource assessment, particularly with respect to 

the use of geochemical and geophysical techniques. In 

previous discussions, a large strontium anomaly would 

not be considered a resource because no use for it the 

strontium had been identified. This nomenclature highlights both the role of geochemical exploration and the 

primary mission of the USGS, which is to search for 

undiscovered resources. We can define undiscovered 

resources in many ways, but one way is to call them a 

geochemical anomaly. One of the things done in landassessment programs is to find geochemical anomalies 

and then to consider what they might be caused by and 

whether or not they may indicate a potential resource. In 

so doing, the attempt is to shift what is an undiscovered 

resource into categories that become progressively better 

identified, first as an inferred resource and ultimately as 

an identified resource. By the time a resource has 

become "identified," it is the responsibility of the USBM. 

Even though we might not know whether something will 

be useful as a filler or purifier, if it can be identified as an 

anomalous commodity, we can then begin to consider it a 

resource. The USBM ultimately will evaluate such factors as minability, processing, quality control, resource 

specifications, and marketability. 

Applications of Geologic Research 

Several developments in geologic research provide 

new tools to help predict regional resource-forming 

domains and resource distribution in surface and subsurface sediment and igneous rocks. J.C. Dohrenwend 

describes his studies of basin characteristics in the Great 

Basin in Nevada, which should lead to a better understanding of potential for concealed deposits. M.F. Sheridan discusses some of the new geologic methods developing at ASU. 

CONCEALED RESOURCES IN THE BASIN AND RANGE 

PROVINCE 

By J.C. Dohrenwend 

The current emphasis of USGS regional mineralresource assessment in the Basin and Range province is 

Geotechnical Research Applications 33 
focused on metallic-mineral resources exposed in the 

mountain ranges and concealed within the intervening 

basins of Nevada, but the methodology is equally applicable for use in the assessment of industrial minerals in 

southern and western Arizona. Two examples of recent 

research in Nevada include the identification of neotectonic domains and the use of TM. 

Neotectonic Domains 

Few, if any, areas here or elsewhere in the world 

are the same geologically, and the various areas of the 

Basin and Range province in Nevada, southeastern California, arid southwestern Arizona illustrate this point 

rather well. This province can be divided into subregions 

or areas that I will refer to as neotectonic domains. These 

domains have histories of basin-and-range development 

that differ in timing, style, and level of tectonic activity. 

To demonstrate these differences more formally, regionally consistent geologic mapping of young faults in central and southern Nevada shows that both the density and 

orientation of these faults vary significantly from one 

neotectonic domain to another. Also, the timing and level 

of activity of these faults appear to vary substantially from 

one domain to another. Not too surprisingly, young-fault 

density and activity seem to be fundamental determinants 

of the region's geomorphology. Among the several neotectonic domains, significant correlations exist between 

young-fault density and various general morphometric 

parameters (for example, ratios of range relief to total 

relief, range area to total area, topographic closure of 

basins). The present configuration of the region probably 

is largely determined by the high-angle, deeply penetrating style of normal-fault extension and by how active or 

inactive, how recent, or how ancient this style of deformation has been. 

Another neotectonically significant characteristic 

of the Basin and Range province in Nevada is the 

distribution of pediments and areas of thin alluvial cover. 

Mapping at 1:250,000 scale shows significant differences 

in the size, continuity, distribution, and density of these 

areas among the various neotectonic domains. 

Experimental maps show the general subsurface 

configuration of the basins throughout this region: These 

maps combine surficial geologic data about young faults, 

pediments, and areas of thin alluvial cover with available 

geophysical and subsurface geologic data, including gravity data (interpreted by a four-layer density gravity 

model), aeromagnetic data, some limited seismicreflection-profile data, and well data (oil and gas, geothermal, and water). Using these maps, we can begin to 

define the three-dimensional subsurface geometry of 

these basins. We can estimate approximately how deep 

and continuous they are, and we can now begin to 

identify the neotectonic and geologic controls on this 

geometry and thus develop predictive models of basin 

geometry for other areas. 

A typical example of these maps, showing the 

central and northeastern part of the Tonopah 1 o by 2° 

quadrangle, is figure 7, which shows three large intermountain basins. The westernmost basin, Big Smoky 

Valley, is a typical asymmetric graben, bounded on the 

west by the high, young-fault-bounded front of the Toiyabe Range and on the east by the relatively gently west 

dipping flank of the Toquima Range. The subsurface 

geometry of this basin reflects these relations: It is 

deepest near its western margin and progressively shallows toward an area of pediments and thin alluvial cover 

along its eastern margin. In contrast, the next basin to the 

east, Monitor Valley, is more of a true graben: Both sides 

are flanked by high-angle faults. Resources concealed 

here could lie at considerable depth and would be less 

accessible than those in the eastern part of Big Smoky 

Valley. The next basin to the east, Little Fish Lake 

Valley, is intermediate in style between its two neighbors; 

its subsurface configuration includes a major fault along 

its western margin and lesser faults along its eastern 

margin that are separated by an asymmetric graben. 

These differences in subsurface geometry are highly 

significant to mineral-exploration activities in basin 

areas. 

Preliminary results of this work include the observations that: (1) the size, depth, and continuity of the 

basins decrease markedly toward the margins of individual neotectonic domains; (2) basins within or adjacent to 

"transverse accommodation zones" (generally east-west 

trending zones where the overall Tertiary dips of the 

range blocks systematically change orientation) are generally small, discontinuous, and shallow, even though 

many basins appear on the surface as broad, continuous 

alluvial plains; (3) in these broad areas, middle Tertiary 

volcanic rocks, which are part of the basin fill, commonly 

lie within a few hundred meters of the surface; and ( 4) 

basins within the various domains of the Walker Lane 

also are generally small, discontinuous, and shallow in 

the subsurface. All of these shallow-basin areas seem to 

have considerable promise for concealed mineral 

resources. 

In summary, combination of regional neotectonic 

and surficial geologic data with available geophysical and 

subsurface data can provide a first -order approximation 

of what to expect below the surface of the alluviated 

basins of the Basin and Range province. Although this 

type of basin analysis does not apply directly to industrial 

minerals, it does provide a useful geometric and stratigraphic context for those situations where large volumes 

of such minerals occurs as basin-fill materials. The 

three-dimensional geometry and stratigraphy of such 

basins must be at least approximately defined if we are to 

have a basis for assessing the resource potential of such 

commodities as lithium, zeolites, or evaporite deposits. 

34 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
C) 

('I) 

0 

~ 

:::r 

::I 

c;· 

!. 

:JJ 

('I) 

U) 

('I) 

~ 0 

:::r 

l> 

't:J 

"2. 

c;· 

I» 

.. 

cr 

::I 

U) 

(,) 

U1 

117 ° 

39 ° 

38.5 ° 

r 

} 

975 • pT 

\15 

116.5 ° 

generalized 

young fault trace 

1-km depth contour 

based on gravity modeling 

well locations showing 

approximate depth (in m) 

to bedrock 

generalized dip and strike on 

middle to late Tertiary strata 

0 10 

I I 

miles 

Figure 7. Part of the Tonopah 1° by 2° quadrangle, Nev., showing structural configuration of Big Smoky, Monitor, and Little Fish Lake Valleys. 
In Arizona, the AZGS has already developed preliminary 

regional maps for young faulting and gravity data and a 

similar type of basin analysis could be conducted for 

basin-and-range areas in the southwestern part of the 

State. 

Thematic Mapping 

Another new technique useful for regional studies 

of basin and other surficial deposits is the interactive 

digital analysis of Landsat TM imagery and other similar 

multispectral-image data (Taranik, 1988). Band-ratioed 

images (see cover) provide geologists with a new tool to 

facilitate geologic interpretation and to enhance the 

mapping process. The potential of such imagery for 

resource assessment and (or) exploration in piedmont 

and basin areas should be readily apparent. In the cover, 

for example, compositionally distinct plumes of surface 

deposits derived from different source areas can be 

distinguished within the ranges. This ability provides a 

means for quickly estimating the general compositions 

and grain-size characteristics of aggregate materials on 

piedmont surfaces and thus provides a basis for designing 

geochemical surveys in basin areas. The image also 

shows extensive areas with discontinuous pink to violet to 

light-blue coloration immediately south and southeast of 

the Gila River flood plain (dark-orange-red area). These 

areas are veneered by accumulations of eolian dust and 

calcium carbonate; in this particular image, the more 

dust, the lighter, and the more calcium carbonate, the 

bluer the surface appears. Such color variations are 

common on band-ratioed TM images of arid regions, and 

they can be used to estimate both the general surficial 

characteristics and the relative ages of basin and piedmont surfaces. This highly detailed imagery, which is 

produced from digital data that can be transferred 

directly to maps without going through any intervening 

manual manipulations, conjures up all sorts of possibilities for resource research and assessment applications. 

NEW SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL DATA USEFUL IN 

THE DEVELOPMENT OF RESOURCE MATERIALS 

By M.F. Sheridan 

Improved exploration and development of industrial materials in Arizona must advance on three fronts: 

(1) improved access to data, (2) use of modern equipment, and (3) development of new theoretical models. 

Before examining the potential use of new technology in 

the exploration of volcanic materials, we should consider 

our present use of existing technology. High technology is 

currently underused in the exploration of nonmetallic 

minerals in· Arizona, partly because industrial-mineral 

deposits are very small features on a regional scale. It is 

doubtful that some of the smaller deposits could be 

detectable using such standard remote-sensing techniques as Landsat images. Furthermore, the value of 

industrial materials depends on the use(s) to which they 

are applied. Because it is difficult to predict which 

materials will be valuable in the future, exploration and 

development of resources based on current uses and 

demands will be flawed. Technology has not been a major 

factor in the location and development of industrial 

materials in the past. Given these reservations, let's 

examine the most useful technologic resources for Arizona in the future. 

Centralized Data Base 

The highest priority technology for the largest 

number of people in Arizona will be a uniform data base 

that is available for easy public use. This data base will 

require a physical facility for data manipulation and a 

technical staff to administer it. The compilation of dispersed data sets into a centralized data bank will require 

a tremendous amount of work and money. Automatic 

entry and update of spatial data would be preferable to 

manual entry. An optimum data system for mineral 

exploration could accept and overlay land and airborne 

(including spacecraft) geophysical, geochemical, and 

geologic data. 

After the type and format of the data have been 

selected, the next step will be to choose a system for 

interrelating and overlaying the various data elements. A 

good system for the manipulation of this type of data is a 

GIS. Researchers at ASU have begun development of a 

GIS termed the AGIS that covers the entire State. Spatial 

data, such as spacecraft images, can be indexed into the 

AGIS and combined with other types of geographic data 

from municipality and county sources, as well as with 

numerical and tabular data. Using the AGIS, you could 

draw polygons to query the system for information of 

various types from specific areas, such as mining districts, 

river channels, or entire basins. The data could include 

the types of materials mined, quantity of products, or any 

other pertinent information. Many of the data that we 

have discussed thus far in this workshop could be incorporated into the AGIS data base. The AGIS requires a 

dedicated mainframe-size computer and technicalsupport personnel. Thus, financial support at the State 

level will be required to establish a GIS for mineral 

exploration. 

Thematic Mapping 

Landsat TM data are especially valuable for mineral exploration. Although hardcopy images are useful, 

the maximum potential of TM data sets is in conjunction 

with image-processing facilities, to enhance various 

bands of the digital data. A few image-processing systems 

36 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
exist at universities, but these systems are expensive 

(about $100,000) and are currently used to their capacity 

for funded research projects. An image-processing system should be available at the State level, along with 

appropriate data sets, for use by the mineral industry. 

The most important data set for the State to obtain is 

complete coverage of Arizona by Landsat TM images. 

These images should be available for viewing by the 

public and for image processing with the assistance of a 

technician on a fee basis. This TM data base could be 

computer-linked to other types of geographic data 

through a system like the AGIS. Models also could be 

incorporated into such systems. These data should be 

brought up to date periodically and archived. 

Establishing Resource Criteria 

My experience as a consultant on industrial materials (principally volcanic rocks) in Arizona has made me 

aware of a general misunderstanding of the quality of 

volcanic materials while they are still in the ground. Legal 

suits commonly arise over the use of "bad" materials that 

were bidded on as good materials on the basis of 

Government -provided specifications. These could be 

multi-million-dollar suits concerned with an outcroplevel decision. The legal question may be as simple as 

whether or not the outcrop is a common lava flow or a 

lava with special industrial characteristics. 

We must establish criteria for specifying the quality 

of volcanic materials. For sand and gravel and similar 

industrial materials, the deposits and use specifications 

are adequate, and so "prospectors" can identify good 

areas to develop. This is not so for volcanic materials. 

Generally, developers or potential users are unclear what 

constitutes a "good" lava, a "good" cinder deposit, or a 

"good" pumice before to removal from its natural environment. We need to establish acceptable criteria for 

common volcanic materials, so that we can keep the 

geologist out of court and on the outcrop. A publication 

that compiles the various types of volcanic materials in 

Arizona, their physical properties, and their uses would 

be a step toward solving this problem. 

Expanding the Application of Existing Technology 

We should also try to find other forms of existing 

technology that could be useful for exploration of 

nonmetallic-mineral deposits in Arizona. The most applicable techniques should be rapid and inexpensive. One 

example of an underutilized technique is SEM. This 

instrument could be a powerful tool for rapid analysis of 

industrial materials in the form of grain concentrates or 

rock slabs. When an object is examined by backscatter 

electrons, the brightness of the viewed image is proportional to the mean atomic number of the material 

present. For example, barite would appear bright relative 

to anhydrite. A heavy-mineral concentrate mounted in 

epoxy and subjected to backscatter electrons could be 

analyzed by using a computer program that conducts a 

modal analysis based on grain brightness (atomic number). This type of analysis could result in an assay, using 

an appropriate computation. The method is highly reliable, and the costs are comparable to those of assays by 

other methods. An SEM analysis could also use EDAX 

in combination with the backscatter data for quantitative 

chemical analyses of single grains. This technique can be 

adjusted to determine the proportion of grains with 

different properties in a sample. Thus, we can obtain an 

excellent chemical analysis of individual grains, as well as 

a modal analysis of the minerals present in the entire 

sample, in a few minutes by the use of this technique. 

Exploration Models 

Besides new data and new instruments, we must 

also develop new exploration models. An example of a 

new model for volcanogenic mineral deposits is the 

scheme of Burt and Sheridan (1986) for the distribution 

of lithium, beryllium, uranium, and thorium in relation to 

fluorine-rich rhyolites. The association of lithium deposits with certain pegmatites is well known, but the close 

relation of topaz rhyolites, rich in fluorine, with lithophile 

elements (such as Be, Li, Th, and U) was established only 

a few years ago. Two localities in Arizona where topazbearing rhyolites occur are at Burro Creek and at the 

south end of the Chiricahua Mountains. Basins adjacent 

to these mountains have lithium deposits. It is easy to 

imagine the glass of fluorine-rich rhyolites weathering 

and devitrifying to release lithium, which migrates to clay 

zones in the basin. Thus, identifying a specific type of host 

rock-here, topaz rhyolite-could be used to locate 

mineral deposits (Be, Li, U, and Th) in various environments near to the source. This study serves as an example 

of the type of new exploration models that we need to 

develop and test for other mineral commodities so as to 

develop new resources in Arizona. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF 

GEOLOGIC RESEARCH 

Neotectonic Domains 

• How are the maximum depths of basins determined? 

Reply: Gravity data indicate depth to wellconsolidated basement rocks, which in most places 

underlies any Tertiary basin fill. In Arizona, we commonly find an upper posttectonic basin fill, which is 

essentially undeformed, and a lower syntectonic fill and 

associated volcanic rocks, which typically are well 

deformed. The same general sequence is observed in 

Geotechnical Research Applications 37 
Nevada, and so it is not altogether clear how, quickly and 

easily, we can come up with closely constrained depths 

for late Tertiary basins. What we are seeing with the 

gravity data is the depths of the late Tertiary basins plus 

something else. 

• Are the drill holes superficial? 

Reply: Some are, but some of the drill holes go all 

the way to basement. In areas where we have some 

control, the basin depths range from less than 1 to as 

much as 6--7 km. In central Nevada, more than half of the 

basin fill may be pre-upper Miocene volcanic and sedimentary rocks, and the upper Miocene to Holocene fill 

may represent less than 30 to 40 percent of the total. 

• In seismic profiles, can you distinguish volcanic 

materials from sedimentary materials that might contain 

industrial minerals.? 

Reply: If you've looked carefully at seismicreflection profiles, particularly published profiles, there's 

a good chance you'd agree that this is probably not 

possible, except, possibly, in situations where reliable 

logs of wells data are abundant. Without reliable core or 

well-log data, interpretation of seismic-reflection profiles 

usually is highly subjective. 

Thematic Mapping 

• Use of Landsat photos and interpretation of TM 

data is one of the most positive exploration methods now 

used by private industry for both industrial minerals and 

metals. 

Comments: We in the USGS wish that we could 

afford to use TM data more than we currently are able. 

Since the formation of launching of Eo sat, TM data have 

become too expensive for many research projects. Each 

pixel in the resolution of TM data represents an area 30 

by 30m. The French SPOT satellite data have a resolution of 10 by 10m. Planned systems have much higher 

resolutions that will probably make the TM system 

obsolete. Let's hope we can afford to use these data as 

they become available. 

• What targets does industry particularly look for 

in TM data? 

Reply: We use TM data to identify a particular type 

of mineralogy in basins. If you get the right ratio, for 

example, a pattern for gypsum distribution comes out. If 

you look at the images from different angles, different 

structures emerge, and so structural interpretation 

becomes very useful. On an image-processing machine 

with an experienced operator, you can flip through ratios 

rapidly. A combination of ratioed data may bring something out-a rock type, a certain mineral in a formation, 

or a structure. TM data may be applied to any mineral 

you might want to look for; it's a matter of experimenting 

with the ratios of images. The search may not be direct, 

but indirectly through a combination of structures or 

rock types. Part of the power of the image-processing 

technique is the capability for interactive image viewing. 

Research activity on remote sensing should place 

more emphasis on the identification of aggregate 

resources, particularly those that occur in or near urban 

areas. 

• Can the color variations in volcanic rocks be 

quantified relative to age? 

Reply: Quantification is possible, provided you 

have good information on the ground. However, a single 

image covers many thousands of square kilometers, and 

so collecting ground data can be time consuming and 

labor intensive. 

• What about distinguishing soils? 

Reply: This particular type of imagery would have 

to be modified to enhance more relevant band ratios. 

With appropriate modifications, useful soil data would be 

generated. 

• Some Landsat processing needs to be taken out 

of the hands of specialists closely wedded to technology 

and put in the hands of field geologists. The field persons 

should be the ones flipping through the imagery and 

making interpretations. Some of these techniques are no 

longer state-of-the-art, "black box" -type technology. 

There is no reason why much of this work can't be done 

by the exploration geologist with a little orientation 

training. Indeed, right now it's possible to take subscenes 

on a PC or other computer and develop a workstation for 

$12,000 to $15,000 instead of $100,000. Five years from 

now, it will surely be even less costly. The real problem is 

the size of the data base. On a big TM image, the user 

needs 200 to 300 megabytes of storage capacity; however, 

you can use the subscene technique with present computer capacity. Programs are currently being developed 

that will vastly streamline computer processing of TM 

data. 

Geographic Information Systems 

• The USGS is spending a lot of effort developing 

GIS technology for such purposes as the National Census 

and mineral exploration. Techniques are available for 

overlaying geochemical, geophysical, and geologic data 

for the Western States and for integrating these data with 

Landsat TM imagery. Some of this technology ultimately 

will be available to the Arizona user community in the 

form of a cooperative facility at the USGS' Tucson office. 

• The shortfall in a multidisciplinary interpretation 

has been the fact that the geologic map is not in digital 

format. The USGS intends to have all State geologic 

maps of the Western States on tape, disk, or otherwise 

within the next 2 years. For example, the geologic map of 

Arizona (Beikman, 1986) will be completely digitized 

shortly. In the future, we will take the best available 

maps, scan them, and store them in digital form, available 

38 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
on request. This capability will be accomplished by 1990, 

assuming that the necessary level of funding continues. 

• We have heard of the anticipated population 

explosion in Arizona and the increasing demands for 

industrial minerals expected in the next 5 to 10 years. If 

this workshop group were to reassemble 5 to 10 years 

hence, what would we conclude needed to have been 

done here to anticipate the future demand? First, the 

USGS, AZGS, USBM, ADMMR, BLM, USFS, and 

ASLD will need information in a reliable data system. 

We have already discussed this proposal in several ways, 

but we may not have addressed both whether we would 

need to put an integrated data system together and how 

actually to do it. It seems that at some point we need to 

start looking at what it takes to put together the data for 

user groups ranging from land-use planners to geologists 

and people who are managing specific plots of land. That 

range touches a GIS, and how to make it work. This 

project should have a high priority, possibly the subject of 

another workshop by a similarly representative group of 

participants. 

Conclusions 

• Clearly, having a trained person with a professional geologic background included in data analyses 

adds important additional information and experience to 

data interpretation and avoids reliance solely on rote data 

manipulation. Thus, the USGS' role in mineral exploration should include more than finding geochemical 

anomalies. Professional geologic experience must be 

involved in evaluating what resources that an anomaly 

may indicate to be present. 

• Industry uses geophysical and geochemical 

methods, satellite imagery, and data bases. These are 

exploration tools, but they cannot of themselves find 

mineral deposits. Such tools help to put the explorationist 

into the right area, but it still takes trained professionals 

to make discoveries. The human mind must be involved. 

Application of Resource-Occurrence Models 

Resource-occurrence models have long been recognized and used informally by geoscientists to categorize and compare ore deposits. The economic-geology 

literature is replete with models of individual deposits or 

classes of deposits, such as those by Lindgren (1932), 

Dolbear (1949), and Ridge (1968). Cox and Singer's 

(1986) Mineral Deposit Models provides a more formal, 

systematic summary of the various descriptive and gradetonnage models of ore deposits. Descriptions of two 

types of current deposit models are included here that 

may bring the model concept into focus for industrial 

minerals. Such models may be useful for resource assessment and exploration for industrial rocks and minerals. 

First, Orris and Bliss' descriptive/statistical model is 

useful in the systematic characterization of deposits and 

the resource assessment of larger areas. Second, Nations 

and Ranney's analysis of the geologic environment of a 

basin is particularly useful in the exploration for 

sedimentary-rock types of industrial minerals. 

INDUSTRIAL-ROCK- AND MINERAL-RESOURCEOCCURRENCE MODELS 

By G.J. Orris and J.D. Bliss 

Introduction 

Government-sponsored studies have been evaluating the probable future availability of mineral resources 

for many decades. Early studies were based on the 

opinions and experiences of expert economic geologists; 

more recent studies, especially in the past 20 to 30 years, 

have become increasingly structured (that is, based on 

standardized data and rules) and quantitative. Major 

advances in methodologies to quantitatively assess fuel 

and metallic-mineral resources have been made, but 

industrial minerals have been largely ignored in developing these methodologies, and regional assessments have 

commonly failed to evaluate industrial minerals beyond a 

few scattered passing comments. For many areas in the 

United States, the value of industrial-mineral production 

far exceeds that of metals or fuels, and urbanization has 

lead to increasing demand and inadequate supplies of 

so-called common industrial minerals. This situation 

points to the need and appropriateness for assessment 

methods in evaluating industrial minerals. This discussion summarizes the current status of some assessment 

methodologies used in the USGS's Branch of Resource 

Analysis and the efforts to incorporate an evaluation of 

industrial minerals into this framework. 

Resource Assessments 

Mineral-resource assessments are conducted to 

meet a broad range of needs, including managing of 

public lands, determining the probable future availability 

of mineral resources, and planning exploration for undiscovered mineral resources. Mineral-resource assessment 

involves the overlapping of geology and economics, and it 

requires an understanding of both. The beginning of and 

continuing interest in mineral-resource assessment is 

based on Government requests for guidance on land 

disposition, particularly in areas of limited exploration 

and, commonly, those areas in dispute. The U.S. Government requested that the mineral resources in the 

Boulder Dam area be evaluated (Hewett and others, 

1938). Similarly, Allais (1957) was requested by the 

French Government to evaluate the French Sahara. One 

of the earliest assignments was in 1846 by the Canadian 

Geotechnical Research Applications 39 
Government for William E. Logan to assess the mineral 

potential of Upper Canada as part of a general geologic 

survey. This assignment became a foundation for the 

Geological Survey of Canada (Cargill and Green, 1986). 

The beginning of quantitative mineral-resource 

assessment is rooted in the evaluation of petroleum 

resources (Rice, 1986), an area of study much advanced 

in comparison with the assessment of methodologies for 

most nonfuel minerals. A quantitative assessment by 

Drew and others (1984) gave the undiscovered metallic 

endowments of Cr2 0 3 , Cu, Au, Pb, Mn, Hg, Mo, Ni, Ag, 

W03 , and Zn at the 90-, 50-, and 10-percent-confidence 

levels for undiscovered deposits in USFS wilderness 

areas in the Pacific Mountain system. Methods of assessing metallic-mineral resources are numerous (Harris and 

Agterberg, 1981; Singer and Mosier, 1981), reflecting 

both the range of techniques and the desired end products. 

It may be helpful, at the outset, to define some of 

the underlying terms and concepts used in the following 

discussion of models. A model may be a facsimile in three 

dimensions (Thrush and others, 1968), a word representation to help visualize what may not be directly observable, or a mathematical description. Models consist of 

generally applicable, representative, non-site-specific 

features (Barton, 1986). As modified from Cox and 

Singer (1986), a mineral occun·ence is considered to be an 

unusual concentration of minerals or commodities of 

economic or scientific interest, without regard to economic potential. A mineral deposit is a mineral occurrence of sufficient size, grade, and ore characteristics to 

have economic potential. An ore deposit is a mineral 

deposit that has been tested and has suitable ore characteristics and accessibility for profitable production. 

The Three-Part Method 

Models for industrial rocks and minerals are compatible with and based on the three-part assessment 

method of Singer (1975). Examples of the use of this 

method are by Richter and others (1975), Eberlein and 

Menzie (1978), Grybeck and DeYoung (1978), Hudson 

and DeYoung (1978), Mackevett and others (1978), 

Hodges and others (1984), and the U.S. Geological 

Survey and others (1987). In simplified terms, the threepart method includes the following considerations: (1) 

Areas are delineated according to the type of deposits 

permitted by the geology, (2) the amount of metals and 

some ore characteristics are estimated by means of 

grade-tonnage models (to be defined later), and (3) the 

number of undiscovered deposits of each type within 

delineated area( s) is estimated. 

Models Applicable to Industrial Minerals 

A key concept in the three-part assessment method 

is definition of the mineral-deposit type. In their summary of deposit models, Cox and Singer (1986) defined 

"deposit type" as consisting of several deposits "sharing a 

relative wide variety and large number of attributes." The 

systematically arranged shared attributes that represent a 

deposit type compose the descriptive model (Barton, 

1986). An important contribution provided by a welltailored descriptive model is the distinction of essential 

shared features from incidental accessory features that 

may not be present in all such deposits (Barton, 1986). 

Cox and Singer (1986) also noted that these models 

should highlight the more descriptive aspects of deposits 

to help users to recognize the deposit types. 

The format of a descriptive model consists of two 

parts (Cox and Singer, 1986), the regional geologic 

environment of the deposit and the deposit characteristics. Subheadings of the geologic environment include 

rock type, texture, age range, depositional environment, 

tectonic setting, and associated deposit types. The deposit 

description includes mineralogy, texture, structure, ore 

control, weathering, geochemical signature, and exampies of typical deposits. Information in descriptive models for industrial-mineral deposits is largely identical to 

that for metallic-mineral-deposit types. Of the 85 

descriptive models presented by Cox and Singer (1986), 

12 are for deposits of nonmetallic- and (or) industrialmineral commodities, as defined by Harben and Bates 

(1984), including bedded barite (Orris, 1986a), diamond 

placers (Cox, 1986b ), carbonate-hosted asbestos 

(Wrucke and Shride, 1986), serpentine-hosted asbestos 

(Page, 1986), laterite-type bauxite deposits (Patterson, 

1986b ), karst-type bauxite deposits (Patterson, 1986a), 

shoreline Ti (Force, 1986), warm-current-type phosphate 

deposits (Mosier, 1986a), upwelling-type phosphate 

deposits (Mosier, 1986b ), diamond pipes (Cox, 1986a), 

and podiform chromite (Albers, 1986). Mosier and Page 

(1988) recently modified an older descriptive model for 

volcanogenic Mn (Koski, 1986), expanding it to include 

the Franciscan, Cuban, Olympic Peninsulan, and Cyprian 

deposit types. An example of a descriptive model for 

bedded barite is shown in figure 8. Current developments 

of descriptive models for industrial materials attempt to 

identify differences in the chemical and (or) physical 

properties of a commodity from one deposit to the next, 

which materially affect its application. Economic limitations play a larger role in industrial minerals and are part 

of the descriptive models. 

For metals, grade-tonnage models are used to 

describe the economic characteristics of the ores. Ideally, 

the data used in grade-tonnage models should be premining grade and tonnage (Cox and Singer, 1986); tonnages are associated with the lowest cutoff grade used. 

The models are displayed graphically, with grade or 

tonnage plotted against cumulative proportion of deposits. These models show the frequency distribution of 

grade and tonnage. Individual values are shown as points, 

or as a number if deposits overlap. Curves are plotted 

40 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
through the points, and the intercepts of the 90-, 50-, and 

10-percent-confidence levels are given. The total number 

of deposits is given in the upper right corner of the 

diagram (in our examples). Correlations among grades 

and between grade and tonnage are reported only when 

significant at the 1-percent-confidence level (Cox and 

Singer, 1986). Each grade-tonnage model is applicable to 

the population of deposits defined by the descriptive 

model. Examples of a grade-tonnage model for bedded 

barite are shown in figure 9. Grades and tonnages can 

commonly be described by using a statistical distribution-most often, a log-normal distribution, although a 

Model 31b 

small percentage of grade-tonnage models do not exhibit 

a log-normal distribution. Of the 60 grade-tonnage models presented by Cox and Singer (1986), 10 are for 

deposit types that represent nonmetallic-mineral commodities. These models accompany the descriptive 

deposits listed earlier, except that no grade-tonnage 

models were published for diamond placers, diamond 

pipes, and carbonate-hosted asbestos. 

Most grade-tonnage models with log-normal distributions exhibit a characteristic inverted-S-shaped curve. 

The curves for commodities with grades approaching 100 

percent may be truncated concave to the left, such as for 

DESCRIPTIVE HODEL OF BEDDED BARITE 

By Greta J. Orris 

APPROXIMATE SYNONYM Stratiform barite. 

DESCRIPTION Stratiform deposits of barite interbedded with dark-colored cherty and calcareous 

sedimentary rocks. 

GEOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT 

Rock Types Generally dark-colored chert, shale, mudstone, limestone, or dolostone. Also with 

quartzite, argillite, and greenstone. 

Age Range Proterozoic and Paleozoic. 

Depositional Environment Epicratonic marine basins or embayments (often with smaller local 

restricted basins). 

Tectonic Setting(s) Some deposits associated with hinge zones controlled by synsedimentary faults. 

Associated Deposit Types Sedimentary exhalative Zn-Pb (see fig. 158). 

DEPOSIT DESCRIPTION 

Mineralogy Barite ±minor witherite ±minor pyrite, galena, or sphalerite. Barite typically 

contains several percent organic matter plus some H2s in fluid inclusions. 

Texture/Structure Stratiform, commonly lensoid to poddy; ore laminated to massive with associated 

layers of barite nodules or rosettes; barite may exhibit primary sedimentary features. Small 

country rock inclusions may show partial replacement by barite. 

Alteration Secondary barite veining; weak to moderate sericitization has been reported in or near 

some deposits in Nevada. 

Ore Controls Deposits are localized in second- and third-order basins. 

Weathering Indistinct, generally resembling limestone or dolostone; occasionally weathered-out 

rosettes or nodules. 

Geochemical Signature Ba; where peripheral to sediment-hosted Zn-Pb, may have lateral (Cu)-Pb-ZnBa zoning or regional manganese haloes. High organic C content. 

EXAMPLES 

Meggen, GRMY 

Magnet Cove, USAR 

Northumberland, USNV 

(Krebs, 1981) 

(Scull, 1958) 

( Shawe and others, 1969) 

Figure 8. Descriptive model for bedded barite deposits (from Orris, 1986a). 

Geotechnical Research Applications 41 
barite (fig. 9) and glass sand, as well as for other 

industrial commodities that commonly occur in highgrade (more than 90 percent) deposits. Grade-tonnage 

models prove useful for some, but not all, industrial 

commodities. 

Grade-tonnage models are useful in differentiating 

two graphite deposit types (figs. lOA, lOB), disseminated-flake graphite and amorphous graphite (J.D. Bliss 

and D.M. Sutphin, unpub. data, 1989). Although the 

grades of these two deposit types differ, the tonnages are 

1.0 

0 n = 25 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

0.2 

0.1 

0.0 

BARITE GRADE IN PERCENT 

MILLION TONNES 

Figure 9. Grade (A)-tonnage (8) model for bedded barite 

deposits (from Orris, 1986a). 

similar, and their carbon contents are essentially the 

same (fig. lOC). 

For some industrial minerals, grades are not applicable; the only requirement is that the material meet 

some minimum level of purity. These types of industrialmineral deposits can be best modeled by using their 

material contents. Two contained-materials models developed to date include one for feldspar in pegmatites (fig. 

11) and one for travertine deposits along streams in 

Virginia (fig. 12). Contained-materials models will probably be developed for several industrial minerals. Even 

diamonds in placers are best modeled by using such a 

model (fig. 13). 

For materials that are required to be of high purity, 

the distribution of impurities becomes critically important. These minor constituents can be modeled in the 

same way as in a grade-tonnage model, except that here 

it is an impurity model. These types of models describe 

such impurities as iron or aluminum distributed in glasssand deposits in Canada that may affect utilization of the 

commodity. 

Although various model types are available to 

describe the quality of materials from industrial-mineral 

deposits, model development can be complex and is not 

always successful. One example of a particularly difficult 

problem involves diamond kimberlites. Diamonds mined 

from these deposits are always a mixture of two commodities-industrial diamonds and gem stones. The 

value of the gem stones is potentially orders of magnitude 

higher than that of the industrial diamonds. Here, 

deposit-specific models need to be developed to determine the proportions of diamonds that consist of gem 

stone, the average size of the stones, and the distribution 

of diamonds within the deposit. 

Model development is plagued by several problems, including size biasing (that is, only larger deposits 

are used), which can be due to several causes, including 

incomplete reporting or truncation due to economics. 

Reliable models are more likely if based on data from 

more deposits. To meet the need to develop these 

models, a data base describing grade, tonnage, and other 

attributes in 2,000 and 3,000 industrial-mineral deposits 

is under development. In addition to the models already 

published, about 50 grade-tonnage, descriptive, and 

related models have been or are in preparation for about 

29 industrial commodities. 

Spatial Models 

All the model types identified up to this point have 

been concerned, in the broadest sense, with the characteristics of the ore. To make a mineral-resource assessment, however, an estimate of the number of undiscovered deposits is needed (see preceding section). This is 

one of the most difficult tasks for the economic geologist. 

To provide assistance in this area, spatial models need to 

42 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
be available. Both the development and use of spatial 

models need to be consistent with deposit type (as 

described by a descriptive model) and with ore characteristics (as described by a grade-tonnage model, 

contained-materials model, impurity model, and (or) 

deposit-specific model). Spatial models are just beginning to be developed for metallic-mineral deposits. To 

develop this type of model, first, well-explored areas that 

contain a specific deposit type need to be identified; it 

must be assumed that all deposits have been found. 

Second, the area must be delineated, using rules based 

on geologic and other criteria that can be applied elsewhere. Such criteria might include lithology, stratigraphy, 

metamorphic grade, and intrusive-rock types, among 

others. Given the number of deposits and the size of the 

permissible area, a mineral-deposit density can be computed (expressed in number of deposits per square 

kilometer). Example calculations are in Bliss and others 

(1987) and Mosier and Page (1988). Given deposits 

within a well-explored area, not only can deposit density 

be calculated, but also discrete distributions can be fitted. 

To date, most distributions seem to be best described by 

a Poisson or negative-binomial distribution. For bedded 

barite deposits in Nevada, the Devonian Slaven Chert has 

a density of 74 X 10"3 deposits/km2

, best described by a 

Poisson distribution (fig. 14). 

Spatial models are sensitive to both the scale and 

level of reporting in a target area. With better information, several spatial models may be applicable to the 

U) 

1-

Ui 

0 

c.. 

UJ 0.6 a 

u. 

0 

z 0.5 0 

i= 

a: 

0 

c.. 

0 0.4 a: 

c.. 

GRAPHITE GRADE IN PERCENT 

Figure 10. Grade and tonnage models. A, Grades in disseminated and amorphous graphite deposits. 8, Tonnages in 

disseminated and amorphous graphite deposits. C, Tonnages of contained carbon in disseminated and amorphous 

graphite deposits (from J.D. Bliss and D.M. Sutphin, unpub. 

data, 1988). 

same deposit type where areas are nested. An example of 

a nested spatial model is for magnesite deposits in California. Soil maps developed by the USDA for an area in 

two counties in central California allow an additional 

90-percent reduction in the area defined as permissible 

for magnesite on the basis of host geology-a substantial 

decrease in the area to be searched! 

Summary 

Work is underway to develop models for industrialmineral deposits for use in the three-part method of 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

DISSEMINATED (N: 83) 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

0.3 

0.2 

0.1 B o.o23 1.3 

0.051 

TONNES (X 100,000) 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

0.4 

03 

0.2 

0.055 .,._2.212 

0.1 c 0.0 L_ _ _L__...L__...L__....L.._.....L._....L_~---:-:1-----:-L-~ 

0.0016 0.0063 0.025 0.1 0.4 1.6 6.3 25 100 400 1,600 

TONNES (X 10,000) 

Figure 10.-Continued. 

Geotechnical Research Applications 43 
mineral-resource assessment. Descriptive models are 

needed for step 1; grade-tonnage, contained-materials, 

impurity, and deposit-specific models for step 2; and 

spatial models for step 3. Although we have focused on 

the models used in assessment, we recognize a continuing need to conduct research in deposit genetics, as well 

as the role the exploration model plays in the successful 

search for undiscovered deposits of industrial minerals. 

Nevertheless, we expect that the models we already have 

and hope to develop will contribute to the needs of those 

1.0 00 

0.9 

0.8 

0.7 

rJ) 

1-

Ui 0.6 

0 

a.. 

w 

0 

u_ 0.5 0 

z 

0 

i= 

a: 0.4 0 

a.. 

0 

a: 

a.. 0.3 

0.2 

0.1 

0.0 

0.0016 100 400 1,600 

TONNES (X 10,000) 

Figure 11. Contained-materials model for feldspar in pegmatite deposits. 

rJ) 

1-

Ui 

0 

a.. 

w 

0 

~ 

z 

0 

f= 

09 

0.8 

0.7 

0.6 

0.5 

~ 0.4 a.. 

0 

g: 0.3 

0 2 

0 1 

n= 24 

100 400 1,600 

TONNES (X 10,000) 

Figure 12. Contained-materials model for travertine-marl in 

deposits along streams in Virginia. 

making quantitative mineral-resource assessments, as 

well as to our understanding of deposit genetics, as they 

already have for some metallic-mineral-deposit types. 

GEOLOGIC MODEL OF A CENOZOIC BASIN 

IN ARIZONA 

By J.D. Nations and W.D.R. Ranney 

The Cenozoic basins of Arizona are the sites for 

various industrial minerals. One of these basins, the 

Verde Basin, illustrates of the geometry and facies relations that help to explain and predict the occurrence of 

0.2 fI 

I 

I 

I 

I I 0.1 t 

~ 0.005 

I 

I 

o.o L 0 0016 0 0063 0 025 01 

0.18 

'____L_ 

04 16 6.3 

t> 1N! /,II~LL· [JIAill•tJ[i'C, 

MILLIONS OFCAAATS 

I 

I __ , 

l 

) 

i 

I 

i 

I 

--1 

. I 

-'___L__~I 

25 100 400 1,600 

Figure 13. Contained-materials model for carats of diamonds in diamond placers. 

PROBABILITY OF ONE OR MORE DEPOSIT FOR GIVEN CELL 

_J 

_J 

1.0 LU 

0 

a: 

LU 

0.. 

0.8 (f) 

1-

• us 

> II ~ 1- 0.6 LU :J II 3 0 iii LL < ~ 4 0 Ill 

0 0.4 D 5 a: a: LU a. D CD 6 ~ 

IIIII 7 :::> 

0.2 z 

~ 

:::> 

~ 

0.0 z 1 0 40 ~ 

CELL AREA (KM2) 

Figure 14. Spatial model for bedded barite in the Slaven 

Chert, given tracts (cells) of 10 and 40 km2 . 

44 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
industrial minerals. Geologists familiar with the distribution of Cenozoic rocks in Arizona will recognize that 

most Cenozoic rocks occur mostly in present -day topographic basins. Earlier, Tertiary rocks deposited on the 

Colorado Plateaus, at the base of the Mogollon Rim in 

the transition zone, and in the Basin and Range province 

do not conform to present -day topography. This occurrence reflects their deposition before basin-and-range 

disturbance, which is responsible for most of the modern 

topographic features on the landscape. These topographic basins are visible on a physiographic map (fig. 

15). Most of the Cenozoic stratigraphic units occur in the 

Basin and Range province, some in the transition zone, 

and a few on the Colorado Plateaus. In cross section, the 

age distribution of the rocks illustrates a pattern that is 

controlled by the tectonic evolution of Arizona. The 

earliest Tertiary sedimentary rocks on the Colorado 

Plateaus are of Eocene age. Most of the Cenozoic 

deposits in the Basin and Range province young from 

southeast to northwest and into the transition zone (fig. 

16). The ages are based on radiometric and paleontologic 

data or stratigraphic correlations for various Tertiary 

sedimentary rocks in basins. 

The Verde and Tonto Basins (fig. 15) are midTertiary extensional basins that contain diverse types of 

basin-fill sedimentary rocks. Exposure of the sedimentary rocks in these basins by dissection allows stratigraphic and paleoecologic analysis and the construction 

of depositional models that may be useful for predicting 

the composition of poorly dissected basins in the rest of 

the Basin and Range province. The erosional dissection 

of basins in the transition zone was a response to 

lowering of the base level, probably by the opening of the 

Gulf of California, about 5 to 6 Ma. Headward erosion, 

after this event, eventually caused the dissection of the 

Tertiary basins at higher elevations in the transition zone. 

During and after basin-and-range extension, the Verde 

Basin was filled by sediment of the Verde Formation, 

which ranges in age from about 8 Ma (Lewis, 1983) to 

about 2 Ma (Lindsay and others, 1975). 

The long axis of the Verde Basin trends northwestsoutheast, parallel to the structural grain developed 

during the basin-and-range disturbance in the Western 

United States (fig. 17). Proto lithic sediment of the Verde 

Formation filled this basin to about 4,600 ft above sea 

level, on the basis of their present elevation. Much of the 

Verde Formation is exposed along the Verde River, 

where it has been eroded to a depth of about 1,600 ft. 

Erosion probably began in the early Pleistocene, because 

the youngest lacustrine sedimentary rocks are of Blancan 

age, on the basis of fossils of land mammals (Lindsay and 

others, 1975). Volcanic rocks in the south end of the 

basin are part of the Hackberry Mountain volcanic field, 

which functioned, to some extent, as a dam at the south 

end of the basin because volcanism coincided with subsidence and sedimentation. The bounding surfaces along 

the eastern margin of the basin, where the Verde Formation overlaps the base of the Mogollon Rim, are 

primarily topographic. In the vicinity of Sedona, the 

Verde Formation apparently was deposited on an extensive pediment eroded down to the Permian red beds 

during the development of the Colorado Plateaus escarpment. The Verde also overlaps remnants of earlier 

Tertiary sedimentary and volcanic rocks. The western 

margin of the basin is formed by the Black Hills. North of 

Jerome, the Verde Formation overlaps folded Pennsylvanian to Permian red beds, and to the southeast, in the 

vicinity of Camp Verde, Ariz., it has a fault contact and 

exhibits drag folding, dipping as much as 45° into the 

basin. The basin margins are structurally controlled on 

the west. The rocks beneath the Verde Formation range 

in age throughout the Basin and Range province from 

Proterozoic to Miocene, depending on the amount of 

erosion that had occurred before subsidence. 

The timing of subsidence is known because the 

youngest volcanic rocks of the Hackberry Mountain 

volcanic field and the Hickey Formation, which underlie 

much of the basin, are about 10 Ma old. They have been 

displaced downward by the Verde fault from the top of 

the Black Hills to the bottom of the valley-a throw of as 

much as 6,000 ft between Jerome and Cottonwood. 

Movement on this fault was apparently intermittent 

during deposition of the Verde Formation. 

Along the eastern margin of the basin, fine clastic 

and carbonate sediment was deposited against Permian 

red beds on the plateau escarpment. Generally, the facies 

relations in the Verde Basin are typical of those of an 

internally drained basin, with coarse clastic materials 

near the margins, finer clastic materials toward the 

center, and mudstones and carbonates in the center of 

the basin (fig. 17). Evaporites are concentrated in the 

southeast end of the basin near the Verde fault and the 

Hackberry Mountain volcanic center. Carbonate content 

generally increases in the upper (Pliocene) part of the 

Verde Formation. 

Coarse-grained clastic near-shore facies are interbedded with lacustrine facies in many places but are most 

abundant along the western margin of the basin. Vertical 

variation in the coarseness of the clastic materials suggests that movement along the Verde fault was episodic. 

The Verde Formation is thickest near the faulted western 

margin and fines upward in the section. Carbonate 

content generally increases upward through interbedded 

red sand, silt, and limestone, and culminates in thick 

lacustrine limestone in the upper third of the basin fill. 

Near the northwest end of the Verde Basin, a 4.5-Ma lava 

flow is interbedded with Verde Formation near the base 

of an 800-ft-thick section. A vertebrate locality at the top 

of this section indicates a Blancan age of approximately 2 

Ma. These and other dated interbedded lava flows and 

fossil occurrences provide a reasonably well documented 

chronology within the Verde Basin. 

Geotechnical Research Applications 45 
Distally from the shoreline, silt- and sand-size 

fluvial and lacustrine sedimentary deposits increase in 

abundance. Carbonate sedimentary rocks increase in 

abundance toward the center of the basin, where they 

,,.,1 

(_ J TONTO BASIN 

0 VERDE BASIN 

form massive limestone deposits. Massive carbonates 

toward the center of the basin are commonly composed 

of highly porous travertine or tufa. South of Camp Verde, 

Ariz., a thick mudstone sequence was deposited; these 

Figure 15. Physiographic diagram of Arizona, showing Miocene to Holocene topographic features, major drainages, and 

locations of major cities (modified from Smiley and others, 1984). 

46 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
Safford basin ..... . . . * Duncan basin .... . . . . * 

Nipper Fm. ..... . . . . ......- St. David Fm. ... . . . . . -~ 

Quiburis Fm. ...... . . -- ~ 1-

(f) Mineta Fm. .. . . . . . . . . ....... <! 

w Cloudburst Fm. ... . . . 

I -·- Whitetail Cgl. 1- ..... . . r\..-- - - - - + :::> Pantano Fm. - + 0 .... . . . . . 

(f) San Rafael basin ..... ~* 

(f) Nogales Fm. ......... ·- - - -- -(\.. 

~ w Helmet Fgl. .. . . . .. . . - <..9 z z Tucson basin . . . . . . . .---.. ::::> <{ Red Rock basin ...... - a: 

>-

Daniels Cgl. ......... ·- - -r\. 

0 

0::: z Locomotive Fgl. .... . . ·- - - -rL. - <{ <{ Picacho basin ........ 

~ ---· 

z Higley basin .. . . . . . . -- - - - - - z 1- -· 

w - (f) Paradise basin ..... . . - -r\. 

~ (f) w <{ ~ "Chalk Canyon" Fm. r\.- - CD *-iL 

0 I Rock Springs beds 1- .... +- -r\. 

w 

(f) :::> Milk Creek beds 0 ... . . +•- -(\. (f) Luke basin ... . . . . . - - - - -(\. 

>- Kinter Fm . . . 

0::: Yuma basin (marine) +-------- <{ 

- Bouse Fm. ....... .. fe-

~ 

0::: 1- Chapin Wash ...... . . 

w (f) --·- w Artillery Fm. I I I • • 1- ~ 

. . . . . . . 

:r: 

1-

Big Sandy Fm. ... . . . ~ 

lL a:: Red Lake basin ..... ......__ - -+ 

0 0 

z Muddy Creek Fm. .. . . 

>- z Payson-Tonto basin ... - - - -r\.. 

<.9 0 

0 - w Bloody basin ......... (\._ ~- - - (\. 

I-

_J - z Verde Fm. . . ... . ..... *-• ~-

0 (f) 0 

z N Hickey Fm. ..... ......._... z <{ 

0 ~ Perkinsville Fm. .. . . . . e-f-e 

0::: 

I 0 :::) Coconino Basin *---

0 0 <{ "Rim gravels" <{ .. . . . - - - - - ·- - - - -. w a: I- Baca basin - Eager Fm. 'ti---e- - -n.. 

0 <{ 

_j _j Bidahochi Fm. ...... ·----- 0 Q_ Chuska Ss. u ......... --n.. 

r. (.{) r0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

~ I[) - CiJ rr r ? ~ 

w w w z w z w z w z w w u w u z u 

0 u 0 w 0 - 0 <..9 u w _j - - 0 _j 

Q_ ~ _j w <{ 

0 Q_ 

Figure 16. Chronology of Tertiary rocks in Arizona. •, K-Ar ages; *,fossil correlations (ages); +,lithologic correlations 

(after Nations, 1984). 

Geotechnical Research Applications 47 
clay beds are contorted by slumping, and scour-and-fill 

structures are common. 

Environmental indicators in the Verde Formation 

signify a dominantly lacustrine environment, but fossils of 

aquatic plant and elephant tracks are also found, probably indicating a marshy area rather than a deep lake. 

Farther to the south, near the Hackberry Mountain 

volcanic center, the mudstones are interbedded with 

gypsum and halite. South of Camp Verde, the gypsum 

currently is being mined, and halite was mined by the 

prehistoric inhabitants of Verde Valley. Thick deposits of 

halite and other more exotic evaporite minerals have also 

been identified-thenardite, glauberite, and others. The 

localization of evaporites in the southeast end of the 

basin suggests that it was the topographically lowest area 

during deposition and that evaporation occurred there 

during times of low water level. Common deformation of 

these mudstones and evaporites adjacent to the Verde 

fault indicates that movement on the fault system continued after they were deposited during the late Miocene. 

A model based on measured sections and subsurface data indicates that the Verde Formation rests on 

Paleozoic strata and Tertiary volcanic rocks and has a 

total thickness of approximately 3,000 ft. Fossil occurrences and radiometric ages on interbedded lava flows 

provide chronologie control for a stratigraphic analysis of 

the Verde Formation. Interbedded lavas near the eastern 

margin of the Verde Basin are dated at about 5 Ma, 

which is the boundary between the Miocene and 

Pliocene. Restoration of the Verde Formation indicates 

that the uppermost beds were deposited about 4,600 ft 

above sea level, on the basis of their present elevation, 

and included lacustrine sedimentary deposits (carbonates and fine-grained clastic materials), coarse-grained 

marginal facies, evaporites, and interbedded volcanic 

rocks. The Verde sedimentary rocks overlap the Paleozoic erosional surface to the north, abut the Verde fault 

to the west, and are interbedded with volcanic rocks to 

the south. A generalized axial cross section shows the 

lithofacies within the basin (fig. 18). A cross section 

normal to the axis shows the distribution of these facies 

across the basin (fig. 19). 

In contrast, the Tonto Basin, 60 mi southeast of the 

Verde Basin (fig. 15), is filled primarily with mud. 

Coarse-grained debris flows preceded deposition of 

much in the basin center and are laterally equivalent 

along its margins (fig. 20). Only minor amounts of 

carbonate rocks or evaporites are present. Basin subsidence also occurred earlier than in the Verde Basin, with 

initiation of basin filling about 19 Ma. 

To use such models for mineral-resource prediction, the explorationist needs to understand the facies 

distributions in greater detail. Nevertheless, this brief 

analysis demonstrates that such basin models can be 

constructed and used for the prediction of the occurrence 

of some types of sedimentary resources. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF 

RESOURCE MODELS 

Resource-Occurrence Models 

• Both academic and USGS constituencies recognize the importance of ore-deposit models and model 

development for resource assessment. Does industry 

recognize this technology as an important part of their 

exploration program? More to the point, is this an area of 

interest in which more communication between industry, 

academia, and the USGS could provide constructive 

criticism and collaboration? 

Reply: Models are important tools for the minerals 

industry, and they are avidly examined as they are published. Industry, however, is not likely to contribute their 

own ideas on the subject because of proprietary interests.Somehow, in the near future, there should be an 

attempt to correct this unfortunate situation. 

• How are models used (if at all) by other Government agencies or industry exploration groups? 

Reply: Models are useful in that they can be tested! 

• The USGS and USBM have a program of 

resource assessment and appraisal mandated by their 

organic acts. To accomplish this program, they need 

some mechanism by which information from a piece of 

geography can be put together with information from 

Section 

Number 

Index of Measured Sections Shown in Figures 17, 18, 19 

I. House Mountain. Section measured by Twenter and Metzger (1962); and Nations 

(1974); NE 1/4, sec .. 4, T. 1S N., R. S E. toNE 1/4, sec. 29, T. 16 N., R. S E. 

Fossil localities: NAU 42, 7I, 43, 44, 4S. 

2. Sedona Interchange. Section measured by Nations and others (1981); NWI/4, sec. 

20, T. IS N., R. 6 E. Fossi!Iocality: NAU 30. 

3. Hog Canyon. Section measured by Nations and others (198I); SE 1/4, T. IS N., R. 

S E. 

4. Wet Beaver Creek. Section measured by Twenter and Metzger (I962); SE 1/4, sec. 

I7, T. I4 N., R. S E. 

S. Camp Verde north. Section measured by Twenter and Metzger (1962); NE I/4, sec. 

32, toNE 1/4, sec. 32, toNE I/4, sec. 28, T. I4 N., R. S E. 

6. Camp Verde south. Section measured by Twenter and Metzger (1962); SE I/4, sec. 

I, to NW I/4, sec. I, T. I3 N., R. S E. 

7. Clear Creek. Section measured by Bressler and Butler (1978); sec. I2, T. 13 N., R. 

S E. 

8. Arizona Verde #I oil test. NW I/4, sec. I4, T. 13 N., R. S E. Lithologic data based 

on generalized sample log in Arizona Oil and Gas Conservation Commission files. 

9. Wingfield Mesa. Section measured by Twenter and Metzger (I962); NW I/4 sec. I, 

T. I2 N., R. S E. to SW I/4, sec. 2S, T. I3 N., R. S E. 

IO. Hackberry Mountain-Verde River composite section. Section measured by McKee 

and Elston (1980), from Cottonwood Wash to Hackberry Mountain, approximately 

from SW I/4, sec. 36, T. 13 N., RF. S E. to sec. IS, T. I2 N., R. 6 E. 

II. Minter Wash. Section measured by Twenter and Metzger (1962); SW I/4; sec. 2, T. 

I4 N., R. 4 E. 

I2. Arizona Verde #72-3 stratigraphic test hole; sec. 9, T. IS N., R. 3 E. 

I3. Clarkdale. Section measured by Cassell (1980); SE I/4 toNE I/4, sec. 7, T. I6 N., 

R. 3 E. Fossil localities: NAU 7S (=MNA I8I). 

I4. Buckboard Wash. Section measured by Nations and others (198I); SW I/4, sec. 25, 

T. 17 N., R. 3 E., to NW 1/4, sec. 9, T. I6 N., R. 3 E. Fossil localities: NAU 28, 

74, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 73, 40, 38, 39, 41. 

IS. Anderson Butte. Section measured by Twenter and Metzger ( I962); NW I/4, sec. 

I7,T.17N.,R.4E. 

48 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
B 

R3E. 

Jerome ~· o 

0 4 miles 

VERDE 

A 

R.6E. 

-~-

/~ : 0 ~ .0 

:. ~ 

~ 0 ~-. ":) 

··• 

I 

10 A8• 

·-Hackberry 

Mfn. 

BASIN 

R.7E. 

T.I7N. 

T.l6 N. 

T.I5N. 

T.l4 N. 

T.I3N. 

T.12N. 

EXPLANATION 

Q) Outcrop area of middle Miocene to Pliocene Verde Formation 

CJ:i/ Outcrop area of Oligocene to lower Miocene sedimentary rocks 

--- Lines of cross section 

• Measured sect ion 

o Borehole 

Figure 17. Generalized geologic map of Verde Valley, showing outcrop limits of the Miocene to Pliocene 

Verde Formation and Tertiary sedimentary rocks older than the Verde, and lines of cross sections A-A' (fig. 

19) and B-8' (fig. 18). 

Geotechnical Research Applications 49 
01 

0 

~ 

§" 

:::s 

II) 

~~~~ 

:::s 

Q. 

c 

~ 

[ 

:a 

0 

(') 

~ 

II) 

:::s 

Q. 

~ 

:;· 

(I) 

!. 

:a 

(I) 

"' 0 

c 

c:; 

(I) 

"' I

~ ;. 

"' :::s" 

0 

"'0 

"tl 

0 

(') 

(I) 

(I) 

Q. 

:;· 

ca 

"' 

s· 

HACKBERRY MOUNTAIN 

VOLCANIC CENTER 

ELEVATION 

4600' 

4000' 

3000' 

2000' 

\ el 5BOO' 

\ 

" 

t 

p 

M 

I 

0 

c 

E 

N 

E 

I 

~ Civ.. 

of:::-~ ~~ ~ 

,'(JQo"' v.."'o QJo- c)f::, 

~(l :j ~ r:,"'' ,t>"' 

th"-~q, ~b (;0... ~~ ~0... 

<}.::,0; <:';:;, ._6 ~· f::Q. 

J' § C' <i <Jo 

10 9 ( 8 .,7 6 

~ ~0 

,t>"' ::,"-

l 

0 """ l :ro"' 0 

f::Q. 'Q;q. ~~ 

<Jo :r"' .;i 

5 4 II 

RESTORED LATE 

\ 

i -a I 

3~ C"'l~ I ~ ? "(]J ' (/)~ 

Jl Informal unit of Elston and others ( 197 4). 

PLIOCENE DEPOSITIONAL SURFACE 

CARBONATE 

CLASTIC 

CARBONATE 

":> 

~ ~ """ "' ,t>"' ~0 

~q,ov.. ....... 0-<:- l ~~c}IJ t? ?o * <' ~ 6 QJ"' " (J 

12 13 14 

.. ~ 

~?J"' 

<:' 0 

, ... <:ct:>"' 

" 

15 

0 w 

~ 

~ 

El 

8 

MOGOLLON RIM 

el. 7000' I 

I 

EXPLANATION 

Clastic sediments 

Evaporite sediments 

Carbonate sediments 

0 CHERT 

Volcanic rocks 

6 TUFF 

~ Measured sections 

~ Borehole 

e Isotopic age 

(*PREVIOUSLY UNPUBLISHED) 

• Paleomagnetic correlation 

.. Fossil occurrence 

Jj MIOCENE AND OLIGOCENE SEDIMENTARY ROCKS. 

Figure 18. Stratigraphic cross section along northwest-southeast axis of the Verde Basin, showing facies relations in the Verde Formation. 
other pieces of geography to make a national assessment. 

The only way to do it is probabilistically. 

Geologic Models 

• Do you have any information on the ground 

water in the basins? 

Reply: Yes, there have been some good studies of 

the ground-water system in the Verde Basin, most notably by Twenter and Metzger (1963). The data for the 

Tonto Basin are uncertain. Ground water in the Verde 

Basin is mostly fresh, very low in salinity, and certainly 

not a brine. 

• How did rates of deposition change over time in 

the Verde Basin? 

Reply: Basin filling was much more rapid in the 

Miocene than later in the Pliocene. About the beginning 

of the Pleistocene, the area was subjected to erosion. 

A' 

HACKBERRY MOUNTAIN 

VOLCANIC CENTER 

ELEVATION 

4600' 

4000' 

3000' 

M 

I 

0 

c 

E 

N 

E 

I 

2C·C•C ! 

el 5800' 

4 

DEPOSITIONAL 

~~ 

~~~?~? 

~\II I ~ ~? 

0~ ~ ' ~ 2 PALEOZOIC ROCKS 

3 2 

SURFACE 

• Were the Tonto and Verde Basins once connected by a river system? 

Reply: The basins were part of a single drainage 

system, but not since basin-and-range faulting. Previously, after the Laramide orogeny and until middle 

Tertiary time, the drainage from the Colorado Plateaus 

might have crossed these basin areas. 

• There was commercial production of sodium 

sulfate in the early days in the halite area; it was also an 

aboriginal source. The asymmetry of the location of the 

halite deposits is interesting. They are not far from the 

Verde fault, and they are not centrally located. We 

shouldn't think that all industrial minerals in Arizona 

occur in basins. There are many potentially important, 

recently discovered types of industrial-mineral deposits 

that have not been addressed here. In the past 5 to 6 

years, USGS-AZGS projects in the Kofa area have found 

about 10 exposures of massive quartz-kyanite rocks 

HOUSE MOUNTAIN 

SHIELD VOLCANO 

EXPLANATION 

0 Clastic sediments 

~ Evaporite sediments 

~ Carbonate sedimePitS 

0 CHERT 

0 Volcanic rocks 

6 TUFF 

~ Measured sections 

U Borehole 

• Isotopic age 

( •PREVIOUSLI' UNPUBLISHED) 

Paleomagnetic • correlation 

• Fossil occurrence 

Stdono 

A 

,' MOGOLLON R!M 

•' 7000' 

J} Informal unit of Elston and others (1974). 3.1 Miocene and Oligocene sedimentary rocks. 

~ Miocene basalt. 

Figure 19. Stratigraphic cross section across southeast end of the Verde Basin, showing facies relations in the Verde 

Formation. 

Geotechnical Research Applications 51 
M.S. 5 6 

SEA-LEVEL 

ELEVATION 

2600' 

2500' 

2400' 

2300' 

2200' 

2100' 

2000' 

1900' 

1800' 

1700' 

1600' 

1500' 

1400' 

1300' 

1200' 

EXPLANATION 

~GYPSUM 

f-----J MUDSTONE 

t..:..:3 SILTSTONE 

D SANDSTONE 

(;3 CONGLOMERATE 

~DACITE 

I~ 61 BASALT 

2 

? 

I 8 II 

Compos•te; projected 

below surface 

I 

I 

8 

I 

I 

? 

9 

I 

10 

TB-12 

19.4 Mo 

VERT I CAL SCALE : t" = 100' 

Figure 20. Stratigraphic cross section along axis of the Tonto Basin, showing basin-fill and facies relations of 

Cenozoic rocks (from Nations, 1988). 

52 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
containing 70 to 80 percent k:yanite. Other bedrock units 

contain dumortierite, rutile, and other minerals. These 

are massive pyrite-andalusite schists and massive deposits of pyrophyllite, aggregating hundreds of millions of 

tons in beds several hundred feet thick. There are many 

possibilities besides those in the basins. In the Kofa area, 

these deposits are associated with Jurassic hydrothermal 

events or Cretaceous metamorphism. The k:yanite-rich 

rocks, for example, were probably an advanced argillicalteration zone before metamorphism. 

Geotechnical Research Applications 53 

Meeting Information Needs 

L.D. Fellows, Moderator 

The users of resource information range widely, 

from those concerned with governmental processes 

involving the legislative, legal, or administrative disposition of public lands that contain these resources, to 

private industry exploration and the development of the 

resources therein. Although the particular needs of each 

of these constituencies may vary in considerable detail, 

there also is a strong overlapping interest. Identification 

of these needs is an important first step to assure that 

specific aspects of the needs are not overlooked and that 

users become more appreciative of the requirements 

placed on the others-whether by law or economic 

survival. In the following sections, the specific concerns 

and requirements of legislators, the mining industry, 

State and Federal Government land managers, the 

Indian Nations, and local communities are considered. 

A Legislative Point of View 

The resource industry operates in a political world, 

and the legislative system needs to be well informed 

about resource issues to foster industrial growth in 

Arizona, while, at the same time, it is protecting the 

environment. Senator Doug Todd represents Tempe 

district No. 27 in the Arizona Legislature. 

CURRENT POLITICAL REALITIES FOR THE 

RESOURCE INDUSTRY 

By Senator Doug Todd 

Introduction 

As you may know, I was a farmer in the Tempe 

area, dealing with the earth and related problems for 

many years before I entered politics. Not too long ago, I 

didn't know the difference between mass wasting and a 

Precambrian outcrop. I now have been from the Coconino Sandstone, all the way through the Tapeats Sandstone and Redwall Limestone, down to the Vishnu 

Schist. My association in the legislature with the naturalresources constituency has been most enjoyable. 

I'm going to address some of the current political 

realities for industrial rock and mineral resources in 

Arizona. In particular, I'd like to share with you my 

perspective after having served 10 sessions in the Arizona 

House and Senate. 

My legislative involvement with geology and geologists began with a discussion of the licensing of geologists and assayers in the State. Most recently, I've sponsored a bill that makes petrified wood the official State 

fossil. It's important, however, to recognize that I'm only 

1 of 90 legislators-there are 89 others. Contrary to what 

you might want to believe, most of them don't give a rap 

about what happens to geologists or anything geologic. 

Part of the reason for this is the poor communication 

between the geologic profession and the legislature. 

Impact of Legislation on Resources 

Many legislative items go on daily that may have a 

bearing on you as geologists and producers of industrial 

minerals. Currently, the legislature is facing many problems in addition to balancing the budget. We're looking 

at ways to address these problems-raising taxes, revenue enhancement, or plugging loopholes. Some of the 

things that happen in this process let the legislature know 

that there's something going on in the world of geology .I 

think that we're mostly aware that the Superconducting 

Super Collider project proposal for Arizona has seen a 

high level of cooperation between our two universities, 

ASU and the University of Arizona. It has been good to 

see the two geology departments working together on 

this project. If my information is right, the potential of 

the Maricopa Mountains site was first pointed out by a 

member of the AZGS in a review of the initial screening. 

More legislators are now aware that the million or 

million and half dollars which they authorized to advance 

this cause was specifically allocated for geologic surveying of the project site. Increasingly, all of us have become 

more aware of the significance of geology in the past few 

years. 

Meeting Information Needs 55 
Tomorrow, we will discuss a sand and gravel bill. 

Briefly, it's regulatory, but it addresses something that 

exists out there. We have a State mine inspector who 

doesn't have many mines to inspect, and now sand and 

gravel fall into the mine category. Therefore, these 

deposits are exempt from certain zoning regulations 

outside city limits. We now will address this problem, 

which has great economic impact. 

Let me briefly touch on another example of a 

problem that we've looked at in the past couple of years. 

Up in Verde Valley, one sand and gravel mining operation created a disturbance in the bank downstream. It 

caused local concern, and so the people went to their 

legislator to see whether something could be done about 

the problem. As a result, someone started checking into 

the old statutes and the Constitution, and found that 

ownership of some of these mines, some of which had 

been family businesses for years, possibly was questionable. It was called a problem of navigable streams. In the 

process of becoming a State, ownership of the land under 

those streams was uncertain. The legislature passed a bill 

that is now being tested in the courts to resolve the 

ownership question. Again, there is great economic 

impact that may have a direct relation to your ability as 

geologists to work in the real world. 

Impact of Voters on Legislators 

If there's anything that I'd like to leave with you, it 

is that you cannot afford to remain above the legislative 

process. I've enjoyed my association with geology and 

geologists, largely because of my personal involvement 

with friends in this particular arena. Thus, I've been or 

become an advocate for those things connected with your 

profession and professional interests. But what about the 

89 other legislators? They also need your support for 

input to the legislative process. And that's not all. It's not 

an easy process to try to get a few more votes out of a 

committee or enough to make sure that there are 16 

votes to pass Senate legislation which you feel is conducive or good for Arizona. Thus, I'll leave some ideas for 

your consideration. 

_ Whether you live in Arizona or in another State, 

you have a responsibility to become a voter. A citizen 

who has registered as a voter hopefully knows who his or 

her senator and representatives are. As taxpayers, you 

should want to follow issues before the legislature and to 

search out your legislators to be advocates for you, so as 

to foster getting something passed that's good for the 

State. Those of you in Arizona have three people representing you in the State legislature, in whatever district 

you may live. 

The Political Facts 

How does it work in the real world? Let's say 

there's a bill going through the State legislature. Your 

legislator may not have heard about that bill. A taxpayer 

calls up and says, "I'd like you to support this bill-it's a 

good bill." The legislator might say, "Is that right, what 

did you say your name was, where do you live, have we 

ever met? OK, I'll take a look at the bill." What I'm 

telling you is that if you want an advocate in the State 

legislature for support of a bill, remember that you're 

represented by one senator and two representatives from 

your legislative district. If you want them to do something 

for you at the State capital, have you ever thought what 

you might be able to do for them ?1 

This spring, between now and June, everyone who's 

up for election or reelection has to have petitions filled 

out with the signatures of registered voters who support 

their candidacy. You live in a neighborhood and have 

neighbors, most of whom are registered. About 51 or 52 

percent of those eligible to vote in Arizona are registered. 

A petition has 25 blank lines on it. You and your wife can 

provide two names. Hopefully, you are registered in the 

party of the person you want to support for the legislature. Go out in your neighborhood and complete a 

petition for him or her. When you do this, your name, 

address, and phone number go into the candidate's 

computer, and the candidate writes you a letter thanking 

you for carrying the petition. Next year, when someone 

comes around with a geological bill, you call up the 

person you supported and say, "This is J. Smith, I'm for 

bill number such-and-such." The legislator will know 

who you are and will respond very positively. If you want 

to really blow your legislator away, volunteer to put up 

road signs for him. You'll impress him, and next year 

when you ask for his support, he'll really know who you 

are. You don't need to spend money or go to meetings. 

Money is important, but your personal involvement in his 

or her campaign is primary. And whether it's a sand and 

gravel bill or the petrified-wood State fossil bill or an 

increase in the budget for the AZGS, you'll have a friend 

in Phoenix. When you call your legislators, they'll know 

who you are and what issues are of concern to you. Thus, 

if you become involved, it will make you an acceptable 

and effective participant in the legislative process. This is 

the only realistic way to go. 

Industry Need for Data and the 

Results of Applied Research 

By B.N. Watson 

Several industry persons were polled in an attempt 

to obtain a broadened industry point of view. Although 

these comments concern industrial-minerals exploration 

primarily, many of the points made are equally applicable 

for metallic-minerals exploration. These observations are 

1Editors note-Federal and State Government employees' permitted political involvement should be considered. 

56 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
divided into three parts: (1) data needs, (2) applied 

research needs, and (3) legislative needs. 

DATA NEEDS 

Industry has long depended on several types of 

resource data supplied by Government agencies, academic institutions, and other private sources. The main 

types and sources of these data are as follows. 

• Geologic mapping is the main continuing need of 

industry from Government . We are aware of the outstanding history of the USGS throughout the decades for 

producing geologic maps of the United States and its 

territories. Those of us in industry will be happy to see 

continuing emphasis on geologic mapping by the USGS, 

and we hope that current budget cuts will not affect that 

aspect of their program. Quick publication of geologic 

maps and reports by open-file release is also helpful. 

There is a need for mapping and geophysical 

studies of the basins in the Western States. Throughout 

past decades, the USGS and others have concentrated on 

the more interesting rocks in mountainous areas of 

outcrop. Many industrial-mineral commodities occur in 

basins, as we have seen in the talks and discussions here. 

These basins have been lightly passed over in the past as 

being Quaternary alluvium, Quaternary gravel, or Tertiary to Quaternary sedimentary rocks. There is a lot 

more out there in those basins than these generalized 

geologic units. We need better geologic and geophysical 

evaluation of what really is in the basinal areas. Another 

program element of the USGS that helps industry is map 

compilation, based on university theses or other studies, 

with fill-in mapping of the intervening areas. We also 

need reinterpretation of old mapping, as well as remapping of areas that were mapped long ago on a gross scale 

or with the use of now-outdated geologic models. An 

example, accomplished recently by the USGS, is the work 

by Lipman and Sawyer (1985) in compiling information 

on some of the old porphyry copper districts in the 

mountain ranges of southeastern Arizona. 

I have collected some minor complaints that are 

probably not original but should be mentioned anyway. 

We know that the USGS was inundated by WSA's that 

they had to evaluate. This program must have put a strain 

on personnel. Nevertheless, when we are talking about 

areas that may be locked up for a long period of time, we 

would like to have the areas evaluated properly. In our 

opinion, some of the WSA evaluators simply lacked the 

experience and capability to know how to evaluate the 

areas assigned. Another problem is that certain USGS 

topographic maps, particularly some of the more recent 

7.5-minute quadrangles, lack road, prospect, and mine 

symbols in places where those roads, prospects, and 

mines are known to exist. We hope that this sometime 

practice is reversed and that these important location 

symbols for assessment and exploration are always 

included on these maps.With respect to the AZGS, we 

are encouraged to see that their staff has been strengthened, particularly in the areas of tectonic mapping and 

Quaternary studies. We also encourage the AZGS to do 

more mapping. 

• Age determination of materials is becoming an 

important tool in putting the explorationist in the right 

geologic environment to find the type of deposit being 

sought. We use ages extensively, and we are fortunate to 

have the Geochronology Laboratory of the University of 

Arizona in this area. We need a clearing house for new 

ages, and we would like to make sure that ages are not 

held back for a final formal publication. This preliminary 

release could be in the form of a column in the AZGS' 

Arizona Field Notes, published four times a year. Each 

issue ought to carry a listing of new ages for the State. For 

the rest of the Western United States, the magazine 

Isochron West, which is still in print, could be a clearing 

house for ages for the broader region. 

• A core and drill-hole data repository is needed 

by industry because we have an exploration-duplication 

problem. All too often, at present, holes must be 

redrilled because we cannot find out what was discovered 

in earlier drilling programs. This is an environmentally 

and financially unsound practice. It should be mandatory 

for terminated projects that, when a company is finished 

in an area and is walking away and letting claims lapse, 

they deposit information with some governmental group. 

Such information should include who drilled the holes, to 

what depth they were drilled, a brief geologic log, some 

representative core and chips (skeletonized), and any 

other information that would be useful. The information 

is going to be imperfect, some good, some poor; nevertheless, something is better than nothing. Conservative 

industry objections to a core repository is lessening as 

time goes on. Such a repository is currently in use in 

Canada. The Texas repository charges $2.00 for examination of a box of core, and the response has been 

exceptional. Originally, I thought that this would be a 

good function for the ADMMR, but the AZGS has some 

of this information already. It is immaterial to me who 

might administer such a service, but it would be good to 

have it in one place. The storage costs might well become 

a problem, eventually. 

• Analytical data of three principal types are of 

interest to industry. Water analyses are important for 

some types of industrial-mineral exploration, such as for 

borates and lithium. We are struggling to understand 

what water analyses really mean, but we do use them as 

a tool. Our problem is that we need a broad and 

consistent spectrum of ground-water analyses. Too often, 

water analyses omit certain important elements, such as 

boron. For example, you would think that it would be 

critical to know what the boron content is in agricultural 

areas, because more than 1 ppm B can be toxic; however, 

Meeting Information Needs 57 
many water analyses from such agricultural areas omit 

boron. We also encourage reporting such anions as 

bicarbonate, carbonate, and sulfate in these analyses, so 

that we can know what type of water we are dealing with. 

It lets us know what types of bedrock might be below or 

up drainage. Soil and streambed chemistry is not considered as important in Arizona as it would be in Montana 

or Canada, but because we are dealing with industrial 

minerals and they sometimes do occur in basins, I think 

that soil and streambed geochemistry can be important. 

Finally, there are outcrop analyses. Some of the industry 

persons polled felt that the Government should not be in 

the assay business. There is a risk that information will 

get out prematurely and may unduly benefit certain 

companies. But there are people in the USGS and AZGS 

who understand what altered and mineralized outcrops 

are, and I believe that these people should sample 

outcrops and publish the results. 

Another complaint involves the Federal Government's Paperwork Reduction Act. People commented 

that this act requires data destruction by some Government agencies for space reasons. Old publications of the 

USGS and analytical data of some organizations have not 

been given away or put in a repository somewhere, but 

destroyed. In one case, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 

destroyed analytical data from the Lake Meade area that 

we could have used. If nothing else, Government agencies ought to donate old data that they don't want to keep 

and give it to an institution like the University of Wyoming's Heritage Center, which has been set up to house 

old company files and other forms of data of potential use 

to explorationists. 

• Industrial-minerals demand and known mineraloccurrence data are often provided by the major companies themselves, but there are times when State geologists run across specific needs for specific minerals in 

specific areas. It would be useful if there were some 

system whereby such information could be regularly 

released to the public. Mineral occurrences are being 

cataloged in Arizona, and I would like to call attention to 

the excellent publication mentioned earlier-the ADMMR's 1987 publication on Arizona's industrial minerals. 

It should be updated periodically. 

• Land-availability data in the USBM's 1986Availability of Federally-Owned Minerals for Exploration and 

Development in the Western United States: Arizona has 

been helpful; this is also a publication that needs updating periodically. The ADMMR has a publication by 

Clark and Verity (1986), Laws and Regulations Governing Mineral Rights in Arizona, which also has been most 

useful. One complaint under land-availability data concerns the BLM's delays in posting data on claims staked 

and claim-assessment work. It seems that the BLM is 

often behind in posting such data, which causes industry 

problems in trying to keep up to date or in obtaining 

rights for land on short notice. The BLM has been 4 or 

more months behind in such States as Nevada, California, and Arizona, where the current gold rush is occurring. Somehow, the county courthouses are keeping up; 

why is the BLM so far behind? 

• Permitting information is needed because industry is often hampered by duplicate needs for permitting 

from various agencies that all seem to require much of 

the same information. We are also hampered by the time 

involved in the permitting process. Nevertheless, if we 

must go through these items, it would be nice to have all 

the permitting information for the State in one place. In 

Arizona, I'm told, it's pretty well scattered about. One 

State, Colorado, is trying to put it all in one place. The 

Colorado Department of Natural Resources publishes 

the Colorado Pennit Directory for Energy and Mineral 

Resource Development, of which this is the third (1983) 

update prepared by the Colorado Joint Review Process 

Program; it contains all the permitting information, all 

the needed forms, all the names of important persons and 

their phone numbers, and so on. 

• Academic information and liaison with the university system is important to industry to obtain information about student availability for mapping theses. Industry has supported numerous theses and can use students 

for summer work and part-time work during the rest of 

the year. University libraries contain good geologic information from student theses in areas where we have 

interest. Universities should advertise student project 

areas and their theses subjects. The University of Arizona attempts to do this with a special meeting, a 

geosciences symposium, each spring. They allow students 

and others to give presentations on work that they are 

conducting. Apparently, UNA does not have such a 

program, and I don't know whether ASU does or not. It 

would be helpful to industry to know where the students 

are working, and, where mutually beneficial, they might 

receive some funding from industry that they were not 

aware was available. If there are going to be geosciences 

symposia held by the universities, then the sessions need 

backing and attendance by industry. I'd also like to see a 

list of these in progress, as well as theses published on 

some sort of a regular basis. Again, a regular column in 

Arizona Field Notes would be a good place to have this 

reported. These data should not be difficult to obtain 

from the Arizona universities, and information about 

theses on Arizona geology by students from out-of-State 

institutions could also be obtained and published in 

Arizona Field Notes. 

APPLIED-RESEARCH NEEDS 

The mining industry is interested in new exploration technology and the development of new scientific 

concepts of ore deposition. 

• Introduction of new techniques is viewed by 

many industry folk as best met by academia and the 

58 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
private sector. However I'm sure that there are important areas of applied research suitable for Government 

input, including introduction of new techniques in 

geochemistry, geophysics, age determination, computer 

data and digital systems, and satellite imagery. Industry 

will use these new methods once their practicality is 

demonstrated. 

• Development of new concepts is a second way in 

which Government and academia can contribute to 

industry exploration programs. Such ideas as the connection between geologic processes and ore formation, and 

between plate tectonics and certain ores, have been most 

useful. 

LEGISLATIVE NEEDS 

Industry needs support from Government, such as 

avowed and stable policies with respect to land availability, permitting, and access. We need legislative stability; 

constant change hampers and discourages industry. A 

classic example is Mexican mining law, which seems to 

change after every election. This instability has hindered 

mineral development in Mexico. 

Finally, some industry persons are quite concerned 

about the politicization of such Government agencies as 

the USGS, USBM, BIA, BLM, and USPS. Their strength 

and contributions to society have been based on the fact 

that their loyalty is to the Nation and meeting its needs. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSION OF INDUSTRY NEEDS 

• The AZGS has statutory responsibility for a 

cuttings and core repository in Arizona, which has several thousand wells represented, mainly water wells. The 

AZGS also gets oil and gas well data and cuttings. Not 

much has been done with respect to cores, mainly 

because of space, time, and funding limitations. Those 

records that have been maintained are open to the public. 

This is an area that the AZGS believes should be 

improved. Other State geological surveys also have such 

facilities, and they are used extensively. 

• The BLM was unaware of the lag in recording of 

Arizona mining claims. A company is allowed 90 days 

after staking a claim before they have to record it with the 

BLM. The BLM is now putting these data into an 

automated system and can check on how long it takes, 

after a claim is staked, before it appears on the system. 

The BLM is going more and more to an automated 

land-record system, and at some point in the future, when 

the paper records are shipped to an archive, there will be 

a total dependence on computer files-CD ROM technology for record keeping. We now have 148 thousand 

active mining claims in the State, and many patents have 

been granted over the years. All of these data are 

accessible through the ELM's automated land-record 

system. 

• Patenting of claims is a problem for the industry. 

We see that many metallic-mineral claims, particularly 

those for copper at Safford, are allowed to go to patent. 

Many of these metallic-mineral deposits may never have 

been in production. When industrial-mineral claimsspecifically, the Bowie zeolite deposit, which is adjacent 

to the productive Union Carbide deposits-came to be 

considered, the smaller Bowie group was turned down on 

the basis of no demonstrated marketability. There seems 

to industry to be a bias against patenting industrialmineral deposits because contracts for these materials 

are expected. 

Reply: The same criteria for metallic- and 

nonmetallic-mineral deposits are used by the BLM, 

regardless of the commodity. If you believe that the 

decision by the authorizing officer is invalid, please take 

it up with your field office and get a judicial decision on 

it. The problem for industry producers is that they are 

faced with the position that if they do not withdraw the 

application for patent and the BLM finds that the claims 

cannot be taken to patent, the operator is faced with 

possible invalidation of the claims because the material is 

not marketable. 

• Regarding a core repository, if industry kept 

requests coming in to the USBM, there is a chance that 

the USBM would create a repository. The last time this 

matter was considered by the USBM, it was dropped, not 

from outside pressure but from internal USBM policy; 

the funds appropriated were cut off and diverted elsewhere. Had there been sustained industry pressure, such 

a repository might have been created. 

Replies and comments: It seems doubtful that 

industry pressure to create a core repository will be 

forthcoming. Such pressure will have to come from the 

governmental end. Nonetheless, I think that industry is 

now at the point where it would accept rather than rebel 

against the concept. There is a difference between 

accepting and saying that industry wants it. 

There is a USGS core repository in Denver that is 

available for anyone to examine. They charge a user fee 

because it is very expensive to create and maintain such a 

repository. The USGS gets many offers of core, but the 

problem is that such a program has a relatively low 

funding priority relative to all other programs. The 

program started out mainly with oil-well cores, but lately 

mineral cores-the first are from Creede, Colo.-have 

been made available. The Geologic Division is encouraging this venture. In the future, there undoubtedly will 

be pressure for accessions from other States. 

• Information is a much-needed commodity by 

industry. Like vegetables, it becomes less valuable the 

longer it sits around. In the case of the USGS, the time 

interval between the acquisition of information and its 

availability in a report may be several years. If there 

could be some way of getting the critical information out 

more rapidly, that would help. It may not be as important 

Meeting Information Needs 59 
to have the information released in good form as to get it 

out where it can be used. 

Replies and comments: Recently, the USGS has 

been conducting open meetings to review CUSMAP 

studies, or meetings of a program-review type. Are such 

meetings before publication of sufficient interest to gain 

industry support? Is this a good way to get information 

out without the laborious publication route? 

From an industry point of view, these open meetings were a good effort, and appreciated. The problem is 

to find a time when most industry folks are in town and 

available to attend. USGS Open-File Reports also are 

being used increasingly to speed release of data and 

interpretations. These reports are now listed in the 

USGS' Monthly List of Publications. 

State and Federal Government Needs 

STATE LANDS-MANAGEMENT NEEDS 

ByM.J. Rice 

Before discussing the ASLD's various needs for 

resource information, I believe it is appropriate first to 

explain how State lands are leased. Like the Federal 

Government, we classify minerals as locatable, leasable, 

and salable. Industrial minerals are classed as either 

locatable or salable. Locatable minerals are leased under 

a mineral lease, and salable minerals under a mineralmaterials lease. As required under Federal law, the type 

of lease depends on a determination whether the mineral 

commodity is a common variety. Because Arizona statutes further define common mineral materials as those 

that are used for similar purposes, we must also consider 

any proposed marketing of the mineral. With these 

distinctions in mind, I will first address our resourceinformation needs relative to issuance of a mineral lease 

for locatable minerals. 

In applying for a mineral lease, the applicant is 

required to submit documentation in support of his 

discovery of a valuable mineral deposit. Upon review of 

that documentation, which usually includes laboratory 

analyses, drill-hole logs, geologic reports, and reserve 

estimates, the ASLD must make a determination as to 

the value of the deposit. At this point in the evaluation, 

we find a serious absence of information about commodity prices and other market conditions, such as product 

demand. If we could obtain this type of information in 

greater detail, I believe our economic evaluation of the 

property and projection of royalty income would be 

greatly enhanced. 

For a mineral-materials lease of salable minerals, 

we do not have most of the detailed information that is 

available under the mineral lease. Thus, we must rely on 

the available literature, geologic maps, and fundamental 

exploration guides. Here, the ASLD is in a position like 

that of any exploration company, and so we would find 

such specific geologic information as drill-hole information or depositional-basin studies most valuable. Efficient management of State lands requires that this information be made available in a timely manner, and we 

encourage development of an avenue of exchange, such 

as a library or computer file. This information could also 

be used in evaluating mineral properties for the purposes 

of commercial leasing, our Federal land-exchange program, and the sale of State land, as well as for advising 

other ASLD divisions. In conclusion, I would identify 

technical data, drill-hole information, depositionalenvironment studies, and market-related information as 

most essential to the leasing of industrial minerals. 

Because we also have a great deal of information to 

share, I believe the key to using that information effectively is to identify an efficient avenue of data exchange. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF STATE 

LAND-MANAGEMENT NEEDS 

• Are we correct in saying that there are there are 

basically two ways to acquire industrial minerals: (1) 

through a regular State mineral lease for such commodities as clay, bentonite, and zeolites, which customarily 

are 20-year leases, starting from a prospecting permit, or 

staking 20-acre parcels; or (2) through a materialspurchase contract for common clays, sand, cinders, and 

other aggregates, where that commodity must be submitted to public bidding, after a statutory time interval? 

Reply: Yes, that's correct, but the issuance of a 

20-year lease requires that the commodity be distinguished from common types. Therefore, the technical 

information and (or) product use must support that 

requirement. The whole question of royalties is up in the 

air right now, but otherwise you're correct. 

• One problem we have with industrial minerals is 

that the product has value at several points. Value at the 

mine generally bears very little resemblance to the value 

of the end products; there are many steps in between. If 

the value is set too high at the mine, the commodity has 

no value; it's basically a crude raw material that has to be 

processed to a final product. It's important not to confuse 

the mine and product values. For a bentonite that has a 

mine value of $35 per ton, the end values come after $300 

of processing. 

• Major problems for industry are public auctions 

and royalties. If someone is going to risk accepting the 

cost to make the discovery, that person will be reluctant 

to have the information made public, so that a competitor 

could step in and buy the claim by making a higher bid. 

There would be little incentive to explore, because there 

is no assurance of title if a discovery were made. 

60 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL-QUALITY NEEDS 

By Debra Daniel 

Unlike the other agencies represented here, the 

Hydrology Section of the ADEQ does not control any 

lands, and so we do not zone land or specify which lands 

are or are not available for special uses. However, we do 

regulate how activities are conducted on lands. Activities 

that may affect water or air quality need to obtain 

permits. Mining is a regulated activity. Many of the 

environmental permits required for an activity are issued 

by the ADEQ, although the EPA also issues some 

permits in Arizona. The ADEQ rules are necessarily 

based on geologic, hydrologic, and geochemical information. Thus, the ADEQ is a user of resource information 

and also produces and maintains such information. 

The rules of most concern to this group would be 

those governing air-quality permits, which are given by 

either the county or the ADEQ, and aquifer-protection 

permits, presently called ground-water-protection permits until the new regulations are finalized. The aquiferprotection-permit program, which is being developed, is 

more rigorous than the existing ground-water-protection 

program. The aquifer-protection-permit program will 

require permits for any facility that discharges to ground 

water, including surface impoundments, discharges to 

dry washes, leach operations, and so on. The proposed 

rules for this new program are out for public comment at 

this time. Copies can be obtained from the ADEQ 

(telephone, (602) 257-6897). 

Under the new rules, most people will be required 

to obtain an individual permit for each discharge. The 

applicant has to perform studies to demonstrate that the 

standards for the aquifer will be met. There is also a 

requirement to use BADCP (Best Available Demonstrated Control Technology). In addition to individual 

permits, there is a provision for a general permit, a 

permit-by-rule, that would not require an applicant to 

come to the ADEQ to obtain an individual permit. 

Institution of a general permit is something that the 

ADEQ is looking at for sand and gravel operations that 

meet certain criteria and that do not use chemicals in 

processing. Another type of permit that may be required 

is the NPDES (National Pollution Discharge Elimination 

System) permit. This permit is still given by the EPA in 

Arizona, but the ADEQ does most of the administrative 

processing, and so you have to come to the ADEQ for it. 

The non-point-source program will cover discharges to 

surface water from dispersed sources. The EPA is also 

working on regulations for non-point-source discharges. 

Most of the mining activities that have been discussed 

will fall under this non-point-source program. Operations involving underground injection are presently 

required to have a UIC (Underground Injection Control) permit, which is issued by the EPA. These activities 

would also require an aquifer-protection permit issued 

by the ADEQ. 

With respect to resource information, the ADEQ 

is working to produce DRASTIC maps for the whole 

State. ("DRASTIC" is an acronym for a system of 

mapping that gives an indication of aquifer vulnerability 

to contamination, as developed by the National Water 

Well Association under contract to the EPA.) We have 

completed maps for Yuma and La Paz Counties; the 

Maricopa County map is about to be released, and Pima 

County is in line to be done. These maps can be used by 

a wide variety of Government agencies for planning. 

They might be useful for developing the well headprotection program, which is still in a formative stage. 

The well head-protection program will likely affect mining activities near urban areas and around public water 

wells, where certain activities would be limited or prohibited. As presently conceived, individual cities and 

counties will be developing their own well headprotection programs, probably in conjunction with the 

ADEQ and EPA. 

The ADEQ is developing computerized data bases 

for the chemical quality of water and soil. These data 

bases were authorized by statute in 1986, and we are still 

getting them on line. We are looking at eventually 

developing a GIS, in conjunction with the ASLD, so that 

the well data located and can be overlaid with other data 

in the GIS. One application, for example, would be to 

help identify sources in an area of ground-water contamination. 

At present, the ADEQ compiles numerous data on 

water quality and receives additional data from regulated 

facilities. Drinking-water systems, some ground-waterpermitted facilities, and RCRA (Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act )-permitted facilities have to monitor 

ground-water quality and submit the data to the ADEQ. 

Presently, it is difficult to access that information when 

studying an area unless the particular facilities and 

permit programs are known in advance. The ADEQ 

hopes to enter all the water-quality data into one data 

base, which can be accessed by any interested person. 

The ADEQ generally requires data for standard inorganic materials, as well as any contaminants of concern. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF 

ENVIRONMENTAL-QUALITY NEEDS 

• Airborne particulate discharges generated by 

mining activities are of great interest to industrialmineral operators. Decisions by the State have been held 

in abeyance for at least a year, pending the outcome of a 

lawsuit by a mining company against OSHA regarding 

generic asbestiform minerals-minerals that really are 

not asbestos but have the morphologic characteristics of 

asbestos. How is the air-quality-standards program being 

handled? 

Meeting Information Needs 61 
Reply: I am unfamiliar with air-quality permitting 

and with how those standards are set; you should ask the 

Air Quality Section of the ADEQ. 

• Some areas of mutually beneficial cooperation 

have been identified. The ADEQ's water-quality data 

base might be a good exploration source because many 

toxic substances are also indicators used in geochemical 

exploration. 

• Not only should volcanic rocks be looked at as 

marketable sources in themselves, but they also may be 

source rocks for such elements as boron and lithium, and 

thus serve as geochemical indicators of nearly deposits. 

• Mitigation of environmental hazards, such as the 

protection of ground water from acid rain and the 

disposal of refuse in landfill, will require large additional 

supplies of industrial materials like limestone and clays. 

The sources of these materials will have to be near the 

place of use. The location and type of these material 

requirements should be addressed in some way. 

FEDERAL LAND-MANAGEMENT NEEDS 

By L. P. Bauer 

I'd like to start with a description of the ELM's 

land-planning process, which we call "developing the 

resource-management plan" (RMP), as required by the 

ELM's 1976 organic act, the Federal Land Policy and 

Management Act. The ELM had always done some 

planning on an as-needed basis, but comprehensive planning is now required. The ELM is managed at a State 

office (which considers one or more States), at district 

offices, and at the resource-area (field) office. An RMP 

generally covers a resource area; it examines how the 

ELM wants to manage a given resource area. All aspects 

of the ELM's program are considered in the search, and 

minerals are one important area examined in the planning effort. 

Planning starts with a "scoping process," whereby 

the ELM publishes an announcement in the Federal 

Register that a plan is going to be developed. Public 

meetings provide input on what resources are important 

and need special consideration. Do we need a plan for 

mineral development in some areas? Is recreation a big 

issue in some areas? What about wildlife preservation or 

range management? There may be a series of scoping 

meetings to determine the issues to be addressed in 

developing a plan. 

The ELM then prepares a "management-situation 

analysis," which summarizes what is known about the 

area at present and what currently is being done. It is a 

basic working document to be modified or from which 

alternatives are developed, if a new direction is indicated. 

Among the alternatives considered is no action, the 

current management alternative. In such a case, a survey 

is made of how many mines are operating there today, 

how many mineral leases are there, and, if we make no 

changes in mineral priorities, the effects of allowing the 

current level of activity to continue. How many head of 

deer are out there, and what will be the effect of no 

change on management of the deer population? We also 

look at other resource-protection alternatives; for example, to maximize the number of wildlife the land can 

carry, what changes in mining activity will have to occur? 

We consider the problem with the view of setting up 

special management areas, such as ACEC's, naturalmaintenance research areas, or special recreation management areas. Another alternative considers commodity 

production; that is, we examine the decisions necessary to 

maximize mineral production, timber cutting, and cattle 

grazing. After looking at those alternatives, the ELM 

develops the "preferred alternative," which generally is a 

common meeting ground. 

It is important for industry to be involved in the 

scoping process as early as possible, so as to identify their 

concerns for present and future mineral development. 

On a practical level, each alternative is developed 

because of the special interests of people. The wildlife 

specialist is going to make his best case for protecting the 

resource he knows best. The range manager is going to 

be working with his client. The geologist is going to use 

his data to encourage mineral development. The ELM 

needs data for this purpose, not entreaties for no more 

wildernesses. 

The ELM makes use of information from USGS 

and AZGS publications. The ELM also has some of its 

own specialists who go out into the field to determine 

what is happening at mineral-development sites. It has its 

own data base, which contains notices and plans of 

people operating mining claims, and records what is 

going on in the area and for what commodity, but that's 

about it. The ELM needs public contributions to expand 

that data base, and knowledge of the area to prepare 

these reports. 

In the final development of a "preferred alternative," each specialist makes his case before an authorized 

officer, in most cases, the resource-area manager or 

district manager. This is basically a highly personal type 

of political process. The more data in hand, the better the 

case that can be made for a particular resource area. In 

counting deer or trees, you obtain good, hard numbers to 

build a case. It's a little harder to develop a comparable 

mineral-resource data base. The preferred alternative is 

produced and published as a draft RMP. 

The types of geologic data needed to build a good 

case include mineral-occurrence information, particularly in the broad areas between the mountain ranges 

where the ELM has no data. These areas get proposed 

for wilderness status because they haven't been much 

affected by man. When these areas are identified in 

public notices, anyone in industry who knows about any 

available data or exploration activity going on in the area 

62 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
probably knows more about that area than the BLM 

does. 

The planning process is nearly complete in Arizona. We are preparing new RMP's for the Safford 

district and the Arizona strip. Where we know about 

mineral development, we have to factor in such information. In some of our WSA's there are cherry-stemmed 

roads into known mineral developments. If we don't 

know about them, we can't make a case for development. 

When the draft is published, there is further opportunity for people to provide their input or to challenge 

the draft. The BLM has to consider every comment that 

comes in and show that it either adopts the comment, 

adopts it as modified, or rejects it, giving the reasons for 

rejection. That is part of the process in producing the 

final RMP. There is still another chance to protest the 

decision. If the BLM sets up a mineral-withdrawal area 

or an ACEC that excludes mineral development, there is 

the opportunity to protest to the Director of the BLM 

when the final plan is published. A protester must have 

been part of the planning process at some point-either 

by attending a public meeting or making a comment-to 

have any recognized standing. A protest can be lodged by 

a company, an individual, or a trade association. If there 

are no protests to the final RMP, it is set in place. If there 

are any protests, they are resolved by the Director. 

Amendments to RMP's can also be made. Assume 

that an RMP is in place and someone wants to exchange 

some large blocks of lands covered by the RMP but not 

considered suitable for exchange in the RMP. The planning process is reopened to consider that amendment. 

Anyone can come in and ask for certain amendments to 

the plan. If they are considered important-for example, 

discovery of a new gold deposit that wasn't known 

before-this new piece of information would be sufficient to reopen the plan. The plan is designed for a 5- to 

10-year life. Thus, as the BLM is completing its first 

go-around, it's time to begin the process all over again. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF 

FEDERAL LAND-MANAGEMENT NEEDS 

• What is the process for introducing recommendations of areas of "critical mineral potential," as discussed in the Wilderness Act? 

Reply: When the BLM has asked for nominations 

for areas of critical mineral potential, it has obtained 

mostly unusable suggestions. Nothing has been received 

that pinpoints special areas, and generally the information is for too broad an area. If a new piece of information indicates that an area contains important mineral 

resources, that area can be proposed for exclusion 

according to the act, and the process will resume with 

public hearings. If the proposal is valid, the area can be 

set aside and managed as an area of critical mineral 

potential. 

• As the process has been described, there are 

several points of input. Can you describe the early stages 

of the process when the BLM staffs are starting to 

prepare the report? You come to the AZGS, USBM, and 

USGS and make use of their available information. 

There may be a lot of data that are irrelevant or meaningless. Could you elaborate further on what the BLM 

finds most useful from these surveys, with regard to 

geologic information, to help get a better RMP that will 

minimize protests? 

Reply: The most useful data are those that the 

BLM is least likely to get-site identification and reserve 

tonnages. Regional information is generally available in 

the ELM's files; it consists of site locations and reserve 

data that interact with the quantifiable data of the 

proponents of nonmineral-resource development. 

• One thing we discovered on winding up an 

industry project, in which we had identified several 

specific types of mineral deposit, was the vast number of 

occurrences for which we had data. Plots of these occurrences were spread over the Southwestern United States, 

covering a very large area, sparsely. This type of deposit 

could never be pinned down to a specific area. What 

could be done with these interesting data? 

Reply: One service that USGS, AZGS, and 

ADMMR data-collecting facilities provide is to collect 

data that industry people may be reluctant or unwilling to 

put their name on, for whatever reason. The collection of 

fundamental site and locality data is not particularly 

interesting, but it is as important for any future industry 

exploration as it is for BLM planning. In Arizona, the 

BLM is getting more involved in land information and 

geographic information; they are beginning to build 

coordinate data and computer-overlay site-specific data, 

and then overlay various other resource themes. You can 

now ask a computer to show you all the mineral sites and 

to overlay the critical wildlife habitats on them. The 

computer can calculate all kinds of areal relations. The 

Arizona strip RMP is being done in this mode, which 

helps make better comparisons and formulate better 

alternatives. 

• An often-heard comment is that we've been 

looking for a material in this area for a long time, and so 

we must already have found all that can be found. This 

simply isn't true, because the science is dynamic. With 

changes in occurrence models and increases in the number and type of data, old conclusions become outdated. 

• In one case of critical mineral potential, mining 

claims were located in an area that adjoined a wilderness. 

A letter had been filed indicating this information, but its 

argument was essentially dismissed. Can the process be 

reopened under the act? This is the case for a saponite 

deposit, which is composed of a unique magnesium clay, 

although it is not a strategic material at the moment. 

Reply: Yes, the case can be reopened if new information is made available. The saponite deposit you refer 

Meeting Information Needs 63 
to is an interesting case: It's also the site of an endangered plant species. This is a typical example of a 

management problem for the BLM. Which use should 

take presidence? 

• If you think that the BLM is dealing with an 

ocean of ignorance in site-specific mineral data, you 

should realize that most mining companies also are 

dealing with these same types of problems; they are in the 

same ocean. You can't put hard reserve numbers or 

economic potential on a little bit of outcrop, some chip 

samples, or even a few diamond-drill holes, and make a 

case that the company should go ahead with mining. The 

explorers at that juncture are fairly ignorant, and so the 

BLM shouldn't expect too much in the way of hard data. 

The sources of hard data are from the producing mines. 

Exploration targets in a wilderness area have the least 

amount of information available. However, the discovery 

of the Coppers tone mine was based on three mineralized 

outcrops, each about the size of a table. 

Reply: It may be that the best solution is for direct 

industry interaction with the land-management agency, 

to become personally acquainted with the people 

involved in making the ELM's decisions. In the final 

analysis, it's a personal decision for the decisionmaker. 

• There doesn't seem to be much consistency 

between the decisionmakers in different BLM offices 

within or between States-one is a biologist, another may 

be interested in mineral development and understands it. 

Each decisionmaker is more sympathetic with his or her 

own field of competence; usually, that situation provides 

an opening for a lawsuit, but it doesn't get the job done 

for exploration or for planning. 

Reply: If someone feels excessively put upon by an 

individual in the BLM, he should contact the next higher 

level. Overzealousness can result in problems, and the 

BLM needs to become aware of such problems. All too 

often, geologists and mining engineers are good people 

who want to deal with hard data, but they forget about 

dealing with other people who must deal with other types 

of data. 

• Such forums as this are the first real opportunity 

to get all of these constituencies into one room and to be 

able to interact on a nonthreatening, frank, and informal 

basis. In a public forum, such interaction usually is not 

possible because people with violently different persuasions become argumentative, and the proceedings are not 

productive. If a regional exploration manager takes the 

time to write a letter, does it have the same weight as 16 

letters from the Sierra Club? The manager may present 

data and a professional analysis worth thousands of 

dollars, in contrast with a blast from a person who just 

believes that an area should be a wilderness. The BLM 

has a difficult problem to read and evaluate such letters. 

• Exploration for industrial minerals entails problems very different from those for metallic minerals. For 

example, consider the hectorite deposit at Kirkland Junetion. A clay producer needed a clay resource that was 

high in lithium. Drilling began in 1982. Preliminary 

testing indicated that the clay in this deposit was a 

satisfactory viscosifier with the proper amount of lithium. 

Several chemical problems were successfully overcome 

during 1982. In 1983, additional drilling confirmed the 

amount of the resource needed. Next, a large bulk 

sample was taken to determine whether a product could 

be developed for sale under their trade name; it would be 

a substitute for the Hector, Calif., materials currently 

being used. The Kirkland Junction material passed these 

tests. Next, in 1986-87, 137 tons of the material was 

shipped for bulk testing and processing. The product was 

prepared, and sold under the buyers' trade name, and 

they waited for acceptance of the product. The waiting 

process will take another year or two. This development 

process will extend well into 1989 to 1990, a span of 8 

years just to find out whether the material is marketable. 

Expenses of the mine operator are not nearly as high as 

those of the buyer; it takes time and money to develop a 

resource. 

• What kinds of information can Government surveys provide to the land-management agencies? 

Reply: From BLM experience, while working in the 

lower Gila and Kingman areas, the most useful pieces of 

information for resource assessment were the published 

regional studies. Core complexes had just been recognized at that time, and the regional mapping by the 

AZGS was essential in interpreting the depositional 

environments in the basin. The value of a certain tract of 

land could be predicted, albeit somewhat crudely. 

Although it was not a definitive prediction, it was good 

enough, in this case, to forestall inclusion of areas into a 

wilderness classification. You know what has already 

been discovered from MILS data and survey publications; what is not known is where those undiscovered 

resources are going to be located. The way you obtain 

real clues is by looking at regional studies, as we've been 

talking about, developing predictive models, and interpreting depositional environments, volcanogenic history, 

the timing of basin subsidence, and so on. Such models 

are essential for making management -plan decisions. 

• The USGS is setting up regional offices in Tucson, Ariz., Reno, Nev., and Spokane, Wash., to assist in 

mineral-resource activities. Each office will have a fulltime person whose job it is to visit the USFS and BLM 

district and State offices. A senior manager will be able to 

talk with senior managers of industry and the Federal and 

State agencies. There also will be an information system, 

locally, that has plotting capability and other support 

equipment that will be available to the user public. This 

will be a joint USGS-AZGS effort in Arizona. The USGS 

also is trying to approach this problem through better 

intra-Government communication and coordination. We 

are proposing to develop a program that would increase 

the USBM's and USGS's efforts to provide more useful 

64 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
mineral data to our clients like the BLM, and whoever 

else wishes to use it. 

Geologic Data and Research Needs 

of the Indian Tribes 

By James Crowther 

The invited representatives of the Indian tribes 

apparently were unable to be present during this workshop, so I will do my best to represent what I think they 

might want to tell us from my experiences working with 

the tribes. It is difficult to speak on their behalf, and I 

would like to qualify my statements by saying that I am 

not speaking for them. I learned a long time ago that you 

cannot do this. There are some needs that the Indian 

tribes in Arizona have in relation to mineral resources, 

but these needs are not necessarily for hard data. I look 

upon their needs as more social than technical. I have 

tried to suppress basic idealism from creeping into my 

discussion. Nonetheless, it was encouraging to hear Larry 

Bauer say pretty much the same thing about industry 

striving to build a closer relationship with the regulatory 

agencies. 

I think that what the Indians need, first, is the 

confidence to be able to deal with mining companies on 

an equal footing, and to receive the same kind of respect 

that other mineral owners receive. Currently, the Indians 

rely on tribal attorneys to negotiate mineral contracts for 

them. There are many competent attorneys out there, but 

there are also many who are unfamiliar with the mineral 

industry. This unfamiliarity creates a burden. The Indians need education in that respect; they need members of 

their own tribes willing to become familiar with resource 

matters. They also need companies and local, State, and 

Federal agencies willing to spend time with the tribal 

governments to form trusting relationship and to get to 

know the Indian's side of the story. It takes a lot of 

commitment and patience to do this sort of thing; this 

task up to now has been relegated solely to the BIA. 

Other interested parties need to take a hand in it. 

Some of the people in companies that are interested in minerals on Indian reservations look upon the 

reservations and their inhabitants as targets of opportunity that are available to be exploited by any available 

means. This predatory approach is no longer viable. 

Instead, companies need to consider forming partnerships with the tribes for mineral development. There has 

been more of this activity in the past few years, and I hope 

companies are losing their fear of dealing with the 

Indians. This sense of partnership can come about by 

fostering personal relationships, so that the true aspect of 

the situation is recognized. 

Federal agencies, including the BIA, need to recognize the importance of mineral development to the 

tribes. Mineral income to Indian tribes far exceeds all 

other revenues, yet the BIA is geared more toward crop 

production, forestry, and grazing resources. Paul 

Theobald, who is involved with Indian tribes, understands that the solution to this problem is education of 

both the tribes and those dealing with them, to get to 

know the situation and to bring the Indians up to a level 

of competence whereby they can give proper attention to 

mineral issues. 

As far as basic technical data are concerned, I think 

the tribes have received quite a bit from various Federal 

programs and from private industry. Companies are 

required to give copies of their exploration data to the 

tribes. Thus, as I view it, the problem is more one of 

education than of technical information. 

PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF 

INDIAN TRIBAL NEEDS 

• There seems to be a substantial difference 

between attempting to do mineral exploration with the 

Alaskan Native corporations and attempting to do so 

with the tribes in the conterminous States. Is this difference because of the legal setup of the Native corporations? 

Replies and comments: The Alaskan tribes are, in 

fact, corporations, approaching, in a few years, the ability 

to sell off the lands that were distributed to them. It is a 

different management system. There are only two Indian 

reservations in Alaska in the same situation as those in 

the lower 48 States. The Alaskan Indians were never put 

upon in the same way as those in the conterminous 

States, that is, violated treaties, constant reduction in 

reservation boundaries, and so on. That sort of thing did 

not occur in Alaska, and so there seems to be more trust 

of non-Indians. As Jim Crowther said, you have to build 

trust between the two parties before you can work 

effectively. 

The BIA does not have responsibility for the Alaskan corporations. They are independent corporate organizations; there is no Federal oversight of their programs, 

except that there would be some response if a corporation failed. As a result of this independence, you can get 

rapid turnaround. In the lower 48, the BIA has to sign off 

on contracts. 

Local Government Needs for Urban 

Land-Use, Planning, and Zoning 

By J.R. Perry 

Because I am not an earth scientist, I should give 

you some idea of my background as a preface to my 

comments on urban land-use planning and zoning. I am 

Meeting Information Needs 65 
an urban planner and real estate consultant. I have an 

undergraduate degree in political science and am a 

member of the National Political Science Honorary 

Fraternity. My Master of Science degree is in urban 

planning, and I am a member of the AICP. I have had 

some experience in remote-sensing applications to land 

planning in Arizona, and I have worked at several local 

Government levels as an urban planner. 

On the basis of my training and experience, I have 

developed some theoretical observations on the subject 

at hand. The first is that Federal assistance to local 

Government comprehensive planning has become virtually extinct; the HUD 701 program is dead, and with it 

went planning grants to local Governments. Linkage to 

Federal programs has become functionally integrated 

into regulatory programs on a vertically insulated basis 

throughout Government. This was not always the case. 

At one time, there was a movement, the comprehensiveplanning movement, that focused on the local and 

regional Government planning process as an integrative 

mechanism in a democratic planning process. This 

comprehensive-planning focus at the local level has lost 

its place in the mainstream of Government. Regulation 

and management of individual Federal programs by 

different agencies with various goals over different time 

horizons, without comprehensive budget integration and 

goal setting by a professional planning body, has become 

the conventional wisdom. 

My second observation is that the de facto planning 

theory in American Government has been "muddling 

through," rather than attempting to achieve a rationalcalculative ideal. Systems maintenance through regulation, rather than institutionalization of the planning function within Government, has been the pattern since 

World War II. This policy has deteriorated to the point 

where the judicial system becomes planning through the 

"back door" by punishing the wrong moves in the 

increasingly cumbersome regulatory process. Wrong and 

inefficient directions are, of course, inevitable without 

comprehensive planning in a regulatory system. The cost 

of such wandering may be to the detriment of our 

children's quality of life and many aspects of their environment. 

Not since the National Resources Planning Board 

was abolished in the 1940's has there been any comprehensive Federal commitment to resource planning. Since 

F.D. Roosevelt, no president has been committed to the 

concept of planning for optimization of our national 

resources. The situation has deteriorated further since 

the Nixon administration axed the HUD 701 Comprehensive Planning Assistance Program. Even that level of 

Federal support was very low; however, it supported 

thousands of planning jobs and idealistic careers that no 

longer exist at the city, county, and State levels. A third 

observation is that history demonstrates that although a 

depression scenario was required to elevate planning to a 

level beyond ad hoc, disjointed incrementalism, we can 

rediscover that experience to advantage without another 

depression. Now that the "cold war" is truly thawing, we 

may find ourselves within a new, more rational political 

atmosphere than existed before the nuclear age. In fact, 

we may be near the dawn of a positive political environment favorable for considering a major national 

resource-planning effort that is integrated at all levels of 

Government and tied directly to budget planning. 

Such a commitment, for example, would facilitate 

data storage and the use of highly improved datagathering techniques at all levels of Government. I 

perceive a small improvement in data coordination 

within the past few years among various agencies, mostly 

as a natural result of computerization. This progress, I 

feel, is the precursor to more efficient and realistic 

government through planning; the planning would 

involve a new degree of professionalism at all levels and 

require the highest educational and retraining commitments. 

There is still very little planning coordination 

between the private and public sectors, both because 

Government regulation and judicial punishment inhibit 

the free flow of information, and because of justifiable 

fears that competitors will obtain proprietary knowledge. 

Even this consideration could be addressed within a 

rational planning framework in a democratic system. The 

corporate long-range planning efforts should be directly 

involved in a national effort to optimize the total costs 

and benefits to our society within the constraints of its 

democratic, republic, and capitalistic framework. The 

ultimate synthesis of my ideal future for planning may be 

embodied in the constitutional amendments developed 

by Rexford Guy Tugwell, one of F.D.R.'s "brain trust," 

now available through the Center for the Study of 

Democratic Institutions in Santa Barbara, Calif. 

On a practical level, there have been some good 

examples of Federal assistance in local planning, and I 

think the two most outstanding were USGS programs. 

The flood-plain-mapping program is a good example. 

The USGS flood-hazard-boundary maps were the basis 

for the first flood-plain-zoning ordinances in Arizona. 

Also, in the ground-water-management area, passage of 

the USGS program to the State level helped to facilitate 

what has become the Nation's most comprehensive 

ground-water-management and ground-water-planning 

program. 

As with the Depression-driven NRPB, CCC, and 

WP A Federal programs, it took negative, disastrous 

environmental problems (flooding and drought) involving land-use conflicts at the local level to implement the 

Federal programs. A good recent example, developed as 

part of an earthquake-hazard-reduction program, has 

been the seismic-risk data provided for use at the local 

planning level. In California, this facilitated major 

changes in their State Planning Act, which requires that 

66 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
local Governments develop hazard-reduction and 

seismic-risk elements in their comprehensive plan in 

concert with land-use plans. 

Unfortunately, when the problems are economic 

and esthetic, rather than oriented to immediate safety 

and survival, Government priorities are much more 

difficult to define without a formal and professional 

goal-setting process. Spectacular events precipitate legislative action, but the more mundane, positive, and nonstrategic (nonmilitary) aspects of our natural environment, such as planning for nonmetallic minerals, hardly 

make for headlines, media attention, and the legislative 

votes that we seem to need to obtain planning action. 

This is hardly a rational planning situation; it is the 

epitome of ad hoc incrementalism, but it is our present 

political climate. 

An example of the planning situation at the local 

level is the media attention and court action that has 

recently precipitated a complete change in Arizona law 

and better enabling legislation for local planning of 

gravel lands. Until 1988, the sand and gravel mines 

claimed constitutional exemption from planning and zoning authority, then settled for land-use self-regulation 

after litigation. Lack of data at the Government level has 

led to allowing the local operators to proclaim themselves the only experts and to prepare the maps to zone 

their own lands as SG (sand and gravel zone). Certainly, 

State and local Governments have recognized the importance of this resource, but they are uncertain where it is, 

do not have the geologic expertise to plan for such lands, 

and have begun to allow private landowners to delineate 

the zones without any realistic geologic interpretations, 

drilling, data gathering, or planning effort by State or 

Federal Government agencies. Lack of such data does 

not facilitate proper use of one of the most effective 

planning tools, the police power over land use. A similar 

course of events was experienced with flood-plain planning before the USGS, FEMA, and PIA got into the act, 

and provided some scientific basis for use of the police 

power in land-use planning and zoning. 

The economic consequences of mining this 

resource are not trivial. Within the next 15 years, about 

715 million tons of sand and gravel are going to be 

needed to meet projected construction demands in Arizona, largely in areas of urban growth. The total payroll 

for Arizona workers in sand and gravel mining and 

various affiliated construction industries was more than 

$2.39 billion in 1985. In that year, output per worker in 

sand and gravel mining was $80,908, which was slightly 

higher than that of the exalted electronics worker, who 

accounted for $80,490. The presently planned freeway 

system for Maricopa County will create a future demand 

for 8,760,000 yd3 of concrete and 14,496,000 tons of sand 

and gravel for its construction. 

In addition to the availability of the resource itself, 

the weight of rock products and the perishability of mixed 

concrete lead to increased transportation costs. As sand 

and gravel production sites are moved farther and farther 

away from construction sites, the total urban economic 

costs rise dramatically. Studies show that if production 

sites were moved only 10 mi from delivery sites, this 

would add more than $1.3 billion to Arizona construction 

costs over the next 15 years; and at a distance of 40 mi, 

the cost would increase to more than $5.2 billion in 

added construction costs to Arizona consumers. This 

increase does not account for other external diseconomies, such as torn-up urban streets, traffic congestion 

from trucks, air pollution, and so on. 

Certainly, sand and gravel lands should be available 

as close as possible to the place of use. However, 

considerable local opposition has become a reality as 

urban residential land uses have pushed onto the bajadas, 

flood fringes, and alluvial fans. Zoning is a tool being 

utilized to restrict the use of resources in some urban 

places. This situation has become more critical as the 

flood-plain program itself has made it difficult to mine in 

floodways. 

The nonmetallic minerals may be so varied and 

discrete that different data programs and mapping techniques are necessary for each, and the interface with local 

Government land-use planning programs will be different for each one. Each mineral may require different 

scales of data. I have focused only on sand and gravel 

because of their importance to the future of urban areas, 

and their sensitivity to good urban land-use planning. 

In summary, the future of integrated, intergovernmental, comprehensive natural-resource and land planning in America should be positively affected by a 

continuing thaw of the cold-war philosophy and its concomitant antiplanning political rhetoric. This change may 

foretell a virtual renaissance in planning during the 

1990's, further accommodated by major improvements in 

computers and such planning tools as remote sensing. 

Despite the lack of commitment and coordination of land 

planning, there have been good examples of Federal 

assistance to local planning, but not nearly enough to 

stem the rising costs of growth. Among these examples 

are the flood-plain, ground-water, and seismic-risk programs. A specific example of how geologic-resource 

information could be beneficially used now is the scientific identification of sand and gravel deposits for local 

Government planning and zoning agencies. The economic benefits could be very high. A mapping program 

would be required, in combination with flood-plainmapping efforts on the same base maps. To be useful at 

the local level, a scale of 1 in. to 200 ft would be required; 

help in transposing the data to zoning maps would be 

much appreciated by local planning directors. Identifying 

the deposits in urban areas, ranking their value (size and 

composition) on a rough scale, and printing the results on 

Flood Insurance Rate Maps would be a major contribution. 

Meeting Information Needs 67 
PARTICIPANTS' DISCUSSIONS OF 

LOCAL-PLANNING NEEDS 

• The total mineral output in Arizona of copper 

and everything else was about $1.7 billion. That gives us 

a scale to work from. The additional cost of moving the 

gravel to the consumer caused by zoning gravel pits out 

to areas beyond a 30-mi radius from the use site is going 

to add $4.5 billion in direct cost. That's more than the 

output of the entire mineral industry of the State! 

• Even though Phoenix is the largest city in Arizona and the ninth largest in the United States, it's still a 

pretty small spot on the map. Planners are not worried 

about 1:1,000,000-, 1:250,000-, or even 1:24,000-scale 

maps; they often are thinking about data at a some fairly 

tight scale. 

Reply: When you have discrete data-let's say, the 

location and description of one of the zeolite minesthose data are at a pretty large scale. As for maps, I've 

never seen a map that wasn't useful to a land planner. 

There are 15 county planners; some counties have a lot of 

private land, and some don't. In addition, the State is 

trading off its land with the Federal Government, and so 

we can't depend on the pattern remaining unchanged. 

Some lands will be urbanized if a 50- or 100-year time 

scale is used. Once these data are available, we can start 

saying that subdivisions will not be put on an area 

because it has mineral potential. All an urban planner 

can tell is that urbanization is increasing all across the 

State. Phoenix isn't the only town that's growing: Tucson 

is big, but the Yuma, Flagstaff, Camp Verde, and Parker 

areas are also expanding. Some of the counties where 

traditional mines are located are not developing significant urban areas, for example, Greenleaf and Cochise. 

So, as to scale of practicality on the geological-survey 

level, whatever scale is economic is acceptable because 

the next wave of urbanization will take up any slack. 

• If there were an opportunity for the Arizona 

State Geologist to hold a meeting of county land planners 

or city county planners to discuss minerals, is there 

anyone out there to invite? 

Reply: The AICP at the State level is one possibility. There was a remote-sensing committee within it, and 

there are GIS subgroups at the national and local levels. 

There are planners interested in information, some 

involved in transportation as well as land-use planning, 

some involved in environmental planning. But they come 

from the private land-planning tradition. There are mailing lists and contacts for such persons. 

• Is there some way the AZGS could support a 

group meeting with planners that would focus their 

attention on minerals? 

Reply: A talk could be scheduled at an annual 

meeting of the AICP, or you could schedule a meeting 

and invite the society. It would be more economical to 

ask to be put on the annual-meeting program. 

• Can we have more elaboration and clarification 

about the data requirements for planners? There is a 

clear picture of explosive growth in Arizona over the next 

several decades, and an increasing use of industrial 

minerals. We have heard that the data necessary to work 

on this problem, using the analogy of the flood plain, 

were needed but weren't available early enough. What 

types of industrial-mineral information will be necessary 

at the local planning level, and how should it be put 

together and made available? 

Reply: That's a big question deserving some theoretical work by resource experts over a period of time; it's 

not something that can be answered specifically. For 

example, there are 14 counties that don't have maps of 

sand and gravel potential to use for overlays. Data for use 

in compliance with a pending State act, if passed, would 

be a sand and gravel resource map for each county for 

use by the planning department and zoning agencies. For 

discrete mines, the scale changes, and data within a very 

small area are needed. Unless the deposits occur within 

an urban area, they would never cause a major conflict. 

There are other mines that create incredible hazards 

from tailings, which that can result in disastrous floods. 

I've surveyed some disaster areas where tailings have 

become involved in urban water supplies. Obviously, the 

environmental departments have been created to help 

regulate water pollution, and the health agencies may 

have an interface with them. That's another level of data 

use for environmental-planning purposes, but communication has to be kept up over time. As for maps, the use 

of remote-sensing data opens up another level of data 

whereby improved technology permits identification of 

resources as well as tectonic features. Geomorphologic 

data that may be useful in the scientific community are 

not always useful at the local planning level; they have to 

be interpreted. 

• This workshop has been principally a meeting of 

geologists, so I'd like to speak from the viewpoint of a 

manager and operator of a local industrial-minerals 

operation, as opposed to an academic looking at rocks. 

I've worked in the minerals industry all my life in oil and 

gas, coal, uranium, and metallic minerals, as well as 

industrial minerals. Each of these commodities is somewhat different, but they all have a common base. From an 

economic standpoint, you realize that there are different 

areas of expertise which will be required to be successful. 

For example, in the early (pre-1902) oil and gas industry, 

the only thing necessary to be a successful company was 

to be a smart geologist, that is, a smart finder of the 

resource; you could have total idiots running the rest of 

the business. In Eastern coal, a different set of skills were 

required for success. Geologic skills were not particularly 

important, but very strong local managerial presence, to 

keep costs down, and some moderate sense of market 

trends were important for success. In Western nonferrous metals, copper-lead-zinc, similar competence68 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
more geologic input, but strong cost control of the 

operation-was needed, as well as a high level of technology in the mineral-processing field. Marketing ability 

was not required. 

Industrial minerals are different, in that you need 

some competence in all three areas, as well as very strong 

ability in the marketing area. The geologic input is 

needed to discover and delineate competitive depositsnot perfect deposits, but competitive deposits, that is, 

something that will be useful for the market being 

defined. The mineral technology and processing skills are 

needed so that the mine will not operate at a substantial 

cost disadvantage to its competitors. It's a pretty roughand-ready process in most cases. The real key for success, 

in my experience, is to be a darn good marketer, or 

you've lost the ball game. The geologic input, the 

resource assessment, and the mineral technology are all 

important, but the creation of a market product that 

meets specifications which can beat out competitive 

substitutes is more important. That's where you obtain 

leverage. 

If I were going to attempt to encourage industrial 

minerals in Arizona, or anywhere else for that matter, I 

think I'd be looking at this problem differently. Rather 

than hiring more geologists, I'd be looking at hiring some 

mineral economists and (or) market-development persons to see if some of these common materials can be 

made into a silk purse. For example, most of northern 

Arizona is covered with volcanic cinders. You can take 

those cinders and make dandy roadstone or driveway 

gravel when it's mixed with asphalt. Their value is about 

$2.00 to $4.00 per ton. It's a low-value, common-variety 

resource. How about taking those same cinders and 

putting research-and-development money into seeing if 

you could create a medium for making hot tubs to sell in 

California? In this form, the cinder resource becomes a 

high-value, specialty resource. The same is true with 

specialty clays and diatomaceous earth in Arizona; these 

materials take technology at the market end that probably is as important as the resource identification and 

delineation. Again, I think we as professionals need to 

encourage and apply as great an effort on the marketing 

side as on the resource-assessment side, to stimulate the 

industrial-minerals industry in the State. 

• There seems to be a philosophical difficulty and 

a frustration that we must defend minerals development 

and exploration, as if these activities were the enemy of 

the environment. There should be no reason for minerals 

to compete with the deer for priority. We have to make 

the case at the lower level that ore deposits are necessities for living and cannot be taken for granted. There also 

seems to be a momentum or mindset at present that the 

long-range national objectives are the biotic values, 

which take precedence over the abiotic resources. How 

can we reset the current priorities of public and governmental planners to the reasonable perspective that 

resources are also necessary? 

Replies and comments: We can start off with the 

term "benign ignorance." But beyond that, the history of 

the BLM may illustrate the root of the problem. The 

USGS' Conservation Division dealt with minerals management in the Federal domain. This responsibility was 

transferred to the Minerals Management Service, and 

subsequently to the BLM. Over the period of USGS 

tenure, from 1925 to 1982, the BLM was called the 

General Land Office. In 1936, the Grazing Service was 

formed. These agencies were combined in 1946, becoming the Bureau of Land Management. At that time, its 

entire focus had been on the surface estate-grazing and 

land disposal. With the addition of the Minerals Management Service, the BLM underwent large expansion and 

responsibility for the overview of the surface and the 

subsurface-two entirely different, mostly competing 

perspectives of the world. The competition between 

surface and subsurface values continues today within the 

BLM. In answer to the question, there may be a lot of 

people who recognize this area of conflict and try to 

compensate. The ELM's job, before 1982, was almost 

entirely surface protection; minerals development was 

handled by a different agency. I don't think that we can 

expect to turn around attitudes of that magnitude in a 

short period of time. It's something that requires much 

effort in education. It may be a never-ending process. 

Outside of Government, the answer is probably the 

same, local education of lay persons. It will never end, 

but we have to continue trying to develop that clear, 

long-range vision of reasonable and proper priorities. 

As Senator Todd said, perhaps 1 out of 90 persons 

in the legislature is interested in natural resources, but 

let's hope that there are more than that 1. Even among 

geologists in and outside of academia, how many are 

really concerned about resources? All too often, we're 

interested in our own research, and we can communicate 

effectively with others of a like persuasion. That's important, of course. We tend to get specialized in this society, 

and sometimes we look at the world differently; that may 

not be what the real world needs. 

We have to do a better job of talking to the public 

about these concerns, rather than just to ourselves. We 

must move in that direction in any way possible, to let the 

public know what the issues are and their significance in 

national priorities. Let's not forget to talk to the Optimist 

Clubs. 

Meeting Information Needs 69 

Summary Comments and Recommendations 

T.H. Eyde, Moderator 

Introduction 

Several resource-availability issues have been 

examined during the workshop: (1) the current status of 

industrial rock and mineral resources in Arizona and the 

future prospects for enhancing them; (2) some of the 

critical problem areas that complicate the search for and 

evaluation of these materials; (3) several encouraging 

current geotechnical research programs that can be 

expected to assist in the evaluation, exploration, and 

discovery of resources; and ( 4) examination of the perceived needs of resource information by a widely divergent user constituency, including Federal, State, and local 

Governments, the Indian Nations, academia, and the 

resource industry.The objective in the final workshop 

session is to develop participant recommendations for 

sharpening the focus of resource programs and products 

of the AZGS, USGS, and other resource-directed organizations. A summary statement by a panel representing 

the user community is followed by a compilation of the 

specific recommendations. 

Industry Comments 

By B.N. Watson 

Exploration for industrial minerals differs vastly 

from exploration for metallic minerals. Development of 

both metallic- and nonmetallic-mineral materials is market driven, but industrial minerals have to be handled on 

a much more individual basis. Material specifications are 

critical, and a marketing strategy may be crucial. A 

serious problem for many explorationists-those who are 

not affiliated with a large company-is to get material 

identified, analyzed, and tested. We've also seen that 

sand and gravel is another world, which needs to be 

considered separately from all the other industrial minerals. 

There probably is a lot more industrial-mineral 

exploration and development going on in Arizona than 

you might think. It's a type of business that's out of the 

limelight, in comparison with gold and silver. As Ted 

Eyde pointed out, the industrial-minerals business 

accounts for something like $18 billion per year, in 

comparison with only $7 billion for the metallic minerals, 

mostly copper. Note that domestic supplies meet most 

U.S. needs for industrial rock and mineral materials. 

I think that this workshop has considerable potential value, an important part of which has been the 

opportunity to clear the air and to make some suggestions for program enhancement. It bothers me that I've 

felt inclined to make such recommendations as the core 

repository and upgrading BLM claims-data posting, 

which would require increased Government personnel 

and money. I view the USGS and AZGS as service 

organizations, each with strong research components. 

But as service organizations, I stress that the industry has 

a continuing need for their traditional geologic mapping. 

That's probably the number 1 need of industry from both 

surveys. Age determinations and analytical data also are 

continuing basic needs. I'm happy with the general 

directions of the USGS resource programs, as far as I 

know them. I would deplore any deemphasis on mapping. 

I'm also happy with what I see of the AZGS programs, 

but I'd like to see that activity scaled up and their 

publications increased. 

Finally, I guess I'd agree that better communication is definitely needed between industry and the Federal and State regulatory agencies. My own land agent 

and geologists are working on this problem with the BLM 

in California and Nevada. I think, perforce, if not for 

other reasons, that communications between industry 

and the regulatory agencies will increase. I don't have a 

list of items that I wish the Government would provide at 

the present time; I'd like more to emphasize the things 

we like that they're already doing and that we'd like to see 

continued. 

Summary Comments and Recommendations 71 
Federal Land-Management Agency 

Comments 

By L.P. Bauer 

This has been an extremely useful workshop for me 

in calling attention to the special problems of the 

industrial-minerals industry, because my background has 

been in leasable minerals-oil, gas, and coal. The need 

for increased communications is especially important, 

and I'll see if a one-day conference with industry persons 

and the Federal land regulators can be scheduled-to 

explain our administrative positions on new policies, to 

develop ways of handling legal requirements and data, 

and to gain advice from industry. The BLM has done this 

on almost a yearly basis for the oil and gas industry in the 

"OPEC" States of New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, 

and Montana. We should do that for the industrialmineral industry in Arizona. 

State Land-Management Agency Comments 

ByM.J. Rice 

The current mapping being done by the AZGS and 

the possibility of completing depositional-environment 

studies are information that we would find useful, particularly in evaluation for an inventory of potential mineral properties in Arizona. 

As far as industry's needs are concerned, we can 

provide access to the lithologic and electric logs that are 

in our files, and can assist in land-status determinations. 

Because our need for information is quite extensive, I'd 

like to see the ASLD involved in a focused exchange of 

information with all the agencies represented here, as 

well as with industry representatives. I believe that these 

workshops are helpful in identifying the framework for 

better communication. 

Academia Comments 

By M.F. Sheridan 

The three main functions of a university are teaching, research, and service. Some suggestions are presented here for improvement in education related to 

nonmetallic-mineral deposits, provision of resources necessary for training and research in these areas, and 

development of services that they could provide to the 

resource community. 

Improvement in education requires better 

resource information regarding nonmetallic minerals. At 

present, the State lacks a uniform coverage of geologic 

and spectral data. Landsat TM imagery is one of the best 

available sources for such data. A complete set of TM 

images for Arizona would greatly improve the availability 

of geologic and other information to the public. Its 

dissemination would be facilitated by the use of a centralized image-processing laboratory. The estimated cost 

for complete coverage of the State by TM imagery in 

digital format is approximately $40,000. The presence of 

an image-processing facility for geologic data at an 

academic institution, at the new USGS office, or at the 

AZGS office in Tucson would be important for evaluation of industrial-mineral resources. 

Closer cooperation between academia and industry 

would be of great benefit for resource assessment and 

exploration. University students constitute a tremendous 

asset for on-the-job training because they are technically 

well trained and strongly motivated. The students need 

both moral and financial support from industry and 

Government agencies. Students are constantly looking 

for research problems; however, it is difficult to convince 

them to choose research problems that appear to have a 

poor chance of being funded. Although research projects 

range from theoretical to practical, funding from Government agencies, such as the NSF, is generally directed 

toward the more theoretical; research projects with 

strongly practical objectives generally go unfunded. 

Because specific target commodities change over time, 

an early connection with a company could focus a student 

toward an area of research that is interesting to industry 

and also beneficial to the general public. 

Close contacts among all the groups represented at 

this workshop would help achieve the academic goals of 

research and service. Better communication among universities, Government agencies, and industry could help 

promote the development of natural resources. Joint 

research projects with common goals would be of great 

benefit to the State. Identification of specific commodities to be studied by industry, Government, and academia 

is needed. One example of a topic that could be studied 

is volcanic materials-lavas, pumice, pumicite, and cinders. A study of these products could determine possible 

markets, the available resource base, and field specifications for exploration. Such a study would form the basis 

for a source document for decisions by land-management 

agencies. At present, each site for these materials is 

generally considered unique. 

The universities are the ideal environment in which 

to foster advances in the techniques of resource assessment and exploration. One potential research theme is 

the development of a prototype GIS for mineral 

resources. A GIS would be useful because it not only 

contains a CAD component with geographic layers but 

also has an integrated data-base system with linkages 

between both modes. Changes in one part of the system 

have an immediate and visible effect on the rest. Thus, a 

GIS is dynamic and well suited to testing various eco72 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
nomic and geographic models. A GIS should be invaluable for considering projected markets for commodities. 

In many other ways, a GIS would be extremely useful for 

resource assessment. 

Development of a GIS will require a large team of 

researchers to cover different aspects of the project. 

Because of the great investment of time and effort in 

acquiring the GIS data base, we must start developing a 

prototype system as soon as possible. The ultimate form 

of data structure and display cannot be assembled without developing and testing a prototype. We also need to 

create resource models for analysis of the data. Both of 

these projects (data acquisition and resource models) are 

areas in which academia can be helpful in the establishment of an Arizona GIS (AGIS). 

The university faculty could synthesize models for 

resource assessment, using data from student theses and 

their own projects. An example of a project well suited to 

data synthesis is the type of basin analysis that Dale 

Nations and Wayne Ranney reported on at this workshop. Every basin in Arizona is probably unique, and we 

need to know more about the resources they contain. 

This also is an area where better coordination between 

industry and academia could produce positive results. 

Students will be much more interested in practical problems if their faculty advisors are also involved. 

Finally, there is a need for developing new analytical techniques that are specific for different types of 

industrial-mineral products. The universities have the 

facilities and faculty to provide the diverse research 

capabilities needed for this type of investigation. Most 

faculty members in the geosciences, however, are 

unaware of the types of problems facing industry, in 

terms of identifying the quality and quantity of various 

industrial minerals. Projects must be proposed and 

research funds made available for development of the 

new technology. 

Recommendations of the Participants 

E.W. Tooker, Compiler 

Before setting forth specific workshop recommendations, it seems worthwhile to place them in the context 

of the main conference findings. It was recognized that 

there will be a continuing and increasing pressure to 

expand the Arizona economy so as to accommodate an 

explosive increase in population, which, in turn, will 

require accelerated use of industrial rock and mineral 

materials. At the same time, the known available industrial rock and mineral resource base is being depleted, 

and the sources of potential materials are being subjected to increasing land-use competition. How can earth 

scientists, land managers, planners, and the mineral 

industry begin to help alleviate this apparent impasse? 

First, accurate, up-to-date, retrievable resource information, together with new earth-science search technology, 

will aid resource-assessment, discovery, and economicdevelopment activities. Second and no less important is 

the need promote congenial, mutual understanding of 

the ground rules for, and the motivation of, the individual 

parts of the resource constituency in Arizona. Reduction 

of adversarial working relationships among the diverse 

users of industrial-mineral resources should help provide 

the climate for more equitable and environmentally safe 

future resource decisions. 

This workshop produced a beginning response to 

these determinations. The recommendations that follow 

illuminate some of the specific paths toward resolving the 

apparent resource dilemma facing the State. Ways to 

increase the effectiveness of the resource programs of the 

USGS and AZGS are also considered. The recommendations are grouped in the order in which they were 

considered during the workshop. Starred(*) recommendations indicate that their significance warrants prompt 

attention; unstarred recommendations represent desirable, longer term goals. 

DATA ACQUISITION AND MANAGEMENT 

*la. The AZGS and USGS should continue and, 

where possible, expand their joint and individual 

resources-directed geologic-mapping programs. 

*lb. The AZGS and USGS should continue their 

joint efforts to acquire a broad spectrum of computerbased resource information and to provide data-retrieval 

systems accessible by a wide range of users. 

* lc. The computer systems of the AZGS and 

USGS should be compatible with each other and with 

those in other States, ultimately to develop a uniform 

system of national industrial-mineral-resource information. 

* ld. The operation of the AZGS and USGS data 

centers should be more closely coordinated with and tied 

to related systems or sources of additional data in other 

Government agencies, academia, and industry. 

*le. The existing AZGS well-cutting and corestorage library obtained from public and private industry 

sources should be expanded. 

*lf. The AZGS and USGS computer systems 

should be periodically evaluated by representatives of the 

user community to assure that the systems meet existing 

and anticipated data needs. 

lg. A "one stop" computer center for Arizona 

resource information may provide users with the most 

efficient and economical data source. 

*2. An interagency and academic inventory of 

available Arizona resource information should be undertaken, and a plan developed to share such information on 

request. 

Summary Comments and Recommendations 73 
3. Upon completion or abandonment of any 

industry activity on State, Federal, and, ideally, private 

lands in Arizona, the files of raw data from drilling and 

geologic exploration should be made available to AZGS 

data systems, so as to improve the data base, forestall or 

reduce present costly duplicative exploration efforts, and 

assist in resource assessments. 

4. A complete set of Landsat TM images for 

Arizona and the equipment necessary to use the data 

should be made available. 

5. As research on and development of a GIS 

proceeds, such capabilities should be applied to the 

State's resource-data system, along with the technical 

backup required. 

6. The capability to digitize and manipulate geologic, geophysical, and geochemical map data should be 

made routinely available to meet needs for quick release 

of map data, and for update and compilation. The State 

geologic map (1:500,000 scale) should be digitized first; 

this would be the core data for a GIS and for regional 

interpretation. 

7. A centralized repository for the systematic collection and quick release of the rock ages that become 

available each year in the State should be undertaken by 

the AZGS. 

8. Completed and inprogress dissertations on Arizona geology and resource-related subjects by Arizona 

and out-of-State universities should be compiled, 

indexed by title, and published annually by the AZGS. 

9. Industry and Government agencies should make 

better use of the technical support available from academia by the use of strongly motivated, well-trained, and 

faculty-guided students. The University of Arizona's geoscience symposium program for the review of student 

research activities should be expanded to the other 

universities in the State. 

10. Public apathy or ignorance of the fragility of the 

industrial-mineral-resource market and the tenuous 

availability of these resources highlights the need for 

increased education in the schools, the legislature, at 

public and service-club meetings, and in the printed and 

video media. 

RESOURCE ANALYSIS AND TESTING 

1. Although industry depends on commercial laboratories for analyses and materials testing, these laboratory facilities and services often are not well known. 

Therefore, an unofficial listing of volunteered information about available laboratories, their services, and 

charges, but without warranty as to the quality or speed 

of the services, should be kept on file as a useful service 

to explorationists who may lack access to such services. 

2. Industrial minerals are unlike metallic minerals 

in terms of their occurrence, specifications, testing, production, and marketing characteristics. Thus, most of the 

land-management and resource-assessment methodology has been modeled on metallic-mineral-resource 

characteristics, whereas the classification, development 

of specifications, and production of industrial-mineral 

resources lie more in the area of marketing than of 

geologic availability: 

a. Agreement on standard physical and chemical properties of industrial minerals should be 

considered by a broadly based committee representing industry, academia, and Government agencies. The composition of many individual minerals 

has been established by ASTM, AEG, and State 

and Federal resource agencies, but generic and 

specific attributes for aggregated materials and for 

many of the specialized or performance-oriented 

industrial minerals have not been established systematically. 

b. The USGS, AZGS, USBM, ADMMR, and 

academia together should harmonize economic 

factors and mineral technology to provide correct, 

more equitable formulas in determining resource 

values in land-management decisions. 

3. A broader range of materials testing should be 

implemented to improve the accuracy of resource assessments for industrial minerals in WSA's, particularly to 

enable changing certain "common variety" materials into 

specialized, performance-oriented materials, where 

applicable, and thereby increase their weight in the 

assessment process. 

4. Additional academic research is needed on 

fibrous or acicular minerals in determining their surfaceactivity properties to use to counter the current shapeof-the-silicate-minerals criteria for separating those 

industrial minerals that may be carcinogenic from those 

that are safe to mine and use. 

5. Periodic updating of information in such publications as the ADMMR's report on Arizona industrial 

minerals and the USBM's publication on the status of 

and need for specific industrial-mineral commodities in 

the State should be continued. 

LAND-AVAILABILITY AND PERMITTING INFORMATION 

*1. Completion of the computerization of miningclaim location, staking, and assessment records by the 

BLM should receive priority; a similar file should be 

started for State-owned lands by the ASLD, and for 

Indian lands by the BIA. 

*2. Duplicative permitting requirements by State 

and Federal agencies that oversee exploration activity 

and resource development should be eliminated; the 

essential permitting requirement should be placed in one 

agency, available to all. Colorado, for example, has a 

permit directory for energy-and mineral-resource devel74 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
opment that contains all the forms, names of contacts, 

and pertinent telephone numbers. A similar directory for 

Arizona would be desirable. 

3. Existing publications, such as the USBM's report 

on the availability of Federally owned minerals in 

national parks and on military reservations in Arizona, 

and the ADMMR's report on the laws and regulations 

governing mineral rights on State lands, are invaluable 

sources of information that need to be regularly updated 

to reflect changes in minerals availability and policy. 

4. Regularly scheduled meetings that include 

industry, land managers, and resource evaluators should 

be initiated to discuss problems, clarify controversial 

actions, foster development of acceptable weighting 

standards for resource values, and propose revisions of 

outdated or handicapping BLM or ASLD guidelines, 

many of which currently may provide only minimal 

recognition of known or potential industrial-mineralresource values. 

GEOTECHNICAL RESEARCH 

* 1. Periodic scientific/technical meetings of personnel from academia, State and Federal agencies, and 

industry who are directly involved with Arizona resource 

problems and challenges should be established. Such 

meetings will provide the incentive for closer liaison and 

mutual support, sharing of expertise and facilities, expansion of research opportunities (particularly in the areas 

noted below), and the development of new concepts to 

stimulate the industrial-minerals activity. 

2. Research in geophysical technology, which has 

not been fully tested, is needed to expand the capability 

for assessing the potential for and the exploration of 

industrial minerals. This research should include 

gamma-ray-spectroscopy, EM, spectral-reflectance, and 

other techniques. 

3. Research is needed to provide a stronger base 

for evaluation of geochemical anomalies and to distinguish those anomalies having resource potential from 

those that may be of scientific interest but do not have 

resource potential. 

4. Existing regional geochemical data, originally 

collected for special purposes, should be screened and 

edited before being released into regional digitized geochemical data base. 

5. Research is needed leading to rapid and quantifiable mineral technology, using simple chemical or 

instrumental methods for field and laboratory use in the 

detection of industrial-mineral materials. 

6. Promising new assessment and exploration 

methods, such as remote sensing and neotectonicdomains research, should be developed and expanded to 

aid in identifying new terranes permissive for the discovery of industrial-mineral resources. 

7. The focus of ASU's and USGS' prototype 

resource programs in their respective GIS's should be 

specifically broadened to include industrial rock and 

mineral materials. 

8. Resource-occurrence models, such as the mineral, geochemical, and geologic basin types, which assist 

exploration, and the statistical models needed for 

resource assessment require continuing research and 

testing. 

MEETING THE NEEDS FOR RESOURCE INFORMATION 

* 1. Arizona and the Nation need committed, coordinated, and well-informed land planning from Federal, 

State, and local land-management and protection agencies to assure availability and wise use of resources, while 

maintaining environmental and health values. 

*2. Government agencies should strive to maintain 

open communication with industry representatives, who 

depend on prompt, sympathetic, and equitable actions. A 

wide range of management alternatives is needed to 

assure that future resource development is not forestalled or precluded in an adversarial climate or by 

overzealous use of the regulation. 

3. Creating sound legislation in the public interest 

depends on resource scientists and professionals to provide their best, unbiased information and advice to the 

legislatures, and on industry support for those legislators 

who are responsive to meeting the State's continuing 

need for industrial-mineral resources. 

4. The Indian tribes will benefit from the development of greater inhouse tribal expertise and confidence 

in handling their own mineral-resource matters with the 

outside resource community. 

a. Companies should form mutually beneficial 

partnerships with the tribes through the development of personal relationships with tribal representatives, technology transfer, and training of Indians 

in developing their resource base. 

b. Special programs should be developed by 

academia in which useful university-extension programs are jointly planned and held on tribal lands. 

c. Expertise in the form of land management, 

geologic and mining technology, and resourceassessment methods should be available from the 

Federal Government. 

5. Public meetings are encouraged, such as those of 

the USGS' CUSMAP, at which the results of an organization's resource information, management actions, or 

research results can be presented and discussed informally by users before release of formal, usually delayed, 

publications. 

6. Informal discussions of resource-related problems, which may involve a diverse group of producers and 

users, such as those participating in this workshop, are 

Summary Comments and Recommendations 75 
more productive for developing solutions than are formal 

adversarial hearings. Therefore, the workshop participants recommend that this session be followed at some 

regular interval by followup sessions to evaluate what has 

been accomplished toward meeting these recommendations, to consider further strategies for moving forward, 

and to consider any problems that have arisen in the 

interim. 

7. Future industrial-mineral-resource requirements in Arizona undoubtedly will move toward a search 

for those resources required for high-technology applications, such as superconductivity, structural ceramics, 

and organic polymers, that meet as-yet-undefined, stringent user specifications and require long and complex 

processing. These small-volume, high-cost materials for 

"tomorrow's necessities" (London Mining Journal, 

1988) will require technology advances to locate and 

develop them, and the modification of land management 

and planning regulations to make them available. Thus, 

high-technology research by Government, academia, and 

industry must be anticipated and planned. 

Closing Comments 

By G.H. Allcott 

The AZGS and USGS greatly appreciate the time 

and serious effort by the workshop participants in their 

considerations of the problems faced by the industrial 

rock and mineral resource community, and their purposeful recommendations to reduce or solve these problems. Our industrial-mineral-resource programs should 

benefit from a better appreciation of the ways in which 

the information we develop can be used, how it can be 

delivered successfully in a timely fashion, and even more 

significantly, what the gaps are that our users find. Your 

opinions have been helpful to us, and we hope that you 

have gained a better understanding of what we are doing 

and where our interests lie. I concur with you that such 

meetings as these need to be conducted regularly. We 

will make significant progress toward meeting Arizona's 

resource needs only if we approach them constructivelytogether. 

76 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
References Cited 

Albers, J.P., 1986, Descriptive model ofpodiform chromite, in 

Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 34. 

Allais, M., 1957, Methods of appraising economic prospects of 

mining exploration over large territories: Management 

Science, v. 3, no. 4, p. 285-347. 

Attanasi, B.D., and DeYoung, J.H., Jr., 1986, Grade and 

tonnage model of shoreline placer Ti, in Cox, D.P., and 

Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 270-273. 

Barton, P.B., 1986, User-friendly mineral deposit models, in 

Cargill, S.M., and Green, S.B., eds., Prospects for mineral resource assessments on public lands. Proceedings 

of the Leesburg workshop: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 980, p. 94-110. 

Bates, R.L., and Jackson, J.A., 1982, Our modem stone age: 

Los Angeles, William Kaufman, Inc., 132 p. 

Beikman, H.M., Peterson, J.A., Huber, D.F., and Butler, W.C., 

1986, Metallic mineral and mineral-fuel resource potential map of Arizona showing major mineral deposits: 

U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Investigations 

Resources Map MR-94, scale 1:1,000,000. 

Bressler, S.L., and Butler, R.F., 1978, Magnetostratigraphy of 

the late Tertiaty Verde Formation, central Arizona: 

Earth and Planetacy Science Letters, v. 38, p. 319-330. 

Bcyan, D.P., 1987, Natural lightweight aggregates of the southwest, in Peirce, H.W., ed., Proceedings of the 21st forum 

on the geology of industrial minerals: Arizona Bureau of 

Geology and Mineral Technology, Geological Survey 

Branch Special Paper 4, p.55-63. 

Burgin, L.B., 1985, The mineral industcy of Arizona, in Area 

reports, domestic, v. 2 of Minerals yearbook 1985: Washington, U.S. Bureau of Mines, p. 59. 

Burt, D.M., and Sheridan, M.F., 1986, Mineral deposits related 

to topaz rhyolites in the Southwest, in Beatty, Barbara, 

and Wilkinson, P.A.K., eds., Frontiers in geology and ore 

deposits of Arizona and the southwest: Arizona Geological Society Digest, v. 16, p. 170-178. 

Cargill, S.M., and Green, S.B., eds., 1986, Prospects for mineral 

resources assessment on public lands. Proceedings of the 

Leesburg workshop: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 

980,330 p. 

Cassel, D.l., 1980, Sedimentacy petrography and depositional 

models for the nonmarine carbonate rocks of the Verde 

Formation, Northern Verde Valley, Arizona: Flagstaff, 

Northern Arizona University, M.S. thesis, 153 p. 

Coope, Brian, 1987, A world review of the industrial minerals 

industcy: London Mining Journal, Industrial Minerals 

Supplement, v. 308, no. 7919, p. 1-15. 

Cox, D.P, 1986a, Descriptive models of diamond pipes, in Cox, 

D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: 

U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 54. 

--- 1986b, Descriptive model of diamond placers, in Cox, 

D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: 

U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 274. 

Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., 1986, Mineral deposit 

models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, 379 p. 

Crippen, R.E., Blom, R.G., and Heyada, J.R., 1988, Directed 

band ratioing for the retention of perceptually independent topographic expression in chromaticity enhanced 

imagecy: International Journal of Remote Sensing, v. 9, 

no. 4, p. 749-765. 

Dolbear, S.H., ed., 1949, Industrial minerals and rocks (nonmetallics other than fuels): New York, American Institute of Mining and Metallurgical Engineers, 1156 p. 

Drew, L.J., Bliss, J.D., Bowen, R.W., Bridges, N.J., Cox, D.P., 

DeYoung, J.H., Jr., Houghton, J.C., Ludington, S.D., 

Menzie, W.D., Page, N.J, Root, D.H., and Singer, D.A., 

1984, Quantification of undiscovered mineral resource 

assessment-the case study of U.S. Forest Service wilderness tracts in the Pacific Mountain System: Economic 

Geology, v. 81, no. 1, p. 80-88. 

Eberlein, G.D., and Menzie, W.D., 1978, Map and tables 

describing mineral resource potential of central Alaska: 

U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 78-1D, scale 

1:1,000,000, 2 sheets. 

Eyde, T.H., and Eyde, D.T., 1987a, The Bowie chabazite 

deposit [ abs.], in Peirce, H.W., ed., Proceedings of the 

21st forum on the geology of industrial minerals: Arizona Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology, Geological Survey Branch Special Paper 4, p. 133. 

--- 1987b, Bentonite and specialty sand deposits in the 

Bidahochi Formation, in Peirce, H.W., ed., Proceedings 

of the 21st forum on the geology of industrial minerals: 

Arizona Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology, 

Geological Survey Branch Special Paper 4, p. 123-127. 

Force, E.R., 1986, Descriptive model of shoreline placer Ti, in 

Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 270. 

Goldsmith, Richard, Horton, J.W., Jr., Milton, D.J., Gair, J.E., 

and D'Agostino, J.P., 1986, Mineral resource potential 

for construction materials in the Charlotte 1 o X 2° quadReferences Cited 77 
rangle, North Carolina and South Carolina: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map 

1-1251-M, scale 1:250,000. 

Grybeck, D.J., and DeYoung, J.H., Jr., 1978, Map and tables 

describing mineral resource potential of the Brooks 

Range, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 78-1-B, scale 1:1,000,000. 

Harris, D.P., and Agterberg, F.P., 1981, The appraisal of 

mineral resources, in Skinner, B.J., ed.: Economic Geology, 75th anniversary volume, 1905-1980: El Paso, Tex., 

Economic Geology Publishing Co., p. 897-938. 

Harben, P.W., and Bates, R.L., 1984, Geology of the nonmetallics: New York, Metals Bulletin, Inc., 392 p. 

Hewett, D.F., Callaghan, Eugene, Moore, B.N., Nolan, T.B., 

Rubey, W.W., and Schaller, W.T., 1938, Mineral 

resources of the region around Boulder Dam: U.S. 

Geological Survey Bulletin 871, 197 p. 

Hodges, C.A., Cox, D.P., Singer, D.A., Case, J.E., Berger, B.R., 

and Albers, J.P., 1984, U.S. Geological SurveyINGEOMINAS mineral resource assessment of Columbia: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 84-345, 

348 p., scale 1:1,000,000, 2 sheets. 

Hudson, T.L., and DeYoung, J.H., Jr., 1978, Map and tables 

describing mineral resource potential of the Seward 

Peninsula, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File 

Report 78-1-C, scale 1:1,000,000. 

Koski, R.A., 1986, Descriptive model of volcanogenic Mn, in 

Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposits 

models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 139. 

Lamp, 1988, Getting warmer: The search for super C: v. 70, no. 

2, p. 14-17. 

Lewis, R.E., 1983, Geology of the Hackberry Mountain Volcanic Center, Yavapai County, Arizona: Pasadena, California Institute of Technology, Ph.D. thesis, 295 p. 

Lindgren, Waldemar, 1932, Mineral deposits: New York, 

McGraw-Hill, 930 p. 

Lindsay, E.H., Johnson, N.M., and Opdyke, N.D., 1975, Preliminary correlation of North American land mammal 

ages and geomagnetic chronology, in Smith, B.R., and 

Friedland, N.E., eds., Studies of Cenozoic paleontology 

and stratigraphy (Hibbard volume): Ann Arbor, University of Michigan, Museum of Paleontology, p. 111-119. 

Lipman, P.W., and Sawyer, D.A., 1985, Mesozoic ash-flow 

caldera fragments in southeastern Arizona and their 

relations to porphyry copper deposits: Geology, v. 13, no. 

9, p. 652-656. 

MacKevett, E.M., Singer, D.A., and Holloway, C.D., 1978, 

Maps and tables describing metalliferous mineral 

resource potential of southern Alaska: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 78-1-E, scale 1:1,000,000. 

McKee, E.H., and and Elston, D.P., 1980, Reversal chronology 

from a 7.9 to 11.5-Mg-old volcanic sequence in Arizona: 

Comparison with ocean-floor polarity record: Journal of 

Geophysical Research, v. 85, p. 327-337. 

Mining Journal, London, 1988, Industrial minerals' many facets: v. 310, no. 7966, p. 354-355. 

Morris, J.D., 1987, Raw materials and manufacture of vitrified 

clay pipe in Arizona [abs.], in Peirce, H.W., ed. Proceedings of the 21st forum on the geology of industrial minerals: Arizona Bureau of Geology and Mining Technology, Geological Survey Branch Special Paper 4, p. 131. 

Mosier, D.L., 1986a, Descriptive model of upwelling type 

phosphate deposits, in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., 

Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 

1693, p. 234. 

--- 1986b, Descriptive model of warm-current type phosphate deposits, in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., 

Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 

1693, p. 237. 

--- 1986c, Grade and tonnage model of karst type bauxite 

deposits, in Cox, D.P. and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S.Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

258-260. 

--- 1986d, Grade and tonnage model of laterite type 

bauxite deposits, in Cox D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., 

Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 

1693, p. 255-257. 

--- 1986e, Grade and tonnage model of upwelling type 

phosphate deposits, in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., 

Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 

1693, p. 234-236. 

--- 1986f, Grade and tonnage model of warm current type 

phosphate deposits, in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., 

Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 

1693, p.237-238. 

--- 1986g, Grade and tonnage model of volcanogenic Mn, 

in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit 

models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

139-141. 

Mosier, D.L., and Page, N.J, 1988, Descriptive and gradetonnage models of volcanogenic manganese deposits in 

oceanic environments-a modification: U.S. Geological 

Survey Bulletin 1811, 28 p. 

Nations, J.D., 1974, Paleontology, biostratigraphy and paleoecology of the Verde Formation of Late Cenozoic age, 

north-central Arizona, in Karlstrom, T.N.V., Swan, G.A., 

and Eastwood, R.L., eds., Geology of northern Arizona 

with notes on archeology and paleoclimate, pt. 2-Area 

studies and field guide: Geological Society of America, 

Rocky Mountain Section Meeting, Flagstaff, Ariz., 1974, 

p. 611-629. 

Nations, J.D., 1988, Stratigraphy and tectonic significance of 

Cenozoic basin-fill sediments, Tonto Basin, Arizona, in 

Anderson, L.W., and Piety, L.A., eds., Field trip guidebook to the Tonto Basin: Geomorphology, Quaternary 

geology, Tertiary basin development, archaeology, and 

engineering geology; Friends of the Pleistocene, Rocky 

Mountain Cell Fall Field Trip, 1988, p. 165-186. 

Nations, J.D., Hevly, R.H., Landye, J.J., and Blinn, D.W., 1981, 

Paleontology, paleoecology and depositional history of 

the Miocene-Pliocene Verde Formation, Yavapai 

County, Arizona: Arizona Geological Society Digest, v. 

13, p. 133-149. 

Nations, J.D., Landye, J.J., and Hevly, R.H., 1982, Location and 

chronology of Tertiary sedimentary deposits in Arizona: 

A review, in Ingersoll, R.V., and Woodburne, M.O., eds., 

Cenozoic nonmarine deposits of California and Arizona: 

Los Angeles, Society of Economic Paleontologists and 

Mineralogists, Pacific Section, p. 107-122. 

Noestaller, Richard, 1987, Industrial minerals: World Bank 

Technical Paper 7 6, 117 p. 

Northwest Mining Association, 1986, Industrial minerals-are 

78 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Proceedings 
they for you? (1986 short course notes): Spokane, Wash. 

Orris, G.J., 1986a, Descriptive model of bedded barite, in Cox, 

D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: 

U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 216. 

--- 1986b, Grade and tonnage model of bedded barite, in 

Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds, Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological Sutvey Bulletin 1693, p. 216-218. 

--- 1986c, Grade and tonnage model of serpentine-hosted 

asbestos, in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Sutvey Bulletin 1693, p. 

46-48. 

Page, N.J, 1986, Descriptive models of serpentine-hosted asbestos, in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit 

models: U.S. Geological Sutvey Bulletin 1693, p. 46. 

Patterson, S.H., 1986a, Descriptive model of karst type bauxite, 

in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit 

models: U.S. Geological Sutvey Bulletin 1693, p. 258. 

--- 1968b, Descriptive model of laterite type bauxite 

deposits, in Cox, D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral 

deposit models: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 

255. 

Peterson, N.P., 1938, Geology and ore deposits of the Mammoth Mining Camp area, Pinal County, Arizona: Arizona Bureau of Mines Geological Series Bulletin 114. 

Peirce, H.W., 1983, Asbestos-toward a perspective: Arizona 

Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology, Geological 

Sutvey Branch Fieldnotes, v. 13, no. 1, 8 p. 

--- 1987a, Industrial minerals and rocks in Arizona, in 

Peirce, H.W., ed., Proceedings of the 21st forum on the 

geology of industrial minerals: Arizona Bureau of Geology and Mineral Technology, Geological Sutvey Branch 

Special Paper 4, p. 17-23. 

--- 1987b, Proceedings of the 21st forum on the geology of 

industrial minerals: Arizona Bureau of Geology and 

Mineral Technology, Geological Survey Branch, Special 

Paper 4, 134 p. 

Peterson, D.L., 1968, Bouguer gravity map of parts of the 

Maricopa, Pima, Pinal, and Yuma Counties, Arizona: 

U.S. Geological Sutvey Geophysical Investigations Map 

GP-615, scale 1:250,000. 

Rice, D.D., ed., 1986, Oil and gas assessment methods and 

applications: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Studies in Geology, no. 21, 267 p. 

Richter, D.H., Singer, D.A., and Cox, D.P., 1975, Mineral 

resources map of the N abesna quadrangle, Alaska: U.S. 

Geological Sutvey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map 

MF-655, scale 1:250,000. 

Ridge, J.D., ed., 1968, Ore deposits of the United States, 

1933-1967 (Graton-Sales volumes): New York, American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical, and Petroleum 

Engineers, 1,880 p. 

Searls, J.P., 1985, Potash, in Mineral facts and problems: U.S. 

Bureau of Mines Bulletin 675, p. 632. 

Singer, D.A., 1975, Mineral resource models and the Alaskan 

mineral resource assessment program, in Vogely, W.A., 

ed., Mineral materials modeling: Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, p. 370-382. 

--- 1984, Mineral resource assessments of large regions: 

now and in the future, in Geological Sutvey of Japan, ed., 

U.S.-Japan joint seminar on resources in the 1990's: 

Tokyo, Earth Resource Satellite Data Analysis Center, v. 

2, p. 32-40. 

--- 1987, Recent advances in resource assessment methods, in Resources and materials: Mining and Metallurgical Institute of Japan, fall meeting, Sapporo, 1987, p. 

23-24. 

Singer, D.A., and Mosier, D.L., 1981, Review of regional 

mineral resource assessment methods: Economic Geology,v. 76, no.5,p. 1006-1015. 

Singer, D.A. and Page, N.J, 1986, Grade and tonnage model of 

minor podiform chromite, in Cox, D.P., and Singer, 

D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological 

Sutvey Bulletin 1693, p. 34-38, 41-42. 

Singer, D.A., Page, N.J, and Lipin, B.R., 1986, Grade and 

tonnage model of major podiform chromite, in Cox, 

D.P., and Singer, D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: 

U.S. Geological Sutvey Bulletin 1693, p. 38-40, 43-44. 

Skillings Mining Review, 1988, U.S. nonfuel mineral production improves by 9 percent to $25.5 billion level in 1987: 

v. 77,no. 11,p.4-10;v. 77, no. 12,p.4-9. 

Smiley, T.L., Nations, J.D., Pewe, T.L., and Schafer, J.P., eds., 

1984, Landscapes of Arizona: The geological story: 

Lanham, Md., University Press of America, 505 p. 

Taranik, D.L., 1988, Remote sensing adds a new tool to an 

explorationist's kit: Engineering and Mining Journal, v. 

189,no. 7,p.38-40. 

Theobald, P.K., Jr., Billone, M.A., Detra, P.S., and Vassalluzzo, 

C.A., eds., 1987, Summary of a workshop on the search 

for unconventional ore deposits in Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 87-498, 16 p. 

Thrush, P.W., compiler-ed., 1968, A dictionary of mining, 

mineral, and related terms: Washington, U.S. Bureau of 

Mines, 1269 p. 

Twenter, F.R., and Metzger, D.G., 1962, Geology and ground 

water in the Verde Valley-the Mogollon Rim region, 

Arizona: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1177, 132 p. 

U.S. Geological Survey, Direcci6n General de Geologia, Minas 

y Hidrocarburos, and Universidad de Costa Rica, 1987, 

Mineral resource assessment of the Republic of Costa 

Rica: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Series Map 1-1865, 76 p., scale 1:500,000. 

Wrucke, C.T., and Shride, A.F., 1986, Descriptive model of 

carbonate-hosted asbestos, in Cox, D.P., and Singer, 

D.A., eds., Mineral deposit models: U.S. Geological 

Survey Bulletin 1693, p. 98. 

References Cited 79 

APPENDIXES 1-6 

APPENDIX 1.-Program for the 1988 Industrial Rock 

and Mineral Resources Workshop 

INDUSTRIAL ROCK AND MINERAL RESOURCES OF ARIZONA: 

PROBLEMS, OPPORTUNITIES, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

A workshop sponsored by the Arizona Geological Survey (AZGS) 

and the Office of Mineral Resources, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 

Sheraton Tempe Mission Palms Hotel 

Tempe, Ariz. 

May 17-18, 1988 

Registration and coffee (May 17) 

• SESSION 1 (Mny 17) 

8:00-9:00 a.m. 

9:00a.m. 

Welcome and introductory remarks: Goals, acknowledgments, and organizational 

plan for the workshop 

Larry Fellows, AZGS, Co-convenor/Co-host 

Overview of the current geologic and economic availability of industrial rock and 

mineral resources in Arizona 

Wesley Peirce, AZGS (retired) 

Potential for expanding the industrial rock and mineral resource base in Arizona 

Ted Eyde, GSA Resources, Inc. 

Coffee Break 10:00-10:15 a.m. 

DISCUSSION -Current and emerging critical problem areas for the search and 

evaluation of Arizona industrial rock and mineral resources 

E.W. Tooker, Moderator 10:15 a.m. 

1. Data acquisition and management-what types of data (that is, written or drill 

cores) are available, where, and stored in what retrievable computer format or 

facility from Government, academic, industry, or consultant sources? 

[Leaders: S..J. Reynolds, AZGS; A. Barsotti, USBM; and K.A. Phillips, ADMMR] 

2. Analytical and laboratory and industrial testing capability-what types are needed 

to meet mineral-identification, chemical, and industrial specifications, and what is 

their availability from public or private facilities? 

[Leaders: D. Eyde, GSA Resources; and K. Broadhead, USBM] 

Lunch 11:45 a.m.-1:00 p.m. 

• SESSION 2 (May 17) 1:00 p.m. 

3. Land access and availability-what are constraints, regulations, and methods of 

obtaining access to Indian, State, Federal, and privately owned lands for evaluation, exploration, and production? 

[Leaders: M. Rice,ASLD; J. Crowther, BIA; and L. Bauer, BLM] 

Appendixes 1-6 83 
DISCUSSION -Geotechnical and research capabilities to stimulate understanding 

and facilitate discovery of industrial rock and mineral resources 

M.P. Foose, Moderator 1:45 p.m. 

1. Application of geophysical technology in discovery and assessment 

[Leader: J. Crowley, USGS] 

2. Geochemical exploration technology using solid and fluid materials to locate and 

assess resources 

[Leaders: W. Dean, USGS; and P.K. Theobald, USGS] 

Coffee Break 3:15-3:30 p.m. 

3. Regional geologic-use of new scientific and technical data to predict resourceforming processes and resource distribution in surface and subsurface sediments 

and igneous rocks 

[Leaders: J.C. Dohrenwend, USGS; and M.F. Sheridan,ASU] 

4. Deposit models-methodology for deriving models to codify deposit-type characteristics and identify critical base data required; examples of USGS resource 

assessment models presented 

[Leaders: G. Orris, USGS; and J.D. Nations, UNA] 

• SESSION 3 (May 17, evening) 

Social Hour and Dinner 6:00p.m. 

INVITED SPEAKER: Senator Doug Todd, Arizona Senate, Introduction by Larry 

Fellows, State Geologist of Arizona 

Topic: The legislative point of view, current political realities 

for the industrial rock and mineral resources industry 

in Arizona 8:00p.m 

• SESSION 4 (May 18, morning) 

PANEL/DISCUSSION-Meeting the needs of the users of resource information. 

What are viable applied research components and products that may be expected 

from the mineral resource programs of AZGS and USGS? 

L.D. Fellows, Moderator 9:00a.m. 

1. Industry needs for data and applied research to assess resources, assist exploration, and development 

[Leader: B.N. Watson, U.S. Borax] 

2. State and Federal government needs for efficient land management 

[Leaders: M. Rice, ASLD; and L. Bauer, BLM] 

Coffee Break 10:00-10:15 a.m. 

3. Indian Nation's needs for effective development of their resource base 

[Leaders: G. Anton, Salt River-Pima-Maricopa Committee; and R. Edwards, 

San Carlos Apache Tlibe] 

4. Local government needs for resource information to assure broadening the 

resource base consistent with effective urban land-use planning and zoning 

regulations 

[Leader: J.R. Perry, AICP] 

Comments from the floor-other user needs 

Lunch 11:30 a.m.-1:00 p.m. 

84 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Program 
• SESSION 5 (May 18, afternoon) 1:00 p.m. 

SUMMARY SESSION-What are the main conclusions developed during this 

workshop by the prime user groups (for example, Federal, State, and local 

Governments, Indian Nations, academia, and industry) regarding types and 

availability of resource information, advances in resource assessment and exploration research, and land access and use? What recommendations can the users 

make to improve the resource services of the State and Federal geologic and 

mining programs? 

PANEL: T. Eyde, Moderator 

B.N. Watson: Industry 

L. Bauer: Federal Government 

M. Rice: State Land Department 

Debra Daniel: State Environmental Quality 

M.F. Sheridan: Academia 

WRAPUP-Evaluation of the workshop and appreciation of the participant's contributions; encouragement for continuing communication with AZGS and USGS 

Glenn Allcott, USGS, Co-convenor/Co-host 

ADJOURN 

Appendixes 1-6 85 
Appendix 2. Partial List of Analytical and Testing 

Laboratories 

The following are some of the firms that advertise their capabilities to analyze 

and test industrial rock and mineral materials. This list is not complete, and no 

warranty of service quality is implied by the U.S. Geological Survey or the Arizona 

Geological Survey. This is only a starting point for interested users. 

Chemex Labs, Inc. 

103 N. Parkmont 

Butte, MT 59702 

C.S.M.R.I.-Analytica, Inc. 

5930 Mcintyre 

Golden, CO 80403 

(303) 279-2581 

Corning Engineering Laboratory Services 

Corning, NY 14830 

( 607) 97 4-6360 

Charles H. Kline & Co., Inc. 

330 Passaic Avenue 

Fairfield, NJ 07006 

(201) 227-6262 

Global Geochemistry Corp. 

6919 Eaton Avenue 

Canoga Park, CA 91303 

(818) 992-4103 

Metallurgical Laboratories, Inc. 

1142 Howard Street 

San Francisco, CA 94103 

( 415) 863-8575 

Ontario Research Foundation 

Sheridan Park Research Community 

Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5K 1B3 

( 416) 822-4111 

Explore (the Association of Exploration Geochemists Newsletter) contains 

advertisements for analytical services. A more extensive listing, indexed as (1) 

chemical analyzing and assaying, (2) mineral determinations, and (3) testing, other 

than 1 or 2 above, may be found in the 1988 Buyer Guide, Engineering and Mining 

Journal, v. 189, no. 9, p. 103-104. 

86 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Program 
)> 

"0 

"0 

<D 

::I 

a. 

)(" 

<D 

Ill 

..... 

I 

(7) 

00 

--..1 

Appendix 3. Indian Agency and Tribal Council Officials, Phoenix Area 

!!!!!!!! 

Colorado River Agencl C. L. Henson .. ~rlntendent Rt. I Box 9-(, Pc:rker .. 1J. 853~4 (&02) 669-6121 

Chenehuevl Tr lbol Catn:ll Rlctu"d AlvlTtZ. Chalr1111 P.O. Box 1976 .. Chemehuevl Voller .. CA 92363 <619) 858-qSjJ 

Colorcxto River Tribal Council Anthony ~enrm .. Sr 1. Chalr101 Rt. I Box 23-8, Porker. AZ 85344 (602) 669-9211 

Fort lbJ(He Tribal Comcll ftlro Ga"c Ia. Chairperson 500 11errlnm Averue, Needles. CA 92361 (619) 326-'1591 

Fort Apache Agency CVocmt> Superintendent P.O. Box 560, Whiteriver .. AZ 8S9ql (602) JJ8-If36't 

Will te ~ataln loxhe Tribal Ccmcll Reno Jotmon .. Sr ... CholriDl P.O. Box 700. "-lterlver, Al BS9CU < 602) lSB-'13116 

Fort YI.JIQ A~ Felix fbltogue, Superintendent P .0. Box 1591. YliiKl. Kl.. 8536'1 (619) 572-02'13 

Coc~• Tribal Comcll Fr~ Miller .. Sr 1, Chalr101 Bin G. Sanerton. Al 85350 <602) 6V-2102 

Ouechon Tribal Council Lorraine Whl te. President P ,0, Box 1352. YlJIIl, AZ 8536'1 (619) 572-Q213 

Jlopl A9MCY AI~ Secdcuku. ~rlntendent P. 0. Box 158, Kems Cowon, A1. 8&03'1 (602) 738-2228 

lbll Tr lbol CDtllCII hm Sidney, Chalrlbl P.o. Box 123, Kytcotsawl. Al. 86039 (602) 73'1-24115 

P<1l090 Agencl Janes lkrber. ~rlntendent P.O. Box 578. Sells, Al 85631f (602) 383-7286 (8-261-7286) 

T ohono o• oclul Coooc: II Enos Frmclsco, Chalr1111 P.o. Box 837, Sells, AZ 8563'1 (602) 383-2221 

Plm Agency Denise Haner, Swerlntendent P .0. Bolf 8. Sacaton. AZ 85~7 (602> 562-1326 <963-7613)•• 

». Chin lndlm COIIIIUll ty Coooc:ll • Della Antone, Chairperson Rt. 2. Box V, lb"lcopa, A1. 85239 (602> 568-22U 

Gila River lndhn CCIIIUll ty Cooocll • TlXJ10S R, htal te, 6oYeroor P .0. Box 97, Sa:atan. A1. 852'17 (602) 562-3311 (963-.323)•• 

So 1 t RIver Agency CVocmt> ~lnttndent Rt. 1 Box 117, Scottsdale .. Al 85256 (602) 2Cil-2Bq2 

r.atOVe-~he Camu'llty Cooocll Clinton Patteo. President P.O. Box 17779, Fountain Hills, Al 85268 (602) 990-0995 

Pascua Y(QJI Tribal Comcll bid Rmlrez. Chalrnm l"lllf s. Cmloo De Oeste. Tucson, A1. 857116 (602) 883-2838 

Sol t River PIIIO-ltrlcopo lndloo Gerold Anton, President Rt. I Box 216, Scottsdale, AZ 85256 (602) 9111-7217 

CommunitY Council 

Sm C<rlos ~Y AIIM J. Anspach, Superintendent P.O. Box 209, Soo C<rlos, A1. 85550 (602) lf75-2321 

Sen Car 1 os Coooc II bJt KltcheyCJ1, CholriDl P.O. Box o. Sm Carlos. A1. 85550 (602) '175-2361 

Truxton Canon Agencl George Kt II er. Stver lnteodent V~Ientlne. AZ 86~37 (602) 769-2236 

llavas~l Tribal Comc:ll • De liner lkJJo llo. Chol riiDl P ,0, Box 10. Supai, Al 86lf35 (602) 4'18-2961 

lbllcvol Tr tool COlllCil Ed9ar Wo I ema. Cho I riiDl P. 0. Box 168 • Peach Sor I ngs • Al SGqJ'f (602) 769-2216 

Tonto hxJche Tribal Comcll Jeri Johnson, Chairperson Tonto Reservation 130, Parson. A1. 855~1 (602) ltl'l-5000 

Yov~l-l(xlchc! COd'IIIJfll ty Counc II Theodore Snal th. Sr., Chalr1101 P.o. Box ll88, Caro Verde, AZ 86322 (602) 567-36Jt9 

Yavapai-Prescott Board ot Directors Patricio ncGee, President P.O. Box 348, Prescott, A1. 86301 (602) '&'15-87!lJ 

Sm ((J"Ios Irrigation ProJect· Ral~ [$(J.Jel"ro. ProJtct En91neer P.O. Box 250. Coolld9e. Al 85228 (602) 723-5439 (963-6902)' 1 

Phc>tnlr Uool P<rtl tloned lmds Ortlce Rav Slllth. rtJtural Rtsource lblatJer P .0. Box 10. Phoenix. A1. 85001 (602) 2fii-51'JJ 

•Denotes chCI19es i •wrooenu rumers 9 + seven digit iUitiei1 
Appendix 4. General Requirements for Indian 

Mineral-Resource Development 

A. Proposal Stage 

1. Proposals (written or oral) must be submitted to the 

tribal governing body (tribe) having authority over the lands in 

which the proposer is interested. 

2. The BIA may offer procedural and other information to 

proposers. 

B. Negotiations Stage 

1. Negotiations are conducted by the tribes. The BIA is 

available to provide technical assistance to tribes, if requested. 

C. Contract Stage 

1. Contracts should be submitted by pro~osers and reflect 

the following basic principles: 

a. Prospecting/exploration contracts, and mining 

contracts are executed by the tribes, and approved by the BIA. 

b. Prospecting/exploration plans, and mining plans, are 

approved by the BLM after consultation with the BIA. Current 

policy requires concurrence by the tribes. 

c. Absolute options for mining cannot be conferred in a 

prospecting/exploration contract because of the requirement for 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) compliance. 

2. Contracts under the authority of the Indian Mineral 

Leasing Act of 1938 must conform to the regulations contained in 

25 CFR 211, 212, and 216 (regulations existing as of 5/15/88). 

3. Contracts under the authority of the Indian Mineral 

Development Act of 1982 must conform to specific provisions of the 

Act in the absence of regulations, (no regulations as of 

5/15/88). Leases issued under this authority must also conform to 

the procedures contained in 25 CFR 216. 

4. Proposed regulations apply to the following authorities: 

a. 25 CFR 211 

(1) Subpart A - 1982 Act 

(2} Subpart B - 1938 Act 

(3) Subpart C - Applicable to all contracts 

b.. 25 CFR 212 

Removed and reserved. Currently this number 

applies to mineral leasing of allotted Indian 

lands. 

c. 25 CFR 225 

(1) Subpart A - 1982 Act Oil & Gas Agreements 

(2) Subpart B - 1938 Act Oil & Gas Agreements 

(3} Subpart c - Applicable to all contracts 

88 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Program 
Appendix 5. U.S. Bureau of Land Management 

Mining-Claim Reports 

For many years, mining claim information has been available at Blf1 Offices on 

microfiche by Arizona r.tining Claim (fJ"'C) serial number, the name of claim, the 

name of claimant, or geographic location (Township/Range/Section). This 

~icrofiche is updated several times a year. 

Arizona has about 286,000 mining claims, of which approximately 148,000 are 

active. Current information on mining claim activity is often required to 

make decisions involving land title. Land and mineral information is being 

automated in accordance \'lith the Automated land and f4ineral Record System 

(AL~iRS). The Hi ni ng Claim Recordation System can no\" pro vi de current 

information on mining claims. A serial page can be printed by a specific AMC 

number. The serial page includes information on the name of the claim, the 

name of the claimant, location of the claim, and actions that have happened on 

that specifiC case. A report is also available by To\omship/Range/Section. 

This report includes information on all claims in the specified location and 

includes the na~e of the claim, name of the claimant, status of the claim 

(active/closed), type of claim (placer/lode/millsite), date of location, and 

date of latest assessment. 

The AMC Serial Page generally prints within a few minutes. However, the 

Township/Range/Section Report may take some time to generate the requested 

information and print (usually within the same day as requested}. These 

computer reports are current to the cay before's activity and are available in 

all Arizona BLM Offices. 

Arizona State Office 

Bureau of Land Management 

f·1ay 23, 1988 

TRANS: LTSRP1T FUNCTIONa R SERIAL N01 AMC134413 

CASE TYPE: 384201 CLAIM NAHE: SANDS OF TIME COt1MODITY CODE: 

NAHECF£0PER/CORP/AGYI MAILING ADDRESS Cl!I 

GARRITY G W PO BOX 1483 

INT-P.EL: 03 

GARRITY DANI PO BOX 1483 

INT-REL: 03 

INT-REL: 

INT-REL: 

WICKENBURG 

PCI-INI: 00000000 

WICKENBURG 

PCT-INTI 00000000 

PCT-lNI: 

PCI-INT: 

ST ZIP 

AZ 85358 

AZ 833.58 

MERIDIAN TO~NSHIP RANGE 

14 0080N 0050~ 

SECTION NE-N~-5~-SE COUNTY GEO-ST DISTR 

012 I OZ5 AZ 02 

ACTION-DA!E(MD~I ACTION-CODE ACTION-TAKEN ACTION-REMARKS 

05 05 1981 403 LOCAllON DATE 

07 22 1981 395 RECORDATION NOTICE RECD 

05 26 1981 404 COUNTY RECORDATION 011383;743 

SUCCESSFUL RETRIEVE. ALL DATA PRESENTED. 

Appendixes 1-6 89 
(0 REPORT DATEt04115/88 UNITID STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 0 

PCNaLTq93 BUREAU or LAND HANAGEHENT 

~ LIST or HlNlNO CLAIHS BY SECTION 

N. 

::s 

0 KDIDIAN • 14 TOWNSHIP • 0080N RANGE • 005Diol SECTION • 012 Ill 

ui QUADRANT :; 

a. N N S S LAST c: 

~ I W WI SUIAL NtmBEI CLAI" NAME CLAJftANT CASE TIPI STATUS LOC DATE AS!fr 

[ • • • • .............. . .......... ........ • •••••••• • ••••• • ••••••••• • ••• 

:IJ I AP!C13~~13 SANDS OF Tlftl: GARRITY DANI 384201 CLOSED 0510511981 0000 0 GARRITY 0 W n 

~ I AltC134414 OARIITI'S ftLST 11 GARRITY DANI 384401 CLOSED 05/19/1981 0000 Ill 

::s GARRITY 0 W a. I Atte134415 OAIIIT!'S "LST 12 GARRITY DANI 384401 CLOSED 05/19/1981 0000 ~ 

:;· GARRITY 0 W (II I A"Ct7753 TOLLEY "ILLSITE NO 1 TOLLEY CLARK 384~01 CLOSlD 10/Z~/1977 0000 !. I Attet77!4 TOLLII "ILLSITI NO Z TOLLEY CLARK 384401 CLOSED 10/2511977 0000 

:IJ 

(II I J AftC194Z64 TIP 15 FIHR OEOROE 384201 ACTIVE 0~/13/1983 1987 (/1 

0 GROSS DARRELL c: WINDERS BUD c:; 

(II I I AftCtt4852 C 0 S I 17 FEHR GEORGE 384201 ACT IVI 04/13/1983 1987 (/1 

I GROSS DARRELL ~ WINDERS BUD 

g 

~ I A"C195380 ftiSTAKE "IHI 11 BURRIS BRUCE 384101 CLOSrD 04/14/1983 1985 (/1 I AftC19~U8t fUSTAKI 12. BURRIS BRUCE 384101 CLOSID 0~/14/1983 198, :::r 

0 J AftC19538Z "ISTAKJ: 13 BURRIS BRUCE 384101 CLOSED 04/tlt /1983 198, "C I At1Ctt9458 "OONSHIHE BIAVtR JI" 384201 CLOSED 04/14/1983 1985 "tt 

0 J A"CZ00174 PfOONSHINE BEAVER JI" 384101 CLOSED 05/15/1983 1984 co I At1C2001?' "OONSHINI 12 BEAVER JI" 384101 CLOSID 0~/t,/1983 198-4 ; 

3 I At1C33,741 "ISTAKI JONES HENRI 384101 ACTIVt 04/09/1985 1987 

I MC23574Z "ISTAKI 11 JONES HENRY 384101 ACT IVI 04/09/198, 1987 

I A"CZ3,743 "ISTAKI IZ JONES HENRY 384101 ACTIVt 04/09/1985 1987 

I AltCI7,31t4 SANDS OF TUII It GARRITY DANI 384201 CLOSED 08/01/1987 0000 

GARRITY OW 

KIRKLAND JOHN 

KIRKLAND LLOYDA 

I AJ9CI7536' SANDS or TUtE IZ GARRITY DANI 384201 CLOSED 08/01/1987 DODO 

GARRITY OW 

KIRKLAND JOHN 

KIRKLAND LLOYDA 

J ARCJ7536' SANDI "JLLSin GARRITY OW 384401 ACT IVI 08/0t/1987 0000 

KIRKLAND JOHN 

I MCJitZ12 8AND8·"ILL8IT! 11 GARRITY DANI 384401 ACT IVI 12/30/1987 0000 

GARRITY 0 W 

KIRKLAND JOHN 

KIRKLAND LLOYOA 

I MC281Zt3 SANDS ftiLLSITJ: 12 GARRITY DANI 384401 ACT IVI 12/3011987 0000 

GARRITY 0 W 

KIRKLAND JOHN 

KIRKLAND LLOYDA 
REPORT DAt£10411~188 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENt OF THt INTERIOR 

PCNaLT993 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT 

LIST Of MININO CLAIMS BY SECTION 

PttiiDIAN • 14 TOVNSHIP • 0080N RANGE • oo~ou SECTION • 01Z 

QUADRANT 

N N S S LAST 

IWWI 8DIAL IMIIrf CLAift NAPfl CLAI"ANT CASE TIP! STATUS LOC DATI ASitT 

• • • • ••••••••••••• •••••••••• ........ • •••••••• •••••• •••••••••• • ••• 

I A..CZ8t215 BANDS OF TI"E It GARRITY DANI 384201 ACTIVE tZ/30/1987 0000 

GARRITY 0 W 

KIRKLAND JOHN 

KIRKLAND LLOYDA 

I A"CZitZ16 BANDS or TIKI IZ GARRITY DANI 384%01 ACTIVE tZ/30/1917 0000 

GARRITY 0 W 

kiRKLAND JOHN 

KIRKLAND LLOYDA 

I AJIC36t4J TOLLE! "ILL SITI It TOLLEY CLARK 384401 CLOSED 01/30/1975 1979 

I A"C36143 TOLLII "ILL SITE 12 TOLLIY CLARK 384401 CLOSED 01/30/1975 1979 

I Atte56,15 TOLLII "ILL SITE It KIRKLAND JOHN 384401 ACTIYI 07/11/1979 1916 

I ""c''''' TOLLII "ILL SITE IZ KIRKLAND JOHN 384401 ACT I VI: 07/11/1979 1916 

I AftC!t.511 SANDS OF Tlftl BARNES RON 384%01 CLOSED 07/tt/1979 1916 

I I AftCI4710 COPPER LODI NO t AROS JOE 384101 ACTIYI OZ/10/19'6 1987 

JONES LOIS 

STANSBERRY KARL 

I I MCM7t3 VISTA NO Z AROS JOE 384101 ACT IVI 04/24/1956 1917 

STANSBERRY KARL 

I I AftCM715 !LACK TOP AROS JOI 384101 ACT IVI tti2Z/t9~ t917 

JONES HENRI 

JONtS LOIS 

STANSBERRY KARL 

I I I I MCM716 !LACK TOP NtnfBD ONI AROS JOE 384101 ACTIVE tt/2Z/t9'4 t••' JONES HtNRt 

JONES LOIS 

STANSBERRY KARL 

I MICIIt717 ftiSTAKI AROS JOE 384101 ACTIVE tt/22/1,,4 .•. , JONI:S H£NRt 

JONES LOIS 

STANSBERRY KARL 

I MCM7tt •nsTAKI NO ONE AROS JOE 384101 AC'liVI 11/2!/19~ -t-M7 

BAKER C D 

l> STANSBDRI KARL "0 I I Af1CIIt7ZO ftiSTAKI NO 2 AROS JOE 384101 ACT IVI tt/22/1954 t917 "0 BAKEl C D (!) 

::s STANSBERRY KARL a. 

)(" 

(!) rND or 67 Ill FUNCTION?ULI .... 

I •PL"I 0'1 

~ 
Appendix 6. U.S. Forest Service's Proposed Resource 

Classification 

[3410-11] 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULnmE 

Forest Service 

36 CF'R Part 228, Subpart C 

Disposal of Mineral Materials 

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Existing regulations at 36 CF'R 228, Subpart C, authorize the 

cfisposal of mineral materials. These materials include petrified wood 

and common varieties of sand, gravel, stone, pumice, pumici te, cinders, 

clay and other similar materials. This proposed rulemaking would 

clarify which mineral materials are those common varieties subject to 

disposal by the Secretary of Agriculture under the Mineral Materials 

Act of 1947. 

DATE: Comments must be received by June 27. 1988 

ADDRFSSES: Send written comments to F. Dale Robertson, Chief (2850). 

Forest Service, USDA, P. 0. Box 96090, Washington, D. C. 20090-6090. 

The public may inspect comments received on this proposed rule in the 

office of the Director, Minerals and Geology Staff, Room 606, 1621 

North Kent Street, Arlington, VA, during regular business hours (8:00 

a.m. to 4 : 00 p.m. ). Monday througb Friday. 

FOR FllR1HER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Marshall, Minerals and Geology 

Staff, (703) 235-3142. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Materials Act of July 31, 1947 

[30 U.S.C. 601 et seq.], as amended by the Act of July 23, 1955 

[30 U.S.C. 601, 603 et seq.) allows the Secretary of Agriculture, under 

such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, to dispose of mineral 

materials including, but not limited to, common varieties of sand, 

stone, gravel, pumice, pumicite, cinders, and clay. Existing 

regulations at 36 CFR 228, Subpart C, covering disposal of mineral 

materials do not specify what materials are common varieties. This 

lack of specificity makes it difficult for operators and the agency to 

know what materials may be disposed of under 36 CFR 228, Subpart C, 

versus those materials that are subject to exploration, prospecting, 

and claim under the U.S. Mining Laws. Consequently, operators have 

staked numerous mining claims under the provisions of the 1872 Mining 

Law for materials on National Forest System lands that are actually 

subject to sale and disposal by the Secretary of Agriculture through 

Subpart C provisions. 

The lack of an explicit description of common varieties in the 1955 Act 

and in subsequent regulations has led to several hundred mining claim 

contests dealing with common variety issues. These contests have 

resulted in a series of administrative and judicial interpretations 

variously defining common variety characteristics. The result of these 

precedents is a complex set of criteria making it difficult for the 

Forest Service and operators alike to know whether or not a material is 

a common variety. The time and cost of resolving such questions is an 

imposition on both parties. 

The overall objectives of the 1955 Act were to allow for the multiple 

use of public land resources and to prevent fraudulent location of 

mining claims under the mining laws. Towards these ends, this proposed 

rule would establish five categories of common variety mineral 

materials to guide authorized agency personnel in determining whether a 

material should be sold under the rules at Subpart C. These categories 

reflect both the legislative history prior to the passage of Public Law 

167 and the judicial and administrative interpretations since then. 

The proposed categories and representative examples of uses within each 

category are as follows: 

1. Common Varieties. 

A. Agricultural Supply and Animal Husbandry Materials. This category 

includes, but is not limited to, materials used as or for: soil 

conditioners or amendments, fertilizers or other direct applications to 

the soil such as carbonate rocks, animal feed supplements, and other 

animal care products. 

B. Building Materials. This category includes, but is not limited 

to, materials used as or for: flagstone, ashlar, rubble, mortar, brick, 

tile, and terrazzo used for floors, walls, roofs, fireplaces, and 

similar building construction uses. 

C. Cleaning and Abrasive Materials. This category includes, but is 

not limited to, materials used as or for: filters, absorbents, filing, 

scouring, polishing, sanding, and sandblasting. 

D. Construction Materials. ·This category includes, but is not 

limited to, materials used as or for: fill, borrow, rip-rap, ballast, 

road base or surfacing, crushed rock, concrete aggregate, and clay 

sealants. 

E. Decorative and Ornamental Arts Materials. This category includes, 

but is not limited to, materials used as or for: sculpture, lapidary, 

furniture, and natural art objects. This category does not include 

precious gems. 

F. Landscaping Materials. This category includes, but is not limited 

to: chips, granules, sand, pebbles, cobbles, boulders, or slabs used 

for retaining walls, walkways, patios, yards, gardens, and the like. 

2. Uncommon Varieties. The following types of uncommon materials 

are not subject to disposal under this Subpart: 

A. Limestone suitable and used for cement manufacture, metallurgy, 

production of quicklime, sugar refining, whiting, fillers. paper 

manufacture, and desulfurization of stack gases; 

B. Silica suitable and used for glass manufacture, production cf 

metallic silicon, and rock wool; 

C. Alumino-silicates or clays suitable and used for production of 

aluminum, ceramics, drilling mud, taconite binder, and foundry 

castings; 

D. Gypsum suitable and used for wallboard, plaster, or cement; 

E. Precious gems (gem quality diamond, jade, opal, sapphire, star 

garnet, turquoise, and tourmaline); and 

F. Block pumice which occurs in nature in pieces having one dimension 

of two inches or more. 

Based on both past experience tmd environmental analysis, this proposed 

rule will have no significant effect on the human environment, 

individually or cumulatively. Therefore, it is categorically excluded 

92 Arizona's Industrial Rock and Mineral Resources-Workshop Program 
from documentation in an environmental assessment or an environmental 

impact statement (40 CFR 1508.4). 

This rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12291 and USDA 

procedures and it has been determined that this rule is not a major 

rule. Additionally, it will not have a significant economic effect on 

a substantial number or small entities as defined under the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). 

The proposed rulemaking contains no information collection requirements 

needing the approval or the Office of Management and Budget under 44 

U.S.C. 3501 et. seq. 

List of subjects in Part 228 

Administrative practice and procedure; Environmental protection; Mines; 

National forests; Public lands--Mineral resources; Rights of way; 

Reporting and recordkeeping requirements; Surety bonds; Wilderness 

areas. 

Therefore, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, it is proposed to 

amend Subpart C of Part 228 of Title 36 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations as follows: 

PART 228 

Subpart C 

1. The authority citation for Part 228 continues to read as follows: 

Atm!ORITY: 30 Stat. 35 and 36, as amended (16 U.S.C. 478, 551), and 

94 Stat. 2400. 

2. Revise {228.41 by adding new paragraphs (c) and (d) to read as 

follows: 

{228.41 Scope. 

(c) Materials to which this subpart applies. This subpart applies 

to mineral materials which consist of petrified wood and common 

varieties or sand, gravel, stone, pumice, pumicite, cinders, clay. and 

other similar materials. Such common variety mineral materials include 

deposits which, although they have economic value, are used for 

agriculture, animal husbandry, building, cleaning and abrasion, 

construction, decorative and ornamental arts, landscaping, and similar 

uses. Representative examples of these materials are: 

(1) Agricultural Supply and Animal Husbandry Materials. This 

category includes, but is not limited to, materials used as or for: 

soil conditioners or amendments, fertilizers or other direct 

applications to the soil, such as carbonate rocks, animal feed 

supplements, and other animal care products. 

(2) Building Materials. This category includes, but is not limited 

to, materials used as or for: flagstone, ashlar, rubble. mortar, brick. 

tile, and terrazzo used for floors, walls, roofs, fireplaces, and 

similar building construction uses. 

(3) Cleaning and Abrasive Materials. This category includes. but is 

not limited to, materials used as or for: filters, absorbents. filing. 

scouring, polishing, sanding, tll'ld sandblasting. 

(4) Construction Materials. This category includes, but is not 

limited to, materials used as or for: fill, borrow, rip-rap. ballast. 

*GP0-689-081 /P4662 

road base or surfacing, crushed rock, concrete aggregate, and clay 

sealants. 

(5) Decorative and Ornamental Arts Materials. This category 

includes, but is not limited to, materials used as or for: sculpture, 

lapidary, furniture, and natural art objects. This category does not 

include precious gems. 

(6) Landscaping Materials. This category includes, but is not 

limited to: chips, granules, sand, pebbles, cobbles, boulders or slabs 

used for retaining walls, walkways, patios, yards, gardens and the 

like. 

(d) Materials not covered by this subpart. Common variety mineral 

materials do not include materials used in manufacturing, industrial 

processing, or chemical operations for which no other mineral material 

can be substituted due to properties giving it distinct and special 

value; nor do they include block pumice which in nature occurs in 

pieces having one dimension of two inches or more. Disposal of these 

latter varieties of mineral materials is subject to the terms of the 

United States Mining Laws of May 10, 1872, as amended (30 U.S.C. 22 et 

seq.), on those portions of the National Forest System where these laws 

apply. They include: 

(1) Limestone suitable and used for cement manufacture, metallurgy, 

production of quicklime, sugar refining, whiting, fillers. paper 

manufacture, and desulfurization or stack gases. 

(2) Silica suitable and used for- glass manufacture, production of 

metallic silicon, and rock wool. 

(3) Alumino-silicates or clays suitable and used for production of 

aluminum, ceramics, drilling mud, taconite binder, and foundry 

castings. 

(4) Gypsum suitable and used for wallboard, plaster, or cement. 

(5) Precious gems (gem quality diamond, jade, opal, sapphire, star 

garnet, turquoise, and tourmaline). 

(6) Block pumice which occurs in nature in pieces having one 

dimension of two inches or more. 

3. Revise (228.42 by removing the term and definition of "mineral 

materials." 

(date) 

Appendixes 1-6 93