In the old LR200 system a claim was classed as ACTIVE, CLOSED or PENDING. There was no FILED class. We have recently received an explanation of the meaning of FILED from the BLM MLRS staff. Here's the explanation Land Matters received from the BLM National Operations Center last week.
"Formerly, when a case was PENDING, it meant that the case was entered to LR2000 with only the information that the filing of the new claim or site had been received. No other data had yet been entered. In MLRS, PENDING is no longer used and the initial case disposition after payment has been submitted is FILED. The case stays in a FILED status until adjudication of the filed claim or site has been completed. For those claims and sites that were previously reported as ACTIVE and have are now in a FILED case disposition, those cases are either missing the Land Status Check and need further adjudication or in general need further adjudication to be moved forward to an ACTIVE status." The inclusion of the new FILED status in many mining claim case files means that the BLM has taken no action on a mining claim after receiving a notice of location. When the BLM receives a location notice they are supposed to check that the required information is included in the location notice and the claim is located on public lands open to location (not private land or lands closed to mining claims). Once that is done the mining claim case file will be marked as ACTIVE.
We have been investigating the implications of this new FILED claim status and it's been rather revealing as to the efficiency and timeliness of each state's BLM claims processing. The differences between different state's priorities in processing new mining claim locations is surprising in several instances. We've run some rough numbers to illustrate these differences between states. What's presented here are the approximate percentage of mining claims case filed per state that have not been processed by the BLM beyond acknowledging the receipt of a notice.
4% - Arizona
53% - California
20% - Colorado 10% - Idaho
1% - Montana and South Dakota*
1% - New Mexico
6% - Nevada
3% - Oregon and Washington*
14% - Utah
9% - Wyoming
* These States are administered as a single unit by the BLM.
There are significant differences in how each state prioritizes their mining claims case entry work. California stands out due to more than half the mining claims case files never having been adjudicated to ACTIVE status in the case file system. These numbers are not absolute but they are a reasonable indication of mining claim case status work. As Land Matters develops the new MLRS database we should be able to use this new category to present these case action timelines by year and date.
We would like to point out that, in our experience, the BLM National Operations Center (BLM NOC) has many talented and devoted people on their staff. Often these problems with public data access can be traced to poorly designed or implemented systems provided by third parties. The BLM NOC has a history of successfully solving these problems as they encounter them. We look forward to continuing our work with the BLM NOC staff to resolve these issues so we can bring our users current and accurate up to date information.
The pilot “boxed” it and it was electronically tracked...(weapons system thing)...Personally, I think we’re catching glimpses of some radical new technology being deployed on various platforms. There are also reports of underwater objects being tracked at speeds that far exceed anything seen before.... FWIW, “I” think all these “unidentifiable” contacts are the result of DOD SAPs....