87. PNOC vs. Veneracion

8/18/2019 87. PNOC vs. Veneracion

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/87-pnoc-vs-veneracion 1/11



sho" that it had not applied for nor "as it able to obtain an ;ploration Per1it fro1 the M7S overloc% ($*.

On (4 pril (**', Presidential Procla1ation No. 6*= "as issued, "hich effectivel) e;cluded loc%($* fro1 the operation of Procla1ation No. '6#, and declared loc% No. ($* as &overn1ent 1ineralreservation open for disposition to Bualified 1inin& applicants, pursuant to ;ecutive Order No. '+*. 6

On '> Ma) (**', petitionerCs application for MPS coverin& !oal loc% Nos. ('=, ($* and (>= "asaccepted for filin&.* Respondent i11ediatel) filed, on '6 Ma) (**', a protest to the petitionerCsinclusion of loc% ($* in its application for MPS before the RD of the DNR Office in 3a1boan&a!it).(=

fter the parties "ere heard, the RD, in an Order, dated (' pril (**4, ruled in favor of therespondent and ordered the petitioner to a1end its MPS b) e;cludin& therefro1 loc% ($*.(( On (6Ma) (**4, petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Order dated (' pril (**4,(' "hich theRD denied in an Order dated $ 5ul) (**4.(4

On 4= 5ul) (**4, petitioner filed an appeal "ith the DNR Secretar) Buestionin& the Orders issued

b) the RD.(#

<hile the case "as pendin&, respondent applied for a MPS. On 4( 5ul) (**', he paid theprocessin& fee for a MPS coverin& loc% ($* and "as able to co1pl) "ith all other reBuire1ents of the MPS application.($

On # October (**#, the Office of the Secretar) dis1issed the appeal on the &round that petitionerCsri&ht to appeal had alread) prescribed.(> Section $= of Presidential Decree No. #>4 providestherefore for a five2da) re&le1entar) period fro1 the receipt of the order or decision of theDirector .(+ Petitioner received its cop) of the assailed Order dated (' pril (**4 on + Ma) (**4, butfiled its Motion for Reconsideration onl) on (6 Ma) (**4, or eleven da)s after its receipt thereof.Thereafter, petitioner received a cop) of the Order dated $ 5ul) (**4 on (> 5ul) (**4, but filed its

appeal onl) on 4= 5ul) (**4 or nine da)s after the allo"able period to appeal.

On '$ October (**#, petitioner, throu&h a letter addressed to the DNR Secretar), sou&ht thereconsideration of the Decision, dated # October (**#.(6 In a Resolution, dated '( Dece1ber (**#,the then DNR Secretar) n&el !. lcala reversed the Decision, dated # October (**#, and &avedue course to the MPS of the petitioner.(*

On ( Februar) (**$, respondent filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Resolution, dated '(Dece1ber (**#.'= The no" DNR Secretar) Victor O. Ra1os issued an Order, dated $ u&ust(**>, reversin& the Resolution, dated '( Dece1ber (**# and reinstatin& the Decision, dated #October (**#. It ruled that the Orders issued b) the RD have alread) beco1e final and e;ecutor)"hen the petitioner failed to file its appeal five da)s after it had received the Orders. s a result, theDNR Secretar) no lon&er had the -urisdiction to issue the assailed Resolution, dated '( Dece1ber

(**#. It added that after loo%in& into the 1erits of the case, the Orders of the RD "ere inaccordance "ith the evidence on record and the pertinent la"s on the 1atter .'(

On '= u&ust (**>, petitioner filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Order, dated $ u&ust (**>.On '( Ma) (**+, the M resolved the 1otion in favor of the respondent and affir1ed the assailedOrder, dated $ u&ust (**>.'' It too% co&niAance of the appeal filed b) petitioner, in accordance "ithSection +6 of Republic ct No +*#', other"ise %no"n as The Philippine Minin& ct of (**$.'4 TheM ruled that the petitioner filed its appeal be)ond the five2da) prescriptive period provided underPresidential Decree No. #>4, "hich "as then the &overnin& la" on the 1atter.

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/nov2006/gr_129820_2006.html#fnt8









































The M also decreed that the respondent had preferential 1inin& ri&hts over loc% ($*. It ruledthat the proper procedure "ith respect to the 1inin& ri&hts application over loc% ($* "hen it "asstill part of the Malan&as !oal Reservation reBuired the follo"in& /(0 application for prospectin&per1it "ith the O or other office havin& -urisdiction over said reservationE /'0 application fore;ploration per1itE /40 application for e;clusion of the land fro1 such reservationE /#0 PresidentialDeclaration on e;clusion as reco11ended b) the Secretar)E and /$0 application for 9ease thereof

"ith priorit) &iven to holder of e;ploration Per1it.

The M noted that petitioner did not file for an e;ploration per1it nor applied for the e;clusion ofloc% ($*. Moreover, petitioner filed a MPS on (6 October (**(, or al1ost si; />0 1onths prior tothe issuance of Procla1ation No. 6*= e;cludin& loc% ($* fro1 the Malan&as !oal Reservation andallo"in& its disposition. Thus, the application for a MPS over loc% ($*, "hile it "as still part of a&overn1ent reservation other than a 1ineral reservation, "as erroneous and i1proper and could nothave been le&all) accepted. nd, since the records sho" that onl) one MPS "as filed after theissuance of Procla1ation 6*= that of the respondentCs, the preferential ri&ht over loc% ($* "asacBuired b) the respondent. The M, nevertheless, pointed out that the said preferential ri&ht doesnot necessaril) lead to the &rantin& of the respondentCs MPS, but 1erel) consists of the ri&ht tohave his application evaluated and the prohibition a&ainst acceptin& other 1inin& applications overloc% ($* pendin& the processin& of his MPS.

Gence, this Petition for Revie" on !ertiorari.

The correct 1ode of appeal "ould have been to file a petition for revie" under Rule #4, before the!ourt of ppeals. PetitionerCs reliance on Section +* of the Philippine Minin& ct of (**$ is1isplaced.'# Republic ct No. +*=' e;panded the appellate -urisdiction of the !ourt of ppeals toinclude

;clusive appellate -urisdiction over all final -ud&1ents, decisions, resolutions, orders or a"ards ofRe&ional Trial !ourts and Buasi2-udicial a&encies, instru1entalities, boards or co11issions ; ; ;e;cept those fallin& "ithin the appellate -urisdiction of the Supre1e !ourt in accordance "ith the!onstitution, the 9abor !ode of the Philippines under Presidential Decree No. ##', as a1ended, the

provisions of this ct, and of subpara&raph /(0 of the third para&raph and subpara&raph /#0 of thefourth para&raph of Section (+ of the 5udiciar) ct of (*#6.

<ith the enact1ent of Republic ct No. +*=', this !ourt issued !ircular No. (2*$ dated (> Ma)(**$ &overnin& appeals fro1 all Buasi2-udicial bodies to the !ourt of ppeals b) petition for revie",re&ardless of the nature of the Buestion raised. Said circular "as incorporated in Rule #4 of theRules of !ivil Procedure.'$ In addition, this !ourt held in a line of cases that appeals fro1 -ud&1entsand final orders of Buasi2-udicial bodies are reBuired to be brou&ht to the !ourt of ppeals, under thereBuire1ents and conditions set forth in Rule #4 of the Rules of !ivil Procedure.'> Nevertheless, this!ourt has ta%en into account the fact that these cases "ere pro1ul&ated after the petitioner filed thisappeal on # u&ust (**+, and decided to ta%e co&niAance of the present case.

There are t"o 1ain issues that need to be resolved in this case /(0 "hether or not the petitioner hasalread) lost its ri&ht to appeal the RDCs Order dated (' pril (**4E and /'0 "hether or not thepetitioner acBuired a preferential ri&ht on 1inin& ri&hts over loc% ($*.

This !ourt finds no 1erit in this Petition.

Petitioner alle&es that Section >( of !o11on"ealth ct No. (4+'+ &overns the petitionerCs appeal ofthe Orders, dated (' pril (**4 and $ 5ul) (**4, and not Section $= of Presidential Decree No. #>4.













Ge further adds that even if Presidential Decree No. #>4 "as applicable in this case, his appealshould have been allo"ed on &rounds of substantial -ustice.

<hen Presidential Decree No. #>4 "as enacted in (*+#, Section $= of the la" had clearl) intendedto repeal the correspondin& provision found in Section >( of !o11on"ealth ct No. (4+, and toshorten the 4=2da) period "ithin "hich to file an appeal fro1 the Decision of the Director of Mines

and 7eo2Sciences to five da)s. Section >( of !o11on"ealth ct No. (4+, as a1ended, providesthat

S!. >(. 2 !onflicts and disputes arisin& out of 1inin& locations shall be sub1itted to the Director ofMines for decision Provided, That the decision or order of the Director of Mines 1a) be appealed tothe Secretar) of &riculture and Natural Resources "ithin thirt) da)s fro1 receipt of such decision or order. In case an) one of the parties should disa&ree fro1 the decision or order of the Secretar) of

&riculture and Natural Resources, the 1atter 1a) be ta%en to the !ourt of ppeals or the Supre1e!ourt, as the case 1a) be, "ithin thirt) da)s fro1 the receipt of such decision or order, other"ise thesaid decision or order shall be final and bindin& upon the parties concerned. ; ; ;.

Section $= of Presidential Decree No. #>4 reads

Sec. $=. ppeals. 2 n) part) not satisfied "ith the decision or order of the Director, 1a), "ithin five/$0 da)s fro1 receipt thereof, appeal to the Minister Hno" Secretar). Decisions of the Minister Hno"Secretar) are li%e"ise appealable "ithin five /$0 da)s fro1 receipt thereof b) the affected part) tothe President "hose decision shall be final and e;ecutor).

PetitionerCs insistence that the 4=2da) re&le1entar) period provided b) Section >( of!o11on"ealth ct No. (4+, as a1ended, applies, cannot be sustained b) this !ourt. ) providin& afive2da) period "ithin "hich to file an appeal on the decisions of the Director of Mines and 7eo2Sciences, Presidential Decree No. #>4 unBuestionabl) repealed Section >( of !o11on"ealth ctNo. (4+.

In Pearson v. Inter1ediate ppellate !ourt,

'6

this !ourt e;tensivel) discussed the develop1ent of thela" on the ad-udication of 1inin& clai1s, as seen in the provisions of !o11on"ealth ct No. (4+,Presidential Decree No. #>4, until its present state under Republic ct No. +*#'. It "as noted thatthere "as a clear effort to 1oderniAe the s)ste1 of ad1inistration and disposition of 1ineral landsand that the procedure of ad-udicatin& 1inin& clai1s had beco1e increasin&l) ad1inistrative incharacter.

H<ith the issuance of Presidential Decree Nos. **2, 4=*, and #>4, the procedure of ad-udicatin&conflictin& 1inin& clai1s has been 1ade co1pletel) ad1inistrative in character, "ith the Presidentas the final appeal authorit). Section $= of P.D. #>4, providin& for a 1oderniAed s)ste1 ofad1inistration and disposition of 1ineral lands, to pro1ote and encoura&e the develop1ent ande;ploitation thereof, 1andates on the 1atter of JProtests, dverse !lai1s and ppeals,J thefollo"in& procedure

ppeals K n) part) not satisfied "ith the decision or order of the Director 1a), "ithin five /$0 da)sfro1 receipt thereof appeal, to the Secretar). Decisions of the Secretar) are li%e"ise appealable"ithin five /$0 da)s fro1 receipt thereof b) the affected part) to the President of the Philippines"hose decision shall be final and e;ecutor).

It should be noted that before its a1end1ent, the Minin& 9a" /!.. No. (4+0 reBuired that after thefilin& of adverse clai1 "ith the ureau of Mines, the adverse clai1ant had to &o to a court ofco1petent -urisdiction for the settle1ent of the clai1. <ith the a1end1ent see%in& to e;pedite the





resolution of 1inin& conflicts, the Director of Mines beca1e the 1andator) ad-udicator of adverseclai1s, instead of the !ourt of First instance. Thus, it cannot escape notice that under Section >( ofthe Minin& 9a", as a1ended b) Republic ct Nos. +#> and #466, appeals fro1 the decision of theSecretar) of &riculture and Natural Resources /then Minister of Natural Resources0 on conflicts anddisputes arisin& out of 1inin& locations 1a) be 1ade to the !ourt of ppeals or the Supre1e !ourtas the case 1a) be. In contrast, under the decrees issued at the onset of 1artial la", it has been

e;pressl) provided that the decisions of the sa1e Secretar) in 1inin& cases are appealable to thePresident of the Philippines under Section $= of the Mineral Resources Develop1ent Decree of(*+# /P.D. No. #>40 and Section + of P.D. No. ('6( in relation to P.D. No. 4=*.

The trend at present is to 1a%e the ad-udication of 1inin& cases a purel) ad1inistrative 1atter. Thisdoes not 1ean that ad1inistrative bodies have co1plete rein over 1inin& disputes. The ver) ter1sof Section +4 of the Minin& 9a", as a1ended b) R.. No. #466, in reBuirin& that the adverse clai11ust Jstate in full detail the nature, boundaries and e;tent of the adverse clai1J sho" that theconflicts to be decided b) reason of such adverse clai1 refer pri1aril) to Buestions of fact. Thecontroversies to be sub1itted and resolved b) the Director of Mines under the sections referred onl)to the overlappin& of clai1s and ad1inistrative 1atters incidental thereto. Luestions andcontroversies that are -udicial, not ad1inistrative, in nature can be resolved onl) b) the re&ularcourts in "ho1 is vested the -udicial po"er to resolve and ad-udicate such civil disputes andcontroversies bet"een liti&ants in accordance "ith the established nor1s of la" and -ustice.Decisions of the Supre1e !ourt on 1inin& disputes have reco&niAed a distinction bet"een /(0 thepri1ar) po"ers &ranted b) pertinent provisions of la" to the then Secretar) of &riculture andNatural Resources /and the bureau directors0 of an e;ecutive or ad1inistrative nature, such asJ&rantin& of license, per1its, lease and contracts, or approvin&, re-ectin&, reinstatin& or cancellin&applications, or decidin& conflictin& applications,J and /'0 controversies or disa&ree1ents of civil orcontractual nature bet"een liti&ants "hich are Buestions of a -udicial nature that 1a) be ad-udicatedonl) b) the courts of -ustice.

This distinction is carried on even under the present la". Findin&s of fact b) the Mines d-udicationoard, "hich e;ercises appellate -urisdiction over decisions or orders of the panel of arbitrators,shall be conclusive and bindin& on the parties, and its decision or order shall be final and e;ecutor).

ut resort to the appropriate court, throu&h a petition for revie" b) certiorari, involvin& Buestions ofla", 1a) be 1ade "ithin thirt) da)s fro1 the receipt of the order or decision of the Mines

d-udication oard.

Nor can petitioner invo%e the doctrine that rules of technicalit) 1ust )ield to the broader interest ofsubstantial -ustice. <hile ever) liti&ant 1ust be &iven the a1plest opportunit) for the proper and -ustdeter1ination of his cause, free fro1 the constraints of technicalities, the failure to perfect an appeal"ithin the re&le1entar) period is not a 1ere technicalit). It raises a -urisdictional proble1 as itdeprives the appellate court of -urisdiction over the appeal. The ri&ht to appeal is not part of dueprocess of la" but is a 1ere statutor) privile&e to be e;ercised onl) in the 1anner and inaccordance "ith the provisions of the la".'*

Petitioner invo%es the -udicial polic) of allo"in& appeals, althou&h filed late, "hen the interest of -ustice so reBuires. Procedural la" has its o"n rationale in the orderl) ad1inistration of -ustice,na1el), to ensure the effective enforce1ent of substantive ri&hts b) providin& for a s)ste1 thatobviates arbitrariness, caprice, despotis1, or "hi1sicalit) in the settle1ent of disputes. Gence, rulesof procedure 1ust be faithfull) follo"ed e;cept onl) "hen for persuasive reasons, the) 1a) berela;ed to relieve a liti&ant of an in-ustice not co11ensurate "ith his failure to co1pl) "ith theprescribed procedure. !onco1itant to a liberal application of the rules of procedure should be aneffort on the part of the part) invo%in& liberalit) to e;plain his failure to abide b) the rules. 4= In theinstant case, petitioner failed to state an) co1pellin& reason for not filin& its appeal "ithin the








1andated period. Instead, the records sho" that after failin& to co1pl) "ith the period "ithin "hichto file their 1otion for reconsideration on ti1e, the) a&ain failed to file their appeal before the Officeof the DNR Secretar) "ithin the ti1e provided b) la".

ven if petitioner had not lost its ri&ht to appeal, it cannot clai1 an) 1inin& ri&hts over loc% ($* forfailure to co1pl) "ith the le&al reBuire1ents. Petitioner applied for an MPS "ith the DNR on (6

October (**(, prior to the release of loc% ($* fro1 the Malan&as !oal Reservation underProcla1ation No. 6*= on (4 pril (**'. Thus, the provisions on the acBuisition of 1inin& ri&hts"ithin a &overn1ent reservation other than a 1ineral reservation under Presidential Decree No. #>4and the !onsolidated Mines d1inistrative Order /!MO0 should appl).

s a &eneral rule, prospectin& and e;ploration of 1inerals in a &overn1ent reservation is prohibitedunder Section (4 of Presidential Decree No. #>4. Go"ever, the sa1e rule provides an e;ceptioninvolvin& instances "hen the &overn1ent a&enc) concerned allo"s it.

Section (4. reas !losed to Minin& 9ocation. No prospectin& and e;ploration shall be allo"ed

/a0 In 1ilitar), and other 7overn1ent reservations e;cept "hen authoriAed b) the proper

7overn1ent a&enc) concerned.

Section 6 of Presidential Decree No. #>4 reiterates the rule and clarifies it further b) statin& thatprospectin&, e;ploration and e;ploitation of 1inerals on reserved lands other than 1ineralreservations 1a) be underta%en b) the proper &overn1ent a&enc). s an e;ception to this rule,Bualified persons 1a) underta%e the said prospectin&, e;ploration and e;ploitation "hen the saida&encies cannot underta%e the1.

Section 6. Prospectin&, ;ploration and ;ploitation of Minerals in Reserved 9ands. Prospectin&,e;ploration and e;ploitation of 1inerals in reserved lands other than 1ineral reservations 1a) beunderta%en b) the proper &overn1ent a&enc). In the event that the said a&encies cannot underta%ethe prospectin&, e;ploration and e;ploitation of 1inerals in reserved lands, Bualified persons 1a) be

per1itted to underta%e such prospectin&, e;ploration and e;ploitation in accordance "ith the rulesand re&ulations pro1ul&ated b) the Secretar) HMinister. The ri&ht to e;ploit the 1inerals foundtherein shall be a"arded b) the President under such ter1s and conditions as reco11ended b) theDirector and approved b) the Secretar) HMinister Provided, That the part) "ho undertoo%prospectin&, e;ploration and e;ploitation of said are shall be &iven priorit).

Not"ithstandin& the provisions of the precedin& para&raph, a special per1it 1a) be issued b) theDirector to the e;ploration per1itee to e;tract, re1ove and dispose of 1inerals in li1ited Buantitiesas verified b) the ureau of Mines HDirector of Mines and 7eo2Sciences.

Section ($ of the !MO is 1ore strai&htfor"ard "hen it states that &overn1ent reserved lands areopen for prospectin&, sub-ect to the rules and re&ulations provided therein.

S!. ($. 7overn1ent Reserved 9and. 9ands reserved b) the 7overn1ent for purposes other than1inin& are open to prospectin&. n) interested part) 1a) file an application therefore "ith the headof the a&enc) ad1inisterin& said land, sub-ect al"a)s to co1pliance "ith pertinent la"s and rulesand re&ulations coverin& such reserved land. Such application shall be acted upon "ithin thirt) /4=0da)s. In such cases, the co1pensation due the surface o"ner shall accrue eBuall) to the a&enc)ad1inisterin& the reserved land and the ureau of Mines.





M"N"T! V. C&"CO-N!'!R"O ssociate 5ustice

< !ON!R

!RTEM"O V. P!NG!N"(!N

!hief 5ustice!hair1an

CONSUEO YN!RES-S!NT"!GO ssociate 5ustice

M!. !"C"! !USTR"!-M!RT"NE' ssociate 5ustice

ROMEO %. C!E%O, SR. ssociate 5ustice

! R T I F I ! T I O N

Pursuant to rticle VIII, Section (4 of the !onstitution, it is hereb) certified that the conclusions in the

above Decision "ere reached in consultation before the case "as assi&ned to the "riter of theopinion of the !ourtCs Division.

!RTEM"O V. P!NG!N"(!N!hief 5ustice

)oo*+o*e

( Penned b) !hair1an Victor O. Ra1os "ith ssociate 5ustices Vir&ilio L. Mercado andGoracio !. Ra1os, concurrin&E rollo, pp. (**2'=$.

' Rollo, p. *(.

4 Records, Folder II, pp. (#2($, 4*2#=, #(.

# Rollo, p. '==.

$ Id. at #( and #>.

> Id. at *(.

+ Records, Folder V, p. #4.

6 ;ecutive Order '+*, uthoriAin& the Secretar) of nviron1ent and National Resources toNe&otiate and !onclude 5oint Venture !o2Production, or Production2Sharin& &ree1ents for the ;ploration, Develop1ent and tiliAation of Mineral Resources, and Prescribin& the7uidelines for Such &ree1ents and Those &ree1ents Involvin& Technical or Financial

ssistance b) Forei&n O"ned !orporations for 9ar&e2Scale ;ploration, Develop1ent andtiliAation of Minerals, '$ 5ul) (*6+.

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2006/nov2006/gr_129820_2006.html#rnt1


















* Rollo, p. *'.

(= Id.

(( Id. at *4.

(' Id. at *#2*6.

(4 Id. at **2(==.

(# Id. at (=(2(('.

($ Id. at '==.

(> Id. at ((#2((6.

(+ Sec. $=. ppeals. 2 n) part) not satisfied "ith the decision or order of the Director 1a),"ithin five /$0da)s fro1 receipt thereof, appeal to the Minister /no" Secretar)0. Decisions ofthe Minister /no" Secretar)0 are li%e"ise appealable "ithin five /$0 da)s fro1 receipt thereofb) the affected part) to the President of the Philippines "hose decision shall be final ande;ecutor).

(6 Rollo, pp. ('=2(4#.

(* Id. at (4$2($=.

'= Id. at ($'2(>#.

'( Id. at (6(2(6>.

'' Id. at (**2'=$.

'4 S!. +6. ppellate 5urisdiction. The decision or order of the panel of arbitrators 1a) beappealed b) the part) not satisfied thereto to the Mines d-udication oard "ithin fifteen /($0da)s fro1 receipt thereof "hich 1ust decide the case "ithin thirt) /4=0 da)s fro1 sub1issionthereof for decision.

'# Rollo, p. $.

The last para&raph of Section +* of Republic ct No. +*#', The Philippine Minin& ctof (**$ provides that

; ; ; ;

petition for revie" b) certorari and Buestion of la" 1a) be filed b) the a&&rievedpart) "ith the Supre1e !ourt "ithin thirt) /4=0 da)s fro1 receipt of the order ordecision of the oard.

'$ Sebastian v. Gon. Morales, ##$ Phil. $*$, >=>2>=+ /'==40.






































'> !arpio v. Sulu Resources Develop1ent !orporation, #4$ Phil. 64>, 6## /'=='0E Fabian v.Gon. Disierto, 4$> Phil. +6+, 6=426=# /(**60E S) v. !o11ission on Settle1ent of 9andProble1s, #(+ Phil. 4+6, 4*4 /'==(0E Sebastian v. Morales, supra.

'+ n ct to Provide for The !onservation, Disposition, and Develop1ent of Mineral 9and andMinerals, + Nove1ber (*4>.

'6 4$> Phil. 4#(, 4$+24$* /(**60.

'* Republic v. !ourt of ppeals, 4+* Phil. *', (==2(=( /'===0.

4= Sebastian v. Morales, supra note '$ at $$62$$*.

4( S!. *+. Prospectin& Per1it efore a prospector is allo"ed to enter a &overn1entreservation, he shall first secure a prospectin& per1it fro1 the a&enc) that has -urisdictionover the area. Ge shall sub1it to said a&enc) the follo"in&

a0 ureau of !oast and 7eodetic Surve) Map of scale ($=,=== sho"in& the

boundaries of the area and location thereof in the 1ap prepared b) a&eodetic en&ineerE and

b0 Proof of financial capabilit) and technical co1petence.

The ter1 of prospectin& per1it shall be for si; />0 1onths "ithin "hich period theapplicant 1a) appl) for e;ploration per1it "ith the ureau of Mines. If portions onl)of the area covered b) the per1it are 1ineraliAed, the prospector shall 1odif) andreduce the area. In no case should the area be enlar&ed even after prospectin& thesa1e is found to be lar&er than the ori&inal area applied for. nother application forprospectin& per1it for the additional area shall be filed thereon.

4' S!. *6. pplication for ;ploration Per1it pon discover) of 1ineral deposits or stron&evidences thereof, the prospector 1a) appl) for e;ploration per1it "ith the ureau of Mineson the for1 /M For1 No. MRD2'#0 attached hereto as ppendi; JTJ, and 1ade part ofthese Re&ulations. Ge shall pa) a filin& fee of fift) centavos /P=.$=0 per hectare, and sub1itto&ether "ith his application the follo"in&

a0 certified cop) of the prospectin& per1it "hich should be subsistin& at thedate of application for e;ploration per1itE

b0 !op) of the sa1e location 1ap as in Section *+ /a0 acco1panied b)another 1ad defined b) actual surve)E

c0 <or% pro&ra1 for e;ploration coverin& the full ter1 of the per1it for t"o /'0)earsE

d0 Proof of financial capabilit) and technical co1petence to underta%ee;plorationE and

e0 7eolo&ic support of prospectin& activities and findin&s in the areaprepared b) a licensed &eolo&ist or 1inin& en&ineer.

















S!. **. pproval of ;ploration Per1it 22 The Director shall thereafter cause a&eolo&ic verification of the area applied for and upon findin& that the sa1e contains1inerals, he 1a) issue an e;ploration per1it. Ge 1a) issue an e;ploration per1it onthe for1 /M For1 No. MRD2'$0 hereto attached as ppendi; JJ, and 1ade part ofthese Re&ulations, for a period of t"o /'0 )ears e;tendable for the sa1e period.

44 S!. (=(. ;clusion of the rea for Minin& Purposes 22 If the result of the e;plorationreveals the presence of a co11ercial deposit, the per1ittee 1a) appl) "ith the ureau ofMines for the e;clusion of the area fro1 the reservation "hich shall be supported b)

a0 !o1plete &eolo&ic report on the area prepared b) a licensed &eolo&istE

b0 Pro-ect stud) prepared b) a licensed 1inin& en&ineer -ustif)in& thedevelop1ent of the areaE

c0 Financial report of all e;penditures incurred dul) certified b) a certifiedpublic accountantE and

d0 oundar) surve) of the area b) a deput) &eodetic en&ineer co1plete "ithsurve) returns and 1ap on prescribed for1 /M For1 No. MRD2(60.

pon receipt of the application, the Director shall conduct a verification of thefindin&s reported in the pro-ect stud) and valuation of the area at the e;pense of theapplicant.

If after verifications the Director finds the application 1eritorious, he shall for"ard tothe Secretar) for consideration "ho 1a) reco11end to the President the e;clusionof the area fro1 the reservation.

In the event that the area is e;cluded fro1 the reservation, the applicant shall have a

preferential ri&ht to the lease thereof, sub-ect to the ter1s "hich the President 1a)i1pose in the e;clusion of the area.

4# Id.

4$ Rollo, p. #( and #>.

4> Records, Folder V, p. #4.

4+ Records, Folder II, pp. 4'244E Rollo, p. '=4.

46 Id. at 4*2#=, and #(.

4* Records, Folder II, p. >'.

#= Rollo, p. *4.

#( Records, Folder II, pp. >'2(==.

The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation



















Documents

87. PNOC vs. Veneracion