The Battle Formation was named for outcrops on the east slope of Antler Peak, T. 32 N., R. 43 E., near Battle Mountain (Roberts, 1951).

The Battle Formation contains Pennsylvanian (Atokan) fusulinids in its middle and upper members (Drowley, 1973). It is equivalent to the upper part of the Moleen Formation and lower portion of the Tomera Formation in the central portion of the evaluation area.

The Battle Formation consists of grayish-red pebble to boulder conglomerate, with lesser amounts of light-red, yellow, and brown limestone. Contact metamorphism and hydrothermal alteration are locally pervasive in the Battle Formation which is the host lithology for mineral deposits in the Battle Mountain area. Roberts (1964b) divided the Battle Formation into three informal members.

The lower portion (398 feet) of the formation is a poorly sorted, medium to thick-bedded, pebble to cobble conglomerate which is characteristically a deep red color. Subangular to well-rounded clasts of sandstone, quartzite, chert, limestone, and greenstone are abundant in the conglomerates which become both finer-grained and more well-sorted upwards. Crossbedding can be found within silty and sandy beds in the formation. The middle unit of the Battle Formation (74 feet) is primarily pebble conglomerate, with interbedded moderately sorted and coarse-grained yellowish or reddish sandstones, and reddish to buff calcareous shales which are concentrated in the upper portion of the middle member. The upper portion (258 feet) of the formation is composed of interbedded fine-grained sandstones, subangular to rounded chert-pebble conglomerate, and calcareous shale.

In the northern Toiyabe Range, the Battle Formation consists of grayish-red conglomerate, primarily composed of chert and quartzite clasts up to 5 inches across (Stewart and McKee, 1977). The Battle Formation rests unconformably on the Valmy Formation and is conformably overlain by the Antler Peak Limestone in the Toiyabe Range.

In the Shoshone Range, the Battle Formation is a coarse conglomerate with subangular to well-rounded pebbles and boulders, commonly from 2 to 6 inches in diameter and locally up to a foot across. These pebbles and boulders are composed of red and brown quartzite and chert of the underlying Ordovician Valmy Formation (Drowley, 1973). Minor sandstone, mudstone and marls are also reported within the Battle Formation (Gilluly and Gates, 1965). Sorting ranges from poor to excellent, and bedding varies from medium to massive with some current bedding and lensing of units (Drowley, 1973). In the Shoshone Range, the basal contact of the Battle Formation is an erosional unconformity upon the Valmy Formation and the overlying formation is Triassic in age (Gilluly and Gates, 1965).

In the Simpson Park Mountains, conglomerates originally assigned to the Permian Garden Valley Formation are questionably assigned to the Battle Formation (Stewart and McKee, 1977). These gray to reddish chert-pebble conglomerates are in beds 1 to 5 feet thick, and contain a few thin interstratified sandy limestones.

At Battle Mountain, the Battle Formation varies in thickness from 50 feet in the north to 730 feet in the south (Roberts, 1964). In the Toiyabe Range 200 to 300 feet of Battle Formation are present, and 50 to 400 feet can be mapped in the Mount Lewis area of the Shoshone Range (Stewart and McKee, 1977). Thickness in the Simpson Park Range is about 600 feet (Stewart and McKee, 1977). The formation was probably originally highly variable in thickness as a result of the underlying surface which it overlapped (Roberts, 1964b).

The Battle Formation occurs within the northern Toiyabe Range and Battle Mountain, and the Mount Lewis area of the Shoshone Range within the evaluation area.

The term "fanglomerate" was originally defined by Lawson (1913) for the medium and thick-bedded conglomerates now designated as the Battle Formation (Roberts, 1964b). Although the basal portions of the formation are poorly sorted, crossbedded and channeled, conglomerates in the middle and upper portions of the formation are marine in origin. Roberts (1964b) has suggested that the Battle Formation was deposited under a combination of marine and terrestrial conditions. Terrestrial plant fossils and marine fusulinids, corals, and hydrozoans have been found in the Battle Formation.

The decrease in grain size and increase in sorting upward in the unit suggest that the relief of the adjacent source area was gradually diminished. Roberts (1964b) suggests that the climate was probably hot and humid perhaps leading to lateritic conditions which left iron oxide cement within the conglomerates. He suggests the Battle Formation may be a delta plain deposit where depositional conditions oscillated between estuarine and marine. Rich (1977) also suggested delta plain environments for the Battle Formation.

Drowley (1973) suggested that the Battle Formation represents both fanglomerate and deltaic, and shallow marine conglomerate deposited in two or perhaps three small basins along the western flank of the Antler belt. He felt they were sourced from the east, northeast, and west.