Review of Supplemental Information - 7/23/1993

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Land Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Charles Gardner, P.G_ P.E.
Director and State Geologist
July 23, 1993
Mr. Bill H. Cecile, President
Radford Quarries of Boone, Inc.
P.O. Box 1114
North Wilkesboro, North Carolina 28659
F== F=1
RE: Supplemental Information for Application for a Mining Permit
Bamboo Road Quarry
Watauga County
Dear Mr. Cecile:
This office has completed its review of the supplemental
information your attorney, Mr. Randal Marsh, submitted to this
office on your behalf dated July 7, 1993, -which was received by the
Land Quality Section on July 13, 1993. Although many of the issues
raised by this office in its letter to you dated May 14, 1993 have
now been addressed, there are several issues that still need
clarification before this office can continue its review of your
application. These remaining items are as follows:
,/1) Although an overall mining permit boundary has been
indicated on the mine maps, said boundary still does not
clearly include all existing and proposed land disturbing
activities. The permit boundary, as indicated on the
revised mine map, runs down the centerline of the access
roads around and above the quarry' excavation. In
addition, the highwall barriers have been indicated
outside of the permit boundary. Please note that all
aspects of the mining operation must be located inside
the proposed permit boundary. The reason for this is to
ensure that these areas, which will be used for the
mining operation, are covered by the mining permit which
will require proper installation, maintenance and
reclamation of these areas under the mining Act.
Therefore, please adjust the mining permit boundary to
encompass all access roads and highwall barriers to be
utilized around the pit area. In addition, the proposed
limits of the mine excavation and corresponding buffer
----..---,-zone widths between the mining limits and the --permit
Geological Survey Section Land Quality Section Geodetic Survey Section
[phone] [phone] [phone]
FAX: [phone] FAX: [phone] FAX: [phone]
P.O. Box 27687, Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 Telephone [phone] FAX[phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Mr. Cecile
Page 2
boundary must also be clearly labelled on the mine map.
In addition, if this adjustment results in a significant
change in the acreage to be permitted (currently proposed
as 13.96 acres), a revised acreage must be provided for
the overall permit area.
,v/2) Please note that this office has not received the
additional application processing fee of $750.00 for the
additional acreage that was added to the permit
application. The required fee for a quarry with a
permitted acreage of 10 but less than 25 acres is a total
of $1,000.00. To date, this office has only received the
initial check in the amount of $250.00. Please note that
a decision on your mining permit application cannot be
made until this remaining fee ($750.00) is paid.
-/3) Although the sediment basin has been removed from its
previous location on the map adjacent to the riverbank,
perimeter dike symbols (indicated as 11PD11 and drawn by
v1 Municipal Engineering) are still indicated on the map to
convey runoff to the basin's previous location. This is
Also true on the east side of SR 1514 in f ront of the
scales and primary crusher. As these items are no longer
applicable, please delete these symbols from the mine
map.
In addition, no reference has been made on the revised
mine maps as to how and when the area between the permit
-/boundary and the riverbank will be permanently
revegetated with native and wildlife species and remain
undisturbed. Will it be revegetated in place or will the
fill area be removed then the subsequent area
revegetated?
Lastly, Mr. Marsh, at our June 7, 1993 meeting in
Raleigh, agreed to f orward to this of f ice copies of
./supporting documentation and calculations compiled by the
engineer who certified the flood elevations on the map.
To date, this office has not received such documentation
to verify these elevations.
,/4) As noted in my May 14, 1993 letter, a revised
construction detail is needed for the perimeter dike
proposed to divert all surface water runoff from the
Processing 'Center - to * Sediment' -Basin No. 1. -- -The dike
detail must clearly indicate that an excavated channel
will be installed at the inside toe of the dike to 1,

Mr. Cecile
Page 3
sufficiently carry the runoff to the basin without
breaching or overtopping the berm. Design calculations
are also needed for the perimeter dike/channel system to
support the size and proper stabilization of the channel.
v/5 This office's review of the storage capacity of Sediment
Basin No. 1 noted that the proposed dimensions must be
increased or the basin, as proposed, must be cleaned out
every six months and after every significant rainfall to
prevent failure of the structure. In addition, the Silt
Basin Schedule on the second sheet still indicates the
elevations of the initial basin proposed adjacent to the
riverbank. This schedule must be revised to clarify the
frequency of cleanout and the correct elevations for the
basin bottom, spillway and berm sections.
,/6) Although "landscaping" has been proposed in various areas
at the Processing Center, information has not been
provided as to the type and size of the plantings to be
utilized. Will the "landscaping" be flowers, shrubs
and/or trees? What types do you propose to plant and
when?
It appears that plantings for visual screening can be
safely provided between SR 1514 and the road that runs
parallel and directly in front of the shop. These
plantings will be far enough back away from the road's
connection with SR 1514 to allow proper visibility. In
addition, as the Surplus Material Storage has been
relocated outside of the proposed visual screening,
V/ plantings must be provided between it and SR 1514 to
screen it from public view.' As stated earlier, this
revised screening should provide a direct visual screen
for these aspects of the operation while providing a
recessed screen that will not interfere with sight
distance on SR 1514. Locations and details for this
revised screening,' or other similar alternative, must be
provided on the mine maps.
As noted earlier, all access roads to be utilized to
access any stripping and mine areas on the east side of
SR 1514 must be located within the mining permit boundary
and must have properly designed and constructed erosion
and sedimentation control measures to prevent offsite
sedimentation. As you are aware, runoff down the access
road located -at the -northern end of the existing pit has
caused failure and offsite sedimentation at the curve in
the road. As a result, you had constructed a rock dam in
the wash area to prevent further erosion and
sedimentation problems. Please locate this rock dam, and

Mr. Cecile
Page 4
any other structures that exist or are needed to control
runoff on these access roads, on the mine map.
Locations, design calculations and construction details
are needed for each structure to ensure that their
proposed dimensions will be sufficient.
At our meeting on June 7, 1993, it was indicated that you
would install a water bar across the access road that
exits onto the east side of SR 1514 to slow runoff and
prevent stone from the road from washing onto SR 1514.
However, this issue was not addressed on your revised
mine map. Therefore, please provide a construction
detail of the water bar and indicate its location on the
mine map.
,/10) Although you have indicated the locations of the
discharge pump and its corresponding pipe on the mine
map, it appears that the pipe will end at the upstream
end of the culvert. If so, please provide details of how
the outlet point of the discharge pipe will be stabilized
to prevent erosion and offsite sedimentation. A rip -rap
lined sediment basin/pool may be necessary to prevent
scour at the discharge point prior to the water entering
the culvert under SR 1514. This issue must be clarified
on the mine map.
J11) Although a typical cross-section of the pit has been
provided on the second sheet of the mine maps, several
items have not been provided on the cross-section as
previously requested. The cross-section must clearly
indicate the permit boundary, buffer zone width, highwall
barrier and corresponding safety ledge in addition to the
2 horizontal to 1 vertical or flatter overburden slope,
the minimum 20 foot wide safety bench at the toe of said
slope, and the quarry face that you provided.
Again, please be sure to clearly label on the mine maps
v/the width of the undisturbed buffer zone that will be
maintained between the top of the mine excavation and the
permit boundary on all sides of the site.
/12) Clarification is still needed regarding notification of
adjoining landowners as outlined in my letter to you
dated April 29, 1993 and May 14, 1993. This office still
has not received copies of all return receipt cards for
all persons notified of this application. In addition,
the Castiblancos and the Austins have not been located on
the adjoining landowners map. Which adjoining landowners
on the map have now been replaced/conveyed their
properties to the persons noted above?

Mr. Cecile
Page 5
J13) The size and boundaries of the Surplus Material Storage
area containing all scrap metal, junk equipment and
parts, and other refuse has not been clearly indicated on
the mine maps. In addition, how will it be accessed now
that it has been relocated behind the perimeter dike
leading to the sediment basin? How and when will this
material be removed from the site and properly disposed
of offsite? Again, how do you propose to visually screen
this area from SR 1514? Please clarify these issues.
PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT THIS OFFICE CANNOT CONTINUE ITS REVIEW
OF YOUR APPLICATION UNTIL ALL OF THE ABOVE ITEMS HAVE BEEN
ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED.
Although significant progress has been made in clarifying the
issues raised in my previous letter, the remaining issues noted
above must be addressed before a decision can be made on your
application. It is strongly recommended by this office that you
solicit assistance from an experienced surveyor or engineer
regarding the technical issues addressed in this letter.
In addition, this office has been advised that you have not,
to date, received an air quality permit nor a water quality
discharge permit for this site. Even if your application for a
mining permit is approved, please be advised that no crushing or
mine dewatering can be conducted at this site without first
obtaining appropriate air quality and water quality permits for
these activities, respectively.
Lastly, if the Director determines that your mining permit
application can be approved, the final mining permit cannot be
issued for this site until this office has received a reclamation
bond in the name of "Radford Quarries of Boone, Inc." in the amount
of $12,500.00, to cover 10 to 25 acres of affected area at the
site. The Department's standard procedure is to, once the
application is approved, forward a "draft" permit to the applicant
along with various bond forms for securing the required bond. Once
the required bond is received by this office, the final mining
permit is then forwarded to the Director, Division of Land
Resources, for his final consideration and decision. I am advising
you of this matter now so that you may begin work on securing the
required bond.
In order to continue processing your application, please
forward three (3) copies of the requested information to my
attention at the following address:

Mr. Cecile
Page 6
Land Quality Section
P.O. Box 27687
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611
If you should have any questions on the above or would like to
contact me to discuss the contents of this letter, please contact
me at [phone].
Si,
,)64erely,
�/ajcy Dav�is, E.I.T.
State Mining Specialist
Land Quality Section
TED/td
cc: Mr. Charles Gardner
Mr. Mell Nevils
Mr. Doug Miller
Ms. Sueanna Sumpter
Mr. Randal Marsh
Mr. Joe Napoleon
Mr. Dave Paletta