Wake Stone transcript Vol 1

Aafrie P. G'AW& aNd Associates
GENERAL COURT REPORTING SERVICES
RALEIGH • DURHAM • OXFORD
NORTH CAROLINA
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA.
COUNTY OF WAKE.
BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA MINING COMMISSION.
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.
IN THE MATTER OF:
WAKE STONE CORPORATION )
PERMIT DENIAL APPEAL, )
CARY QUARRY SITE, )
WAKE COUNTY, NORTH CAROLINA.)
----------------------------)
T R A N S C R I P T
O F T H E
P R O C E E D I N G S
V O L U M E I j
1
P
Before: The North Carolina Mining Commission;
Dr. Henry B. Smith, Chairman;
Mr. Stanley R. Riggs, Member;
Mr. Earl Van Horn, Member;
Mr. P. Greer Johnson, Member;
Dr. W. W. Wo6dhouse, Member;
Mr. T. W. Tysinger, Member;
Mr. Harry L. Salisbury, Jr., Member;
A P P E A R A N C E S
For the Commission: Ms. Becky French, Department Hearing
Office:., appearing as counsel to Commiss
For the Department Daniel. C. Oakley, Esquire,
of Natural Resour- Assiotart Attorney General,
ces and Community N. C. Department of Justice,
Development: P. O. Box 62�),
Raleigh, North Carolina 27602.
For the Petitioner, James M. Kimzey, Esquire,
Wake Stone Corpora- Kimzay, S:aith and McMillan,
tion: Atto,i:eys ct Law,
P. 0. ijox 150
Raleig'i, l;oxth Carolina 27602.
At Raleigh, North Carolina.
Thursday, November 6, 1980.
P. 0. BOX 30112 * * • 201 N. ROXBORO ST. 203 MAIN ST.
RALEIGH, N. C. 27622 DURHAM, N. C. 27701 OXFORD, N. C. 27565
[phone] [phone] [phone]

a
0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
TABLE
OF
C
0
N
T E X T S
BXAMINATIOWS
Witness
Dr,, Henry S. Brown
Dr. Henry S. Brown
Dr. Henry S. Brown
Dr. Henry S. Brown
James R. Reece Jr.
George M. Stephens
Phillip R. Berger
Phillip R. Berger
Phillip R. Berger
Phillip R. Berger
Earl Sidney Harbison
Earl Sidney Harbison
Earl Sidney Harbison
Earl Sidney Harbison
George C. Turner
George C. Turner
Bruce G. Leonard
Bruce G. Leonard
Bruce G. Leonard
Bruce G. Leonard
Bruce G. Leonard
Examination By Whom
Direct
ximzey
Cross
Oakley
Redirect
Kimzey
Commission
Members
Direct
ximzey
Direct
Kimzey
Direct
KiMZey
Cross
Oakley
Redirect
ximzey
Comm se ion
Members
Direct
Kimxey
Cross
Oakley
Redirect
Kimzey
Re -Cross
Oakley
Direct
Kimsey
Cross
Oakley
Direct
Kimsey
Cross
Oakley
Redirect
Kimsey
Re --Cross
Oakley
Commission
Members
ami--
Page Noe
47
78
90
92
101
116
125
136
149
151
154
173
184
191
199
209
214
247
267
272
277

0
N
f
0
U.
0
0
0
z
W
z
z
0
r
a
m
0
u
0
a
u
z
W
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
TAS ; E 0FCONT.E,T,. Cntt'd_i_
EXHIBITS
Exhibit De� tion- Pam.
Wake Stone 1 Wake County Map depicting 54
rock formations
Wake Stone 2 Topographic *Cary Quarry' Map 55
Wake Stone 3 Study entitled *Effects o: Federal 77
Lags, Policies and Practices on
Access to Minerals on Onshore,
Non -Federal Lands in North
Carolina'
Make Stone 4 Map of 6 counties 116
Make Stone 5 Map referred to by Witness Stephens 125
Wake Stone 6 Topographic Map referred to by 162
Witness Harbison
Wake
Stone
7
Cross Section Topographic Map
Wake
Stone
8
Cross Section Topographic Map
Wake
Stone
9
Cross Section Topographic Map
Wake
Stone
10
Aerial:. Photograph - of. ,pivopetty area
Wake
Stone
11
Aerial Photograph of property area
Wake..
Stone
.12:.'
Noi6e ,-;Analysis Location Map
Wake
Stone
13
Letter, Alan R. Sakes from Rhudy
and Warrick, dated 8-15-80
162
162
162
170
170
243
243

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
—iii—
TABLB OF CONTENTS (Coated.)
MISCELLANEOUS
Item By Whom Pa a No,
Colloquy and Opening Remarks 2
Motion to Disqualify Commissioner Barkalow (Eim$ey) 7
Statement by Dir. Barkalow is
Deliberation and Consideration of motion (by Commission) 25
Withdrawal Statement by Dr. Barkalow 25
Opening Statement Mr. Kim$ey 29
Opening Statement Mr, Oakley 42
Motion to Limit Evidence Mra Oakley 100

1
�2w
2 P R O C E E D I N G S
3 The following Administrative Hearing before the Min
4 Commission of the Department of Natural Resources and Communi
5 Developmentj Division of Land Resources, was reported by
6 Manie P. Currin, Court- Reporter and Notary Public in and
7 for the State of North Carolina, at the Hearing Room 6X,
8 Archdale Building, State Government Complex, Raleigh, North
9 Carolina on Thursday, November 6, 1980, commencing at- 9:30
10 1 a.m.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The hearing was convened by Chairman Smith.:and
the following proceedings were had, to wit:
CHAIRMAN SMITH: This hearing will now come
to order.
My name is Henry Smith, and I am Chairman of
the Mining Commission. I will say that all is
present except one (referring to Commission members;.
This is a hearing of the Land Resources
Division, a subunit of the Department of Natural
Resoarces and Community Development, and the
Make Stone Corporation.
Will the person representing the State
identify himself for the record, and indicate that

1 1 Colloquy -3-
2
he is ready to proceed.
3
MR. OAKLEY: My name is Dan Oakley, Assistant
4
Attorney General, representing do Department of
5
Natural Resources and Community Development.
6
Also assiting me today will be Mr. David
7
Heeter, of the Department of Natural Resources
8
and Community Development, Office of Legal Affairs.
9
And we are ready to proceed.
10
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Thank you, sir.
11
Will the person representing the Wake Stone
12
Corporation identify himself for the record and
13
indicate that he is ready to proceed?
14
MR. KIMZEY: Mr. Chairman, my name is
15
James M. Kimzey of the firm of Kifhzey, Smith and
16
McMillan, P. 0. Box 150, here in Raleigh, North
17
Carolina.
18
I represent Wake Stone Corporation. We
19
are ready to proceed.
20
I'm used to standing before tribunals. I'll
21
ask your usual practice. Do you prefer that I
22
stand or remain seated when addressing the
23
Commission?
24
CHAIRMAN SMITH: I'll ask that you stand, please.
25
MR. KIMZEY: All right, fine. Thank you.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
0
17
N
18
0
19
s
20
W
_
21
m
u 22
0
W 23
d
24
25
-4-
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Rimzey.
The procedures we will follow today general-
ly are the procedures applicable to a Superior
Court of this State, as far as they are practical.
In all contested cases irrelevant, material
immaterial and duly -- unduly repetitious evidence
will be excluded.
This standard of admissibility will be
applied in favor of making the record as complete
as possible.
It will not be necessary for a party or
his attorney to -object at the hearing to
evidence in order to preserve the right to object
to its consideration by the Commission in reaching
a decision.
Each side is entitled to an opening state-
ment which should be limited to what the evidence
will show.
Witnesses, if any, for each side will be
subject to cross-examination.
After all witnesses are through, closing
statement maybe made -- presented.
A full and complete record of this hearing
will be transcribed from tape and any party shall

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-- 5-
be entitled to a copy of such record.
Following the hearing and after the trans-
cript has been prepared and served on the parties,
the parties are entitled to thirty days in which to
file proposed findings and conclusions and any
briefs with the Commission.
North Carolina General Statute 15OA-34 then
required the Commission to prepare a proposed
decision with findings and conclusions and serve
them on the parties.
Are there any questions concerning the
procedure?
MR. KIMZEY: Mr. Smith, I notice that you
mention that the parties are entitled to thirty
days to file briefs and proposed orders.
We have met with Ms. French, your hearing
officer, Mr. Oakley and myself and had discussed
the possibility of ten days, each party, and
I believe the hearing officer agreed to that.
Of course, we seek an expedited ruling as
quickly as possible. I wonder if it would be
proper by agreement to shorten that time to ten
days?
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Is that agreeable, Mr.

0
N
F
0
0
0
0
a
z
z
O
4
m
O
u
a
z
a.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Colloquy -6-
Okaley?
MR. OAKLEY: I have no objection.
MR. KIMZEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: If there is no objection,
then we will limit it to ten days.
MR. KIMZEY: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Are there any other ques-
tions concerning procedure?
(No response)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: No, before we begin the
opening statements, I am going to ask the Attorney
General's representative, Mr. Oakley, to.identify
the materials which constitute the administrative
record today.
MR. KIMZEY: I'm sorry, Mr. Smith. I guess
that I anticipated that you wDuld call for hearing
at this time, the motion, prior to opening state-
ment.
We have made a motion,on file with the
Commission through Ms. French, to seek the dis-
qualification of Mr. Harkalow.
We would ask that the Commission consider
that prior to any further proceedings.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: We will do so, then. Are

11 Colloquy/Motion
-7-
2
you prepared to make your statement?
3
MR. RIMZEY: Yes, sir. I would like to be
4
heard briefly on the motion.
5
As the Commission is probably aware, Mrst
6
French has made available to you copies of our
7
motion for disqualification of Mr. Barkalow.
8
Let me read briefly from that and then
9
make a brief argument thereon.
10
"Wake Stone Corporation..." moves the
11
"...Mining Commission..." that "...Fred S. Barkalow
12
Jr. disqualify himself from sitting on this matter,
13
or in the event he fails to do so, that he be
14
disqualified by the Commission itself from so
15
sitting. In support of this Motion, Wake Stone
16
Corporation shows unto (the) Commission that Fred
17
S. Barkalow, Jr. appeared in opposition to the
18
rezoning at the proposed site and stated his
19
opposition to a quarry at (that) site at a Hearing
20
of the Wake County Commissioners concerning appli-
21
cant's zoning tequest on January 7, 1980, and also
22
spoke at a meeting of the Glenwood Community Citize
23
Advisory Council on December 17, 1979 in
24
opposition to the rezoning.
25
Transcript of Mr. Barkalow's remarks before

a
0
N
g
O
0
0
s
z
W
Z
Z
O
Y
a
m
0
V
Ij
Z
W
S
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
- 8-
the Wake County Commissioners and minutes of the
meeting of the Advisory Council are attached Ato
the motion) as Exhibits A and B."
Finally concludes that "Mr. Barkalow's active
opposition to the applicant's proposal prior to
his being appointed to the Mining Commission ...
creates a conflict of interest for Mr. Barkalow
and disqualified him from sitting as an impartial
Commission member during the hearing on Wake Stone'
... permit denial appeal before the Mining
Commission."
And in presenting this to the Commission,
Mr. Barkalow was kind enough to review a transcript
of his remarks which is an agreed -upon transcript,
that we'd like to enter into the record.
I would like to read briefly from that just
to give you the flavlor of his remarks at the
hearing on January 7, 1980, before the Wake County
Commissioners.
I will not read the entire thing, but I would
read a couple of portions.
When Mr. Barkalow was called to the stand,
he said, and I quotes "I am Fred Barkalow, a
citizen of Wake County. I would like to urge the

0
N
0
N
O
0
s
Z
W
Z
Z
O
m
0
u
0
u
Z
d
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-9-
Commissioners to deny this petition.
As has already been pointed out, this
property, if it is zoned industrial, there's no
control whatsoever the type of activity that would
go (in) there.
For example, potential mining of rock has
already been mentioned. Nello-Teer requested to
mine it when it was I --.when I--40 was being
built. It was turned down by the county Board of
Adjustment. The Williams family property is the
property in concern.
Another thing that would happen if (that)
rock is processed, very probably, most of the rocks
in this area are very high in fluorine, 1 nuo* -tine
is one of the most toxic materials, particularly for
pine trees."
Going -- he continued his remarks, addressing
himself to other possible industrial uses of the
property, and then addressed himself again to
the potential for damage'to Umstead Park and
stated that: "The petition ... does not address
the impact the conversion of the area would be
on flood control (on) structure 25, which is to be
built.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-10-
The increased flooding potential will be
severe on Crabtree Mall, Claremont Drive, and
White Oak Road, and there's no question about it."
Now, I read these remarks to put them in
context to this hearing. I make this motion on
behalf of Wake Stone with all due respect to
both Mr. Barkalow, himself personally, and to him
as a member of the Mining Commission and to the
Mining Commission itself.
He has made prior appearances in opposition
to the applicant's position.
He -- this was stated on the record that
he opposed mining, and he gave reasons which have
subsequently been investigated by the Department
of Natural Resources and Community Development and
have found to be not sufficient reasons and stipu-
lations have been entered which I will read to you
which would eliminate those reasons from any con-
sideration, such as the Wig, in the rock or
flooding downstream.
There is a stipulation in effect which
says that those matters are satisfied by this
applicants that they are not even issues before
this Commission.

0
0
N
O
O
0
O
z
W
Z
Z
O
m
0
u
0
a
0
Z
a.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
n -11-
And he would have to disabuse himself of
his predilection about those, and we think that
would be difficult.
Really, the question here is whether or not
Mr. Barkalow should sit and give the appearance
of a fair trial a taint or not.
I have researched the law. We find almost
no law in North Carolina concerning what would
disqualify a member of a commission or agency.
So, I have had to make analagous reasoning
with what might disqualify a judge.
Now, there is a body of law in North Caroli;
which says judges, being trained in the law, shouI
be able to look at a case impartially regardless
of what their personal preferences may be.
There is no similar body of law for laymen
who sit on administrative agencies, and I would
urge you to consider whether or not that may be
more difficult for one who is not making judgments
every day than one who is.
But where there is law against judges sitti,
who have a prior interest, I think the law is very
clear that it would be very analagous to this
case.

a
0
u
Z
W
G.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1s
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-12-
For instance, there is a Statute which
prevents judges from sitting on contempt hearings
if the judge has a prior interest, and that
Statute whas been interpreted in the case of Ponder
versus Davis, 233, North Carolina, 699, decided
by the North Carolina Supreme Court on June, 1951,
In that case, the court speaking through
Chief Justice Stacy, said, and I quote: "The
Statute declares a sound,public policy that no
judge should sit in his own case or participate
in a matter in which he has a personal interest..."
and I emphasize this, "...or has taken sides
therein."
In this case. that I quote from a judge was
sitting in a contempt proceeding concerning the
sheriff whom he had worked for in the election;
that is the judge had worked for the sheriff in
the election.
And the Court held that he should have dis-
qualified himself. He took sides in the election
of the sheriff, and he was sitting in a proceeding
involving contempt of the sheriff, and really,
the contempt was that the sheriff refused to
follow_ the mandate of the electorate and refused

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
13-
to get out of his office.
So the Court siad he had participated in
the very thing that was before him, and he should
have as it says, instead of removed himself, the
Court said that he should have protected himself
by not sitting.
And I would like to read just a few more
statements from that case of -the reasoning of the
Court.
As you recall, the judge has just quoted
the Statute which makes the sitting of the judge
in a manner in which he has taken sides aginst
the Statute, and he says -- goes on to say: "Aside
from the Statute"-- which is the case we have here
..- there is no Statute.
"Aside from the Statute, however, every
litigant, including the State, is entitled to
nothing less than the cold neutrality of an im-
partial judge."
And further, he says: "(As) it was said
in Berger v. United States..." a Supreme case,
"...that the policy or solicitude underlying the
Federal statute on the subject,... applicable to
the Federal Couts, is that'the tribunals of the

2
3
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
a
O
17
N
18
0
0
19
0
0
20
z
W
Z
0
21
6
m
22
u
0
4
z
Z
W
LL
23
24
25
-14-
country shall not only be impartial in the contro-
versies submitted to them, but shall give assurance
that they are impartial,..." -- "shall give
assurance that they are impartial...", "free, to
use the words of the section, from any 'bias or
prejudice' that might disturb the normal course of
impartial judgment'; i.e., shall also -appear to be
impartial."
Under those standards, if Mr. Barkalow even
can be impartial I think the appearance to the
public would be impossible that he could be impar-
tial so the appearance is there.
Further on the point Judge Stacy said:
"It is important that the judgments of the court
should be respected. To insure this, however, the
court must first make sure that they merit
respect. The issue here raised transcends any
consideration of the immediate personalities or
parties to the proceeding. 'The law is not so much
concerned with the respective rights of judge,
litigant, or attorney in any particular cause,
as it (may be) , as a matter of public policy,
that the courts shall maintain the confidence of
the people.'"

0
Z
IL
1 1 Motion -15-
2
And finally, Judge Stacy said, "To like
3
effect is the announcement of the Michigan Court...
4
and cites another case, quoting, "One of the funda-
5
mental rights of a litigant under our judicial syst
6
is that he shall be entitled to a hearing before
7
a court to which no taint or prejudice is attached.
8
"It is the duty of courts to scrupulously
9
guard this right and to refrain from attempting
10
to exercise jurisdiction in any matter where his
11
qualification to do so is seriously brought in
12
question."
13
Now, Mr. Barkalow, as.I understand it,
14
takes the position that he was appearing in
15
opposition to a zoning request, not a mining
16
request, that he was not certain what the applica-
17
tion of the property would be since that had not
18
been revealed at the zoning request and all that's
19
true,
20 However, I will state to you that his re-
21 marks concerning a quarry and concerning the rea-
22 sons for the opposition speak for themselves as
23 to his.position on the quarry.
24 I don't need to characterize this as ap-
25 pearing in opposition to a quarry because his words

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
_A
-16-
say that.
We think that Mr. Barkalow should have dis-
qualified himself with all due respect to his
personal disagreement on that point, and we would
ask at this time that the Commission, itself, dis-
qualify Mr. Barkalow from further sitting on this
proceeding.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Thank you.
Mr. Oakley, do you wish to comment on this
motion?
MR. OAKLEY: I would like to make a few
general comments.
The Department of Natural Resources, of
course, nas no position to state to the Commission
in this matter.
We have met with Mr. Kimsey and Mr.
Barkalow at the initial stages of the hearing to
determine if Mr. Barkalow would indeed disqualify
himself for the reasons noted by Mr. Kimsey.
The next inquiry according to the Adminis-
trative Procedures Act and according to the case
law, would be for the full Commission to look
into this matter and to determine.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-17-
And this is what I would like to point
out. The question before you is whether or not he
has taken sides. I think the general case law is
as has been pointed out to you is correct.
We are interested, as a Department in the rigli
decision being made.
Of course, if he -- we would not like to
have Mr. Barkalow sit if he has indeed taken sides
or if he has indeed spoken in opposition.
I think that whether or not that is true
is up to this Commission. We would like for you
to focus on that in your decision making.
And the only other point that I would like
to make is that zoning is not an issue in this
hearing.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Barkalow, would you
like to make a statement in your behalf?
DR. FRED S. BARKALOW, JR.: Yes. I, con-
trary to Mr. Kimzey's interpretation of my remarks,
I was not objecting to a quarry per se or any
other thing.
I was objecting to rezoning, and if I may
read the first statement --
CHAIRMAN SMITH: (Interposing) We'll have
t

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
OMM
to swear you in as a witness.
DR. BARKALOW: I'm sorry?
MS. FRENCH: Why don't you take the witness
stand and be sworn if you're going to take the
stand as a witness.
DR. BARKALOW: Where is the witness stand?
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD.)
Whereupon,
DR. FRED S. BARKALOW, JR.,
Having been first duly sworn,
proceeded. to., make the following statement:
DR. BARKALOW: The statement which I made
before the County Commissioners on the 7th of
January, 1980, which Mr. Kimzey read that I would
like to point out some of, I think, his erroneous
interpretation.
To state my -- just the first part of it:
(reading from transcript) "I'm Fred Barkalow,
a citizen of Wake County. I would like to urge the
Commissioners to deny this petition. As has
already been pointed out, �ftis..." and I!d like to
emphasize, 11...As has already been pointed out,

0
u
_
d
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-19-
this property if it is zoned industrial, there's
no control whatsoever (on) the type of activity
that would go in there."
Now, in that statement, as has already been
pointed out, the third sentence, I would like
to read into the record which you have the last
part of Asir. Jim Goodnight's testimony which was
immediately prior to mine.
Mr. Goodnight is President of the Statistics
Analysis Systems Institute which is located right
adjacent -- right across the highway from where
this proposed site would be zoned "industrial".
And I'll just read the last part of his:
"...large trucks that were using this industrial
areas would undoubtedly shift four or five gears
tying to get up to fifty-five miles an hour on that
acceleration ramp right outside of our door.
And, if the worst possible thing that could
happen to this area, and that is that it be used as
a rock quarry, then we're talking about dump
trucks, very large scale dump trucks carrying very
heavy loads, shifting gears five or six or seven
times right outside our door.
So, it's going to be a considerable

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Motion -20-
detriment to our facility there, if this indus-
trial zoning goes through."
Mr. Goodnight was objecting to a mine, not
I.
I picked this up in my statement which
immediately followed as, and that is the part that
I read.
Now, I would like to re-emphasize several
things.
Rezoning, now, is not the question. I was
objecting to rezoning. The client was not identi-
fied in any way.
Neither was the nature of the industrial
activity identified in any way when I made my
statement.
In fact, Attorney Adams for the client
refused to identify the nature of his client's
acitvity or the client itself. He was asking for
rezoning.
Now, I believe that this is on tape, also.
The -- another point that I would like
to make is that the question before us now is
whehther or not the State acted properly in
denying the mining permit. That is really the only

O
Z
d
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Motion -21-
question.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Fred, you're getting a
little --
DR. BARKALOW: Beg your pardon?
MS. FRENCH: We're just talking about your
disqualification.
DR. BARKALOW: Oh, okay, fine. All right,
I have not made my mind up on the question before
us.
The -- as to Mr. Kimzey's concern, that
judges be impartial, I should like to point out
that I have had some eight years college training,
more than many lawyers have had in the particular
field of natural resource, conservation, and
natural resource management issues.
And in any natural resource management
commission, there are trade-offs. The question is:
what is the best?
And I'll leave it at that.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Kimzey do you have a
statement?
MR. KIMZEY: May I be heard briefly in
rebuttal?
I do not choose nor wish to argue with Mr.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-22-
Barkalow.
As I say, I respect him as a person. I
respect him as a member of the Commission.
I would state to you again, though, that whi
you read: "For example, potential mining of
rock has already been mentioned." And saying,
"...if that rock is processed, very probably, most
of the rocks ... " will contain fluorine, and that
fluorine;.s very toxic to pine trees. When that
has been stipulated, if that is not opposition
to a stone quarry, whether he appeared initially
for that, I don't know what it would be. I'll
leave the words to your interpretation.
He has stated three things: one in his
rebuttal, that he is now quoting from a prior
witness who was concerned about adjacent property
and trucks going up.
That has been stipulated to be of no con-
cern, and he stated about downstream flooding,
and that has been stipulated to be of no concern,
not because those things are not your concern,
but because they ar siot true factors negative to
this as has already been determined by the Commis -
by your Department which has stipulated that they

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-2 3-
won't have any effect.
I think his words speak for themselves,
and we would -encourage you to sit as a body free
of taint or free of apparent partiality whether
impartiality is there or not - .
I can accept his remarks that he could be
impartial, but the appearance of impartiality
is still there.
I have ..no doubt if any Superior Court Judg
were faced with this,.. he- would have transferred
this case to another Court already.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. -Oakley, do you have
a statement?
MR. OAKLEY: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: I'd like to recess the
hearing for ten minutes.and give the Commissi
a chance to consider this motion.
MR. *KIMZEY : I' d like it to be on : ,the
record whether or not Mr. Barkalow will participat
in the discussion concerning his own disqualifica-
tion.
MS. FRENCH: Well, he will be in the room
while it's being discussed.
CHAIRMAN SMITHL No.

0
N
E
C
O
U.
s
0
0
z
W
Z
O
IC
0
V
O
z
W
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Motion -24-
MR. KIMZEY: I'd like to show an objection
to that, please.
MS. FRENCH: It will be shown on the record
MR. OAKLEY: Could I make one statement,
please?
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Sure.
MR. OAKLEY: The Department would be inter-
ested in Mr. Barkalow not- attehdirng- while you
discuss this matter.
MS. FRENCH: Do you have any objection?
MR. KIMZEY: No, I would prefer that he
not attend.
That would be my point. That's the reason
I objected.
MR. OAKLEY: We would agree with that.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Fred, do you have any
objection to not being in on this?
DR. BAR'KALOW: No.
MS. FRENCH: Then let the record show that
Dr. Barkalow will not attend the discussions.
(Whereupon, the Commission members and their
counsel, Ms. French, retire for deliberations

0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-25-
on the Motion to disqualify Dr. Fred S. Barkalow,
Jr., from sitting on the hearing of the instant
cause.)
(The Commission returns to the hearing room.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Like to call the hearing
back to order, please.
Dr. Barkalow, do you wish to make an
additional statement?
DR. BARKALOW: Yes, I would like to add this
for the record, that in view of the fact that my
continuing to sit on this Board at this time would
appear to be a conflict of interest, and in order
to eliminate any appearance whatsoever of a con-
flict, I would requestthe Chairman to dismiss me
from this hearing.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Thank you, Dr. Barkalow.
You might have this in the record as well.
The Commission and I greatly respect Dr. Barkalow's
integrity, his honesty and his expertise in the
field of wildlife, and we know of no other reason
why Dr. Barkalow should disqualify himself other
than that of appearance of bias and that alone.
Fred, we will accept your resignation, and

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-2 6-
we thank you very much.
DR. BAPYALOW: Y' all have fun today and
tomorrow. (laughter)
(Dr. Barkalow dismisses himself from the
hearing room.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Are there any more motions
to be made before opening statements?
MR. KIMZEY : None from Wake Stone.
CHAIRMAN: Mr. Oakley.
MR. OAKLEY: No, sir.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: I'm going to ask that.. the
Attorney General's representative identify -- Mr.
Oakley, identify the materials which constitute
the admission (administrative) record to date.
Following this, I will ask Mr. Kimzey to
add any comments that he would desire.
Mr. Oakley.
MR. OAKLEY: If it please the Commission,
we have discussed and agreed the administrative fi
be the officialfile to this point, to date,
generally includes the application of March 21st,
1980, and after that it would include the various
motions and things that have been filed.
I think I have a,complete list of them, if
e-

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-27-
it would make it a little clearer for everybody.
August 22, 1980, Mr. Conrad the Director of
Land Resources, issued a letter denying the permit.
September 16, 1980, Mr. John Bratton for
Wake :.Stone requested this hearing.
September 22, 1980, Chairman Smith granted
this request for a hearing.
October 14, 1980, Wake Stone filed two
motions: one for review of the premises and one
to disqualify Dr. Barkalow.
On October 24, 1980 the Wake Audubon Sociei
petitioned to intervene.
On October 29, 1980, the Notice of this
hearing was issued.
October 31, 1980, the prehearing order
between the two parties and a statement of issues
was filed.
On November 3, 1980, the Sierra Club
petitioned to intervene.
Also, on November 3, 1980, the Department
of Natural Resources and Community Development file
a motion also to view the premises and to visit
two active quarry sites.
On November 4, 1980, Wake Stone renewed the

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
_28_
motion to disqualify Dr. Barkalow.
I do not have any rulings on any of those
motions. They should be in the record if they
have been issued.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr, Kimzey. Do you have
any comments?
MR. KIMZEY: No, that should constitute,
with the addition of the rulings, constitute the
official record on file.
Of course, we'll have many exhibits which
will be added to that official record, but that
is the official record at this point, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: We are now ready for open-
ing statements.
As I understand, you, Mr. Kimzey, represent
ing Wake Stone will make the first statement.
MR. KIMZEY: Yes, sir.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the
Commission. Since this is an opening statement, I
will attempt to be brief because I assure you
the case does not promise to be brief.
We have several witnesses and we have sever
exhibits which will be submitted.
I would, though, prefer to make about a

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Colloquy/Opening Statement-Kimzey -29-
five-minute opening statement for a couple of
basic reasons.
The first thing being that my understanding
is that this is the first case to be heard by
the Mining Commission on appeal -- on an appeal
from a decision of the Department, and that we fee
that we need to at least for ourselves set a
little bit of the stage about where we are heading
and hopefully, maybe, reinforce for you what is
happening here, since this is breaking some new
ground.
The -- the case before you is a fairly
simple case, but it will,require the applicant to
put on all of its evidence in order to make a com-
plete record that we have satisfied all the
requirements.
And actually, I think since this is the fir
case, and I know that your hearing officer, Mr.
Oakley and I had some discussions about who has
the burden of going forward and who should go
forward and who has the burden of proof, since
that doesn't seem to be established under the
statutes and certainly has not been established
by your practice since there's been no practice
t

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement-Kimzey -30-
before you before now.
I --
CHAIRMAN SMITH: We have been very fortu-
nate.
MR. KIMZEY: I took the unusual step per-
haps for an attorney in•.this casein volunteering
to go first, stating to your hearing officer and
Mr. Oakley that regardless of who has the statu-
tory burden of proof, Wake Stone recognizes that
it must convince you members of the Commission
that we have a desirable situation for a quarry
there, and not only must we do that, whether we
have the statutory burden of proof or not, we
are convinced we can.
We think that we have an excellent case.
We think that you will concur with us, and for
that reason we're not worried about stepping
out and going forward.
Probably the normal procedure, since it's
an appeal from Mr. Conrad's letter, would be
for Mr. Conrad's attorney to substantiate their
decision and us to shoot at 'it.
But quite frankly I felt that that would
make it a little difficult for the State to put

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement-Kimzey -31-
on a negative case, and we were willing to go
first for the reasons that I have reiterated.
The -- I think it will be important for me
and hopefully for the Commission to remind ourselves
what your function is here.
The Mining Act of 1971, under which this
proceeding is ultimately being brought, had in its
preamble or in its findings,a general policy
statement.
And as part of my opening remarks, I'd
just like to read that policy statement to
you..
I think it directs -- it is the policy
which you should follow -- which you are directed
to follow by the statutes in making your determi-
nation here.
"The General Assembly finds that the
extraction of minerals by mining is a basic and
essential activity making an important contribu-
tion to the economic wellbeing of North Carolina
and the nation.
Furthermore, it is not practical to extract
minerals required by our society without disturbing
the surface of the earth and producing waste

CL
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement-Kimzey -32-
materials, and the very character of certain
surface mining operations precludes complete
restoration of the land to its original condi-
tion.
However, it is possible to conduct mining
in such a way as to minimize its effects on the
surrounding environment.
Furthermore, proper reclamation of land
is necessary to prevent undesirable land and
water conditions that would be detrimental to
the general welfare, health, safety, beauty
and property rights of the citizens of the
State.
The General Assembly finds that the conduct
of mining and reclamation of mine lands as pro-
vided by this article will allow the mining of
valuable minerals and will provide for protection
of the State's environment and for the subsequent
beneficial use of the mine and reclaimed land."
That last sentence seems to me to be the
key thing; that is the: "The General Assembly
finds that the conduct of mining..." will be
allowed under this article, and that this article
provides protection to the State's environment.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement-Kimzey -33-
And that's the key to our case.
I will read to you a couple of stipulations
to explain what I'm going to say, but what I'm
saying right now is the key to our case.
Wake Stone Corporation, under this statute
has satisfied the Department's requirements,
guidelines and standards in every respect and yet
has been denied a mining permit because of a
nebulous overall dissatisfaction with having a
quarry at this: location even though all standards
have been met.
Now the policy says that we should allow
mining in the first place and secondly, if we do
meet the standards set under this act which this
Department has established itself, then the
environment and the State's natural resources will
be protected, and we state that's the policy.
Once we have met their standards, we should
be granted a permit.
I would like to read to you as part of the
opening, just to set the stage further, a
statement of the issue.
The State and I, or Wake Stone, have
agreed that there is only one issue involved

0
0
f
0
0
0
s
Lj
z
z
0
to
0
IL
0
u
z
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-34-
If you will look back at the statute, you
will see that there are several grounds that would
warrant the denial of a mining permit.
However, the sole issue before you, and this
is the only thing that you should consider. If
other evidence of some of these things comes up,.
it's not relevant, and that.may be difficult,
but that's what you're charged to do.
The sole issue -- "The parties herein,
Wake Stone Corporation and the Department of
Natural Resources and Community Development have
agreed that the sole issue to be decided in this
matter is whether or not the operation of the
petitioner will have a significantly adverse
effect on the purposes of a publicly -owned park,
forest or recreation area."
In addition to agreeing that that is the
sole issue, the parties have stipulated facts --
there are about four or five paragraphs I plan to
read to you right now, and I would say that these
stipulated facts are uncontroverted and are in
essence binding ai you.
Now, you may have a first negative reaction

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement-Kimzey -35-
to that. How can we stipulate facts that you
must ..accept, if you don't think that they were
true?
I agree with that.
However, these facts are stipulated not
because we're trying to impose something on you,
but because the applicant has submitted data and
the State has reviewed and found that data accept-
able, and everybody agrees that these things -- th
stipulations are true.
It's not a matter of in -- chicanery; it's
a matter of satisfaction of proof so that you don'
have to deal with the things that the Department
has been dealing with for six months, but only
the issues that are involved.
The stipulations are in consideration of
the sole issue, "Only the factors of noise,
visibility, sedimentation, dust, traffic and
blasting are to be considered.
The applicant has satisfied the Department
that , with adherence to submitted control
measures, other factors will be controlled so as
to not present adverse effects."
You will recall in my motion of Mr.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement -Kimsey -36-
Barkalow, I mentioned that there had been stipu-
lations that eliminated, for instance, any con-
sideration of flooding downstream or fluoride
that he brought out, or vibrations to adjacent
property because it's not on the park.
This says that those things have been
satisfied by the State; that is, that those -
there's not going to be any flooding downstream;
there's not going to be any release of fluoridel
there's not going to be vibration to any adjacent
property.
The State has done studies and satisfied
itself and has stipulated that the only factors
are noise, visibility, sedimentation, dust and
traffic and blasting.
And we will present to you today evidence
on each of those factors; noise, visibility,
sedimentation, dust, traffic and blasting, evidence
that we can conduct this proposed -- and will
conduct this proposed operation within the standards
of noise set by the State, within the standards
of visibility set by the State, within the stand-
ards of sedimentation set by the State, within
the air pollution dust controls as set by the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement-Kimzey -37-
State, within the traffic and blasting standards
as set by the State.
And, in fact, have been issued permits in
those.areas where the State issues permits in
those areas.
And we say that as to each of these factors
which you can consider, we are well witHn State
standards.
My understanding of the State's position is
that even though that be so -- I don't even think
they question that.
They say that even that be ---though•:- that
be so, the cumulative effect of meeting all those.
standards still has an impact on the park,
We state to you that the State is bound by
its own standards and must grant the mining
application if we meet those standards in that
area.
And in my closing arguments and in my brief
I will cite to you cases which support that
position.
The other stipulations have to do with
those factors which you can consider: noise,
visibility, sedimentation, dust, traffic and

a
0
N
f
O
U.
N
O
O
0
O
Z
W
Z
O
0
0
u
0
c
0
Z
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement-Kimzey -38-
blasting. And I will read those briefly.
The second stipulation: "Applicant has
submitted a plan for closed circuit process waste
water and plant water.
Applicant has been granted a permit by the
North Carolina Environmental Management Cbmdssion
Department of Natural Resources and Community
Development for its handling of such water.
Said permit is attached hereto as Exhibit
1"
That becomes a matter of official record,
the permit for water.
The applicant -- second stipulation.
"Applicant has submitted a plan for con-
trolling road and plant dust which is designed to
meet Department standards."
"Applicant has been granted a permit by
the North Carolina Environmental Management Com-
mission of the Department of Natural Resources
and Community Development to operate the pro-
posed air pollution abatement facilities for
controlling the dust under applicable standards."
"Said permit is attached as Exhibit 2."
And that's a part of the official record.

0
N
F
0
0
0
0
z
W
Z
Z
0
a
m
0
v
0
4
0
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement-Kimzey -39-
Three, as to traffic. "With estimated
park -- with estimated maximum peak day traffic
for the park and peak loading periods of forty
trucks per hour at the plant, the Division of
Highways has determined that unsafe conditions
will not be created."
And it refers to a letter of Mr. Rhudy
and Mr. Warrick to Alan Eakes, dated August 15th,
attached as exhibit 3.
We will explain that letter later to you,
but that becomes a part of the record.
And we say that we are well within the
traffic standards.
And the last -- or next to the last stipu-
lation is as to blasting.
"Blasting will occur about eight to twelve
times per month. The vibration and air blast
levels are within the North Carolina Department
of Natural Resources and Community Development
guidelines."
In other words, as to the four .elments
of these stipulations, we have stipulated that
we are well within the guidelines.
That leaves noise and visibility with

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement-Kimzey -40-
no stipulation, but our evidence will show that
as to those, we are within any conceivable guide-
lines.
There simply is no permit process available
from the State for us to reach any stipulation.
They don't have a permit process that we can apply
for a permit and -obtain as we have in these other
areas.
The finAl stipulation is that William B.
Umstead Park is a publicly -owned park.
We will, as I have said, offer evidence -- I
ask you to bear with me because we have an obliga-
tion to present the entire case.
We will offer evidence in those areas, the
only areas left in dispute; that is, whether or
not there is any significant adverse effect on
public parks, and in considering that, only the
areas of noise, visibility, sedimentation, dust,
traffic and blasting that the applicant will
operate well within all of the standards estab-
lished by the Department itself; that we will not
have any significantly adverse effect on a State
park, and as a matter of fact, in the long term,
because of the willingness of the applicant to

01
N
F
0
0
0
0
z
Lj
Z
Z
O
a
0
V
O
a
V
z
CL
a
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement-Kimzey -41-
make donations of the exhausted quarry site to the
park, that it is conceivable that you might
find that this would be a significantly long-
range advantage to the park.
They have not been able to buy the land.
We have landowners here to testify that they
have tried to sell to the park at a less price
than they're able to get outside; that the park
has not been able to consider purchasing the
property.
So we say that not, only will we not have
intereste in an adverse on the park the long range.
We have evidence to show that, but for the long
range we may very well offer a significant advan-
tage to the park.
I believe that the evidence will speak
for itself, and that would conclude my opening
statement.
Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Thank you, Mr. Kimzey,
Mr. Oakley, are you prepared to make an
opening statement?
MR. OAKLEY: Yes, sir.
Members: of the Mining Commission, e emba s r , w have

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement -Oakley 0042-
as Mr. Kimzey has pointed out, we have agreed
fairy , extensively on the issues in this matter.
I think it points out the Department's
willingness to review this application in a very
thorough manner.
We have looked at the application along the
same lines as our other reviews of applications.
The Department of Natural Resources and
its Land Resources Division is in the business
of issuing permits. We are not anti -mining.
We are not anti -quarry.
We have spent a great deal of time in this
particular review process.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Excuse me, Mr. Oakley,
could you speak a little louder, please? We're
having difficulties.
MR. OAKLEY: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SMTTH: Thank you.
MR. OAKLEY: The stipulations that we have
come up with to a great degree have limited the
issues that are before you today.
I would like to point out that the statute
mining statute 74-51(5), states that "The
Department may deny a permit upon finding that

0
u
0
a
z
Z
W
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement -Oakley -43-
the operation will have a significantly adverse
effect on the purposes of a publicly -owned park,
forest or recreation area."
This is a separate -- separate item of
concern that the Department is supposed to look at
and that this Commission is supposed to look at.
It is included within seven reasons for
denial. The standards that Mr. Kimzey has pointed
out to you are included in various other ones of
those reasons for denial.
Water quality, air quality permits, those
things -- they are standards -- they are reasons
that the Department can deny a mining permit.
In this particular instance, we looked at
all the factors.
We were able to agree that they had an air
quality permit; that they had a water quality
permit.
Our concern focuses on the effect on the
park= the William B. Umstead Park, and we con-
sider this as the -- if you will, a different
guideline under which the Department can look.
The effect of the issuance of the other
permits, of course, will be up to you.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement -Oakley -44-
We feel that we are not confined to the
standards that they are going to present to you.
Indeed, the standards do not address
specifically the effect on the park, and that's w]
we're going to be focusing on.
We have again stipulated that the effects
that will be considered, again, relating only to
the park, are noise, sedimentation, blasting,
visibility, dust and traffic.
It is the position of the�_Department that
the combined effects of this particular quarry
are significantly adverse to the realization of
the purposes for which the William B. Umstead
Park was intended.
Even with the best of controls, even with
the compliance of the standards that Wake Stone
is going to point out to you today, even with
the best of intentions on the part of Wake Stone,
the quarry will result in impacts to the Park
uses such that the enjoyment of the natural
areas will be threatened.
Activities that are unique to the Park,
such -- we will be focusing on such as hiking,
camping, animal and bird watching, picnicking,
t

0
N
f
O
0
0
0
z
W
Z
Z
O
m
0
V
O
a
u
Z
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement -Oakley -45-
general peace and quiet of the Park and the abilit
to get away from it all, was significant to the
Department.
We want -- we want that issue, and that
issue alone, to be reviewed by the Commission
today.
The ability for Triangle area residents to
get away from it all, we feel would be curtailed.
We will show that the quarry operation can
be controlled so as to prevent intrusion into the
Park.
We will further show that secondary factors
such as increased traffic within the area, uncon-
trollable dust which will settle within the Park,
uncontrollable sedimentation to Crabtree Creek,
and the blasting which can be heard within the Par
all of that the Park uses.
And we have been able to agree with Mr.
Kimzey and Wake Stone that they can operate this
quarry very efficiently.
They are, by all accounts that I've heard,
are good operators.
The Division of Land Resources has had
opportunity to deal with Pair. Bratton on several
t

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Opening Statement -Oakley -46-
occasions. We are impressed with the way they
operate.
Again, the effect of the quarry and the
location and proximity to the Park is what is
significant to the Department, and we hope that
will be significant to the Commission.
We would point out to you, the general pur-
poses of the Mining Act as Mr. Kimzey has read to
you, the Department is in complete agreement.
The General Assembly has gone further upon
this purpose in adopting the whole Alining Act
which gives the Department the ability to deny
permits under certain circumstances.
And they have specified as a separate rea-
son for denial the effect -- the significant
adverse effect on a publicly -owned park.
And we would seek today to have the positio
of the Department to deny this permit, affirmed.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Kimzey, are you ready
to call your first witness?
MR. KIMZEY: Yes, sir, prior to calling
the first witness, and not to unduly belabor it,
there's a technical point I'd like to offer as
evidence, the statement of the issues and the

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
'3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-4 7-
stipulations contained in paragraph 5.a. through
f., which are in the pretrial order just as a
matter of technicality.
You have heard those read to you,.and I
won't repeat that.
I call Mr. Henry Brown at this time.
Whereupon,
DR. HENRY S. BROWN,
Having been first duly sworn,
was examined and testified as
follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KIMZEY:
Q. Mr. Brown, I know you need to refer to the board,
but I'd like to begin by asking you some questions
You may remain standing or sit down until
it's necessary to get there, whichever you
prefer.
State your name for the record, please.
X My name is Henry S. Brown.
4 And what is your occupation and position in that
occupation, Mr. Brown?
A. I'm a geologist. I'm a professor of geology at

0
N
f
O
0
0
s
W
Z
Z
O
r
m
O
0
Z
W
d
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct -48-
North Carolina State University.
And what is your capacity at State in that
Department?
X I teach courses dealing with geology of mines, and
I am presently acting head of the Department.
Q, You're the acting head of the Department of
Geology, is that correct?
�. Yes.
Q, Have you had occasion to -- well, let me go through
your education, just a little bit.
Will you state briefly your educational
background at this time?
�. I have --
CHAIRMAN SMITH: (Interposing) Mr. Kimzey,
I think Mr. Brown is appearing as a private con-
sultant and not as a representative of the Univer-
sity, is that correct?
MR. KIMZEY: I -- certainly that is true, azi
I'll make that clear.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Please do.
MR. KIMZEY: But I believe -- what I want
to do is to qualify him so that you gentlemen
will have an idea of what his opinions are based
on and what the expertise is that he has.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -49-
MR. OAKLEY: May I ask a question? What
field?
MR. KIMZEY: Geology.
MR. OAKLEY: Well, we'll stipulate to that.
MR. KIMZEY: Well, I'd still like to get it
in the record.
Q, (Mr. Kimzey) would you state your educational
background, just briefly for the Commission?
A. I have a doctorate in geology, University of
Illinois.
And your undergraduate degrees?
A. I have a bachelor of science -- bachelor of arts
degree from Berea College in Kentucky, and a
master of science degree from Illinois.
And how long have you been -- had experience in
the field of geology?
A. I began -- I received my master's degree in 1955,
my doctorate in 1958, and I've been practicing
essentially since 1955.
4 And in addition to your teaching duties, have you
acted as a consultant?
14. Yes, sir, I have.
In this case, are you acting as a consultant to
the Wake Stone Corporation?

a
0
N
O
0
0
s
z
W
Z
Z
O
4
O
O
0
Z
W
a
1 Brown
2 A.
3
4
5 A.
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
L
Efl
19
20 A
21
22
23
24 I.
25
Direct
-50-
Yes.
What professional associations or organizations
are you a member of?
I'm a member of the American Institute of Mining
and Metallurgy. I'm a member of the Geological
Society of America, and the Carolinas and Georgia
Society.
Could you speak up so all members of the Com-
mission can _. . hear you now, okay?
Have you had occasion to do a study on the
proposed site called the Cary location of the
Wake Stone Corporation?
Yes, sir, I've been on the site several times,
I've examined the land fors, the rock
types, the soils and the water at the site.
Did you also assist Wake Stone in its preparation
of the application which is before this Commission
as a part of the record in this proceeding?
Yes, I did.
And have you had an opportunity to study the
geological formations and conditions surrounding
this site?
Yes, I have lived in Wake County for twenty --two
years, and I have walked over most of it with

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct ..51-
my students and on my own looking at the various
rocks and rock types in the area.
Would you explain to the Commission what the
geology of the surrounding area is and what con-
clusions you've come to as to the desirability of
this site for a rock quarry?
A. (going to map posted on writing board.) This is
a map of Wake County, a geologic map prepared by
Dr. Parker and published by the State last year.
The -- the part of the geology of the coon
that is of importance is the western part of the
county where the proposed quarry location is to
be.
The western edge of the county is composed
of sandstones and shales that are not quarried
anywhere for road stone, although some clays are
mined for brick. (pointing to belt as outlined
on map.)
The next westernmost belt of rock consists
of fine grain schists and slates of volcanic
origin that break with a very thin form that does
not lend itself well to road stone.
The next belt of rock is the large blue
area on the map, and those are gneisses and

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct 4052--
schists that are mined in some places.
The quarry site proposed is located in the
western edge of this blue, just north of Intersta
40 and southwest of the Umstead Park area.
The rock here is a fine grain -- medium,
fine-grain mica gneiss, the amount of mica is
relatively low although the amount of mica in
the rock varies very considerably through the
county*
The other rock consideration nearby is this
pink body and that's a granitic intrusive rock
that is similarly -- those rock types are mined
other places in the county.
The rock of concern here is in the blue
area.
I'd like to continent on that rock. The --
the mica gneiss here (indicating area on map)
does resist weathering pretty well. It has very
few fractures. It has forms of fairly strong
ridges, and its resistance to weathering has
yielded at the proposed site of the quarry, a
relatively thin overburden, so the amount of
overburden that would be required to be removed

A
O
N
f
O
U.
0
O
0
z
W
Z
Z
0
m
0
u
0
4
u
z
a
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -53-
is going to be relatively small in the initial
operation.
The freedom from fractures or- very top
fractures that occur, implies that the rock has
low permeability.
And so the dewatering of a pit in that
area would have minimal impact upon the ground
water in the vicinity.
My findings are that the ground water table
would not be lowered away from the actual site
of the mine which includes the entire area of
the proposed mining site.
And finally, the resistance to weathering
has created some ridges that I have indicated
on this enlarged topographic map of the site.
(placing a second map over the first one referred
to.)
The ridges -- ridge tops are outlined
here in the yellow.
The entire operation will be confined to
this portion of the mine -- of the quarry site --
and just --
(Interposing) Mr. Brown, let me interrupt there,
just for a point of evidentiary technicality.

u
Z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct -54-
You have -- previously when you were refer-
ring to a map of Make County --
L (Interposing) Yes.
-- geologic map of Wake County, right?
A. Yes*
MAR. KIHZEY: Could we mark this as Brown
exhibit 1 and this is the only copy we have because
of its size.
If you would coo that, Madam Reporter, when
you have a chance,or shall I mark it for the time
being?
(TIAKE STONE' S EXHIBIT 1,
MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION. )
(Mr. Kimzey) And Mr. Brown, what does that --
you're now referring to an apparent map. Well,
ghat does that predict depict?
L All right, this map is the map of the property
that the quarry is proposed to be opened on.
(referring to second map posted on board.)
To orient you, Interstate 40 is located
along the bottom ►edge of the map. North is off
to -- north is not directly up on this map.
This is Crabtree Creek flowing along the
north and northeast sides of the property.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -55-
The airport property is across the creek
on the west, To the north, and to the east is the
park.
The scale here is one inch equals a hundred
feet, so each of these blocks is five hundred
feet.
MR. €%IMZEY o Could we have that marked
for identification as Wake Stone's exhibit number
2? -
(WAKE STONE'S EXHIBIT 2,
MARKED FOR I DENT ELF I CAT ION . )
¢ (Mr. Kimsey) All right, now, continuing your
explanation of the topography of the site using
that exhibit 2, please, sir.
A. All right. I would like to digress just a moment
¢ All right.
A. -- and point out the proposed location of the
facilities that this quarry --
¢ All right.
L -- would utilize.
The -- this is Harrison Avenue located at
this point (indicating on map). It leaves inter-
state 40 and this is an access road here that
comes into the property and then an old dirt road

Z
d
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct --56-
turns down and terminates about this point here,
The proposed quarry site is located es-
sentially on this ridge and this ridge, with the
pit area to be opened along this westernmost
ridge across the creek from the airport property,
The plant is on the ridge to the east, and
the stockpile area will be adjacent to the
plant.
Now, the point I want to make here about
the topography is that layers of gneiss lay --
run generally in a north/northeast direction,
but with the location of the plant at the southern
end of these ridges, it means that there are two
ravines that drain the plant area.
These are shortheaded ravines --that means
they are very small streams, very small drainage
areas in each of the ravines, and that means that
the site lends itself uniquely to control of any
waters that might leave the site with sediment .►-
with fresh water ponds located here and here
in the two ravines and sediment catch basins up
the ravines from those ponds.
While explaining that, Mr. Broom, would you
again point to the pit area there?

a
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct -57-
L Yes, the pit area is located here. This is where
the initial pit opening will be made. (indicating
on map)
Qt Now, that would be the initial pit.
If the pit were expanded over the years,
I
where would that expansion occur? Can you show
us that?
�. Almost certainly along the ridge to the north
and to the south.
All right, and woUd --
At least that --
Excuse me.
-- that would be the direction for expansion.
Is that where the most desirable rock for quarry-
ing is?
L Yes, sir.
Would you point out the borders of Umstead Park
with relation to the pit and plant area?
L All right, the boundary between the airport and
Umstead runs somewhere like this, (indicating)
and all the land on the north side of the -- Crab-
tree Creel;, and down this line on the east side
are Umstead Park lands.
The airport property is located -on this

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -58-
side and the pit area would be some twelve, thirt
hundred feet away from the nearest border to the
park.
The plant area would be some, again, twelve
to thirteen, fourteen hundred feet from the
park.
Does that conclude your explanation of the topogrs
of the site?
A. I think unless there's some questions, I think so,
but--
(Interposing) Do you have a conclusion, Mr. Brow
as to the desirability of this site for a rock
quarrying operation from a geological standpoint?
A I believe that the --- that the low degree of
weathering, that is a small amount of overburden
that.- would have to be .handled in the initial
stages of mining, and the form of the land both
lend themselves to ease of control of runoff
and sedimentation of site.
I believe those are guy major point.
¢ Mr. Brown, have you also, in your duties as a
consultant and professor of geology, been engaged
in studies of mineral resources and the utilizatie
of those mineral resources in North Carolina and
Y

0
N
F
O
0
0
0
W
Z
Z
O
4
m
0
V
0
Z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
IBrown Direct -59-
the nation?
A I have made a number of studies. I think the one
that is most pertinent to this particular case
dealt with a --- a study I did for the U. S.
Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, about
three years ago that deals with the effects of
laws and practices and policies on access to
minerals.
Would you relate your understanding -- I believe
you slid say that you assisted in the preparation
of the application for this particular quarry?
�. Yes, sir.
Would you relate your understanding of this partic
applicant, the application and the dens -- initial
denial of his permit to your findings in those
studies?
L Yes. (placing small flip chart on writing board.)
I could like to utilize these cards, but I do
need a way to hold them up here somehow.
MR. OAKLEY : I'd like to object to the
use of the cards with the phrasing at the top.
MS. FRENCH: On what grounds, Mr. Oakley?
FR. OAKLEY: It's labeled Congressional
Concerns of -- the Congress is not here. It's
ar

0
z
cc
O
u
Z
d
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -60-
related -- if it's related to his knowledge I
don't have any objection to it, but I think the
visual impact of that is prejudicial.
M.R. KIMZEY: I do plan to inquire as to
his knowledge concerning these things, and they
are illustrative of his testimony on it. We,
of course,will have to have his testimony to
dertionstrate that, but that would be my Laoint
as relates to this material.
1--15. FRENCH: At this time, the objection
will be overruled, Mr. Oakley.
MR. KIMZEY: Would it be permissible if I
just hold it here so you can see it*while he refer
to it?
(Mr. Kimzey holds flip chart for witness.)
Go ahead, Per. Brown.
8. During the Arab oil embargo of 1974 - 75, the U. S.
Congress became concerned that the United States
has reached a point where we are becoming
dependent on foreign sources of raw materials that
can be cut off.
In other words, we are becoming vulnerable
to such cutoffs.
And following that there were a number of

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -51-
programs to -- designed to reduce our dependency
on such foreign supplies. Such programs as stock-
piling, or trade agreements and alliances --
MR. OAKLEY: I'd like to make an objection
to this general area of direct examination and
I don't believe that tiie answer is responsive to
the question as I understood it.
The issua :sere is not the use of the stone,
I don't relieve.
MR. KIMZEY: Well, if you will please, in
response to that, the issue is the denial of this
permit, and I have asked the witness to explain
how his knowledge of the denial of this permit
relates to the studies that he has on mining
generally in North Carolina and in the nation.
I think that that is an important considera-
tion for the mining Commission in whether or not
there is a weighing to be done in terms of what
effects on the park and what effects on the public
will be met.
As you know, the statute requires a sig-
nificantly adverse effect which must be weighed
against the benefit.
And I think we're entitled to put on the

OI
O
N
f
O
U.
0
0
0
z
W
Z
Z
O
a
m
0
O
4
V
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1s
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct -62-
benefits.
MR. OAKLEY: I think that the use of the,
rock and the fact that a quarry would be able to
be located in that particular part of Wake CoUnty
is not very relevant to this consideration.
MS. FRENCH: We' re going to sustain fir.
Oakley's objection.
MR. KIMZEY: I'd like to show an exception
to that, please.
MS. FRENCH: Will be noted for the record.
MR. KIMZEY: Madam Hearing Examiner, I'd
like to make an inquiry at this point.
We do have a good bit of evidence on than
benefits, the economic benefits to this particular
locale in North Carolin of this quarry.
we think that- that is certainly relevant
testimony. we don't see how the dining Commission
can consider the overall question of the correct-
ness of this denial of an application without
having some idea of what the desirability of this
is.
It cannot all be negative testimony, and
if that ruling is going to apply to our presen-
tation of evidence on the economic benefits,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -63-
including energy policy, including mineral
utilization, than I feel like we're being unduly
restricted, and I'd like to ask for reconsidera-
tion of that ruling.
DAIS. FRENCH: it will not be reconsidered
at this particular time.
Mr. Oakley, do you want to make a blanket
objection to the testimony concerning. -this area?
MR. OBI LBY : I would like to note the objec-
tion, and in all fairness to Mr. ximzey and Wake
Stone, I understand what he's trying to get in.
I believe this is going to be a lengthy
hearing in any event. We would. -- we would like
to point out under the A.FA that if the particular
evidence becomes unduly repetitious, then we would
object to that.
I really don't mind if Dr. Brown -- Mr.
Brown would testify with regards to the site as
it relates to the park.
I think that is the issue before the Mining
Cormuuission.
Obviously they want to put the quarry there,
and they think it's a good site.
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD - between

Z
W
a
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct -64-
Chairman and Ms. French.)
CiiAIMSAc"�T SMITH: I don't think there's
an objection to the presentation of economic
factors involved in the location of the quarry,.
to the site, but I do think that the whole questio
of mineral policy of the United States is not
involved here,
MR. KIMZFY: . Well, I have asked specifically
to relate tAe mineral policy of the United States
and the State to this application.
I agree with you that we're note here to
discuss generally the mineral policy of the United
States, but I have asked the witness to relate
the significance of -the denial of this permit
to that policy.
Go, we are, I think his preaiable remarks
were a little broad, but I think he will get
into the relations of this particular site and
this particular denial to the --- fitting into
the parameters of those policies.
For instance, I can ask him other questions
but I think that will become clear if you will
allow him to continue along these lines.
CHAIPI-LAN S14ITII: Air. Kimzey, we're going to

f
O
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -6 S-
object -- now allow your line of questions to
the question at hand.
MR. KIDS""KY : All right, sir.
CIiAI:2 31►V SMITH: If you will do that. fir.
Oakley, do you have any question about that?
MR. OAKLEY: I think my main objection woul
be that his question was not responsive to the --
his answer was not responsive to -the specific
question.
CHAIRMU14 AJMITH: Right.
Q. (Mr. Kiiazey) Mr. Brown, the language of the
statute is whether or not this particular quarry
would have a significantly adverse effect on
surrounding park land.
Would you state whether or not what con-
clusions you have come to concerning this particul
site as to any significant effect on park land?
A. The term "significant" has not been defined, and
I am not sure that I know what that means, but
if we --- I suppose it could be argued that any
effect would be significant should be considered,
but if we follow that line of reasoning, then
there are: other activities that are going on
already or will be allowed in this end of the

W' 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct -66-
park that might also impact.
And my concern is that the definition of
"significant" implies that we know ahead of time
what significant is.
If -- if any impact is significant, then,
is the State willing to prohibit any other activi-
ties that might have impact?
QL In addition to other activities, are there factors
which should he considered from a standpoint of
geological considerations, mining policy considera-
tions, which affect the definition of thetword
"significant" in tennis of overlying considerations
of whether or not a minor an impact might be
considered minor in relation to the other positive
benefit of the same impact?
MR. OA�:LEY: I ° d like to object to that,
I'm not sure which impacts lie°s going to testify
to*
R. KIMZEY. hell, unless you hear the
answer, of course, you can't.
14R. OAKLEY: We specified to six that are
going to impact upon the park,
If Wake Stone would like to ask him questic
about those, I wouldn't have any objection to

0
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct 0067--
that, but this general line of questioning --
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD - between
Chairman and Ms. French,)
CiiAIRM;U4 SMITH: Mr. Kimzey, I'd appreciate
your narrowing your question.
AIR. KINZEY : Well, that's what I was
attempting to do. I think that was a narrow
question. I'd appreciate a ruling. I think that's
a legitimate question.
CHAIlld- t0 SMITH: Would you repeat the que-
tion, please, sir?
01 (14r. Kirazey) Mr. Brown, in considering whether or
not the impacts of noise, sedimentation, traffic,
dust, vibration, have a, quote, "significant
impact", do you also have to consider the impact
of the mining operation as providing positive
benefit to determine whether or not. those --
the impact in those areas are significant or not?
And that is, do you have to weigh those
impacts against the other benefits that maybe
obtained?
1�. In my opinion that all impacts have to be --- the
good of the impact has to be weighed against
the bad of the impact.

W
n
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
-68-
A I see.
A There are -- there are impacts that would be forth-
coming if the permit were denied in my opinion.
Such impacts as longer truck haulage for stone
in the area, because of ;quarry locations farther
away, which would consume more motor fuel which
would add to the air pollution of the area.
It would increase costs of construction
and maintenance in the region.
I feel like that it would provide a -- an
ability , I suppose that would be an opinion.
I feel like there are other impacts that
have to be considered if the permit is denied.
Q. All right, are there significant -- is the question
of whether or not there is a significant impact
also to be considered in the light of the utiliza-
tion of natural resources of the area?
L Certainly. I think that they have to be con-
sidered.
And could you explain why that would be in terms
of Whether or not if you don't permit mining
at a particular location, what is available
in terms -- from a :Wining standpoint?
A. I'm not quite sure --

0
N
O
U.
0
O
0
z
W
Z
Z
O
m
0
V
V
W
d
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -69-
'well, I'm not sire I made my question clear.
NO .
If -- actually, I gue3s I'm trying to gat back
into your studies that you have referred to,
and- -- and the policy effects.
I will move on from that . -
Nr. Lrown, would you comment if you
c%Yould, ;please # sir, from your standpoint -
as a geologist and an expert in geology, on
the importance of standards to measure whether
or not a particular raining operations may
have an impact and the importance of following
those standards, and relate that to this particular
application and the denial of the permit?
A. Well, I certainly believe that standards
need to be es ta-blished and need to be followed,
and I believe that State and Federal regulations
do in fact , , e-stablish standards.
I believe that the problem that we're
addressing here is than there are conditims
beyond which requirements can be made that- are
not bases, upon the normal standards, and I think
that we're dealing here with the -- with. standards
or realuiren�ent q that
� are specifically tailored +n

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct- -70-
this particular site ,.
0ne of the problems that we addressed in -
this .study that I referred to was whether or not
such additional requirements beyond the normal
accepters requirements, do in fact limit access
to minerals for whatever reason.
Now, we know -Uiat people object to mining
Leinq naarLy. .
1"%nd MiSIP4 tale issue of environmental
protection:, has a lot of clout and are difficult -
to challenge, but they do tend to ring a bell
becaus.� of the fact that we are --- we have been. -
in an . environmental movem. ent and it has affected
people's tzinking - about what we are doing.
Lut I think that what we 'have got- to con-
sider here is: will we require the same degree
of environmental protection and will we look at
the, impacts frori the mining operation in the
same sense t,zat pro look at- irtipacts from other
types of human , acgvities?
Ail
(Interposing) In that respect, relating solely
to C'.1is site, have ;you considered whether or not
there will be, say, the relationship of impact

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Sacn�m Direct-.-71"
from this _ proposed mining operation with the
controls that are built into it in relation to
other alternative uses of this site?
�. In my opinion, the, controls that are built into
this go beyond the normal where you would expect
inoother places except in the sensitive fringe of
the park.
I believe haL those built-in protections
on the environment will adequately protect the
environment to the oxt._4nt that it will be --- the
impact ►: will be within the Limits of impacts of
other activities that are already going on in
the vicinity of the park or that will be allowed
within the vicinity of the park in the future,
For example, if this site were to be
developed as a residential area, I feel like that
sedimentation, noise and dust would be equal
impacts at that time.
i think ---
g, (Interposing) All right.
MR. OAKLEY : ( Interposing) I'd like to
object to the line of questioning and also move
to strike.
We are not concerned with other uses of

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct -72 -
of this particular land.
MR. KIMZLY : We are talking about, if the
Com►aission please, this particular site and this
particular site in terms of what the impact may be
on t1ae part: as related to what other uses may be.
.HAI1 ,iAN SR11 'd: I wish to sustain the
objection, please.
(Mr. Kii:izey ) Mr. Brown, is it your information
that tie State has standards, for instance, relati
to sedimentation whic:l -- which apply to this
sits?
A. Yes, the State does have standards relating to
the --
�. (Interposing) Anti is it your information that
this particular proposal has ntet all those stand-
ards?
A. Yes.
And is that true as to air pollution?
A. Yes.
And is that true as to the traffic?
A. Yes.
4 And is that true as to the blasting standards?
A. Yes.
Q6 And noise standards?

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct -73-
�. I don't know what- the standards are, but I
believe they have been net.
All right, if it be the case that the Sta -- that
the evidence shows that the applicant has met
all the State's standards in the various areas
that are arailable for the Commission to consider,
do you have an opinion as to whether or not the
Mining Lommi.ssion or the State -- whatever deciding
policy is provided, should make an exception for
tAis particular location in spite of meeting
trio se s taridards to deny the application?
I believe that if the State grants this permit,
that the impact upon the park would be within
an acceptably: limit.
I do not think that there would be sig-
nificant adverse effects on the park.
¢ All right.
Can you identify the document which I am
now handing you, Mr. Hraom?
Yes, tiAis is the study that I performed for the
U. S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment,
that relates to an examination of how Federal
laws and policies and practices affect access to
minerals on private lands.

44011 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
O
N
18
0 19
O
0
z
20
of
0 21
a
m
22
0
a
u
W 23
a
24
25
Brown Direct -74-
Q� Does that study speak to the particular utilizati
of this site within the iunbit of the policies
and findings that you have made in that study?
A. Yes, one of the findings was that denial of
access to mineral resources is very commonly
based on an objection that it will create un-
acceptable environmental impact, and the finding
was that this is not Always the real reason, but
that the reason may be other objections, simply,
we don't want mining nearby.
But the Finding was that in many cases,
land classifications or additional restrictions
placed uponmini.ng that go beyond the normal
restrictions that may be applied to other human
type activities.
�. And what are -- is the effect of those additional
or "beyond the normal restrictions"?
L The effect is to deny access to the resources
that are needed for our standard of luring, our
way of life.
Did you also do studies within that report con-
cerning parks and the ;peripheral area around
parks?
A. Yes.

0
0
N
E
O
0
0
z
W
Z
Z
O
m
a
0
a
u
Z
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct M75-
And what conclusions did you come to that might
relate to this particular site of choice?
A ( Interposing) I find that the areas in vicinities
of parks, while they may not be zoned to exclude
mining, nevertheless there is a sensitive fringe
around those types of lands where mining is
resisted.
And the resistance wrings to bear enormous
pressure on public officials, to -- to imply --
impose additional requirements or restrictions
that deny access in effect, as if the park were
zoned for nonmining purposes.
QL And if those zones are not permitted to be mined
in the periphery of the park, is there an
alternative? Can they be mined elsewhere?
�. Minerals have to be mined where the naturally
Y are Y
fixed, and if they are not. alined there, then
they will not simply be mined.
¢ Mr. gown, considering the standards which have
been set by the State and which this application
is designed to meet and considering your -- you
are -- ;you have personally visited the site, --
X (Interposing) Yes.
9 -- and walker the site yourself, have you not?

O
O
a
u
Z
W
LL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct -76--
J. Yes.
And you're familiar with the borders and the dis-
tances and the topography and the vegetation on
the site?
A. Yes.
Do you have an opinion as to whether or not the
development of this site as proposed by Wake
Stone would have a Significantly adverse effect
on the park?
1,1R. O;�XLSY: I'd like to object to the
question. It's referred to standards set that
relate to -- to the park.
I don't believe he's testified to any of
the standards that are inherent in that particul
question.
I don't think there's a proper foundation
laid.
N.R. I:IMZ%Y: Beg . you rule on that, Madam
Examiner, of course, we can put on each of the
witnesses as to each individual standard which
will tic: that in, and we intend to.
Lut you have to start with someone, and
we decided to start with a broad witness and go
to the specific.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Direct - 7 7-V
But we certainly would expect that a
ruling will be conditioned upon the sta -- the
evidence that the standards have been met, and
we do intend to offer that.
MR. OAKLEY: I would like to also point
out that he was qualifed as a geologist.
CHAIRV1AN SMITH: I would like to overrule
the objection.
(Mr. Kimzey) Go ahead, Mr. Brown.
Do you have such an opinion?
IL In my opinion the plan for developing the quarry
at the site does provide adequate protection to
the park and does not create adverse effects at t
site.
MR. KIMZEY:, I would like to have the
booklet which Pax. Brown just testified to marked
as Wake Stone's Exhibit 3, and offer that with
the f irs t two exhibits.
NJAI:E STONE' S EXHIBIT 3,
MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
MR. KIMZEY: And I tender the witness for
cross --examination.
CHAIRVIAiv SMITH: Mr. Oakley, are you ready

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Cross -78-
for cross --examination?
PiR. OAKLEY: Yes, sir.
(DISCUSSION OFF M, CORD - at
Department's Counsel tables)
MR. RIMLEY: (to witness) You may have
a seat.
CROSS-EXAMIZIATION BY MR. OAXLLY
Dr. Brown --- is it Dr. brown or Mrs Brown?
A Dr. Brown.
Ll Dr. Brown, you were employed by Wakes Stone to
pull together this information and submit the
application, were you not?
L Yes, I -- I worked with hake Stone in preparing
application.
I did not prepare all the parts of the
plan.
01 And the studies that you have referred to -- I'm
not sure if I got those na.•nes, when were those
studies conducted?
A. The Congressional study?
4 The two --- the booklet that you referred to?
A, Yes, this was produced, I believe, in 1977.
(looking at publication date of "Study").

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
cross ..79-
Yes, the work was performed in the summer
of 1977.
Q And I believe you testified that you had particula
interest in park areas in that study?
�. The study covered all sorts of land that would not
be Federal land or any other type of governmental
lands.
In other words, private lands and a part
of the study found that lands within the vicinity
of parks was especially sensitive to mining.
W
I did look at other types Of lands as well. .
OL And what was the general -- what was the general
question that you were trying to determine?
�. Okay, the general question is: -- or the charge
that I was given was: Are Federal lawns, practices
and policies in effect denying access to minerals
and perhaps going beyond the original intent of
the laws or are being utilized to resist mining,
and/or perhaps they are not being equally applied?
And the study involved interviews with
numbers of people, Federal officials, State
officials, mining people, environmentalists,
private citizens, but the requirement was that
all peoples that I worked with had to be

0
E
0
0
0
z
W
Z
Z
0
0
0
a
V
z
a
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Cross -80-
knowledgeable in some respect about mining,
either from a regulation standpoint or involved
personally as au environmentalist, or that they
were involved in mining.
Q. Who was the report submitted to? Who --
(Interposing) It was prepared for Dr. Frank
Wobber who is in charge of this project for they
office of Technology Assessment in Washington.
Would you consider the particular charge that you
had relating to whether or not the Federal regula-
tions involved said or restricted the use of
A►i:iing?
Would you consider that purpose as basically
a negative purpose?
A. No, the -- the findings showed that in fact
that some of the Federal laws and regulations
actually increased access to mineral resources,
such as laws that entitle the construction to
taxes and energy do make access more readily
available, and that was quoted in this finding.
Q. would you have a similar opinion about State
laws?
A. Yes, because many State laws are patterned after
Federal laws,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Cross -81-
The National Environment Policy Act, for
example, was enabling legislation out of which
grew a whole host of other laws on the State and
local level.
Q. Are you familiar with the land quality section
of the Department of Natural Resources?
A. Yes
Can you describe to me what you consider to
be their basic function?
A. They are charged with the protection of lands, to
regulate the usa of lands insofar as they are
restricted by legislation.
I beLeve that their job is to protect both
land rights and the people's rights,
Q And, I believe you testified that standards have
to be established in -- in areas like this?
A Standards are established. There are in --- it's
my understanding there are basic requirements
that have to be met before wining permits can be
granted.
There are, also, my finding pointed out that
many of these laws are written, opipn_:.ende:d such
that there may be minimum standards but in many
cases there are no maximum standards,

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
brown Cross - 82-
And that these --- in some cases that
maximum standards may be imposed beyond the normal
minimal.
I hand you a copy of the General Statutes. I'd
like for you to take a look at what's designated
as 74-51, in particular, parenthesis number (5).
A. (looking at reference handed up by counsel for
the State.) Yes.
Are you familiar with that?
A. Yes, I am.
96 Would you read it to us, please?
IL "`] Aat the operation will have a" --okay. "The
Department --
a (Interposing) You might have to read the first..
� Okay, that "The Department may deny such permit
upon finning...", and item (5), the -- "That the
operation will have a significantlyd p a verse effect
on the purposes of the publicly -owned park,
forest or recreational area."
Would you consider that as a guideline or a
standard that the Department should look at?
A. I believe it's a guideline.
Thank you.
A. I would not consider it a standard.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown cross "83-
OL You are aware of the issues in this particular
hearing?
A. Yes, I believe I understand the issues,
What is --- what is your basic understanding of
what is involved?
A. I believe that the issue here is whether or not
the proposed action will have a significantly
adverse effect.
I believe that the issue is in the defini-
tion of the term, "significant".
I believe that the ---- if it can be -- okay,
I believe that --- shallwe establish -- I guess
an issue has to be an either/or situation, one
side or the other.
Shall we establish standards, requirements,
for protecting the environment equally to all
types of human activity or shall we single out
mining to undergo a special type of standard?
Would you say that the mining act in general
should not have been enacted?
A. Should not be enacted?
Should not have been enacted?
A. Oh, no, I think the Mining Act is a good thing.
a And you don't think it's singling out raining

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Cross -e4-
in particular?
A. No, I support the mining law.
¢ Have you ever been to the William B. Umstead
State Park?
A. Yes, I have.
Have you been there in connection with this par-
ticular application?
A. Yes, I'vebeen there in connection with the appli
tion, as well.
What did you do when you went to the park?
A. walked through the parr, looked toward the site
from the park.
Do you have any -- Ilia not sure if you've stated
this; before -- do you have any opinion on the
relationship between the park and mining in
general?
L Well, my opinion is that -- mining in general, or
this particular application?
Q, Mining in general, first.
MR. KIMZEY: well, what solves the problem
for the goose solves the problem for the gander,
and I think this is all related to this. I don't
object to the broadness if he will in the future
come back to this particular application.

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Cross M85-
(Mr. Oakley) You can just limit it to this par-
ticular application.
A. In my opinion, I do not think that the proposed
mining as the plan is designated would have a signs
cant impact on the park.
And you say that even with earlier saying that
74-51(5) would be considered by you as a guide-
line?
A. Yes, sir, but I --- I --- I accept that guideline,
but I think the burden of proof has to be whether
or not there is in fact going to be a significant
adverse effect.
¢ That's what we're all hers: to find out.
A. Okay.
You were going through the general outline of the
quarry, I believe you mentioned future expansion,
did you not?
A. Yes.
¢ What is the --- what are the long-range plans for
the expansion for the pit area?
A. I'm not sure that I can answer that, because I
was involved simply in preparing the initial
mining permit which would be for the first ten
years.
i-

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Cross - 6 6-
But I believe that -- that the expansion of
the pit would be along the ridge within those ten
years.
Again, it would depend upon production
rates and all, which V i:i not qualified to
answer.
You probably should ask a miner about
that.
¢
The particular area that is designated as a pit,
that rectangle on the map?
A.
Yes.
¢
What length of time would be involved in
mining
out that particular area?
8.
It depends upon the production -rate, and
I'm not
sure I know what that is at this time.
I would guess we would be talking
about
a few years, perhaps, less than five.
Q.
So at some -- at some point within five,
ten--
year range, expansion would occur --
A.
(Interposing) Beyond this rectangle, --
Q.
-- beyond this rectangle?
A.
Yes, air, that's right.
And it was your opinion that it would generally
go in wlch direction?

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Cross -87--
�. Along the ridge to the north and/or to the south.
Q, Do you have any knowledge of the anticipated life
of this quarry?
A. It's been stated that -- I have heard other people
say, who are on this coimittee for application,
that it would probably last -- there's enough
stone there for fifty years.
96 'could you list for me the standards -- quarry
standards which you say could be met?
A. I believe that sedimentation can be completely
controlled.
I -- that's not the question. The question is --
MR. KIMILY: (Interposing) Well, I object.
That is the question. That's the standard that
he's setting, that it can be completely con-
trolled.
He's asked the question. Now, I believe
we're entitled to give the answer.
THE WI T AESS : I'm not sure I understand the
question, then.
MS. FRENCH: would you restate the ques-
tion?
(Mr. Oakley) The question I'd like to know is
the specific -- standard is used in a generic

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
• 17
m
0
N
f 0 18
s 19
0
0
z
20
W
0 21
m
0 22
U
O
4
W 23
a
24
25
IN
Brown Cross -8�-
sense, I believe -- I think that's what he's
saying.
I would like to know the specific standard
that he's talking about when he makes his opinion.
MS. FRENCH: Are you talking about measure-
ment?
I.R. obi{LEY : Measurement. Control of
sediment is not responsive to the question that I
would like to ash,:.
MR. XIMZEY: Well, I think the question ---
THE WITNk;SS : Well, T' x k not sure I under-
stand the question then.
(Counsel and. witness talking simultaneously.
PIR. KIMZEY : I think that is the question.
MS. FRENCH: Can you rephrase the question,
Mr. Oakley?
MR. OAKLEY : I don't think so.
(Mr. Oakley) %iat standards -- in regards to
sedimentation, what standards do you think that
this mine will laeet?
Do you -mean in pounds per hour or do you mean in
whether or not things will he controlled completely
or adequately?
I'm not sure -- I still don't understand

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown
Nuf
A.
a
L
E
cross
149-
what you mean.
I'm talking -- when you talk to me about standards,
my impression of that is that you have looked in
an objective -- in some book somewhere and found
an objective limit, or design criteria, et cetera,
et cetera, on what regulatory body will impose
upon a particular operator, is that correct?
Under normal circumstances, yes.
Okay, you testified --
(Interposing) I think this is a special case.
You testified earlier that you believe they can
meet all these standards.
Yes, I think they can.
I'd like to know what standards you think they're
going to meet.
I think they will go beyond the normal standards
required by regulatory agencies on control of
dust, sedimentation, noise, blasting and so
forth.
In;other words, you don't have.. any objective
standards to tell me?
No more than we have defined "significant adverse
effect".
MR. OAKLEY: Thank you. I don't have any

0
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Redirect "90-
other Questions.
MR. KIMZEY: I have a few on redirect.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Redirect, please, Mr.
Kimzey,
REDIRECT LXAMINATION BY MR. KIMZEY:
Mr. Brown.. Mr. Oakley asked you about subsection,
(5) of section 74--51 of north Carolina General
Statutes, that is'whether or :not the operation
will have a significantly adverse effect on
the purposes of a publicly -owned parka
You agreed with him that that was a guide-
line for him to look at, is that correct?
A. Yes.
Now, if the State establishes standards, that
is objective criteria, which should be -met which
would measure whether or not an operation will
have a significantly adverse effect on a publicly -
owned park, should those standards be applied
differently to mining operations than to other
operations?
A, Not in my opinion.
I believe that if we agree that the noise
level shouldn't exceed a certain decibel, or

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
WWI
Brown Redirect W91-
if there should not be more than a certain level
of sediment in the waters leaving the site,
I think that should apply to any human activity;
not just mining.
OL All right.
A. I think this is equal protection under the law.
Whether or not you have a specific knowledge of
the specific numerical value of a standard, is
it your understanding that this application will
meet whatever standards the State has set, not
your standards or the mining industry's, but the
State standards for the control of these factors
which are to be considered by the Mining
Commission?
A. That is my understanding.
MR. KIMZEY: No further questions
. OAKLEY : We have no further questions.
CHAIRMAN SMITE: No further questions, Mr.
Oakley?
°4R. OAKLEY: No further questions, .
CFAAIR�.UiN SMITH: I'd like to ask a question,
FIR. KIMZ EY : (to witness as he begins to
leave stand.) Mr. Brown, the Commission may have
a question.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Commission/Redirect 4W92_
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Has it been established
that the quality of the stone available at the
proposers quarry site meets the quality control
requirements of the Department of Transportation
and the FAA for aggregate construction?
A. I e m not qualified to answer that, Dr. Smith.
I believe that of -hers will be more quali-
fiedo
I I m not an expert on that.
i'.m. is m=k : 11w, sorry, Dr. Smith. 'ghat
was the question? I'm sure we have --
CHAIRMAN SMITii: (interposing) The questi
was whether or not the rock anticipated -- at the
anticipated site meets all the requirements of
the Department of Transportation and the FAA for
roadway and airport construction?*.
MR. KIMZEY: We will have two witnesses
that will testify to that. We have Mr. Reed
corning up and Mr. Bratton, the 'fake Stone Quarry
owner.
k, R. STANLEY R. RIG GS : I have five question
I I d like to ask.
CiYAIRRIUi SMITH: You may.
14R. RIGGS: If we go back to Exhibit 1,

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Commission 0093-
the geologic map, this is an extensive belt of
rocks that you have delineated.
�. Yes.
!U�. RIGGS: This belt of gneiss that runs
through Wake County.
Yes .
MR. RIGGS : Why is --- would you point out
first of all on that map where other quarries are
in the same belt of rock?
11 R. RI! U' LY : P%1r. Riggs, may I -- Mr. Chair
the next witness is specifically familiar with
quarrying operations in Wake County, and is
intended to cover this.
I don' t mind Mr.
--
YR. RIGGS : I wazited --- I would like this
question to be answered by this witness.
MR. KLMZEY : -- Brown answering that. It
may he repetitive. I just would like to point
that out.
(Counsel and Commissioner talking simul-
taneously.)
CLAIiZc43 SMITH: Go ahead.
A. So far as I Z'mow at this time there is no active
quarry in this belt of rock in Wake County.
i

a
a
N
E
0
0
0
0
z
Ui
Z
Z
0
r
a
CO
0
V
O
Q
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Commission -94-
There was, however, a quarry operating in
the park north of the creek at one time in this
belt of rock.
NCR. RIGGS : Why is this site right there
(indicating on reap) any better than the rest of
that massive belt of rock that runs through Wake
County?
Why should this site be the single site
out of that whole belt that is projected for
mining?
A. From a --that that -_ the quality of the site as a �-
for a stone quarry depends on many factors other
than geological.
In my opinion the rock there is a good,
hard, solid rock, and it has low mica contents.
It is riot schistos at that particular place.
There are other factors such as access,
load limits on roads, that I think others will
he more qualified to address than I am.
Mlle RIGGS : I o d like to address the questi
on the quality of the rock.
Are there not other areas in that belt of
rock that have the saute duality of rock as
this?

V
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown commission~'
X I suspect that there are, yes.
MR. RIGGS: If we take the small amount
of weathering that you were talking about, this
is the minimum overburden, and this ridge structure
and if this is a belt of rocks -- similar -type
rocks, then one would expect to find a similar
geologic setting with similar rock types available
in many places along that outline, is that
correct?
A. Well, the ntap shows that the rock -- this belt
of rock is a general belt consisting of a variety
of rock types that have been generally classified
a3 mica gneiss, schist, and amphibole gneisses
and schists, so it's really quite a variety of
rock types.
Dr. parker is of the opinion that the
origin of this rock was volcanic flows, ash beds
and so on that were subsequently metamorphosed
to a gneissic and schistos forms, and that the
quality of the rock varies considerably from
place to place even though it is mapped as a
single type unit on the map.
This is a general belt with specific rock
types within that belt.

0
N
E
0
0
0
0
z
W
Z
0
a
m
0
c
dc
Z
W
LL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Commission -09 f -
MR. RIGGS: Has the study that you have referred to in any
place referred to indicated values or rock types
for different types of uses?
A. There are other deposits in Wake County of material
that .have other uses.
For example, in the large green area, there'
large deposits of clay.
Is that what you're --
MR. RIGGS: (Interposing) No, I'm talking
about tiie saiue belt of rock again, for the same
type of purpose, for road -type aggregate, or a
road base.
X Again, I have no �. studied the belts specifically
for that purpose, so I could not answer that,
MR. RIGGS: Going to Exhibit number 2,
where you showed the quarry site, you pointed out
the drainage basins in them;, the two little
depressions or gullies t1lat run up through
there that carry the water off.
You said nothing about the ditch out to
the west of the map, and your map shows no
catclment basins whatsoever to the left, and
it appears according to the map that you would
have drainage directly from the quarry site or

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Commission -97-
mining site into Crabtree Creek.
A The method of opening the pit and the maintenance
of slopes would preclude sediment from leaving
clown the west slope of tliat ridge.
MR. RIGS: aow?
A With the use or diversion structures, brush
barriers and temporary catch basins during opening
of the pit, and then later as the pit is deepened,
all the drainage areas will be in the pit or in
the pit area.
Again, this will be addressed in more detail
by other people.
1411. RIGGS : And I'd like --- this question
was touched on earlier. I'd like to know what
the reserve potential of that whole property is?
A Again, I haven't done reserve studies, but it's
my understanding that there must be fifty years
supply of stone.
MR. RIGGS : At what sort of production
rate?
A. Probably a million tons a year.
A projected need for stone in the area is
considerably Ir►ore than that. So it is a needed
resource.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Brown Commission -98-
MR. RIGGS: What is the projected need?
A. It Gould run as high as three million tons a
year in -- several years down the road.
Again, there will be testimony on this
later on.
MR. RIGGS: What would be the major use
of that rock?
A. For aggregate, for construction of roads, homes,
businesses, airport.
MR. RIGGS: Is there any reason why that
site in the Raleigh region should be any better
than a site oh, say, ten miles away --
A. (Interposing) I think --
4 -- in the same region?
A. I think the geological restrictions require that
you limit your sites to those rocks that are
suitable.
Other restrictions such as access, land, --
already existing land use, limited to where quarri
can be opened.
MR. RIGGS: Do you know what the other land
what the other potential, economic potential.. of
the associated rock in this belt are?
Have you evaluated it and do you know
s

0
a
0
0
z
Lj
Z
Z
0
}
m
0
v
0
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20.
21
22
23
24
25
groWn Commission NW99-
that that is the only place it can be mined?
�. I have not myself evaluated it, as stone ---- from
a standpoint of looking at it as a stone quarry
potential, but others have and they will testify.
CHAIRMAN SMITH e Thank you. Any other
questions?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH:* Hearing none, you may stew
down, Dr. Brown.
(WITNESS EXCUSED.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Gentlemen it's about twent
minutes to t1jelve. Do you want to break now for
lunch?
MR. GREER JOHNSON : Good idea.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: (to counsel) Is that
satisfactory?
We will break the hearing for an hour for
lunch and return at about a quarter of one, please
(LUNCH RECESS 11-6 40 -- 12 :45 P, M- )

2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-100-
CHAIRMAN.SMITH: we will resume the
hearing of the Mining Commission.
Mr. Kimzey.
MR. OAKUY: If it please the Commission,
we'd like, before you get started with the next
witness, in light of the testimony given this
morning, the Department would like to wake an
inquiry of the Commission and ask for a ruling
upon the exact nature of the issues that are going
to be decided here today.
The cost --benefit approach --
CHAIRMAN SMITH: fir. Oakley ---
MRo OAKLEY s --mineral use -- yes,, sir?
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Will you approach the bent
please sir.
MS. FRENCH: Both:.. You and Mr. Kimzey.
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD - at head table•)
CHAIRMAN SMITHS; The Commission would like
to recess for about ten minutes, and we will
return.
(Whereupon, the Mining Commission members and
their counsel retire from the hearing room for
consideration of the motion made by Mr. Oakley.)
•

a
0
0
z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Motion -101-r
(Whereupon, the Commission members return to
the hearing room.)
CHAIRS SMITH: Let's go back on the
record, then.
MS. FRENCH: Let the record show► that the
State's motion was denied, that the evidence will
be allowed in.
Are you ready to proceed?
MR. KIMZEY: Yes, Mr. Reed.
Whereupon,
MR. JAMES R. REED, JR.,
Saving been first duly sworn,
was examined and testified
as follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KIMZEY:
9 State your name, please, sir,
L James R. Reed, Jr.
And with whom are you employed, Air. Reed?
A. I have a --- I operate a consulting firm called
Crushed Stone Consultants, Incorporated, here
in Raleigh.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reed Direct -10 2-
OL Have you been employed on a consulting basis by
Take Stone Corporation in connection with this
application now before this Commission?
A. Yes, I have.
What is your education in the area of quarrying,
please, sir, just briefly?
A. I have twenty-six years experience in the crushed
stone business. I'm a graduate of North Carolina
State University with a bachelor of science
degree.
I'm a licensed real estate broker. I'm a
member of the Raleigh Board of Realtors. I'm a
member of the North Carolina Aggregate dissociation,
and I'm a registered surveyor for the State of
North Carolina.
I established the consulting firm of
Crushed Stone Consultants in-1977. we're head-
quartered here in Raleigh. We're consultants in
the crushed stone induatry nationwide.
We have expertise in quarrying mineral
evaluations, quarry feasibility studies,
prospecting and testing of stone deposits and
matters related to quarry real estate and zoning,.
4, Are you familiar with the geological formations

0
N
f
O
IL
0
0
0
Z
W
Z
Z
0
CO
0
V
C
V
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reed Direct -103-
and the stone deposits particularly for aggregate
quarrying in and aro --- in the Wake County and
surrounding area, primarily?.
A. Yes, I am.
Has your experience been primarily in the area for
the past twenty-six years?
A. Well,, my experience has been in the southeastern
United States, but I have --y off and on, I have
spent a considerable time prospecting in Wake
County.
Q, Could you tell. the Commission just briefly, please,
sir, -- before you get into that, there's one more
qualifying question.
Have you personally inspected the site of
the proposed quarry, the Cary Quarry at -- of
Wake Stone Corporation?
A. Yes*
Q� And done tests A. (Interposing) Yes. I -�-
--- and evaluations?
A. Yes, I have personally inspected it and have
supervised the drilling of the property.
Q. All right, would you tell the Commission whether
or not this is a viable quarry site and why the

0
N
O
IL
N
O
O
n
O
Z
W
Z
Z
O
a
m
0
u
0
4
V
Z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reed Direct -104-
particular Wake Stone site that we're talking
about?
�. In ray judgment it is a viable quarry site, and
the things making up aNiable quarry site I think
is important, number one is market, number two
is deposit, three is access to a major highway,
four is you have to have sufficient real estate,
five, you've got to be isolated, six, you have
to have a competitive location, and seven, very
importantly, it has to be properly zoned.
Q. Now, does this site meet your requirements in
all that -- in those seven areas, without ex-
plaining why in each area?
A. Yes, it does.
06 Are you prepared to testify in each of those areas
if questioned --
A. (Interposing) Yes, I am.
4 -- by the Commission?
A Yes, I am.
Proving on to another topic, have you prepared
a map which shows the geographic forma -- the
geologic formations -- excuse aye -- and the exist-
ing quarrying sites in relation to the proposed
site?

a
0
N
f
O
N
O
0
0
z
W
z
O
Y
Q
m
0
u
c
a
u
W
IL
1
2
3
4
Reed
A
5 A.
6
7
8
9
A.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
-l05-
Yes, I have.
And is that the snap that is now on the board behind
you?
Yes.
Mould you please go to that snap and explain to the
Commis s ion the to cat ion of the existing quarries
and how they relate to the proposed site, please?
Yes. (Witness goes to map posted on writing
boardJ
Gentlemen, so we can all be oriented, the y+
low here is Raleigh. This is Cary.* This is
Umstead Park. This is the Research Triangle Park
in brown.
Up to the north is Durham, over to the the
west is Chapel dill. Pittsboro, Moncure, Sanford.
This is a -- I have put together six county
maps for Wake, Durham, Orange, Chatham, Lee and
Harnett, on a scale of one inch to a. mile.
The existing quarries starting down to the
south of Raleigh, in green, is Martin Marietta's
quarry, over to the east on Highway 64 is Wake
Stone's Knightdale quarry,
Up to the north near Wake Forest is the
Teer Company quarry.
..

a
0
N
E
O
W
0
0
s
z
Z
Z
0
m
0
V
V
Z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reed Direct -1.06-
Over to the west, just off Highway 70, is
also the Tear Company quarry called Crabtree
Quarry.
This brown dot is the property under dis-
cussion today.
Up to the north of Durham is the Tear
Company, Durham Quarry.
Over to the west of Chapel dill is a
joint venture between the Teer Company and
American -- it's called American Stone, a joint
venture between the Tear Company and Central Rock.,
At Moncure Mere is the Rnightdale Quarry --
excuse me, the Wake Stone o s Moncure Quarry.
Down to the south of Sanford is Martin
Marietta's Lemon Springs Quarry.
Now, these are the existing quarry opera-
tions as of today. You may wonder what the big
red area is here. This is a geologic phenomenon
known as the► triasic basin.
As I understand it, millions of years
ago along the Jonesboro fault, there was a dis-
placement of the rock downward some thousands of
feet. In the ensuing millions of years, the
erosion of the mountains and the high places

1 Reed
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct --107-
brought into this area sands and clays, primarily.
So, what I'm saying, you have sands and
clays, siltstone and sandstone, no commercial
grade stone in this vast red area, emcompassing
some six hundred square miles, and coming from the
underlying City of Sanford, underlying the
Research Triangle Park, underlying the airport,
underlying most of Durham, and going on up into
Granville County.
That precludes a giant vast geographic
area so far as commercial grade stone goes,
That is why I say that where you see this
deposit is the only viable quarry site on ---
in western wake County, And I base that on
some twenty years prospecting from time to time
in Wake County. -- In western Wake County.
You may asks well, this geologic formation
that Dr. Smith -- that Dr. Henry Brown spoke
of. extends down this way.. Rows about that?
That happens to lie under the City of Cary,
and also under McGregor Downs, and you're
certainly not going to have a rock quarry back
in that country.
As you get on over here --

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reed Direct 4408_
g (Interposing) What is the overburden situation
in that particular situation, also?
A. The overburden -- as you come back this way (indi-
cating on map), the overburden becomes prohibitive,
fifty feet , perhaps.
Another factor, even it you had a viable
rock site back in here, you have load limit roads
and bridges, thirteen thousand pounds per axle,
You can't haul it.
¢ What --- what weight limit per axle does it require
in order to haul the stone out of there?
�. To be economically feasible, eighteen thousand
pounds per axle.
g And there are none in that area that you just
pointed to-: that are --
(Interposing) All of these are load limit roads
and bridges.
All right, now, that seems to explain your opinion
that there is not another viable site to the south
and the east -- as far as west and south from the
site.
What about to the north? Could you explain
what the situation is there?
A. All right, up in this country here, of course,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reed Direct 00109-
this is a very, very such of a growing area of
Raleigh where you have Land prices of ten, fifteen
thousand dollars an acre.
That doesn't lend itself to quarrying,
plus here again you have the low load limit roads
and bridges problem.
I don't know of any viable place in here
you could operate, simply because of the high
real estate prices and low load limit roads and
bridges.
Now, Mr. Reed, you have pointed to the Crabtree
Quarry,, would you locate that again, please,
sir?
�. This is Crabtree. tpointing to area on map.)
How close is that to the,proposed site'?
�. By road or by as -the -crow- flies?.
Either, or both.
A. I would say about six miles.
0� All right.
A. Six or eight miles.
Why doesn't that supply the needs for that area?
Can you explain that?
�► This old quarry here at Crabtree was established
backiii the 1930's by the North Carolina Highway

0
f
O
LL
N
O
O
n
O
z
_
O
a
m
0
u
a
a
u
_
A
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reed Direct -110-
Commission to furnish road Metal for the roads
in those days.
It subsequently got into private hands.
However, the State still owns the property, and
they lease it to the Teer Company.
This quarry is operating under a noncon-
forming zoning classification which does not allow
expansion.
They cannot legally expand the quarry. They
can go down. They can't go out.
For that reason, as you work your way down,
you get down into the eye of the needle, you
reach a point of diminishing returns as we say
in the rock business.
And it ease -- eventually becomes economically
unfeasible to go any deeper, and that would be
the end of that quarry.
Is that quarry presently.operating to full capacit
A. It is any understanding they are and not meeting
market demands.
That is, are they supplying all the demand for
stone in that area?
L No, they are not.
Q. All right.
rim

0
u
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -111-
You heard Commissioner Riggs' questions
concerning whether or not there are any other
viable locations maybe that don't border the
parka
Are you familiar -- are you aware of any
locations for possible quarry sites that meet
not only the factor of the geological formation
but the other factors you mentioned within that
area immediately north or south or along that
band on the triasic basin?
Are you familiar with any other sites in
that area?
A. I sar not aware of any that don't have low load
limit roads and bridges problems.
Q. There would there be some geologic formations
which would not be able to be developed because
of the -- such low load limit road limitations?
A, I know of a granite deposit down below Holly
Springs covering just by visual observation,
possibly twenty-five or thirty acres,
That -- that be the best site that I
can think of.
However, when you look at the location, it'
not located in a competitive place You'd go

u
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reed Direct -112-
broke in there, even if you could get out,
which you can't.
So, the economies of it is just not -- it
is not economically feasible to do anything with
that property.
Okay, and going up just beyond that -- north of
the Cary area, I believe.you said there's a
possibility of some stone there but it's all
within the city limits or under the City of
Cary?
Is that correct?
�. That's correct. You've got your rock, going across
here (indicatingmap). And the projecting
on p� 're Y P j g
a giant housing development here just south of
Cary.
And in that red basin there is no mineable stone,
is that correct?
�. There's absolutely no commercial stone in this
six hundred mile -- six hundred square mile area.
You will notice the quarries all lie outside
this triasic basin.
CHAIRMN SMITH: Mr. Kimzey, I think this
is irrelevant to the case.
MR. KIN:RY: Fine. We'll move right on to

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
--113--
another topic.
(Mr. Kimzey) What is the advantage of the location
-- this location to bringing stone from those
other quarry sites, Mr. Reed?
�. Well, haul is the chief advantage. This quarry 4m4.
a quarry here would be sitting in the area of the
greatest projected growth in this area.
In fact, this is the fastest growing
projected area in the State,
The quarry here would reduce the truck haul
considerably from this quarry, because this is
a real chore coming out of the rock quarry, be --
cause they have got a very steep hill to traverse
and come through this very heavily congested area
around the New Rex Hospital to get out. It would
be hard to get out of here to market,
A quarry here would be directly on an
interstate highway, would be a direct exit.
That's ghat a trucker loves. He can make a
living that way.
OL Do you know what the savings per ton mile would
be over those other quarries «-- over any other
quarry location if it's closer to the
market?

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
A.
Be at least ten cents a ton mils, and possibly
more than that.
Q.
All right, are you familiar with your -- with your
experience in Make County in the past twenty-six
years, are you familiar with the Wake Stone opera-
tion and Mr. Bratton's operation?
A.
Yes, I am.
What's your opinion of b.m as a quarry operator?
L
Triple A.
4
Is that --
L
(Interposing) I consider him to be one of the best
quarry operators in the country.
MR. KIMSEYs We have no further questions,
of this witness.
(to witness) You may take your seat.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Cross-examination?
MR. OAKLEY : I'd like to renew the Depart-
ment's objection to the line of questions and
move to strike the answers to these questions.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Oakley, we wish to den
your request -- your motion, rather.
MR. OAKLEY: Can I have just a second?
CHAIRMAN SMITH: And in doing so, you may
cross-examine the witness, but we again warn Mr.

Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7,
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Reed Direct -115-
Kimzey that you're very close to having your
testimony denied for lack of relevance,
MR. KIMZEY: Well, Mr. Smith, I appreciate
that.
We're moving along as rapidly as we can,
and I think this witness is a very good example.
We certainly are trying to minimize the time and
put on the very essentials of the testimony we had
planned.
MR. OAKLEY: We don't have any questions.
MR. KIMZEY: Mr. Stevens.
(to witness) You may come down.
(WITNESS EXCUSED.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Are there any questions
from the Cammission members of this witness?
(No response.)
MRo KIMZEY: Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman,
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Do you have any further
witnesses, giro Kimzey?
MR. KIMZEY: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, I
do need to identify the map that he testified
from as an exhibit and I'll mark that as Exhibit
number 40

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
(MAKE STONE'S EXHIBIT 4,
MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
-116--
Whereupon,
MR. GEORGE M. STEPHENS,
Having been first duly sworn,
was examined and testified as
follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KIMZEY o
State your name, please, sir.
A. George M. Stephens.
{� And for whom are you employed and in what
capacity?
R. I'm a principal and owner of Stephens Associates
which is an economic and planning consulting
firm.
And have you been employed b Wake Stone C � yy orporati
in a consulting basis to make economic projections
in this particular application?
A. I have.
Would you state briefly your educational back-
ground?
A. I have a bachelor's degree in economics from the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Stephens Direct -117-
a master's degree in city and regional palnning
also from that institution.
OL And what about your experience in economic and
particularly referring to population projection,
Mr. Stephens?
L I have worked as regional planners for the State
Highway Commission, as assistant for economic
development to the governor, as deputy director
of the Appalachian Regional Commission, and since
1968 have been in business for myself.
And I think perhaps most relevant to this
concern is that- I have done a number of studies
of population and economics within Wake County,
-including studies for Raleigh, for Wake County,
the regional studies for two regional sewer
system plans in the area, the studies for the
Falls of the Meuse Reservoir, for Garner for
Cary, for the Wake County Public Schools, and
I am Chairman of the Economic Indicators Committee
of the Raleigh Chamber of Commerce, and I've done
a number of market studies in these areas.
4 Does each of those market studies encompass
population projections and future projections
as to both'Zpopulation and economic growth?

2
3
4
Stephens
A.
5
6 L
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A.
Direct
-118-
They did.
And have you conducted a similar study in regard
to the market area of the Ca --- of the proposed
Cary Quarry of Make stone Corporation?
Yes, I have.
Would you just tell the Commission what your wha
you found in your study and what the results of
your feelings are, using your exhibit, please?
Gentlemen, the market area for this quarry which,
as on Mr. Reed's map, is marked in brown, is an
area about sixteen miles across.
And to orient you on this, this is a smaller
version of Mr.-- Reed's map.
Here is Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, the
quarry, the Crabtree Quarry, Umstead Park and the
Research Triangle Park.
This encompasses Triangle Township in
Durham County and in Wake County, the Cedar Fork,
White oak, Leesville, Cary, Meredith, and Mouse
Creek Townships.
This area now has about a hundred thousand
square people in it.
The average population in it.
(laughter)

0
f
O
w
N
O
O
n
O
.4
W
Z
Z
0
m
0
CL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Stephens Direct --119-
Now, wait a minute!
�. Excuse me -- has about a hundred thousand people
in it, and the average population that's going to
be there over the life of this quarry is about
three hundred thousand people, so that's the
operational figure that we can use.
+Q, What did you use as the life of the quarry? A
fifty-year life?
L Fifty years as Mr. Reed said.
Now, during the course of the regional
sewer studies, working with the plans for the
county and for the towns in the county, we came
to a consensus on where the growth was going in
the county and what percentage of that growth
would go into various townships.
The conclusion of those professionals was
that fifty-eight percent of the growth of Wake
County will go into those townships over the next
twenty-five years.
Have those -- has that projection recently been
confirmed by recent census showing growth in this
area, and how does it compare with the rest of
North Carolina?
L The -- the projection for -- my projection for

O
0
4
_
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Stephens Direct -120--
the county has recently been confirmed.
The census has not yet put out township
f igures .
But the census -- it's been determined from
the 1980 census Figures that Wake County is the
fastest growing metropolitan county in the State
and this is the fastest growing part of Make
County. (indicating west Raleigh area on map.)
Okay, continue with your statement.
Mr. Reed has testified that the savings on haul
would be ten cents a mile or more, but the
Transportation Department has substantiated ten
cents a mile.
Since this is an area sixteen wiles across,
there's a haul saving of eight miles over any
of the quarries on the outside of that area.
That means that three ---- for three hundred
thousand people, ten tons of stone per capita
will be needed each year.
That's a figure that the North Carolina
Aggregate Association has determined to be true
both for the nation and for north Carolina.
So three million tons of stone are needed
each year within this market area. With an eight-

V
Z
W
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Stephens Direct -121-
mile haul savings, that's twenty-four mil --
let's make sure of my figures here. (referring to
notes) That's twenty-four million ton miles and
at a ten -cent savings that's going to be a saving
of two million four hundred thousand dollars a
year to the people of this area having a quarry
there, versus not having a quarry there.
And over the fifty-year life of the
quarry, that would amount to about a hundred and
twenty million dollars saving.
Now, that's if the quarry met all of the demands
of the three million.. .. You have heard
testimony that it Mould produce approximately one
million tons a year.
Have you also done an analysis to show
what the percentage would be on the actual pro-
duction of the quarry itself?
A. I have. If it were restricted to one million
tons, it would be a savings of eight hundred
thousand dollars per year or about forty million
dollars over the life of the quarry.
¢ In your market analysis, have you taken into
account the factor of the Crabtree Quarry being
located near that same market area?

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
x.5tepnens Direct -122-
A. Yes, it has the same market area obviously -hut
Mr. Reed has testified that it does not meet
the demands of that area.
Q: Without quantifying this particular savings,
.would there in addition to the dollar savings
that you have mentioned be a ecology savings in
terms of energy, oil and gas saved by the location
of that quarry there?
A.. Yes, I think there obviously would be a saving
in energy, and I've heard the figure of five
gal --- that a heavy truck that hauls uses -- only
gets about five miles to the gallon, so I haven't
run out the number of gallons, but it's obviously
going to add up to quite a few gallons saved
over the Life.
Q Your projection was based on the use of ten tons
per capita per year, as a figure produced for
North Carolina and the nation, is that correct?
A. That s correct.
That ten tons encompasses all uses such as road
beds or other -- or industrial or housing con-
struction, is that correct?
A. It includes all uses, that's right.
Are there particular projects in this particular

0
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Stephens Direct -123-
market area which lead you to believe that is at
least accurate or maybe a conservative estimate
on the usage there?
A. Yes, for instance, I think it should be mentioned
that the Raleigh Durham Airport is planning a major
expansion over the -- beginning very soon now.
And the airport engineer has said that it
will require about a million, one hundred thousand
tons of crushed stone for that expansion.
Now, there is an eighteen -mile haul advanta
over these other quarries for that, which means
that the savings to the Airport Authority alone
would be a million nine hundred eighty thousand
dollars.
Now, the saving over the Crabtree Quarry is
only two point seven miles, and that would be a
two hundred ninety-seven thousand dollar savings,
but Mr. Reed has said that he does not believe
that the Crabtree Quarry can meet the airport's
demand.
MR. KIMZEY: Thank you, Mr. Stephens.
I have no further questions.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Cross-examination?
MR. OAKLEY: Again, we'd like to make

V
0
N
f
O
L6
0
0
0
2i
W
Z
Z
O
a
m
V
0
a
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Stephens -1 2 4-
a general objection to this line of questioning
and move to strike his testimony in total as
not relevant.
CI-IA►IR 4AN SMITE: We will overrule, again,
Mr. Oakley.
Would you firing your next witness, please,
Mr. Kimzey?
Excuse me, does the Commission have any --
14R. OAKLEY : ( Interposing) Could I have
just one second? Excuse me.
MS. FRENCH: Yes.
Mkt. OILKLEY: I might have one question.
CHAIRMIU4 SMITH: Please go ahead, Mr.
Oaaley.
(DISCUSS ION OFF' RECORD at Department' s
counsel table.)
MR. OAKLEY: We have no questions.
(WITNESS EXCUSED.)
MR. KIMZEY: Mr. Chairman, are will now
call Mr. Phillip Berger as our next witness and
express our appreciation to the Commission,
We'll get right into the several factors

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
L
Berger Direct -125-
mentioned, now, and this is a witness on blasting,
and we're moving away from the general testimony
as to economics.
I'm sorry, I once again failed to mark an
exhibit which I must do technically. May I do
that?
(to reporter) That's Wake Stone's exhibit
number -- ?
PXPORTER: Five.
(WAKE STONE' S EXHIBIT 5,
MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
Whereupon,
MR. PHI'LLIP BERGER,
Having been first duly sworn,
was examined and testified as
follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KIMZEY:
Q. State your name, please, sir.
A. Phillip Berger. B-e-r-g-e-r.
And what is your occupation and position in that
occupation, Mr. Berger?

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Direct -126
A. I'm a consulting seismologist, dealing primarily
with the effects of blasting.
I'm head of the firm which carries my
name and which is located in the Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania area.
¢ And is that Phillip R. Berger and Associates,
Incorporated?
A. Correct.
Blasting, seismology and geology, primarily?
�. Yes.
Mould you just state briefly your educational
qualifications in these areas?
I have a bachelor's degree from Harvard University.
My field of concentration was physics. I
have a master's degree in geophysics, and my
primary field of study within geophysics was
seismology.
Q. And your mas ter' s d,agree was also from Harvard,
is that correct?
A. That's correct, yes.
Q. What's your professional experience in this area,
Mr. Berger?
A. In'this particular area I've been engaged in
measuring and analyzing the effects of blasting
r'I�,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Direct -127-
operations for the past thirty years. I started
in 1950, first with Professor Leake who was one
of the early authorities in the field at Harvard
University, following that with a firm known as
Vibra-Tech Engineers with which I was associated
for eighteen years, then in 1971 I resigned the
Vibra-Tech affiliation and formed my own
company.
OL And would you just briefly list some of your pro-
fessional societal memberships in this area?
A. I'm a member of the American Institute of Pro-
fessional Geologists, Seismological Society of
America, American Institute of Dining, Metallurgical
and Petroleum Engineers, Society of Explosives
Engineers.
OL Where has your experience primarily been? In the
United States or --
A. Yes, --
Q. --- outside?
A. -- almost exclusively in the United States. I
have done some work in Central America and in
the Caribbean, but ninety-nine percent within the
U. S.
QL Have you been employed with, by, and are you

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
:verger Direct -128-
familiar with the Wake Stone Corporation?
A. Yes.
Q. What --- briefly, what work have you done for the
Wake Stone Corporation?
A Oh, about a year and a half ago, I believe, Mr.
Bratton requested that we look at the Knightdale
operation and make recommendations for control
program on the blasting.
They --- the program has gone forward. We
supplied them with seismographic equipment which
measures the ground vibrations and the airborne
effects of blasting.
They operate the equipment, as I said,
send the film recordings to my firm which we analy
and then let teem know the results.
We compare the measurements with accepted
standards.
Q, Is that a seismograph monitoring of every blast
at his present Knightdale plant?
�,. At Knightdale, yes.
And, also, there has been some monitoring
at Moncure.
And have you also been employed to do consulting
or an evaluation of the proposed site at the Cary

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Direct -129-
Quarry --- the proposed site under study here for
Cary?
A. Yes,
Q. And there has been some question previously
concerning standards.
Mould you explain to the Commission what
the air blast overpressure of the particulate
velocity standards that the State follows as in
terms of blasting?
L Yes, the State guidelines they use to control
blasting operations are in accordance with the
standards that have been developed generally.
For example the limit on ground vibration
which we recommend and which has been used in
the Worth Carolina gui4elines is that which was
set forth by the Office of Surface Mining of the
U. So Department of Interior about two years
ago.
The limit on airborne blast is based on a
recommendation that was made in a publication of
the United States Bureau of Mines a few years
ago. I think it was 1978,
Q: Are you familiar with the application which has
been filed by Wake Stone as regards to the

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Lerger Direct -130-
blasting section of that application?
A. Yes.
And does the Ware Stone Corporation operation coma
within those standards which have been set by
North Carolina?
A. Yes, with the -- and you're talking about the
proposed site?
¢ Yes, the proposed site?
A. Yes. With the distances involved to various
buildings and other structures in the area, the
blasts can quite easily be designed so they will
conform to the North Carolina guidelines.
�► Now, Mr. Berger, not -- you have testified they do
conform, but could you give the Commission some
idea of how close to the maximum standards the
proposed operation comes.
For instance, if you would take, for in-
stance, the particulate -- particle velocity, the
standard there as I understand it is one inch
per second, is that correct?
a. Correct, yes.
Do you. have an opinion based on measurements
made at the hnightdale Quarry and your knowledge
of the particular proposed location what the --

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Direct -131-
what blast measurements would be made at the park
lines, say fourteen, fifteen hundred feet to
twenty-five hundred feet from the blast: sites
themselves?
L Yes, at fifteen hundred feet, we estimate that
the vibration level would be on the order of
twelve to fifteen percent of the North Carolina
guideline.
At twenty-five hundred feet based on a
measurement made at the Knightdale Quarry, at
that distance, our estimate is six or seven
percent.
Do you know of any standards anywhere that come
dose to prohibiting those particular measurements
that you have just described as ten percent: or
twenty to thirty percent of the standards?
L No, sir, the vibration levels that we have
quoted would conform to any standard that I know
of.
Now, how about the air blast overpressure?
Would you also express an opinion on
that?
L Yes, based again on our experience at Knightdale,
the maximum that has ever been recorded there I

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Direct -132-
think is hbout fifty percent of the Office of
Surface Mining standard and the Bureau of Mining
recommended limits.
And I might point out that there the --
the recording was in the open, there was no
intervening vegetation between the blast and
the instrument, which you would have at the pro-
posed site.
And that fifty percent was just one or
two occasions. Normally it's ten percent, fifteen
percent in openess.
Qt Are there any standards so strict that would pro-
hibit the types of blast you would expect in
terms of air blast overpressure there?
L Not under normal operating circumstances, no.
Under normal conditions and cautious
operation, ten to twelve percent would certainly
be a reasonable maximum,
Q Mr. Berger, there is on both the State's and Make
Stone's exhibit lists a letter of April loth from
Mr. Simons, Mining Specialist for the State that
has paragraph two, and I quote:
Although the vibration and air blast
levels ire -- given are within our guidelines,

0
N
Z
O
N
O
O
n
O
W
Z
Z
O
CO
0
0
u
Z
W
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Direct 4M133-
somne information is needed explaining how these
levels will be maintained.
It is realized that stemming, spacing and
burying an amount of explosives will vary. How-
ever, some explanation of your proposed general
blasting practices is needed."
Are you familiar with that inquiry or were
you at the time it was made?
A. Yes.
Q. what is the answer to this inquiry then, Mr.
Berger?
& Well, I think the answer is that with continued
monitoring, recording of every blast, the design
of subsequent blasts can be established so as to
conform to any guideline,
Changes can be made if they become required,
but what you are doing is on each and every blast
waking measurements to determine whether or not
your are staying within the guidelines.
Is the type of monitoring that Mr. -- well, that
Wake Stone Corporation has employed you to make,
is that the maximum type of monitoring that would
answer the question that Mr. Simons has raised
there?

0
W
S
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Direct -134--
A. Yes, I would certainly think so. The equipment
used measures the vibration quantity directly that
is specified in the State guideline.
Air blast is also mentioned.
¢ And that would be available on a contiuing basis
on each and every blast?
A. Yes,
Q. Okay.
A. That's been Wake Stone's procedure.
4 And so far as you know, that would be their
anticipation at the new site, correct?
A. Yes,
Q. So far as you were concerned at the time, to your
knowledge, does that measuring device, when you
responded that to they State, did that satisfy the
State' s inch ui ry?
A. I believe so, yes.
Now, fir. Berger, there were other questions raised
that did not concern impact on the park in some
of the other proceedings such as zoning in this
case, is that correct?
L Yes.
Q. When any of those concerns were raised, were you
able to -- unable to satisfy any of those other

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Direct --135-
concerns?
A. Well, I'm not sure just what you mean.
In my judgment, from a professional stand --
pointy the technical evidence is that there is
no basis for other concerns that the blast can be
controlled.
Let me ask you this: are you familiar in your
employment for Mr. Bratton at 'fake Stone, are you
familiar with Wake Stone' s operations from a
blasting standpoint?
J• 'Yes y sir.
What is your opinion of their operation there,,
from that standpoint?
A. Well, I think Pair. Bratton and his operation is a
very concerned and conscdentious operation; one
which is concerned with the effects which they
are producing.
f And based'on your knowledge of your monitoring of
Mr. Bratton' s --- Wake Stone' s present operations
of your knowledge of the proposed site, and the
conditions there, and the proposed operation there,
do you have an opinion as to whether or not the
blasting operations will adversely affect or
significantly affect the park which is adjacent

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
-136-
to that property?
A. I am certain that blasting operations can and
would be conducted in such a manner that there
be no effects whatsoever on the park, or on ap-
propriate enjoyment of the facility.
MR. KIMZEY: No further questions.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Oakley, cross-
examination?
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. OAKLEY:
Mr. Berger, have you had contact with any State
officials during this application process?
L Formal contact?
Yes.
�. Whether I talked about the subject with gate
officials on a formal basis?
Correct.
L Not as pertains this. No, I have talked to State
officials -- well, let me back up. That's sort
of a sticky question.
I have talked informally with Mr. Simons au
Mr. Gardner, I think during --- during this
process.
Had they -- had they ever indicated to you that

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Cross -137-
they were concerned with the level of blasting
or that the -- the way that the make Stone Quarry
'would be operating as gar as blasting is con-
cerned?
L No, air, I do not believe they have.
OL Would you say that they mould be generally in
agreement with what you have testified to so
far?
A. I think so.
4 Are you aware of any other -- what effects mould
be the reuult of a blast?
I know you've talked about vibration.
That other types of effect would be caused by any
one particular blast?
L Well, the --- excuse me, the -- in terms of energy,
almost all of your -- the energy produced in a
blast is used in breaking up the rock. That's
the purpose of the Mast.
The waste energy is dissipated in vibration
traveling out either through the ground or through
the air.
These are the effects with which nay firm
would be considered (sic).
Fragmentation, as I mentioned, that's

F
v
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Cross -138-
certainly a factor in the blast.
Well --- and physical control would certainly
be the --- a concern by a regulatory agency.
QL Mould noise also be an effect?
A. Well, this is the airborne vibration, yes.
Would you have an opinion based on the -- I'm not
sure if I have written it down correctly -- the
particle velocity and -- in the size of the blast
that you say they will be using at the proposed
quarry?
Would you have an opinion about the amount
of noise that might be generated by such a
blast?
A. Well, --
MR. RIMZEY: I object unless he specifies
what scale that he's talking about.
I believe there are various scales for
noise measurement.
Are you talking about the A scale which
is the standard which is used for noise?
MR.. OAKLEY : Right, I was just talking
about the general. -- the A weighted scale which
would be ghat the people in general would be
knowledgeable about. How it would affect the

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Cross -139-
human ear,
MR. KIMZEY s No 'objection.
L All right, the -- well, first of all, our measure-
ment is a broad -band measurement.
Normally we're concerned not only with the
human response to noise but also the structural
response to airborne waves.
In the extreme case, for example, there
could be a substantial atmospheric overpressure
for air blasts which could hardly be heard, if
heard at all.
It would depend on the frequency.
Our measurements are made on the broad -base
frequency scale, and that's the guideline that is
employed by North Carolina -in controlling air
blasts.
Are you -- have you had occasion to acquaint
yourself with the location of the Umstead Park?
�. Yes.
To the proposed quarry?
Do you have an opinion about whether you
could hear a blast within the park boundaries?
L Oh, I think it would be possible to hear it,
yes,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Cross -140-
And again, this is a relevant terra, but --
well, it under most circumstances what you
would hear would be less than a local thunder-
storm. Perahps, less than traffic, An airplane
taking off would probably muffle the noise of the
blast.
Do you have any projections on the number of blast
per week?
I don't personally. I heard this figure eight to
twelve per month as being the probable number.
Do you know what production figures that would
be based upon?
�. No, sir, I do not.
Would you have an opinion about whether that figure
would be consistent if you were -- with a productio
of say, a half a million tons per year?
A. Neil, this would depend, again, on the number of
blasts -- would be governed by the size of the
blast and the amount of stone that's necessary to
be produced.
And again, the size of the blast is not
necessarily -- does not necessarily govern the
ground vibration intensity or the air blast
intensit
y for that matter.

a
V'
Z
W
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Cross -141-
It°s the design of the blast that is
important.
Q. You were initially contacted by hake Stone in
June of this year, is that correct?
A Oh, no. Well, I don't recall when I was contacted
with regard to this operation.
I've been doing work for Wake Stoney at
other operations since, I think it was the middle
or late 179.
4 You did have occasion to discuss with hake Stone
officials the possibility of blasting effects on
Landmark Engineers?
L Yes.
What were your general conclusions about the effec
of their equipment?
A. Well, my general conclusions had to be based on,
first of all, on a minimum of information.
I was unable to obtain information on the
types of equipment concerned in the -- that we
were concerned with.
But I did check with a number of firms
around the country who utilized the same type
of equipment and asked whether they would be con-
cerned about such an operation, and in no instance

1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1s
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Cross -142-
was any concern expressed by similar con -- firms.
Generally speaking, if you- lower the magnitude of tl
blast or make the --- I'm not sure if I know how
to express the question to you --- if you take
into account the vibrations or the level of
vibrations that would affect the equipment such
as at Landmark Engineers, you take that into
account, is there a way to limit the blast so that
the vibrations will be lessened?, and I think
that is the question I'm trying to ask.
L Well,. blasts can be designed particularly at this
remote location so that you could meet almost
any criterion that you wanted to,
OL And in the --
L I think that's what you asked, isn't it?
I think so.
Is the --- is the loudness of a blast or
the effectiveness of a blast related to how much
rock you're trying to get with any one particular
blast?
L No, loudness in particular bears no relation to
that whatsoever.
You could put off one stick of dynamite
out in the open in.that particular area and

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
a
17
0
N
0
18
0
19
0
20
tj
Z
y
21
m
g 22
O
W 23
6
24
25
(In typing the transcript the typist
omitted the numeral 143 in they pagi-
nation of the transcript body.
There is no break in the context of
Material contained herein.)
-143- 1

u
Z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Cross -144-
create more noise than you would in a production -
type blast.
Within a typical blast, what type of factors would
affect how loud it would be?
A. How loud it would be?
Well, yes.
A. well, it would be the design of the shot, the
amount of the explosives and the way in which the
explosives are loaded.
And, of course, the distance to the point
that you were talking about.
Have you had occasion to do any types of study on
how blasting would affect the human ear?
R. How blasting would affect the human ear?
¢ (Nods affirmatively)
A. No, not specifically.
Q, Have you had occasion to -- well, explain that
if you could.
L Well, maybe that's an over --simplified answer.
We have conducted some tests using primer
core or detonating core, and the human response
to that when it's fired in the open.
Really, what it all boils down to, the
human response insofar as air blast is concerned

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Cross -145-
is going to be governed to a great extent with the
type of operation or the controls that are employ
in that operation.
Qt Have you ever had occasion to study the effects of
blasting as it would relate to the enjoyment of
a recreational area?
A. No, but here again, I can make some -«- I think --
well--founded statements based on experience.
I would suspect that enjoyment of a recrea4m
tional area where you're out in the open, you're
being. active, the human response both to ground
vibration and to the noise from a blast are going
to be far less pronounced than it would be under
ordinary circumstances, say, within a home.
Bo that I would say that, yeah, the effect
on the human being is going to be less in this
instance than in many others.
Would you -- you wouldn't hold to that opinion
necessarily if the. person were in that open area
to enjoy peace?
L 4h, yes, I would, because when you're in the
open area, you pay much less attention to this
type of situation.
I'm sure that the blasting would be done

Z
Z
O
a
m
0
V
Ld
Q
u
2
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
i9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Cross -146-
with people in the park, and they probably would
not even realize that it was being done.
QL Does blasting produce any other enviroaamental
effects other than noise?
A It can produce -- we have talked about fly rock
or flying debris earlier.
Q, That type of rock -- what size particle would
you be talking about?
A. Well, this again varies- a great deal on the type.
of situation and most specifically on the manner
in which the blasting is being donee
Obviously the operator -- a careful
operator wishes to keep the rock within the con-
fines of his own pit.
Would --- would the particle size, would it relate
to dust?
When you have a blast, is it not within
your knowledge --- isn't it possible for a dusting
occurrence to occur during that blast?
A Yes., sure.
g Do you have any way -- any way to measure an
effect like that?
A (Interposing) Well, we don't get involved in
that. I'm not a blasting expert per se, or an

V
_
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Cross -147-,
authority on dust control, but I think there's som
obvious characteristics which would govern that,
again, weather_, what it is at the time of the
blast and so on and so forth.
Again, you do not blast to create dust.
Maybe that's the best way of putting it,
but there is bound to be some associated with it.
(k 3o to a large extent, the way I understand you,
if the operator takes adequate controls, on the
blast, and takes care to address these particular
issues, then what your testimony is that you
see no -- you see no problem with blasting, is
that right?
A That's correct, as far as the blast effects are
concerned ground vibration, noise, air blasts,
concussion, fly rock. I -- again, referring to
this remote location, I think the blast could be
controlled without a great deal of difficulty.
OL Have you had occasion to visit active quarri®s
where problems of this magnitude not ---
L (Interposing) Well, certainly I've been involved
with quarrying operations for thirty years.
4� And you have been on -- you have been able to
observe blasting operations that were not able

0
N
E
0
N
O
0
0
z
W
Z
O
a
0
0
v
0
4
x
R
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Cross -148-
to control the fugitive dust situation?
AYes, I would have to say that that is a fair
statement.
¢ Have you also --
A. (Interposing) Perhaps we're not -- we're not --
aware not able' is the wrong term; 'did not.
Were you also --- have you also been in a position
to observe a blast where flying rock also, say,
left the premises of the quarry?
A. On very, very rare occasions, yes.
NOw,.how would you typically approach setting up
a blast? What would you do? What would the
operator do?
A Well, again, I am not an authority in blast
design. My experience is in blast effects, but
based on my experience, the :normal. way is to
start out with a modest size blast, measure those
effects and then proceed in the design of sub-
sequent blasts using the information that you've
gained.
0 Is there any sort of warning system when a blast
-- when a blast is going to take place?
L In most instances I mould say there is. There
certainly should be.

1 Berger
2
3
4 A.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Cross
-149--
What type of -- how would such a warning system
typically be identified?
Oh, a whistled some kind, a siren.
MR. OAHLEY; Could I have just one second?
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD - at Department's
counsel table.)
MR. OAKLEY: I think that's all we have.
MR. KIMZEY: I have just --- excuse me,
(DISCUSSIONS OFF RECORD - at head table,)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Redirect,
MR. KIMZEY: Yes,
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KIMZEY:
Q, Mr. Berger, I guess I failed to ask you on direct
but it did come up on cross, concerning fly rock and
flying debris.
In your opinion, would that be a detriment --
would that be a possibility for that to be -- or
let me strike that question.
In your opinion, would there be any
problem off the site with fly rock or flying
debris based on your knowledge of Wake Sone's
operation at this site?
�. No, I do not believe -- obviously with fly rock,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Redirect -150-
you cannot make a carte blanche conclusion, but
knowing the hake Stone operation as I do and the
people involved, I am sure that any risk would
be drastically minimized and I would not antici-
pate that happening.
You were asked about fugitive dust from a blast.
Are you aware that the North Carolina Depax
went of Natural Resources and Community Develop-
ment monitors Wake Stone's operations at Moncure
and Knightdale concerning dust and air quality?
A. No, I.was not personally aware of it. I would
assume this would happen.
g Then you would not be aware that there's never
been a measured instance of any violation of the
air quality at either of those sites?
A. No, sir, I would not be aware.
If later testimony proves that to be true, would
you think that that situation would be equally
achievable at the proposed site?
A Yes, I would think that wald be a fairly conclusiv
demonstration that it could be done.
MR. KIMZEY: No further questions.
CIHAIRMAN SMITH: Re -cross?
MR. OAKLEY: No further questions.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Commission
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Berger, I believe
Commissioner Johnson has a question.
NAR. JOHNSON: I wanted to be sure I didn't
misunderstand.
Did you say that the noise would be general,
less than an airplane taking off?
L From a blast?
MR.JOHNSON: Yes.
L If it's going over that area, yes, I think that
would mask it, yes.
MR. JOHNSON: Well, I thought you said
that. I just wanted to make sure I understood you
right.
L That's correct, yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any other questions,
gentlemen?
MR. SALISBU,RY: I have a couple of ques-
tions.
Mr. Berger, I'd just like to ask you as
a :natter of clarification, one, as I understand
it, your company puts in the monitoring equipment
at the location.
They in turn send the data to you. It is
analyzed by your company and sent back to Wake

a
N
E
O
0
O
O
Lj
Z
Z
O
m
0
V
O
V
W
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Berger Commission -152-
Stone, is that the correct sequence?
L That is correct, yes.
MR. SALISBURY: Okay, is this done after
every blast they get the report back or are there
a series of blasts and then you analyze them and
it comes back?
�. In wake Stone's case, I think the material is
sent to us quite rapidly.
There are sone companies that we wish
wouldn't follow the process, but they'll shoot
for a month and then send everything to us at
once.
That's not their procedure.
MR. SALISBURY: what would you say would
be the turn -around time from the time of a
blast and would other blasts occur before they
receive the data on the first blast? The ones
that are reported to you.
All right, sir, there is another feature to the
instrumentation which I did not go into.
In addition to producing a filmed record,
the instrument operator also has a digital read-
out of vibration intensity and air blast.
It's on a meter right on the instrument.

V
a
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Commission -153-
So he knows quite closely what the vibra-
tion levels are right at the time of the blast.
As far as actual turn -around time, I would
think if they sent out the data that day or the
following day, normally we try -r- and it's about
a day or two to our office -- we try an analyze
the records the day they come in or the day after,
so you might be talking about a week's period of
time,
But meanwhile the operator does have the
advantage of the metered values.
MR. SALISBURY: In clarification of Mr.
Johnson's question a minute ago, if I were on the
edge of the park close to the quarry site and
they were setting off a blast, it world be something
like a thunderstorm, is that what you said?
A. Not necessarily that heavy. I would say it
would be less than you would normally experience
in a thunderstorm blowing through the area.
A "whoom", or something on that order.
MR. SALISBURY: Thank you,
A. It would not be a wildly startling booze that would
scare you, no.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any other questions?

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-154-- 1
(No response)
CHAIRMAN :SMITH: You may step down.
THE WITNESS. Thank you.
(WITNESS EXCUSED.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Kimzey.
MR. KIHZEY: Yes, sir, excuse me just a
minute. Webe got another witness ready. We are
just trying to decide on the order.
Sid, will you come forward?
Whereupon,
MR. EARL SIDNEY HARBISON,
Having been first duly sworn,
was examined and testified as
follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY AIR. KIMZEY:
Q. State your name for the record, please, sir.
�. Earl Sidney Harbison.
Q, What is your occupation and position in that
occupation, Mr. Harbison?
A. I'm a photogrammetrist. I'm employed by H & M
Aerial Surveys in Cary, North Carolina.

a
0
0
0
0
s
z
tj
Z
Z
O
I.
to
0
Ld
O
4
V'
Z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -155-
Q. Could you explain briefly what a photogrammetrist
is?
A. Photograrm etry is the art of determing accurate
horizontal and vertical information from
photography. In this case it would be aerial
photography.
Q1 From aerial photography in this case?
L Yes, sir, that is correct.
9 I believe you said you are employed by --
L H & M Aerial Surveys.
a What do you -- what is your capacity in that
company?
L I'm the president, the owner.
a What is your experience in this field?
L I have been practicing photogrammetry for eighteen
years. I opened H & M Aerial Surveys in 1975.
OL And in your practice of photogrammetry, do you
prepare -- what is the common application of
photogrammetry?
A. We build topographic maps.
L You are dealing then with elevations of -- eleva-
tions on the ground from your analysis of the
photographs, is that correct?
A That is correct, yes, sir.

0
E
O
0
0
s
z
W
Z
Z
O
a
m
0
V
0
4
u
Z
W
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -156-
OL Do you do the flying and take the photographs
yourself for your company?
A. At times, yes, I coo.
Would you explain exactly just briefly how you
develop elevations in this manner?
�. Yes, sir, we fly over the area that we want to
snap and take photography --,vertical photography
that overlaps each preceding print overlaps the
preceding print by sixty percent.
By doing this we are able, once we put the
photography in a stereo blotter, you can view
the area we flew over in the third dimension.
g And from that then you read the elevations on the
ground?
A. Yes, sir.
All right, sir, now, would you just briefly out-
line some of your work experience in developing
elevations on particular portions or segments
of north Carolina?
A Yes, sir, we have done quite a few developments
that I'm sure you are familiar with.
We have done the work for Kildaire Farms
in Cary, North Carolina. We have done work for

A
O
N
E
0
0
0
0
z
W
Z
Z
O
I.
m
0
V
G
Q
O
Z
W
d
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -157--
Hound Ears, a ski development up in the mountains.
We did -- we mapped the Town of Nagshead, the
Town of Garner, the Town of Petersburg, Virginia,
Lawrenceville, Virginia.
Have you had also experience in developing ele-
vations of foliage or trees on the ground?
A. Yes, sir, we have been very active in doing air-
port approach zone studies where we measured the
height of any object that might penetrate the
flora of the instrument approach area.
Mould, you name some of the airports for which
you've done that type of work?
A Yes, sir, the Asheville, North Carolina Airport,
Greenville, North Carolina Airport, the Greenville
South Carolina Airport. That's all I can thing
of right now.
I imaginge when you're doing a study for the
heights surrounding an airport the implications
of that go beyond just the visual impact of that,
is that correct?
L Yes, sir, it's very important,
Now, have you been employed by Make Stone to do
a study of its proposed site at the -- the Cary
proposed site?

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -158-
�. Yes, sir, we built this topographic map (referring
to map posted on writing board.)
That was the map that was used first by Mr. Brown
and has been used otherwise.
You had --- you developed the topographic
Y P
measurements on that, is that correct?
':that's correct:, yes, sir.
NOw, slid you, A18D do a study as to the visual the potential of any visual impact on the park of
the proposed operation?
A. Yes, Six, we did.
+� What did you do in relation to that study?
L Well, what we did was pick the plant site as being
the -- where the tallest structure in the
operation would be ---
OL (handing pointer to witness) Let me let you use
this pointer.
A. All right, sir. ---- would be in the crushing
equipment, and we struck a line to the first
corner --
(Interposing) NOw, before you go to striking a
line, you said you picked the plant crusher
site.
Did you pick a point on the ground or at

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -159-
proposed top of the plant?
At the top of the structure, forty feet above
the ground.
So you're talking about a site forty feet above
the ground at the site of the plant?
L That's correct.
QL All right, sir, then what did you do?
x Then we struck a line every ten degrees around
from -- where the State park property is in
question.
0. Would you again review for the Commission where
the State Umstead Park property is there so they
can see --
A (Interposing) Yes, sir, the Umstead Park property
--- the property line comes cff here and goes in this
direction, and all this back up here, and down
to here is State Park property.
Q Now each of those rays I see you've drawn on there
represents a ten -degree distance around the
parts -- those particular borders, is that
correct?
L Yes, sir.
4 All right, sir, what did you do from that?
L From this map we derived cross sections --

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -160-
((showing several cross section map segments
to Commission)
MR.KIMZEY: Let me help you with those so
we can speed this process up.
�. These are the cross sections we developed.
This brown line is the surface of the
ground --
(Interposing) Now, let me orient this. Would
this cross section --
MR. OAKLEY: (Interposing) Would you lean
that back just a little bit this way?
MR. XIMZEY: I'm sorry,
(Mr. Kimzey) Would this cross section that you've
just pointed to, is that number one?
L That's number one. That is this --
Q, (Interposing) Now, what ray does that correspond
to there?
A That is this one right here (pointing out ray on
topographic map).
Q� So that would be the line of sight as represented
by that first ray on the map?
L Right, first brown line.
From a point of a hundred forty degrees -- from
forty feet above the plant to the park border, is

u
Z
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Harbison Direct-161-1
that correct?
A Yes, it would. This round dot represents the
height of the structure, forty feet above the
ground.
The brown is the surface of the ground,
the pink line is the line of sight for a man
between six and seven feet tall.
¢ All right.
A In all of these first six instances it's not
possible to, even if there were no vegetation,
to stand on the park border and see the top of
that structure.
Q, Why -- would you explain why that's true? For
instance take a sight from number one.
A. Well, this first one right here is about two
hundred feet. This topography that's not shown
on the map that I have at the office, interrupts
the line of sight so that it's just not possible
to see.
You'd have to --- the structure would have
to be almost a hundred feet high to see it.
Well, where ---
A. (Interposing) That is for this point (indicating
on map) .

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -162-
Qt Where is that depicted on this exhibit which shows
the lines of sight.
Would you show me where the ground inter-
feres with the line of vision there?
�. Yes, sir, on the first one, it would interfere
right along in here, yes, sir.
Well, show me also on this exhibit. (referring
to cross section map)
A. This one right here.
We need to number these so we can talk about them.
MR. KIMZEY: Mr. Chairman, let me number
these so we can refer to them a little more
accurately.
That is exhibit number ---- (to reporter)
what, please ma'am?
REPORTER: The map will be number six.
(WAKE STONE' s EXHIBIT 6, 7,
8 AND 9, LARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(Mr. himz(--%y) Now, going back and referring to
Wake Stone Exhibit number 7, how many of those
rays are depicted on this map?
A. That's the first six.
Would you point those out --
A. (Interposing) From here around to this point

0
N
z
cc
O
0
0
0
a
O
4
m
0
u
0
a
u
W
d
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -163,
right here. (indicating rays 1 through 6 on
topographic map.)
Qt All right, now, Mr. Harbison looking at the
topographic structures as shown on exhibit 6,
where does the -- where are the hills and the
valleys if you can point them out so we can
identify which rays are in the valley.
A. This is a draw here. This is a valley. This is
a hill, a knoll. This is also a hill.
Is there a --
14. (Interposing) This hill here is what is
interrupting the line of sight through here.
And on each of those six rays, I believe you said
that would the forty foot high structure be
visible from the border of the park?
L No, sir, not on any of the first six.
And what would it be blocked by?
L By the ground itself even if there was no
vegetation.
Q, All right, do you also have the vegetation drawn
in here? (referring to cross section maps.)
�. Yes, sir, this is the average height of the -- or
the general height of the vegetation along this
same cross section.

O
CL
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -164--
g Are you referring to the green as being the
height --
a. (Interposing) The green.
¢ __ of the vegetation?
}L Yes, sir.
Q, Is that based on actual measurements?
Yes, sir, a rhotogrammetric measurement.
C All right, sir, and in addition to the blockage
by the ground, would you have blockage by that
vegetation of that line of sight if the ground
were not already blocking your vision?
�. Very much so, yes, sir.
Well, like in this instance right here,
we're looking at twenty-one hundred feet of
vegetation.
¢ Now, in your experience, approximately how far
can you see in this vegetation?
A. About a hundred feet.
Now, looking at exhibit 8, which of those rays
does exhibit 8 depict, rapidly?
A, This one goes from number seven around to number
eleven.
And what did you find on each of those rays
as far as visibility of the plant site from the

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -165-
park border?
X We found that on number eight and on number ten
that if there was no vegetation, that it would
be possible.
Number eight is looking right at this draw
right here, and number ten is looming, because
of this mill that's in the park, you would be able
to see over this hill and you could see the
forty -foot structure, if there was no vegetation.
¢ All right, now, with -- strictly with regard to nu
ber eight, how many feet from the plant site is
that border of the park at number eight?
A. Fifteen hundred feet.
And does your graph indicate what would happen if
you take into account the actual vegetation that
is there on number Eight?
A. Yes, sir.
Q What would happen, then? You said you could see
it if there was no vegetation. What ---
A. (Internoisng) Well, it would totally block your
vegeta --- the line of sight.
And approximately how many feet of vegetation
would you have blocking that?
L Fourteen hundred feet.

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -166-
Qt And have you been out to the site personally?
L Yes, sir, I have.
Q. What type of vegetation is there primarily?
A. It's primarily evergreen vegetation.
Q. All right, nor, on number ten, I believe you said
if there were no vegetation, you could -- you
might -- that you could see from down number ten?
�. Yes, ---
¢ To the pare?
A. Once again, you could see on this one here.
No�,r, what does your exhibit eight reflect as to ray
number ten?
A That you could see the target.
¢ Well, with vegetation, what would be the situation
A. It would not be possible.
OL And examining exhibit number 9, would you please
demonstrate what rays are graphically shown on
number 9 that --
(Interposing) Yes, sir, these are number twelve
through number seventeen.
The last of them. And in -- I believe it's
all of these. (looking at cross section maps)
Yes, sir.
In each case, if there was no vegetation

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -167-
the observer standing on the park boundary would
be able to see the forty -foot structure.
But once again he's limited in every case
by several hundred feet of vegetation.
¢ Would you just give the Commission an example
of about how far, starting with number ten, and
going around to the bottom, about how far those
distances are from. the plant location to the
park border?
A. Yes, the shortest one is number twelve and it's
fifteen hundred feet from here (indicating park
border) to the plant.
¢ And the longest --
A. (Interposing) And the longest one is number seven
teen and that's twenty-eight hundred feet.
And what is the amount of vegetation on -- vege-
tation screening or canopy screening that you
would have on those sites, generally?
A. Several hundred feet, most of them are well over
a thousand feet.
¢ All right, now, 114r. Harbison, all of these mea-
surements were done from the edge of the park,
is that correct?
X That is correct.

f
OI
O
N
F
0
0
0
0
W
O
m
0
O
O
Z
W
6
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -168-
MR. KIMZBY: You may have a seat. I'm
sorry.
(Witness resumes witness stand.)
(Mr. Kimzey) Particularly along Crabtree Creek,
the topography of the proposed site drops dmm
to Crabtree Creek,, is that right?
x That's correct.
OL Is there a corresponding rise on the other side?
A. Yes, sir.
a Have you been down to the creek, physically?
A In some places, not on all these rays, no, air,
But you have been to the creek adjoining the park
property?
1�. Yes, sir, that' s correct.
And what was the effect if you started up the bank
from the other side of the creek, so gar as visual
encroachment on the park by the plant -- proposed
plant site?
A. Well, all you're doing is increasing the distance
that you have to see through the vegetation and
adding vegetation between you and the site.
Q► well, --
A. As you go up --- as you go up these rises,
eventually your line of sight -- well, if you

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -169-
could get thirty feet in the air, your line of
sight would be even more restricted than it is
on the ground because you then would be looping
into the canopy of the vegetation, the top.
I see. Now, Per. Harbison, have you -- while
you were at the site, did you do any physical,
visual inspection to check on your measurements
that you've done here?
�. Yes, sir, to satisfy my awn curiosity I hung
an aircraft strobe light in the vicinity of the
plant. site and walked around in the woods just
to see if I could see that light.
I never got more than --
Q. (Interposing) Before you get too far with that,
now, what is an air strobe -- aircraft strobe
light? What does it do?
A It's a very bright white light. It's very similar
to the flash equipment that photographers use.
Q, All right, and what did you do with that light?
A. I hung it in a tree approximately forty feet.
O And was it going off intermittently in a strobe --
X (Interposing) That's correct.
4 -- fashion?
L That' s correct.

a
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Karbison Direct -170�-
96 Then what did you do?
A. Then I walked around in the woods to see if I
could see that light,
Well, what was the result of that study?
L I couldn't get more than about three hundred
feet from the light.
OL Before you --
L Before I lost visual contact with it.
Did you ever get as far away as fifteen hundred
feet from the light to see whether or not you
could see it from fifteen hundred feet?
L No, sir, not until I got in the car and went
home.
What -- was there any use to your going any furthe
than the two or three hundred feet that you went?
A No, sir, none that I could see.
PAIR. KIMZEY: Just a minute. If you will
be patient just a minute.
(fir. Kimzey shows photographs to
Department's counsel.)
(WAKE STONE'S EXHIBITS 10 AND
110, PARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION.)
(Mr. Kimzey) Mr. Harbison, I show you what's been
marked as wake Stone's exhibit number D-,.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
0
17
N
18
0
0
0
19
0
Z
20
W
Z
0
21
a
m
22
0
a
a
23
24
25
Harbison Direct-r171-
Can you identify that, please?
A. Yes, sir, that's an aerial photograph that I
took on November the lot, 1980.
That was just last week, is that correct?
A. Yee, sir.
And what does that aerial photograph depict?
Can you illustrate your testimony with
that?
A To some extent, yes, Asir. This is the approximate
park boundary coming right through here like
this-Ullustrating on aerial photograph , and
it's all in evergreens.
Q. where is the site of the -- let's see. Where is
the site of the plant site?
A. The plant site is in this general area right
here.
And where is the wooded area between the plant
site and the park?
Can you point that out?
A. It's all of this area tight in here.
Now when you took this Last week, were the hard-
woods in color at that time?
A Yes, sir.
a Does this illustrate your testimony that that's

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Direct -172-
primarily evergreen canopy vegetation?
A Yes, sir, it does.
OL And I show you what's been further identified as
Wake Stone's exhibit number 11 and ask if you
can identify that?
L Yes, sir, that was also taken the same day.
QL What is it?
A. It's an aerial photograph of the same site.
And where is the park illustrated on that?
A This is the parking lot for the park, The park
boundary comes out through here , and then down
through here, and then this is Crabtree Creek
right here.
All right, where is the plant site illustrated on
the photograph, exhibit number 11?
A. The plant site, again, is just about right here,
�► And does this picture accurately illustrate your
testimony as to the evergreen nature of the canopy
there?
�. Yes, sir, it certainly does.
MR. KIMZEY: We have no further questions o
this witness.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Cross-examination?

0
N
0
0
0
0
Z
W
Z
0
Y
Q
m
0
V
O
Q
U'
Z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Cross -173-
CROSS --EXAMINATION BY MR. OAKLEY:
Q. Mr. Harbison, what is your educational back-
ground?
A. I have three years with North Carolina State
University.
Q► In what field?
A. Civil engineering.
¢ How -- how again did you get into photo --
�. Fhotogrammetry?
Q, Photogrammetry. .
I was. employed in 1962 by the North Carolina State
Highway Commission and that's where I got started,
4 And you've worked generally in that Meld for
eighteen years?
A. Yes, sir, that is correct.
4 You said your work experience included, I think
you mentioned the ski area at Boone?
�. Yes, sir.
What type of work did you do for that ski area?
A. We did topographic maps.
And what -- describe generally again, if you will,
how you go about building those maps.
L We photograph the area in question so that it
can be viewed stereoscopically. That's in the

a
0
N
i
0
N
O
O
0
O
z
tj
Z
Z
0
I.
dc
0
4
0
z
d
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Gross IM174-
third dimension, and the equipment that we use allows us
to make accurate horizontal and vertical measurements
from that- photography.
You say that the majority of your work, then,
involves the building of these taps?
A. Yes, sir.
Do you ,-- have you also had experience in
interpreting those maps if you will or experience
along the lines of what you're doing for wake Stonie
today?
A. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Would you tell me a little bit about that?"
A well, primarily the work with the treetops, the'
work we have done has been for airport clear
zone studies,
When you do work of that nature, is your work af-
fected by seasonal variations?
X when __
5 when you talked about foliage?
L ©h, yes, sir, very definitely.
Q Do you have any sort of rule of thumb, if you
will, about how you take into account the various
seasons?
L We can only take photographs in the wintertime.

0
N
O
LL
0
0
0
z
W
Z
Z
0
a
CO
O
u
0
a
Z
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison
OL
IL
a
A.
4
A.
a
A.
a
11
Cross
-175- 1
Okay.
For mapping purposes.
Would you be able to do mapping such as that at
this point?
Today?
Today.
No,, sir, no, sir, it will be after Christmas,
why is that?
Because of the foliage on the trees.
You said you were -- had visited the site in the
park --- the general site in the park-.Mma personall
is that correct?
Yes, sir, that's correct.
Would you point out on the map there where you
actually visited?
Yes, sir. (Witness goes to map posted on whiting
board.)
I have been -- let me get myself oriented -
been down this road, down to the -- about along in
here, back across like this, down to the creek,
back in here and then back out to this property
line.
in the process of building the Hasp, we
ran vertical patrol, that's by conventional survey

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Cross -176--
methods, to points down in here, to down in here,
to over here on the airport property and all
along Interstate 40 and Harrison Avenue.
Maybe to digress just a little bit, when did you
build this particular map?
L I can't tell you exactly the date, sir, but it
was probably last April, sometime.
Q, While you're at the map, could you tall us the
points from Crabtree Creek, or at the park border,
where you could see the point that you could see?
I believe you stated on direct examination
there were several points or several of those rays
that you could see up to the point of the plant
site.
MR. KIMZEY: Objection, his testimony was
that he could see if there was no vegetation, but
there was vegetation.
L (Interposing) If there had been no vegetation.
(Mr. Oakley) so, then what you're saying is at
no point -- at no point could you see straight up,
standing at the border of the park, is that what
you're saying?
A. That I could see straight up?
Q6 You -- you -- I thought you stated on direct

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Cross -177-
examination that there were several points along
the border of the park that you could see up to
the point that you measured from, is that
correct?
A No. sir, that is not correct.
A Okay.
A. If -- if there was no vegetation on that property
there would be several points that you could
see a forty -foot structure.
Q. The ---
L It's limited now by the vegetation.
Q Dick you make any personal observations to the
south and to the west --
(Interposing) No, sir, I --
�. -- as far as that particular map is involved,
it would be to the left.
A No, sir, that's not park property.
Are you aware of the William B. Umstead master
plan for the -- for that State park?
A I know that it exists. I am not familiar with
it.
Q� Are you familiar with the plans for the park to
expand into that area?
L No, I'm not.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Cross -178-
OL The Crabtree Creek area denoted on the map is
generally the lowest point in that general area,
9 Y p
is that correct?
A. That's correct, yes, sir.
�! And as you cross the creak and enter into the
park boundary, elevation -wise, do you go up?
A. You ascend, yes, sir, away from the creek,
MR. iMIZEY s Mr. Harbison, the Commission
needs to hear you, if you will turn around a
little bit so they can hear you, please.
A. You ascent up from the creek, that's Correct.
Q, (stir. Oakley) And as you move -- as you move upwar
in elevation, would you not expect the ground
blockage that you've referred to earlier to
diminish?
A. No, ,sir, it will increase.
The ground blockage?
A. The blockage of the ground from your line of
sight?
Yes, sir.
A. Yes, sir, that will go away as you ascend,
Are you familiar with the general plans of the
Wake Stone Quarry with regard to their operations?
B, Reasonably so.

to
0
Z
W
d
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Cross -179-»
Q► Are you aware that there is a great deal of
clearing that would be done with regards to the --
operating that particular plant at that particular
sited
L I would assume there would be, yes, sir.
Did any of your schematic graphs take into ac-
count a lack of vegetation near this focal point?
No, sir.
Can you tell us why not?
L I don't know exactly where --- how much area is
going. to be cleared.
Q� Explain, if you will, the use of the strobe light,
again.
A. I did that to satisfy myself that I couldn't see
something that had a --
(Interposing) What --- what size is that light?
I mean what --
(Interposing) Physically?
Q, What actually -- yes, what actually is it?
L It's the same light that you see on the -- the
white flashing light you see on an aircraft.
It's about two and a half inches in
diameter.
And was it flashing?

Z
O
}
m
0
V
O
Q
V'
Z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison
A.
A.
4
A.
a
L
A
A.
fL
Cross
Oh, yes, sire
Was it moving from side to side or was it sta-
tionary?
Just hanging on a string.
That be stationary?
Reasonably so, yes, sir.
Did you give a figure on direct examination about
how far you would Estimate you could see through
trues or through foliage?
Yes, sir, a hundred feet would be a good round
number out there.
Do you also have a figure of about how far you
could see as winter progresses or as the foliage
diminishes?
on that particular site, sir, I would say it
would still remain around a hundred feet.
Why would you say that?
Well, I've had an awful lot of experiences as a
surveyor, and that's about as far as you can
see.
Q. Would you disagree with a denomination of the
foliage in that area as mixed hardwoods?
A. mould I disagree that there's hardwoods in there?
¢ Right.

01
O
N
0
0
0
0
W
Z
Z
0
}
m
u
0
0
Z
W
a
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison
A.
Q.
M
F
Cross
No, sir.
I think it's fairly obvious that those leaves
will fall off sometime in the future, is that
correct?
That's correct, yes, air.
They are not at this particular time, or at the
time you visited the site, the foliage was not
off the trees, is that correct?
No, sir, it was not.
Do you have any knowledge of the types of other
trees that would be in that area, other than
mixed hardwoods?
Such as pine?
Such as pine. Are there a lot of pines?
The vast majority of the site are evergreens, yes,
sir.
Could you describe those pines? Are they new,
old, thin, the long -leaf?
Ah, I'm not a forester, sir, but the majority of
them are probably between eighteen and sixty
feet high.
And mould you characterize the amount of density
that such pine trees would provide as slight,
moderate?

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison
L
a
A.
A.
OL
L
NE
Cross _182-
You mean the percentage of the pine coverage on the
property, or what?
Right.
Again, I'm not a forester, but I would say seventy
to eighty percent.
Seventy to eighty percent?
(Nods affirmatively)
All right.
Evergreen.
The pine trees themselves,you said were tall
pine trees.
You don't have _- do you have an opinion
about the density provided by those particular
trees?
I don't completely understand what you're
ask me.
Well, there're pine trees that are short and
there're pine trees that are tall.
Yes, sir, and there are --�
And the majority of the tall ones ---
many of both kinds on this site.
-- the majority of the tall ones don't have any
-- any limbs at all on the lower -- at the lower
level, is that the type of trees that are out

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison
A.
A.
4
A.
M
Ai
4
A.
4
Cross
-183-1
there?
Yes, sir, there are some that don't -- there's
no limbs on low, and there's some that are just
small trees.
Why did you pick the forty --foot point above the
ground to take the measurement?
Why did I pick it?
(Nods affirmatively)
Because Mr. bratton told me that his structure
would be thirty feet high.
Did you consider running your ten -degree rays
out into the park rather than stopping them on the
border?
No, sir.
And I believe you testified that generally the
border of the park is the lowest elevation, is
that correct?
That is correct.
once again your particular schematics did not take
into account any clearing whatsoever, is that
correct?
That is correct.
And would -- you would expect the line of vision

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Cross -184•-
to increase as clearing took place, is that
correct?
L Not from the park boundary, I can't -- no, sir, I
would not, unless you cleared right up to the
boundary.
Qt Well, you don't know whether that's a possibility
or not, do you?
L No, air, I don't.
MR. OAKLEY: No further questions,
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Redirect examination?
MR. KIMZEY: Yes, sir, I have a few ques-
tions on redirect.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KIMZEY d
Q1 Looking at your exhibit number -- at your exhibit
number 6, the plant location would be here, is
that right? (referring to topographic map.)
X Yes, sir.
Did you hear fir. Brown's testimony that the expan-
sion would be in this area?
L Yes, sir.
And suppose there was an absolute clearing, at the
worst case, all around the plant up to these

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Redirect -185-
structures which are the lakes, and that was
completely cleared down around there, would that
mean that you could see this point from any of
these points that you have, with that foliage
cleared all around the plant here?
No, sir.
There's no reason for that plant to be moving
as the pit's moving, is there?
A. dot to my knowledge, no, air.
As far as you know, it's not going to move down
towards it?
�. No, sir.
¢ Now, you say -- and let me ask you this question
again.
Do you have an opinion as to whether or
not you could see this plant if it were forty
feet high from any of these plants (sic) based
on your studies and your actual visitation to the
site?
A. Yes, sir.
What is your opinion?
A. It is not possible.
g Couldn't see it. Why couldn't you see it along
these lines here?

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Redirect -186-
�. Because of the vegetation.
Because of the foliage, is that correct?
A. (Nods affirmatively)
All right, now, why did you not run your rays on
out here and go up these hills?
I believe you explained that on direct,
but I don't believe Mr. Oakley understood.
A. Well, I --
What is the effect of going away from there?
A. The further away you go, the more you increase
your distance and the amount of vegetation that
you have to penetrate, and as you ascend up this
bank, you're going to be looking into the tops
of the vegetation, into the canopy.
Q, Could you take num -- exhibit number 9, for
instance, and suppose -- will you hold this corner
(handing corner of cross section map to witness)
And suppose, instead of viewing this forty --
foot structure from the creek, is this --- would
this be the border here? (pointing)
A. Yes, sir, this is the property line.
g All right, if you came on out this property line
and came up here, --
A. That's correct.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison
Redirect
-187-
QL
-- can you show me -- can you J11ustrate
with
this what --
MR. VAN HORN: (Interpo
ing) Excuse me,
Mr. Chairman, could we have Mr
Harbison stand
to one side?
MR. KIMZEY: Gee, I'm s
rry. I'm trying
to make this available to you
d opposing counsel
Maybe I can ask counsel
to come around and
try to show it to all of you, Jf
I could, okay?
MR. OAKLEY: Go ahead.
A
As you -- I know what you're --
a
(Mr. Kimzey) All right.
A
As you go up this hill, --
g,
Yes.
A
-- the line of sight -- of cou
se, the vegetation
is going to continue right up
e hill with you,
and then your line of sight has
to penetrate the
top which is even thicker than
a bottoms.
Q
All right, if you have an obstr
ction closer to
you in your line of sight, what
does that do to
the visual obstruction of some
ing farther
away?
Do you --
A (Interposing) It obliterates it.

0
1
Harbison
Redirect -188-
2
Q1
Why is that? What would the angle be?
3
L
Well, sir, if you stand behind a pine tree,
4
you couldn't see anything in front of it.
5
In other words, you'd be looking up in the air,
6
and it doesn't matter whether there's any obstruc--
7
tion two miles out there or not, all you can see
8
is up in the air?
9
A.
Up in the air, that' s correct.
10
MR. KIMZEY: (looking through notes) I
11
did have a couple of other questions.
12
Q►
(Mr. Kimzey) Mr. Oakley asked you if winter made
13
any difference, and I believe you stated it
14
probably would not, is that correct?
15
A
Ah, in my opinion, no, sir.
16
a
He did not ask you why it would make no difference
17
L
Because the foliage -- the majority of it is ever-
18
green.
19
a
And the foliage would still be there during the
20
winter, is that correct?
21
L
Yes, sir, that's correct.
22
He also asked you, as you ascend upward from the
23
creek on the other side, would the ground blockage
24
go away, and you agreed that was true, is that
25
correct?

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Redirect -189-
L That's correct, yes, sir.
What would happen to the foliage blockage?
L It would increase.
Q. Would increase.
Now, one other point, Mr. Harbison. In
addition to the foliage blockage there, what would
happen -in the way of visual blockage from the park
to this site if a berm, that is a mound of --- were
built along this line inside of Wake Stone's
area and there were no vegetation there?
�. The berm would block the visual --
MR. OAKLEY: I'd like to object to the
question and move to strike the answer,
MS. FRENCH: What grounds, sir. Oakley?
MR. KIMZEY: I'd like to be heard on that.
MR. OAKLEY: There's no facts in evidence
to any kind of berms; don't know the height he's
talking about or anything.
MR. KIMZEY; I'd like to be heard on that,
lady and gentlemen.
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD - at head table.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Will the attorneys approac
the bench, please?
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD -- at head table,

a
a
Ir
N
Ir
0
U.
0
a
0
W
0
a
m
0
V
0
u
W
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Redirect -190-
among the Chairman, counsel to the Commission,
counsel for the petitioner, and counsel for
the Department.)
MS. FRENCH*: We will sustain. the objection
of fir. Oakley.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Sustained.
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD r- at Petitioner's
table.)
CHAIR14AN SMITH,- Do you have further ques-
tions?
1*-1;t. KIMZEY: If you'll give me a minute.
I believe that there is some information concern
the potential of a berm, and if the Commission
felt it was desirable on the application, I'd
like to give you that if you'll give me just a
minute.
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD -- at Petitioner's
counsel table.)
MR. KIMZE Y : I have no further questions
of this witness although we may bring that ques-
tion up again with another witness on direct
examination.
(to witness) They may have some more
questions.

0
O
L6
0
0
0
Z
W
Z
Z
O
m
0
u
0
a
u
Z
W
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Re -Cross -191--
CHAIRMM4 SMITH: Any further re -cross-
examination?
MR. OAKLEY: I have a couple of questions.
RE-CROSS-EXMINATI014 BY MR. OAKLEY:
Q With.regard to -- again I'd like to go back to
the point of --- as you cross the park boundary
and go generally upward, when you reach an ele-
vation that is deeper than the elevation where
the plant site crusher will be -- can you
visualize that?
L Oh, yes, sir.
Q -- the creek itself will be down here, correct?
A. That's correct, yes, sir.
Q Okay, if you're looking straight across there,
are there any trees or any kind of obstructions
in the middle?
A. Yes, sir.
Q What could be there?
L All the trees that grow up all those banks between
where: you start out --
Q (Interposing) These trees that grow up on the
bank go up like this.

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Re --Cross -192-
L That's correct, yes, sir.
Q► If you're looking at the same elevation, say,
what --- what is the --
A (Interposing) Four hundred and twenty feet.
Q, Okay, if you're four hundred twenty Feet --
A. Yes, sir.
Q --- on the plant site, and pu' re four hundred twen
feet in the park --
A. Yes, sir.
Q -- and Crabtree Creek is, what'?, two hundred ---
what would be the elevation?
A. Two sixty, approximately,
Q Two sixty, as you look straight across, don't you
have a clear line of vision --
A (Interposing) Yes, sir.
Q -- except for two canopies of trees?
A. Yes, sir.
QL One right mere and one here? (indicating areas
on map.)
�i. Yes, sir, but they gonna' block your line of
Sight.
Q But that's not the sarae as looking straight up
from the creek all the way up to where your plant
site is. That's not the -- the distances are not
r

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison
Re -Cross
-193- 1
the same?
A. Well, sir, I have not made any studies out into
the park.
I would assume that the park land is
probably shaped a lot like the -- this site is,
so it means that you would have to go approximate)
fifteen hundred feet back into the park.
OL So you're --
(Interposing) So then you would have fifteen
hundred feet of vegetation, and then you'd have
to look over the creek., and then you'd have
fifteen hundred more feet.
Well, that's the question I have.
How do you compute fifteen hundred feet
of vegetation if you're up here and the plant site'
up here, and the land slopes like that.
Is there not a clear space --
A. (Interposing) Oh, yes, sir, there's a clear
space. There's a clear space.
4 Okay, I didn't understand you to say that
earlier.
If you are in the park and there is a
clear area in the park and there's not that
canopy of trees.in the parr for you to look
5

V
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Re -Cross -194-
through, would that affect ghat you'd be able
to see on a hill across?
MR. KIMZEY: I object to that -- the
hypothetical nature of that. I think there is a
canopy of trees all over the park.
CHAIP1,U%.N SNUTH : Would you restate the
question, Mr. Oakley?
MR. OAKLEY: I'm asking him as an expert
in photograinmetry and visual effects, I suppose..
to assume that he's standing in the -park, in
a cleared level of the park at the same elevation
as the plant site crusher will be.
Q. (Mr. Oakley) Can you assume that?
L Yes, sir.
MR. KIMZEY: Well, I .object to being a
"cleared area". I don't think there's any evidence
that there is or ever will be.
ERR. OAKLEY: Well, we haven't put on any
evidence yet.
MR. KIMZEY: Well, that's true.
MR. OAKLEY: I'm asking him as an expert,
I assume, to assume those facts in making up
in rendering his opinion.
MR. RIMZEY: I object,

a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Re -Cross -195-
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Your objection is over --
ruled, Per. Kimzey.
A. Now, let me you're asking me would I be able to
stand in a cleared area --
(Mr. Oakley) I'm asking you to assume that
you're in a cleared area at one elevation --
A. (lnterposng) The same as the top of the crusher?
Q. -- and the top of the crusher is at the same
elevation, --
A. Yes, sir.
�, -- and assume that that area is also cleated ---
A. Yes, Asir.
-- would you not have a clear line of sight between
those two points?
L Well, sir, to -- in order to clear that, you
would have to clear all of the vegetation.: in the
park that the top of the vegetation is four hundred
twenty feet or less, to be able to see that.
If you had one object four hundred twenty-
five feet, it would block your view.
Again, I don't understand how you can say that.
MR. KIMZi Y: Well, I object to that com-
ment. lie asked t1he question. He may not under-
stand his answer, but he is only permitted to

u
W
a
1
2
3
4
Harbison
N
5
6
7 A.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
W.
L
Q.
Re -Cross
-196- 1
ask the questions.
(Mr. Oakley) Assume, if you will, you're in a
cleared area in the park, looking straight across,
there are no trees in the middle, is that
correct?
I don't think you under -- you and I aren't
communicating, sir, I --
(laughter)
MR. OAKLEY: Obviously. Well, why don't
I just leave it right there.
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD - at Department's
counsel table.)
ChAIPIWI SMITh: Do you wish to try again,
Mr. Oakley?
MR. OAKLEY: I'm trying to decide.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Okay.
(14r. Oakley) Would you agree that this situation,
notwithstanding, if you had a two -hill situation
with a valley in between, would you have a clear
line of sight between the same elevation on those
two hills, assuming no vegetation?
Oh, yes, sir.
The question I'm asking you to assume, or the
facts I'm asking you to assume is if you are in

a
O
N
Z
0
0
0
0
z
W
Z
Z
O
r
a
to
0
V
V
Z
W
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Harbison Re -Cross -197-
the parkin a cleared area in the park, at the
same elevation on the plant site, assuming clear-
ing at the plant site, would you not have a clear
line between the two elevations?
A. Well, sir, that's -- it would have to be a
terrific clearing.
Everything that --- because it's evergreen
all the vegetation that's in the park along
that line of sight, if the height of it was four
hundred twenty or more feet, would have to be
removed.
Have you ever been to the park in the winter?
A. Yes, sir, I believe I have.
And again, how would you characterize the vege-
tation?
A. The majority of it is evergreen.
MR. OAKLEY : No further questions.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any questions from the
Commission?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: You may step down, Mr.
Harbison.
(WITNESS EXCUSED.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
--198-
CHAIRMAN SMITH: I'd like to declare a ten-
minute recess, please.
(RECESS, 3 :fly - 3:15 P. Ti.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: The Commission Wishes to
resume the hearing, please.
Mr. Kiilzey, one question that has concerned
the Commission is we don't have any estimate of
a degree of reiroval of the forestation of the
mine site within the ten-year period and within
the fifty-year period.
MR. KIMZ.EY: Mr. Chairman, I appreciate
your making that question.
We have Mr. Hratton who is the primary
operator and owner of Wake Stone who will testify
last.
The reason we're doing that is so we can
go ahead and get these technical witnesses, on
these points.
That was itly perception of what the
Commission really wanted. I had him scheduled

a
0
N
g
O
4
N
O
0
0
W
Z
O
m
0
0
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Turner Direct -199-
for just immediately following these other wit-
nesses, but I thought y'all wanted to get into
those particular things, and when he gets -cm,
we'll have him testify directly as to those
aspects.
CHAIRIAAN SMITH: Thank you.
Would you proceed with your next witness,
then?
L4R. KIMZEY: If you would like me to call
him out of turn of these folks, I'll be glad to
do that.
CHAIPVAN SYEITH: No, that's all right.
MR. KIMZEY: Fir. Turner,
Thereupon,
GEORGE C. TURNER,
Having been first duly sworn,
was examined and testified as
follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KIMZEY:
Q, State your name, please, sir.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Turner
A.
4
A.
A.
In
L
OL
A.
06
A.
9
L
a
Direct
-200-
George C. Turner,
Inc. Turner, what is your occupation?
I'm in the ready mix concrete business.
Who are you with?
I'm president of Southern Equipment Company which
has divisions for ready mix concrete in about
four counties in North Carolina.
And in what four counties is that? Is that Wake
County and the surrounding areas?
Wake County is our largest, --
(Interposing) And this --
-- Lee County, Marren County and Franklin County.
Are y'all users of crushed stone in this area?
Very much so.
All right, can you give us some examples of volun
of stone that you' re using?
We probably use -- well, to giv a you j ust a prime
example, approximately one ton:. of stone is in
each cubic yard of concrete. So we're in the
three to four hundred thousand yard capacity.
And that's annually?
Right.
All right, now, 14r. Turner, moving specifically
to the points we'd like to cover here, I'd like

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Turner Direct -201-
for you to inform the Commission concerning the
availability of stone at Crabtree Quarry.
Do you have an opportunity to buy stone
both from Make Stone's present quarry, other
quarries in the area, and Crabtree Quarry?
X That's correct.
Q. Are you able to get the stone that you need from
Crabtree Quarry?
L Not consistently, no.
Q, Why is that, sir?
�. Lack of -- I think lack of material, lack of
production facilities during peak times, and I
might just go back in the last sixty to ninety
days, there was actually one period of time
in there For two weeks we couldn't get a piece
of stone out of Crabtree Quarry.
9� Are you aware of the fact that Crabtree Quarry
is limited as to expansion because of the lack
of any further territory to expand to?
A. Very much so.
Q. And in your opinion, is Crabtree operating at
peak capacity now?
�. I would say they've been doing that for the last
ten years.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Turner Direct -2 0 2-
And they are still not producing enough stone for
ycu and other users, is that correct?
L That's correct.
Qt Now, you're aware of the , to cat ion of the pro-
posed site of the Wake stone Quarry in Cary, are
you not?
�. yes, sir.
Would that be any -- would that site have any
advantages to you in serving the area --- the
market areas around that site?
A. Very much 'so.
Q. Would there be haul savings from that site as
compared to other sites or other quarries in the
area?
CHAIRMM SMITH: Mr. - Kimaey,
MS. FRENCH: Would you please not ask
leading questions of the witness.
MR. KIMZEYs I'll try not to do that. I
thought I might speed it along.
QL (Mr. Kimzey) What advantages, if any, exist from
that site to your market area from other quarrying
sites presently in the county?
A Well, at present, we have three plants in this
proximity where Crabtree's quarry now is and

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -203-
where Wake Stone is proposing their future
quarry, and these three plants are basically de-
pendent upon that -- that one quarry at this
point.
When that quarry is down, I have to more
than double my mileage sometimes.
That quarry being the Crabtree Quarry?
L That's correct.
¢ Yes
�. If you will permit me, I've just sketched out
a few figures here. I can give you an example.
(retrieving handwritten notes)
Just taking one of our plants, which
happens to be right on Airport Road off of
Highway 70, when we have to pull from Crabtree
Quarry, it's approximately a twelve -mile round-
trip haul.
our tractor/trailer equipment will average
somewhere in the neighborhood of five miles to
a gallon of diesel fuel.
If you were to take that and consider
the time element, it taken us about thirty-five
minutes if we can go directly to the quarry, be
loaded at that point when we get to the quarry

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
s
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -204-
and leave, which, I'd like to qualify that.
Puny times our equipment has to stand in
line and wait for stone to come off of the belts,
build up the stockpiles, to fill our trucks, of
course.
Again, you're still talking about the Crabtree
Quarry?
A. That's correct.
All right, say we're going twelve miles,
it takes thirty-five minutes to make the round
trip.
if -we're -- if we're getting five miles
to the gallon of gas, that's about two point
four gallons on that twelve --mile haul, say,
we're averaging a dollar a gallon, that's two
dollars and forty cents for fuel. Taking one
other factor, and that's my driver's time, an
hour of tractor/trailer drivers approximate
about four dollars and seventy-five cents an
hour, strAight time, -- doesn't include overtime
-- if you take that thirty --five minutes and break
their pay out, that's two dollars and seventy-
seven cents.
That's a total of five dollars and sevente

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -205-
cents that it costs me to make a trip just for the
fuel and for the driver's time. No other expenses
incurred -- or calculated at this time.
If we cannot get stone from these peoples
we have to turn around in lieu of that, we can
go to Highway 64, to Mr. Bratton's quarry at
Knightdale, it's approximately thirty-four miles,.
it takes, at again the five miles to the gallon, is
that's six point eight gallons to do this.
It takes me approximately an hour and
fifteen minutes to make this turn -around.
My -driver at the same scale, we come to
six dollars and eighty cents for fuel, five dollar
and ninety --four cents for labor, a total of
twelve dollars and seventy-four cents additionally
it costs me seven dollars and fifty-seven cents
per truck, per trip to have to go across town and
get stone.
If you could go to the proposed area -w Cary
operation at this proposed site, what would be
the result --- how would that affect those
figures?
MR. OAKLEYt I°d like to.object to the
line of questioning. I hate to -- I hate to

0
N
f
O
L6
N
O
O
n
O
z
W
Z
Z
O
I.
a
ca
0
a
t!
Z
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Turner
A
L
a
L
4
Direct
belabor the point
- 206- 1
MR. KIMZEY s (Interposing) That's the last
question I have in that line, if you want me to
conclude.
MR. OAKLEY (Interposing) It seems as
though we're getting way away from the issues.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Would you complete this
one question and then cease this line of ques-
tioning?
MR. KIMZEY: Go ahead. I have completed
the question.
y approximate costs would be essentially the
same with Mr. Hratton's new quarry as it now is
with Crabtree.
(Mr. Kimaay) So you would not have the additional
expense?
That is correct
Now, are you familiar,as, a stone user and marketer
of products using stone in this area, with sir.
Eratton's present operations in Knighdale and
Moncure?
MR, OAKLEYs Objection.
Very much so.
(Mr. Kim$ey) How would you characterize his

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
operation?
MS. FRENCH: Just a moment, Mr. Kimzey,
What grounds, Mr. Oakley?
MR. KIMSEY: I'm sorry.
MR. OAKLEY: I understood him to say that
was the last question.
MR. KIMSEY: I said that was the last ques-
tion on that topic. I've changed topics now.
I think this is very, very relevant.
MR. OAKLEY: Again, I'll just repeat our
objection that we are straying from the object of
this hearing.
I think that the Commission has asked the
Department to let this material --- this evidence
in, and we're trying to be patient, but --
CHAIRMAN SMITH: I think we'll sustain
Mr. Oakley's objection.
MR. KIMSEY: I'd like to get that in the
record as an opinion of Mr. -- of Make Stone's
operations and how they operate their quarries.
And I'd like to --
CHAIRMAN SMITH: I'll sustain-1. it as is.
MR. KIMSEY: too ahead and answer for the
record, Mr. Turner.
L We have found that Mr. Bratton' s people at both

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
-208- 1
quarry locations are very professional.
They produce a quality product, and our
turn -around time has been excellent. They have
excellent stockpiles, and we very much enjoy
doing business with his company.
I --
a (Mr. Kimzey) (Interposing) As a --
(Interposing) Can I qualify one thing? I'm
not saying a thing against Crabtree Quarry and
the Teer Company which now owns that. I would
like --- you can understand that I believe and I
.know that it's going to take both of these
quarries in this area to substantiate the needs
of this particular material, because I don't even
think Mr. Dratton's quarry could produce enough
material for the needs of this -- this area that
we're talking about for the next twenty-five
years.
MR. KIMZEY: No further questions.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Kimzey, we don't --
MR. KIMZEY: (Mterposing) I have no fur
questions.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: -- want to have any more
testimony on the economics of the issue.

V
Z
Ld
a
1 1 Turner
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Cross -209-
MR. XIXZZY: I have no further question.
MR, OAKLEY: I have two questions I'd like
to ask this witness.
CHAIRMAN SMITH % Okay. Co ahead.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR* OAKLBY:
As I take your testimony, you're in favor of Mr.
Bratton and Wake Stone Corporation being able to
locate a quarry close to your operation, is that
correct?
A.
The answer to your question --- to answer your
question directly, yes, but I would be in favor
if it were someone else in the done business
going to open up a quarry in that location.
Would you --
A
(Interposing) I need the stone.
QL
Would you be in favor of any type of limit on
the ability of that proposed quarry to expand in
the future?
A.
You mean tonage limits?
(Nods affirmatively)
A.
I'll take what I can get* Anything would be an
improvement. If I might --

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Cross -210-+
YAR. OAKLEY a I have not further questions.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Kimzey, redirect?
MR. KIMZEY: No redirect examination.
CHAIRHM SMITH: Any questions by the
Commission?
MR. RIGGS: At some point, are we going to
find out how all this fits into a planning program
for Wake County, if such exists?
CHAIRMAN SMITH: ,A planning program
for Wake County, you say?
MR. RIGGS: Yes. Hoes make County have a
development program with -- or the City of Raleigh
with respect to growth projections and a zoning
plan that this whole -- encompasses this whole
area that we're talking about?
CHAIRMAN SMITH: We have had some informa-
tion provided on that point as to the growth of
the area.
MR. RIGGS: Is that part of a �-
CHAIRMAN SMITH: (Interposing) We have
the zoning information involved and since this
case deals only with the issue of substantial
effects or aspects of the park, I'm not sure
that that question will be set forth.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Turner Cross -211-
Any more questions?
MR. XXMZEYs (Interposing) If I might en-
lighten him on another witness.
CHAIRS SMITH: Go ahead.
MR. KIMZEY: In answer to Mr. Riggs'
question, the application, of course, shows that
the site is zoned for quarry.
We will have a county commissioner member
as stipulated and, arranged to have her on first
thing in the morning, and we will have a witness t
speak briefly to that point.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any other questions from
the Commission?
(No response.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Hearing none, we will
excuse your witness.
(WITNESS EXCUSED.)
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Let's have your next
witness, please.
MR. KIMZEY = Bruce Leonard, please,
CHAIRMAN SMITH: What was that?
MR. KIMZEY: I was calling the next witness

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct-212 -
I sn' t that what you asked me to do?
CHAIRMAN SMITHS Yes, sir.
MR, KIMZBY: Bruce Leonard,
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Ximzey, I want to
warn you, sir, that we will not listen to any
further issues of economics, is that clear, sir?
MR. KIMZLY: Wells your remarks are clear.
I don't intend to offer any direct economic wita-
nesses, but if the issue should come, I might want
to get some in the record even though you don't
listen to them, sir,
CHAIRMAN SMITH t That's your privilege.
MR. KIIAZEY: All right, sir. Mr. Oakley
was inquiring about the prospective witness's
exhibit and wanted to see it before we proceeded.
I'll be glad to accord him that time if
that's the Commission's wishes.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr, Oakley.
MR. OAKLEY: May we have about five minutes
to take a kook at this?
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD -- at Department's
counsel table.)
MR. KI14Z%Y : I might say that_.. this witness
is going to testify both as to traffic and noise.

a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -213-
I'll be glad to take him through the
traffic testimony first, unless Mr. Oakley himself
needs the time to look at these exhibits -in order
to --
MR. OAKLEY: I would like five minutes at
this point.
(BRIE' RECESS.)
(Mr. Kimzey places map on writing board.)
CRAIP14AN SMITH: Are you ready, sir?
MR, KDIZEY : I' m ready.
CHAIP14, T SMITH: Mr. Oakley, are you ready?
MR. OAKLEY: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mould you please proceed?
Whereupon,
Having been first duly sworn,
was examined and testified as
follows:
DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KIMZEY:
Q. Will you state your name, please?

1 Leonard
2 A,
3 Q.
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A.
A.
QL
A.
a
A.
4
F. y
A.
Direct
1"214- 1
Bruce G. Leonard.
Mr. Leonard, the Commission has to hear you, so
I'll ask you to speak up so they can.
What is your profession?
I'm a civil engineer.
And where do you work?
Kimley-Dorn and Associates
And what's your title there?
I'm vice president.
What is Kimley-Morn and Associates?
Basically a general civil engineering Firm
with special emphasis in transportation.
And how long have you -- what is your work exper-
ience there?
I have been with them since 1970.
And your prior work experience?
Prior work was with Harland -Bartholomew and
Associates, another transportation planning engi-
neering firm.
And what -- would you just state how long, what
type of experience you have had over what period
of time?
Okay, I graduated from Duke University in 1961,
and since then have been involved in highway

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct «-215-
engineering, transportation engineering of one
kind or another.
In connection with your transportation activities,
have you had occasion to do noise analysis studies
from an engineering standpoint,.Mr, Leonard?
A. Yes, sir.
QL What -- just -r- would you briefly tell us some of
the noise analysis situations that you have
studied?
A. Well, we basically got into the area of noise
analysis as related to highway locations and
environmental impact statements for highway
locations.
And we have done, I guess, eight to ten
different projects involving noise analysis and
measurement and measurements and predictions,
4 Most of those be around in this area or just in
North Carolina generally?
I. Throughout the southeast.
Q. All right, sire
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Leonard, we're having
difficulty hearing you.
MR. LEONARD s Excuse nee. I'll turn around
a little.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
-216-
(Mr. Kimzey) Mr. Leonard, what societies and
associations are you a member of?
L American Society of Civil Engineers, the Institute
of Transportation Engineers, Transportation Research
Board, and Professional Engineers of North
Carolina, North Carolina Society of Surveyors, and
National Society of Professional Engineers.
�. Do you hold offices with any of those organizations,
or have you held offices?
A. I have served the local section of the ASCE,
American Society of Civil Engineers group for an
area of the State, say, east of Burlington, as
secretary -treasurer, vice president and president.
I':A currently vice president of the South®
Section of the Institute of Transportation
Engineers, covering the --- basically nine south-
eastern states.
In addition to the noise studies which you have
previously testified that you have done, have you
had occasion to do traffic counts and traffic
observation studies?
A. Yes, a number of these over the years.
All right, just generally, can you give us
what your experience is in that area?

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct --217-
A. Well, from individual sites, counting the traffic
to large area transportation, collection of data,
starting, I guess, with the Memphis -- Urban
Namphis, Tennessee urban area study back in 1964,
the Raleigh -Durham thoroughfare studies in this
area.
�. All right, sir, did -•- were you employed by Fake
Stony: on a consulting basis to do any studies or
analysis of their proposed site?
A, Yes, sir.
Q In what two particular areas did you do your
analysis?
�. Primarily in traffic related analysis and noise
analysis.
Q. Taking these topics one at a time, Mr. Leonard,
let's go to the noise analysis, first.
A. .All right.
Q Would you date what the objectives or what you ---
what the objectives were of your noise analysis
and what you physically did to achieve those?
A. Well, our first assessment of noise, I guess,
was related to a question concerning traffic
noise, on the road serving the proposed site.
And to do this analysis, we chose to go to

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct _218w
the field, to measure the noise at several times
in the day, at several sites, one being at the
intersection of the service road and on Harrison
Avenue, and another at the park __ in the park
parking lot and another on the closest corner of
the park property to the service road.
And we made ambient measurements there of
the noise level and subsequently then had a loaded
truck, loaded with stone, large truck, I believe
forty-nine thousand pounds load on it to start
from the beginning of the service road, come out.
of the site, up to the stop at the intersection,
turn onto the Harrison Avenue and leave the site,
measuring the noise levels experienced while this
truck was in operation.
So your first study had to do primarily with they
truck noise levels at the more or less corner of
where the entrance to the site was?
�. (Interposing) near the entrance to the site and
near the entrance to the park parking lot --- the
park area.
Did you sub -- do subsequent studies or analysis
of noise that would originate from the proposed
plant?

0
N
f
0
0
0
0
z
W
Z
z
0
}
0
m
0
V
O
4
V
Z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -219-
�. Yes, there was some analysis performed by the --
the Department of Cultural and Economic Resources
.._ I never can keep their name straight, but you
know who I I m talking about.
9L (chuckling) Department of Natural Resources and
Community Development?
A. Natural Resources and Community Development.
QL Are you talking about Mr. Simons' work with
them?
A Mr. Simons' works
Q< All right.
A. After that we made some measurements at the Wake
Stone Quarry at Knighdale to confirm some equip*^
ment noise levels.
$ (Interposing) You say some measurements. Are you
talking about noise measurements?
�. Noise measurements ---
Okay.
L -- of equipment noise levels at -- based
.distances and generally scattered around the
site jut to assess the noise level there.
Basically these measurements confirm most ol
the noise levels that had been used in Mr. Simons"
analysis, and we took those analysis then, or

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct --220-
-- of those base volumes and made an analysis of
how much reduction in noise would be obtained due
to the distance and vegetation from the plant
site to various points on the park property.
And did you also take measurements in the park
property border itself of what I would call the
existing noise level without the plant there?
A. Yes o
Did dire Simons also do some work in that area?
A. Yes, he had done some counts in that area.
In _-
A. I think al-1 of us basically confirmed that the
ambient noise level there was somewhere around
forty-five decibelse on an A weighted scale.
What is the ambient noise level? What do you mean
by that?
A. The existing noisd level that exists there over a
period of time
Q. Now, that's without the proposed plant there?
& Right.
OL And with your engineering studies, were you able
to do calculations which show what the noise level
would be there with the imposition of the plant
at the proposed site?

1 1 Leonard
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
-221- 1
B. Yes, sir.
Qt Now, what standards were you informed will be in
effect there, or what -- what were the State
standards that you were informed oft
�. It's my understanding --
MR. OAKLEY: (Interposing) I'd like to
make a general inquiry before we get into this
farther.
I assume Mr. Leonard is being tendered as
an expert. Is that right?
MR. XIMZEY: Noise and traffic analysis
and what those analyses show.
M.R. OAKLEY: We would like it limited to
the transportational aspect if that's possible.
MS. FRENCH: I didn't catch that, Mr.
Oakley.
MR. OAKLEY: We would like the -- if he's
going to be tendered in fact as an expert in
noise and transportation analysis, we would
request that the level of expertise be limited
to the transportational aspects of his work.
I think he's tes -- I think his testimony
is related more to traffic noise as it relates
to traffic studies, and that --

O
O
u
W
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct -222-
MR. KIMZEY r (Interposing) Madam Chair-
man, -- I'm sorry -- Mr. Chairman --
MR, OAKLEY: Before we go much further,
I'd like to know what areas of expertise he will
be testifying in.
MS. FRENCH: Could you clarify for us -•-
MR. KIMZEY : (Int'erposing) He will be
testifying in areas of noise analysis in the
park, both the traffic noise and the }slant noise
as he's testified he's done studies in both►
area, and done prior studies of noise evaluations
generally,. as well as, traffic.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Noise evaluation.
MR. KIMZEYa I think he's fully qualified
to testify in both areas.
MR. OAKLEY: Can I ask the witness a Pew
questions?
MS. FRENCH: Do you just care to ask him
questions on his expertise?
MR. OAKLEY: I'd just generally like to
know what studies he's done in the noise field
that do not relate to transportation analysis
or aspects and traffic aspects.
MS. FRENCH: I believe that would be in

0
N
f
O
LL
a
0
0
z
W
O
a
0
V
G
Q
0
2
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard
R,
Direct
order.
-223-
MR. KIMZEY: Well, I believe --- I believe
that mould be a matter of cross-examination.
He will have his opportunity to make ques
on his own.
I've qualified the witness. He's already
testified he made a study of the ambient noise
levels at the park.
He made studies of the noise level at the
Knightdale Quarry, at the Moncure Quarry, and
he's reviewed Mr. Simons' studies and transposed
those studies or figures over to a projected
study of his site.
MR. OA►KLEY: 1 don't have any -- I don't
have any objections to ---
MS. FRENCH: (Interposing) Will you come
up here?
(DISCUSSION OFF RECORD - at head table
among the Chairman, Counsel to the
Commission, Counsel for Petitioner,
and Counsel for the Department.)
MS. FRENCH: We will go ahead with fir.
Kimzey's questions.
(Mr. Kimzey) Mr. Leonard, the last question I

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -224-
asked you was: were you informed what the stand-
ards were for the noise levels at the park which
you were attempting to make an analysis of the
noise levels to do with that?
A. It's my understanding that the Division of Barks
and Recreation has proposed that a level of
fifty-five decibels on a --- an Ldn measurement,
which is a day/night equivalent measurement, be
the standard which is used.
They have in a memorandum published saying
that since the park --- or the quarry does not
operate duking the nighttime hours that they would
say that the Ldn value or the Leq values or the
noise equivalent value. would be the same, or
treated as the salve in this case.
And that would be a level of fifty-five decibels
Ldn or Leq used interchangeably, is that right?
A. Right.
Q Are you also familiar with other standards for
park or quiet secluded areas that are in effect
in the State?
�. Well, the one I'm most familiar with is related
to the traffic, and this is a Federal highway
Administration standard for noise levels in parks

0
f
0
U.
N
O
O
n
0
z
Lj
Z
0
}
<
CO
0
u
0
u
Z
W
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct --225-
and recreation areas before an impact is assessed
or
Q► And what level is that?
L It's an Leq measurement of fifty-seven,
¢ So that would be a fifty-seven rather than a fift;
five standard for Mr, BrattoW A plant?
L (nods affirmatively)
¢ For what type of area would that fifty-seven
apply?
L That particular standard , it says in there --
the Federal Highway Manual regulations, that
that would-be applicable to tracts of land in
which serenity and gu3et are of extraordinary sig-
nificance and serve an important public need,
where the preservation of these qualities is
essential if the area is to continue to serve
its intended purposes, such areas would be
amphitheaters# particularly parks or portions of
parks and so on,
Q, All right, sir, now, would you tell us how you
conducted your study and what the result of your
study were as to the imposition of noise at the
plant location and the pit location, as to the
possible effects on Crabtree -- I'm sorry --

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard
Direct
-2 2 6-
on Umistead Park?
A. All right, ve conducted the analysis basically
on the same ---- Following the,same procedures that
Mr. Simons had used, and well, I'll point to the =p
here. (Witness goes to map posted on writing
board.)
fir. Leonard,I'll ask you again to continue to
raise your voice. You' re inclined to let it drop
down.
If you will speak loudly so the people can
hear you, please, I'll appreciate it.
A. All right,' this is the same basic site that under-
lines --- same site zap that underlines here just ist
a reduced volume -- or version, 1-40 running
along here, the plant location is in this area,
the pit location is here, Crabtree Creek running
along in here, and the property line of the parr
coming basically along this Tine and then I
believe it turns back in this direction.
We basically initially looked at two points
which are identified here as point A and point B
on the map. We --
(Interpoisng) Before you get to those points, now
you've previously stated that you had agreed --

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -227-
that you and Mr. Simons had agreed on an ambient
level in the park.
Would you show where that level would be?
L Basically through this area and up this way, of
forty-five decibels as an ambient value.
QL All right, sir, --
A. And I don't know that we everagreed on anything
in this area.
char .. measurements in here confirmed that
this was somewhere around forty-eight at this
location and you would anticipate this being
forty-seven, forty-six, back -- going back toward
-- getting some of the influent from this activity
that occurs here around the intersection. (point-
ing to different areas of posted map.)
And did your measurements -- your actual measure-
ments confirm the forty-five decible degree ambi -
forty-five decibel ambient over in the -- further
away from the road?
L In this area here?
Yes.
�. Yes, I think they generally confirmed it.
Are you aware of further studies done by the
State engineer, Mr. Bailey, concerning those

a
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
-228- 1
ambient levels?
x yes, I have looked at his measurements --
(Interposing) Do you know what they resulted in?
L They -- I did not calculate out what they would
be, but it appeared to be down in the order of
forty or something in this vicinity.
(Interposing) Less than what you and Mr. Simons
found?
L It would appear to be less than what we found.
All right, sir, would you continue with your
study and what it showed?
x All right,* initially we looked at Point A and
Point B here, these two paints being points that
Parr. Simons had originally done to --- some calcu-
lations on, we looked at the noise effect of the
plant and the pit operations on these sites.
Basically what we did was to take the
noise generated by the equipment in this
location of the pit, and in this location of the
plant for the primary crush, and this location
for the secondary crusher, and project these, or
to see what effects the distance between these
and a receiver at this location would be, and
also what effects the vegetation between them

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -229-
would have, and lastly what effect the topographic
barrier might provide, -- or attenuation that
this might provide.
All right, would you explain just briefly for
the Commission what you mean by what effect the
vegetation might have between the origin of the
source of the noise, the plant or the pit, and
the point along the park?
L It's generally accepted that vegetation --
vegetational matter will reduce the round level
as it goes through this area of vegetation.
For a thickness of goods of approximately
a hundred feet, it's found that it will generally
decrease the noise level by about five decibels.
If you extend on out to two hundred feet
it will generally add another five decibels of
reduction
Because a lot of this noise associated with
vegetaion reduction had been related to highways,
and that generally being interested in the areas
bordering the highways, there is not a tremendous
amount of research information on distances
great than that, and the general convention is
that in analyses that you would use only the

0
O
0
0
0
z
Lj
Z
O
}
Q
In
O
u
0
a
u
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -234-
amount of reduction that you mould get from two
hundred feet.
In other words, if you had at least two
hundred feet of woods between the source and the
receiver, it would tend to reduce it ten decibels.
If you had more than that, it would tend
to reduce it more than that, but you would only
use the ten decibels reduction maximum in your
calculations.
Q, So, is my understanding of that correct that a
standard engineering practice would be to use
a reduction that would be equivalent to two
hundred feet of vegetation reduction?
A. Right.
How many actual feet of vegetation reduction did
you find along those borders there?
If you assume that basically from these points
on that it's vegetated anywhere from fifteen
hundred to two thousand, twenty-five hundred
feet.
¢ Did you take into account in your calculations
any reduction beyond the standard accepted engi-
neering practice of the two ..hundred foot
reduction?

1 Leonard
2 A.
3 Q.
4
6 �
7 �
8
9 A.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
4
19
20
21
22
23
A.
24
25
Direct
r-231- 1
Ito, sir.
Would there in fact be some additional value
along there that you did not take into considera-
tion?'
There should be, yes, sir.
All right, then continue your explanation of your
studies?
Okay, the other thing that we considered was the
reduction in noise level due to distance from the
noise source to the receiver, and basically this i
due to an atmospheric dispersion of the noise as i
gets further out from the source.
There is an equation that you use to
calculate that value based upon this distance
(indicating). It is a logarithmic, invert square
function.
Now, just taking the distance and the vegetation,
but without any other adjustments, did you come
up with some calculations that were. -In agreement
with the State's calculations on the borders of
the park?
Yes, sir, at location A, we came up with a com-
bined noise from ambient and from the pit Ut
this location of fifty-five decibels.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -232-
Fifty-five without any adjustment for topo-
graphic?
A. (Interposing) Fifty --five without any adjustment
for topographic interference.
And dd the State's figures and calculation agree
with that?
L 'des, sir, I believe sop
a All right, go ahead.
A. At Point B which is the other point that I noted
they had information on, ah, came up with a value
of fifty --three and a Ralf to fifty-four at that
point without any --
(Interposing) And did the State's calculations
also agree with that?
A. The State's calculations, as I understand,
generally agreed with that.
That was without the reduction because of topo-
graphic value, is that correct?
A. Right.
All right, now, did you give --- would you explain
what the rest of your study is and what chart
shows, --
A. All right, we --
Q. -- or what that map shows'

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -233-
L All right, we did similar to the dw- first let sae
point where these points are on the map.
Point A that Mr. Simons had used is this
location, and as I understood it was approximately
where the Raleigh -Durham and park property line
that runs through here came in.
From later information, we felt that that
property line was really along in this area, a
little further away from the site, so we did a
calculation at that point, and we did a calculation
here, back sort of behind that one.
(indicating on topographic map.)
We did one calculation here at B. We did
one on either side of it. Then we did one coming
up the road, or the property line here between
this area of the park and the site.
OL And what were the results of your calculations
taking into effect (sic) distance, vegetation
and topographic attenuation.
A. All right, for the topographic attenuation we
plotted to these points a profile from the
plant site to the location and fr= the pit site
to the location, and looked at what topographic
barrier might exist in that range along that

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Di rectq - 2 3 4-
profile.
Now, if you loop at the point they are all,
except I believe one in this area up here, all
the points are lower than the plant site. And
so you would first think that there is not a topo-
graphic barrier there, but as mentioned earlier,
there is a ridge that runs along here. There is a
ridge here, and another ridge here, and there is
a ridge that runs down into this creek -- in the
creek.
And so going from this point down to here,
there is very little topographic shielding.
There is a little bit basically along an
eye level basis from the plant site to the receive
location, running through the end of this little
hill here.
Whereas, for locations such as along here,
there is no shielding from the plant because of
topography, but the hill where the plant sets
itself is a shield for the drilling operation.
Now, we did not take into account any
dampening of the noise by going down into the
pit with the drills, which will happen except the
time that they're up at this top level and start

a
f
Cr
0
0
0
s
Z
W
Z
O
CO
0
0
Z
W
LL
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct - 235-
working their way down.
Using and applying these, all these adjust-
ments, we came up with a measurement here at
Point A of forty-seven decibels, A prune of
forty-seven, at E of fifty-one, of D of forty-six,
8 of forty-six, and C at fifty --two, coming doanra
this line, fifty --one, fifty and a half, fifty-one
and fifty.
The fifty-two, even though these two
are at forty-six, you can see some of the effect
of the topographic shilding.
This draw down through here gives virtually
no shielding -- or does give no shielding from
the plant site and coming across the end of this
draw here, very little in that direction.
That's the reason it's a little higher.
£� So all of those measurements -- projected measure-
ments, then, are below the standard of fifty -fives
and well below the standard of fifty --seven decibels,
is that correct?
A. Yes*
OL Did --
MR. KIMZEY: Excuse me just a minute and
let me get out an exhibit.

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -235-
(Mr. Kimzey looks, through exhibits
previously marked.)
Qc Are you familiar with the State's previously
identified exhibit number 18, a letter of August
22nd, which has on page 3 some information
concerning the noise impact on the park, Mr.
Leonard?
L Yes, sir.
Would youjust read to the Commission what the
State's analysis from the parks person, Mr.
Stevens, to Mr. Conrad -- would you read that
paragraph on top of page 3 of the State's exhibit
number 18?
L "Recent noise testing and analysis conducted by
Rimley-Horn and Associates, Incorporated, indicat
an ambient noise level at two pointy on the
boundary between the park and the Make Stone
property of 45 Leq. When combined with antici-
pated noise from the crushed stone operation,
the combined Leq ranges from 53 to 5 5 . These
noise levels are adjusted for distance and for
i
their ---excuse me --
These levels are adjusted for distance
from the operation and (for) a maximum vegetation

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
0
Leonard Direct -236--
noise attenuation but are not adjusted for
topographic variations. By utilizing approximate
conversion processes (Ldn is approximately 3 dBEA
higher than Leq, but Lan is a daytime -nighttime
average that essentially adds 10 dBA nighttime
weighting - a weighting that is not applicable due
to projected quarry operation times), these noise
levels are equivalent to 53 to 55Ldn. Therefore,
future quarry operations are anticipated to pro-
duce noise impacts in excess of the ambient to
William B. Umstead State Park."
¢ Blow, that paragraph, as I understand it, says
that they found that the measurement would be
fifty-two and a half to fifty --five without ad-
justments for topographic variations, is that
correct?
L Yes, sir.
At the part; border?
A Yes, sir.
Did your measurements and your study and your
testimony essentially confirm and agree with
that?
A. Yes, sir.
¢ Now, why are your measurements lower than those

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct - 237-
fi.fty-two and a half to fifty-five measurements?
A Well, we have taken into account the topographic
variations that does exist on the site.
4 And so when you take the State's own figures
and you apply the topographic variation, you
come up then with the figures that you have
projected on your exhibit, is that correct?
A That's correct.
And those figures range from where to where in
terms of decibels?
�. They range from a low of forty-six at this point
to basically a high of fifty-one at thence three
points. (pointing out points on topographic
map . )
So you are -- at the maximum worst case, you are
four points below the State's own standards, is
that correct?
�. That' s correct.
Now, Mr. Leonard, did you take into account ----
suppose you were to proceed in distance away
from the plant site, going up the bank on the
other side of Crabtree Creek at Point 8 where
the decibel level is forty-six there, is that
correct?

1
2
3
4
Leonard.
JL
Q.
5 A.
6
7
8 A.
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
A.
a
A.
4
A.
Direct
-238- 1
Right,
What would happen to the decibel Level as you
proceeded away from the plant site?
Okay, --
(Interposing) what factors would affect it first
of all?
As we mentioned earlier, that the reading out
there without taking into consideration the
topographic attenuation, would be about fifty-
three and a half.
As you go up the hill, away from the creek,
and there -is a flat area in here and then it
does rise fairly steeply up in this direction,
as you go back in that direction, you tend to
raise up on that hillside and lose any topographic
shielding you have from these points here.
All right, but you also are increasing your dis-
tance ---
(Interposing) Yes.
--- away from the source,, aren't you?
You're also increasing your distance away from
the source.
What were the results of those two factors?
Picking some points back on the line here, doing

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -239-
away from the plant further into the park, I
believe at about two hundred fifty feet from
this point, you begin to lose all of the topo-
graphic shielding, and at that point without any
topographic attenuation, you have an Leq value of
fifty - fifty-one.
Do at any point you reach a level where because
of the absence of topographic shielding coupled
with a decreased distance that you come up to
the fifty-five level which the State has asked
to be imposed here?
L No, sir, even if you take the topographic
attenuation away from any of these point, they're
all below fifty-five.
p So, even with the State's own measurements and
not counting topographic, they're below fifty-
five. And, of course, as you get further away
just because of distance they decrease, is that
correct?
A. Right. They continua to decrease with distance.
Mr. Leonard, you may have a seat.
(Witness returns to witness stand.)
Let's go into your traffic study, please,
sir.

0
N
E
R
O
0
0
s
W
Z
O
Q
m
0
0
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -240-
Would you explain to the Commission what
you did and what your objectives were in your
traffic study at the site?
A. Well, our original objectives at the site was
to review the adequacy of the existing access
road to the site for the traffic generated by the
proposed quarry and the adjoining roadway
facilities: 1-40, the ~ interchange, Harrison Avenue
these areas, which we did based upon trafficcounts
provided by the Department of Transportation and
traffic generation values for the maximum traffic
out from the --- the quarry site.
QL What traffic counts did you use provided by the
Parks Division?
A. Okay, then after we had done that, the Parks in
their memorandum of study of this, had suggested
or stated that the maximum peak day vehicles ----
the total vehicles in and out of the park was
two thousand and thirty-three (2,033) vehicles
a day on that peak day.
And they said then if the elements of the
master plan are further implemented and the
entrance off of 70 into the park is closed and
that that traffic moved around to be served by

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
m
Leonard Direct -241-
this location that the peak day would go up to
thirty-four hundred ( 3 , O0) vehicles a day.
And, that if the rest of the master plan
was developed, that that -- it would increase up
to forty-eight hundred (4,800) vehicles a day.
Did you use those vehicles counts in doing your
traffic studies, those some two thousand, three
thousand, --
L (Interposing) Yes, we used --
�, -- four thousand vehicles?
�, -- we used --- we did an analysis of the adequacy
of the roadways, safety of the roadways, basically
using the forty-eight hundred vehicles a day which
is the maximum that they said'vould exist.
What vehicle count from the plant site proposed
operation did you use for the vehicles?
�. I believe it was eighty vehicles an hour, forty
in and forty out.
O Forty in and forty out?
A. Forty in and forty out.
What was that based on?
A, That was based basically on the capacity of the
loading facilities to load the truck, to weigh it
and get it out

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -242-
And I believe the forty vehicles outgoing, was
a maximum stated in the application, anticipated?
A True.
Now, what were your conclusions as to the adequacy
of the roadways there using those traffic counts?
A. Well, basically using these values that the Parks
and Recreation Division had suggested, using them
in the analysis, we found that there was no
traffic problem.
Q How about as to whether or not there would have
to be imposition of any safety design or safety -map
additional- safety features in the roadway there,
would that be necessary?
A. No, sir.
How about as far as the physical structure of the
road.
Was it adequate to carry the traffic?
A. It should be adequate to carry the traffic.
QL Are you aware of another of the State'ss exhibits,
if you will give me a minute.
(Mr. Kimzey looms for a previously
marked exhibit.)
MR. KIMZEY: Before proceeding with this
document, I would like to, Mr. Chairman, I'd

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -243-
like to mark the previously identified noise
analysis location exhibit as the next Wake
Stone exhibit, please.
(WAKE STONE' S EXHIBIT 12 ,
MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION,)
MR. KIMZEY: And the pretrial order of
this document has been identified as State's
exhibit 18. I'd like to mark it as the next Wake
Stone exhibit.
(WAKE STONE'S EXHIBIT 13,
MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION,)
Qt (Mr. Kimzey) Are you familiar with what's now
been marked as Wake Stone's exhibit number 13,
which is one of the State's exhibits in this
case?
L Yes, sir.
4 And what is that letter?
A. It's a letter to Mr. Alan Eakes from Mr. Harold
Rhudy, Manager of Traffic Engineering and Mr.
Warrick, the Area Traffic Engineer with the
Division of Highways,. Department of Transpor-
tation.
Q. And what are the opinions expressed in that letter
based on so far as the traffic count, do you

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Direct
-a44- 1
know?
A. Okay, it's basically a response to a letter or a
request from Mr. Bakes to Mr. Rhudy that they
evaluate the traffic that I've cited here,
of the maximum of forty-eight hundred vehicles,
ultimately as to whether this was safe and so
forth.:
Basically they responded that
(Interposing) They" being Mr. Rhudy of the
Department of Transportation?
A. Mr. Rhudy of the Department of Transportation
responded that in their judgment that this traffic
volume will not create an unsafe condition at
the 7 -- SR 1790, SR 1654 intersection at the
park entrance or at the I-40, SR 1654 inter-
change.
Q, How --
MR. OAKLEY: (Interposing) I'd like to
point out at this time to the Commission that
we've stipulated that safety is not an issue,
as --.
letter.
MR. KIMZEY: (Interposing) Also, --
MR. OAKLEY: --handled by Mr. Rhudy's

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard. Direct -245-
MR...KIMZEY: I have also stipulated to
this letter, but unless I get it in evidence before
the Commission for its consideration, that stipu—
lation doesn't help you much.
I'd like to continue with that. There's
only two more paragraphs to be referred to.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Please continue.
QL (Mr. Kimzey) What other conclusions did Mr.
Rhudy come to?
A. The second question that has been asked was:
"Can this intersection be made safe by use of
control devices?'"
And their response was basically that
there was not anticipated any serious problem at
this time.
�. And no need for controls?
A. And no need for a control.
Q And the -third area that they inquired into and
bahat ---
L (Interposing) whether it was feasible to redesign
the intersection and the interchange to create
a safe condition, and their conclusion was, of
course, that there was no need to redesign
these.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Direct -246-
a So that was adequate?
A. That it was adequate.
Q Do your conclusions agree with those of Farr. Rhu4y'
conclusions as expressed in Wake Stone's exhibit
number 13?
A. Yes, sir.
4 Do you have an opinion satisfactory to yourself,
Mr. Leonard, based on your actual measurements
and studies and your engineering analysis as to
whether or not the noise level of fifty-five
decibels Leq or Ldn will be exceeded at the park
or anywhere in the park from the imposition of the
proposed quarry?
A. There is no reason to believe that it would.
VIR. KIMZEY: No further questions.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Oakley?
MR. OAKLEY: Could I have just about five
minutes to confer? I do have some questions.
CHAIRMANi SMITH: Recess for five minutes.
(FIVE--14INUTE BREAK,)
CHAIRMAN: We will resume the hearing.

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -247-
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Mr. Oakley, are you ready
for cross --examination?
MR. OAKLEY: Yes, sir.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Please proceed.
CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MRo OAKLEY:
Mr. Leonard, you testified on direct examination
from a document which has been identified as
Department's exhibit number 18.
It's a letter dated August 22nd, 1980,
from James S. Stevens to Mr. Stephen Conrad?
A. Yes, sir.
MR. XIMZEY: Wake: exhibit 13.
(looking at document) No, I beg your pardon,
twelve.
¢ (Mr. Oakley) Do you still have that in front of
you?
L Yes, sire
¢ I believe you testified on. page 3 -- I believe
you read that first paragraph, did you not?
A. That is true.
L1 Would you take a second look at that paragraph
and tell us� where the word "standardu appears
in there?

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -248-
MR. KIMZEY: Would you wait a minute until
I can get a copy of that so I can follow along
with you, sir?
L (witness looking at document) The words "standard
does not appear in that paragraph as best I can
tell..
QL Would you read for us again the last sentence of
that paragraph?
A. "There, future quarry operations are antici-
pated to produce noise impacts in excess of the
ambient to William B. Umstead.' State Park•"
¢ Are you aware of any state standard with regard
to park areas?
A State standard?
QL State standard?
L No, air.
QL Are you aware of any EPA standard for noises in
regards to recreational areas?
A. Only in the regard that they use the Federal
Highway Adrinistration standards.
4 And that's basically related to traffic -- to
transportation?
A. Basically related to transportation.
Looking back at the exhibit that is on the board,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -249-
now, I don't know the number on that. Does it
have . one?
MR. KIMZEY: I'll have to go look and see..
I don't know it either.
THE 'WITNESS: Twelve,
MR. KIMZEY: Twelve*
M.R. OAKLEY: Twelve?
(Mr. Oakley) Wake Stone's exhibit number 12, I
believe you testified that you took some measure-
ments at Knightdale, is that correct?
L Yes,,
Q. Would you tell us what -- what you did to get
those measurements?
A. The measurements at Knightdale were basically,
we went to the quarry at Knightdale. We took
one series of measurements at basically fifty
feet from the various pieces of equipment, and
measured the noise level over a period of time --
I don't recall whether that was fifteen minutes
or twenty --
MR. KIMZEY: Please keep your voice up,
Seems like it was fifteen minutes -a constant
period while they were in operation -- to determine
a Haase equipment noise.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -250-
These numbers were basically then looked
at as compared to the noise levels that Mr.
Simons had used in his calculations, and I think
only in one of those did he find any difference
that was with the air drills, and I believe at
that time that he had already agreed that that
was --- the number he had previously used was high*
(PRr. Oakley) What type of sound level meter did
you use?
A. It was a Type 2 r►ieter, by ANSI standards, manu-
factured by Quest Electronic Company, I
believe.
Does that have a known accuracy level?
A. Wo response)
9 Plus or minus?
A. If it is reading properly with the calibration
device that is with it, I believe it is plus or
minus one decibel,
Q� And what is --- was this calibrated?
A. Yes e
how was it calibrated?
A. Theta is a calibration device in the case with
it*
You basically turn on the meter, after

0
N
O
LL
N
O
O
O
z
W
Z
z
O
In
0
CL
Z
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -251-
checking the battery. and turn on the sound devicse f
mate.the two together and see if it reads what
it should read, and then you switch scales and
see that it still reads as it should.
And did you do this before you --- before taking
the measurements at Knightdale?
A. Yes, it's our standard practice to do this before
all measurements.
Does your -- does your type 2 meter -- what does. --
what range of measurements does that meter?
X It -- excuse me --- backing up one minute first.
You were asking about the noise measurement s
at Knightdaleo
We also made a series of four measurements,
I believe it was, at different locations, remote
from the site --- by remote, being not, you know,
right up on top of it as we did when we were
getting the -equipment noises.
I think we were in the range of f ifteen
hundred to two thousand feet; that is, in the
record that you have,
Getting back to the range of the meter,
lower limit of -- it has a ten decibel increment-
ing meter on it so that the indicator reads

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Cross --252-
basically a positive ten decibels above the number
that you have in at a particular time.
In other words,. if you set it on fifty
and the meter was reading two, it would be fifty-
two*
There is a negative indication on the metelr#
also, which is accurate down to about a minus
five.
So, again, if you were reading with it set
at fifty and you read a minus two, it would be
forty-eight.
If the noise level increases up to sixty,
you have to switch it from fifty to sixty, and it
takes approximately -- about a second or a second
and a half for it to adjust,
Q� Can --- you can set it at forty decibels?
A. You can set it at forty and in essence it will
read down to thirty --five, and the upper limit
on it, I don't recall what it is, but I believe
it's over ninety and I bel.eve it's over a
hundred.
All right, you can't set it at thirty?
A Cannot set it at thirty.
OL What do you do for readings, if you've got it set

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross - 253-
at forty and it dips below thirty -"five, how do you
factor those figures?
�. Basically, just not include those figures or
note them, as thirty-five and include therm in
the calculations at thirty-five.
That's sort of the standard practice.
Most of these types of meters only go to forty
or forty-five.
Forty-five is comparable .
4 So you took your specific measurements from
Knightdale, plotted them on to the ambient, or
combined them with the ambient you had measured?
A (Interposing) No, we did not take the measurementii
fgom Knightdale themselves and use them.
Exactly, we didn't take them and plot
there,
,We basically used measurements Mr. Simons
had previously used in his calculations which
is to say we questioned initially the secondary
crusher and the air drills,but the crusher was
at eighty-five, I believe, is the number he had
used, and that's what it was, and the air drills ..
I think he had originally used ninety -some, and
we found that an eighty-seven was about right .

a
0
N
f
0
0
0
0
z
W
Z
z
O
}
m
0
0
a
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -254
And he had since, I think, made that
adjustment, also.
Q. Do you combine those with the ambient to
come up with an Leq figure at the park boundary,
is that correct?
x Correct.
QL ` M + I w.
A. fell, we combined them after adjusting for the
distance and the topography and the vegetation.
That is the Leq?
�. The Leq is the equivalent sound level for a
period of time which represents the same amount
of energy level, total energy for that period of
time, generated by the sound that occurs in that
time e
In other words, generally as you're loosing
at the noise readings, the needle tends to go up
and down or actually sideways.
But in terms of a graph it would go up
and down in rather jagged form (illustrating).
The Leq is basically a straight line that
represents all the energy under your jagged line.
You sum on a energy -level basis and not on a
numeric or a paraphonetic dB average,

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -25-
Q It Mould be an average figure?
L It's an average figure, yes.
Bo your Leq was calculated for what length of
time?
�. The Leq that we measured at various times as far
as the ambient was concerned and the equipment
noise was a -- we raised -- measured varying de-
green from ten to thirty minutes, and once you
establish that the equipment itself is putting
out a specific range of noise --- in other words,
if eighty-seven decibels is the Leq for a period
of time and -- for the crusher, and you're
going to assume then that that crusher runs at th
for a longer period of time,,so it really would
be applicable to that Leq for almost the total
value for the total time that it was running.
Did you use the twenty-four hour period to do your
average?
b, No, I did not.
Did you use an eight -hour period?
L Basically, it would be daytime average while the
machine was operating.
OL And can you give us an hourly figure on that?
Would that be eight hours?
t

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -256-
A. I Would assume that it would operate somewhere
in the neighborhood of eight to ten hours a
day.
I really do not know.
Your primary expertise, I believe you said it
was in traffic and transportation?
A. Yes, sir,
You went out --- you did some measurements relating
to the vehicular traffic expected at the pro-
posed quarry and related that to the park entrance
is that correct?
A. We did -- we actually dial not do any measurements
of traffic.
We used some figures provided by the
Department of Transportation, and we used figures
on traffic generation frora the Institute of
Transportation Engineers, trip generation
information then from Mr. Bratton on how quickly
he could get trucks weighed and out.
And so basically we used that as a control
on the. truck traffic.
In our analysis of the traffic volumes,
we did review the counts provided by the Parks
and Recreation Division.

0
N
f
0
N
O
0
0
z
Lj
Z
z
O
CO
0
V
G
Q
O
Z
d
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17,
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -257-
Did you -- you used an eighty -vehicle figure I
believe for trucks, is that correct?
A. For the maximum hour.
QL Are you familiarwith 'how close the park entrance
would be to the first point that truck traffic
from the quarry would intercept with that?
A. Approximately two hundred to three hundred feet
before the entrance to the park beyond the
intersection of the secondary road.
Is there a basic accepted equivalence between
trucks and cars that you would use in your work?
X Generally in the capacity ofa highway or an
intersection, you would use a factor to consider
the truck traffic.
In this cast: the truck traffic, if you
use the traffic volume supplied by the Parks and
Recreation Division to it, the truck percentage
is so small that it has no more effect than a
vehicla.
In signal timing work, you might use as much
as one and a half times equivalent for trucks as
the equivalent of passenger vehicles.
OL In terns of noise i s there , a way to relate trucks
to cars?

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -258-
In your work, isn't this a general --
x ' (Interposing) Yes, trucks --
--- you do this generally?
A. Yes, trucks are much more noisy than cars,
definitely.
Q On what order of scale?
A. Three.to four times.
Would you disagree with me if I said it was ten
times?
A. I would tend.to, but I -- I don't recall the
number, and it would depend.upon the conditions of
whether you were looking at a car and truck on a
level grade or on an incline.
g Do you have any knowledge of the types of
trucks that are proposed that wake Stone Quarry
will be using?
A. They will vary from some of the very large tractor
trailer trucks equipped to handle crushed stone
to the smaller dump trucks for crushed stone,
as far as haul trucks are concerned.
Q, So that wouldn't make any difference in the
.calculations that you did?
L Really, in -- Mr. Simons had used them in his
original calculations.in going back and reviewing

e
0
N
O
0
0
s
z
W
Z
Z
O
m
0
0
a
Z
W
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -259-
his calculations, I found that looking at the
area along the creek and beginning up the side
property line, the value of a normal highway truck
at an operating Leq or decibel noise level of
sixty-eight at fifty feet, which he was using,
get to be insignificant as compared to the other
vehicles or the other equipment sources.
When we did the calculations of Points 9
and I, as you get close to the service road, we
did include the effect of the highway traffic
at those locations.
Ira your line of work, .I suppose that you have
heard truck traffic described in many different
Y,,,Ays o
'low would you describe the sound of these
tees of trucks?
A. Loud in comparison to cars.
Dui.: I don' t know I don' t know whether
I und�rstand you an,,r further than that.
I was just wondering if you would be able to
give us any description of that type of sound
to relate it to what we ° ve heard other than
loud?
now

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -260-
what he's seeking here.
I think that's no question.
¢ (Mr. Oakley) In your opinion, would the truck
noise at the entrance to the quarry be audible
within the park?
A. From the measurements that we made there with a
loaded truck as large as which will be leaving
the site, it was indiscernible from inside the
park parking lot.
Now, at the corner of the property which
is approximately point I there, I cannot tell by
listening when the truck passed on the service
road. You can barely tell when it started up at
the intersection.
Where were you standing?
A We were approximately at this pointo
M.R. KIP17LY' : ( Interposing) Mr. Leonard,
let the Corunission see you. You're shielding THE WITNESS: Excuse me.
A. We were approximately at this point here. The
park property line comes down, turns and goes
this Tway.
So we were on at the edge of the park
property here.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard
N
01
0
Cross
--2 61- 1
Basically we set up at that location,
(indicating) coming off of this road, we measured
it also in the park parking lot, and I believe
fifty feet away from this intersection were the
three places that we measured it.
And basically we had the truck go down
here fully loaded. It would -- to this point,
turn around, get ready to come out. It was
equipped with a CB radio. We would snychrohize
when he would leave this point. He would drive
from that point up to the intersection, stop,
and accelerate out onto Harrison Avenue and leave
the site.
. And at that location, I could not tell
when he,passed by this area. (indicating)
(Mr. Oakley) Once again, how far is it from the
intersection where the truck would be coming out
to the park entrance?
I believe it's in the order of three hundred
fe3 t.
I can look that up if you wish ----
(Inter?osing) I may not have asked the question
correctly, lout ' at the three hundred feet, are
you saying that you can't -- that you cannot

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard
N
,A.
l
L
Cross
- 26 2- 1
discern a truck?
I said in the park parking .lot which is probably
another two hundred and fifty feet, and you're
basically through the woods in there, because
the road turns into -- it's curving away from
you and into the park.
If you were visiting the.park in your automobile
you would be coming down the road -- the sage
road that these trucks would be using, is that
correct?
That's correct. Ah -- you would be on Harrison
Avenue and at some point in your trip, and --
or turning up onto what is Harrison Avenue and
going into the park.
DR. WOODLOUSE: Could I ask a question for
clarification on this map which is on -- your
exhibit 1.2, it shows the location of the quarry
site and the truck route coming out here and
the park.
. That (indicating) I guess is Harrison
Avenue coring in there?
This is a letter from me to sir. Bratton, ---
DR. WOODLOUSE: Yeah.
Yes, sir.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -263-
DR. WOODHOUSE: I was just trying to chat
some f. el for what distances we're talking about.
We show the park gate. We show the entrance
of the truck route into --- is that Harrison
Avenue there?
Yes, sir, that's ilarrison Avenue.
DR. WOODHOUS]r]: Okay.
A And I couldn't remember the secondary roach number*
DR. WOODHOUSE: And how far is it from
where the trucks enter then to the park gate and
into the parking lot?
I just don't get from this diagram any
feel for that.
A. If I may use this aerial photograph and I guess it
was Blake Stone exhibit 10. (retrieving Wake
Stone exhibit 10 for illustration.)
This is Harrison Avenue coming out of
Cary, crosses I-40, and there's the interchange
ramps.
Right at this point which is -- shows on
• the map over there is .the beginning of the
service road that Roes rack to this point where
you come in and the gate is approximately at
this location.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Commission -264-
And I think that's around two
hundred to -three hundred feet. I believe it
ac`ually says on this, somewhere what it is, and
so it's anothar ap?roxinr ately four hundred feet
I would guess, sir --- three hundred, something
of that order into the park parking lot.
Picnic areas are then on down in this
area that you're familiar with.
DR. WOODHOUSE: Well, okay, I pass.
HORN : Mr. Chairman, while we're
waiting, wonder if Mr. Leonard could just point
out the s`rvice road on this drawing?
A. (demonstrati:ig on und6rlying ..map) . one lane
of I-- 4 0 3hows goi:ig up through here and then it
sort of peters out and then pretty much
goes straight on through like this -- and Harrison
PAR. �IMLEY: (Interposing) Mr. Leonard,
I'm sorry. Your ovinn map is being covered up.
What's the good of you .using it?
A. Oh, okay.
r`R. KIMZEY : We'll go to this one..
THE WITNESS: All right.
A. Again, this is the I_40 that comes along
through here and begins to peter out, and it

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Commission -265-
then goes basically straight on through. Harrison
Avenue comes across like this.
And this is the service road, begins at
this point, comes clown, exists to this location,
right now, and that would be the entrance into
the proposed quarry site.
The Harrison Avenue stops really at this
state road as such as the park gate which I would
estimate to be about here, it curves around to
the park. parking lot whic.a is probably in about
that location.
CiAIuMXN SI-:ITH : Are you ready to proceed,
Mr. Oakley?
(DISCUSSIOdv OFF 1 : CORD - at Department's
counsel table.)
Q, (14r. Oakley) If you start the truck at the
intersection, I assume the truck had to come to
a complete stop?
A Yeah, came to a complete stop here ---
Qt Starting a truck from that intersection, is there
a generally accepted figure of how loud in
decibels that startup would be at, say,
fifty feet?
A. There are some ordinances somewhere in the --

a
z
I, 0
0
0
0
W
0
m
0
u
0
u
Z
W
0.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Cross -266-
in the United States that relate to that, but I
don't know where any of their are.
As far as a standard, it's fairly variable
I would thin: by the t�n3e of truck whether -- how
large its capacity is, how large its engine is.
The highest that we got is that it accelerat+
from the stop at about fifty feet away -- I believe
was --- well, seventy-four in the afternoon period
and seventy in the morning period.
That was from a complete stop?
A. From a complete stop. That was fifty feet from
the intersection towards the park.
g Do you have an opinion of whether the plant --
the equipment that has been identified so far,
if that were operating at the Wake Stone site,
would that be audible in the park?
A. From listening to the equipment at various points
out into --- out at the Knightdale location,
I think it -- it might be audible -- ah -- at
some points in the: park.
There was one location that we went to. It
was actually not one that we did any readings for
in our letter to Mr. Bratton, because it really
was outside of his property that we went to, and

0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Cross
-267--
if you listened you could hear the equipment.
You could. tell equipment was running, but I
couldn't get a reading on ray meter.
4 That's not exactly the question I asked.
A. It was audible in that I could hear it.
It was discernible if I listened that
there was noise there, but there was no reading
on the meter. So it was less than forty.
MR. OAKLEY: No further questions.
CHAIR -AN SMITH: Any recross? Redirect.
Excuse me.
REDIRECT EXkMINATION BY MR. KIMZEY:
Mr. Leonard, one point of inquiry that I simply
omitted asking you on direct.
Have you -- have you made analysis of the
noise impact on the park as concerning the air-
port by studying the airport plans?
A. Well, I'm ---- I've not really made a study of
the impact of the airport, but I did review their
summary master plan.
Q, Do you have that master plan with you?
& Y'72s, I have. It's in my briefcase.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Redirect -268-
(Witness goes to search briefcase for referenced
document.)
QL Mould you get that, please?
A.
(Witness returns to stand with document.)
Q► Is there in the airport master plan that you
have in front of you an analvsis of noise levels
as imposed on Umstead Park?
A. Yes, sir, it is. There are several different
analyse3 or different representations of the noise
conditions.
4 Would you turn to the -- to the analysis which
shows the decibel level on -- impact on the park
from the airport noise?
L Okay, (turning in document) figure 15 of the
report
OL (Interposing) Well, what report are you referring
to?
L Okay, this is the Raleigh -Durham Airport Long -
Range Development Master Plan and Environmental
Assessment Summary Report,
QL And that was prepared when?
A This was prepared in March, 1980, or published
in March of 1980.
QL And when does -- where does the effective date of

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Redirect -269-
figure 15 to which you're referring?
A. Figure 15 is the 1977 existing day/night average
sound levels surrounding the airport.
1977?
A. 1977.
All right, what does that show in terms of imposi-
tion of a fifty-five decibel noise level from
the airport into the park area?
�. Well, the northwest portion of the airport or
the park, excuse me, nearest the airport gets
to a level of about -- well, some areas get up
to seventy-five decibels, but most of it's
around -- in the highest areas, around seventy and
on down to fifty-five which is the latest that
they show, on back well into the park, and
according to my -- my planimetering of the area,
sixteen percent of the -- a little over sixteen
percent of the park area is higher than fifty-five
Ldn existing.
So,. you would say ;:hen from that, that over
sixteen percent of the park has an ambient level
currently of over fifty-five, is that correct?
A. yes, Sir, it 4 S.
Q, And of course that would not be in the area where

0
W
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Redirect -270-
the plant --proposed quarters for -the plant,
since •--
A. (Interposing) iIo .
Q� ---- that arihient level is less?
A.- That's off of Higln-7ay 70, basically, in that -
section (indicating - on map) .
One other questioI3, you were asked on cross--
examination about the actual _traffic counts..-
A.- Yes, sir.
Q, Did you �,o an anal-vsiS of the actual traffic
counts in t;:c park subsequent to being furnished
information by _.,=r. Lahes?
A. Yes, sir.
¢ Concerning th® p"ak dal
A. Yes, sir.
Just surz arize '�riefly what you found there for
the Commission, plca.sc in regards to the relia-
biiitY of !'r.traffic count that - was
used b j, Mr. 'hudy in the Department of Transpor-
tation.
A. Well, reviewing the counts that they,, had made,
they appeared to us -- the peak day volume
anpeared to us to be very hi;h.
This was haled on a review of the --

1 Leonard
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 QL
9
10
15
16
17
18
19
MEMO
21
22
23 �.
24 Q,
25
Redirect -2 71-
excuse me -- of the daily variations by creek, a
review of similar weekend days, the number of
parking spaces available in that parking lot, and
the count data immediately preceding the peak
and immediately following the peak of the level
in comparison.
I believe he had a level of '..two thougaxmds and thir
three (2,033) vehicles, or approximately -- a littl
over two thousand vehicles on his peak day?
Right, that was --
( Interposing) Dick you find --
-- that was for vehicles both -- I mean really,
twice the number of vehicles that visited the site.
It's the vehicles in and the vehicles out. So,
you've got half of that, a thousand and some
which were measured'.
As best I could tell, on Saturday, the 26th
of June , 1979.
Now, what did you find as a normal count for
a weekend, on a Saturday or Sunday other than
that paak day?
Ah --
(Interposing) Just a range generally *ithout
being exact with it.

43
Z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Redirect -272-
�. Well, the average Saturday or Sunday for the
June through August period, -a
All right.
�. --- which inclu'-- including this large high
volume which we thought was somewhat high,
averaged two hundred eighty vehicles,
And what about the weekday volumes, do you have
the average of that?
A. The average weekday during the June to August
period which is somewhat of a'peak usage, was
a hundred one vehicles aday.
Q. So you're talking about traffic counts which are
considerably below the peak day which was used by
the traffic engineers?
�. Yes, after you get past that one high volume,
the numbers drop off very, very rapidly.
NIR. KIMZEY: So further questions,
MR. OAXLEY s Just have a few questions,
RE -CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. OAKLLY r
OL You testified, I believe, if I can summarise ghat
you testified to, the ambient levels at the edge
of the parr that you have measured are less than
the ambient levels that you just testified to

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
0
N
17
0
18
0
0
19
0
z
20
W
Z
0
a
21
m
u
c
22
4
a
23
24
25
Leonard Re -Cross 273-
from that document is impacted by RDU, is that
correct?
L They only presented fifty-five and above. They
did not show any volumes or any values below fifty.*
five as it's my understanding that fifty-five
Ldn has tended to become an accepted standard for
airport analyses.
So, they didn't report any ambients
below the fifty-five.
Q They used and Leq or an Ldn?
A. They used an Ldn.
¢ Which is an average?
L Which is anaverage, right.
And the question I have is the ambient levels
that you have found on the border of the park
less than the ambient levels you just testified
to?
A. Yes, but --
That's fine.
A. but they are two different places.
Q. That's fine. I just granted a simple answer.
MR. KIMZEY s Well, I object to your
interrupting him. He doesn't like his answer,
"Yes, but it's two different points".

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard
P. y
A.
A.
0
Re -Cross -274-
AIR. OAKLRYt I think I'm entitled to an
answer.
MR. KIM`LEY : He doesn't like his answer,
but he got it.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: All right, would you try
that. one again, please, Dam?
(Mr. Oakley) The ambient levels that you measured
at the edge of the pari: are less than the ambient
levels. you just testified to from that RDU report,
is that right?
Yes, or no?
Nell, ---
Mkt. KIMZEY : ( Interposing) Well, I object
to him saying yes or not. The witness does not --
there's no rule of evidence says a witness has to
answer yes or no.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: The question sounded
clear to me. Just answer.
MR. KIMZLY: Right. Just give your answer.
Fifty-five -- forty-five is below fifty --five,
yes. Numerically they're different. They're
different points.
(Mr. Oakley) And in laymen's terms# the forty-
five would be quieter?

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard
JL
A.
In
1E
Re -Cross
-275- 1
Yes.
Than the - fifty Five?
Yes.
Do you have any general knowledge of the -- of
the -- strike that. I'm trying to figure out
what I'm going to ask*
Do you have any general knowledge of the
measurements that RDU has gone through, or is
presently going through, to lessen the impact of
their noise on the park?
Other than -- they have some abatement plans for
take -offs and landings, particularly take -offs,
is my understanding.
If they don't affect --these additional areas
of the park will be impacted by 1983.
They're spending a great deal of money, I would
assume, to reach that goal., right?
MR. RIMZEY: Object, irrelevant.
CHAIRMW4 SMITH: Would you repeat the
question, please, Mr. Oakley?
(Mr. Oakley) Is it your understanding that R©U
is making efforts to reduce their noise level --
the noise level impact that they may have on the
park?

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Re --Cross 002 76-
CHA►IRMAN SMITH: Objection overruled.
A. I do not have any specific knowledge whether they
are or not, but I would assume that they are.
14R.. OAKLEY : Just one further question,
I believe.
(14r.-Oakley) Airport noise -- is there a way to
relate airport noise in terms of startups and
starts -- transient as opposed to a constant
noise level in your line of work?
I don't know whether I understand your question.
is airport -- airport noise is not what you
would call --- consider a constant all the time?
A. No.
When you have measurements of the airport noises,
you're on a scale. The plane comes over, it
immediately goes up, when there are no planes,
Uiere is no sound?
�. (Nods affirmatively)
Do you have any knowledge of the relationship
of the equipment that will be used at the pro-
posed quarry in terms of ghat level of constant,
steady -type noise it will have as opposed to the
up and down noise of the airport?
A. our_ measurements at Knightdale tended to indicate

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Re -Cross " 2 7 7"
that most of the equipment would tend to run
more smoothly or more on a constant noise level
than an up and down, sharp attenuation.
MR. OAKLEY: Thank you. That's all we
have.
MR. KIMZEY: No question on redirect.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: (to.witness) You're
through.
MR. RIGGS : Excuse me. I have just a
couple of real quick questions.
CHAIRMAN SMITE:: Would you, please.
MR. RIGGS: Mr. Leonard.
�. Yes, sir.
MR. RIGGS : How chid you crank in the
noise levels for the crusher complex into your
numbers here?
A. Basically used a value of eighty-seven decibels
at fifty feet from that equipment, which this is
sort of a standard way of assessing the base
noise level.
In other words you start with a noise
that is what it is fifty feet away.
MR. RIGGS : And did you adjust the crusher
for the crusher the same way for distance as you

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard commission --278-
did for traffic where when you get two hundred
feet you assume a constant?
�. No, it's -- well, the two hundred moot constant
for the vegetation d-- the effects of the vegeta-
tion, the leaves and bushes and so forth, yes,
we applied that same reduction for that.
MR. RIGGS: In your calculations do you
include anything t1iat deals with prevailing wind
patterns or seasonal change for vegetation?
A. No, wind patterns generally tend to be too unpre-
dictable or dependable, you might say, to include
in the noise analysis.
MR. RIGGS: Is it not true that a lot of
noise, however, is very much a function of the
wind pattern?
A. (No response)
MR. RIGGS: Whether you hear traffic or
noise or whether you hear a crusher, or smell
a papermill or whatever, it is a function of
the wind pattern to a large extent?
A. Sometimes this does increase it. And smell, it
definitely does.
Noise, it is not as Evident. It tends to
accentuate it in some cases.

0
N
f
O
U.
N
O
O
w
O
z
W
Z
Z
O
0
u
0
a
u
z
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Commission -279-
it tends to dampen it in others. And
these numbers are basically on an averages
V:R. RIGGS : But you don't have any tray to
calculate this into the overall scheme here?
A. Basically in looking at those distances, the
recordated -6 the recommender: procedures are to
ignore the wind because it is too unpredictable to
be taken into account.
CHAIRMM SMITH: Any further questions?
MR. VAN HOIUq : Yes, sir, I have one or
two.
CHAIRMAN SHITci t All right.
MR. VAN HORN: Mr. Leonard.
Yes, sire
MR. VAN HOWi: In measuring ambiency, your
airport noise would have been a part of the ambie
record?
Yes. Basically we took the measurement over a
period of, say, up to thirty minutes in time
rather than make a continuous graph of it, we
read it every ten seconds.
MR. VAST HORN: In the practice of your
profession, are there acknowledge orders of
magnitude of acceptable peaks above Ldn and Leq?

V
a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Leonard Commission --284-
L Year there are and ;,both of those numbers are,
of course, there always being numbers higher --
individual readings higher than that, just to be
able to get the average.
MR. VAN HORN: I was thinking in terms of
startups.
A. You know, as far as standards for that, some
zoning ordinances around the country do have
limitations on peak noise, but generally it's
related to an average type of -situation, either
the Leg applied to a daytime use:, or Ldn on
a day -night, twenty-four hour basis.
CHAIRMAN SMITH: Any further questions?
(No response)
CHAMLkN SMITH: nearing none, then we
will recess the hearing until 6:30 -- let's
make it 6: 4 5. We j us t lost f i f teen minutes,
6:45, if you will.
(WITNESS EXCUSED.)
(DINNER RECESS, 5.� 10 - 6 2 43 Po Ho)

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11•
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-281-
C E R T I F I C A T E
I. Manie P. Currin, a Court Reporter and Votary
Public in and for the State of North Carolina, duly com-
missioned, qualified and authorized to take and certify
hearings, do hereby certify that I stenographically recorded
the verbatim proceedings at the time and place aforesaid
and same was reduced to typewritten form; that the record
appearing in the preceding pages 1 - 280 is a true and corre
transcript of said proceedings to the best of my ability
and understandings that I am not related to any of the
parties to this action; that I am not of counsel; and that
I am not interested in the event of this cause.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand
and affixed my official seal this the 15th day of November,
1980.
My commission expires 7-1-81.
Manie P. Currin
Court Reporter
203 Main Street
oxford, North Carolina 27565
Telephones 919/693-6954