1-Combined Cover and Narrative Response to ADI2

Quarry Phone Numbers:
[phone] - Knightdale
[phone] - Triangle
[phone] - Moncure
[phone] - Nash County
[phone] - N. Myrtle Beach
WAIF STONE
CORPORATION
y'IYw,wakestQneGQrp,ca 1
Locations:
6811 Knightdale Blvd., Knightdale, N.C.
222 Star Lane, Cary, N.C.
9725 Stone Quarry Rd., Moncure, N.C.
7379 North Halifax Rd., Battleboro, N.C.
3990 Hwy 9 Business East, Loris, S.C.
March 22, 2021
David Miller, State Mining Specialist
N.C. DEQ —Division of Energy, Mineral and Land Resources
521 North Salisbury Street
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687
Subject: Wake Stone Corporation — Triangle Quarry
Mining Permit No. 92-10
Responses to ADI Letter Dated February 10, 2021
Dear Mr. Miller,
Busi -ess Office Address:
P.O. Box 190
6821 Knightdale Blvd.
Knightdale, N.C. 27545
[phone]
Fax: [phone]
Please find attached duplicate copies of supplemental information pertinent to the pending
Triangle Quarry Mining Permit Modification Application. Included in the data package submitted under
this cover you will find:
• A narrative response to the ADI questions,
• An updated Piedmont Land Design Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan,
• An updated Piedmont Land Design Erosion Control Calculations,
• An updated Wake Stone Corporation Site Plan drawing set,
• The final noise study report prepared by WSP USA, Inc., and
• A USB "thumb drive" containing digital copies of all the above documents.
We believe these materials satisfactorily address the questions raised in the February 10, 2021
ADI letter. We look forward to your review of these materials as you prepare the modified Mining
Permit for issuance. Please let us know if you have additional questions.
Sincerely,
Wake Stone Corporation
C#6 N4;U-
L. Cole Atkins
Geologist/Environmental Specialist

Response to ADI request dated February 10, 2021:
7. Please provide the following information for the proposed bridge:
Design and construction sequencing details.
Design considerations for wildlife passage along the Crabtree Creek corridor.
A stormwater and sediment control management plan for run-on and runoff from the
bridge.
The request has not been met.
Clarification of this statement was sought by Wake Stone by means of a Microsoft Teams meeting with
DEMLR staff on February 25, 2021. Our understanding from that conversation is that these items are
more specifically requested in subsequent comments, including 19(c), 19(k), 19(aa), and 19(cc) below. In
addition, more detailed plans for piping of pit dewatering wastewater from the new pit across Crabtree
Creek to the existing pit have been added to WSC Site Plans, page 11 of 12.
12. Please perform a noise study, that evaluates the potential for noise impacts to William B. Umstead
State Park (Umstead Park). The protocol for the study must be approved by the Mining Program before
the study is conducted.
The results are pending.
The Wake Stone Noise Study Protocol was submitted to the Mining Program on September 2, 2020.
After Mining Program review, the study protocol was accepted by DEMLR with several additional
requests and conditions as detailed in a letter from Mr. David Miller dated November 4, 2020 (letter
attached). The study was conducted in accordance with this protocol, and a draft report was submitted
to the Mining Program on February 11, 2021. Comments and requests for additional information
regarding the noise study report were submitted to Wake Stone in a letter from Mr. David Miller dated
February 25, 2021 (letter attached). Wake Stone has addressed these comments and requests with the
help of acoustical engineering consultants WSP USA, Inc., and all responses have been incorporated into
the final Wake Stone Triangle Quarry Expansion Acoustical Study report attached.
14. Please provide additional information regarding screening for the following locations:
Future reserve section — The operation would be visible to 1-40 and parts of Old Reedy
Creek Road.
East side of the proposed pit — Pit operations may be visible from Umstead Park.
Original WSC response:
a) The future reserve area will not be logged or cleared as part of this permit action, and therefore
provides 1000-1400 feet of undisturbed vegetation between Interstate 40 and the southern end
of Old Reedy Creek Road from any proposed mining activity. In addition, the 1-40 right of way
provides an additional 100-200 feet of dense vegetation, and the topography rises sharply above
1-40. The dense, mature hardwood and pine vegetation on this slope rises well above the line of
site for any proposed mining activity. The photo below clearly illustrates that there is no need
for additional screening in this area. However, conditions will be evaluated again at such time as
a mining permit modification application is submitted to impact the future reserves, and
additional berming and/or vegetative screening will be considered at that time if warranted.
Additional Information:
Wake Stone is confident that the proposed berm along Old Reedy Creek Road is more than
adequate for visual screening of this area, particularly given that mining activities will not take
place in this area as part of this permit action. Existing topography and vegetation will provide
additional screening along 1-40. The photos attached (including the addition of winter photos)
should clearly illustrate this visual screening.

1

b) On the east side of the proposed pit, additional undisturbed dense vegetation exists on both
sides of Foxcroft Lake. Additionally, the topographic ridge east of Foxcroft Lake and the ridge
across Crabtree Creek on the existing mine site (which extends 50 feet vertically above creek
level) provide attenuation of line -of -site views from Umstead State Park. These buffered areas
provide complete screening for most of the Park. The only area of the park with the potential for
visibility into the mining operation is the small area immediately to the northeast of Foxcroft
Lake along the property boundary. The photos below illustrate the dense vegetation on either
side of Foxcroft Lake. The west side of the lake will have a 50'+ undisturbed buffer, and the
topography rises 10-18 feet in elevation in this buffer. It is also important to note that initial
stripping and pit development will be in the area west of Foxcroft Lake, which will very quickly
put all mining activity in this area below grade and behind a cut -slope that will essentially act as
an already vegetated, undisturbed visual and noise attenuating berm. If upon clearing the area
west of Foxcroft Lake it is determined that operations are visible from the park, additional
screening could be added in the form of dense evergreen vegetation or fabric screening on the
proposed security fence.
Additional Information:
Additional photographs (during the winter season), taken from the same locations below, show
that the density of tree vegetation provides excellent visual screening from Umstead Park. It is
important to note that there are no established trails in this area of Umstead Park, and that any
mining activity that may be visible from immediately at the property line would only be during
the initial overburden removal period. Fence fabric (such as illustrated below) could be utilized
during this brief phase of mine development if needed. Also, Operating Condition 12 (C) of the
current mining permit stipulates that "Other berms may be required as mining progresses to
reduce the noise and visual impact upon Umstead State Park." Wake Stone anticipates this
condition will remain in the modified permit and will address the need for additional screening
as deemed necessary by the Division.
Photo Locations
1
Photo 1
Photo 2
Photo 3

14
Ps
` v
p 4 p¢
R
h
r l
NW
s
oR.��
f1Ai 5 �i�•� I W tL1
IV
It
6 1

- - Available Galars
Example of fence fabric that could be used for visual screening
19. Please provide the following revisions to the plan drawings:
A detailed construction sequence addressing practices that will prevent sediment loss to
Crabtree Creek during retaining wall and bridge construction.
REVISIONS NEEDED: Notes 2 and 3 of Bridge Construction Schedule must be revised to
clarify that initial clearing and grubbing will be limited to that which is necessary to

install perimeter erosion and sedimentation control (ESC) measures. After perimeter
ESC measures are installed, additional clearing and grubbing may progress.
Bridge Construction Schedule notes have been revised on Erosion Control Plan SITE 1 to
clearly specify that clearing and grubbing will be limited to those areas required for
installation of perimeter erosion and sediment control measures. Additional clearing
and grubbing for bridge construction will not commence until installation of those
measures is complete.
k. Planting plan (riparian where required) for screening and stabilization adjacent to
proposed headwall.
REVISION NEEDED: A riparian seed mix should be specified. Proposed limits of
disturbance do appear to include a portion of the riparian buffer.
Wake Stone intends to minimize disturbance to the riparian buffer to the maximum
extent practicable, and absolutely will not disturb any riparian buffer outside of the area
illustrated on the Neuse Buffer Authorization approved by the Division of Water
Resources on June 4, 2020. The approved impacts to the riparian buffer are permanent
and will consist of bridge end bents and wing walls, with compacted fill up to bridge
elevation. However, should it be determined that incidental impacts within the
approved area can be returned to functional riparian zones, a riparian seed mix, as
illustrated on Erosion Control Plan SITE 10, will be utilized.
Silt bag detail and maintenance requirements.
ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION RECOMMENDED: To maximize water quality, specification
of a floating intake for the pump located within the skimmer cell is preferred.
Regardless of method used, care is to be taken to prevent withdrawing sediment from
the bottom of the basin.
A note has been added to the SILT BAG detail on Erosion Control Plan SITE 10 that a
floating intake for dewatering of basins will be used where practicable if or when a silt
bag is utilized. However, it should be noted that dewatering of a skimmer basin for
maintenance, removal, or conversion is typically a water depth of a few inches or less.
Cavitation as a result of using a floating intake is just as likely to stir up sediment due to
the shallow water depth. That is why Wake Stone's preference (as previously indicated)
for dewatering basins is to pump the water to the quarry pit where more effective
settling and treatment for water quality is possible. Wake Stone will take all necessary
steps to ensure that water quality is maximized no matter what method of dewatering is
utilized.
Plans showing diversion ditches routed so that discharge passes through at least 2
baffles prior to entering skimmer cell. Lower diversion ditch enters basins 5 & 6 in the
skimmer cell.
ADDITIONAL CLARIFICATION REQUIRED: Slope drains have been added to address this
comment. These slope drains cross the length of basin 5. Once the basin filles with
water, the Program are concerned about damage to or inoperability of the drains,
primarily due to potential for them to float. Please provide more details regarding the
hold down stakes in the slope drain construction details. An additional detail for hold
down stakes located within the impoundment area of the basins is required if the
standard method is insufficient to resist flotation.

STANDARD TEMPORARY SLOPE DRAIN detail on Erosion Control Plan SITE 10 has been
modified to illustrate the use of a horizontal stake across the top of the slope drain and
attached to the vertical hold-down stakes to prevent floatation.
Clarification that the location of the diversion ditch between basins 5 & 6 is correct.
ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION RECOMMENDED: The diversion ditches bypassing these
basins are very long and makes sharp directional changes to convey bypass flow to
basin 4. The Division would like to recommend:
That these ditches be surveyed upon completion to confirm positive drainage
throughout.
Although the Division has reviewed the design calculations and they
technically do not support it, permanent turf reinforcement matting in ditches
1A, 1B, and 2 due to their unusually long length and duration of anticipated
use, is advisable. If acceptable drawing notes need to reflect this.
Wake Stone will survey both diversion ditches before, during, and after construction to
ensure positive drainage throughout. However, the use of permanent turf
reinforcement is not supported by the design calculations. Furthermore, as overburden
removal progresses, the drainage areas for both diversions will be continuously reduced
until eventually all drainage is to the newly established pit. These diversions were
developed using the 25-year design storm only because they may be in place for more
than one year. They are not, however, permanent structures, and therefore do not
require permanent turf reinforcement.
Reconciliation of the access road it is shown in the undisturbed buffer (sheet 4).
REVISION NEEDED:
There is still a section of the access road that is in the undisturbed buffer.
Road alignment should be adjusted so that it is outside the proposed
undisturbed buffer.
All existing and proposed haul/access roads should be shown and labeled
throughout the entire site.
Appears that new security fencing impacts access roads.
The short section of the access road that appears to be in the undisturbed buffer is an
existing road. No improvements for this access road (other than the construction
entrance as indicated on Erosion Control Plan SITE 4) will be required. This road will only
be utilized for initial access to the property for installation of erosion and sediment
control measures and for bridge construction activities. Once erosion and sediment
control measures are in place, the new proposed construction entrance will be utilized
exclusively, and any portions of the existing road that are shown in the undisturbed
buffer, crossed by the proposed security fence, or under the footprint of the proposed
berm will be abandoned. A locking gate has also been illustrated on the Erosion Control
Plan at the proposed relocated entrance, and details for the gate have been added to
the WSC Site Plan detail on page 10 of 12. Notes have also been added to the WSC Site
Plans to clarify existing and proposed roads.
Identification of pipe and culvert sizes on the plan sheets.
REVISION, OR CLARIFICATION NEEDED: There is a temporary pipe located at the
second entrance. In previous conversations, Wake Stone intended to leave this

entrance in permanently to serve as access for emergency vehicles. If this pipe is
permanent, add to energy dissipator table on Drawing "Site 11". Add inlet and outlet
pipe protection for this culvert pipe.
The label for the 15" pipe in the existing ditch at the proposed relocated construction
entrance has been corrected to "PERMANENT" instead of "TEMPORARY." This pipe has
been labeled PIPE #3, inlet and outlet protection are illustrated, and details have been
added to ENERGY DISSIPATER DETAILS on Erosion Control Plan SITE 11.
X. The symbol used for silt fence must be distinct and not hidden beneath the line type
used to delineate the limits of disturbance.
See ee, below.
aa. A supplemented seeding and planting plan that considers native vegetation in and
around riparian areas.
See k, above.
CC. Provide additional erosion and sedimentation control measures as required to protect
the stream, all public, and private property from damage.
REVISION NEEDED:
Extend perimeter silt fencing on the basin 7 side of bridge as is on the opposite
side of bridge.
See Erosion Control Plan SITE 2, 5, 7, and 8. Silt fence has been extended, and
additional silt fence has been provided for construction of temporary basin 7.
II. It appears the wall construction coincides with the footprint of basin 7. Please
detail construction sequencing to confirm no impact to ESC measures.
The retaining wall construction does in fact coincide with the footprint of
temporary basin 7. Basin 7 will be utilized during bridge construction and
perimeter road improvements. However, this section of retaining wall will be
the last section constructed, at which time the remainder of the perimeter road
will have been widened and all drainage directed into the existing pit. Once all
drainage is directed to the pit, the basin will be removed, and the retaining wall
constructed and backfilled to also drain to the existing pit.
III. Show locations of stockpiles and concrete washouts.
Temporary stockpile and concrete washout locations have been added to all
Erosion Control Plan and WSC Site Plan maps.
IV. Fence disturbance should be added to the acreage table in the permit.
Fence area will be added to the acreage table on WSC Site Plans for
informational purposes. It will not be added to the affected area for purposes of
the mining permit for the following reasons:
1. As indicated on the Erosion Control Plan, the fence area "will not be cleared
— stumps will remain or be grinded and used as mulch for ground cover"
2. Tree removal will be limited to the maximum extent practicable, and NO
trees greater than 5" DBH or 6" stump diameter will be removed in Zone 1
of riparian buffers
3. No stumping, grubbing, or grading will be done in the area designated for
fence construction.
4. The categories of land disturbance include: Tailings Ponds, Stock Piles,
Waste Piles, Plant Area, and Mine Excavation. Minimal tree cutting and

fence construction does NOT fall into any of these categories of land
disturbance or affected acreage.
Further explanation of "affected area" vs land disturbance is provided in
item #20 below.
V. Recommend wildlife friendly netting be used.
Wildlife friendly netting will be used where practicable.
ee. A minimum of 5 feet between the toe of the slope and the installation of the silt fence.
REVISION, OR CLARIFICATION NEEDED: The location near Old Reedy Creek Road
parallel to 1-40, it appears the silt fence is on the undisturbed buffer line. The security
fence is shown between the silt fence and the slope. Is there adequate room to
maintain or replace silt fence without entering into the undisturbed buffer? Sediment
and erosion control measures may not be located within the undisturbed buffer.
Please supply more information concerning this location.
The undisturbed buffer as illustrated in this area on Erosion Control Plan SITE 6 is the
area between the hatched pattern for the security fence area and the blue dashed
property line (1-40 right of way). There is no land disturbance proposed in this area, and
therefore no toe of any slope. The only slope is existing natural ground. The silt fence
was proposed within the security fence construction area as an additional safeguard for
construction of the security fence. Several feet between the proposed security fence
and the silt fence provides plenty of room to maintain or replace silt fence without
entering the undisturbed buffer. No sediment and erosion control measures are
proposed to be located within the undisturbed buffer.
ff. Adequate space for the installation, maintenance and removal of perimeter silt fence.
Specific maintenance requirements for all proposed sediment and erosion control
structures included on the plan.
See ee, above.
gg. A plan detail and construction specifications for the silt fence and silt fence outlet that
complies with the skirt trench requirements per the Erosion and Sediment Control
Planning and Design Manual. The skirt is to be trenched in, at a minimum, 8 inches
vertically and 4 inches horizontally.
REVISION NEEDED: The silt fence outlet detail needs to be revised to reflect an 8"
trench, not 6".
This correction has been made on the STANDARD SILT FENCE OUTLET detail on Erosion
Control Plan SITE 10.
hh. A structure/device for dewatering the temporary basins prior to removal and/or
conversion to a permanent structure. Provide a plan detail, construction specifications,
and maintenance requirements for this device. Include the use of this device in the
construction sequence.
See I, above.
Construction specifications for the skimmer basin are to include the excavation,
embankment construction, spillway construction, and skimmer basin installation.
Specify on the plan detail that an impermeable liner is to be installed on the spillway.
The emergency spillway is to be installed in undisturbed ground (not over the skimmer

pipe). Include a stone pad for the skimmer to rest upon and a rope attached to the
skimmer for maintenance in the plan detail. Include the basin surface area dimensions,
depth, side slopes, dam height, embankment width, length of emergency spillway,
skimmer size, skimmer orifice size, and dewatering time on the plan sheets.
REVISION NEEDED: Overland flow is still entering basin 4 as sheet flow from the
upgradient area.
Diversion ditches 10, 11, and 12 and an additional slope drain and energy dissipater
have been added to prevent overland flow directly into basin 4. Locations are illustrated
on Erosion Control Plan SITE 5 and 7, and energy dissipater details are included on SITE
11.
nn. Provide design calculations, a plan detail, construction specifications, and maintenance
requirements for the outlet stabilization structures. Construction specifications for the
outlet stabilization structure are to include the width of the apron at the pipe outlet and
at the end of the apron, the length of the apron, the stone size, and depth of stone.
REVISION, OR CLARIFICATION NEEDED: Normal standard is that any basin expected to
have a life of 1 year or more should be designed based on the 25-year storm.
Applicant needs to specify how long each basin will remain in use.
On Erosion Control Plan SITE 12, "Expected Duration of Use" has been added to the
Table SKIMMER SEDIMENT BASIN DESIGN DATA.
20. New issue raised by modification to application: On the original Erosion Control Plan and Wake
Stone Site Plans, a fifty -foot undisturbed buffer was illustrated along the northern proposed permit
boundary, with a security fence as proposed by RDU Airport Authority. RDUAA proposed only ten feet of
undisturbed buffer with a thirty-foot clearing for the security fence, essentially clearing our proposed
buffer. Therefore, after negotiations with RDUAA, Wake Stone has agreed to provide the security fence
for the Odd Fellows tract. Wake Stone will still be required to use the style of fence proposed by RDUAA
as illustrated "Typical RDU Security Fence" on page 10 of 11 of WSC Site Plans, but instead of a ten -foot
undisturbed buffer and thirty-foot clearing, we are proposing a 25-foot undisturbed buffer, a 10-foot
clearing outside the fence, and 15-foot clearing inside the fence. However, the clearing for the fence will
only be removal of vegetation; stumps will either remain or be ground in place, and mulch used for
ground cover. No clearing will take place in zone 1 of the Neuse Buffer and only minimal clearing of
vegetation in zone 2 in order to continue the fence across the buffers around Foxcroft Lake and to
extend to Crabtree Creek at the western and eastern property boundaries.
This fence installation was not included in the first submittal package that underwent our initial
review and public comment.
1) Due to the fence installation, the undisturbed buffer has been reduced from 50' to 25'.
2) Trees will be removed as part of the installation. Per the Riparian Neuse Buffer Rules, effective
June 15, 2020, fence installation that results in the removal of trees from Zone 1 is Allowable
with Authorization. Buffer Authorization is required. Please provide a copy of this
authorization.
3) Include all fence installation areas within Limits of Disturbance table shown on drawing 2 of
11, and 3 of 11 of Site Plan Map.
WSC Response
20. 1) On the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and Wake Stone Site Plans accompanying the April 8,
2020 Mining Permit Modification Application, a fifty -foot undisturbed buffer was illustrated along the

northern and western proposed permit boundaries. Within that proposed buffer, a perimeter security
fence as then proposed by RDU Airport Authority was also illustrated. RDUAA's proposed fencing plan
would have provided only ten feet of undisturbed buffer setback from the property line, with a thirty-
foot clearing proposed for security fence installation and a maintenance/patrol corridor. RDUAA
temporarily halted their security fencing plan to address public concern, and ultimately removed the
Odd Fellows tract from the overall fence plan. In so doing, RDUAA and WSC agreed that WSC would
install security fencing of a comparable style to that proposed by RDUAA. WSC recognized this as an
opportunity to provide a greater width undisturbed existing vegetation buffer along the northern and
western property/permit boundaries. In our January 11, 2021 response to Item 20 of the July 23, 2020
ADI letter we provided the following discussion:
"Additional Considerations:
On the original Erosion Control Plan and Wake Stone Site Plans, a fifty -foot undisturbed buffer
was illustrated along the northern proposed permit boundary, with a security fence as proposed by RDU
Airport Authority. RDUAA proposed only ten feet of undisturbed buffer with a thirty-foot clearing for the
security fence, essentially clearing our proposed buffer. Therefore, after negotiations with RDUAA,
Wake Stone has agreed to provide the security fence for the Odd Fellows tract. Wake Stone will still be
required to use the style of fence proposed by RDUAA as illustrated "Typical RDU Security Fence" on
page 10 of 11 of WSC Site Plans, but instead of a ten -foot undisturbed buffer and thirty-foot clearing, we
are proposing a 25-foot undisturbed buffer, a 10-foot clearing outside the fence, and 15-foot clearing
inside the fence. However, the clearing for the fence will only be removal of vegetation; stumps will
either remain or be ground in place, and mulch used for ground cover. No clearing will take place in
zone 1 of the Neuse Buffer and only minimal clearing of vegetation in zone 2 in order to continue the
fence across the buffers around Foxcroft Lake and to extend to Crabtree Creek at the western and
eastern property boundaries."
We also provided revised Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and Site Plan drawing sets
illustrating the revised security fence and expanded undisturbed buffers. We believed we had clearly
stated our plans for installing perimeter fencing by removal of only the minimal vegetation necessary,
and without soil surface disturbance (clearing and grubbing). To reiterate this plan, our intention is to
retain an undisturbed 25' wide buffer of existing vegetation along the northern and western permit
boundaries. On the mine side of these undisturbed buffers, we plan to remove only such vegetation as
necessary to install the RDUAA stipulated chain -link security fencing. No grubbing activities are
planned. Tree stumps within the fence alignment will be shredded/mulched to land surface and the
mulch used as ground cover. Any other trees cut for fence installation or future maintenance will be
cut as near ground level as possible. The stumps will be left intact. Tree trunks and limbs will be
removed using small rubber tracked skid -steer loaders. Fence post holes will be installed using the
same small rubber -tracked skid -steer with 12" power auger attachment. Concrete for post anchors
will be placed using the same small equipment.
20. 2) As we stated in the "Additional Considerations" paragraph of the January 11, 2021 supplemental
data submittal, WSC will not remove trees within Zone 1 of the Neuse River Riparian Buffer area.
Pursuant to 15A NCAC 02B .0714 (11) (f) (ii), fences are allowed within the Neuse River Riparian Buffer if
"installation does not result in removal of trees from Zone 1". Per supporting information found at 15A
NCAC 02B .0610 (40), "Tree means a woody plant with a DBH equal to or exceeding five inches or a
stump diameter exceeding six inches." DBH is defined at 15A NCAC 02B .0610 (9) to mean "diameter at
breast height of a tree measured 4.5 feet above ground surface level". During installation of the
proposed perimeter security fence through any portion of Zone 1 of the Neuse River Riparian Buffer
areas associated with Foxcroft Lake or Crabtree Creek, no trees with a DBH equal to or greater than

five inches or having a stump diameter exceeding six inches will be removed. Under these constraints,
no Neuse River Riparian Buffer Authorization is required for construction of said fencing.
20.3) A new hatch pattern for the fence construction zone has been added to Site Plan Maps and
corresponding legends. Areas of fence installation have been tabulated and are included on pages 2 of
12 and 3 of 12 of the Site Plan Maps as a "special land use category" per your request. The tables
illustrated on these pages however represent "Affected Areas" under the mining program which are
typically used for the purposes of quantifying and tracking mine reclamation requirements. "Affected
land" as defined in the Mining Act of 1971 (N.C. General Statutes, Chapter 74) is "the surface area of
land that is mined, the surface area of land associated with a mining activity so that soil is exposed to
accelerated erosion, the surface area of land on which overburden and waste is deposited, and the
surface area of land used for processing or treatment plant, stockpiles, nonpublic roads, and settling
ponds". Minimal tree removal with stumps either left in place or ground, and mulch used for
stabilization, does not constitute soil being exposed to accelerated erosion. Furthermore, in the
absence of inclusion in the categories of tailings ponds, stock piles, waste piles, plant area, or mine
excavation, this area should not be considered "affected" for purposes of this mining permit
modification application. The security fence construction area is however included in the Limits of
Disturbance, as illustrated in the Erosion Control Plan.

ROY COOPER
Governor
MICHAEL S. REGAN
Secretary
BRIAN WRENN
Director
Sam Bratton
Wake Stone Corporation
P O Box 190
Knightdale, NC 27545
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
November 4, 2020
RE: Wake Stone Quarry Noise Study Protocol
Permit No. 92-10
Cary (Triangle) Quarry
Wake County
Neuse River Basin
Dear Bratton:
After carefully reviewing the proposed Wake Stone Quarry noise study protocol, the Mining
Program has the following comments:
1. Wake Stone will make all reasonable attempts to conduct two production shots as part
of normal operations during the monitoring period.
2. Please place short-term noise meters at the following locations:
i. At the two points where the property line cross the east and west ridgelines
caused by the stream feeding Foxcoft Lake.
ii. At the intersection of Old Reedy Creek Road and 1-40.
3. The short-term meters are required to monitor noise multiple times a day, during
periods of quarry operation and during periods when the quarry is not operating.
4. Upon completion of the report, a draft copy of the report will be provided to the Mining
Program for comment before the final is submitted.
5. Please provide production information for the two -week prior, the week of, and the two
weeks after the monitoring study for the following:
i. Primary Crusher:
A. Daily hours operated
B. Tons produced per day
ii. Finishing Yard:
A. Daily hours operated
B. Daily total tons produced
If these conditions are acceptable to you, please consider the protocol approved. If these
conditions are not acceptable, please contact either Brian Wrenn or me to discuss the matter.
As we have discussed, we would like to schedule a videoconference between your company,
the Mining Program, and your consultant to discuss the study and how the final report output
will be presented. The Mining Program staff will be in contact you shortly to set up this
videoconference.
D_E Q - North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Energy. Mineral and Land Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 11612 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1612
�� 919.707.9200

If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at 919-707-9228.
Sincerely
v
David Miller, PE
State Mining Engineer
Land Quality Section
DM/bh
cc: Mr. Bill Denton, PE

ROY COOPER
Governor
MIC14AEL S. REGAN
Secretary
BRIAN WRENN
Director
Mr. Samuel T. Bratton
President and CEO
Wake Stone Corporation
P O Box 190
Knightdale, NC 27545
NORTH CAROLINA
Environmental Quality
February 25, 2021
Subject: Cary (Triangle) Quarry's Draft Noise Study
Mining Permit No. 92-10
Wake County
Neuse River Basin
Dear Mr. Bratton:
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you and your staff at Wake Stone for allowing me and the
staff of DEMLR the opportunity to review and discuss your proposed draft of the Wake Stone Triangle
Quarry Expansion Acoustical Study.
General Comments:
A 10dBA increase/decrease seems to be coarse measure of significant impact. The Division
understands that this standard is used by NCDOT and other agencies evaluating noise impacts.
However, considering a state park is adjacent to the proposed quarry, the Division believes a more
conservative standard should be considered. Please provide further justification for a use of this
standard.
During our discussion, Wake Stone described several conservative assumptions that were included
in the model. Please provide a comprehensive list of these assumptions.
Report Specific Comments:
• Please include further discussion of the usage factors for equipment noise implemented in the
modeling (p. 18).
• On p. 17, a ground factor of G=0.5 was used for the quarry. Please provide a discussion explaining
why this is appropriate.
• Table 4, p. 20 — Please provide a detailed explanation of how the "existing 1-40 traffic" was
modeled.
• Blasting noise discussion p. 22 — Please explain how the blasting noise ranges compare similarly
between the existing and proposed pits. The maximum blasting noise from the proposed pit
seems significantly higher than the existing pit.
• Footnote of Table 6, p. 22 — Please provide an explanation of how blast noise is not used for
compliance purposes. Per our discussion, you indicated that the blast noise was included in the
hourly averaging of the study. Please describe this.
• Please describe why back-up alarms were not included in noise study.
D_EQ�� North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality I Division of Energy. Mineral and land Resources
512 North Salisbury Street 1 1612 Mail Service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1612
919.707.9200

Figure. 12 legend — Please provide color blocks for different dB ranges. It is difficult to discern
colors using lines in legend.
Figure. 14 — Please provide transparency for the color ranges so that the base layer map and
landmarks can be seen.
Please contact me if any further clarifications concerning the above are needed. I can be reached at:
919-707-9228.
Sincerely, _
David Miller
State Mining Engineer
CC. Bill Denton PE., RRO