20210604_E_Portman_Commission

From:
Ervin Portman
To:
Wrenn, Brian L
Subject:
[External] Sound levels documented from the Mining Commission decision - background to show park has
already been significantly adverse effected before expansion impacts
Date:
Wednesday, June 2, 2021 9:16:10 AM
Attachments:
image001.pnna
imaae002.png
Mining Commission from State Archives.pdf
CAUTION: External email. Do not click links or open attachments unless you verify. Send all suspicious email as an
attachment to Report Spam.
h. The testimony of the noise experts for each party is in substantial
accum . Bruce G. Leonard testiiiea for the Fatiiioncr that the ambient 60ise
level ip the pertinent nprtiop of the park is about 45 deejhel5 on an A weighted
scale (dB(40 , Tr. p. 227, and the projected noise level of equiptent and trwks'
measurad at Various points in the park, ranges from 46 to 55 dB{A}, Tr. pp. 22$-
39. Re a7.s0 testifias that the Federal Highway Administration standard for traE-
,`ic noise in parka is 57 d9 Ldn or Laq, Tr. p. 22�, and that the Division of
parks and Recreation has proposed a guideline for noise levels in packs eE 55
dB Ldn or, Lcq.
iar the ➢epartMtnt 3aMOS P. Sirknu ti11SU G 04 that the am4i-�nt'naiae
lave-1 in the southwestern part of the "rk is about US 40(A), Fr. p. Ulu, aad
-6-
the projected noise level of, equipment and trucks ranges from 54 to 55 dff(A),
Tr. P. e96 (see also pp. 499-510_ Documentary evidence introdvca2 by the
Keep in mind the Wake Stone supplied sound study does not include the worst sounds of mining,
the backup alarms of the trucks, the siren pre and post blast and the blast itself. These are
requirments of mining and cannot be mitigated to reduce the impacts. Based on this the sound
study shows the expansion request must be denied, and the sunset clause reinstated.
I hope this is helpful to your review.
Ery Portman
101 Fern Bluff Way
Cary, NC 27518
Cell 919 924 6025

e. The iMtswty of the wise Aspects for each wrty is in aMst,pc1,L
Accord. woe G. Bwoard testifies for the eeeielnnae that the ,rbiea noire
4111 11 the M dinmt aeetiM If the wrh Is abnet es decibels m en A w,ishwdl
Mule (O(A)), ir, P. 327, and the ptej"wd noise level of Mail`owe AM trucks.
wavered ,t reeIDua point, in the pork, vans, £eve 16 to 55 dUA). Fe. pp. 928-
39. Xe also testified that tM Federal Xigh"y Administration ,taMaM Foo tc,F
fee sales in {auks is 57 N W or we. tt. P. 32Y. uW that the Uiviniw of
fake and Peeweid, Ms proposed a guideline for noire levels in peeks of SS
as Mn w 1e9.
pie the 0.pttnent Jame D. 6emv testifies that the ow6lant'roiee
!Adel In tG muthxea[ern Not If the park 11 Wwt 45 dB(N. fe, P. Vq AM

The praytM mrae 11111 at yulpment aM teocks 11r 11 E 51 to S5 IBM,.
Tr. P. 496(aee also pp. 490.516). Weuvntery evidema Sntroem" th the

Y
In the Matter of Denial of)
Permit Application of the )
Wake Stone Corporation )
BEFORE THE MINING COMMISSION
Findings of Fact, Con-
clusions, and Decision
This cause was heard before the Mining Commission on November 6 and 7 and
December 16 and 17, 1980, pursuant to NCGS 74-61 and NCGS 15OA-23 et seq., to
consider the denial by the Division of Land Resources, Department of Natural
Resources and Community Development (hereinafter the Department), of Wake Stone
Corporation's application for a permit.
Preliminary Statement
Wake Stone Corporation (hereinafter the Petitioner) has options to purchase
various parcels of land, some of which adjoin Umstead State Park (hereinafter
the park). ,It seeks a permit to quarry stone there.. The Department denied
Petitioner's request for a permit. The Petitioner then appealed this decision
to the Mining Commission.
Issue
The issue in this case is whether the proposed quarry would have a signifi-
cant adverse effect on the purposes of the park.
The Department is empowered to issue a permit to quarry stone "conditioned
upon compliance with all requirements of the approved reclamation plan for the
operation and with such further reasonable and appropriate requirements and
safeguards as may be deemed necessary by the Department to assure that the
operation will comply fully with the requirements and objective of this
Article." NCGS 74-61. The Department may deny a permit if "the operation would

-2-
v
have a significantly adverse effect on the purposes of a publicly owned park,
forest, or recreation area." NCGS 74-61(5). An applicant may appeal the De-
partment's action to the Mining Commission, which may "affirm, affirm with modi-
fications, or overrule the decision of the Department and may direct the Depart-
ment to take such action as may be required to effectuate its decision."
NCGS 74-61.
Background Information
The park consists of 5,217 acres in Wake County, along the eastern edge of
the Piedmont Plateau, between Raleigh and Durham. The Master Plan developed for
the park in 1974, State Exhibit T"20, sets forth its history:
Until 1934, the land now occupied by Umstead Park was a farm
community --houses, mills, and fields in various stages of use
and abandonment. Poor agricultural techniques, such as one
crop farming, primarily cotton, led to the loss of topsoil
,and subsequently, a submarginal existence. Second -growth timber
was then removed from some upland areas, which expedited the
erosion process.
During the great depression, the United States Resettlement
Division began a program of purchasing sub -marginal farm land,
and in 1935 a proposal to acquire and develop a recreational
demonstration project was instigated generally within the area
now known as Umstead Park. The development of this area was
jointly supervised by the National Park Service and the Depart-
ment of Conservation and Development and until 1943, all develop-
ment and land acquisition was financed by Federal money.
-.In addition to the development of four group camps, a lake, tem-
porary roads and utility systems, the CCC Work Force was re-
sponsible for important conservation measures such as tree
planting and the construction of check dams, which aided the
stabilization of the soil.
World War II forced the abandonment of Federal activities and
on April 6, 1943, the United States deeded to the State of
North Carolina, for the sum of one dollar, 5,088 acres to serve
"public park, recreation, and conservation purposes". This
land was officially designated as Crabtree Creek State Park.
In 1947 and 1949, public use facilities including picnic areas,
tent and trailer campgrounds, and utilities were financed by
the General Assembly's first State Parks Division appropriation.

-3-
The master plan also describes the present and projected use of the sur-
rounding land:
Umstead Park lies in a highly urbanized area of the State
and, as in the past, is currently under pressure from ad-
jacent development. Suburban Raleigh is rapidly moving
westward and recent development, in fact, abuts the eastern
edge of the Park. With the development of Crabtree Valley
Shopping Center and Interstate 40, land values have risen
enormously so that a setting for residential and industrial
growth in very close proximity to the Park has developed.
City and county land use zoning has set the stage for both
of these types of uses so that the only inhibiting factor
at present is the lack of sanitary sewer and water lines.
While it is only a matter of time before these utilities
are provided, the exact location of the utility easements
has not yet been pinpointed as it relates to the Park.
Specifically, the land adjacent to the northeast between
the Park and Highway 70 and that land between I-40 and the
park boundary is currently under considerable pressure for
building . . . . In addition, the Raleigh thoroughfare
plan indicates the construction of a new road linking I-40
and the Duraleigh Road as an extension of the Southern Belt -
line which, without control measures, will most certainly
create similar development pressure.
Raleigh -Durham Airport lies adjacent to Umstead Park's
western boundary and presently has two runways; one for
commercial airlines runs parallel to the Park in a northeast/
southwest direction and the other, for small craft use, lies
perpendicular to the Park in an east -west direction. The
Airport Authority is currently in advanced stages of planning
a new runway and enlarged facilities. The proposed runway
would lie perpendicular to the Park south of the Airport's
existing facilities and service commercial flights.*
Thus, Highway 70, Interstate 40, and Raleigh -Durham Airport bound the park on
three sides. Of these three neighboring land uses, the airport has the most pro-
nounced effect on the day-to-day uses of the park. The map on page 9 of the
master plain depicts two broad swaths, covering about one-half of the park, as
"airport impact zones." The plan states:
Noise emanating from the airport as well as the major roads,
I-40, Highway 70, and proposed roads, is important not only
to the location of overnight facilities in the Park but also
those areas of daytime sue where a greater degree of tranqui-
lity is required. Flight zones over the Park from the existing
,The Mining Commission is aware of the more recent action of the Raleigh -
Durham Airport authority regarding Plan 523L and the alignment of the pro-
posed runway parallel to the western border of the park.

-4-
small craft runway and proposed runway impact the park
not only due to noise but also visually so that, in these
zones, the location of uses requires considerable scrutiny.
Stipulations
In the Prehearing Order, Wake Stone Exhibit #3, the parties stipulate as fol-
lows:
1. The only contested matters are blasting, dust, traffic, noise, and visi-
bility.
2. Blasting will occur eight to twelve times per month and at vibration and
air blast levels within the Department's guidelines.
3. The Petitioner's dust control plan meets all Department standards, and
the Petitioner has a permit to operate proposed air pollution abatement facilities
for controlling dust.
4. The Divsion of Highways has determined that a coincidence of projected
peak traffic for the park and the quarry will not create unsafe conditions.
Findings of Fact
A. Chronology of Events
1. On March 21, 1980, Wake Stone Corporation, operator of several stone
quarries in North Carolina, applies for a permit to quarry stone on 195 acres
situated north of Interstate 40, south of the airport, at the southwest corner
of the park. Wake Stone Exhibit #1.
2. By letter dated August 22, 1980, Mr. Stephen G. Conrad, Director, Divi-
sion of Land Resources, Department of Natural Resources and Community Develop-
ment, denies the permit. State Exhibit #18.
3. By letter dated September 16, 1980, the Petitioner requests a hearing
before the Mining Commission to appeal the denial. State Exhibit #19.

-5-
4. On October 31, 1980, Mr. Daniel C. Oakley, Assistant Attorney General,
appearing on behalf of the Department, and Mr. James M. Kimzey, Esquire, ap-
pearing on behalf of the Petitioner, hold a prehearing conference and file a
Prehearing Order. Wake Stone Exhibit #3.
S. On November 6 and 7 and December 16 and 17, 1980, the Mining Commission
hears the appeal.
B. Evidence
1. A summary of the.important objective evidence on the matters of blasting,
noise, and visibility is as follows:
a. On blasting, the Department puts into evidence documents showing that
the southern area of the park is an "airport impact zone." Department Exhibit
#20, pp. 8-9.
For the Petitioner, Phillip Berger testifies that the sound of an
airplane taking off over the southwestern corner of the park would muffle the
sound of a blast, Tr. pp. 140, 151, and that projected blasts would he well
within the Department's guidelines, Tr. pp. 131-2.
b. The testimony of the noise experts for each party is in substantial
accord. Bruce G. Leonard testifies for the Petitioner that the ambient noise
level in the pertinent section of the park is about 45 decibels on an A weighted
scale (dB(A)), Tr. p. 227, and the projected noise level of equipment and trucks,
-
measured at various points in the park, ranges from 46 to 55 dB(A), Tr. pp. 228-
39. He also testifies that the Federal Highway Administration standard for traf-
fic noise in parks is 57 dB Lan or Leq, Tr. p. 224, and that the Division of
Parks and Recreation has proposed a guideline for noise levels in parks of 55
dB Ldn or Leq.
For the Department James D. Simons testifies that the ambient noise
level in the southwestern part of the park is about 45 dB(A), Tr. p. 414, and

the projected noise level of equipment and trucks ranges from 51 to 55 dB(A),
Tr. p. 496 (see also pp. 497-516). Documentary evidence introduced by the
Department indicates that most of the southern half of the park is a flight
zone for aircraft taking off and landing. Department Exhibit r20, pp. 8-9.
C. The testimony on visibility reveals little agreement among the
experts. For the Petitioner, Earl Harbison testifies that, due to topography
and vegetation, the crushing equipment at the proposed site would generally
not be visible from the park. Tr. pp. 158-98.
Richard Hazard testifies for the Department that, during the sum-
mer, the equipment could be visible from a few areas in the park, and, during
the winter, it would be visible "from a good area within the southern half" of
the park. Tr. pp. 776-8.
2. The purposes of the park are to preserve natural resources and to make
them available to the public for recreation and wildlife interpretation. Tr.
p. 912 (testimony of Stephen G. Conrad for the Department).
Conclusions
The Mining Commission makes the following conclusions:
1. Based on:
a. the stipulation by the parties that vibration and air blast levels
generated by proposed blasting are within the Department's guidelines, Wake
Stone Exhibit #3, p. 2;
b. documentary evidence that the southern area of the park is an "air-
port impact zone" (i.e. a flight zone for incoming and outgoing airplanes),
Department Exhibit P20, pp. 8-9;
c. Phillip Berger's testimony that

-7-
i. the sound of an airplane taking off over the southwestern cor-
ner of the park would muffle the sound of a blast, Tr. pp. 140, 151; and
ii. that projected blasts would be well within the Department's
guidelines, Tr. pp. 131-2,
the Commission concludes that blasting will not have a significant adverse ef-
feet on the purposes of the park.
2. Based on:
a. the stipulation by the parties that the Petitioner's dust control
plan is designed to meet Department standards, Wake Stone Exhibit #3, p. 2;
and on
b. James D. Simons's testimony that the dust from blasting is not a
concern of the Department in this case, Tr. p. 490,
the Commission concludes that dust from the quarry and roads will not have a
significant adverse effect on the purposes of the park.
3. Based on the stipulation by the parties that the Division of Highways
has determined that, even with a coincidence of projected peak traffic for the
park and the quarry, there would be no unsafe traffic conditions, the Commission
determines that traffic generated by the quarry would not have a significant ad-
verse effect on the purposes of the park.
4. Based on:
a. testimony of Bruce G. Leonard, Phillip Berger, and James D. Simons
about an existing noise level of about 45 dB(A), Tr. pp. 227 and 414, and pro-
jected noise levels ranging from 46 to 55 dB(A);
b. the absence of a noise level standard for equipment near parks such
as this one; and
c. the analogous, though not dispositive, Federal Highway Administration
standard for traffic noise in parks of 57 dB Ldn or Leq, Tr. pp. 224-5; and

WIN
d. testimony by Bruce G. Leonard that the Division of Parks and Recrea-
tion has proposed a guideline of 55 dB Ldn or Leq, Tr. p. 224,
the Commission concludes that the noise from the quarry machinery and traffic
will not have a significant adverse effect on the purposes of the park.
5. The Commission concludes from the conflicting testimony of Earl Harbison
and Richard Hazard that, while the crusher may be visible from certain places
in the park, such visibility will not have a significant adverse effect on the
purposes of the park.
Decision
The Commission feels strongly that the Department has acted in a conscientious
and responsible manner, and had a reasonable basis to believe that the denial of
the permit was correct. The Department had to reach a conclusion on a major issue --
noise --without standards or guidelines applicable to parks. To make matters more
complex, the area around the park reflects a checkerboard of land use plans by
various state and local government units. Thus, although the Commission reverses
the Department's action in this case, it wishes to commend the Department for its
diligence and dedication.
In order to protect the park from any possible adverse effects of the quarry-
ing operation, the permit should be issued, subject to the Commission's final
approval, with the terms and conditions outlined below.
i. The Division and Wake Stone shall develop a plan to be incorporated in
the permit to require utilization of state-of-the-art techniques to minimize
noise, dust, and other possible adverse effects on the park.
2. The Division and Wake Stone shall develop a plan for the optimum location
of processing and stockpiling facilities and roads to minimize possible effects
on the park.

3. The Division and Wake Stone shall develop an adequate buffer zone plan
for the area between the quarry and the park.
4. The Division shall require Wake Stone to construct a berm or berms
between the quarry and the park.
5. Pursuant to Wake Stones proposal that, as part of its reclamation plan,
it donate the quarry to the State for park use on termination of the operation,
the Commission requests that counsel for Wake Stone meet with Mr. Daniel. C.
Oakley, Assistant Attorney General, and Ms. Becky R. French, Director, Office
of Administrative Hearings, to reach an agreement, to be submitted to the
Commission, on the best method to transfer the land.
This decision is not final. In no more than 45 days, unless the Commission
grants an extension, the Division and Wake Stone shall, at a public hearing,
present to the Commission the plans outlined above. At the hearing the Commis-
sion will not hear new evidence. At least 5 days before this hearing the parties
shall deposit the plans with B. R. French for distribution to the Commission.
Following the hearing the Commission shall render a final decision, from which
the parties may appeal pursuant to NCGS 150A--1 et seq.
Date of original decision: January 27, 1981.
As amended and corrected, this the "Ao-y All 1981.
Ll1",; nuf .tuned 6.4
Dr. Henry B. Smith, Chairman
North Carolina Mining Commission

BEFORE THE MINING COMMISSION
In the Matter of Denial. of FINAL DECISION
Permit Application of
Wake Stone Corporation
In accordance with this Commission's initial Findings of Fact, Conclusions,
and Decision of January 27, 1981, as amended and corrected, and with the
March 12, 1981 Agreement of Wake Stone Corporation and the Division of Land
Resources, Department of Natural Resources and Community Development, concerning
the Conditions enumerated below as 1, 2, 4, and 5; and upon consideration of
the supplementary arguments of the parties concerning Condition 3, infra, the
Mining Commission hereby orders that the Division of Land Resources grant to
Wake Stone Corporation the permit applied for with the following conditions:
Condition No. 1 - Minimize noise, dust, and other possible adverse effects.
Noise
1. Noise barriers between crushers and screening towers to minimize noise
levels at the park shall be provided from the outset of the operation.
Noise barriers may be enclosures, walls, bins, structures, stockpiles,
or natural terrain. In the event there is disagreement over the required
noise control measures, the final design and emplacement of noise barriers
shall be determined by qualified noise and engineering consultants mutually
agreed upon by both parties.
2. The plant shall be located at a lower elevation as indicated on the required
site plan.
3. The plant shall be designed so that the primary crusher can be relocated in
the pit at the earliest possible date.
4. The chutes used in processing shall be rubberized.

- 2 -
5. Compressors with noise abatement enclosures (currently called whisperized
compressors) shall be used with track drills to open the quarry. Once
the quarry is opened, either hydraulic or down -in -the -hole drills shall
be used to further reduce noise.
6. Only such blasting techniques as minimize noise shall be employed.
7. Pit haul trucks shall be equipped to exhaust through the beds of the
trucks to muffle engine noise.
B. Conveyors rather than trucks shall be used for stockpiling material.
9. The quarry shall be operated only on Monday through Friday and shall not
be operated on State -recognized holidays.
Dust
1. The access road to the quarry,from the scale house to SR 1790,shall be
paved. Wake Stone Corporation agrees to cooperate with the Department
of Transportation in paving SR 1790 from the entrance to the quarry to
the intersection with SR 1654.
2. The provisions of the air quality permit No. 4386 shall be followed.
3. A water wagon with sprays shall be used for wetting roads to prevent dust.
4. Sprays shall be used throughout the plant at transfer points to control
dust.
5. Drill hole dust shall be controlled by wetting or other means.
6. Dust control shall be maintained by the use of water sprays.
7. A water spray shall be provided for highway haul trucks.
8. Washed stone shall be stockpiled within the part of the designated plant
area which is closest to the park.

- 3 -
Condition No. 2 - optimize processing and stockpiling facilities to minimize
possible effects on the park.
1. The processing and stockpiling facilities shall be relocated as indicated on
the Wake Stone revised site plan submitted February 18, 1981. The purpose
of this relocation shall be to screen the park from the sight and sound
of the operation, reduce erosion, and shield the operation from public
view along Interstate 40.
2. The relocation shall place the processing and stockpiling facilities at a
lower elevation to reduce visibility and noise.
3. The stockpiles shall be located close to the quarry entrance roads.
4. The plant and stockpile area shall be close to the intersection of SR 1790
and SR 1654.
5. The initial site disturbance from both quarry excavation and plant site
development shall be confined to one drainage system, which is now already
protected by ponds which will serve as sediment basins. The purpose of
this relocation is to aid erosion and sediment control.
6. The new location of the pit shall be such that, once the overburden is
removed, the quarry excavating equipment - i.e. compressor and drill,
shovels, and trucks - can be placed below the surrounding land at the
initial phases of quarrying.
Condition No. 3 - Suffer Zone Plan
1. The extent of the completely undisturbed buffer zone to be maintained between
the park boundary during the 10 year permit shall be as indicated on the
revised plan and modified by Exceptions 2, 3, and 4 listed on Page 2 of
Wake Stone Corporation's memorandum of March 10, 1981, except all of the
area north of the ten-year buffer line shall be left as a natural buffer

- 4 -
zone and not be developed or altered for commercial purposes.
Condition No. 4 -- Construction of Berms
1. A vegetated earthen berm shall be constructed between the Wake Stone Corporation
plant and the western boundary of the park as shown on Wake Stone Corporation's
revised site plan.
2. Berm dimensions shall be no less than indicated on Wake Stone Corporation's
revised site plan and may be higher and longer than shown, except the berm
shall not encroach on the permanent buffer zone.
3. The side slopes of the berm shall be graded to a stable grade of 2 horizontal
to 1 vertical grade or flatter and revegetated on the sides and top with
grasses and evergreen trees. The toe of the berm shall not encroach on the
park property boundary and shall be at least 50 feet from the boundary.
4. Other berms may be required as mining progresses to reduce the noise and
visual impact upon the quarry.
Condition No. 5 - Donation of Quarry to the State
Pursuant to Wake Stone Corporation's offer to donate the quarry site to
the State as part of its reclamation plan, the terms and conditions of the offer
and acceptance shall be set -forth "_n the reclamation plan as follows.
The term, "quarry site", shall include the entire pit as it exists after
quarrying has been completed, a strip extending at least 50 feet back from the
top of the slope of the pit on all sides (see the reclamation plan for the
requirements applying to the slope), and a reasonable area to connect the pit
and surrounding strip to Umstead Park, constituting a total area of at least
75 acres.

- 5 -
The method by which the quarry site will be donated to the State is as
follows: Upon acquisition of the land by Wake Stone (by the exercise of its
options to purchase), Wake Stone will grant to the State an option which, if
exercised by the State, will require that Wake Stone convey a fee simple title
to the quarry site to the State. The State shall have no obligation to exercise
its option to accept a conveyance of the quarry site.
The terms and conditions of the option shall be as follows:
1. When all quarryable stone has been removed from all of the land belonging
to or under the control of Wake Stone Corporation during the period of its
quarrying operations and which lies between Umstead Park and Interstate Highway 40,
it shall be the duty of Wake Stone to notify the State of this fact. Upon receipt
of such notice, the State shall have six months within which it may elect to have
Wake Stone convey the quarry site to the State. If the State elects to have
Wake Stone convey the quarry site to the State, it shall notify Wake Stone of
such election within said six month period. All notices shall be by certified
mail with return receipt requested. If the State fails to make an election
within said six month period or shall elect not to accept a conveyance of the
quarry site, the option shall thereupon terminate and Wake Stone shall have no
further obligation to convey the quarry site to the State.
2. If all quarryable stone is not removed, the right of the State to acquire
the quarry site shall accrue at the end of 50 years from the date quarrying
commences or,10 years after quarrying operations have ceased without having been
resumed, whichever is later, and notices shall be exchanged at that time in the
same manner and with the same time limitations as set forth in paragraph 1 above.
3. Until the option has expired Wake Stone will not encumber by mortgage or
deed of trust any of the area designated "BUFFER AREA" on Wake Stone's site plan
dated February 17, 1981, revised March 10, 1981, except for purchase money security
interests.

2
- 6 -
4. During the option period, Wake Stone shall have the right to encumber
all of its remaining property from time to time by mortgage, deed of trust or
other security agreement then in common use for the purpose of securing one
or more bona fide obligations of Wake Stone, such as the payment of money or
the providing of any goods or services. The option to the State shall be
subordinate to each such encumbrance in the same manner and to the same extent
as if such option had been recorded after the recordation of each such encumbrance.
5. The right of the State to exercise its option shall be subject to:
(a) Wake Stone not being prohibited by the U.S. Government, State of North
Carolina, Wake County, any municipality having jurisdiction, or by any court
from removing from Wake Stone's property all quarryable stone which is outside
of the BUFFER AREA referred to in paragraph 3 above. The requirement by the
State that Wake Stone comply with laws and rules and regulations generally appli-
cable to stone quarries shall not be deemed a prohibition of quarrying for the
purpose of the option agreement.
(b) The operation of a quarry on Wake Stone's property for a minimum period
of five years.
6. The conveyance of the quarry site shall be by deed containing the usual
covenants of warranty and conveying the quarry site free and clear of all encum-
brances except -those existing at the time of Wake Stone's purchase, ad valorem -
taxes at the time of conveyance (which shall be prorated), and such drainage and
utility easements as shall have been installed in connection with the development
of the property.
7. The option may include such other terms as are mutually acceptable to
the State and Wake Stone.

- 7 _
The Mining Commission concludes from the evidence submitted in this case
that the operation of the quarry, under the conditions set forth in tUs deei4jon,
will not have a significant adverse effect on the purposes of the park.
APR 3 1981
For the unanimous Mining Commission, this the day of 1981.
O;'tginai ign Cal by
Henry B. Smith, Chairman
�rigie:a� Aignesi �r�
T.W. Tysinger
Original 3i{gne:i dg
W.W. Woodhouse
Commissioners Barkalow and Long took no part in the disposition of the case.

In the Matter of Denial of)
Permit Application of the )
Wake Stone Corporation }
BEFORE THE MINING COMMISSION
Amendment to the
Final Decision
The 250' buffer area shown on the northern boundary and
the 100' buffer area on the eastern boundary of Wake Stone's pro-
perty is considered by the Commission the permanent buffer zone.
This the 3rd day of April 1981.
Henry B. $nith, Chairman '
T W. Tysinger W. W. Woodhouse, Jr.

e
BEFORE THE MINING COMMISSION
In the Matter of Denial of)
Permit Application of the ) Amendment to the
Wake Stone Corporation ) Final Decision
The 250' buffer area shown on the northern boundary and
the 100' buffer area on the eastern boundary of Wake Stone's pro-
perty :is considered by the Commission the permanent buffer zone.
This the 3rd day of April 1981.
HenryyB.,Sfiith, Chairman
i
�'--
T. W. Tysinger W. W. Woodhouse, Jr.
w.