Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ITE1M 7 _ If mining from the north southward does occur, will the southern drainage <br />crossing still be necessary? If so, why? <br />RESPITEE: Please refer to response under item 6. Probably this southern <br />crossing would not be needed once the north crossing was established. <br />ITEP1 8 = Sections 34-32-102(1), 34-32-103(1), and 34-32-116(7)(8), (h) and (i> <br />address minimizing impacts to hydrologic balance, air quality, water quality, and <br />human safety in unstable affected areas and off~ite areas. What measures will be <br />implemented to assure that mining does not exceed the proposed Phase III mining <br />permit limits? What measures will be taken to insure that mined material does not <br />fall into Williams Canyon outside the mining permit limits? <br />RESPQVSE: First of all, "minimizing" we do not take to mean total prevention. <br />We interpret minimizing as taking suitable measures to reduce the effects to a <br />manageable level. Second, we do not believe that the west edge of Phase III will be <br />unstable as a result of mining and certainly will not add to the high degree of <br />instability already existing on the east side of Williams Canyon. Third, by <br />examining the maps~you can see that any area where mining would occur up to the <br />permit boundary faces east and is protected from any spillage into the canyon by <br />walls created as a result of mining. Fourth, you can also determine from the map <br />that all areas where there is no mining-created barrier to protect the land from <br />rockfallsthere is a setback of the mining area from the permit boundary of 50 to 200 <br />feet. This was included just for this reason. If any rocks did roll they would <br />stop before reaching the permit boundary. The danger of rocks falling into Williams <br />Canyon is essentially zero. Furthermore, prior to mining in those areas where there <br />could be even slight danger of rocks going into the canyon the land in the canyon <br />will be secured and posted. Keep in mind that the land in Williams Canyon west of <br />the amendment is owned by Castle Concrete and any person who is in this section of <br />the canyon without permission is trespassing on private property. And last, the <br />mining techniques developed during the mining of the South Knob at the Queen's <br />Canyon Quarry have shown that areas on the sides of canyons can be mined without <br />spillage, and the situation at the South Knob is far more severe than anything which <br />will be encountered at this operation. <br />ITQ1 9 -_ I believe the first sentence on page 10 should read "the southern end of <br />Phase III and not "the southern end of Phase IV." <br />RE~.~PQJSE: You are correct. Sorry about that; typos do occur. <br />ITEM 10 - Please provide the formation dip angle, dip direction and strike direction <br />of the dip you describe at the end of the first paragraph on page 12. <br />RESPWSE: The dip of the rock in this area is somewhat variable, although not <br />nearly as variable as it is at the other quarries. Generally, the dip is between 10 <br />and 15 degrees to the southeast. <br />ITEM 11 = Complaints and concerns about damage to property outside of the permit <br />area due to blasting vibrations have been recently filed. that investigations have <br />been made to assure that such off-site damage will not occur? What particle <br />SNYDER IW AhQ~NE1VT AOEQIIACY f2E5'PQ5E5 MAY 22, 1989 PAGE 3 <br />