Laserfiche WebLink
60 foot rule is that it meet base rock, not concrete grade quality. He indicated they are <br />currently mining to that depth and it is economically worthwhile to do so in the existing <br />pit. He added they are able to process the rock before they sell it and they could upgrade <br />substandard rock to rock that passes the base rock standard, and it could be of economic <br />interest to them. He said the question remains that to whether the lower section actually <br />passes the base rock standard. He said it was a mixed sample and it made it invalid from <br />the standpoint of being representative because they mixed the high quality with the low <br />quality and they couldn’t tell whether the deeper part passes the test. He thought it made <br />the sample invalid. <br /> <br /> Concerning the 74 acres, Sorenson asked if three bore holes were adequate. <br /> <br /> Reed responded it was likely to be adequate. He thought the quality of the rock was not <br />good. He thought the quality of the samples they tested passes. <br /> <br /> Bettman commented that given the fact of their decision making rests on specific criteria, <br />(one being that there be a significant resource, and the significant resource issue is so <br />important to this application), why when there is a broad range of standards to choose <br />from for sampling would they pick one that is not the highest standard and one that could <br />be questioned by the opponents so easily. She stated there are certain standards to adhere <br />to make sure they have a pure outcome. She said since the 60 feet of quality aggregate is <br />the standard that determines whether the resource is significant enough to sacrifice the <br />prime farmland and create impact on the residential neighborhood. She said the criteria <br />is not whether it is a good company or great jobs, it is based on very specific objective <br />criteria. She asked why they have a significant resource, why they didn’t choose the <br />highest standard of sampling. <br /> <br /> Christenson said they did choose the highest standard of sampling. He said they followed <br />the ASTM, the Corps of Engineering sampling protocol. <br /> <br /> Bettman asked if what Reed described was the industry standard. She asked if people <br />used that sample. <br /> <br /> Christenson responded that they do use the ASTM and the Corp of Engineering sampling <br />standards. He recalled what Reed submitted was the standard for quarry rock that is not <br />appropriate in this case as it is aggregate and they didn’t use that standard. He said they <br />had also gone through the Goal 5 and there was a different set of standards they were <br />supposed to adhere to by Reed’s testimony and they adhered to his previous testimony. <br />He didn’t think Reed wanted to see a gravel operation disturb farm ground. <br /> <br /> Bettman asked if he was confident it would have shown that there is a significant <br />resource. <br /> <br /> Christenson said it does. <br /> <br /> Bettman asked why he didn’t do the sampling the way it was described. <br />Page 18 – Joint Elected Officials' Meeting – December 12, 2006 <br />WD bc/m/06121/T <br /> <br />