HomeMy WebLinkAboutAffidavit: Rudenko, Douglas
:-- p- -
. ;:i
~
u
Q
STATE OF INDIANA
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
OF ZONING APPEALS
CARMEL/CLAY ADVISORY BOARD
COUNTY OF HAMILTON
DOCKETS NO. 05090003-SU
AND 05090004-SU
In Re: Application of Martin Marietta Materials, Inc.
for Special Use Approval for Mueller Property-8outh
Surface Limestone Operation and Artificial Lake
AFFIDAVIT OF DOUGLAS RUDENKO
Personally appeared before the undersigned notary public, Douglas Rudenko, who under
oath, deposes and states as follows:
1.
I am over the age of 21 years and have personal knowledge of the facts cited
herein.
2.
Vibra-Tech performed a document review and an isoseismic study of Martin
Marietta's present blasting practices, as well as the potential impact of future blasting
conducted on the property known as Mueller North. A copy of the report we issued is
attached as Exhibit A. We also prepared a response to questions from Spectra
Environmental, the City's consultant, about Martin Marietta's blasting practices, and that
response is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
3.
To perform the isoseismic study Vi bra-Tech arrayed 151 seisl1)ometers, devices that
measure vibration, wave frequency, and air overpressure from a blast or other event.
r:-i
1'\
~
,;, "'i;
u
()
These seismometers then recorded data from a normal Martin Marietta production blast
and from a test, or signature blast, at 151 different locations. This data enabled us literally
to map the vibration patterns throughout the area of the blast and thus to predict the impact
of future blasting at specific areas, which we did, developing a vibration map that
essentially showed the predicted footprint of future blasting.
4.
One of the purposes of the study was to evaluate the impacts, if any, of future open
pit blasting conducted on Mueller North on Kingswood, and similarly situated
neighborhoods. Based on our study, we concluded that impacts from open pit blasting at
the northernmost point for which approval is sought on Mueller North would comply with all
applicable rules and regulations at the closest Kingswood property line, with a substantial
margin of safety. This conclusion includes the lower vibration limit of .5 inches per second
specified in the City of Carmel's Mining Ordinance, as well as its air over pressure limits.
We also determined that Martin Marietta's existing blasting practices are in compliance with
both Indiana law and the lower .5 inches per second limit specified in the Carmel Mining
Ordinance, as well as applicable air overpressure limits.
5.
Nevertheless, Martin Marietta expressed a desire for its blasting practices to reflect
the current state of the art and asked us for recommendations toward that end. We made
recommendations, however we do not believe these recommendations are necessary for
Martin Marietta to meet any applicable regulations as they now exist. We do not view our
recommendations as requirements, or as universally applicable to every blast, but rather as
. "
. '
""'
.
Q
u
general recommendations that should be considered and evaluated in consultation with the
blaster, who must always retain ultimate responsibility for blast design.
6.
Martin Marietta also discussed with us how our recommendations should be
expressed in commitments to this Board. We advised that our recommendations be
expressed just as what they are---recommendations to be evaluated in consultation with
the blaster and to be implemented as deemed advisable. I have reviewed the commitment
language submitted to this Board by Martin Marietta and I am satisfied that it adequately
reflects our intention in making our recommendations. Further, I have reviewed the
extensive blasting related commitments filed by Martin Marietta and they are among the
most extensive, strictest, and far-reaching I have seen.
7.
Martin Marietta MM shall use blast designs intended to employ destructive
interference techniques to minimize low frequency energy. Blast designs shall generally
conform to the timing recommendations of Vi bra-Tech in its letter of Feb. 8, 2006, in
consultation with the blaster. The timing utilized for each blast and the resulting frequency
spectra shall be one of the review criteria for the annual review of Martin Marietta's
practices specified herein.
8.
In my opinion, Martin Marietta's blasting practices at Carmel are very good and are
better than those of most companies with which I am familiar. Further, the persons
involved with blasting at Martin Marietta are knowledgeable and have consistently shown
. "
.. .-l
u
u
both a desire and a willingness to take all reasonable steps recommended by Vibra- Tech
to minimize impacts from blasting.
FURTHER Affiant sayeth not.
This 24 day of f=E8(tuA(t...y
,2006. ~
&kO
Sworn to and subscribed
befo,te me this ~ t./ day
ofr~' ,006.
My Commission Expires: 10 .-2 9~
.li.~~..'.o.'..:~~~"'NOf_l~~1~<=i
:" S9j1J " FOO'Jc ~
.." C:tl@f .. ~
~ 't~ C{~r~1~1:%~;C&~ ~~~~tt~? 2t~~ ~
'i"~~~,~2./:::.=[.~=-.:.':";'::;':':~:"':~'.~~:"';:~:';:'~~~"';:"'.""""1it'"::_<:~: 1
.A