Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pilot Program topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advisory board reviews pilot program blast complaints and asks for clearer PPV visuals
Summary
Board reviewed pilot program data showing increased complaints and requested clearer charts and a print‑friendly handout; Edwin agreed to update graphs, add 'felt/unfelt' thresholds, and circulate a revised report for Tallahassee outreach.
The Blasting Advisory Board heard a detailed update on pilot‑program complaint data and asked staff to improve visualizations and descriptive text for stakeholder outreach.
Edwin reported 324 complaints in the latest month and noted that 2025 totals have increased compared with the previous year. He also said the maximum PPV (peak particle velocity) reported rose (from 0.5 to about 0.58) and that the team had synced addresses with a private appraiser database to better attribute complaints to municipalities.
Board members pressed for clearer charts and explicit buckets that communicate when residents are likely to feel blasts. One member suggested adding a dashed line or shaded divide to show a ‘felt’ versus ‘unfelt’ PPV range and making numeric axis labels legible for printed handouts. Edwin agreed to create separate sheets tying specific blasts to named mines (for example, White Rock and Samex) and to superimpose complaint counts on PPV distributions so policymakers can see correlations.
The board debated whether to label a single cutoff (members discussed 0.15–0.16 as a meaningful breakpoint) but ultimately concluded any threshold in materials must be defensible; members asked Edwin to present data with clear buckets (0–0.15, 0.16–0.19, etc.) and a short explanatory note defining PPV in plain language.
Edwin committed to making the edits and to circulate the updated report and a printable one‑page summary by the next day so the board could finalize copies for the Tallahassee trip.
