Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.o. Renewal by Shafer Contracting to Renew their Mineral Extraction Permit through 2013, Case 12-33-ME ROSEIv1OUNIT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL City Council Meeting Date: December 18, 2012 AGENDA ITEM: Case 12-33-ME Request by Shafer AGENDA SECTION: Contracting to Renew their Mineral Extraction Consent Permit through 2013. PREPARED BY: Eric Zweber, Senior Planner AG NDA NO. ATTACHMENTS: Site Map; 2013 Small Scale Mineral Extraction APPROVED BY: Permit; Airport Area E Soil Sampling Results; Airport Area E Map; EPA Information Regarding E Coli; Shafer 2013 Permit Renewal Request Letter; Current Operations / Reclamation Status Map; Proposed 2013 Operations / Reclamation Map, American Engineering and Testing Memorandum dated December 10; Excerpts from the November 27 and December 11 Planning Commission Meetings. tai RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve the Renewal of the Shafer Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit for 2013, subject to the terms and conditions in the attached 2013 Draft Conditions for Small Scale Mineral Extraction. ISSUE Shafer Contracting has applied for the annual renewal of the mineral extraction permit for their property located one mile north of 135th Street East and 1/4 mile west of Rich Valley Blvd. (County Road 71). DECEMBER 11 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING The Planning Commission continued the review of the Shafer mining renewal request at their December 11 meeting. Staff reviewed the information that was gathered since the November 27 meeting including Dakota County's negative E Coli test results for the Ista/Berquist well; the Shafer industrial well application submitted to Dakota County; the concrete and asphalt recycling approval within the 2000 Shafer permit request;and American Engineering&Testing memorandum stating that the risk of contamination from asphalt and concrete recycling is remote. Chair Powell asked if Mr. Ista had any additional comments or concerns and Mr. Ista stated that he did not. The other neighbor to the mine, Joan Schnieder, did not attend the meeting.The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of the Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit for Shafer. NOVEMBER 27 PUBLIC HEARING The Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing for the Shafer Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit on November 27, 2012. Two residents, Gary Ista and Joan Schnieder, spoke during the public hearing. Mr. Ista stated that after testing his well there was total coliform and E. Coli detected and that he requested that the permit be withheld until the issue can be addressed. Ms. Schnieder stated that she has sediment in her water, the trucks haul material very shortly after the 7 a.m. start time of the mine, and that Shafer is bringing material in from the airport. Following the testimony, the Planning Commission tabled the permit request until December 11 to allow staff to discuss these concerns with the residents and determine how these issues may be addressed by Shafer through the permit. Information regarding Issues Raised in the Public Testimony Staff has provided information in the packet from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regarding E Coli contamination. The information says that E Coli comes from either human or animal waste. Staff contacted Jeff Luehrs of Dakota County to discuss E Coli contamination of private wells. Mr. Luehrs indicated that positive reading of E Coli is usually either an issue with the wellhead (allowing surface water, rodents, or insects to access) or an infection in the plumbing system in the house. Staff asked if the mining site could be source of the E Coli and Mr. Luehrs indicated that is unlikely. Mr. Luehrs stated that even a septic system located 50 feet from a well is an unlikely source because the bacteria cannot travel through the soil that distance, therefore the mine site over 1,000 feet from the Ista property would not be the source of the contamination. Mr. Luehrs visited Mr. Ista's home on Thursday,December 6 to collect some water samples for testing and to inspect the plumbing to look for likely locations for the contamination. The test results received on December 10 were negative for total coliform and E Coli in all three test locations. On Monday, December 3, staff met with Amy Bergquist (Gary's wife), Gary Ista,Joan Schnieder, Frank Weiss from Shafer,and Rick Pennings from American Engineering&Testing (AET) to discuss the issues that arose during the Public Hearing. Staff discussed the E Coli issue and the discussion with Mr. Luehrs that the gravel mine is an unlikely source of contamination. Mr. Pennings,who performed both Shafer and Ista's water testing, concurred with that assessment. Staff discussed the offer by Mr. Luehrs to assist in locating the source of the E Coli contamination. The discussion transitioned to the material brought into the mine from the airport. It was clarified that the material brought to the site was concrete from the Terminal 2-Humphrey fuel facility relocation,referred to by the airport as Area E. No soil was brought into the site as haul back, only concrete was brought to the mine to be recycled into RAP (recycled aggregate product). While, the concrete itself cannot be tested in the same manner as soil is for contamination, Shafer has provided the test results of the soil under and adjacent to the concrete in Area E. This would be the soil adjoining the concrete that was brought to the mine. The soil testing shows that the soil was not contaminated. Test results and map of the Area E project are attached to this Executive Summary. The RAP will be sold in the future and transported out of the mine after the sale. Staff pointed out that the RAP was addressed on the exhibits of the mining permit and is addressed in Condition V of the permit. Staff indicated that the hauling of concrete is permitted and that Shafer is in compliance with the 2012 permit conditions. Staff also discussed that RAP is a standard industry practice and that other mines within Rosemount process RAP. The recycling of asphalt and concrete are identified as beneficial uses of solid waste within Minnesota Rule 7035 because if the aggregate or concrete was not recycled, then it would need to be deposited into a construction and demolition landfill. Staff discussed the management of RAP with solid waste staff at the MnPCA and if concrete or asphalt would be a conduit to transport contamination. PCA staff stated that it is unlikely that unpainted asphalt and concrete carry any contaminants due to their impervious nature. 2 Concrete would be considered contaminated if it had a surface of lead paint (because the lead paint is a contaminant) but that it would not be contaminated if it had a non-toxic latex paint. PCA staff also had reviewed the issue of plane de-icing and found that the glycol used in de-icing planes should not be an environmental concern because the glycol breaks down to a non-toxic level within weeks. Ms. Schnieder stated that she was unsatisfied with the staff responses at the Public Hearing. She knows the City doesn't formally regulate the well at the mine but feels because the City regulates the mining; the City also can regulate the well at the mine site. Shafer stated that the well will be capped and abandoned this spring and therefore the well will no longer be included with the permit and therefore could no longer have any impact on Ms. Schneider's well. A condition has been added to the permit that requires that the Shafer well be abandoned by May 1, 2013. Modifications to the Permit since November 27 Based on Commissioner Demuth's request, staff has added Condition FF which allows the City to collect independent soil and water samples. Staff has added condition GG that prohibits Shafer from using the on-site well and requires that the well is capped and abandoned by May 1, 2013. Shafer agrees with this condition. Staff believes that the recycled aggregate products are being handled in accordance with industry practice and as required in Condition V. Staff has not added any additional conditions regarding RAP in the permit. BACKGROUND Applicant and property owner: Shafer Contracting, Co. Inc. Location: 1/4 mile west of Rich Valley Blvd., 1 mile north of 135th Street East (County Road 38). Area in acres: 93 acre total area, 15 acres active in the middle 500 feet of Phases 3 and 4 and the eastern 220 feet of Phase 5. Comp Plan& Zoning: Agriculture Extraction progress: Phase 5 out of 7 (approximately 55% complete). Nature of request: Annual renewal. Shafer has been working on the site since 1998 and owned the property since 2000. Through September 30, 2012, Shafer had removed and paid aggregate taxes on 120,569 cubic yards of sand. Shafer had not removed any aggregate in 2011 and 104,132 cubic yard in 2010. Shafer hauled back 123,955 cubic yards of clean fill in 2012. Shafer is currently removing aggregate from the eastern 220 feet of Phase 5 and depositing haul back material in the middle 500 feet of phases 3 and 4. Haul back operations have a low elevation of 845 feet in phase 4 and progresses up to an 880 elevation in phase 2. In 2006,the City Council approved this haul back operation to occur from MnDOT construction projects provided that it is clean fill material, does not contain organic matter, and meets a 95% compaction threshold. The haul back material is coming from the I-694 reconstruction project in Arden Hills. Shafer has submitted test results of these haul back operations to confirm that they are meeting the requirements of the permit. 3 Shafer expects the I-694 reconstruction project in Arden Hills to produce a similar demand and amount of haul back material as was generated in 2012. Staff conducted a site inspection on October 9. The mining operation appeared to be conducted in compliance with the permit conditions and no corrections were needed. Staff has received no complaints directly regarding the Shafer operation in 2012. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the small scale mineral extraction permit for 2013. 4 Shafer err } l �� '" � f /h +T".` e } 4kt 11) i .4tA Noraul(--- L�7. C h r � + s fi!4, r•'' 1 4.71,. t 'it Y Zia t 1 I I 1-'f 1.''''. - ''17 1' i 74' Shafer " _.. ...:„..f':::...t-r- y . ` , "' t � Tr 4. 4 ►. ' ' ...e.""rik:± ;5.isil"'t IL '''''''''4e'*,itlt"''C'.' ': \*.:: ' * rMill".-111' '...- ii"i 'Ill- .f..... .4-- 14'. 7. ' t. ' . ,,,,,tirr,.....;,*-1,,,,,i,,,, ,,,I.4 . ::i-:-.....,_ . ,, , :4, T.ii ...:, N,-, . - I, - • --.7c- --4- .-e - . IT i . . 1r . , . I 4. ,. . -., . ,, t,. , ,_ ... \ . - „„,,,,, ' . f et '-''. 4 . ,:. '..---,r,..,. c, ., .-.: mk.k. m...,7-7 ..1- ., , . . i_, , ; ,,, l' .,""..,7.--..* . ,,,..„---3....,:tiri.: ** ., -,..:ki ,,, ., ,c,t, ! $,,..... , - , . i 1 r-- . 4.... .4.... . , 4 . - I- --)4.< ii—&* — imIrl.w, . � r-- ,,d,„ ^a `j ri it_____/ .1. 1 bt te,,,,,„ „v w •' `" ' -Y. , ,... t 444 q =. r . — ,, r L.W - 3 ¢ +T ii'" _ti � � � � - +te"a'� ��hR DATr r o i • rw i a �01/44.-- Y y• • .I - la , i. ,. oirqi ' ...4;*,,f *7...if,. , . 4*tgi ' 1 .'. 4 .. �,..:. 9 . ,/ '# . 1,,,,, i is ,-71..*., "'i. 1,,, '`+z.. 14. J r 4..-- ` I ,S:ti ++•.` r ., t lit,..":"": ' ' f *” ' X. '�!t .4.2.r ' r��/ . it w . wv _,, i", r L � "v' "' s1c I fir . 4 • It ''''-'..4 "."- .it' '., r .,I .•u+�� � �� � `� �4"; � '� e. • � �:441/. ��� }. + KK 144444 Disclaimer:Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not Map Scale a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search appraisal,survey, or for zoning 1 inch = 2001 feet verification. Dakota County assumes no legal responsibility for the information contained in this data. 11/19/2012 Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit 2013 Conditions for Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal SHAFER CONTRACTING COMPANY,INCORPORATED A. Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. (hereinafter "the Property Owner") signs a written consent to these conditions binding itself and its successors,heirs or assigns to the conditions of said permit. B. This permit is granted for the area designated as the middle 550 feet of Phase 3 and Phase 4 and the eastern 220 feet of Phase 5 (19.5 acres), on Exhibit A(Mining Operation and Phase Plan),which is attached hereto as one of the exhibits. Haul- back activities from Mn/DOT projects are permitted only within the middle 550 feet of Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4 (19.5 acres), on Exhibit A. C. The term of the permit shall extend from January 1, 2013 until December 31, 2013 unless revoked prior to that for failure to comply with the permit requirements. D. All required permits from the State of Minnesota, County of Dakota and City of Rosemount(hereinafter "City")or any of their agencies shall be obtained and submitted to the City prior to the issuance of the permit. Failure by the Property Owner to comply with the terms and conditions of any of the permits required under this paragraph shall be grounds for the City to terminate said mining permit. E. The final grading for the permit area shall be completed in accordance with the grading plan Exhibit B (Proposed Reclamation and End Use Plan—Revised 10-31- 06), which is attached hereto, or as approved by the City Engineer, and any other conditions as may be imposed by the City from time to time. F. All gravel trucks and other mining related traffic shall enter and exit the mining area from County Road 71 (Rich Valley Boulevard). It shall be the Property Owner's responsibility to obtain any access permits or easements necessary for ingress and egress. The location of the accesses and/or easements for ingress and egress shall be subject to approval by the City, as well as the County Highway Department or the Minnesota Department of Transportation if applicable or if any changes occur relative to the mining process. The current location of the access driveway is indicated on the Phasing Plan. A stop sign shall be installed at the driveway entrance to County Road 71, in accordance with standards on file with the City or County Highway Department. Warning signs including"Trucks Hauling" shall be installed at the Property Owner's expense as needed in accordance with Dakota County requirements. 2013 Mining Permit Shafer Contracting 2 of 6 G. A plan for dust control shall be submitted to and subject to approval by the City. The Property Owner shall clean dirt and debris from streets that has resulted from extraction or hauling operations related to the Mineral Extraction Permit. After the Property Owner has received 24-hour verbal notice,the City will complete or contract to complete the clean-up at the Property Owner's expense. In the event of a traffic hazard as determined by the City Administrator(or the Administrator's designee) or Rosemount Police Department, the City may proceed immediately to complete or contract cleanup at Property Owner's expense without prior notification. H. The surface water drainage of the mining area shall not be altered so as to interfere, contaminate, or otherwise affect the natural drainage of adjacent property. I. No topsoil shall be removed from the site and the Property Owner shall take necessary measures to prevent erosion of the stockpiled topsoil. The location of the stockpiled topsoil shall be indicated on Exhibit C (Current Operations Map). J. Any costs incurred now or in the future in changing the location of existing public or private utilities including but not limited to pipelines, transmission structures and sewer infrastructure located within the permit area shall be the sole obligation and expense of the Property Owner. K. All costs of processing the permit, including but not limited to planning fees, engineering fees and legal fees, shall be paid by the Property Owner prior to the issuance of the permit. The Property Owner shall reimburse the City for the cost of periodic inspections by the City Administrator or any other City employee for the purpose of insuring that conditions of the permit are being satisfied. The Property Owner agrees to reimburse the City for any other costs incurred as a result of the granting or enforcing of the permit. L. The daily hours of operation for the mining area shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday, subject, however, to being changed by the City Council. M. The Property Owner shall deposit with the Planning Department a surety bond or cash deposit in the amount of Seven Thousand Five Hundred Dollars per acre ($7,500.00/acre) for any active phase in favor of the City for the cost of restoration, regrading and/or revegetating land disturbed by mining activities and to ensure performance of all requirements of this agreement and City ordinances by Property Owner. The required surety bonds must be: (1) With good and sufficient surety by a surety company authorized to do business in the State of Minnesota. (2) Satisfactory to the City Attorney in form and substance. (3) Conditioned that the Property Owner will faithfully comply with all the terms, conditions and requirements of the permit; all rules, regulations and 2013 Mining Permit Shafer Contracting 3 of 6 requirements pursuant to the permit and as required by the City and all reasonable requirements of the City Administrator(or the Administrator's designee) or any other City officials. (4) Conditioned that the Property Owner will secure the City and its officers harmless against any and all claims, for which the City, the Council or any City officer may be made liable by reason of any accident or injury to persons or property through the fault of the Property Owner. (5) The surety bond or cash escrow shall remain in effect from January 1, 2013 until July 31, 2014. Upon thirty (30) days notice to the permit holder and surety company,the City may reduce or increase the amount of the bond or cash deposit during the term of this permit in order to insure that the City is adequately protected. N. The Property Owner shall furnish a certificate of comprehensive general liability insurance issued by insurers duly licensed within the State of Minnesota in an amount of at least Five Hundred Thousand and no/100 ($500,000.00)Dollars for injury or death of any one person in any one occurrence, and at least One Million Five Hundred Thousand and no/100 ($1,500,000.00) Dollars for injury or death of more than one person arising out of any one occurrence and damage liability in an amount of at least Two Hundred Fifty Thousand and no/100 ($250,000.00)Dollars arising out of any one occurrence. The policy of insurance shall name the City as an additional insured and shall remain in effect from January 1, 2013 until July 31, 2014. O. No processing or mixing of materials shall occur on the site, except as approved by the Dakota County Environmental Health Department as incidental to a sand and gravel mining operation at which time such activities will be enclosed with snow, or cyclone fencing or as approved by City staff. Construction of any ponding areas, wash plants or other processing or equipment brought to the site shall require additional City Council approval and notification of adjacent property owners. P. The Property Owner shall hold the City harmless from all claims or causes of action that may result from the granting of the permit. The Property Owner shall indemnify the City for all costs, damages or expenses, including but not limited to attorney's fees that the City may pay or incur in consequence of such claims. Q. The Property Owner shall comply with such other requirements of the City Council as it shall from time to time deem proper and necessary for the protection of the citizens and general welfare of the community. R. Complete mining and reclamation is required in all phases before any additional mining is authorized. Modifications or expansion of the mining areas must be approved in writing to the City. Property Owner shall submit to the City semi- annually a written report indicating the amount of material extracted from the site 2013 Mining Permit Shafer Contracting 4 of 6 for the prior six-month period. After said written report is submitted,the City shall perform an inspection of the site to confirm compliance with the conditions within this Mineral Extraction Permit. S. The Property Owner shall incorporate best management practices for controlling erosion and storm water runoff as specified by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. T. Reclamation requires the replacement of the entire stockpile of topsoil to the mined area, reseeding and mulching necessary to re-establish vegetative cover for permanent slope stabilization and erosion control, provided also that the minimum depth of topsoil shall not be less than two inches after reclamation. Topsoil for reclamation shall conform to specifications on file with the City. No restored slopes may exceed the gradients shown on Exhibit B. U. The Property Owner must show how materials stockpiled for recycling will be processed and inform the City of all stockpiled materials. V. All recycling must be completed within the 280 feet of Phases 2, 3, and 4 as shown on Exhibit D (Projected Operations/Reclamation Status Map). No recycling processes shall be allowed to continue into subsequent phases. W. The Property Owner may not assign this permit without written approval of the City. The Property Owner will be responsible for all requirements of this permit and all City ordinances on the licensed premises for the permit period unless the Property Owner gives sixty(60) days prior written notice to the City of termination and surrenders permit to the City. The Property Owner shall identify all Operators prior to their commencement of mineral extraction-related activities in the pit area. The City shall have the authority to cause all mineral extraction activities to cease at any time there is an apparent breach of the terms of this Permit. X. The Property Owner shall install and maintain a"stock" gate (or equivalent) at the entrance to the property where the mining operation is located. The gate must be secured at 7:00 p.m. and at any time the pit is not in use. Y. There shall be no "haul-back" of materials from any other property or job site that would be imported to the property for fill or other purposes other than incidental concrete recycling as referred to in paragraphs 0, U and V; and topsoil imported for the purpose of re-establishing turf as accepted by the City; and earthen fill materials from Mn/DOT projects that further meets the requirements of testing in documents by American Engineering Testing, Inc., and which is used to replace sand and gravel mined below approved finish grades. Z. No mining activity will occur below the elevation of 840 feet above mean sea level. In no instance shall any mining activity occur within a groundwater aquifer. AA. Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. shall submit quarterly to the City documentation of the American Engineering Testing , Inc. (or other City approved geotechnical testing firm) environmental and geotechnical testing with documentation verifying the 2013 Mining Permit Shafer Contracting 5 of 6 source and quantity of Mn/DOT generated"haul-back"material. These reports shall be provided within 14 days after the end of the quarter. BB. Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. shall submit an incidence report to the City within three days of any testing that fails for contamination or hazardous materials, or will not produce a normal moisture-density relationship for compaction. CC. Shafer Contracting Co., Inc. shall compact the entire reclamation site to a minimum compaction of 95% of maximum dry density. DD. Truck operators within the pit area shall not engage in practices involving slamming tailgates, vibrating boxes, using of"fake"or engine brakes (except in emergency situations) or other such activities that result in excessive noise. EE. Fully reclaimed areas will be permanently seeded within 14 days of final completion. All disturbed non-operating areas shall be seeded at a minimum of once per year,prior to October 1 with Mn/DOT seed mix 130B. Operating areas including working faces, material stockpiles,haul roads, staging areas, and active reclamation areas are not required to be seeded. FF. The City of Rosemount shall have the ability to collect independent soil and water samples. GG. The on-site well shall not be used. The well shall be capped and abandoned by licensed well contractor in accordance with all County and State regulations by May 1, 2013. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. the Property Owner, hereby consents and agrees to the foregoing conditions of said mining permit this day of , 20_. Shafer Contracting Co.,Inc. By: George Mattson,Its President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 20 , by George Mattson, President of Shafer Contracting Company, Inc., the Property Owner, on behalf of the Corporation. Notary Public AMERICAN CONSULTANTS A ENGINEERING •ENVIRONMENTAL •GEOTECHNICAL TESTING, INC. •MATERIALS •FORENSICS May 10, 2012 Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. P.O. Box 128 Shafer,MN 55074 Attn: Mr.Brad Mattson RE: Environmental Soil Screening and Sampling Terminal 2-Humphry Fuel Facility Relocation(Area E) MAC Contract No. 120 4 006 Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport Shafer Job No. 806 AET Project No. 03-04254 Dear Mr.Mattson: Following is a report of Environmental Soil Screening and Sampling activities performed on May 2, 2012, within Area E of the Terminal 2-Humphrey Fuel Facility Relocation project at Minneapolis-St. Paul (MSP) Airport. These services were accomplished with a series of test pits from which soil samples were collected to characterize soils planned for excavation. These services were performed in accordance with AET Proposal No 03-04254 and the Testing and Disposal Plan for this project. Scope of Service AET performed the following scope of services for this project: • Six test pits (TP-1 through TP-6) were excavated at selected locations (about 100' apart) within the project area. Figure 1 depicts the approximate test pit locations. • Soil from within each test pit was screened at approximately 2' intervals with a photoionization detector (PID) equipped with a 10.6 eV lamp. Soil screening was performed in accordance with the attached "General Environmental Sampling Methods." The soil was also observed for physical evidence of contamination, and the soil descriptions were recorded. • One soil sample was collected from each of test pits (TP-1, TP-3, TP-4 and TP-6) and submitted for laboratory analysis. Each soil sample was analyzed for diesel range organics (DRO) silica gel cleanup method, total petroleum hydrocarbons as jet fuel (TPH-jf) silica gel cleanup method, ethylene glycol, propylene glycol, the eight RCRA metals and pH. The soil samples collected from TP-3 and TP-4 were also analyzed for gasoline range organics and the petroleum constituents of benzene, ethyl benzene, toluene and xylene (GRO-BETX). • This report was prepared. 550 Cleveland Avenue North I St.Paul, MN 55114 Phone 651-659-9001 I Toll Free 800-972-6364I Fax 651-659-13791 www.amengtest.com1AA/EE0 tit This document shall not be reproduced,except in full,without written approval from American Engineering Testing,Inc. �r Shafer Contracting AET Project No. 03-04254 May 10,2012 Page 2 of 3 Soil Description The soil descriptions are shown on the attached Soil Screening Data Sheet. Soil Sample Screening Results Soil samples were collected from within the test pits and screened with a PID for the presence of organic vapors. These soils were also observed for physical characteristics and indicators of contamination. The attached Soil Screening Data Sheet shows the results of our PID field screening. • No indicators of contamination such as odors or staining were noted within the test pits. • No PID readings above the background level (0.0 part per million) were not detected within the soil samples collected. Laboratory Analytical Results Soil samples TP#1 (1-3'), TP-3 (2-4'), TP#4 (1-2') and TP#6 (0-2') were collected from the test pits and submitted for laboratory analysis on May 2, 2012. These soil samples were placed in laboratory-cleaned glass jars with teflon-lined lids and delivered to Legend Technical Services, Inc. (Legend). The soil samples were submitted within prescribed holding times and accompanied by a chain-of-custody form. All soil samples were analyzed for DRO, TPH-jf, ethylene glycol,propylene glycol,RCRA metals and pH. Soil samples TP#3 (3-4')and TP#4(1- 2')were also analyzed for GRO-BETX. Legend's analytical report is attached. Table 1 contains a summary of the laboratory results. The following also summarizes the laboratory results. • DRO, TPH-jf, ethylene glycol and propylene concentrations were not detected above the laboratory reporting limit (RL) within the samples submitted for analysis. Additionally, GRO-BETX concentrations were not detected above the laboratory RL within samples TP#3 (3-4')and TP#4 (1-2'). • Laboratory analysis for the eight RCRA metals of the six soil samples submitted for analysis revealed metal concentrations of arsenic, barium, chromium and lead within the range of these elements found to occur in natural soil and at or below the MPCA's Residential Soil Reference Values (SRVs). Concentrations of cadmium, selenium, silver and mercury were not detected above the laboratory RL. • Laboratory analysis for the pH of soil samples revealed pH readings from 7.7 to 8.5 standard units. Shafer Contracting AET Project No. 03-04254 May 10,2012 Page 3 of 3 Discussion and Conclusion Based on field observations and laboratory analysis the soil within these test pits are not considered impacted. Closure We appreciate the opportunity to have been of service to you on this project. If you have any questions regarding the information presented in this report,or if we can be of additional service, please contact Rich Lowe at 651-659-1316. Sincerely, American Engineering Testing,Inc. 111117 • 'c ar• D. Lowe Senior Environmental Scientist Attachments: Table 1 —Analytical Results Figure 1 —Test Pit Locations General Environmental Sampling Methods Soil Screening Data Sheet Legend's Analytical Report CC: Liesch Associates, Inc. Attn: Tom On Janus�°c z z z z umlualas,°o z z z z I paaZ M of en M M � ,O a u m uoigo vii o id U mnlmpi N z z z z 0, a L 1 'd�' u Pull° vii e°`i vii o0 0. ) w oluaSJd 0 M ,o r ,O W O. N e4. M Nl Ci - 11 E es Q ° ,Unala '^ c.D aN L4Ia zz A A zz C N r-- A w o X aualddoaa z z z q z . oaf Gi t, a z C ,� .-c aua1C41� c z z z z co v N (ter T4 4141 a z z aualCX v z z C o g w o A ,� o '�T'., E Z auanloj o z z z z a = U x• © H ?0, N r W auzuag � �o z o E., CV z z z v ' E-4 0 QAAQ >1 aunua g e zzzz 1 es C C Q .i Oa9Z zzzz g 2 - F zzzz ca ° -. E■ 3 - w t a '"' $ °aA z zzzz 0 y _ o oo0 � B a Hd z ..;_c, 00 el -- � N x N `41 M l' fV fV 0.I- Q V p cil ti 7..i Ov X c) a -8 ¢ U d -r M .0. \O C7 E tat apt., r. g0 II cZ c ^ F F = A II it 11 ¢ . rzz �Z . , ..........r..................................... ,......................, 1 . Lu / • / _ , • • .-.,/ cit'C9' S) ,t • ci- • .,,.. .- i i co 0 / a Q 10!) — t ic) c o -,..„ a ;1.4 0 1- "Z ftl .5 0 — .1 ,,c 0 CO 2: o Zs c '( W VI .....>• c . ....• \ . ,. ,-• ' = ,.. ., • . ,/ ,, • ., .„-- a) • a. / i,- . /, i 0 0 (%;') •E' I.. IP .. -g' = al ''' ., . . . / ./ ' 0) 0 4) al / • / . . . . . — ....i = u_ u. fa_ a) U) 1,-'. .,. . . . . , .0-• ,... ...... 0 / ' - H E o. .- • - i .. i" / , O / / /- , . , . C•1 c N - •- a . , . m 2 C7 / / / a) o e . . . , Amik411‘ ,... lat 4 1•.• 76 / / •• • • 0 /,' / .-• , • a • a • • '4' / / f /4: ' •' • 'AV;l' 1. I ' • 0 ' • 4011 0 'I,* • • ,../. • 4 • S e v I • I * Allg . 4: . N•i 1 - ' / i / . • . • X ,L+11 . . • . . • ". • . • 4.p. . • • • • . ,I., b ./ - /(' . . , . . . 04" .' )4,-•• t.4"- t":'•:•4:g', •• -. : - .. t•-.0: . <r * • ...- • L - .. 1 . ' /E /. z., = . . . " • . ...•• 9 f•.,.. I 0 •- / ••■ ;I z,94 I* a in re _ .1 , 4k. . . • n • ".., - •• . 4 / ,7 1 .? i 4.... ._ . ,., „, ,,... imii. -(lavro' ' • do'-,.J.1:04192*.;'.4111 -'% 1. . :7'."' _-.71 / IS' / ilkillii0liti. taw.*3 dot)craze Irk A . 11 • • -7 — I - -•-; — ,..• --- , _ .... ._ "BA ior, ...... - z - misp ,, „_. ., _ ,...... ...... ,... • .• „LI • - - ,y, . ,..., ,.. a ... ., . i• . , . 0-, , ,•• AWN prif . , . . •i • , : - '' ... ... . .: ..... .. ,,,,„,„• -- t-- , ' : i * ,,A = 7,••• .4 . titih• iSti .). .., i ro la •# rill'il 411111113 t ,, -:-:=,_.,----E-.-=,,,:::---_,- all rt3 AO dI21) Orlin 4 rA • 4.- 1 . , a • • . __.. ,, „ , , _,_ ,_ _ ._ __ '*. 4 A. IttAl 1111 41111.7'111111L'Illiii-- • IP -Lai-';',:" * will 417 ..., , I . . t . i a ■ • T. u iiii- 1111121111 111 ,.. NEIRMISEMINRaft •s , ..:410414-.... . tilitKI ..ft.. i .I d A . . . 4 . " ila 1 . . ' fr. Obb- - - :4... , ibikv— . * . . , • ''''.. • 0. 7.1. * 4. • • e o i • # • I.-. ;4- . 000 a •A t, .-4 , , , , , ,,,) 0000610000 . 00 • 00100 :10 • '''.1. •*••••1. ....re, ....? a 01.......•.e....4 era.. ....-Ni.vgt,............ ..............• 4..1.... ■7*...•-•x.i.ra•-TO —•••. . • . • 11, ,..n v g 7 ._ r 3 g n • VI' i- i 8 16 0 . 5 i ,. ... . L E G E N D 88 Empire Drive !-- St Paul,MN 55103 Technical Services, Inc. Tel: 651-542-1150 III-- Fax: 651-642-1239 www . legend -group . com . --- . A CO IS wg -- i M 11111111kplikirithio • lib .... , , . rill: � . iiNikv, , jrTqrpFiEiu : - '-' .. * jo.- 9'. v. &MEM 1 ::46 464 .1444c„:;,.., , , INE111111111111111111111111 r :44‘7‘11EIFECII . ,i7i . - i re. N/A 031:13111dI cnapo r ct 'CNN 1P • 4:16/4 1•11111111111111111111•1111 Nom II11111M=Fr!•I•11 1 'c''I r.-71.77--'i 10 rilOrrallEMIIIII ❑ lir +^ 5tl3NNNOO in oN • 1-4 1 4 - i i '. ., gill; i . d§dig J,of 1 1111. 1st) ' i c.v r...; ,1 E w_ . .I . pin 1 ,,i., 1 e 1 • vl f. Ki ii iiii ..... ....... : 2! rji Men 1 1 I. i 1 I i g glilillin3 . . ., : % Legend Technical Services,Inc. The results in this report apply to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document.This analytical report must be reproduced in its entirety. Page 17 0f 17 t a p o W o �v cp U \ \ \ A h � i i A 2. R a, a txi 4 11\ cn 7,- , : , i \ Q ■ O �j ~ U l \s, , r a a A ___\\ g < ip ,_ r .s, il 5. �.�1Q� \ a/ § N h C C F.12 5 AVMO(V, �y - so O p ` v'` ct 2R MI ate k aoadv 3101,3b1 A3aaanH ¢ � U¢ I a••`t„_ _ !S$ tl g,.?,\ 7) 'Y a "\M 4:41 ...„...) . . 1.1 ca, ‘ 4lIzzi,- . __----"A § n 0 ft Li w 3 r ....._____--- ...,00-. 0 , ....0110 ' ce F----"-------- i5 \ \ AM -----‘'' -21;---1‘ r---.1 [111 w . _________________, Nos 22 r Y W o a. T)J'P1 II r � R q\ / ' \ ..,0041 / COQ '�:�♦4 ' \\\\\\\\\\`.''ii f i< N,\„.:, i 4 '.•••••\ 11,1 ' \V:: .„=; J 1 , i t' l : p ‘,\,,, Q a of Ilki. ` \\\\'' / ----"..---- ' ‘ ..‘ „.._-------- . 0 )111 , ■ ...,_ ----- ---------ri:‘,: IN, „rithLL ....■-,,....___ t.: \___,__--,#.0,--- f.....____ My..,., ., „.____ _.„..- ---------_:., s .......____ 11111111111111111111111111/411.11111 - 1111= INFORMATION FROM ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY (EPA)WEBSITE Basic Information about E. coli 0157:H7 in Drinking Water Introduction One of hundreds of strains of the bacterium Escherichia coil. E. coli 0157:H7 is an emerging cause of foodborne and waterborne illness. Although most strains of E. coli are harmless and live in the intestines of healthy humans and animals, this strain produces a powerful toxin and can cause severe illness. E. coil 0157:H7 was first recognized as a cause of illness during an outbreak in 1982 traced to contaminated hamburgers. Since then, most infections are believed to have come from eating undercooked ground beef. However, some have been waterborne. In 1999, people became sick after drinking contaminated water in Washington County, New York and swimming in contaminated water in Clark County, Washington. Information about the health effects of E. coli 0157:H7, and actions you can take to protect yourself and your family from E. coil infection is provided below. Questions and Answers What is E. coil and where does it come from? E. coil is a type of fecal coliform bacteria commonly found in the intestines of animals and humans. E. coils short for Escherichia coli.The presence of E. coli in water is a strong indication of recent sewage or animal waste contamination. Sewage may contain many types of disease-causing organisms. What are fecal coliforms? Fecal coliforms are bacteria that are associated with human or animal wastes. They usually live in human or animal intestinal tracts, and their presence in drinking water is a strong indication of recent sewage or animal waste contamination. How does E. coli or other fecal coliforms get in the water? E. coli comes from human and animal wastes. During rainfalls, snow melts, or other types of precipitation, E. coif may be washed into creeks, rivers, streams, lakes, or ground water. When these waters are used as sources of drinking water and the water is not treated or inadequately treated, E. coli may end up in drinking water. . -- - I i' Q �� � I" e P 7 °y8®p b j�i$� gi/_ter I �' ®tl' lilt. Y ' I haal till]@ g rEc iI E 5 5 H f F'' ^:k� -.!1 ° is°jl crog7 ;I ob, a B �.�'� 53@ ;;:\ 1�,I m ffIIllhI� ; .I ! I 09.0 �j i\`-� -- « __ ♦ ', _..-- • ..��,�..-'_-7,-,. 'mom WS °�,� �\ `i ice_ i}/ .4...--.5,--,•;..�. .1�� r.-4 J�zj`7 l G a$ e o gam," \ 4.74..�°•\`` 1 -- � 9> ��e� +� •, � W i.'1 1J^r:i�_ i °` VJ lv�. G�a��47e O - �.� ,, 11y^` J%`r , ` .--=.-\� Lam.• F�4 iIF E el .El tv.9,-\---'s.-,au.,.\,-- I �, a-___-, 'II 17.^"...,--2=‘, _4_ \_ __- 1416 . - <, ' �'� q 8.z ?, ' ° ?\ I . v _Lp .- .1..a_.......___ -__ PPy W`, r? -- - 'd °l Uo- [,,..„ - - - �,-ter'ti c a e A."-- f \ c y cd cz P-1 � 11- _ Y_ Fc• ' 'y / „ I O l ' I cv bit y%Trh'-i+ 4 -r ' ' ' G O O a c. P W I _____--_ _____- .-%--,--, .. _------- - (ill =Is —"ffr-r—r---"--- .11. — , ---— - 1 1 ._ 111Ki-, f).:1 i 1 t 'I: g' ; _ 4 I 1=1;- 1 I t, •I 1 ( 'II • z ,:-,) ' N 1 IT , 1 f3. 74 5,1 g-e' ' -4,--'.---■ it_ , ,, r:k ----— -- Z • _- 1_ / \ ■., ' ga 421 EN7-• - !.'''-`■,,,,^,,,,..-:- i - ,ts 2 .L,, ,.6 ( 1 IP ..._. , : , g r. j gl. civoz7iy, I gi- 611 _-:- I 1 i p/,1 , '-',\\•‘:,„4 e-< --._ ._. r o'c' 1 , 1 __.,■1 ,..,..1. Z-g --7,-,-•-- 1 /--.... , - . ', 'i 4',vo,, /Ai 14 F 1-1 \,—. 7: 11 / '---.:. ,----_,_:„..; , A t of.s.ti. 'Xt.!' -a r.:2 ,,,,,,- i . _ _ I "A T.,'„', 12 . ,I • 1 t'.1''`.2,1) ..,'$ t. i i E' -.11 / 7 L--,---1 - I ill ro ?iv.; ii i . , , )...1 ,,, , 0 , ;.2 .s.,4 b --,--,_.2 ; I i\ a; ,1'41'%,-.,_.; 7/1,7/4.,,It $ ,.., .T., -e p i / --- _-■ _ , -,-, , 2 • I 1 1 !g F:h . r4;,0*0-, '7,- .p --fik..u.•ir" i ', I., - - ' 1 k i t I \ 41 ' / /I ) ' R '' 'I '1\L'-1 :,‘Z' F'., ..•-• tl,tii - ' . ./.1,,,,, . ,,- ,.. 1 1 -...1!, 1 0- _-- .-1 ''.', / - / 1 / I ( ,.- 1 0 ', P E i-. „1 --, , .1 L, i , 1-,-,;,,-, , , ., 101-.2 1".. '4'/';: V I- - J ,r, .,,,.; ) __,•,„ , k , ,t,_,•_:_, : 0, .■•i, -1—c---:`-''-' • ,.- 1 I 1 I ''' .'\ th / I - , °3 ''0-'"%-"%.%) 11 67 91 , rr----r,1---9,1 1 ' '.4cS 1 1-I., ,-, .-,._'--k,_...._.r: , " " 'F.1 EY,:,-21 ,-, . -' 212 „V 1 .2 --t. -,t.• ,,t._ , _ 11. I a% ,e3 _ .-..! 1.,n Ig - <'-''', if ---7.-=_, -.--./ 1 I ( `' t ---• t.., ?..7. -0.i -_-_ _./:.4.c, _ 2s: ,._. (It 0,--- -- _... =------': il g Ro._ - '. ,,,/ : -willibia as 1:11.ii 4 E . :-.3 *a. . =6- — 31,,,,1,,/: ,y% 1 - E E ./ I 1 ' \ ' ' ' .F,, 1... ,g,U. q(";'V' .'----Z---'<.■-'---'-■-- --..--."'-'''''g' \.' , . z_5• 1,4. riik---------.._"----______ :;,..,:-.11 4, .ar,.4-- -4,,__.:15___/: '11-,-',.,..,L-- 1 ,. ,.,.: ',A'‘`..iV y. / /- -'itr-.--"=•=5= z' E" g .f, JUL 2 ' i." 7'. 9- E t 2 ,,- n‘;',_ g.1-4 0'2 2' -g '' " '' --' ' •- r, Y ..,. c 194 N*‘if,43,- -A '%. fl, ° \\PAX,*: :‘ t i ' . c E •;•.12:E. g . =• g. ......, _ . .. z, : . 1.t7„, -,,..,-c-•,-..,1 ..;.,-7\ ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i,,,, , ,, , 4,,,,, ,,,,,..,,,,,,i ,-,-, F,..,,,---•:1,;!,f,,O,,,,,,L‘,„,q.• \ i •/ -AtiFeV/i.,,A/ 04,,,t,,A.;',,,,','til . , . .9,• -''''''.?:‘;`;.'W:- •\ ,/ ,,j,ri.1,-/ •7,,,i47/4--V"*"!'4gril „,,,;:.:N,T.,,,,,.-.;-,..‹.:„.,,,,. , , ‘..„441,,1,?,_,_,,,,.,,i,is 1,,,:ii,7/1/7ficvri■ 1 I , re::'4 ., s „.,•;‘,A , , ,.,,,,,,.,,,3.:,,,,,,:,...• • ,,, !,,,:wi.\",:,,, I;i, _ 1 1, !ii)i ' ,,..„..0.••••,..•.,.;\;,.,,,,,,,r3,•.,.t. '',,,;:::',,,„, ,,,,k, \\'A I,\•,. .s,;:„,\;:',..,R,,:,','1 1 c i ■ Z „\,,:,,,,\,,,,,,,, tri,,1 ,--n,,,,,I,,.‘,\\,,i,...,,,, •1 1 1, ,',s.,:r\-;:::•\l'sv,‘'q ,-0 i 4. ' i • `=:-1'1 -Vit,11111-1Vt'll ' r)t,to. sit ig: )-4.. ,', ,,, :..-;..,,.,,,n,t -.6- -, ,..--, ,,,,I,11,I.0,(:.„,,.:„:,!,/.;,,,i 7, ,.,,,I,,,,,,,1,,,,,.„,,, 2, ,,,,,,, , ,,,,,,,v,,.. „..... ,._.; ;,-t• .1 -i- - , . 0 -'i: 11,.!leV,..-4...- f.W:i /; ,.- "'' .4( ../ /1 ;',,.1, :g4,',.”i'i,1 ,-,-.7., a-, 21 I, 1.. ,. , ,E, 1=1 jq ,f,.,:,*k.•.1,,;7/1ivii t // pi(%"- -" 1 r 2 •,__, ,__. . ,,, ,,. t),, , , 11 /70,,_,,,,$-,..,,r.• , . ..._, E3 1 I ' j `'''.--:=-I(ig,'171tii_011^",`(*V,`,/d !I ''';'f --------;-- ` /t 1 1 r•-•''4/i rl'82";,i?,;!7,1';f1. 1 u '--; a (v., :I.:. :0-,-I iii,(61`i,''‘V"',/‘,,l• ■k'''--*-7---A-110 1 ' II' i`:// 031,0,14*/,':;11 1 8 ,?_i i E 1_, ,..,' LI ■i,;k.tkt ■.'.k‘'t:=1,^■•\ ei" ,...: ?/%74.61P'j,eill;Vii i E, E 1 F-..,-Z [410. ‘-i.f:--,:;.C,.1,:',,..4`,`\ - ,..j., v;,./, • , - m 0 --6 vi,,...,-,,,,m.:7:,;,',‘,74\•4;,:\'; 7,••••n---;7420/;44,,i1 &I- 2 t t;.-., ti rIl''''',1,!, 1 i 1,■1(Ov_Viiill IIIii\ ,,11,4_,,,r,r,-.' „ 0:::,0,,',..C■Vi,;"111' 10,'‘, \ --1-//,,,--; q.k.,,\11‘,',101 P, 1, .„ ,°1--:--:?•rptP\stX1 :'''■!''''' , '-`•,_,_1-__t_t.://1 I I 4'::V4.g f,",, ,r I ..,_.- , I 1 1 ,,111)1',, ,i)11,11,11, , N's,,,s.„ , ( , \111141,101-if. ,,_,,/, _ I 'i(IA.q■,*(4,,b,g; 'I, 1 . .-/-4-;5-o'1 )1„.,j,',;01,111;,.? .9 1,, 'rf2 i 6 1 ti.,y/11( . :_ 23',--,; ) ;;; ,,t4 ..i "-- ti_, e,,, 7. 1-,, , , '1 lil.y ,,* ._ _------„. .7 /; ../:,-,;,..‹.-,-44.- i.', . - iLl 11, I v ---- 11 'ill'"4IN . -----• -'-r'-------;.> y { '‘'‘'.7i,..-'„6-,<:-,.,- e,,,,,., - 07, 8 f i i 1 I ' - 'e',..s'41 ',4,0... - 'V..---=: L-- ,'' '. "‘ :"P -44% .7. -2 ■1-1 \-r- ' ,,ifigi,l'it-42:(v.4 ,,,,,, __,,2:■ II, .iii 1 it Oi S'‘1,1 [ ) 1., '4,--- \ ,',10 'II 1 Olaf,I-' 7 9 1.-- , -.."' ci- E----- "rA,/,(^/icke-% Cr\ '-''''.41:1r4t7'0-r..--:N•q-1-----...-.:.,:"--5-:.----.54.-1.5-t.A.a.W.:_- .-5."--- : :<//I,Pl'a.4-4' ')1(,1 '..:. ,._ ' 7 7 V 1-- 0 - .....i ,-, - 0,.4,-,. r'ei'c,'.;;,k.,,,z'•'z'4..'„'T,,-t'";-:'.- -zt'i:i,,--,,-,t:z]--zr.."/' j.,7,7/7:),;„.''(1,K-14, 2T,,, z Q ,, , ,' : ! *-cl Lye: oltil ,n4t.1 'Zio rilr-' ::1- 1---4 rj — '-'R I/n.--%%".2 '-'_P-..-q-72- *Zio"--..■,---,-,-,----..1=-----.-=_---------</5/1/1 l 11.1 P.:,- .p _. 1 !A ) 5 , e ci:-0 c, C/) 1--1 1--' 0 , . _1.)11200.1/5' 3 01‘1.1133it HDOX 0 cr,j , '.._ ‘-- =1 1--c 1P-'\Ai ___ tValyet eaeiraevag9 „ TOZ November 1,2012 Mr. Eric Zweber City of Rosemount 2875 145th Street West Rosemount,Minnesota 55068-4997 Re: Mineral Extraction Permit 12500 Rich Valley Boulevard Dear Mr. Zweber: As required by condition"R"of our mineral extraction permit,we are writing to you about our activities at the site during the past 6 months. We are currently removing sand from the eastern 220 feet of phase 5. Through September 30th we removed approximately 120,569 of sand and paid aggregate taxes for that material to Dakota County. Through September 30th we have placed 123,955 cubic yards of haul back material which was reported in detail under a separate cover. We have not used the Shafer well since 2009 and have had no complaints from adjoining properties. The Ista and Schneider wells were sampled on August 20, 2012, as has been the procedure since the implementation of the "haulback" provisions in 2006. The results of the tests are enclosed. Should you have any questions,please feel free to contact me at 651-257-5019. Yours very truly, SHAFER CONTRACTING CO.,INC. By: Aippr- rank J. Weiss III 30405 Regal Avenue, P.O. Box 128 • Shafer, MN • 55074 Phone: 651-257-5019 • FAX: 651-257-3778 An Equal Opportunity Employer ,i i 1 .i.4 . . , d -. - (I^ z I i i; cc /___.-_ ei 73. i J „.., M ' .. pc a ri :. 1 ,.'. ' f h: _ `L I d ifl• o J i 1L ? l N I o I I 14 4 4; / Vz '1 ' ^ f, - -N-'\,�\\_`•\, 4`` ) -• cv 8 H l'/&----I\( •N //),” F I --,.1 „..;-,--______ 0 ,, ( , ),))/v„c_... „,,,,i,r,„:=---c---;,,,,r___;\ ,-,,,,,)-- ...\ ,,,„ ...,, \ ,, .\1, '....`,.■ ■.,_/',,/) (.■\\:,:......-__—/)( , 1 PI fi,,(//7",,---,---m VA 0 /,),,,,:z-,:., ___(.3)i ..\ \-,--- 1‘ ) ,5 ,,., \,,.. v,1 i.,7_ 1,,, ,.I I,/,, _—_, \s.,\, /7,,,--::::,,,;\\ \\ --3 /1i/1r) -,,\ 1 \-.., ic:,?, 0 � ,;,1/� : �.t. I = — `� ter. -,,,Tr / 7 ((>1./, X 111 V, � \�) � r---- \, ( 1,....,..._,,,3„,., \,\,„‘„.,2:::_____....-_-_,,-_- _,,,,c,—_-_,■)..-;,--„:„....;_-_-_--,2...„--1-;21,---„,..-.-,—,...,--, ,i--1,,),;.;\`)... \\ , , -- _}.;T/� J)-i r--� / i /,.?(' ;ice�- , ��i ."� -_ f----- • r \,� 1/ �// -� (! " ._. o • l 9 0 z( 0 Q , cc m r f / g• / / U CC 4V o Q co • ° ) JPI ° I $ D ° it c. t ° f 4 n CI 1 it o C I 11 ,-' / ' ,o 1 , f1 I I h : ( ; , .l , 41 11 F Q i '••:, z,/ •..,...,-•-•-. ... ....:\:k's\'\ -1 1.. \ 1. II ° ° o o ro . �m t t 2. - '/ I!. I I A - / II tt,ii\V,:(:_./z6::::..::: :.--,..-17.-..::...:-1..:.::.:j_T--,:f,...•-_-.:,:j;1.‘•.s,:::. Q):::;„.":,-Tc.$) -.1..„''..,....:i.".:::.•,-.'/.1 ',..., 1 i,/{/0.,}js'l')..(iii 1 i ) , ol .1 F— Csi �{� \ W N i , , a.,,,,,,, \ \\, (----\\\ ,/,„,,, ))/.:1(,,,,,f((( -) ),,,,-;___....._.-.:\ ____./..,1\i‘,,c ........._... -....„/„-: , .-‘ •'•' '''''';''',/./'-.--------- \ k) \\\'‘‘•• ,_/// I \‘'-- -' i I,( , \( 1/ ' \ \\ ;;"" 1,�!%�/,ice . `\ . l i/ %%%%� : fit- f `'� 1 \ �}( / //( �'`, j c� O I _ .1 r i! i.,,", •., .-- \ , I 1 , 11 4 \‘\'•._O ` .:i i// �'k----� Z Z f/ \ \�`\�' I t 1 i) )/I 41 11i� \-,.—..�'/ .:\ \ I �%:sj1 i(". \\Q���� ' 0 O !j l 1111010 J(1 1r II I1 L 1/ I`/\1.-,,\....-.-'--.-s.—..•.....f....—,...,■.•.•_—.,.•-,,-.;.--.-., , , , i ,/,‘,/,N./ ,----..;---.,(--:.::::::.-::::—..::---,,1 '‘..--- )\,\:-,-, '\ \—\■ 1 0, ' ' ' 1 ( (l 1 1 1 i'18/./7/- ---- \i—,"5---- -:. •-,,,,,,ri—'2".2--.:::::.s.:17_7:-_—_,•—<: :::..-% ; •,,/ . ..,,,,,, ii 1 f(o(-- 1, \\\._1 ,,-,----,,,,, ._.,-,-,--==--1. ,- ', , 1 ) /— 1`j-::.\\,.,\N'‘,.,,,{.,,''•\ ) ' ! i \--_cam= �^--4...;..„,,1....;....:,;)..'.,;,,-;7;.(!.,,.,,//!i . .•\\=_ VI cam, �. f_`:" '- _—/% „ ' \\ ''—"_ ,:\\\` `�-_./ r^ice:•'.;. _:: ,,, c,\\,1‘,,, \. 1I1V ;,/„/".:: /ice'"/)I /I pir \.J 0 n ;— \�% %_\ -r%�1 ' %%�`1 \ '-:j((; ' ' . ir Ai)„/'M ONN1-- j ,- o A∎I E RIM CONSULTANT', L\(,I\I:ERI\G •EN IROrMENI,\;. •GEC TECHNI,At_ TESTING. I\c. •h,ArERIALs •F:. Fr< December 10,2012 Frank J. Weiss Shafer Contracting P.O. Box 128 Shafer, MN 55074 Re: Recycled Aggregate Production and Stockpiles Frank J. Weiss American Engineering Testing, Inc. (AET)understands Shafer Contracting Inc. is producing crushed aggregate products using material originating from existing transportation infrastructure that is being rehabilitated or reconstructed. The materials being recycled are concrete, bituminous and aggregates that are crushed and blended to produce marketable aggregate products. Natural aggregate sources are not renewable resources and these materials should not be considered demolition rubble or a waste product. Recycling and reusing of pavement materials is encouraged by State government,which establishes contract language mandating that material from its construction projects become the property of the contractor and require recycling to the extent possible. The Minnesota Department of Transportation(MnDOT)continues to research and modify its specifications and designs to incorporate and make greater use of recycled aggregate products. Consequently recycled aggregates products are produced and used in nearly all infrastructure construction projects. Existing MnDOT and local agency infrastructure projects call for recycling by pulverization and reuse of resulting aggregates in-place. These efforts are for the purpose of reducing pressure on landfill operations and extending the usable life of scarce aggregate resources, Direct disposal of these materials in landfills is discouraged. Based upon studies conducted by the MnDOT and the Florida Center for Solid and Hazardous Waste Management,the apparent risk to groundwater resources is nearly non-existent for contamination from material stockpiles. To address concerns expressed by Minnesota State Legislators and concerned citizens regarding water runoff from stockpiles of salvaged pavement materials,MnDOT sponsored research to identify environmental runoff characteristics. This research was conducted with the Minnesota Department of Health and titled "An Investigation of Water Quality in Runoff From Stockpiles of Salvaged Concrete and Bituminous Paving,"(Sadecki, Busacker, Moxness,Faruq,Allen). Their study tested water collected directly from the base of the stockpile with the intent to analyze the highest concentrations expected in runoff. The results for stockpile runoff were compared with Minnesota standards for surface waters. This study identified the potential concerns in the runoff for suspended solids,pH (values ranging from 9.3 to 9.8 exceeding the value of 8.5 for surface waters), and possibly chromium. The report states it is unknown whether 555 Cleveland Avarua North l St. Paul, MN 55114 Phone 651 659 9')01( loll Fru, 900.972 635=1i Fax 651-659-13791 ww nr amengt st.coin l AA;EEO • or not chromium is of concern. The report for the Mn/DOT study is available on the internet at httpl/www.lnb.org/pdt7199631.pdU. A later study funded by the Florida Center for Solid and Hazardous Waste Management focused on leachable pollutants from reclaimed asphalt pavement(RAP), where the primary chemicals investigated were VOCs, PAHs, and heavy metals (Townsend, Brantley (1998), "Leaching Characteristics of Asphalt Road Waste," Department of Environmental Engineering Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL). The authors of this study concluded: "The results of this research project indicated that reclaimed asphalt pavement of the nature examined in this study poses minimal risk to groundwater as a result of pollutant leaching under normal land disposal scenarios. The results of the leaching tests indicated that in most cases RAP would pose minimal environmental risk when used as fill in regard to the leaching of the pollutants." The report for the Florida study is available on the internet at littp://www.bevondroads.cotnivisual assets/RAP Leachability Studv.PDF. Both of the above studies indicate that the apparent risk of leaching contaminants from material stock piles is nearly non-existent. In addition none of the EPA National Primary Drinking Water contaminants, for which we test, has been detected above regulated levels except total coliform (all wells) and fecal coliform(Ista-Berglund) well. The EPA Primary Drinking Water standard for total chromium is 0.1 milligrams per liter, which is intended to be protective of chromium in its most toxic form. Chromium analysis can be added to the list of analyses if requested. Direct surface runoff from the stockpile areas to surface waters are not anticipated based on following the best management practices developed for the NPDES/SDS permit regarding stortnwater runoff. Furthermore, in our opinion, sufficient vertical separation to groundwater, and lateral separation between the pit and neighboring wells, exists to filter infiltrating water of contamination if any does exist. AET trusts this information will be supportive to the better understanding of resource management and the need to reduce waste stream materials. If we can be of further assistance to you, please contact us. Sincerely/ /�` /' Joseph F. Korzilius, P.E. Principal Engineer American Engineering Testing EXCERPT OF DRAFT MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 27,2012 5.b. Request for Renewal of the Shafer Contracting Mineral Extraction Permit for 2013 (12-33-ME). Senior Planner Zweber stated that the applicant, Shafer Contracting,has applied for the annual renewal of the mineral extraction permit for their property located one mile north of 135th Street East and 1/4 mile west of Rich Valley Blvd. (County Road 71) and that staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the renewal of the Shafer Contracting, Inc. Mineral Extraction Permit for 2013. Commissioner Miller asked why the two permits, Shafer and the Vesterra-Stonex permit,vary quite a bit in conditions. Mr. Zweber stated that one of the reasons to review the ordinance in the spring is to discuss a more consistent formatting for the small scale permits. However,Mr. Zweber stated that there is increased neighbor's concerns and information involved with the Shafer permit which explains some of the differences between permits. Public hearing was opened at 7:08p.m. Gary Ista, 12131 Rich Valley Boulevard. Mr. Ista stated his well has tested positive for coliform and E Coli the last two years and he requested to have the well bleached. He stated he has spent over $1000 to get his water clean and would like assistance from Shafer in finding out why there are problems. Mr. Ista further stated that he has lived on the property since 1998 and the water has gotten worse in the last two years. He has spoken with George Mattson of Shafer about shocking the well. Joan Schneider, 12255 Rich Valley Boulevard. Ms. Schneider stated she has lived on the property since 1977 and her water was perfect until Shafer installed an illegal well on their mining property. She states she hasn't seen any reports on the tests of her well that Shafer is supposed to conduct. Ms. Schneider further stated she has seen truckloads of rubble coming into the mine from the airport and that Shafer is not following the 7-7 hours of operation on the weekends. She stated she is concerned with the chemicals in the rubble and how close it is to her well. She's frustrated the City has not done anything to protect her or her neighbor. Applicant, Frank Weiss, of Shafer Contracting, home address of 1549 Sherman Lake Road,Lino Lakes. Mr.Weiss stated that Shafer hasn't used their well for several years and have been testing the neighbors'wells consistently. He stated he hasn't received any complaints on the wells or the hours of operation but he will look into it. Chairperson Powell asked why the well on the mining property wasn't capped and whether or not the rubble from the airport is being tested. Mr. Weiss responded that Shafer can cap the well if the City would like them to. With respect to the rubble,Mr.Weiss stated that the rubble consists of pavement removed from the airport that doesn't absorb fuel or de-icing chemicals and they do not test it. He stated there hasn't ever been a problem with it and they recycle and remove it as soon as there is a market for it. Commissioner Demuth asked for a list of the parameters being tested for in the well water. Mr. Zweber showed a list of chemicals being tested for and the results from the Schneider and Ista well tests. Commissioner Demuth asked if the list should be examined closer to possible add chemicals that are on the MPCA list. Gary Ista, 12131 Rich Valley Boulevard, approached the Commission again and stated that the second time his well tested positive for bacteria,Shafer said it wasn't their responsibility to correct it. Mr. Ista requested a commitment from Shafer to investigate why the wells are being contaminated before the mineral permit renewal is approved. There were no further public comments. MOTION by Miller to close the public hearing. Second by Weber. Ayes: 6. Nays: None. Motion approved. Public hearing was closed at 7:24p.m. Chairperson Powell asked staff for a brief history on this item. Mr. Zweber gave a brief overview of the past communications regarding the Shafer well. He stated there is a specific report number at the Police Department for any complaints on the Shafer mine which are then forwarded to staff to report the complaint. Commissioner DiNella asked which company conducts the testing and whether or not the County can be involved. Mr. Zweber stated that Shafer uses American Engineering Company for their testing who in turn has Pace Analytical conduct the water testing. He further stated staff can contact the County if so instructed by the Commission. Commissioner DiNella asked if this item could be tabled to the December Planning meeting until more information from the County could be obtained. Commissioner Miller asked what the requirement is for testing incoming backfill and whether or not it includes testing for diesel range or gasoline range organics. Mr. Zweber replied that recycled aggregate product (RAP) material from the airport is not required to be tested because it's not used as fill but recycled and hauled offsite. Commissioner Miller expressed his concern with stormwater running from the RAP into the lower elevated pits which could possibly be contaminating the neighboring wells. He requested a condition be added to the permit stating that no wells are allowed on the mining property and that any existing wells will be properly abandoned within 60 days. Also, he requested a condition be added that states any stormwater runoff from the RAP shall be drawn away from the mining pits. Commissioner Demuth requested a condition be added stating the City shall have the ability to conduct independent soil samplings. Chairperson Powell stated he would like to table the matter to allow staff to address the neighbors' concerns regarding the well contamination. MOTION by Powell to table the Shafer Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal for 2013 to the December 11, 2012,Planning Commission meeting. Second by Demuth. Ayes: 6. Nays: None. Motion approved. EXCERPT OF DRAFT MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DECEMBER 11,2012 5.a. Request for Renewal of the Shafer Contracting Mineral Extraction Permit for 2013(12-33-ME). Senior Planner Zweber stated that the applicant, Shafer Contracting,has applied for the annual renewal of the mineral extraction permit for their property located one mile north of 135th Street East and 1/4 mile west of Rich Valley Blvd. (County Road 71) and that staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the renewal of the Shafer Contracting, Inc. Mineral Extraction Permit for 2013. This is a continuation of the discussion that began on November 27, 2012. Mr. Zweber reviewed the testimony given at the public hearing on November 27,2012,and reported to the Commission the meetings that took place since that meeting. Mr. Zweber further reviewed the changes to the permit as a result. Commissioner DiNella asked how often samples would be taken with respect to the new condition allowing the City to collect independent soil samples. Mr. Zweber stated Staff does not intend to collect samples unless there would be an indication from the mining operator's testing that the City need to do so;the condition simply allows the City the ability. Chairperson Powell acknowledged that Gary Ista was present in the audience and asked him if he had any questions or comments for the Commission. Mr. Ista stated he did not. MOTION by DiNella to recommend the City Council renew the Shafer Mineral Extraction Permit for 2013, subject to the terms and conditions in the attached 2013 Draft Conditions for Mineral Extraction. Second by Miller. Ayes: 4. Nays: None. Motion approved.