HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.c. Shafer Contracting Renewal of Mineral Extraction Permit for 2016
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y
Planning Commission Meeting Date: November 24, 2015
Tentative City Council Meeting Date: December 15, 2015
AGENDA ITEM: Case 15-47-ME Request by Shafer
Contracting to Renew their Mineral Extraction
Permit through 2016.
AGENDA SECTION:
Public Hearing
PREPARED BY: Kyle Klatt, Senior Planner AGENDA NO.
5.c.
ATTACHMENTS: Site Map; 2016 Mineral Extraction Permit;
Shafer 2015 Permit Renewal Request Letter;
Shafer 2015 Activity Letter; 2015 Current
Operations / Reclamation Status Map; 2016
Proposed Operations / Reclamation Map; Soil
Test Report from American Engineering
Testing, Inc.; August Inspection Photographs
APPROVED BY:
K.L.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to recommend that the City Council renew the Shafer
Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit for 2016, subject to the terms and conditions in the
attached Draft 2016 Conditions for Mineral Extraction.
SUMMARY
The Planning Commission is being asked to consider a request from Shafer Contracting Company, Inc. to
renew the existing Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit for its operation located within the 12000 Block
of County Road 71 (one mile north of Bonaire Path East along Rich Valley Blvd.) in the northeastern
portion of Rosemount. Small Scale Mineral Extraction is permitted in the City as an Interim Use within
specified areas, and the permit for such uses expires after one year. The Shafer site has been operating as a
mine for several years, and the request for renewal is consistent with similar renewals that have previously
been issued for the site.
BACKGROUND
Applicant and property owner: Shafer Contracting, Co. Inc.
Location: ¼ mile west of Rich Valley Blvd., 1 mile north of Bonaire Path
East.
Area in acres: 93 acre total area, approximately 15 acres active in the western 100
feet of Phase 4 and all of Phase 5.
Comp Plan & Zoning: Agriculture
Extraction progress: Phase 5 out of 7 (approximately 60% complete).
Nature of request: Annual renewal.
Shafer has been working on the site since 1998 and owned the property since 2000. Through September
30, 2015, Shafer has removed and paid aggregate taxes on 62,808 cubic yards of sand and has placed 2,184
cubic yards of haul back material on the site as well. The following is a summary of the recent activity on
the site going back a few years:
2
Year Extraction (cu yd) Haul Back (cu yd)
2016 (Projected) 90,000 90,000
2015 (through Sept.) 62,808 2,184
2014 59,629 621
2013 123,955 29,274
2012 120,569 123,955
Shafer has indicated that they are not presently using the pit, and that the amount of activity projected for
2016 will be dependent on future construction projects. The applicant has estimated that if they are
successful at securing certain projects in 2016 that there will be up to 90,000 cubic yards extracted from
the site and 90,000 cubic yards of haul back material brought to the site next year. Please note that the
applicant expected material from the 35E reconstruction project north of Downtown St. Paul to be moved
to its site in 2015; however, the material from this work was found to be contaminated and was therefore
not brought to Shafer’s Rosemount site. This change is the reason for the 2015 numbers being
substantially less than what was projected during the last renewal.
Shafer is currently removing aggregate from Phase 5 as identified on the 2016 Proposed Operations and
Reclamation Plan and depositing haul back material in the middle 500 feet of phases 2, 3, and 4. Haul
back operations have a low elevation of about 850 feet in phases 3 and 4, and progress up to an 875
elevation in phase 2. In 2006, the City Council approved the haul back operation if it complied with the
following standards: from a MnDOT construction project, is clean fill material, does not contain organic
matter, and meets a 95% compaction threshold. In 2012-13, the haul back material was coming from the
I-694 reconstruction project in Arden Hills, which was substantially complete by the beginning of 2014.
Shafer had submitted test results of the haul back material in 2013 to confirm that they are meeting the
requirements of the permit.
Due to the small amount of haul back in 2014, Shafer did not perform a compaction test last year and this
material was to be included with any testing done in 2015. The applicant has provided an environmental
screening and sampling report for the 2015 material, but has not yet submitted the required compaction
testing report. The applicant has again asked that due to the small amount of haul back material brought
to the site in 2015 that they be allowed to perform the compaction testing in 2016 once a more substantial
amount of material is available on site to test. Staff has modified the previous condition of approval CC to
require that the soil compaction tests for the 2014 and 2015 haul back material be submitted as part of any
testing performed next year. Staff is comfortable forgoing this testing for another year; however does
expect to require the testing as part of the 2017 permit review regardless of the total amount of haul back.
In accordance with the City’s previous review of the Shafer mineral extraction permit, Staff visited the site
at three different times in 2015, and most recently on November 13th. Additionally, three members of the
Planning Commission toured the site in September with the applicant and staff to view the current
condition of the property. Photographs of the site taken by staff in early August are attached to this
report, and help document some of the ongoing mining, restoration and reclamation work on the
property. The mining operation appears to be conducted in compliance with the permit conditions and no
corrections are needed. Staff has not received any complaints directly regarding the Shafer operation in
2015.
During public hearings for the mining renewal, the Planning Commission has received comments from
neighboring property owners concerning dust on the site and the condition of a well on property adjacent
to the mining operation. Staff has not received any questions or complaints about the mine throughout its
operation in 2015 and has not received any comments due to the posting and mailing of the public hearing
3
for the mining review. These issues have previously been addressed as follows:
Dust - Staff and the applicant have noted that Shafer applies water and calcium chloride as
required by the Ordinance and permit. Staff pointed out that it is impossible to completely
eliminate dust from mining operations and that the Ordinance intends to limit dust through
limiting the size of the area open to mining and requiring dust suppression, both of which Shafer is
complying with.
Adjacent Well - A neighboring well has previously been tested by Dakota County and on at least
two occasions (most recently in 2014) these tests have indicated the presence of total coliform in
the well. In 2012, City staff visited the site with Jeff Luehrs of Dakota County Environmental
Resources to assist in the potential coliform source review. Mr. Luehrs at that time stated that
there are many possible sources of coliform and that it is highly unlikely that it would come from
somewhere as far away as the mine. The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) states that total
coliform is “common in the environment (such as soil) and the intestines of animals and are
generally not harmful”. MDH recommended disinfecting the well with chlorination.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the renewal of the Shafer Contracting, Inc. Mineral Extraction Permit for
2016. This recommendation is based on the information submitted by the applicant, findings made in this
report and the conditions detailed in the attached memorandum.
Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit
2016 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 western 100 feet of Phase 4 and
all 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, 2016 until December 31, 2016
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.
2016 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 b y 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.
2016 Mining Permit
Shafer Contracting
3 of 6
(3) Conditioned that the Property Owner will faithfully comply with all the
terms, conditions and requirements of the permit; all rules, regulations and
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, 2016
until July 31, 2017.
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, 2016 until July 31,
2017.
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.
2016 Mining Permit
Shafer Contracting
4 of 6
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
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 O, 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.
2016 Mining Permit
Shafer Contracting
5 of 6
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
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. Shafer shall submit a compaction test
for the 621 cubic yards of clean fill brought in into the site in 2014 and 2,184 cubic
yard of clean fill brought to the site in 2015 by September 30, 2016.
DD. Truck operators within the pit area shall not engage in practices involving slamming
tailgates, vibrating boxes, using of “jake” 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 MnDOT 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.
2016 Mining Permit
Shafer Contracting
6 of 6
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:________________________________
Frank Weiss, Its President
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF _________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _________ day of
____________, 20____, by Frank Weiss, President of Shafer Contracting Company, Inc.,
the Property Owner, on behalf of the Corporation.
________________________________________
Notary Public
I--()_
z
0
C/) z
I
0
J
L()
~
0
N
/Y) .... ...,.,
"0>
c6 ....
\O'l
Ill
~ 'l) £)) <;t
.. /
//
/
CX) CX) CX)
-·~ \!) '2
.'/: ·~-'> -..... ~ C:/. t .''
4-<;(_
-' "/,
-----------'
.· ~
N
.<D .
g'l
-
:. ,.-,i, ~
'I ,
CX)
<0
O'l
e
J
l ..
~
j
~ r;.
----"' ~
0
~
~
l.-:t
~
::> u
~
~
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
0
<D
0
0
N
0
0
0
-
',-.: ·, CX) CX) i. ,f CX)
I--a..
z
0 L()
(/) -r-
0 z N
I
0 --, ·I \j
>
5
~
N ,....
CTI
~ 1.'.
'/
ro
<f
0'1 . '
/
'<!'--
<f -<n
------
0 ,.... CX)
4 -·
~
~
-
.--·
i'
<f
L()
(Tl
0
~
~
0 CX) CX)
N
J.D.
_Q'\
'I
) ;I
-~
/I;;' ,,
;, I I I l ''
CX)
1.0
CTI
--
1
~
!
~
'!)
f.£
-' i
!
~
A ~
1 p.. .,
~
0
N
0
0
0
-
0 I-0
UJ (()
w
lL
z
w
_J
<( u
(/)
I
I
0
0
N
0
0
0
N I
' I
N I
I
550 Cleveland Avenue North St. Paul, MN 55114
Phone 651-659-9001 Toll Free 800-972-6364 Fax 651-659-1379 www.amengtest.com AA/EEO
This document shall not be reproduced, except in full, without written approval from American Engineering Testing, Inc.
CONSULTANTS
·ENVIRONMENTAL
·GEOTECHNICAL
·MATERIALS
·FORENSICS
May 4, 2015
Shafer Contracting Company, Inc.
P.O. Box 128
Shafer, MN 55074
Attn: Mr. Chris Tredinnick
RE: Environmental Soil Screening and Sampling
MnDOT SP 6280-308
I-35E Reconstruction/Cayuga Street Interchange
St. Paul, Minnesota
Shafer Job No. 817
AET Project No. 03-05422
Dear Mr. Tredinnick:
Following is a report of Environmental Soil Screening and Sampling activities performed on
April 7th and 8th, 2015 in the area of the above referenced project site in St. Paul, Minnesota. Our
services were accomplished with a series of nine test pits to characterize soils planned to be
excavated and removed from the project site.
PROJECT INFORMATION
The project site involves the improvement of the intersection of I-35E with Cayuga Street and
Pennsylvania Avenue. The locations of these test pits are on the western side of 35E south of
Maryland Avenue.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this soil screening and sampling is to provide a general environmental
characterization of the excavated materials that are planned to be hauled to the Shafer Pit in
Rosemount.
SCOPE OF WORK
AET performed the following scope of services:
x We observed the excavation of 9 test pits (TP-9 thru TP-17). The test pits were
completed to depths of up to 12 feet. Approximate test pit locations are shown in the
attached figure.
x Soil samples collected during test pit operations were field screened for the existence of
organic vapors through use of a photoionization detector (PID). Soils excavated from all
test pits were also observed for visual and obvious olfactory evidence of contamination,
and the soil descriptions were recorded.
Environmental Soil Screening and Sampling
I-35 E Reconstruction/Cayuga St. Interchange, St. Paul, Minnesota
May 4, 2015
Shafer Job No. 817
AET Report No. 03-05422
Page 2 of 4
AMERICAN
ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
· Two soil samples were collected from test pits TP-9 to TP-15 and one sample was
collected from each TP-16 and TP-17. These samples were submitted for laboratory
analysis of diesel range organics (DRO) – silica gel cleanup method, volatile organic
compounds (VOC) and the eight Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
metals.
· This written report was prepared.
SOIL DESCRIPTION
The soil descriptions are noted on the attached Soil Screening Data Sheet.
SOIL SAMPLE SCREENING RESULTS
Soil samples were collected from within TP-9 through TP-17 and screened with a PID equipped
with a 10.6 eV lamp for the presence of organic vapors, and the soils were observed for physical
characteristics of contamination. Soil samples were collected and screened according to the
“General Environmental Sampling Methods” attached. Screening results are presented on the
attached Soil Screening Data Sheets. A summary is as follows;
· PID readings of 0.0 to 0.5 parts-per-million (ppm) were recorded from all the soil
samples collected from the test pits. These readings were at or below background
readings at the site.
· No obvious odors were detected in any of the test pits.
· Evidence of staining was observed in some test pits and noted on the soil screening data
sheets.
· Test Pits TP-12, TP-13, TP-14, TP-15 and TP-17 noted obvious debris (brick, ceramic,
ash, tires and glass) within the test pits.
The following GPS locations were provided by URS/AECOM:
o TP-9 – N 16338150.86’ E 1617230.72’
o TP-10 – N 16338357.71’ E 1617231.1’
o TP-11 – N 16338553.6’ E 1617260.4’
o TP-12 – N 16338532.9’ E 1617373.8’
o TP-13 – N 16338332.2’ E 1617384.6’
o TP-14 – N 16338113.3’ E 1617372.6’
o TP-15 – N 16337790.8’ E 1617352.8’
o TP-16 – N 16339347.5’ E 1617392.8’
o TP-17 – N 16339307.7’ E 1617396.1’
Environmental Soil Screening and Sampling
I-35 E Reconstruction/Cayuga St. Interchange, St. Paul, Minnesota
May 4, 2015
Shafer Job No. 817
AET Report No. 03-05422
Page 3 of 4
AMERICAN
ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
LABORATORY ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Sixteen soil samples were collected for laboratory analysis on April 7th and 8th, 2015. The soil
samples were analyzed for DRO – silica gel cleanup method, VOCs and RCRA Metals. The soil
samples obtained for chemical analysis were placed in laboratory-cleaned glass jars with teflon-
lined lids. The samples were delivered to Legend Technical Services, Inc. (Legend) within
prescribed holding times and accompanied by a chain-of-custody form. Legend’s analytical
report is attached. Table 1 attached summarizes the analytical results. The following is a
summary of the laboratory results;
· DRO concentrations were detected above the laboratory reporting limit (RL) within three
of the test pits. Test pits TP-9 (0’-6’), TP-13 (6’-12’), and TP-14 (0’-6’) had DRO results
of 16 mg/kg, 69 mg/kg and 9.1 mg/kg, respectively. The concentration of DRO in the
other samples were less than the reporting limit.
· VOC concentrations were not detected above the laboratory (RL) within the soil samples
submitted for laboratory analysis.
· Laboratory analysis for the eight RCRA metals of the soil samples submitted for
laboratory analysis revealed metal concentrations of arsenic, barium, cadmium,
chromium, lead and selenium. With the exception of two sample results {TP-11 (6’-12’)-
Arsenic 22 mg/kg and TP-13 (6’-12’)-Lead 150 mg/kg}, the values were within the
ranges of these elements found to occur naturally. Mercury and silver were not detected
above the laboratory RL.
· Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) was completed for lead on sample TP-
13 (6’-12’). The result of 0.26 mg/L of lead is below the hazardous waste criteria.
DISCUSSION
To assess the RCRA metal concentrations, we compared the detected concentrations to
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) established June 2009 Tier 1 Residential Soil
Reference Values (SRVs), Industrial SRVs and established June 2013 Screening Soil Leaching
Values (SLVs). Tier 1 Residential and Tier 2 Industrial SRVs are based on the assumption that
human exposure to the contaminants occurs in a residential or industrial setting, respectively.
Soil Leachate Values are designed to be screening criteria to evaluate soil contaminant leaching
risks to groundwater. When a representative site contaminant concentration exceeds the SRV,
unacceptable risk to human health and the environment is concluded to exist. Noted
concentrations of metals did not exceed the Tier 1 Residential or Tier 2 Industrial SRVs. Sample
TP-13 (6’-12’) exceeded the 20x rule which required the sample to be submitted for TCLP
analysis. The sample result was less than the applicable hazardous waste criteria concentration
of 5 mg/L.
Environmental Soil Screening and Sampling
I-35 E Reconstruction/Cayuga St. Interchange, St. Paul, Minnesota
May 4, 2015
Shafer Job No. 817
AET Report No. 03-05422
Page 4 of 4
AMERICAN
ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC.
AET recommends separating the remaining soils and hauling soils that meet Dakota County’s
Off-site reuse of minimally contaminated soil from development projects and road construction
projects, to the Shafer Pit in Rosemount. The test pit locations that meet criteria are:
· TP-9 (0’-6’ and 6’-12’)
· TP-10 (0’-6’ and 6’-12’)
· TP-11 (0’-6’)
· TP-12 (6’-12’)
· TP-13 (0’-6’)
· TP-14 (6’-12’)
· TP-15 (6’-12’)
· TP-16 (0’-6’)
This material is recommended to be hauled to the Shafer Rosemount pit, provided that it is free
of solid waste, debris or any other sign of contamination. If impacts are discovered then material
in the vicinity of the contamination should not be taken to the Pit as “Haul Back” reclamation
soil. All areas determined as impacted (Table 1) should be removed and disposed of at a landfill
or otherwise approved location.
The AET field technician noted the location of the test pits in the field by locating the
approximate location on a construction map previously provided by Shafer. AET was provided
GPS locations by AECOM representative Mr. Tom Moha.
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 Al Kestler at (651) 999-1391.
Sincerely,
American Engineering Testing, Inc. Reviewed By
Allan A. Kestler E.I.T. C. V. Howard III, P.G.
Environmental Engineer II Senior Geologist
Attachments: Figure 1 – Test Pit Location Map
Table 1 – DRO, VOC and RCRA Metal Analytical Results
General Environmental Sampling Methods
Soil Screening Data Sheet
Legend Technical Analytical Reports
!A
!A
!A !A
!A
!A
!A
!A
!A
N
W
e s mi
ns
t
e
r
S
t
N
M
i
s
s
i
s
s
i
p
p
i
S
t
E Cook Ave
E Jenks Ave
E Lawson Ave
Norpac Rd
E Magnolia Ave
E Jessamine Ave
E Geranium Ave
E Rose Ave
Lo
ri
e
nt
S
t
Maryland Ave
%&c(
TP-9
TP-10
TP-11 TP-12
TP-13
TP-14
TP-15
TP-16
TP-17
0 300150
Feet
±
Map Reference:
U.S. Geological Survey and Digital Aerial
Solutions, LLC: USGS High Resolution
Orthoimagery, Minneapolis-St. Paul,
Minnesota, Spring 2012
File: Cay_Fig1-Samples.mxd Date: 04/17/2015
AMERICAN
ENGINEERING
TESTING, INC
Test Pits Location Map
AET Project No. 03-05422
I-35E Reconstruction
Cayuga Street Interchange
St. Paul, Minnesota
Figure 1
Date: 04/17/2015
Environmental Soil Screening and Sampling
Legend
!A Test Pit Location (Approximate)
TC
L
P
M
e
r
c
u
r
y
A
r
s
e
n
i
c
B
a
r
i
u
m
C
a
d
m
i
u
m
C
h
r
o
m
i
u
m
L
e
a
d
S
e
l
e
n
i
u
m
S
i
l
v
e
r
L
e
a
d
"
H
a
u
l
B
a
c
k
"
M
a
t
e
r
i
a
l
t
o
R
o
s
e
m
o
u
n
t
P
i
t
D
i
s
p
o
s
e
d
o
f
o
t
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
p
e
r
M
n
/
D
O
T
D
i
s
p
o
s
a
l
Reasoning
SR
V
-
1
N
E
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
1
.
5
2
0
1
8
,
0
0
0
2
0
0
6
5
0
7
0
0
1
3
0
0
1
,
3
0
0
SR
V
-
2
N
E
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
0
.
5
9
1
,
1
0
0
2
5
8
7
3
0
0
1
6
0
1
6
0
SL
V
-
1
N
E
v
a
r
i
o
u
s
3
.
3
0
5
.
8
0
1
7
0
0
8
.
8
3
6
2
7
0
0
2
.
6
0
7
.
9
0
27
0
0
TP
-
9
(
0
-
6
'
)
16
ND
N
D
4.
0
3
1
ND
13
1
3
ND
N
D
-
X
TP
-
9
(
6
-
1
2
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
2.
4
2
2
ND
7.
2
4
.
0
ND
N
D
-
X
TP
-
1
0
(
0
-
6
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
2.
9
6
9
ND
12
2
9
ND
N
D
-
X
TP
-
1
0
(
6
-
1
2
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
3.
7
5
0
ND
10
ND
N
D
N
D
-
X
TP
-
1
1
(
0
-
6
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
4.
4
4
7
ND
13
6
.
5
ND
N
D
-
X
TP
-
1
1
(
6
-
1
2
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
22
1
3
0
0
.
8
9
2
0
4
6
4
.
3
ND
-
X
Ar
s
e
n
i
c
TP
-
1
2
(
0
-
6
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
4.
6
4
4
ND
13
2
2
ND
N
D
-
X
de
b
r
i
s
t
o
p
6
'
TP
-
1
2
(
6
-
1
2
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
6.
0
5
6
ND
15
3
3
ND
N
D
-
X
TP
-
1
3
(
0
-
6
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
4.
6
3
3
ND
9.
4
2
1
ND
N
D
-
X
TP
-
1
3
(
6
-
1
2
'
)
69
ND
N
D
3.
0
1
1
0
0
.
3
5
1
3
1
5
0
*
ND
N
D
0
.
2
6
X
de
b
r
i
s
b
o
t
6
'
a
n
d
DR
O
/
L
e
a
d
TP
-
1
4
(
0
-
6
'
)
9.
1
ND
N
D
14
2
8
ND
15
1
7
ND
N
D
-
X
de
b
r
i
s
t
o
p
6
'
TP
-
1
4
(
6
-
1
2
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
4.
2
6
6
ND
13
5
6
ND
N
D
-
X
TP
-
1
5
(
0
-
6
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
4.
7
4
7
0
.
3
4
1
1
6
5
ND
N
D
-
X
de
b
r
i
s
t
o
p
6
'
TP
-
1
5
(
6
-
1
2
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
1.
7
3
8
ND
11
1
6
ND
N
D
-
X
TP
-
1
6
(
0
-
6
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
1.
9
3
0
ND
13
5
.
6
ND
N
D
-
X
TP
-
1
7
(
0
-
6
'
)
N
D
N
D
N
D
2.
1
3
0
ND
12
1
3
ND
N
D
-
X
de
b
r
i
s
t
o
p
6
'
Un
i
t
s
e
x
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
i
n
m
g
/
k
g
ND
=
n
o
t
d
e
t
e
c
t
e
d
a
b
o
v
e
l
a
b
o
r
a
t
o
r
y
r
e
p
o
r
t
i
n
g
l
i
m
i
t
s
(
R
L
)
SR
V
-
1
=
I
n
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
S
o
i
l
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
N
E
=
S
R
V
n
o
t
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
SR
V
-
2
=
R
e
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
S
o
i
l
R
e
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
V
a
l
u
e
*
=
A
b
o
v
e
t
h
e
2
0
x
r
u
l
e
r
e
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
T
C
L
P
SL
V
-
1
=
S
o
i
l
L
e
a
c
h
i
n
g
V
a
l
u
e
s
2
0
1
3
N
A
=
n
o
t
a
n
a
l
y
z
e
d
Di
s
p
o
s
e
o
r
"
H
a
u
l
B
a
c
k
"
RC
R
A
M
e
t
a
l
s
S
a
m
p
l
e
D
R
O
-
S
i
l
i
c
a
G
e
l
C
l
e
a
n
u
p
V
O
C
s
Ta
b
l
e
1
-
A
n
a
l
y
t
i
c
a
l
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
(
D
R
O
,
V
O
C
s
,
R
C
R
A
M
e
t
a
l
s
)
Sa
m
p
l
e
s
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d
A
p
r
i
l
7
-
8
,
2
0
1
5
AE
T
P
r
o
j
e
c
t
N
o
.
0
3
-
0
5
4
2
2
ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING METHODS – GENERAL:
EXCAVATIONS/TEST PITS, HAND AUGERS, SURFICIAL SOILS, STOCKPILES
Page 1 of 1
(02/2013) AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING, INC.
Not all methods summarized on this information sheet are conducted at all sites. Special conditions may also occur
which require modifications to these methods. Any descriptions of field methods within the report text take precedence.
Site Safety Issues
Safety is of paramount importance on construction, demolition, or other high-traffic sites with potentially unstable
ground. Frequent visual and verbal contact is maintained with operators of heavy equipment in the sampling vicinity.
Care is taken not to enter depressions or scale mounds that would constitute confined spaces, where engulfment,
immersion, or falls are possible, or where harmful vapors may collect. Most observations and soil collection are
performed from a stable and level ground surface with the help of heavy equipment operated by an excavation contractor.
Contamination Reduction
Sampling devices (except heavy equipment in most cases) are cleaned between sampling points to minimize cross
contamination. The cleaning procedure may consist of an alconox detergent-water wash using a brush, followed by a tap
water rinse. Certain types of projects may entail more or less stringent decontamination procedures.
Soil Collection
Most soil samples from excavations or test pits are collected directly from heavy equipment (e.g., excavation bucket,
loader, or bulldozer), giving preference to soils that have not touched the equipment. A hand auger is used to complete
shallow soil borings in locations of limited vehicle access. Hand auger borings are advanced manually, typically in 6" to
12" depth intervals. Soils are collected directly from the hollow auger barrel. A spade shovel is used to collect surficial
soils (i.e., up to 6" depth). In many cases, soil samples can be collected by hand without added equipment.
Impacted soils or buried debris may be present in the ground that are not observed due to the spacing and depths of
sampling points. Best judgment determinations, based on known site conditions and past experience in similar situations,
do not guarantee identification or removal of all impacts.
Soil Classification
As the samples are obtained in the field, they are visually and manually classified by the field staff. Representative
portions of the samples may be returned to the laboratory for further examination and for verification of the field
classification. Soil classifications, visual/odor observations, and information on any groundwater encountered are
reported on the Soil Screening Data Sheet or other field notes.
Soil Sample Vapor Screening
Soil samples collected directly or from equipment are screened with a photoionization detector (PID) for the presence of
organic vapors with ionization potentials less than the lamp voltage. The PID is calibrated for direct reading in parts-per-
million-volume (PPMv) of a benzene equivalent. Soil samples are collected and screened according to the bag-
headspace field screening procedure, which consists of placing freshly collected soil into a polyethylene Whirl-Pak or
freezer “baggie” (i.e., bag), sealing the bag to contain an air pocket (i.e., headspace), and allowing 10 to 20 minutes for
vapors to disperse from the soil to the headspace. The highest reading upon inserting the PID probe into the bag
headspace – typically attained within two to five seconds of probe insertion – is recorded on the Soil Screening Data
Sheet or other field notes. Excessive moisture, temperature extremes, ambient vapors, or other unusual field
circumstances can affect screening results.
Other Field Screening
For certain sites, field screening may be conducted for additional parameters in accordance with AET’s Field Screening
Methods Supplemental information sheet.
Soil Sampling for Chemical Analysis
Soil samples obtained for chemical analysis are collected directly or from the sampling device into laboratory-prepared
containers with appropriate preservatives, according to laboratory protocols. The samples are delivered to the analytical
laboratory within prescribed holding times, accompanied by proper chain-of-custody forms.
AET Job No DATE:
PROJECT:WEATHER:
LOCATION:TECHNICIAN:
Instrument Type: (circle) PID FID OTHER:
Instrument ID#:
ID
TP-9
TP-10
TP-11
TP-12
TP-13
TP-14
TP-15
TP-16
TP-17
NOTES:
Page 1 of 1 REV 042005
trace red color within peat
glass bottles, concrete, scrap metal
recommend skimming top fill
Fill
Sandy lean clay brown with rootlets
Organic silt, grey
Sand and gravel with mixed organics, some debris
organic black topsoil, rootlets
Grass line, sandy organic, black with rootlets
Silty sand brown to dark brown with debris
Top soil
Sand with silt, black organics, flag stones and debris
Grass line, black organics and rootlets
Peat with debris
Urban fill, with debris, sandy soils, dark brown, black
Sand, mostly medium grained, brown 0.3
0.2
0.2
Organic Peat, brown to black fiberous
Silty sand with some gravel and black organics and
rootlets mixed
11-12
0-1.5
1.5-5
Fill
Fill
SD
Fill
SD
Fill
Fill
Fill
Fill
Fill
Fill
Fill
Fill
CA
4.5-6
6-11
0-1
1-5
5-7
7-10
10-11
0-7.5
7.5-10.5
10.5-12
0-7
7-12
0-4.5
Fill
0-5
Silty sand with some gravel, brown to dark brown tree
stumps, roots and organics
0-5
FA
4/7-8/2015
Depth (feet)GEOL. DESCRIPTION PID (ppm)
Sunny 40°
ALK
14-0060
03-05422
Cayuga Interchange - Soil Screening
Saint Paul, MN
PID 10.6 eV
Reviewed By: TH
CA
SD
Fill
SD
4-6.5
5-6.5
SOIL SCREENING DATA SHEET
Organic Peat, woody fiborous, brown to dark brown
Silty Sand with black organics, trace rootlets and sticks
Organic Peat, woody fiborous, brown to dark brown
Organic Silt, grey
Remarks
10-12 CA Sand mostly fine gained, grey 0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.5
6-12
12-13
5-10
0.2
0.2
0.2
ash, brick
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.3
wood, tile, other solid waste
brick, tires, concrete, stained soils
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.3
ash layer from 4-5 feet
0-4
4-5
5-12
Fill
Fill
CA
Silty sand with gravel, rootlets, ash, debris
Silty sand and ash layer
Sand, mostly medium grained, brown
CA Sand mostly medium grained tan, moist
Fill
0.2
Topsoil
Silty sand with some gavel, brown
Test pits were completed over two days the estimated test pit locations can
be found on the attached Figure.
1.5-4 Fill Silty sand with gravel, brown, with debris brick and plastic0.0
0.0
0-1.5 Fill Topsoil 0.0
Sand mostly medium grained, tan, miost
1
Shafer Mine Inspection August 2015
Looking East from the Working Face
Looking North at the Edge of the Mine Working Face
2
Shafer Mine Inspection August 2015
Looking Northeast from Mine Floor towards 12255 Rich Valley Blvd.
Looking West from the Mine Floor
3
Shafer Mine Inspection August 2015
Looking West from Mine Floor (Phase 3 and 4 Restoration Area)
Haul Back and Reclamation Area