Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.h. Shafer Contracting Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal for 2016EXECUTIVE SUMMARY City Council Meeting Date: December 15, 2015 AGENDA ITEM: Case 15-47-ME Shafer Contracting Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal for 2016. AGENDA SECTION: Consent PREPARED BY: Kyle Klatt, Senior Planner AGENDA NO. 6.h. 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; Excerpt of the Draft November 24 Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. APPROVED BY: ddj RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve renewal of 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 City Council 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. NOVEMBER 24 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING The Planning Commission reviewed the Shafer request and conducted a public hearing concerning the application at its November 24th meeting. Chair Miller inquired when the last time the property been inspected. Staff said it was inspected about two weeks ago to check for compliance. Miller asked how the city will ensure they stay within compliance. Staff stated that the City conducts site visits and the applicant is required to submit reporting every 6 months. Staff also noted that the applicant had received a substantially lower amount of haulback material in 2015 than was originally projected due to the excavated material from one of Shafer’s projects being contaminated. In this case, the applicant demonstrated compliance with the City’s permitting requirements by rejecting contaminated material that is not allowed to be stockpiled at the site. Commissioner Freeman inquired what compaction testing is and its importance. Engineer Hatcher stated that it is needed so soil won’t settle and change elevation for future building. Commissioner Kenninger inquired if there were any police reports this year. Klatt stated there were none. Commissioner Miller 2 inquired about dust control. The applicant’s representative Frank Weiss stated they have also added millings on road and calcium chloride on roads within the mine, and hauled over 180,000 gallons of water for dust control. There were no public comments received prior to the meeting or during the public hearing. Commissioner Kenninger asked if the adjoining residents were notified and if any comments were received. Staff confirmed that there were none. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit renewal for Shafer subject to the terms and conditions in the attached Draft 2016 Conditions for Mineral Extraction on a 6-0 vote. Commissioner Kurle was absent. 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: 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 3 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 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 and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Shafer Contracting, Inc. Mineral Extraction Permit for 2016 based upon a review of the information submitted by the applicant, the mineral extraction standards in Section 11-10-4 of the City Code, City Police records and the attached permit. 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 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. 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 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 n s 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 r i e n t 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 Ca yuga 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 N D 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 13 0 0 . 8 9 2 0 4 6 4 . 3 ND - X Ar senic TP - 1 2 ( 0 - 6 ' ) N D N D N D 4. 6 4 4 ND 13 2 2 ND N D - X de br 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 N D N D 3. 0 1 1 0 0 . 3 5 1 3 1 5 0 * ND N D 0 . 2 6 X de br 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 br 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 br 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 br 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 NE = 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 NA = n o t a n a l y z e d D i sp 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 EXCERPT OF DRAFT MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 24, 2015 5.c. Request by Shafer Contacting for a Small Scale Mineral Extraction Permit Renewal for 2016 (15-47-ME) Senior Planner Platt summarized the staff report for the Planning Commission. Chair Miller inquired when the last time the property been inspected. Klatt said it was inspected about two weeks ago to check for compliance. Miller asked how the city will ensure they stay within compliance. Klatt stated that the City conducts site visits and the applicant is required to submit reporting every 6 months. An example with when they had haulback their testing found it was contaminated and they reduced their haulback and had additional testing done. This example shows that the applicant is following protocol and the review process is working. Commissioner Freeman inquired what compaction testing is and its importance. Engineer Hatcher stated that it is needed so soil won’t settle and change elevation for future building. Commissioner Kenninger inquired if there were any police reports this year. Klatt stated there were none. The public hearing was opened at 7:07 pm. Public comments: Frank Weiss was on hand to represent Shafer Contracting. Commissioner Miller inquired about dust control. Weiss stated they have also added millings on road and calcium chloride on roads within the mine, and hauled over 180,000 gallons of water for dust control. MOTION by Kenninger to close the public hearing. Second by Henrie. Ayes: 6. Nays: 0. Motion Passes. The public hearing was closed at 7:09 pm. Additional Comments: Commissioner Kenninger asked if the adjoining residents were notified and if any comments were received. Lindquist confirmed that were none. Motion by Kenninger to recommend 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. Second by VanderWeil. Ayes: 6. Nays: 0. Motion passes.