The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About6.d Flint Hills Resources Conditional Use Permit for Storage Tanks, 04-75-CUPCITY OF ROSEMOUNT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FOR ACTION Citv Council Meetina Date: January 18. 2005. AGENDA ITEM: Case 04 -75 -CUP Flint Hills Resources AGENDA SECTION: Conditional Use Permit for Storage tanks Consent PREPARED BY: Rick Pearson, City Planner. -AGENDA,NJB. e i ATTACHMENTS: Draft Resolution, Draft PC Minutes from 12 -28- 04, Location map, plan view. Artist renderings, APPROVED Standards for conditional uses, EAW and related correspondence. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the conditional use permit for Flint Hills Resources subject to conditions. ACTION: ISSUE Flint Hills Resources is requesting a conditional use permit (CUP) to construct two large storage tanks near Rich Valley Blvd. (County Road 71). The CUP is required for multiple buildings or uses in the General Industrial District. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (Executive Summary attached) for the entire Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel fuel project. Included are Findings of fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order documenting the conclusion that the project does not have the potential for significant environmental effect. The state environmental review process is complete with the decision for a Negative Declaration for an Environmental Impact Statement by MPCA. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING On December 28, 2004, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing as required by ordinance for conditional use permits. Lowell Miller Stolte representing Flint Hills Resources as the applicant was present to answer questions. No one other than other F.H.R. personnel was present. The Commissioners questions concerned the height of the enclosure dike, and comparisons with existing tanks behind the proposed tanks. Staff noted that the dikes will be 8 feet. High and the existing tanks to the rear are 30 -40 feet in height. Satisfied, the Commission unanimously adopted a motion in support of the recommended action. Subsequent to the Planning Commission recommendation, the applicant has indicated that MPCA is unlikely to amend the NPDES permit. Their comments are based upon the premise that the entire stormwater area is self- contained, and nothing is discharged off -site. Therefore, the condition that formerly required amending the NPDES permit has been revised to require maintenance of the dike to ensure its integrity for containment of stormwater and leakage of petroleum product. The tank area is enclosed by an 8 -foot high dike that will contain any leakage of the tanks in addition to stormwater from significant rainfall events. Discharge occurs at private FHR ponding basins. BACKGROUND Applicant Property Owner(s): Location: Area in Acres: Structures: Comp. Guide Plan Desig: Current Zoning: Planning Commission Action: Lowell Miller Stolte for Flint Hills Resources 600 feet east of Rich Valley Blvd., 1 mile north of 135 Street East. Approximately 16 260 ft. diameter x 66 ft. height (500,000 Barrels) 160 ft. diameter x 66 ft. height (200,000 Barrels) General Industrial General Industrial Recommendation of approval with conditions (5 -0) SUMMARY The two new storage tanks are being constructed in the "tank farm" area east of Rich Valley Blvd. (County Road 71), along the west side of the refinery area. They will be the closest tanks to Rich Valley Blvd., and the larger of the two will be similar in size as the Butane tank, currently the largest tank east of Rich Valley Blvd., and west of the railroad tracks. The new tanks are part of a series of projects in response to Environmental Protection Agency mandates to produce Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) fuel. These tanks will be the most visible components of the various projects. The Planning Commission has reviewed other recent projects that are related to ULSD. The zoning text amendment for temporary buildings, the "Sprung steel' buildings and the trailers on the east side of the refinery near US 52 will be supporting the construction process. The entire project includes a hydrogen plant, a hydrocracker, the two storage tanks and expansion of an existing cooling tower. The two tanks will both be 66 feet in overall height. The sides of the tanks will be 62 feet tall, with an additional four- foot tall conical roof. The larger of the tanks will be 260 feet in diameter with a storage volume of 500,000 barrels. The smaller will be 160 feet in diameter with a storage volume of about 200,000 barrels. Comparisons Setbacks (from C.R. 71) Maximum Height (bldgs) General Industrial District Standards 75 ft. 75 ft. 500,000 Barrel Storage tank 730 ft. 66 ft. overall 200,000 Barrel Storage tank 640 ft. 66 ft. overall The Flint Hills property holdings extend more than two miles along County Road 71 in this area. The specific storage tank site is approximately 1/3 mile from the northern property line, and 1 mile from the intersection with 135 Street East. Therefore, side and rear yard setbacks were not considered an issue. However, one or both of the tanks are on or very near a section line, which essentially constitutes a property line. Flint Hills Resources owns both sides of the line, but they are technically separate parcels. The westerly parcel fronting FA along County Road 71 is approximately 28 acres is size. The easterly parcel is about 34 acres is size. Platting a 62 -acre lot is unusual, just to erase the section line for the tanks. As an alternative, City Attorney Charlie LeFevere has suggested a restrictive covenant that would be a condition of approval that would be recorded with the County ensuring that the two parcels will not be sold separately, or otherwise be treated as a single parcel of land to accommodate the building permit for the tanks. The tanks will initially contain gas oil or fuel oil and will be equipped with internal floating roofs to control emissions. The tanks will not contain finished product, rather they will be essentially holding tanks for "off- spec" product. The smaller of the two will be directly linked to the hydrocracker. The larger tank will be available for other product that will otherwise be cycled back through the refinery during turn around or other significant events. Existing diesel product tanks will be utilized to store the finished low sulfur diesel fuel product. They will be constructed from prefabricated carbon steel sheets on concrete ringwall foundations, with a double bottom system design with a synthetic liner in the containment area. Site Grading Considerations Both tanks will have a containment area consisting of eight -foot high earthen dikes surrounding them to contain any spillage or leaking from the tanks. The area enclosed by the dikes covers a large area of approximately 25 acres extending beyond the footprints of the tanks. The earthen dikes have roads on top for access by emergency vehicles. Both tanks are accessible in four locations within 100 feet by the design of the dike system. Any leakage would be intercepted by the liner system before ground contamination would occur. A security fence encloses the perimeter of the site. The stormwater run -off generated by the tanks and the area contained by the dike system will be directed to the refinery's internal stormwater treatment system. The contained area appears to exceed the standards for storm water holding of 100 -year rainfall event and ten day snow melt. However, the Engineering department requires the storm water calculations to verify that the system conforms to City standards. Also, the expanded dike area will be an addition to the N.P.D.E.S. permit area. Therefore, the City must be copied with the update. Conditional Use Standards The Commission shall recommend a CUP and the Council may issue such CUP if it finds that such a use at the proposed location: 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the city. The new tanks will be located in the west tank farm of the refinery within a patrolled area secured by fencing. 2. Will be harmonious with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and city code provisions. The new tanks are utilizing existing vacant land designated for general industrial use, and the plan indicates a significant setback and can allow for screening and landscaping at the edges along Rich Valley Blvd., consistent with the Industrial 3 policies on the Comprehensive Plan. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible or similar in an architectural and landscape appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. The tanks are accessory to the refinery, a permitted use in the General Industrial District, 4. Will be served adequately by existing (or those proposed in the project) essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage, structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools. Flint Hills Resources maintains a private on -site fire fighting service. The refinery also has a self contained stormwater management system that collects and treats all stormwater that would be shed by the new tanks. 5. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, material equipment and conditions of operation that will be hazardous or detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. The findings of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet prepared by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency are attached to support the finding. 6. Will have vehicular ingress and egress to the property which does not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic on surrounding public streets. No additional traffic will be generated by the tank construction. Construction related traffic will be accommodated by facilities on the east side of the refinery in a contractor parking lot available for the ULSD project, and available overflow remote parking. 7. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance and will comply with all local, state, and federal environmental quality standards. The findings of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet are attached to support the finding. 8. These standards apply in addition to specific conditions as may be applied throughout this code. LANDSCAPING The site is currently covered with grasses, clover, sparse low -lying shrubs, and along the eastern perimeter of the site, immature poplars. The vegetation is self- seeded. Various sections of the east side of Rich Valley Blvd. have been planted with multiple rows of pine trees. However, there are gaps along County Road 71, particularly in the vicinity of pipeline corridors and related facilities. Security concerns will likely curtail additional mass evergreen plantings. Staff would recommend that over -story boulevard trees planted along or near Rich Valley Blvd. would be a reasonable alternative. The General Industrial District landscaping standards defer to the Planning Commission for a recommendation. For comparison, Commercial and Business Park Districts require a minimum of eight trees or one tree per 3,000 gross square feet of land area, and foundation plantings. Staff would recommend pro- rating the gross square footage of the affected area, for a tree planting recommendation. The area of the footprint of the tanks including an additional 100 ft. radius area enclosed by the earthen dykes would yield 139 trees. Therefore, staff would recommend that 139 trees be planted, either along the right -of -way, or between the storage tanks and the right -of -way. Because of the liner in the dike containment area, the trees would have to be outside of the dike area. CONCLUSION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find as suggested above in support of granting the conditional use permit for the storage tanks. Landscaping with shade or boulevard trees along County Road 71 would be consistent with the policies for the General Industrial land use designation, and pro -rated for the scope of the storage tank project applied to the standards of the General Industrial District standards. The applicant will have to provide additional detail for the stormwater calculations. Lastly, the City Attorney has provided a strategy for section line issue that affects the storage tank area. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit for the two storage tanks subject to recommended conditions. 5 CITY OF ROSEMOUNT DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION 2005- A RESOLUTION APPROVINGA CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR FLINT HILLS RESOURCES, LLP WHEREAS, the Planning Department received an application for approval of a Conditional Use Permit for Flint Hills Resources, LLP to allow for the construction of two large 62 ft. tall storage tanks with diameters of 260 ft. and 160 ft., both located about 600 feet east of County Road 71 (Rich Valley Blvd.) 2/3 mile north of 135 °i Street, legally described as follows: The South of the Northeast of Section 14, and, That part of the Southwest '/a of the Northwest 4 of Section 13 lying west of the Union Pacific Railroad, all in Township 115, Range 19, Dakota County, Minnesota. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Rosemount conducted a public hearing as required by ordinance for the purpose of receiving public comment regarding the proposed Conditional Use Permit on December 28, 2004; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted a motion to recommend approval of the application for a Conditional Use Permit for Flint Hills Resources, LLP on December 28, 2004 with conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, The Council of the City of Rosemount does hereby approve the Conditional Use Permit for Flint Hills Resources, LLP subject to the following conditions: 1. Conformance with building and fire codes. 2. The applicant install 139 boulevard trees along County Road 71. 3. The dike containment area shall be maintained by Flint Hills Resources, LLP in such a manner as to guarantee its integrity in containing stotmwater for a 100 -year rainfall event and am petroleum products, in the event of a tank spill, to prevent any offsite runoff. 4. The City Attorney has recommended that the "Declarant (Flint Hills Resources) shall execute and record in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney a declaration of covenants joining the two properties and providing that they shall not be held, conveyed, transferred or mortgaged separately or apart from each other. For the disposition of the Section line impact on the review of the storage tanks. ADOPTED this 18' day of January, 2005 by the City Council of the City of Rosemount. William H. Droste, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Jentink, City Clerk Excerpt from the Regular Planning Commission Meeting of December 28, 2004. Public Hearing: 5A. Case 04 -75 -CUP Flint Hills Resources Conditional Use Permit. City Planner Pearson reviewed the Staff Report. Flint Hills Resources requested a conditional use permit (CUP) to construct two large storage tanks near Rich Valley Blvd. (County Road 71). The CUP is required for multiple buildings or uses in the General Industrial District. Revised conditions were handed out from that shown in the staff recommendation. Chairperson Messner asked the Commission if they had any questions for Mr. Pearson. Chairperson Messner had a question regarding the dike and how high the earth and burm would be. Mr. Pearson responded that it would be an eight foot tall dike. Mr. Messner then asked what the height was of the existing tanks in the east as compared to the tanks in question. Mr. Pearson said they are shorter and in the vicinity of 30 -40 feet tall. The applicant did not have any comments for the Commission. Chairperson Messner opened the public hearing. MOTION by Powell to close the Public Hearing. Second by Schultz. Ayes: Schultz, Zurn, Messner, Humphrey, and Powell. Nays: None. Motion carried. Chairperson Messner asked for any follow -up discussion or questions. MOTION by Messner to recommend that the City Council approve the conditional use permit for Flint Hills Resources subject to: 1. Conformance with building and fire codes. 2. The applicant install 139 boulevard trees along County Road 71. 3. Flint Hills Resources shall apply for an amendment to the NPDES permit to include the additional contaimrtent area with documentation provided to the City. 4. The City Attorney has recommended that the "Declarant (Flint Hills Resources) shall execute and record in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney a declaration of covenantsjoining the two properties and providing that they shall not be held, conveyed, transferred or mortgaged separately or apart from each other. For the disposition of the Section line impact on the review of the storage tanks. Second by Powell. Ayes: Schultz, Zuni, Messner. Humphrey, and Powell. Nays: None. Motion carried. Mr. Pearson indicated the item will go before the City Council on January 18, 2005. SITE MAP 'ROPEP.TY ID NUMBER: 34- 01300.012 -40 -1 OWNER KOCH REFINING CO :CMMON NAME'. FONT .TILLS PC R:? T� by 67201 -2256 'AYABLE 2004 TAXES JET TAX 40mmftvF SPE ASSCSSMENTS. -C 74L 74 +ESA'. ANNOW 'AY.ABLE 2005 ASMNT JSAGE'IMMSTRIAL 2004 ESTIMATED MARKET DALLIES IW, AB-e:[05) L4ND'. LOT SIZE,UCLJDES BUILDING: RGAD EASEMENTS) TOTAL mulam FT FINISHED SC FT 5i5 547 50 F? SCHOOL DISTRICT. :05 36 .7C ACRE$ LOCATION. S41'N4 NS \'I SECTION 13115 -19 PAYABLE 2CC6 HOMESTEAD STA5'JS. NON HOMESTEAD WATERSHED DISTRICT: `ERMlLL1ONRlVFR LAST QJALIFIEC SALE: 0 DATE. AMOUNT. �(CAr�SS D PreLiS 1 7 o l 1� 1 "I l o w l Dimensmns rourwe0:c neamzl fD01 ighI20G resDaaota DouMy- Irs'N.n9 r �spellf•er3. +_QaIII re,. .rru an0 ,i la an]IS nCl Inle'.eK. ;D Ge JSE.az 1 rn 5 ,S a ,",l s r,, z ?s a 9'pres. mlprT3Ln a :GCpIEC m tJ t., nly, c >0n�j, an: Hmes no Deer ccr, Cec a e 11 a,' .area nu. r o l s l -m, It, be rsed d. If d sc ree purposes D9ADIa .1:, rs nD: l e U. a0'e Wr a_ c t 'Zl n conlaineJ. If ascl ?panties are Dlease wc;aq 7a LDl Coumy G.,na/ sntl La-tl'. ^�crca! Dn p ?parrnen:. 2.04 BUILDUr;. rNFORMATION (PAYABLE 20051 TYPE ''EAR BUIL, 0 ARCH ST ,'L'c I FOUNDATION SO FT FINISHED SC FT 0 BEORGJMS 0 SATHS 0 f RAIAE GARAi.E 50 FT 0 OTHER GARAGE MISC BLDG MISC BLDG PLP.T NAME'. SECTION 13 nl N 115 RANGE 1� TAa DESCRIPTION. PT OF Sw 1,4 OF N'A' 114 LYING W OF RR ']11519 �a it 3 i; i I i' yjl I4 I Ili II I� I Vii, V III II I III I 'I »j a:_ Farcals Uppn'c] 13_:2'04 Aeoa 1590 r I I I ii i �II a PLP.T NAME'. SECTION 13 nl N 115 RANGE 1� TAa DESCRIPTION. PT OF Sw 1,4 OF N'A' 114 LYING W OF RR ']11519 �a it 3 i; i I i' yjl I4 I Ili II I� I Vii, V III II I III I 'I »j a:_ Farcals Uppn'c] 13_:2'04 Aeoa 1590 III 1 l 144 1 141 5 Ill 4 141 -f 4 III f y 2 iAINMEr� Rlz�� A I III I� III 12" WlLl1AM5 BRC)R1ERP PN'EUWE WOCDAIVt.R P/L --411 II k(1' VlAllkalAS flR0 }MF PIPEE0.1 p, rm,o v,x 1 1 150 t I S 152. I 111 WEST T ANK E AR 15d �O 153 72� WISWNSRJ I IO�TK 71 PR&F°SE ZED/ DIA. $TURRG 7HNY C v 1 i 160 Q 7611 I If ff f�� NAT. GAP. .AIRPORT F ff P f1 f T�17 CUT N GAPPED AS IN U t Iert�LF- PTFlllilt R it yy,� ..iC L i 9 S i. 1 C Ti Y dil n (1, i_� s� r .wra� a'.. K ;3 l Y a I t 3..: 1� -'r P `Y3 rY�^Y FF� 2 PE iri Ss.,1 t tl< y �.lsla e', 11.7: CONDITIONAL I?SE PERMITS (CUP): A. Purpose: The purpose of conditional use permits is to allow for those uses which are not generally suitable within the zoning district, but which under some circumstances may be suitable. The applicant for a CUP shall have the burden of proof that the use is suitable and that the standards set forth in this subdivision have been met. B. Application, Public Hearing, Notice and Procedure: The application, public hearing, n"tice and procedure requirements for CUPS shall be the same as those for amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, as identified in Section 16? of this Ordinance. CUPs may be eranted only by a 4:'i vote of the entire Council. Specific submissions required to complete an application for a CUP shall address all standards applicable to the proposed use. The applicant shall provide information as required in the site plan review. C. Standards: The Commission shall recommend a CUP and the Council may issue such CUP if it finds that such use at the proposed location: 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the ncinhh.rhood or the city. 2. Will be harmonious with the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and city code provisions. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible or similar in an architectural and landscape appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 4. Will be served adequately by existing (or those proposed in the project) essential public facilities and scm ices, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage, structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer S" stems and schools. 6. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, material equipment and conditions of operation that will be hazardous or detrimental to any persons, property, or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 6. Will Crave vehicular ingress and egress to the property which does not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic on surrounding public streets. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic, or historic feature of major importance and will comply with all local, state, and federal environmental quality standards. These standards apply in addition to specific conditions as may be applied throughout this code. D. Conditions: In reviewing applications for CUPS, the Commission and the Council ntav attach whatever reasonable conditions they deem necessary to mitigate an ?icipated adverse impacts associated With these uses, to protect the value of other property within the district. and to achieve the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and City Code prop isions. Such conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. Controlling the number, area, bulk, height, density, intensity, and location of such uses. 2. Regulating ingress and egress to the property and the proposed structures thereon with particular reference to vehicle and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or other catastrophe. 3. Regulating off street parking and loading areas where required. 4. Specifying utilities with reference to location availabilit} and compatibility. 5. RequirinL berming, fencing, screening, landscaping or other facilities to protect nearby property. 6. Ensuring compatibility of appearance. In determining such conditions specia! consideration shall be given to protecting immediately adjacent properties from objectionable views, noise, traffic and other negative characteristics associated with such uses. E. Revocation: Failure to comply with any condition set forth in a CUP, or any other violation of City Code provisions, shall also constitute sufficient cause for the termination of the CUP by the Council following a public hearing. F. Expiration: In any case where a conditional use has not been established within one (1) gear of the date on which the CUP was granted, the permit shall he null and void. If the conditional use is discontinued for six (6) months, the CLIP shall be null and void. G. Permittee: A CUP shall be issued for a particular use and not for a particular person. Itlrssacle Page 1 of 3 Pe_ars_o_n,Rick From: Stolte, Lowell [Lowell.StolteCwfhr.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 9:11 AM To: Pearson, Rick Cc: Stolte, Lowell Subject: FW: Proposed Change in Scope for Above Ground Storage Tanks for U LSD Project Here's the response back from Kelly Garvey (see Beth Lockwood's note earlier) acknowledging that the change to 2 tanks (one large and one small) still fit within the original scope of the EAW that received a negative declaration with regards to the project. Any questions on this information, please let me know. LMS From: Garvey, Kelly mailto :Kelly.GarveyCastate.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 12:46 PM To: Stolte, Lowell; Garvey, Kelly Cc: Seth.Lockwood @istate.mn.us Subject: RE: Proposed Change in Scope for Above Ground Storage Tanks for U LSD Project Lowell Just as before Minn. R. ch.4410.1000 subp 5 states if a change is made and there may a potential for significant environmental effects a new EAW may be required. The change being proposed below does not create a potential for environmental effects therefore a new EAW is not necessary. Please let me know if you need anything else. Kelly Original Message---- From: Stolte, Lowell [mailto:Lowell.Stolteafhr.com] Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 12:36 PM To: Garvey, Kelly Cc: Stolte, Lowell; 'Beth. LockwoodCstate.rrl Subject: RE: Proposed Change in Scope for Above Ground Storage Tanks for U LSD Project As we discussed this morning, after further review of storage needs for the ULSD project FHR is considering a slight,modification to the two tanks discussed in the attached Email chain below. The proposed total storage capacity, the height of the tanks, and the footprint for the containment stays the same as that discussed below. However, to utilize these tanks most efficiently and reduce the number of turnovers in the tanks, FHR is proposing to increase the diameter of one of the tanks and decrease the diameter of the other tank so that instead of two 350,000 bbl tanks, we would have one 200,000 bbl tank and one 500,000 bbl tank. The sizes may vary slightly, but the planned diameters would be in the range of 160 feet for the small tank and 260 feet for the larger tank. In our discussions. as with earlier conclusions, since the total tank size is still reduced overall from the original three tanks and since the permit limits do not change, you indicated that no additional environmental review would be required. If there are any concerns with this approach, please let me know. Thanks. LMS 12/21/2004 Alessaac Paure 2 of 3 From: Lockwood, Beth mailto: Beth. Lockwood @state.m n. us] Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 7:07 PM To: Garvey, Kelly; Thorstenson, Craig; Lowell.Stolte @fhr.com Subject: RE: Proposed Change in Scope for Above Ground Storage Tanks for ULSD Project I agree. Kelly and I spoke about the proposed project change. In making this decision I know that Kelly referred to Ivlinn. R 4410. 1000, subp. 5. -Beth Original Message---- From: Garvey, Kelly maflto :Kelly.Garvey@state.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 2:44 PM To: Thorstenson, Craig; LOwell.Stolte @fhr.Com Cc: Lockwood, Beth Subject: RE: Proposed Change in Scope for Above Ground Storage Tanks for ULSD Project Lowell, From the Environmental Review standpoint we do not need any more information. There does not appear to be any potential for significant environmental effects. Therefore, the changes being proposed would not trigger the need to prepare a new E.AW. Let me know if you have any questions. Kelly Original Message---- From: Stolte, Lowell [mailto: Lowell. Stolte @fhr.com] Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 10:14 AM To: 'Garvey, Kelly'; Thorstenson, Craig' Cc: 'Lockwood, Beth'; Stolte, Lowell Subject: Proposed Change in Scope for Above Ground Storage Tanks for ULSD Project As discussed earlier today (directly with Kelly, voice mail message to Craig), FHR is considering installing 2 tanks rather than 3 that were originally proposed in both the air permit application and were identified in the EAW for the Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Project. The two tanks would be approximately 15 °b larger In size than the original design; this would be accomplished by increasing the height of the two tanks by 8 feet each, keeping the same diameter as originally referenced. Th tofal tankage wound Le reduced from 900,000 hhl m .nc—_. 4nri nnn hhl, eachl to roughly 690,000 bbl (2 345,000 bbl each). In our discussions, I referenced that this will reduce the number of emission points and likely actual emissions, would not substantively change the project scope represented in the original EAW (emissions, odors, noise, glare, traffic, water reeds, etc.). The only identifiable difference would be that the two tanks would be 8' higher. As we discussed, given that we already have a tank farm with storage tanks in the immediate vicinity, given the distance to the road, given the terrain to the east rises behind the tanks (from an aesthetic standpoint), it did not appear that this change would trigger any further review under Blinn R 4410.1000 subp 5 if we chose this option. Before proceeding further with this option, FHR wants to ensure that It1PCA concurs with this assessment. Craig, we need to discuss implications from the air permit side (amendment to remove one tank from permit). Please let me know if you have any other questions Thanks. LMS Lowell Miller Smile Environmental Project Manager (Air Permit Compliance System Owner) Flint Hills Resources 11 1 !2004 COPY r_- Minnesota Pollution Control Agency �.r•r REC, VED f ES February 13, 2004 TO: INTERESTED PARTIES RE: Flint Hills Resources, LP -Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Enclosed is the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sit] fur Diesel Fuels, Dakota Count}. The EAW was prepared by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and is being distributed for a 30 -day review and comment period pursuant to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules. The comment period will begin the day the EAW availability notice is published in the EQB Monitor which will likely occur in the February I3. ^_004. issue. Comments received on the EAW will be used by the MPCA in evaluating the potential for significant environmental effects from this proiecl and deciding on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). A final decision on the need for an EIS will be made by the MPCA Commissioner after the end of the comment period. If a request for an EIS is received during the comment period, or if the Commissioner recommends the preparation of an EIS, the MPCA Citizens' Board (Board) will make the final decision. The final EIS need decision will also be made by the Board if so requested by the project proposer, other interested parties or MPCA staff and if this request is agreed to by one or more members of the Board or the MPCA Commissioner. The Board meets once a month, usually the fourth Tuesday of each month, at the MPCA office in St. Paul. Meetings are open to the public and interested persons may offer testimony on Board agenda items. A listing of Board members is available on request by calling (651) 296 -7306. Please note that comment letters submitted to the MPCA do become public documents and will be part of the official public record for this project. If you have any questions on the EAW, please contact Kelly Garvey of my staff at (651) 296 -7796. Sincerely, Beth G. Locl wood Supervisor, Environmental Review Unit Operations and Environmental Review Section Regional Environmental Management Division BGL:min Enclosure 520 Lafayette Rd. N., St. Paul, MN 55155 -4194; (651) 296 -6300 (Voice); (651) 282 -5332 (TTY) St. Paul E:alnerd Detroit Lakes Duluth Mankato Marshall Rochesler 4Villmar, www.pca.state.mn.us Equal Opportu, Employer Printed on recycled paper containing al least 20% fibers from paper recycled b✓ consumers. E NVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET 'Vote to revievi ers The Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. This EA`.'v` a as prepared by the Minnesota Pollution Control eno (MPCA.), acting as the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGIT), to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared. The project proposer supplied reasonably accessible data for, but did not complete the final worksheet. Comments on the EAW must be submitted to the MPC.A during the 30 -day comment period which begins with notice of the availability of the EAW in the M';nncsora Environmental Quali Board (EQB) Monitor. Comments on the EAW should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential imparts that are reasonably expected to occur that war, ant further investigation, and the need for an EIS. A copy of the EAW may be obtained from the N9CA by calling (fir 1) 296 -7398. An electronic version of the completed EAW is available at the NPCA Web site httn :i'v�3w.nca.state.mn.us'news; eau index.html» open -eaa Attachments to the EAW Figure 1. County map showing the general location of the project; Figure 2. United States Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating facility boundaries; Figure 3. Site location for the proposed storage tanks; Furze 4. Construction locations for the proposed storage tanks, hydrogen plant, and hydrocracker; Attachment 1. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) letter dated July 29, 2003; and Attachment 2. Minnesota Historical Society letter dated August 5, 2003. TDD (for hearingand speech impaired only): (651)282.5332 Printed on rrq'c;u! paper containing 39fi f :bcr, iron, paper rec clnd by consumers 1 ECt. tJC �Intira'I.Owj�lllflli f m rr U�.� Deser�pHoa: a o }7de i�?rodect summary af>O ROrcts or3ess to e,pu ,ts led Is; t e EQB Monitor 4 Flint Hills Resources, LP (FHR) proposes to produce ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD) fuels at its Pine Bend Refinery (Refinery in Rosemount Minnesota. Production of ULSD fuels will require the construction of a hydrogen plant, a hydrocracker. three 12,600,000 -gallon (3 Oct, 000- barrel) storage Wks, and expanded cooling tower capacity, omp ere Qesenpt,on oft�epreroo3ed nro�ect relateu�'new cnnstTucbon _attach adn iron necessary? ;ratphasi� co- tstrue. ;cm ope —anon mefho3s and features LSat ri•itl cnusephtis; t) C" of fhe ea7 oriinezit o uill,Froduce wastes Include nodichtions to exisPng egtiipmi f jirocesses and n r~ ficant 6enolihon rernp}aj orretriode5t 'b ez shr r sLuctures :Irdi� g. anddtuatioanfco itsttuctionactic�hes„ LLa.N•- 4i .,z' FHR proposes to produce ULSD fuels at its Refinery in Rosemount, Minnesota. In order to produce ULSD fuels, FHR is expected to install the following equipment: a hydrogen plant, a hydrocracker, three 12,600.000- gallon (300,000 barrel) storage tanks, and expansion of an existing cooling tower. Construction locations for the hydrogen plant, hydrocracker, and storage =Jr s are shown in Figure 4- The hydrogen plant will produce hydrogen for use in extraction of sulfur from diesel fuel stock and to supple hydrogen for the hydrocracking process. The hydrogen plant produces hydrogen by mixing a Iight hydrocarbon feedstock wdth steam and heating it in the presence of a catalyst. The hydrogen gas is then purified and used in various desulfuriaation reactors, including the new hydrocracker. Construction of the hydrogen plant well involve excavation to a depth of approximately 8-feet in an area of 1.5 acres. The cement foundations of the plant will be placed in the excavation. The excavation will then be backfilled and graded to provide a level surface for the construction of the plant. Construction of the hydrogen plant will take approximately 18 months. Hydrocracking is a catalytic process used to reduce the molecular weight of feedstocks. The process also removes almost all sulfur, nitroeer, and oxygen from the feedstock. As a result, it provides products that are almost pure paraffins. naphthenes and aromatics. Hydrocracldng is performed by heating the feedstock to a moderate temperature (between 2S0 °C and 4;5 °C) and passing it over a catalyst bed in the presence of a hydrogen atmosphere. Tne hydrocracking process is exothermic and thus produces large quantities of waste heat that will be captured in various ways for reuse. The construction process for the hydrocracker will be sirr lar to that of the hydrogen plant. Approximately 2.7 acres will be excavated. Foundations will be poured and the site backfilled. The construction of the hydrocracker will take approximately 18 months. As mentioned earlier, the hydrocrackirg process will produce large amounts of heat. An additional 9,UGG gallons per minute (gpm) in cooling tower capacity will be needed to provide cooling water and help dw7p:,te heat from the hydrocracker, .Additional pumping capacity and possibly additional cooling water cells v. ill need to be added to existing cooling tower »6. tint Hills Resources, LP Utra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmcntal Assessment .Osemowl",'Mifln'sota I y lr" The three storage tanks will initially contain gas oil or fuel oil and will be equipped with external floating roofs to control emissions. One is needed for managing off -spec product (given tight tolerances for sulfur content in new fitels requirements), one is lik:eh needed for feed to the new hydrocracker, and the last one of the tanks Fill be used for stort:ge of oilier petroleum products (possibly as light as heat naphiha) that could be fed to the hydrocrack cr. Although unlike]., emissions estimates for this last tank are based on this tank storing heavy naphtha year round. All of the tanks will compiv with the existing above ground storage tail: permit requirements. Each of the tanks will be approximately 200 -feet in diameter and 54 -feet in height. The tank construction process t ill last approximately eight months. Piping connections will then take another four to six months. The tanks will be constructed on concrete ring-v.211 foundations, with a double -bottom system design with a synthetic liner in the containment area. The tanks will be erected in the field from carbon steel prepared sheets. The tanks will be constructed on a flat 20.1 acre site in the existing West Tank Farm. The site is former agricultural land, now oN ned by FIIR and enclosed within the Refinery perimeter fence. The site has been allowed to lie fallow and is now covered with grasses, clovers and other low lying vegetation, and along its eastern side, immature poplars. The entire tank site will be excavated to a depth of approximately eight -feet at most. The excavated material wl{ be used to construct spill containment berms around each of the three tanks. As mentioned above, the berms and excavated spill containment areas will be lined with synthetic spill containment fabric. An eight -inch to ten -inch layer of native soil (sand) will be laid over the fabric liner. The spill containment areas and berms will then be re- vegetated with Minnesota Department of Transportation 50B seed mixture (for use on sandy soils). The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the MPCA have recognized that heavy duty diesel engines produce significant amounts of fine particulates and nitrogen oxides, which particularly in urban environments can have significant adverse impact on air quality. In order to control emnssions from diesel engines, ii is necessary to use catalytic exhaust cleaners and particulate filters. The higher sulfur content of current diesel fuels can damage the catalysts used to reduce nitrogen oxides exhaust emissions. In January 2 _001, EPA promulgated its Control of Air Pollution Fro New N)nior Vehicles: Heat) -Dut) Engine and Motor Vehicle Standards and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Rt uirements. F.nal Rule That rule requires that by June 1, 2006, all diesel producers generate low sulfur diesel fuels with a maximum sulfur content of 15 pans per million (ppm) (the current maximum sulfur content for diesel fuels is 500 ppm). The rule requires all new diesel powered highway vehicles produced in 200 or later to use the new low sulfur diesel fuels exclusively. The EPA and the MPCA have also recognized that off -road diesel engines (construction, agmcultural and industrial equipment) have significant impact on air quality. The EPA is proposing a national program to reduce emissions from these engines. The proposed program includes a significant reduction in sulfur content of diesel fuels used for off -road diesel engines by 2010. The FHR Refinery is a major supplier of diesel fuels for the State of Minnesota and a significant supplier of diesel fuels fog- the upper Nl d.t est. In order to meet the needs of customers and comply with EPA requirements, the Refinery must begin installation and construction of the ULSD equipment and facilities b} June 2004. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels ED% ironmental Assessment Rosemount, Mmnescia 3 'Norksheet Unit of Gm ernment Tv e of Application Status MPC4'EPA Comment I Air Emission Permit Construction pernut required bfPCA Industrial Stormwater NPDES Permit Administrative chances to Stormu ater Pollution Prevention Plan N4PCA Construction Siotmwater NPDES Construction permit required Permit Ai PCA NP DES Wastewater Permi Administrati Chan; es to permit MPC.aVEPA State Implementation Plan (S1P) Chanee to S1 Order to include miniserauve Order Modification new sources of Sulfur Diuxide S02) emissions MPCA 199E Stipulation Agreement: Waste Prepare and submit certification Rater Treat; lent Plant C e tificatton MPCA/EPA Spill Prevention. Control, and Administrative changes to Counter Plan (SPCC) updates existing facility One Plan will be i MPCA Above Ground Storage Tank Permit Modifi existing permit for three new tanks Flint Hilis Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount, "A:nnesotn 4 Worksheet Unit of Government T >c of A ligation I Status Dakota County Well Per 1 'Xell installation Pennit require DNR I 'iVater Auproprations Permit Modify existing permit �I Cin o.` F.osentount'. I Plan Review and Approval To be submitted Fire Ma—hall Ciry of Rosemount: Buiidine PermiLlxcavation To be submitted The proposed project is not expected to conP,ict v,ith adjacent and nearby land uses. Potential conflicts invohing em iionmental matters are not anticipated. The FHR Refinery was the first industrial facility developed in the Pine Bend Industrial District. The District was formed in 1954. At that time, the Chicago and Northw estem Railroad purchased approximately 6,000 acres in the Pine Bend area. In the past five decades there has been continued industrial development of the District. There are now over 30 industries and businesses located witnin a five -mile radius of the junction of U.S. Highway 52 and Minnesota State Hiahwav 55. The proposed project would lie within the boundaries of the existing Refinery complex (see Figure 2). The FHR Refinery is located on land zoned as general industrial, as is the area immediately to the east of the Refn The area adjacent to and immediately west of the Refinery complex is zoned agricultural land. Even with the location of many industries in the Pine Bend Industrial District, the majority of the land in eastern Rosemount has been and continues to be used for agriculture. The site of the three proposed storage tanks was used for farming until 1950. FHR acquired the land and left it undisturbed until 1958, when excavation materials from the constriction of the west tank farm were placed along the eastern edge of the proposed site. The site has not been disturbed since. The site is currentiv covered with grasses, clover, sparse low-lying shrubs, and along the eastern perimeter of the site, immature poplars. The vegetation in this area is self seeded. A main crude pipeline exists in this area and will be clearly located prior to excavation and site clearing and grading to prevent damaee. Although no contaminated soil is expected in this area, it is FHR policy to use visual, olfactory. and monitoring data to appropnately manage any contaminated soil that is suspected during excavation activities. Land for the other aspects of this project (the hydrogen plant, and the hydrocracker) is located within the Rcfinery production areas and has been used for industrial purposes since the construction of the Refinery in 1954. Small residential subdivisions are located nearby: one is two miles southwest of the Refinery, a second is one mile northwest, and a third is one mile north of the Refinery. FHR owns the southwest subdivision. Other homes are scattered across the agricultural lands or along roads to the west, south, and north of the facility. The nearest residences are approximately one mile north, one- quarter mile west, three quarters mile south, and one -third mile east of the Refinery complex. Flint Hills Resources, LP LTlZra Lovv Sulfur Diesel Fuels Rosemount, Minnesota Environmental Assessment Work3heet The Refinery is approximately 8 miles northwest of the town of Hastings (population 18,2(10). It is approximateh• 6 miles northeast of the Rosemount City Center (city population 14,6091 and 6 miles south of the Im er Grove Heights Cip Center (.population '_9.SUD). Other nearby cities are Eagan rruleS to the northwest), Apple Valley (E miles to the west) and St. Paul (I- miles to the north). The city of Rosemount owTis land to the east, south, and west of the Refinery complex. This land has the Potential for high density commercial or residential uses, although this potential has been minimized through density requirements of the ag cultural zone bordering the Refinerv. The density requirements limit new home construction to 4 homes per 40 acres. Future land use plans call for Lte ent ;re eastem portion of Rosemount to remain dedicated to ag cultural or industrial use. Existing and planned land use north of the Refiner, in the ci of Inver Grove Heights, follow a pattern similar to Rosemount However, Liver Grove Heights is a rapid;•; growing co nmumr; and is def,ned in the 1\1etropolitan Council's Development Framework as an "Area of Planned Urbanization." 1 he land in Liver Grove Heights to the north of the Refiner}' is currently zoned industrial, limited industrial or rural residential (with a five -acre minimum lot size). These areas are not served by metropolitan or municipal services. A portion of FHRs' pmperh• extends east of the Rtftners complex. This allows for pipeline transfer of materials from the Refinery to docks on the Mississippi River, where materials are loaded and unloaded from barges. This land use overlaps with the planned use corridor of the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area. The impervious surface includes 2DA acres in the tank containment area. The tank containment area will be fined o; tth an impermeable synthetic fabric. An eight -inch to ten -inch layer of clean sand will be placed over the liner. The sand will be seeded with Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) seed mixture 50B which is suitable for sandy soils. The remaining 2.5 acres of impervious surface will be structures, foundations and other impervious surfaces associated with construction of the hydrogen plant, hydrocracker and cooling tower. The R.efinen production areas in Which the hydrogen plant and hydrocracker will be built are mduStnal areas, with no existing vegetation cover. These areas currently provide little, if any, habitat for wildlife. Flint Hills Resources. LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount, Minnesota 6 worksheet Gravel covered surface. The gravel covered surface is located within the production areas where the hydrogen plant and hydrocracker will be built. The proposed site for the three storage tanks is a former agricultural area that has lain fallow for ove 20 vears. Most of the site is covered by grasses and small shrubs (self seeded). Sparse stands of immature poplars are located along the east boundary of this site. The site cur entl} provides habitat for small rodents. In addition, dirt mounds likely made by gophers or woodchucks were observed dur ng a wallthrough of the area. It is likely that larger mammals may wander th ough the area, but due to its proximity to the Refinery indusmal complex„ it is highly unlikeh' that any larger mamnm;s reside in the tank: farm area. This habitat will be severely disturbed during tank farm construction. Following tank farm construction. the tank containment areas will be seeded with Rin.DOT seed mixture 50B. This mixture includes: Wheal grass Bluestein Brome grass Perennial Rye grass Alfalfa Native Legumes (bush and prairie clover, Canada milk vetch, American vetch) "Dakota" Switch Grass Kentucky Blue Grass This seed mix will provide potential cover for small mammals and birds. Tree and shrub growth within the containment areas s *ill be actively discouraged. The agricultural land to the west provides habitat for species traditionally associated with old field communities. Pheasants, white- tailed deer, a variety of small rodent species, song birds and predators such as fox, raccoon and various raptor species are frequently observed west of the Refinerv. No endangered or threatened species, rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources have been observed in the West Tank Farm or in the other Refinery process areas. Those species identified below will not be affected by this project, but are included for completeness since they are located near to this site. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount. 'Minnesota 7 Worksheet The project will not involve any alteration of watercourse or surface waters and is not expected to have any impact on aquatic species. b correspondence dated July 29, 2003, (Attachment 1), the DINR has noted that: "An area identified by the Minnesota Count} Biological Sure} as a "Site of High Biodiversity Significance" is located immediately east of the project area between Highway 52 and the Mississippi liver. This particular site contains Dry Prairie and Oak Forest Natural Communities as well as populations of James Yolanisia (Crsunel:a )arnesii), a tlaeatened plant species and Creeping Juniper (Juniperus horitontalis), a special concern species. Additionally, a Bald Eagle nesting area has been documented within the significance site." The significance site noted by the DNTR is located east of the project area and the Refinery and is separated from the project area by LIS Hrghw av 52. The significance site it an area of heavily wooded river bluffs and river bottom land. Much of the site is cunenay owned by FHR. FlTP, has fenced the eastern perimeter of the site from 117" Street on the north boundary to the CF Industries properr: on the south boundary. The northern perimeter of the site is fenced along 1 I7 Street. All road access to the site is strictiy limited to authorized personnel through locked gates controlled by FHR. The site can be accessed from the Mississippi River, however this requires boat access. The elevation at the top of the wooded bluffs is approximately 900 feet above sea level. The base of the bluff:, and the river bottom land are at apprommalely 70 feet above sea level. Most of the features and species are to -:tiled well belo t, e top of the bluffs. The Refinery' and the ULSD project will not be visible frurn these locations. In summary the ULSD project: will not be visible from much of the significance site; will not result in increased human or vehicle access in the significance site; will not result in any construction related activities in or near the significance site; and The project will increase the Refinery's water consumption by up to 600 gpm. g'r`ater use can be categorized into three major uses: (1) approximately one third of the water will be used to male steam that is converted into hydrogen in the hydrogen plant, {21 approximately one third of the water will be evaporated in cooling towers after being used for process cooling in the hydrocracker, and existing modified gas processing units; and (3) approximately one third of the water will be used as wash water in the hydro process (this process wastewater will eventually go the wastewater treatment plant after various reuse within the Refinery as stripped sour water). The new process units have been designed to Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low SulFur Diesel Fuels EnVironmental Assessment Roscmoun Dlinnesota 8 ultimately, will not impact this site of high biudiversiiy. minimiae water use to the extent possible. Air coolers have been specified extensively to replace exchangers which would use more cooling water resulting in increased evaporation at the cooling towers and increased cooling tns� er blowdowm to the wastewater treatment plant. A water treatment unit within the h) d plant jmethanol stepper) has been sized to manage both Coe new hydrogen plant as well as a wastewater stream from one of the other hydrogen plants thereby allow mg this stream to be reused (a 90 gpm stream). FHR, is continuing to pursue reuse options where possible to limit the amount of the appropriations increase needed. Chemical testing and other studies are being conducted to identify limitations and feasioilit� based on the impact that they could have on equipment, as well as the technolpg^: needed for these s arious reuse options. Water use options include: upgraded Empire treatment plant effluent being routed near Refinery; FHR's wastewater treatment plant effluent; FHR's process water (e.g.. stopped sour water); Ground water a tthdraw n from FHR's remediatton system near Spring Lake; Ground water withdrawn from a new well adjacent to the Mississippi River. If none of these reuse options are feasible, then the increased water consumption will come either from the Refinery's current well system or potential]% from a new well. The current DNR appropriation permit number is MN 54- 0071. At maximum estimated pumping rates, the project would slightly lower ground -water levels in the immediate vicinity of the Reftnern, due to increased pumping in the Prairie du Chien Jordan aquifer. This increased pumping is anticipated to be between 600 and 1.000 gpm beyond current capacity with the intent of increasing withdrawal from the Prairie du Chien- Jordan aquifer and decreasing withdrawal from the Mi. Simon aquifer. A three dimensional computer ground -water model of Dakota County, developed for the Minnesota Department of Health, was used to evaluate several alternative well locations within the Refinery in order to predict the impacts on ground water in the surrounding area. FHR is cooperatively working with the DNR and Dakota Count} on this modeling effort and subsequent analysis. Discussions with DNR waters, based on preliminary modeling, indicate concurrence that this well is not likely to cause water availability or volume problems; furthermore, the DNR has indicated support of plans that reduce water withdrawal from the Mi. Simon Hinckley aquifer. The results from modeling of al': of the alternative well locations were nearly identical: Ground -water levels in the Prairie du Chien Jordan aquifer are predicted to be lowered by a maximum of about 2.5 feet within 1 mile of the Refinery. Within about 2 miles of the Refinery, ground -water levels will be lowered by less than 1.5 feet and within 3 miles of the Refinery, ground -water levels will be low: ered by less than 1 foot. Ground -water levels in the St. Peter Sandstone and the Quaternary unconsolidated aquifer are predicted to be lowered by less than 1 foot within 1.5 miles of the Refinery and less than 6 inches within 3 miles of the Refinery. The lowering of ground water levels is generally independent of seasonal variations and is more affected by the water transmitting characteristics of the aquifers and the pumping rate. Ground -water flow directions will not be altered. These results indicate that most wells in the area should not be adversely affected by the project because the small potential reduction in ground -water levels at maximum pumping rates is much less than the available v:ater levels in a nrtcai yell. Most well users will like).: not notice any difference in the operation of their wells. P. handful of nearb neighbors may have more noticable impacts. FHR has contacted and will work with these neighbors to get additional well information and mitigate well impacts, if necessar.. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Loin Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount, Minnesota 9 Worksheet Municipal wells operated by Rosemount and Inver Grove Heights are not predicted to be adversely affected by the project because rite predicted drawNdo% n is insignificant compared to the available drawdown in the municipal wells. will be used to construct the berths simoonding the tanks. Soils excavated for construction of the hydrogen plant and hydrocracker will be used to refill and level the site following placement of foundations. Standard construction erosion prevention measures will be used to prevent sediment runoff during construction. Silt fences will be placed around excavation and construction areas. Grading, vegetation, and run -off control measures (described in the stormwater management plan) will be Stormw•ater from the process areas of the Refinery is managed according to the Ref nery's Stormwater Pollution Pre.'ention Plan (SIATPP) under the Refinery's Industrial Sto :nwatcr Permit. The tank construction area is currently a flat 20.1 acre area of fallow farmland. Stormw•ater in this area largely infiltrates into the soil, with cxcess runoff collected in the existin West Stormw'ater Basin. Flint Hills Resources. LP Ultra Lev. Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount, Minnesota 10 Worksheet Additional ground -water modeling will be completed to optimally locate any new well to ensure that it does not ad ersely affect, and may actually enhance, the current ground -water remediation efforts. In discussions mth MPCA ground water remediation staff, an additional well in the proposed area near the wastewater aeatment plant may enhance removal of current contamination. There are no steep slopes or highly erodible soils at the site. During construction, site excavation and grading will take place. Soils excavated for construction of the storage tanks and their containment areas used to control sediment runoff a;ier construction is complete. Following construction, the 20.1 -acre site for the storage tanks w ll be largely impetuous and will be surrounded by 8 -foot high berms. Stormwater will no longer infiltrate and will be collected and directed to either the Snu,l-mest or Wiest Sw -m :titer Basins depending on final elevations. All of this %rater is either reused in the process or is routed ultimatel, to the wastewater treatment plant and discharged via the NPf ?ES Permit. The rate of w'astew'ater generation at the Refinery is estimated to show a net increase of approximately 100 gpm as a result of the proposed project (total wastewater generation will be close to 200 gpm, but will be offset by reuse of the other htidrogen plant condensate back in the process). Wasteu -titer will be collected and treated at the OS'VTP before being discharged to the Mississippi River. A project certification will be completed in accordance with the Refinery's 1998 Stipulation Agreement with the MPCA, which will certifR the OSWTP's ability to appropriately manage an increased frow of wastewater. No significant change to the quality of the effluent leaving the Refinery's wastewater treatment plant is expected. waStAS wih be"dischare'ed'into a publicly owned ;treatrent facility tretreatinent pr6viston and disLu s the fac lth 6 abtltry toh3ndle lhe t vaS iden ti film ativ imnrnvemrnt. neressnrn V Not applicable. Not applicable. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount, Minnesota I I Worksheet The overall quantity and quality of Refinery surface water runoff is not expected to change significant])- as a result of construction and installation of the storage tanks or process equipment. Any increases are expected to be withut limits of the Refinery's existing NPDES Permit. All runoff from the prole- areas will be collected in either the South, Southwest or West Stormwater Basins. The outfall for all of the basins is treated at the Refinen''s Oil Separation and Wastewater Treatment Plant (OSVM') and then discharged to the Mississippi River at outfall #10. There are no Karst conditions, sinkholes or shallow limestone formations beneath the western tank farm. The tanks will be located within a lined containment basin. The soil types located on the Refiner property are: Hubbard loamy sand, Wadena loam, Estherville sand loam. Plainfield loamy sand, Mahtomedi loamy sand, urban land- `'v'aukegan complex, Urban land, Zumbro loamy fine sand, and Algansee sandy loam. These are mainly fine grain soils. Construction: During construction, typical industrial construction waste will be venerated. This will likely include waste carbon steel (from tank construction), lumber, and concrete. The actual amounts of waste material are hard to estimate prior to the project, but will likely be several hundred cubic yards. Construction waste will be recycled to the maximum extent possible. A source separation plan will be used to identify materials suitable for recvcling. At this time it is anticipated that all carbon steel waste can be recycled. Nearly all concrete /cement waste should also be recyclable. Lumber, wastes used primari!y for cement forms Y. ill likely not be recyclable. Lumber used for other purposes will likely be recycled. Construction waste not suitable for recycling will be disposed of at a construction waste landfill adjacent to the Refinery property. Hazardous waste is not expected to be generated during project construction. Oaeration: Routine operation of the storage tanks wil l rot generate hazardous wastes. Occasionally the tanks will need to be cleaned (likel) on a ten year schedule). Oily sludges and hydrocarbon contaminated wastewater will be generated as a result of the cleaning. Contaminated wastewater will be treated on -site at the Refinery's OSNVTP. Oily sludges will be managed consistent with other Refinery wastes. Additional hazardous waste catalyst (waste code KM) will be generated from the reactors that will be mana�_ at hazardous waste facilities, consistent with current practices. These wastes will be rentuved from the reactors only during large scheduled maintenance periods (turr,aruundsi at the Refinery. Flini Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Envizonmental Assessment Rosemount, Pdinnesota 1' Worksheet As mentioned previously, the proposed storage tanks will be located within a lined containment basin. The potential for ground -water contamination from tank spills will therefore be minimized. The proposed storage tanks will be used to store fuel oil grades, gas oil, and hear: naphtha. These materials are ecmt`ustible liquids. The storage tanks will be built in accordance ith .American Petroleum Institute standards and will comply with the existing MPCA above ground storage tank requirements. The tam's will be located in a 15.1 acre lined containment area, sized to contain a spill from any vessel. The Refinery has a SPCC Plan incorporated as part of the Facility's Integrated Contingency plan (referred to as the One Plan), which will be modified to include the proposed storage tanks. The SPCC plan provides a description of procedures used to detect spills, identifies emergency coordinators, provides for implementation of emergency procedures, describes the availability and use of emergency equipment, and outlines response coordination within Cite Refinery and with outside agencies and jurisdictions. A copy of the current SPCC plan is maintained on -site. There will be three 12.600.000 gallon (300,000 barrel) capacity floating roof storage tanks built in the West Tank Farm area of the Refinery (See Figure 3). There are already numerous large above ground storage tanks in this area. See above for descriptions of emergency response containment plans. MnDOT is currently constructing a bridge arid ramps over LIS Highway 52:Tlinnesota Highway 55 at 117" Street. This is a two -year prniect that will overlap with the proposed construction at the Refinery. Given e ::istir,c traffic delays on US Highway 52,Minnesota Highway 55 caused by the bridge construction, it is likely that Refinery construction re'.atcd traffic could result in additional temporary traffic delays. Operation of the proposed project will not result in any increase in existing car or truck traffic to and from the Refiner}. The proiect is not e>:pected to hate any impact on the regional transportation system. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Lora Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount, Nlimiesota 13 Worksheet FHRs Refinery processes and refines crude oil. The Refinery produces large volumes of various petroleum products including: gasoline, diesel fuels, asphalts, kerosene, aviation fuel, LPG, and butane. and coke. In addition to end products. the refining process generates numerous flammable or combustible intermediate products. Construction of the proposed project will result in increased traffic to and from the Refinery during the approximately 18 -month construction period. Up to 500 construction workers will be driving private vehicles to and from the Refinery. In addition, large pieces of prefabricated equipment may be transported to the site by truck. Other than during the temporary construction period, the proposed project is not expected to change the number of vehicle trips to and from the Refinery, therefore no change in vehicle- related air emissions is expected. FHR will be required to obtain an air quality permit from the N4PCA for the ULSD project. Preliminary planning efforts completed to date for the project indicate that the following new or expanded air emission sources and control equipment will be installed as part of this project: Three storage tanks will typically store gas oil or fuel oil- however, they may store products as light as heavy naphtha periodically. All of the tanks will be equipped with internal floating roofs to control emissions and either a geodesic dome ar fixed roof. The tanks will be subject to Federal New Source Performance Standards for volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions (subp. Kb) and will be subject to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (subp. CC). At the hydrogen plant, one process heater (also called a reformer) with ultra low NOx burner technology firing Refinery fuel gas, natural gas, and/or pressure swing adsorption (PSA) gas. The heater will be subject to Federal New Source Performance Standards for S02 emissions (subp. J). At the hydrocracker, two process heaters with low NOx control technology firing Refinery fuel gas. Both heaters will be subject to Federal New Source Performance Standards for SO_' emissions (subp. J). Fugitive components containing VOCs at the hydrogen plant, hydrocracker, other related process units, and tank farm. These components include valves, connectors, pumps, compressors, relief valves, and drains, and will be subject to Federal Leal: Detection and Repair regulations and subject to Federal New Source Performance Standards for OC (subp. GGG). Fugitives from all of the units will be subject to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (subp. CC). Additional oily water sewer piping to manage additional wastewater flow. These components will include connections to existing trunk lines and will be subject to Federal New Source Performance Standards for VOC emissions. All of the sewers being installed will be subject to the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous ,Air Pollutants (subp. CC and FF). One diesel fuel -fired emergency generator. One diesel fuel -fired backup cooling tower pump. Expansion of an existing cooling tower. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemnunt, 6lirincsota 14 Worksheet Over time. the L1LSD project will have an overall positive impact in reduction of diesel powered vehicle emissions in the re; Specifically, particulate maner and nitrogen oxide emissions of vehicles using UISD fuels will significantly decrease compared to existing diesel powered vehicles. Total potential emissions from the new and expanded equipment are preliminarily estimated and summarized it the table belovti for comparison to the EAW 100 tons per year (tpy) threshold in Minn. R. 4410.4300, subp. 15(A). As shown in the table below, only NOx emissions from new and expanded equipment are treater than 100 tpy. all other p: llutants will no; exczed the 100 tpt threshold. FHR will offset the NOx emissions increase for this project to below the 100 tpy threshold by concurrently reducing the annual potential to emit a; other Refinery emission sources. Potential Emissions from New and Expanded Equipment Flint Hills Resources Ultra Low' Sulfur Diesel Fuels Project Pcdlu: ant Estimated Emissions (tpy) Carbon Mono>:ide ICO) 70 Nitrogen Oviies (NOM 224 Sulfur Dioxide kSO2) 31 Volatile Or uric' Compounds (VOC 30 Total Particulate Matter (PM) 38 Particulate Nlatterless than 10 microns (PM10) 38 FHR. will voluntarily offset the NOx emissions increase for this project to below 100 tpy by concurrently up&Tading four Refinery boilers either with ultra low NOx burners or replacing them with one new boiler with ultra low NOx burners. This reduction will be made enforceable in the air permit for this project. Note that potential emission increases represented include; (1) emissions from new source; and (2) emissions from modified sources that show an increase in potential to emit. These emissions were included in the Federal Prevent of Significant Deterioration (PSD) application. Per EA'v'•' guidance (MPCA publication no, p- earl -03, November 2003), this table does not include emissions from increased utilization of Refiner process units not being modified (however, these increases are included in the air permit application). The FHRs' petroleum Refinery is a major source under PSD rules. The emissions increase due to each Refinery modification, such as the ULSD project, must be reviewed to determine applicability of the project to PSD review. FHR is proposing emission limitations in its air permit application to demonstrate that the net emissions increase for the project is less than PSD applicability thresholds for all pollutants. Flint Hills is nearing the end of a five vear commitment with the Emission Reduction Initiative (ERf) to reduce overall emissions 50 percent by the year 2004. Even with the emissions increases identified above, FHR is not expecting o. crall site -wide air emissions in 2006 to increase significantly beyond those that will be emitted in 2004 following startup of these new units. Essentialh'. other emission reduction projects are planned post -ERI which should offset those expected from the ULSD project. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount, Mmaesota 15 Wurlsheel Construction activities would tale place within the fenced Refinery area. Construction activities will involve the use of hea,0' earth moving equipment, cranes. cement trucks and other heavy vehicles. Construction activities wit eenewc both noise and dust, although dust emissions will be minimized through the watering of unpa\ to situ accesE routes arid, if necessan, the application of dust suppressants. Dust generated during site preparation and construction will likely be large particulate that should settle to the ground before leaving the Refinery site. Noise generated during construction will likely be audible outside of the Refinery fence line, however it is extremely unlikely that state noise standards for agricultural land will be exceeded. The nearest residence to the construction is approxirnate;., one -half mile from the Refinery's west fence line. V, hile noise frum construction may be audible at this residence, it is highly unlikely that noise will exceed state noise standard for residences. Operation of the proposed tanks is noi expected u, eenerate odors, noise or dust. Operation of the hydrogen plant and hydrocracker are also not expected to generate additional odors. noise or dust. Operation of the e,cpanded cooling tmver may result in additional condensation plumes that could create icing problems in winter. .Am' i_ing will be hnnted to Refinery roadways and should not produce icing conditions on public roadways. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) (Minnesota Historical Society) was contacted regarding archaeological, historical or architectural resources within the Refinery and near the Refinery. In a letter dated,August 5, 2003, (SHPO No. 2003 -3035; Attachment 2) SHPO stated that: "Based upon our review of the project information, we conclude that there are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected b} this project." Property owned by FHR east of US Highway 52 to the Mississippi River is located in the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (NINlItRA The proposed' project site is located on the west side of the Refinery, 3,000 to 4,000 feet from the NfNRRA corridor. The project site should not be visible from the NINTTIT' corridor. The Refinery is currently illurunated at night. Any lighting associated with tank construction or operation would be indistinguishable from lighting of the remainder of the Refinery. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount, Mirtneso[a 16 Worksheet The proposed project is compatible with land use plans and regulations. The Refiner is located mthin the cith of Rosemnent, which ha: adopted a comprehensive plan. The plan includes the Refiner} and rec07 5;zes the Et"Mer to be pa—IL of the 6,000 -acre Pine Bend Industr Ial District. There are no conflicts between the proposed project and the comprehensive plan. Figures 5A and 5B shows the land use zoning The construction and operation of the proposed project is not expected to have anv impact on local infrastructure or public services. The project will be consmuctcd and operated entirely on Refinery property. There may be some minor alterations to Refinery infrastructure, including roadways and access points to these facilities. Additionallv, utilities including electricity, fuel gas piping, steam piping, cooling water connections (identified above), fire protection, and controlled sewer systems will be connected to the process units. No additional significant impacts to community infrastructure are expected from limited additional employment from this project. Other than the equipment identified in this EAW for the LJLSD project, no new process units or large tanks (i.e., greater than one million gallons) have been installed or are anticipated to be installed at the Refinery in the same timeframe (2004 to 2006) as the ULSD project. FHR is evaluating a proicct to shutdown four boilers that were operational in 1955 and replace these boilers with a nest' boiler "ith ultra losy NOx burner technolog.. The boiler project will likely not trigger a mandatory EAW threshold. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount, Minnesota R Vi DrkSheet of the Refiner; and nearby properties. Certain existing process units at the Refinery will be modified during the timeframe of the ULSD project. These process units are subject to current or future Dlaximum .achievable Control Technology standards for ha :-dour air pollutants as well as New Source Performance Standards for criteria pollutants, includinc sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, and carbon monoxide. These modifications have either ahead_: been or will undergo review through the air permit Process by TAPCA and through the state implementation plan admintstrati�c order process (both requiring public comment periods by both EPA and MPCA. Two other projects currently beine undertaken required air permit modifications, but did not require an EAW. The Tier U Gasoline Desulfurization project and FCC project will result in significant emission reductions at the Refinery as well as reductions localip in mobile source emissions based on lower sulfur gasoline standards. Addir,onallv, other projects not requiring pc-,nits wall be unde ^,aken ove; the next few years to continue to comply with Consent Decree requirements as well as furthering FHR's voluntary emission reduction uutmtive. None identified. None Identified RGLI CERTIFICATION. I hereby certify that: The information contained in this document is accurate and complete to the best of my htowledge. The EAW describes the complete project; there are no other projects, stages or components other than those described in this document, which are related to the project as connected actions or phased actions, as defined at Minn. P.. 4110.0200, subps. 9b and 60, respectively. Copies of this EAW are being sent to the entire EQB distribution list. Name and Title of Signer: Beth G. Lockwood, Supervisor, Environmental Review unit Operations and Environmental Review Section Regional Environmental Management Division Date: Z. do S/ The format of the Environmental Assessment WQTksheet was prepared by the staff of the Environmental Quality Board at ?Minnesota Planning. For additional information, worksheets or for E:9 iP Guidelines, contact: Environmental Quality Board, 655 Cedar St., St. Paul, NfN 55155, 651 296 5'_53, nr at their Web site hito:` mrnlan.:;;,!c mn.cs Flint Hills Resources. LP Ulca Lom Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Rosemount, Mimesota IS Worksheel off Mw- Eagan Burnsville Inver Grove Heights Pine Bmid Refin RoserrKxj N A Figure 1 2 4 6 NO= GENERAL PROTECT LOCATION DAKOTA COUNTY, NIN LTLSD STORAGE TANKS 5 0 Flint Hills Resources, LP T=;zzz?-mm� Pine Bend, AP; -,, � � E�z - � P k� �r ,� , - ; k'� :f� `� , f �r��},� {'y �� :�' /111�:i� r ��r �, �'� /'�! I�.�(X�. � ' �a-- .J / ��; � �, �+-1c1� � T itl�� F! ��mir7 �r�tr �. 11f '!' ��) �+�� 1�,•� �0��; �-�� §-f�•� .:�.� , . :� \ }� 1 a� v {; .}(��-5.:,,.,�� 5• �.. \ JI � •6i�7�!c�,J \�� . . . �/ t� F'� � ; � , ai�� , O � � l �� - ��I �/� .�: , � ��,�, tr �:(� ��t� ' t ' .,i ` �"`� C� '•�(" � � . '�,j� )G' r a� � F� .dl �r '� � : :. r ^ v'"i �mj`�' �� ''.,� t . .l / �T� I � `..� 1 � /r��''�� f ��J<.fh f.:��` F� S''� IZ y( � J Y ,� \�.. ✓ .wj c" \Q�} 'J '"!'°¢/f��'�.�-� W��}i �*`�ry ,�:� �� t�Z �J r / [ - �• r �--�1�� r�� o� � ^l� j�/t ' a '"�' �. m � , � a m,, 7� � ,,,�b.�;-j �.k�' ;� � a( � �� r _�i � Ar"''`�1--*�'�r� � I , ;,� �, ,J '�,,`;`- � CJ'¢,�� ,\` �.,,..1•�:� `, � �� ,`��`- V V ffi � � i. s f �} ( � ..; i�'i � r•'�� x � f ` j� � (% �;till) 11 � .�/� y� �v �,:� ...� V'�-t � N �� ,'�� Y �.' `, . � ' � .� ��..a lr�, ( 1 \ � �i zar-�@. j�f- - J/ �. � Cr-`r � 4p �� 61 G7 � � i / . / �" �� fj �P i ,j� .i �k� �"r-1 .rl'`_� '�' � : i. � 1 �)1 bA �p.�{Yi� �- � �_.. �t � 1 rJ ��i /// ✓ � 1 ti� �' I 4 �' (r�'� C� � r��-y � ��.a; �\II�/.��/� /!// � O A h y _ �' �` '" - �' �� /: `�_ � -- C7 ' . � ��• •� f' � ��- - � aF-_,-`, �'� '�} �`�f# �:�. -� � r ,�,'�, �� ,7 �'!� �4� .� �J �,,�7��, ' �f `�y�^��,\ '\ ` `l--`, ' �\��.�I � �� fA i :r� � � '�,o i -�� ;'!'�frl -��1 !� . - � q . � � -_ �.-�\ 1 ' � ' � . , ,� C3" '�'i��. , � , o\_j � z � �;� ,,�� ;� r�� ''I�``�� l -� a � �.i1 �� .bV '� I �` ' / . ' '. �T{ m : � � `� 1 ��1�1 �„ ��/ \�� `-�I r� � . �.... $h� W _ r�r> v� '�"�..'�!'� ?�,� tll(�J°� -�� l_r-= �v .�` r=_ _,?�-_�'� � - ,��Y MS a �-, 1 � w } � a ` '" " �� i-.� �� ,� �'' 4 � � � � �.��'• ` � �%: • � - -- - �, --.r�� , ,o w G ��1 ' ' � ,�rf`� � I - + 4•• , � � _l� �{al , � �:i � ;.3 �, ��u^': .r- � � •`} ir ;.-r:.� ' ` � .�r�\�� ^; i�., . ' n.� i� _ 1µ� .� :�' -.,� li��.- � ,f';��.�~.�� I�� .�,� � ) �� l Ci�.. : ��, � ;� � �� -, — �"}� � I �" 1I � ��2�,,,L�'ll.\.1 V;fip .:�� i . J � '� ,1� :_ -- � -i.�. � � 1' .r � �_. i 1�' l.�^-� 't/ � ��. � ��. ' �� -,' � 1 II � ,�+-.'-1�-.�� • A `$, l 51- 1 r � � , •,-. �L� >�: �. ; . l '� °� \i�,4ki� _� • �r � o ' � _ y;' � . � � _ - -- - �,`��. � � �5' 1 � _.r� ��:, � �`� � ��t "�� - � "�A'� .�• ,.�• ?,�I ,-�. �� i _ �/ . r / �.^i, � �� ,J :��` � ; ` '� 1 � �`�,, y� �� - � , ,� � (� `J cn , ' � \ J `� � ; � g � ' �� f � � ��!• �.�1 �� i}.=�.. ! ',�.. � � .�. & i '��1� r �1r-�- i�^,' .�C! • " ' � p �� I - � ��'] � f�� Y�� _��_S a r ,Yr, �'' , �j O �,'`��`�' { ��\�o/ , `") �(�sc,�� ur�, _ �� '`q�d -,�.��. � sf"�� _rl ��i� �y :� z $ � � ��;I ��\�_� %/ � �� . �� ,t►4f,nrt -5 � � � i.� t : .�. i h! . �\ I'i '� N ` ; � � I �F a _ � � � '� � a ' . a��K Sa t_r,� t �� y�? � 7 )✓ ��` % i ��'�f ��'� � :� �_ � �:l ~c� � -� 1,I � � ('�. yf r � -- f � �%�'i �� •�;;,i,.�,�_�--_,��• • o_:_,�C_., .a ; 'i ;:��^ _ ' `�� - : 9� `` � � � 'E l'` , ��; • ,� ��f �._�� r�, � �.�_- i� ` �� _. 1 �� - 7 '4� �± `'� :�S ^J � � � � �fi�'� - ��` � �5� � o 't• � r ¢� /' �' v �� . `�.1 .a " .� .� � _ � �.�� :� `"�- � , _ .�. �,�a_, .r - :�-: / � -., „r- ��-� J • �; ��:�_ , , - � �'�� o `y`•�` �'�{� `��. l .�c�� ` '+ �•��:,rt � "_ � - � //� �,• � � !�_w� .�..., . �(_ _�'Y_— j.' . ��r ��1� � . � `� { ! �v '}/'y � .) �P ~�`� ' j- � � J � � �� ` � � +��L ( { ( pp �� c;� S �� 4 _. ,�r �ONF- .1`�-._,.�z .\ � 1• _ � �� 1-\�� O ��,�� >r � •� ` .,f�u ; ��''� - �' � (`� , , �.. � �, , � .� o � � �n ._. S ` ' i �� r� L_ 'p ��' .� :�,, I`1 � .� yi�1..� ��. � � f� .I / i'-�,`� -� (j�,.% ��:C�/',� 1 - "�' � ,, � }� ., � � `� -� dL-,.1Jr��I1 :C.�� C Q J>��{ i�� i� [�i�qy L" �f \. .� �i\•( �\�o `� I-�` \ �� ''-"1�� r A ^JJ , >1 t �' f I` l �� , I � 1+ /\ /� :I � / _ � Q1 �, ..Z�• j J _1 i'l. � / P s- ��I _ r , Ill(i'l� ._� �/ Nr- .� -��, �:3.� �M � �.-.� 'm � I � y r. �.1�` �� I. .` i' F.r' 2 .�.��v. ,"� ,.-a� , _r�" •a,. �;-.- �• �';., �—�`'!� q V'��---�.=;" _ ?`' "�� L;- � m - J --_�� S�" . .�� l ,'' .�{ ��, -- �---a \' .� 1f� ,is �C�� ,� ��i_L� 1. � �. ,'�i"' C- ' '��,:�{-s-�-_I�� , � ��-,� �� -� � ,%f,� � ��`,1` m � �,�:�� ( ' '�'s ,.J '_1' -�r� '�e°- - � ' , �° '^ j�f _./ ��1 �-'� > f�` �MF '�� J� �� \_•,�- �=�G. �� '�(�� '' �/�/�� r'� �� ]/' J� -1 ,V !;�) �� ,_,� r' _ c , •.i �' � i i :`` � i i` /..-/ ` , c �f �'1� _'_'' � =� � in ,`��'- I . _``{°�� '�`-, 'Z � �L'�j � , � '_ },��- .�� /' � �f'�.✓ ,/�^!(` ! ��, /�--� .� //J'� �%/'n: J�l` F l:r;•'1�'1'� /' ��`�\ i 'H/�J rCJ(y��Nr� `� O� Y�7J'`�� [J �(� ��/)�/. � // �(:� `-�1 / , ��`' �/• r �",�, ( y`•�� ,1 � �IS l , 1 �__ ( I /1 Yi� C 1 �/�(� � / f-�� 4Q 1�'t 1 ��- �r r �� l� /\ . . � . . 1 � ��.� _� .!'��✓� C\^l�f`' �-� L ` �" � _� -.J ) J ,�/� � , F,;,C" � ' /� � �/ �-1�� I , � . _�,�-, .,��,;c. u . , �`. - , " ,� ti l' (1 J-f'=s;''� �`�r ?)S �, S `�: f` � �� / � . l��:,� �,� yTi�o�-j�1 -�k��.�� f' \ N /i 'J � � � �. rf� �` , 1 S � _� ) ' )� � �= ��\�'� (��' ^. v`l � � /�� (� ( - � . �' f.J,�.�� - tii i.�\5�'� :��i Jr,,� � • COOZDl�6f�LIZZ�B"ol'('I'9'd`WDl1Ol�+7'�� • '� ��R �. � � � . �'4 iN°�M1Y3ZDQOl[21�F�(wd�.B101P�'�9'4d4{�yuwp�:�'p�ld0'6-C""�5�'W�wa Pq 423 IM Vckd T "P Ta)* IN 1; -T;W* IR+ Wept,1 ,.Y.. i s. Tenll� arm r,� i78 Be stm of V. :1 IF ir r JL' 4 MAL Attachment 1 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Natural Heritage and Nongamc RMamh Prog Box 25 51X1 Lafi voic Road St. Pant Minnewla 55155 -40 Phooc: (651) 296-7863 Fax: (651) 296.1811 E -mail: sarah.hofEmam @dar.state.um.us f July 29, 2003 Color S. Brownlow ✓GC 3 j L` J Barr Engineering Company C' 0 3 4700 West 77 St. Minneapolis, NIN 55435 -4803 Re: Request for Natural Heritage information for vicinity of proposed Flint Hills Resources Ulna Low Sulfirr Diesel Fuel Refinery, TI 15N R1 9W Sections 13, 14 24, Dakota County NHNRP Contact ERDB 2004D051 Dear Mr. Browrilow, The Minnesota Natural Heritage database has been reviewed to determine if any rare plant or animal species or other significant natural features arc known to occur within an approximate one -mile radius of the area indicated on the map enclosed with your information request- Based on this review, there are 11 known occurrences of rare species or natural communities in the area searched (for details, see enclosed database printout and explanation of selected fields). An area identified by the Minnesota County Biological Survey as a "Site of High Biodiversity Significance' is located immediately east of the project area between Highway 52 and the Mississippi River. "Sites of Biodiversity Significance" are areas with varying levels of native biodiversity that may contain high quality native plant communities, rare plants, rate animals, and/or animal aggregations. Biodiversity significance is evaluated on the basis of the number of rare species, the quality of the native plant communities, size of site, and context within the landscape. This particular site contains Dry Prairie and Oak Forest Natural Communities as well as populations of James' Polanisia (Cri.srarella jamesii), a threatened plant species and Creeping Juniper (luniperur horizontalis), a special concern species. Additioually, a Bald Eagle nesting area has been documented within the significance site. As I am unaware of what all is involved with producing ultra low sulfur diesel fuels I am unable to comment on potential impacts at this time. Please consider whether any aspect of the project (e.g. emissions, pipeline construction, utility connections) could negatively impact the aforementioned rare features. This determination, its justification, and any proposed mitigationlavoidance measures should be addressed in section 11 b of the EAW. The Natural Heritage database is maintained by the Natural Heritage and Nongame Research Program, a unit within the Division of Ecological Services, Department of Natural Resources. It is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, natural communities, and other natural features. Its purpose is to foster better understanding and protection of these features. Because our information is not based on a comprehensive inventory, there may be rare or otherwise significant natural features in the state that are not represented in the database. A county-by- county survey of rare natural features is now underway, and has been completed for Dakota County. Our DNRlnformation:651- 296 -6157 1 -888- 646 -6367 TTY: 65] 296 -5484 1 -800 -657 -3929 M Equal Opportunity Employer I'Thm m PeLwod Paper ComziNrq a Who VAIum Diversity 0 tilV*WM of 10%P=-c Sumer waste information about natural communities is, therefore, quite thorough for that county. However, because survey work for raze plants and animals is less exhaustive, and because there has not hcen an on -site survey of all areas of the county, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist on the project area. The enclosed results of the database search are provided in two formats: index and full record. To control the release of locational information which might result in the damage or destruction of a rare element. both printout formats are copyrighted. The index provides tare feature locations only to the nearest section, and may be reprinted, unaltered, in an Environmental Assessment Worksheet, municipal natural resource plan, or report compiled by your company for the project listed above. If you wish to reproduce the index for any other Purpose, please contact me to re-quest written permission. Copyright notice for the index should include the following disclaimer. "Copyright (year) State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources. This index may be reprinted, unaltered. in Environmental Assessrnent Workshects, municipal natural resourcc plans, and internal reports. For any other use, written permission is required." The full- record printout includes more detailed locational information, and is for your personal use only. If you wish to reprint the full- record printouts for any purpose, please contact me to request written permission. Please be aware that review by the Natural Heritage and Nougame Research Program focuses only on rare natural features. It does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whole. If you require further information on the environmental review process for other wildlife related issues, you may contact your Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Rayne Barstad, at (651) 772 -7940. An invoice for the work completed is enclosed. You are being billed for map and database search and staff scientist review. Please forward this invoice to your Accounts Payable DepartmenL Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. Sincerely, Sarah D. Hoffmann Endangered Species Environmental Review Coordinator encl: Database search results Rare Feature Database Print -Outs: An Explanation of Fields Invoice cc: Wayne Barstad Attachment 2 YII�� };�UT1 HI�TnFUi.11 S+ICIF.TI STATE HfSFOR1c PRESERVATION OFFICE August 5, 2003 Mr. Colin Brownlow Barr Engineering 4700 West 77 Street Minneapolis, MN 55435 -4803 RE: Ultra Low Suffur Diesel Project, Flint Hills Resources T1 15 R1 9 S1 3, S14 S24 T1 15 R18 S1 8 S19, SHPO Number. 2003 -3038 Dear Mr. Brownlow: RECEIVED AUG 0 8 2003 Barr Engineering Co. Rosemount, Dakota County Thank you for consulting with our office during the preparation of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the above referenced project. Based on our review of the project information, we conclude that there are no properties listed on the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area that will be affected by this project. Please note that this comment letter does not address the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 36CFR800, Procedures of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the protection of historic properties. If this project is considered for federal assistance, or requires a federal permit or license, it should be submitted to our office with reference to the assisting federal agency. Please contact us at (651) 296 -5462 if you have any questions regarding our comments on this project. Sincerely, Dennis A. Gimmestad Government Programs and Compliance Officer 13K. .,;-,I ...n.1l1 Ii`.nw An,. -w., :�:,I�I ?.I•nuJ'I'd. 1.11.11.. ".1_ -nl:� 4 a. v� April 6, 2004 COF V& D Minnesota Pollution Control Agency n 'Ib TO INTERESTED PARTIES: RE: Flint Hills Resources, LP— Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has approved the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order for a Negative Declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels, Dakota County. The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order document concludes that this project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. The decision for a Negative Declaration completes the state environmental review process under the revised Environmental Quality Board rules, Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7. This project can now proceed to permitting. We want to express our appreciation to those of you who submitted comments on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Your comments and responses to them have been incorporated into the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order and will assist MPCA staff in drafting permits for the proposed project. Sincerely, o Beth G. Lockwood Supervisor, Environmental Review Unit Operations and Environmental Review Section Regional Environmental Management Division BGL:min Enclosure 520 Latayette Rd. N.; Saint Paul, MN 55155 -4194; (651) 296 -63DO (Voice); (651) 282 -5332 (TTY); www.pca.state.mn.us St. Paul Brainerd Detroit Lakes Duluth Mankato Marshall Rochester Willmar Equal opportunity Employer Printed on recycled paper contaming at least 20 pencenl fibers from paper recycled by consumers. April 6, 2009 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 1n ?Z4 TO INTERESTED PARTIES: RE: Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) has approved the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order for a Negative Declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement on the proposed Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels, Dakota County. The Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order document concludes that this project does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. The decision for a Negative Declaration completes the state environmental review process under the revised Environmental Quality Board rules, Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7. This project can now proceed to permitting. We want to express our appreciation to those of you who submitted comments on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet. Your comments and responses to them have been incorporated into the Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order and will assist MPCA staff in drafting permits for the proposed project. Sincerely, Beth G. Lockwood Supervisor, Environmental Review Unit Operations and Environmental Review Section Regional Environmental Management Division BGL:min Enclosure 520 Lafayette Rd. N.; Saint Paul, MN 55155 -4194; (651) 296 -6300 (Voice); (651) 282 -5332 (TTY); www.pca.state.mmus St. Paul Brainerd Detroit Lakes Duluth Mankato Marshall Rochester Willmar Equal Opponunq Employer Printed on recycled paper containing at least 2C percent fibers from paper recycled by consumers. STATE OF MINNESOTA MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY IN THE MATTER OF THE DECISION ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT FLINT HILLS RESOURCES, LP- ULTRA LOW CONCLUSIONS OF LAW SULFUR DIESEL FUELS, ROSEMOUNT, AND ORDER DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT Pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.1000 4410.1600 (2001), the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff has prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed project. Based on the 1`1PCA staff environmental review, comments, and information received during the comment period, and other information in the record of the MPCA, the MPCA hereby makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order: PROJECT SITE Flint Hills Resources, LP (FHR) Refinery is located in the Pine Bend Industrial District in Rosemount, Minnesota. Situated at the junction of U.S. Highway 52 and State Highway 55, the Refinery is approximately eight miles northwest of the town of Hastings, six miles northeast of Rosemount and six miles south of Inver Grove Heights. All of the project construction will be within the existing Refinery boundaries. The area adjacent and to the west of the Refinery is zoned agricultural land. The Refinery site, as well as the area immediately to the east, is zoned industrial. Small residential subdivisions are nearby: one is two miles southwest of the Refinery; another, one mile northwest: and a third, one mile north. The southwest division is owned by FHR for employee use. Other homes are scattered across the agricultural lands or along roads. PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION In January 2001, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated its Control of Air Pollution from New Motor Vehicles: Heaxi Duty Engine and Motor Vehicle Standards and Hio Diesel Fuel Sulfur Requirements The promulgated rule requires that all diesel fuel producers generate low sulfur diesel fuels (ULSD) by June 1, 2006. In order to produce the ULSD fuels at the Refinery, FHR will be installing the following new equipment: a hydrogen plant, a hydrocracker, three 300,000- barrel storage tanks, and expansion of an existing cooling tower. In order to meet the needs of the consumers and comply with the new EPA requirements, the Refinery must begin installation of the ULSD equipment by June 2004. TDD (for hearing and spmch impaired only). (651) 282 -5332 Printed on reycfeif paper cnnmrr:ing n: least 30 %Aber, frum paper recycled br consumers Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Findings of Fact Rosemount, Minnesota Conclusions of Law And Order PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. Pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.4300, subp. 10, an EAW was prepared by MPCA staff on the proposed project. Pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.1500 (2001), the EAW was distributed to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) mailing list and other interested parties on February 15, 2004. 2. The MPCA notified the public of the availability of the EAW for public comment. A news release was provided to the Minneapolis Public Library and Dakota County Libraries, as well as other interested parties on February 13, 2004. In addition, the EAW was published in the EQB Monitor on February 16, 2004, and available for review on the MPCA Web site at httv:;; www.pca.state.mmusinewsleaw i index. html 3. The public comment period for the EAW began on February 16, 2004, and ended on March 17, 2004. During the 30 -day comment period, the MPCA received five comment letters from go�cmment agencies. 4. The MPCA prepared responses to all comments received during the 30 -day public comment period. Comment letters received have been hereby incorporated by reference as Appendix A to these findings. The MPCA responses to comments received are hereby incorporated by reference as Appendix B to these findings. CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 5. Under Minn. R. 4410.1700 (2001), the b1PCA must order an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for projects that have the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur. In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the MPCA must compare the impacts that may be reasonably expected to occur from the project with the criteria set forth in Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7 (2001). These criteria are: A. the type, extent, and revcrsibility of environmental effects; B. cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects; C. the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority; and D. the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Rosemount, Minnesota Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law And Order THE MPCA FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO EACH OF THESE CRITERIA ARE SET FORTH BELOW Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects 6. The first criterion that the MPCA must consider, when determining if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur, is the "type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects" Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7.A (2001). The MPCA findings with respect to each of these factors are set forth below. Reasonably expected environmental effects of this project to air quality Total potential emissions from the new equipment installed to produce ULSD fuel. 8. The extent of any potential air quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: FHR is proposing emission limitations in the air per application to demonstrate that the net emissions increase for the project is less than the PSD applicability thresholds for all pollutants. FHR is neanng the end of a five -year commitment with the Emission Reduction Initiative to reduce overall emissions by 50 percent by the year 2004. Even with the emission increases due to the new project, FHR is not expecting overall site -wide emissions in 2006 to increase significantly beyond those that will be emitted in 2004 following startup of the new units. The reversibility of any potential air quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: The MPCA finds that any potential effect that is reasonably likely to occur from this project would be reversible. As discussed above, the expected effects on air quality are minimal. There is no reason to believe that this project is reasonably expected to cause a significant negative effect on air quality. 11. The MPCA finds that the environmental review is adequate to address the concerns because: All potential impacts to air quality that are reasonably expected to occur from the proposed project have been considered during the review process and methods to prevent these impacts have been developed. 12. The MPCA finds that the project, as it is proposed, does not have the potential for significant environmental effects based on the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects reasonably expected to occur as a result of its air emissions. 13. Reasonably expected environmental effects of this project to ground water: The Refinery may need to install a ground -water well to provide process water to the new treatment units. The new treatment units have been desitmed to minimize water use to the extent possible. FHR is examining alternatives to reuse water to minimize the amount of the appropriations increase needed Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Rosemount, Minnesota Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law And Order 14. The extent of any potential ground water effects that are reasonably expected to occur: A three dimensional computer ground -water model of Dakota County, developed for the Minnesota Department of Health, was used to evaluate several alternative well locations within the Refinery in order to predict the impacts on the ground water in the surrounding area. FHR is working with Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) and Dakota County on this modeling effort. The DNR, based on preliminary modeling, indicate concurrence that this well i not likely to cause waver availability or volume problems. 15. The reversibility of any potential ground water effects that are reasonably expected to occur: The MPCA finds that any potential effect that is reasonably likely to occur from this project would be reversible. As discussed above, the expected effects on ground water are minimal. There is no reason to believe that this project is reasonably expected to cause a significant negative effect on water quality. 16. Comments received that expressed concems regarding potential effects to ground water: Some comment letters expressed concern that additional pumping of ground water may affect the amount of available water in the area. As discussed above in sections 14 and 15, the analysis indicates that the effects on water quality that are reasonably expected to occur are not significant. 17. The MPCA finds that the environmental review is adequate to address the concems because: All potential impacts to ground water that are reasonably expected to occur from the proposed expansion of this facility have been considered during the review process and a method to prevent these impacts has been developed. 18. The MPCA finds that the project as it is proposed does not have the potential for significant effects on ground water based on the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects reasonably expected to occur. Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects 19. The second criterion that the A1PCA must consider, when determining if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur, is the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects," Minn. R. 4110.1700, subp. 7.B (2001). The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below. 20. The EAW, public comments, and MPCA follow -up evaluation did not disclose any related or anticipated future projects that may interact with this project in such a way as to identify any potential cumulative environmental impacts that are reasonably expected to occur. Cl Flint Hills Resources. LP Ulna Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Rosemount, Minnesota Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law And Order The Extent to Which the Environmental Effects Are Subject To Mitigation by Ongoing Public Regulatory Authority 23. The third criterion that the MPCA must consider, when determining if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur, is "the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority," Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7.0 (2001). The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below. 24 The Ulm) ing permits or approvals will be required for the project: Unit of Government Permit or Approval Required Status A. MPCA Air Emission Permit Applied for B. MPCA Industrial Stormwater Permit Modifications to be made C. MPCA Construction Stormwater Permit To be applied for D. MPCA National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System MDES) Wastewater Permit Modifications E. MPCA/EPA State Implementation Plan (SIP) Administrative Order Modification Modifications to be made F. hIPCA 1998+ Stipulation Agreement Modifications to be made G. MPCA Spill Prevention Modifications to be made H. MPCA Above Ground Storage Tank Permit To be applied for 1. Dakota County Well Permit To be applied for J. DNR Appropriations permit Modification K. City of Rosemount Fire Marshall Plan Review To be submitted L. City of Rosemount Community Planning Building Permit T o be submitted 25. A. Air Emission Permit The Air Emission Permit for the facility would contain operational and emission limits, including requirements for use of control equipment, that would help prevent or minimize the potential for significant environmental effects. B. NPDES,SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit and Spill Response Plan The NPDES!SDS Industrial Stormwater Permit requires that specific conditions be adhered to for construction and operation of the facility, and for overall compliance with water quality requirements. The facility will need to prepare a Spill Response Plan and/or revise its Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ulna Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Rosemount, Minnesota Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law And Order C. NPDES Stormwater Construction Permit A general NPDES Stom water Construction Permit is required when a proiect disturbs one or more acres. It provides for the use of Best N1 aria gement Practices such as silt fences, bale checks, and prompt revegetanon to prevent eroded sediment from leaving the construction site. The proposer must have a sediment and erosion control plan that will provide more detail as to the specific measures to be implemented and will also address. phased construction; vehicle tracking of sediment t inspection of erosion control measures implemented, and timeframes in which erosion control measures will be implemented. The general permit also require adequate stormwater treatment capacity be provided to assure that water quality will not be impacted by runoff once the project is constructed. D. NPDES'SDS Discharge Permit to Receiving Waters An NPDES permit will be prepared and issued by the MPCA following a 30 -day public comment period. The NPDES permit authorizes a maximum discharge flow and pollutant loading allowed from the facility. Effluent limitations established within the permit ensure that water quality in the receiving water is protected E. State Implementation Plan Administrative Order An administrative order modification will be made to include new sources of sulfur dioxide emissions. G. Spill Prevention. Control and Cleanup Plan (SPCCPI Certain facilities that store oil and that could affect a navigable water or adjoining shoreline must prepare the SPCCP. Elements include secondary containment, facility layout and drainage pattem, and cleanup procedures, among other requirements. FHR will be making administrative changes to the existing plan. H. Above Ground Storage Tank Permit The Above Ground Storage Tank Permit includes operational limits and construction requirements that would help prevent or minimize the potential for significant environmental effects. Requirements include a secondary containment area, routine monitoring for leaks, corrosion protection for the floor of the tank, overfill prevention equipment, and areas where substances are transferred must be equipped with spill containment. I. County Well Permit A Dakota County well installation permit will be required. I. Water Appropriation Permit The Water Appropriation Permit is required for all users withdrawing more than 10,000 gallons of water per day or one million gallons per year. The purpose of the permit program is to ensure water resources are managed so that adequate supply is provided to long -range seasonal requirements for domestic, agricultural, fish and wildlife, recreational, power, navigational, and quality control. The program exists to balance competing management objectives including both the development and protection of the water resources. Information Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Rosemount, Minnesota Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law And Order on permitted water users and reported water use is used to evaluate impacts from pumping on surface and ground water resources. Water use data are also used for water supply planning and resolving water use conflicts and well interferences. The DNR administers this permit and requires monthly usage monitoring and annual reporting to ensure that surrounding communities' and industries' water supplies will not be affected by draw -down of the aquifer. Minn. Stat. 103G.261 establishes domestic water use as the highest priority of the state's water when supplies are limited. K. Plan Approval The State Fire Marshal Division conducts plan reviews for Aboveground Storage Tanks that contain flammable (Class 1) liquids at bulk plants, chemical plants, refineries, and processing plants. The plan review would consider such design elements as flammable materials storage and conformance with setbacks. L. Grading and Building Permits Building permits and inspections assure that the project will be constructed or installed in accordance with city ordinances and codes. 26. The MPCA finds that ongoing public regulatory authority will address any significant potential environmental effects that were identified as reasonably expected to occur. The Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled as a Result of Other Available Environmental Studies Undertaken b3 Public Agencies or the Project Proposer, Including Other EISs. 27. The fourth criterion that the MPCA must consider is "the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other E1Ss." Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7.1) (2001). The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below. 28. The following documents were reviewed by MPCA staff as part of the potential environmental impact analysis for the proposed expansion of the Flint Hills Facility. This list is not intended to be exhaustive. The MPCA also relies on information provided by the project proposer, commentors. staff experience, and other available information. EAW Data Permit Application Ground -water modeling 29. There are no elements of the project that pose the potential for significant environmental effects that cannot be addressed in the project design and permit development processes, or by regional and local plans. Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Rosemount, Minnesota Findings of Fact Conclusions of Law And Order 30. Based on the environmental review, previous environmental studies, and MPCA staff expertise on similar projects, the MPCA finds that the environmental effects of the project that are reasonably expected to occur can be anticipated and controlled. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 31. The MPCA has jurisdiction to determining the need for an EIS for this project. The EAW, the permit development process, the facility planning process, responses prepared by MPCA staff in response to comments on the FHR EAW, and the evidence in the record are adequate to support a reasoned decision regarding the potential significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur from this project. 32. Areas where the potential for significant environmental effects may have existed have been identified and appropriate mitigation measures have been incorporated into the protect design and permits. The project is expected to comply with all MPCA standards. 33. Based on the criteria established in Minn. R. 4410.1700 (2001), there are no potential significant environmental effects reasonably expected to occur from the project. 34. An EIS is not required. 35. Any findings that might properly be termed conclusions and any conclusions that might properly be termed findings are hereby adopted as such. ORDER The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency determines that there are no potential significant environmental effects reasonably expected to occur from the Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Project and that there is no need for an Environmental Impact Statement. IT IS SO ORDERED Sher7 A. otrtg'an, Commissioner Minnesota Pollution Control Agency I Date APPENDIX A Minnesota Pollution Control .Agency Flint Hills Resources, LP— Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental .Assessment Worksheet COMMENT LETTERS RECEIVED 1. Phyllis Hanson, Manager, Metropolitan Council. Letter received on March 19, 2004. 2. Lynn Moratzka, Director, Dakota County. Letter received on March 17, 2004. 3. James G. Willis, City Administrator, City of Inver Grove Heights. Letter received on March 17. 2004. 4. Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Letter received on March 18, 2004. 5. JoAnn M. Kyral, Superintendent, United States Department of the Interior. Letter received on March 17. 2004. Metropolitan Council Building communi(les tha( work RECEIVE MAR 1 9 2004 March 16, 2004 MPCA ENVIRONMENTAL Kelly Garvey REVIEW UNIT 520 Lafayette Road North St Paul, Minnesota 55155 RE: City of Rosemount Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Metropolitan Council District 16 (Brian McDaniel, 952- 997 -7731) Reviews File No. 19159 -1 Dear Ms. Garvey: The Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels project proposes to produce ultra low sulfur diesel fuels at the Pine Bend Refinery. Production of this diesel fuel requires the construction of a hydrogen plant. a hydrocracker, three 12,600,000 gallon storage tanks, and expanded cooling lower capacity. The project is within the boundaries of the existing Pine Bend Refinery complex. The complex is located south of the north City boundary and west of State Highway 55. The staff review finds the EAW is complete and accurate with respect to regional concerns and raises no major issues of consistency with Council policies. An Environmental Impact Statement is not necessary for regional purposes. Staff provides the following comments for your consideration: Item #25 Nearby Resources. Dakota County Spring Lake Regional Park and the planned Mississippi River Regional Trail are located east of the proposed project. The river is a State designated Canoe and Boating Route and a State Critical Area. Item #26 Visual Impacts. On page 8, Item 12 states, "in summary the ULSD project will not be visible from much of the significance site." Appropriate buffer screening around the proposed development should be planned where the development is visible from the regional park and other natural resource protection areas along the Mississippi River. Screening buffers could include landscape berms, fencing and native vegetation. This will conclude the Council's review of the EAW. The Council will take no formal action on the EAW. If you have any questions or need further information, please contact Christy Mackaman, pnncipal reviewer, at 651- 602 -1750. Sincerely, I 7 P611is'I anson, Manager Plannii and Technical Assistance cc: Brian McDaniel, Metropolitan Council District 16 Cheryl Olson, Referrals Coordmator V:` acvicwi:c[nnmunll ROSCInuOnl:1 -cum ko;cinounl "1104 C.A Uh,;, law sulfur diesel 191 ?0 -I w .meuocouncil.org Metro Info Line 502 -1BBB 230 East Fifth Svmt St. Paul. ht:nncsoca 55101 -1626 (651) 6021000 Paz 602 -1550 r7] 291 -0904 ,M Equ JPm Wl' Emplafer Office of Planning Lynn G Morauka..AICP D renor Dakou County Western Serve Center 14955 Galax,e A.enue Apple Valley. MN 55124 952.891 7030 Fax 952 091 7031 ..co.dakota.mn.vs C O U N T RECEIVED MAR 1 7 2004 March 15, 2003 Kelly Garvey Protect Manager Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North Saint Paul, MN 55155 RE: Comments on EAW for Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel Fuels, Flint Hills Resources LP, Citv of Rosemount Dear Ms. Garvey MPCA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNIT Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel Fuels project proposed by Flint Hills Resources. The Dakota County Office of Planning has coordinated the County's review by the Environmental Management Department and Office of Planning. Although we do not have any comments at this time, the County's Environmental Management Department [(952) 891 -7557] has detailed information about the area's geology and groundwater that is available, if you or the staff at Flint Hills Resources need it. If you have questions about the County's review, please call me at (952) 891- 7033. We look forward to continuing to work with you as this project progresses. Sincerely, L n Moratzka, Director Office of Planning Encl C' Willis E. Branning, Dakota County Commissioner District 7 Brandt Richardson, County Administrator Greg Konat, Director, Physical Development Division Phyllis Hanson, Metropolitan Council 2 March 16, 2004 City of Inver Grove Heights Kelly Garvey Project Manager Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 RE: Flint Hills Resources EAW Dear Ms. Garvey: RECEIVED MAR 17 2004 MP�A ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNIT The City of Inver Grove Heights appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Flint Hills Resources Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Project. The City recognizes that the Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Project offers the State significant environment benefits. However, the City is concerned about the local impacts of such a project on the area's groundwater. The City believes that further analysis is necessary before the project proceeds. Inver Grove Heights' concern is caused by the concentration of industries in the area, particularly Flint Hills Resources Refinery, BFI Pine Bend's Landfill, and Bituminous Roadways' aggregate mining operation. The concentration of these industries, individually and cumulatively, has impacted the area's groundwater. For example, the Pine Bend Landfill has contaminated groundwater. The City strongly encourages Flint Hills Resources and the State and County to consider increased groundwater consumption as a last resort. Flint Hills Resources should eliminate or limit the amount of water appropriations and, instead, pursue water reuse options, including the use of waste water from Empire Waste Water Treatment Plant, Flint Hills Resources Waste Water Treatment Plant, Flint Hills Resources Process Water, and Flint Hills Resources Remediation System. If, after further analysis of alternatives, it is found that a well is necessary, the City urges additional analysis of groundwater impacts, including: 1) Research and modeling of the impact on the Pine Bend Landfill's contamination plume, especially the flow direction of the plume 2) Research and modeling of the impact on industrial and residential wells in the area 3) Testing of area wells to evaluate groundwater quality 8150 Barbara Ave. Inver Grove Heights, NIN 55017 -3412 Teiephone: 651- 4i,CL2500 Fa:: 651- 4542502 3 Memo Kelly Garvey March 16, 2004 Page Two Thank you again for the opportunity to review and comment upon the Flint Hills Resources' EAVI. Your consideration of the City's comments is appreciated. Sincerely, CITY OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS d a o mes G. Willis ity Administrator JGW /kjf cc: Mayor and Council Thomas J. Link, Director of Community Development Environmental Commission Nancy Schouweller, Chair, Dakota County Board Barry Schade, Dakota County Environmental Management Department Fran Shephardson, Flint Hills Resources rd Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 500 Lul.,Y Rreid st. P.wl. MLnuc,ota 55155 -40 [BY FACSIMILE 10riginal to Follow by Interoffice ?1'Iailj March 16, 2004 Ms. Beth G. Lockwood Supervisor, Environmental Review Unit Operations and Environmental Review Section Regional Environmental Management Division Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) 520 Lafavette Road St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 RE: Flint Hills Resources Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Project Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) Dear Ms. Lockwood: RECEIVED MAR 1 8 2004 MPCA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNIT The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed Flint Hills Resources Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Project at the Flint Hills Resources plant in Rosemount in Dakota County. On February 25, Df;R staff had an opportunity to meet with a representative of your staff along with representatives from Flint Hills Resources to discuss the proposed project. For some time, the DNR has also been involved in discussions and activities regarding natural resources at the Flint Hills Resources site which are not specifically related to this proposed project. We offer the following comments for your consideration on this EAW. Regarding the discussion in this section of the EAW about fish, wildlife, and ecologically sensitive resources, the project proposes to use a Minnesota Department of Transportation (h1nDOT) mix of grasses or seed for the grassland area that will be impacted by the project. The DNR encourages the use of a native prairie planting rather than using a MnDOT mix. Our experience is that MnDOT does have a prairie mixture. If the sites where the grassland is impacted is isolated from other habitat and surrounded by a developed area, the DNR's concerns for the seeding or planting mixture are limited. However, if the sites where the grassland are impacted are adjacent to natural areas, then planting with native prairie would be best. DNR Information: 651- 296 -6157 1 -888- 646 -6367 TTY: 651- 296 -5484 1 -800- 657 -3929 An Equal Opportunity Employer 4M Printed on Recycled Paper Containing a Minimum e.( 104 Po,d- Cnn•.umer %%rite Ms. B. Lockwood March 16, 2004 Page 2 In the discussion in the EAW regarding water use (Item No. 13, Page S), the EAW indicates the new ultra low sulfur diesel fuels process will require an additional 600 gallons per minute (gpm) of water. The additional 600 gpm of water needed for the ne+a process amounts to roughly an additional 315 million gallons of water per year, representing an approximately 1— a 2 increase over the existing permitted water appropriation for the Flint Hills Resources facility (DNR Waters appropriation permit 954 0011). The DNR encourages Flint Hills Resources, before pursuing additional water appropriation from new or existing deep wells, to fully explore and exhaust other water use options such as those identified in the EAW including: (1) upgraded Empire treatment plant effluent being routed near the refinery, (2) Flint Hills Resources wastewater treatment plant effluent, (3) Flint Hills Resources process water, and (4) groundwater withdrawn from Flint Hills Resources remediation system near Spring Lake. The DNR is also concerned that a new deep well or increased pumping from the existing deep wells may cause leakage from the water table in the Prairie du Chien aquifer. Leakage captured by the new well or additional pumping from existing wells would likely have otherwise discharged as seeps at the base of the bluff or to the river. There are vegetative communities known as seepage swamps that rely on the groundwater to maintain their composition. This vegetative community relies on water chemistry and cooler water, rather than the water level of the wetland. Additional analysis related to the effect of changes in the seeps and springs on the vegetative community may be needed. This section of the EAW also suggests that groundwater flow directions will not be altered (Item 13, Page 9). While on a regional scale, this is accurate; groundwater flow direction will remain about the same. However, on a smaller (refinery level) scale a new well will likely alter groundwater flow direction. The DNR recommends that Flint Hills Resources work closely with MPCA staff to ensure that any potential future groundwater appropriation will not negatively affect the contamination plumes under and around the Flint Hills Resources refinery. In addition, regarding the pumping of a new well, DNR staff have questions about whether that would change the flow of the petroleum plume that sits under their refinery. Flint Hills Resources feels that pumping down (lowering) of the aquifer would allow more head space which would be beneficial because more air would be available to come into contact with the petroleum. The modeled drawdowns from an additional groundwater appropriation appear reasonable and relatively modest. If modeling and well information predicts negative effects to nearby domestic wells, these impacts would need to be addressed and mitigated before the DNR could consider any additional groundwater appropriation. Ms. B. Lockwood March 16, 2004 PaSe 3 Regarding reuse of water, DNR staff have suggested that Flint Hills Resources reuse water that is collected in the trench, which is piped up to the plant's wastewater facility. Flint Hills Resources has responded that they are not sure if that water would be clean enough for the process. Additional Information on reuse of water collected in the trench might be helpful. Thank you for the opportunity to review this project and the Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the proposed Flint Hills Resources Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels project. We look forward to receiving your record of decision ar.d responses to comments at the conclusion of environmental review as provided by Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, subparts 4 and 5. If you have questions regarding this letter or these comments, please contact me at 651- 296-4x96 or by electronic mail at tom.balcom@dnJ Sincerely, Thomas W. Balcom, Supervisor Envirenrnewal Policy and Review Unit Division of Ecological Services c: Kathleen Wallace Wayne Barstad Pat Lynch Alarilyn Darks Sarah Hoffmann Steve Colvin Dale Homuth Bruce Gerbig Evan Drivas Kelly Garvey, TVIPCA Ion Larsen, EQB Dan P. Stinnett, USFWS Deb McGovern, Flint Hills Resources Lowell Miller Stolte, P.E., Flint Hills Resources File No.: 20040051 -0002 FLINT HILLS RESURCES ULTRA LOW SULFUR DIESEL FUELS PROJECT EAW (31604F).DOC 5 W ART Or r 9 United States Department of the Interior J D NATIONAL PARK SERVICE RECEIVE I D Mississippi Nminnal River and Recreation Area R I E. Kelluac Bled. IN RLPL1 RLRiR 'N SL Paul. Mwnesota 5 5 1111 -1 2 56 L8022(h11SS) -3 /A MAR 7 ZUUa March 15, 2004 MPCA ENVIR�7NHeNrgt REVIEW UNIT Kelly Garvey Project Manager Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 Dear Ms. Garvey. This letter is in regard to the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels proposal. Portions of the Flint Hills property east of U.S. Huy 55 are within the Mississippi National River and Recreation Area (MNRRA), a unit of the National Park System, and the Mississippi River Critical Area, adnt nistered by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Our comments reflect the proposed project's compatibility with the NINMRA Comprehensive Management Plan f which incorporates, by reference, requirements of the state Critical Area, Shoreland, and Floodplain management programs. Item 9: Land use In addition to the MNRRA, Item 9 should also identify the Critical Area as an adjacent land use. The Critical Area boundary Is identical to that of the MNRRA. A discussion of the proposed project's compatibility with each of these designations should be included. Item 13: Water use The E.AVN' states that the proposal would result in an operational increase in water consumption of up to 600 gpm. Among the potential sources for additional water identified in Item 13 are: upgraded Empire treatment plant effluent, groundwater withdrawn from the Flint Hills remediation system near Spring Lake; and groundwater withdrawn from a new well adjacent to the Mississippi River. If any of the potential sources or methods for water acquisition would involve the use of, or have impacts upon, land areas within the MNRRA/Critical Area, such areas should be clearly identified —y ven if the option of selecting those sources or methods is only considered to be a remote possibility. Potential locations of any wells or other infrastructure needed for the acquisition of new sources of water should be described in detail and identified on maps in the E.AW. Item 14: Rater- related land use management districts If any of the water sources being considered for this proposal would involve the use of, or have impacts upon, land areas within either the 1fi0 -year floodplain or the Shoreland district of the Mississippi River, each of these districts should be identified in Item 14, and compatibility of the proposed project with designated land uses within these districts should be discussed. Item 16: Erosion and sedimentation For any sources or methods being considered for additional water acquisition that would involve the use of, or have impacts upon, land areas within the MNRRA /Critical Area, information about grading or excavation needs should be identified, along with information about any steep slopes or erodible soils that might be impacted. Item 25: Nearby resources Item 25 states that the project site should not be visible from the MNRRA corridor. Is this statement valid for any and all possible water acquisition scenarios identified in Item 13 of the EAW? Other than the project's visual impact, are any other impacts to the MNRRA anticipated? Item 27: Compatibilitv with plans and land use reputations If any aspects of the proposal would have an impact on the MNRRA, Critical Area, Shoreland district, or 100 -year floodplain, compatibility with each of the plans or regulations goveming land use within these areas should be discussed, and resolution of any potential conflicts should be explained. Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Flint Hills Resources, LP Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels EAW. The National Park Service commends Flint Hills for its planned investment in cleaner burning diesel fuel production at its Pine Bend Refinery. Please contact Jim Von Haden at 651 -290 -3030, ext. 235 if you have questions regarding our comments. Sincerely, Jo,knn M. K •r 1 Superintendent cc: Sandy Fecht, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Molly Shodeen. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources APPENDIX B Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Flint Hills Resources, LP —ultra Low Sulfur Diesel Fuels Environmental Assessment Ni'orksheet (EAW) RESPONSE TO COMMENTS ON THE EAW 1. Comments by Pyhllis Hanson, Manager, Metropolitan Council. Letter received on March 19, 2004. Comment: Dakota County Spring Lake Regional Park and the Mississippi River Regional Trail are located East of the proposed project. The river is a State designated Canoe and Boating Route and a State Critical .Area. Response: Comment noted. Comment: Appropriate buffer screening around the proposed development should be planned where the development is visible from the regional park and other natural resource protection areas along the river. Response: As discussed in the EAW, Flint Hills Resources (FHR) will be considering appropriate buffer methods in the unlikely event that construction activitv will take place by the river. 2. Comments by Lynn Moratzka, Director, Dakota County Planning Office. Letter received on March 17. 2004. Comment: The County's environmental management department has detailed information about the area's geology and ground water. Response: Comment noted. 3. Comments by James G. Willis. Citv .Administrator, City of Inver Grove Heiehts. Letter received on March 17. 2004. Comment: Flint Hills Resources should eliminate or limit the amount of water appropriations and instead pursue water reuse options. Response: As discussed in number 13 of the EAW, FHR is strongly pursuing water reuse options. Some of these options include using Empire effluent, FHR's plant effluent. FHR process water and groundwater withdrawn from the FHR remediation site. In addition, the new process units have been designed to minimize water use to the extent possible. Comment: If, after further analysis of alternatives, it is found that a well is necessary, the City urges additional anal_ sis of ground -water impacts. Response: A computer model of ground -water flow was used to evaluate potential worst case draw down that would likely result from pumping of a new well. Another, very detailed, ground- water model of the refiner}• area was also used to examine effects right around the well. Much of this is discussed in number 13 of the draft EAW. The ground -water model has been calibrated to an extensive database of water levels that was developed by the Minnesota Geologic Survev, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), and Dakota Count' EMiTOnmerlt3l Management. The model was used to predict ground -water impacts with a new well pumping at worst case rates. Ground -water flow directions were evaluated at the Pine Bend Sanitary Landfill both with and without the new well pumping. The ground -water Slow directions were found to be virtually unchanged. The modeling results indicate only modest levels of draw down from pumping of the new well under worst case conditions. 4. Comments by Thomas W. Balcom, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Letter received on March 18,'_'004. Comment: The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) encourages the use of native prairie planting rather than using a Minnesota Department of Transportation mix. Response: Comment noted and passed along to the project proposer. Comment: The DNR is concerned that a new deep well or increased pumping from the existing deep wells may cause leakage from the water table in the Prairie du Chien aquifer. Leakage captured by the new well or additional pumping from existing wells would likely have otherwise discharged as seeps at the base of the bluff or to the river. Response: The potential proposed new well will be located in the Jordan Sandstone which will minimize draw down effects of the water table. This well will only be installed if all of the mentioned water reuse options are exhausted. The modeling done in the area using the worst case pumping scenario predicted draw down rates within the range of natural fluctuations that would be expected. In addition, DNR staff has been contacted by MPCA staff to discuss this comment. h w'as brought to our attention that D YR staff would look at this closer during their water appropriation permitting process. Comment: The DNR recommends that FHR work closely with MPCA staff to ensure that any potential future ground -water appropriation will not negatively affect the contaminated plumes. Response: As noted in number 13 in discussions with MPCA ground -water remediation staff, an additional well in the area near the wastewater treatment facility may enhance removal of current contamination. Comment: The modeled draw downs from an additional ground -water appropriation appear to be reasonable and relatively modest. If modeling and well information predict negative effects to nearby domestic wells, these impacts would need to be addressed and mitigated before DNR could consider any additional ground -water appropriations. Response: As discussed in number 13, FHR is working with the neighbors and will be addressing issues and concerns should any be raised. Comment: Additional information on reuse of the water collected in the trench might be helpful. Response: The primary difficulty with reusing the trench water is elevated ammonia and nitrate levels from a neighboring contaminated plume. FHR is evaluating feasibility of treating this water for reuse. 5. Comments by JoAnn M. KVral, Superintendent, United States Department of the Interior. Letter received on %I arch 17, 2004. Comment: The Critical Area boundary is identical to that of the Mississippi National River and Recreation .Area (.NTN discussion of the proposed projects compatibility with each of these designations should be included. Response: Portions of the NNTLAA and the DNR Critical Area immediately east of the refinery is located on land owned by FHR. FHR restricts access to that property to authonaed personnel. In the unlikely event that the eater reuse options are not feasible, the refinen• may need to look at a well located br FHR's barge slip on the Mississippi River as a potential water source. Use of this well would acquire installation of approximately 500 feet of pipeline between the well and the existing pipe rack at the barge slip. This is discussed further in other response to NPS comments. Comment: If any of Inc potential sources or methods for water acquisition would involve the use of, or have impacts upon, land areas within the MINR.AA/Cntical Area such areas should be clearly identified. Response: Comment noted and passed on to the project proposer. Comment: If any of the water sources being considered for this proposal would involve the use of, or have impacts upon, land areas within the 100 -year fioodplain or the Shore )arid district of the Mississippi River. Compatibility of the proposed project with designated land use authorities should be discussed. Response: Comment noted and passed on to the project proposer. Comment: For any source or methods being considered for additional water acquisition that would involve the use of, or have impacts upon land areas within the hfNrRAAJCriticaI area, information about grading or excavation needs should be identified, along with information about any steep slopes or erodible soils that might be impacted. Response: FHR, if necessary, may consider obtaining water from a well located near the barge slip. In the unikely event this option is used, F}iR. would need to obtain a :vale- appropriations permit from D!``R.. A small pipeline would be installed between the well head and the barge slip. The barge slip has an existing unused pipe rack running to the refinery that may be used to carry the v, ater to the refiner n'. The ground in this area is flat. FHR would restore any disrupted areas to the natural conditions. The impacts to this area are expected to be minimal. Comment: Other than visual impacts are there other anticipated impacts on the NfNR.AA from the project. Response: FHR currently operates a ground -water remediation system near Spring Lake. This system could be used as a potential water source. The system is visible in the immediate area of the NiNRAA, but is screened by trees and is not visible from other potions of the NINR4,A. Any changes to this system to allow for reuse of the water would be made on refinery property out side of the NINR4A. There are no other expected impacts to the M `rRAA. Comment: Appropriate organizations should be consulted with if there are any aspects of the project which may affect the NFNRAA/Cnhcal Area. Response: Comment noted. FHR will consult with NPS and DNR staff to address any concerns