FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER FOR EIS NEED DETERMINATION IS NOT WARRANTED

Transcription

1 Date Motion by Commissioner BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA Resolution No. Seconded by Commissioner RESOLUTION In the Matter of the Determination of Need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Knife River Naaktgeboren Gravel Pit Expansion, Wright County, Minnesota. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER FOR EIS NEED DETERMINATION IS NOT WARRANTED HUSOM VETSCH DALEIDEN POTTER BORRELL YES HUSOM VETSCH DALEIDEN POTTER BORRELL NO STATE OF MINNESOTA) County of Wright ) ss. I, Lee Kelly, duly appointed and qualified County Coordinator of the County of Wright, State of Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have compared the foregoing copy of this resolution with the original minutes of the proceedings of the Board of County Commissioners, Wright County, Minnesota, at their session held on the day of, 2017, now on file in my office, and have found the same to be a true and correct copy thereof. Witness my hand and official seal at Buffalo, Minnesota, this day of, Lee Kelly, County Coordinator.

2 WRIGHT COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS In the Matter of the Determination of Need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Knife River Naaktgeboren Gravel Pit Expansion, Wright County, Minnesota. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND ORDER FOR EIS NEED DETERMINATION IS NOT WARRANTED This matter came before the Wright County Board of Commissioners at a regular meeting held on September 12, Statement of Issue Knife River is proposing expanding the existing Naaktgeboren Pit from 40 acres to 81.3 acres. This nonmetallic mineral mine, producing construction sand and gravel, is located in Silver Creek Township, Wright County. MN Rules , subpart 12 requires that an EAW be prepared for the extraction or mining of sand, gravel, stone or other nonmetallic materials, other than peat, which will excavate 40 or more acres of land to a mean depth of ten feet or more during its existence. The Boards decision in this matter shall be either a negative or positive declaration of the need for an EIS. The Board must order an EIS for the project if it determines the project will have the potential for significant environmental effects (MN Rules ). Based on the information in the record, which is comprised of the EAW for the proposed project, written comments received and responses to the comments, the Board makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions: FINDINGS OF FACT Project Description 1. This project would expand the existing Naaktgeboren Pit by 41.3 acres, from 40 to 81.3 acres. This pit is contained within a 131 acre parcel. The pit was granted a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) from Wright County on March 15, To date, all of the originally permitted 40 acres have been mined. This mined area now consists of open pit area that is utilized for aggregate crushing, washing, stockpiling, and hot mix asphalt production. The proposed expanded mining area currently is 28.9 acres of tilled agricultural field and 12.4 acres of wooded area. Mining will take this tilled area out of agricultural production for the duration of the project. A 30 foot mining buffer along property lines is required by County Ordinance, and is observed along mine boundaries that approach property lines. Access to the proposed pit is established through the existing pit.

3 2. Continued mining will involve site preparation by stripping topsoil overburden to expose the sand and gravel material. Site preparation will occur only as needed for that mining season. Overburden will be placed in a berm surrounding the mining area. The material exposed will be mined utilizing the same mining techniques as previously used; front end loader extraction, screening, crushing, washing, and stockpiling. All of the aggregate production equipment is portable and only remains on site while production is occurring. 3. The washing operation includes the use of dug ponds which may be 25 to 30 feet wide by 500 feet long by 10 feet deep. This places the bottom of the ponds approximately seven feet above the surficial groundwater. These ponds are filled with water from an on-site well. Once filled, the water is used in the washing operation and recycled back to the ponds for gravity clarification and reuse. As needed, water is added to the ponds from the well to maintain a steady level. Upon cessation of washing, the water is allowed to infiltrate back into the native soils. There is no discharge of wash water or stormwater from the site. 4. There are no permanent structures in the project area, and none are planned. 5. Per the existing CUP, hours of operation at the site are from 7:00am to 7:00pm, Monday through Saturday, with no more than seven nonconsecutive Saturdays during the construction season. No maintenance or other activities can take place outside of this time. No operations are allowed on Sundays or legal holidays. Knife River will be requesting the same hours of operation in their CUP application requesting this expansion. 6. Final restoration of the site will return the land to agricultural production. Final reclamation plans will be reviewed by the Wright County Planning Commission and must meet all Wright County Ordinance requirements. The currently proposed contours for reclamation are shown in Attachment 1, Map C. 7. Mining into the expansion area will commence as soon as all necessary permitting has been completed. It is estimated that there are approximately 10 construction seasons of material in the expansion area. Activities at the site will probably continue for an additional two years to accommodate stockpile inventory depletion and restoration. Procedural 8. Knife River prepared an EAW and submitted it to the Wright County Planning & Zoning Department (P&Z). Wright County is designated as the responsible government unit (RGU) for this type of project. The Wright County P&Z provided review, edits and

4 additional information to complete the EAW with requested input and clarification of issues from the project proposer. 9. The EAW was filed with the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and notice of its availability was published in the EQB Monitor on June 19, A copy of the EAW was distributed to all persons on the EQB Distribution List and a copy was available for review online on the Wright County P&Z website in addition to a hard copy being available at the Wright County P&Z Office. 10. A press release announcing the availability of the EAW and public comment opportunity was published in the June 21, 2017 issue of the Annandale Advocate. 11. The public review and comment period began on June 19, 2017 and closed on July 19, Comments 12. The Wright County P&Z Department received three comment letters by the close of the comment period. 13. Minnesota Historical Society Letter from Sarah J. Beimers, Manager Government Programs and Compliance, dated July 12, 2017 The commenter recommends a Phase I archeological survey be completed based on the nature and location of the proposed project. It is understood that archeological sites can remain under areas that have been plowed and farmed for decades. However, such a survey should be based on scientific investigations that would predict the likelihood of archeological site presence. Although the commenter cites the location as a reason for recommending a Phase I survey, no information on the location is given to confirm investigations or other data exist to warrant further survey. As this project is not governmentally funded, this survey is not mandated by law. 14. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Letter from Rebecca Horton, Natural Resources Specialist Senior, dated July 18, 2017 The commenter notes that Item 13 section b. incorrectly references Attachment 16. The text has been corrected to reference Attachment 17, DNR Natural Heritage Information System Search. The recommendations for the Red Shouldered Hawk and Bald Eagle are summarized in the table on page 15; the entire recommendations in Correspondence #ERDB will be implemented at the appropriate stage of the project.

5 The corrected text: The Natural Heritage letter from the DNR (Attachment 17) listed the following: State Listed Species Status Recommendation Red-shouldered Hawk Special Concern Inspect trees for nests prior to removal Trumpeter Swan Special Concern Avoid wetland habitat Cerulean Warbler Special Concern No tree disturbance May 15-August 15 Blanding s Turtle Threatened Per DNR Fact Sheet and Flyer Northern Long-eared Bat Special Concern Avoid roosting tree removal (none within 1 mile) Federally Protected Status Recommendation Northern Long-eared Bat Threatened Avoid roosting tree removal (none within 1 mile) Bald Eagle Protected Inspect trees for nests prior to removal The commenter correctly states that the worksheets use of the phrase should be no impact or will be no impact are too definitive. There is still potential for impacting the described features. The commenter also suggests a more thorough discussion in part 13 d. of how the project could affect fish, wildlife, plant communities and sensitive ecological resources. Also, the commenter would like the impact of dust and sediment on downstream water quality discussed. The Changed responses to parts 13 c. and d. are: c. Discuss how the identified fish, wildlife, plant communities, rare features and ecosystems may be affected by the project. Include a discussion on introduction and spread of invasive species from the project construction and operation. Separately discuss effects to known threatened and endangered species. If recommended actions described in Correspondence # ERDB are implemented, impacts on described fish, wildlife, plants, and ecosystems are reduced. In Minnesota, Blanding s Turtles are primarily marsh and pond inhabitants. They do however need both wetland and upland habitat to complete their life cycle. As the area to be mined consists of currently cropped areas and upland woods, there could be impact on the habitat of the Blanding s Turtle. MN DNR recommendation fact sheets are included in Attachment 17. Although there are no known roosting areas for the Northern Long-eared Bat found within one mile of the site, there could potentially be impacts to this threatened species. The bat utilizes live and dead trees for roosts during its active season. Cutting trees could remove potential habitat. Left unattended for prolonged periods of time, gravel pits may become germinating grounds for invasive plant species through seed introduction by wind, water, or passive transport by animals. Introduction is also possible by utilizing seed mixes containing undesirable species during re-vegetation.

6 d. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources. Adverse effects to fish resulting from this project are likely minimal. Excessive dust or sediment discharge from the site could impact surface waters. Measures to mitigate dust and sediment are addressed in sections 16 and 11 respectively. In order to minimize adverse effects on nesting birds, the 12 wooded acres in the project area will be surveyed for large nests that could be home to eagles, osprey, or red-shouldered hawks. If warranted, nests will be treated in accordance with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and/or the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. In all cases, any removal of trees will be accomplished outside of breeding season for all species of concern, from April through August. Employees and operators at the site will be trained on avoiding and minimizing impacts on the Blanding s Turtle. Posters informing equipment operators of the possibility of the turtle s presence and avoidance practices will be hung in central dispatch location to inform truck drivers and in equipment job trailers when on site. Any encounter with a Blanding s Turtle will be reported to the DNR Nongame Specialist in St. Paul. MN DNR recommendation fact sheets are included in Attachment Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Karen Kromar, Planner Principal, Letter dated July 19, 2017 The commenter notes, in relation to item 11, that Silver Lake, Silver Creek, and Millstone Lake are listed as impaired for construction related parameters and that this project must determine compliance with the additional requirements in the construction stormwater permit (CSW). Earth disturbance that is a normal part of the long-term use of the pit does not trigger the need for CSW coverage. Construction activity, as defined by federal regulation, is authorized under MPCA NPDES/SDS permit MNG490000, which covers this site as described in part 11 b.ii. of the worksheet. The additional requirements are also required under MNG and will be met. It is noted in relation to item 16 Air, that there are multiple air permits that if viewed together may require and individual permit. As described in this item, there are three air permits which may cover activities at this site. Two of those permits are Option D Registration permits for portable hot mix asphalt plants. The other is a State General Permit for nonmetallic mineral processing stationary sources at multiple locations. In no cases do the asphalt plants operate simultaneously at this site or any site. Rarely do nonmetallic mineral processing (crushing) and asphalt production occur simultaneously. Aggregate production generally precedes asphalt production. As these air permits are for portable equipment, the emissions at the site are for a short duration. There is no prohibition of simultaneous aggregate and asphalt production in either the State General Permit or the Option D Registration permit. Commenter notes the potential for calcium chloride to contaminate groundwater and surface water and advises there are alternatives to chloride based suppressants available. These

7 alternatives are noted. In the majority of cases, water from an on-site well is used for dust control. The commenter discusses Item 17 noise, and suggests a noise test be completed when any new mining approaches nearby residences. This is a standard practice and will be completed when appropriate. The setbacks in the mining condition map are zoning requirements. This 500 foot setback is for processing and stockpiling of material. It is understood that NAC designations begin at property lines. The comment on equipment mufflers is noted. 16. The Wright County P&Z Department received two comment letters after the close of the comment period, but took the comments under consideration. 17. Minnesota Department of Agriculture from Becky Balk, Land Use Program Manager, dated July 20, The commenter recommends that if the property is reclaimed for agriculture that reclamation plans be prepared by a qualified soil scientist or soil technician. The comment is noted. 18. Army Corps of Engineers, St. Paul District Letter from LeeAnn Glomski, Senior Project Manager, dated July 24, The commenter recommends that if any of the project involves activity in navigable waters of the United States or discharge of dredged material into waters of the United States that proper permits be obtained. The comment is noted.

8 CONCLUSIONS 1. The Wright County Board has jurisdiction in determining the need for an Environmental Impact Statement for this project. 2. The EAW for the proposed Knife River Naaktgeboren Gravel Pit Expansion was distributed as required by MN Rules Responses have been provided to all substantive and timely comments on the EAW. 4. The record includes adequate information to determine whether the proposed Knife River Naaktgeboren Gravel Pit Expansion has the potential for significant environmental effects. 5. As to the criteria established under Rule Subd. 7: a. type, extent and reversibility of environmental effects: The mining of this property will be of a limited duration. The property is proposed to be reclaimed to an agricultural operation after the project is completed. There are limited long term environmental effects from this proposed project and any potential long term effects are going to be mitigated or abated by the project sponsor with the use of reasonable best practices. b. cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects: There are no known cumulative potential effects of related projects. c. the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority: The proposed mining operation will be reviewed by the Wright County Planning Commission as part of the Conditional Use Permit Process. A full public hearing will be conducted as part of that process. The potential environmental concerns included in the EAW can be incorporated into any potential Conditional Use Permit. Conditional Use Permits for mining operations are continually reviewed the Wright County Office of Planning and Zoning for compliance. The Wright County Planning Commission also generally requires annual review of mining operations by the local township. 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: The EAW has adequately addressed all of the potential environmental effects from this proposed project. An EIS would result in duplicative information and does not have the potential to add significant information as to any further potential environmental effects. 6. The proposed Knife River Naaktgeboren Gravel Pit Expansion does not have the potential for significant environmental effects. 7. An EIS is not determined to be appropriate or necessary for this proposed project. 8. Any findings that might properly be termed conclusions and any conclusions that might properly be termed findings are hereby adopted as such.

9 ORDER Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions contained herein and on the entire record: The Wright County Board of Commissioners hereby determines that the proposed Knife River Naaktgeboren Gravel Pit Expansion does not require the preparation of an EIS. Approved and adopted this 12th day of September, 2017 Wright County Board of Commissioners Chair Wright County, Minnesota