4.a b b Staff Report Meeting Date: 4/1/2008
Agenda Item:
, , i )
) 6.)
Planning Commission/ City Council
Agenda Report
City of Scandia
14727 209th St. North
Scandia, MN 55073 (651) 433-2274
Action Requested: Continue the public hearings opened on March 5, 2008 on the
following three applications:
a) Bracht Bros., Inc. Conditional Use Permit for a sand and gravel
mining operation located on the north side of 185th Street, east
of Oakgreen Avenue and west of Old Marine Trail.
b) Dresel Contracting, Inc. Conditional Use Peiuiit for a sand and
gravel mining operation located on 218th Street, west of Lofton
Avenue
c) Tiller Corporation. Conditional Use Permit for a gravel mining
and processing operation at 22303 Manning Trail
Deadline/ Timeline: Review period ends June 12, 2008 for all three applications.
Background: • The planners have provided a report with an update on the review
of the applications, which is underway.
• Correspondence that has been sent and received since the hearing
was opened is attached to this memo.
• Possible dates for site visits for the Planning Commission to tour
all three mining site have been identified:
o Wednesday, April 9
o Wednesday, April 16
o Tuesday, April 22
o Wednesday, April 23
If all are to be conducted on the same day, they should be
scheduled in the late afternoon (starting between 5:00 and 6:00
p.m. if possible) so that they can be completed before dark.
• The site visits will be public meetings. Anyone wishing to attend
will be invited to meet at the Community Center and travel with
the Commission to the sites, and approximately times and
locations to meet at the sites will also be posted.
Recommendation: The Planning Commission should receive the update from the planner,
and take any questions or comments from the public before continuing
Page 1 of 2
03/27/08
the public hearing to the May 6 meeting, at which time we expect a
full review to be complete and recommendations on the permits can
be made.
The Commission should also consider setting a date for your site
visits/special meeting(s).
Attachments/ • Memo from TKDA dated March 27, 2008
Materials provided: • Copies of letters sent to applicants March 27, 2008
• Letter dated March 25, 2008 from John Lindell, with attachments
Contact(s): Sherri Buss, TKDA (651 292-4582)
Richard Thompson, TKDA (651 292-4474)
Prepared by: Anne Hurlburt, Administrator
(CUP hearings for mining operations continued)
Page 2 of 2
03/27/08
TKDA 444 Cedar Street,Suite 1500
Saint Paul,MN 55101-2140
ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS•PLANNERS (651)292-4400
(651)292-0083 Fax
www.tkda,com
MEMORANDUM
To: City Council Reference: CUP Applications for Mining --
Planning Commission Bracht, Dresel and Tiller --Progress
Report on Application Review
Anne Hurlburt, Administrator
Copies To: Steve Thorp, Dick Thompson
Proj. No.: 14059.001
From: Sherri Buss, R.L.A. Routing:
Date: March 27, 2008
SUBJECT: Progress Report on Review of CUP Applications for Bracht, Dresel and
Tiller Aggregate Mines
MEETING DATE: April 1, 2008
LOCATION: Bracht--NW Quarter of Section 35, Township 32, Range 20
Dresel--Section 17, Township 32, Range 20
Tiller--Sections 7 and 8, Township 32 North, Range 20 West
APPLICANT: Bracht Bros., Inc., 8303 216th Street North, Forest Lake, MN 55025,
Dressel Contracting, Inc., 24044 July Ave., Chisago City, MN 55013, and
Tiller Corporation, 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 200, P.O. Box 1480,
Maple Grove, MN 55311-6480
120-DAY PERIOD: June 12, 2008
ZONING: Agricultural District, Shoreland Overlay District (Dresel)
ITEMS REVIEWED: Application, Plans, Technical Reports
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST:
The three applications are for new Conditional Use Permits (CUP) for existing sand and gravel mining
operations located in Scandia. The sites have been actively mined for many years, and have operated under
CUP's granted by Washington County, when the County exercised land use authority within New Scandia
Township. The City of Scandia adopted its own Mining and Related Activities Regulations Ordinance in
August, 2007 (Chapter 4 of the City's Code). These applications are requesting new CUP's under the City's
ordinance.
This memo summarizes the activities of City staff and consultants in reviewing these applications. Activities
are organized by each of the key issues identified for the review.
An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity
Scandia Planning Commission Page 2 March 27, 2008
Bracht, Dresel and Tiller CUP Applications
Progress Report on Application Review
Groundwater Water and Related Issues
TKDA has executed a subcontract with Leggette, Brashears (FL Graham, Inc (LBG), a firm that provides
Professional Ground-water and Environmental Engineering Services to analyze the ground water issues in
the applications, and provide recommendations to the City for the CUP process.
LBG's hydrogeologists have completed an initial review of the mining applications, EAW's completed for
the Tiller operation, existing technical reports, and other background materials provided with the
applications. LBG has developed a list of additional information needed from the mining companies and
their engineer in order to complete the application review. The request for information has been sent to the
Applicants. LBG will complete their final assessment and provide recommendations to the City when they
have received and evaluated the additional info!Illation from the applicants. (A list of LBG's requested
information is attached.)
The major issues that LBG will address include the following:
• The adequacy of information provided by the applicants, and needs for additional information
• The appropriateness and adequacy of the groundwater monitoring plans submitted by the applicants,
including the proposed numbers and locations of test wells, and pollutants included in the testing, and
recommendations for additional monitoring and testing, if needed
• Potential impacts to surrounding private wells, particularly those downstream from the mining
operations
• Depth of proposed mining operations and potential impacts
• Potential impacts of Tiller proposal to mine into the groundwater
• Relationship of mining activities proposed in the Tiller application to those evaluated in the EAW's,
and need for any additional analysis
• Recommendations to the City for conditions to be included in the CUP and Annual Operators Permit,
regarding groundwater sampling and testing, reporting, etc.
The City received a letter from John Lindell, dated March 25, 2008, suggesting needs for monitoring nearby
wells and noting concerns about impacts to German Lake. LBG will be addressing the issues identified by
Mr. Lindell in its analysis of the applications.
City staff have used infoiniation from the Minnesota Department of Health to identify private wells within 1
mile of the mining operations. Staff are working to identify additional wells not included in the State
database. LBG will use this information in its analysis of potential groundwater impacts of the mining
operations.
LBG will provide its report and recommendations to the City for the May 6 Planning Commission meeting.
Surface Water
The Carnelian-Marine-St. Croix Watershed District (CMSCWC) and Comfort Lake-Forest Lake Watershed
District (CLFLWD) are coordinating the Districts' review of the mining applications with the City's review.
Scandia Planning Commission Page 3 March 27, 2008
Bracht, Dresel and Tiller CUP Applications
Progress Report on Application Review
The District completed initial reviews of the applicants' submittals and requested additional information
from the Applicants. The information has been provided, and the Watershed Districts' reviews are in
process.
The City will work with the CMSCWD and Washington Conservation District to address issues related to
wetlands on the Dresel Site.
City staff and consultants will continue to coordinate reviews and information with the Districts.
Traffic
TKDA's traffic engineer is reviewing the traffic and roadway issues identified by staff and residents who
attended the public hearing on March 5. He has contacted the County to obtain traffic and crash data, and
discuss issues and information needs related to impacts on County roadways. He has also requested
additional information on traffic issues from the applicants. The engineer will complete a site visit with City
staff to determine needs and options for signage or other safety improvements.
Issues to be addressed include the following:
• Numbers and weight of trucks, and potential roadway impacts
• Needs and recommendations for dust control on gravel roadways
• Safety issues and recommendations for signs, lights, etc.
Reclamation Plans
Staff are reviewing the reclamation plans included in the applications and determining the adequacy of the
plans based on the City's ordinance.
The City has requested concept-level reclamation plans from each of the applicants for this review. The plan
should include a sketch plan identifying the ultimate use proposed for the site, and showing that the proposed
use is feasible. Feasibility issues include proposed grades, vegetation, site accessibility, and other factors
that will be needed to support the proposed use. All current mining operations are in the Agricultural
District. Allowable uses in the District include agriculture, residential, park/open space, and other uses.
While ultimate redevelopment of a site may be years off, the City needs a concept-level plan identifying an
allowable use(s) on each site, and showing that it is feasible on the reclaimed site. The concept plan will
form the basis for review of the reclamation plan. The City will not give preliminary or final approval to the
concept plans as a part of the CUP review, but needs to evaluate whether the a proposed use is feasible.
The analysis and recommendations related to the concept reclamation plans will be completed for the May 6
Planning Commission meeting if the plans are received from the Applicants by April 23.
Site Visits to Evaluate Screening, Berming and other Site Issues
Staff will complete a field visit and comprehensive set of site photos during April, to provide a record of
existing conditions at the three sites. The photos will provide a record for comparison in future years.
Scandia Planning Commission Page 4 March 27, 2008
Bracht, Dresel and Tiller CUP Applications
Progress Report on Application Review
Staff will schedule site visits for the Planning Commission and Council during April to review existing
conditions. The Applicants have been invited to lead or participate in the site visits.
The Planner/Landscape Architect will also complete a site visit to evaluate screening, beiming, and
reclamation issues, based on requirements of the City's ordinance. The issues identified by John Lindell
(letter dated March 25, 2008) related to berming and reclamation are included in the issues that will be
addressed in the evaluation.
The Traffic Engineer will also complete a site visit to evaluate traffic and safety issues, and identify
recommendations for conditions for the CUP's and AOP's.
Dresel Site--Shoreland Issues
We have reviewed the Dresel Mine site plan in detail, and its relationship to the Shoreland Zone for German
Lake. A portion of the existing"reclaimed area" in the southwest part of the site is within the Shoreland
Zone, but the area proposed for active mining is just outside the Shoreland Zone.
Staff will complete analysis and develop recommendations regarding screening, berming, and site operations
for the May 6 Planning Commission meeting
Environmental Review
Environmental Assessment Worksheets were completed for the Tiller Mining Operations in 1987 and 1999.
The 1999 EAW evaluated the potential impacts from the proposed expansion of the Tiller Mine, including
the proposed mining operations into the groundwater that are included in the Tiller CUP Application to the
City. Based on State rules, the site is exempt from further environmental review, unless it is detennined that
there is a potential for additional environmental impacts that were not adequately addressed in the EAW.
LBG and the City's consultants are reviewing the 1999 EAW and related technical reports, and will identify
any issues related to environmental review of the site in our report for the May Planning Commission
meeting.
ACTION REQUESTED:
This update is provided as information to the Planning Commission, and to provide an opportunity for
questions or identification of concerns at the April 1 meeting. The public hearing that was opened on these
applications at the March Planning Commission meeting will remain open at the April meeting, and we
recommend that it be continued to the May Planning Commission meeting.
TKDA
ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS•PLANNERS 444 Cedar Street,Suite 1500
Saint Paul,MN 55101-2140
(651)292.440(1
(651)292.008:3 Fax
raww tkda.com
March 27, 2008
Mr. Josh Dresel
Diesel Contracting, Inc.
24044 July Avenue
Chisago, Minnesota 55013
Re: Application for CUP for a Mining and Processing Operations
Request for Information and Participation in a Site Visit
TKDA Project 13812.010
Dear Mr. Diesel:
The City of Scandia is continuing to review your application for a CUP for mining and
processing operations. As a part of the review, we are requesting more detailed information to
assist us in analyzing your request in relationship to the City's ordinance requirements. The
items requested are listed below.
We also want to let you know that the City's staff and consultants, Planning Commission
members, and Council members will be visiting the site during April. We hope that you and the
other Applicants will join us and lead the tours that include the city officials. We have included
a list of the requirements from the City's Mining Ordinance that will be evaluated during the site
visits for your information. We will contact you on potential dates for the site visits as soon as
dates are available.
The City staff will walk the entire site at another site visit, and take pictures that will provide
baseline information for the review of the Annual Operating Permit (AOP). TKDA's Traffic
Engineer and Planner/Landscape Architect will also complete site visits during April to complete
their analysis of site issues.
Information Requested
The City is requesting the following detailed information for the CUP review process:
• Reclamation Plan-Each Applicant must submit a revised concept Reclamation Plan
identifying the ultimate proposed use of the site, and showing that this use of the site is
feasible. The Reclamation Plans submitted with the applications do not provide sufficient
An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity
Dresel Contracting, Inc.
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 2
detail regarding the proposed site use after reclamation. The concept plan should include a
graphic representation of the proposed use, as required in Section 5 of the Ordinance, along
with text as needed. The concept plan should include the following:
o A sketch plan identifying the ultimate use proposed for the site. All current mining
operations are in the Agricultural District. Allowable uses in the District include
agriculture, residential, park/open space, and other uses identified in the City's Zoning
Ordinance. This district allows for one residential unit per ten (10) acres. While ultimate
redevelopment of a site may be years off, the City needs a sketch identifying an allowable
use and showing that it is feasible on the reclaimed site. Feasibility includes elements
such as appropriate site grades, vegetation, potential septic system location, and site
access for proposed use.
The concept plan will form the basis for review of the Reclamation Plan. The City will
not give preliminary or final approval to the concept plans as a part of the CUP review,
but needs to evaluate whether the proposed use of the site after reclamation meets the
ordinance requirements, and is feasible.
The Reclamation Plan should include a "catch-up" plan for reclamation. This plan is
needed if reclamation to date has not been concurrent with mining activities, The
ordinance states "restoration shall proceed concurrently and proportional to actual mining
operations and will be subject to review and approval at each annual inspection and at the
end of the permit period." The intent of this provision is that if three (3) acres are mined
out in one (1) year, then three (3) acres need to be reclaimed the next year.
The plan should include definite boundaries of the necessary staging area and active
mining area. Areas not proposed to be actively mined (used at least once a year) or for
the staging area, buffers/berms, access roads, and non-minable areas, must be reclaimed.
o The revised concept Reclamation Plans should be submitted to the City by April 23,
2008, to allow for review and comments for the May 6, 2008, Planning Commission
meeting.
• Soil balance calculation-The City needs an estimate of soil that will be needed for site
reclamation, and an estimate of soil that is being removed and stockpiled for reclamation as
mining occurs. The City needs to be assured there will be enough material left on site to
complete the proposed reclamation. If not, the City needs to know how much material will be
imported to complete the reclamation.
• Seed mixtures and maintenance jOr reclamation-Please indicate the native seed mixes that
will be used for stabilizing berms and reclaimed areas, and maintenance that will be provided
Dresel Contracting, Inc.
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 3
to ensure the success of the reclamation (for example, Mn/DOT native mixes and
specifications for planting and maintenance may be referenced).
Traffic Information
The City is requesting more detailed information related to the traffic generated by the mining
operations to assist in determining potential traffic impacts. Please provide estimates of the
following:
• Estimate of the average daily traffic to and from your site, including estimates of truck traffic
and other traffic (employees, deliveries, etc.).
• Estimate of the maximum daily traffic expected to and from the site.
• Estimates of the routes that truck traffic will use to and from the site, by percentage of total
traffic (for example, 30% to 1-35 via 97, or 10% south to the Twin Cities via Manning Trail).
Hydrogeologic Information
The Hydrogeologist reviewing the applications on behalf of the City has requested some
additional detail on a number of issues. The list of information requested is attached.
Operating Conditions to be Reviewed at the Site Visits
This is an outline of issues to be addressed when the City of Scandia visits the mining sites as
part of the review of the CUP's. The Operators/Applicants are encouraged to attend and lead the
site visits that include the City Council and Planning Commission. City staff will complete
additional site visits as needed. These items are required by the City's mining ordinance:
• Setbacks-setbacks shall be verified based on the Ordinance requirements
(103 Sect 7 (1) (A-E).
• Fencing-where deemed necessary for the protection of the general public, a minimum of a
three (3) strand wire fence with warning signs shall enclose the authorized area to be mined.
o Signs shall be at a minimum of 1000' foot intervals and at all access points.
o The fence shall be maintained until final reclamation and will be verified with the AOP
annually.
Dresel Contracting, Inc.
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 4
• Screening-a continuous screen must be maintained to minimize the impacts on the
surrounding properties. The screening must be 6 foot high per the ordinance.
o Upon issuance of the CUP and the AOP, a continuous screen needs to be in place within
24 months.
o The screening plan must be prepared by a licensed landscape architect
(103 Sect 4 (A) (5)).
o Plant materials shall consist of a majority of dense evergreen plant materials to provide a
year round screen.
o The Annual Operators Permit shall evaluate the screening on an annual basis and verify
that maintenance is occurring.
• Dust Control-the owner must construct, maintain and operate all equipment in such a
manner as to minimize on-site dust conditions.
o The Owner must prepare a dust control plan (103 Sect 5 (A)).
o All gravel pit access roads shall be dustless, non-oiled surfaces to a point within 100 feet
of the loading area.
o The access roads shall be constructed and maintained so that the deposit of earth
materials on public roads is minimized.
o The Operator shall be responsible for dust control of the public way if the access road
does not access onto a paved road
• Site Clearance-all debris resulting from the excavation or related activities of the mining
shall be disposed of by approved methods.
o All stumps or dead trees shall be cleaned up from the site prior to the issuance of the
AOP.
• Appearance/Condition of the Site-the operation shall be kept in a neat condition and the
appearance of the landscaped areas shall be preserved.
o Weeds and other noxious vegetation shall be controlled.
Dresel Contracting, Inc.
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 5
o Trees and topsoil along the existing Rights-of-Way shall be supplemented for the depth
of the setback.
Please call me at (651) 292-4582 if you have questions regarding the requests for additional
information, or the issues to be covered on the site visits.
Sincerely,
Sherri Buss, R.L.A.
City Planner
SAB:cme
Enclosure
cc: Kirsten Pauly, P.E., Sunde Engineering
Anne Hurlburt, Steve Thorp, City of Scandia
Dick Thompson, TKDA
^
LBG' |no.—Reqoeot for Information for Scandia Mining Operations
This summary focuses on data that is missing and required 0z, L8B. Inc. ho complete the
HydmBoo}oQic evaluation of the identified nha'
Dveao| Sito
1) Please provide a copy of Figure 2. Not received byLBG.
2) Please provide soil boring logs were not included with the CUP, Not received by LBG
3) Boring locations are not shown on Figure C2 as indicated in text in Section 90, Please
provide m map showing the locations nf the soil borings.
4) Are there survey data for the soil borings (i.e., grade elevation at the boring location when
it was drilled)? |f so, please provide. This will help determine/verify the accuracy ofthe
groundwater elevations used 0oestimate flow direction.
5) What time of year (month)were the borings drilled if not indicated on the logs?
0) Where the borings completed as temporary piezometers that depth the groundwater
levels were measured? If, oo are there survey data for these wells and provide amap
showing there locations.
7) What time of year were the initial depth the groundwater levels estimated in the borings
or wells?
D) How was depth {n groundwater determined from the borings?
Q) Section 9D requests a map of groundwater depth, but this is not shown on Figure C1.
Has e groundwater flow map been created? |f so, please provide.
10) How was the elevation of groundwater determined au illustrated on cross-sections A,4'
B-8'. C'C' and D'D' on plates C5 and CO? '
11) The CUP states that there are no monitoring wells currently on site (Section 9P). Is it
true that there are no water supply wells onoite? |f there ino water supply vvoU(y). please �
provide location map and well |og(n).
�
TKDA
ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS•PLANNERS 444 Cedar Street,Suite 1500
Saint Paul,MN 55101-2140
(651)292-4400
(651)292-0083 Fax
www.tkda.com
March 27, 2008
Ms. Elizabeth Bracht
Bracht Bros. Inc.
8303-216th Street North
Forest Lake, Minnesota 55025
Re: Application for CUP for a Mining and Processing Operations
Request for Information and Participation in a Site Visit
TKDA Project 13812.009
Dear Ms. Bracht:
The City of Scandia is continuing to review your application for a CUP for mining and
processing operations. As a part of the review, we are requesting more detailed information to
assist us in analyzing your request in relationship to the City's ordinance requirements. The
items requested are listed below.
We also want to let you know that the City's staff and consultants, Planning Commission
members, and Council members will be visiting the site during April. We hope that you and the
other Applicants will join us and lead the tours that include the city officials. We have included
a list of the requirements from the City's Mining Ordinance that will be evaluated during the site
visits for your information. We will contact you on potential dates for the site visits as soon as
dates are available.
The City staff will walk the entire site at another site visit, and take pictures that will provide
baseline information for the review of the Annual Operating Permit (AOP). TKDA's Traffic
Engineer and Planner/Landscape Architect will also complete site visits during April to complete
their analysis of site issues.
Information Requested
The City is requesting the following detailed information for the CUI review process:
• Reclamation Plan-Each Applicant must submit a revised concept Reclamation Plan
identifying the ultimate proposed use of the site, and showing that this use of the site is
feasible. The Reclamation Plans submitted with the applications do not provide sufficient
An Employee Owned Company Promotion Alionaliye Action and Equal Opportunity
Bracht Bros. Inc.
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 2
detail regarding the proposed site use after reclamation. The concept plan should include a
graphic representation of the proposed use, as required in Section 5 of the Ordinance, along
with text as needed. The concept plan should include the following:
o A sketch plan identifying the ultimate use proposed for the site. All current mining
operations are in the Agricultural District. Allowable uses in the District include
agriculture, residential, park/open space, and other uses identified in the City's Zoning
Ordinance. This district allows for one residential unit per ten (10) acres. While ultimate
redevelopment of a site may be years off, the City needs a sketch identifying an allowable
use and showing that it is feasible on the reclaimed site. Feasibility includes elements
such as appropriate site grades, vegetation, potential septic system location, and site
access for proposed use.
The concept plan will form the basis for review of the Reclamation Plan. The City will
not give preliminary or final approval to the concept plans as a part of the CUP review,
but needs to evaluate whether the proposed use of the site after reclamation meets the
ordinance requirements, and is feasible.
The Reclamation Plan should include a "catch-up" plan for reclamation. This plan is
needed if reclamation to date has not been concurrent with mining activities. The
ordinance states "restoration shall proceed concurrently and proportional to actual mining
operations and will be subject to review and approval at each annual inspection and at the
end of the permit period." The intent of this provision is that if three (3) acres are mined
out in one (1) year, then three (3) acres need to be reclaimed the next year.
The plan should include definite boundaries of the necessary staging area and active
mining area. Areas not proposed to be actively mined (used at least once a year) or for
the staging area, buffers/berms, access roads, and non-minable areas, must be reclaimed.
o The revised concept Reclamation Plans should be submitted to the City by April 23,
2008, to allow for review and comments for the May 6, 2008, Planning Commission
meeting.
• Soil balance calculation-The City needs an estimate of soil that will be needed for site
reclamation, and an estimate of soil that is being removed and stockpiled for reclamation as
mining occurs. The City needs to be assured there will be enough material left on site to
complete the proposed reclamation. If not, the City needs to know how much material will be
imported to complete the reclamation.
1
Bracht Bros. Inc.
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 3
• Seed mixtures and maintenance for reclamation-Please indicate the native seed mixes that
will be used for stabilizing berms and reclaimed areas, and maintenance that will be provided
to ensure the success of the reclamation (for example, Mn/DOT native mixes and
specifications for planting and maintenance may be referenced).
Traffic Information
The City is requesting more detailed information related to the traffic generated by the mining
operations to assist in determining potential traffic impacts. Please provide estimates of the
following:
• Estimate of the average daily traffic to and from your site, including estimates of truck traffic
and other traffic (employees, deliveries, etc.).
• Estimate of the maximum daily traffic expected to and from the site.
• Estimates of the routes that truck traffic will use to and from the site, by percentage of total
traffic (for example, 30% to 1-35 via 97, or 10% south to the Twin Cities via Manning Trail),
Hydrogeologic Information
The Plydrogeologist reviewing the applications on behalf of the City has requested some
additional detail on a number of issues. The list of information requested is attached.
Operating Conditions to be Reviewed at the Site Visits
This is an outline of issues to be addressed when the City of Scandia visits the mining sites as
part of the review of the CUP's. The Operators/Applicants are encouraged to attend and lead the
site visits that include the City Council and Planning Commission. City staff will complete
additional site visits as needed. These items are required by the City's mining ordinance:
• Setbacks-setbacks shall be verified based on the Ordinance requirements
(l 03 Sect 7 (1) (A-E).
• Fencing-where deemed necessary for the protection of the general public, a minimum of a
three (3) strand wire fence with warning signs shall enclose the authorized area to be mined.
a Signs shall be at a minimum of 1000' foot intervals and at all access points.
Bracht Bros. Inc.
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 4
o The fence shall he maintained until final reclamation and will be verified with the AOP
annually.
• Screening-a continuous screen must be maintained to minimize the impacts on the
surrounding properties. The screening must be 6 foot high per the ordinance.
o Upon issuance of the CUP and the AOP, a continuous screen needs to be in place within
24 months.
o The screening plan must be prepared by a licensed landscape architect
(103 Sect 4 (A) (5)).
o Plant materials shall consist of a majority of dense evergreen plant materials to provide a
year round screen.
o The Annual Operators Permit shall evaluate the screening on an annual basis and verify
that maintenance is occurring.
• Dust Control-the owner must construct, maintain and operate all equipment in such a
manner as to minimize on-site dust conditions.
o The Owner must prepare a dust control plan (103 Sect 5 (A)).
o All gravel pit access roads shall be dustless, non-oiled surfaces to a point within 100 feet
of the loading area.
o The access roads shall be constructed and maintained so that the deposit of earth
materials on public roads is minimized.
o 'The Operator shall be responsible for dust control of the public way if the access road
does not access onto a paved road
• Site Clearance-all debris resulting from the excavation or related activities of the mining
shall be disposed of by approved methods.
o All stumps or dead trees shall be cleaned up from the site prior to the issuance of the
AOP.
Bracht Bros. Inc.
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 5
• Appearance/Condition of the Site-the operation shall be kept in a neat condition and the
appearance of the landscaped areas shall be preserved.
o Weeds and other noxious vegetation shall be controlled.
o Trees and topsoil along the existing Rights-of-Way shall be supplemented for the depth
of the setback.
Please call me at (651) 292-4582 if you have questions regarding the requests for additional
information, or the issues to be covered on the site visits.
Sincerely,
- .17-1R.A1
Sherri Buss, R.L.A.
City Planner
SAB:cme
Enclosure
cc: Kirsten Pauly, P.E., Sunde Engineering
Anne Hurlburt, Steve Thorp, City of Scandia
Dick Thompson, TKDA
`
.
8mcb| Bros. Inc.
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page
LBG' |nc.—Rnquest for Information for Scmndia Mining Operations
This summary focuses on data that is missing and required forLGB. Inc. to complete the Hydnogeo|ngk:
evaluation nf the identified sito'
Bnaoht Site
1) Are there survey data for the 3 borings (ie, grade elevation at the boring location when itwas
drilled)? |f so, please provide. This will help determine/verify theaocuraoyoftheOnoundwater
elevations used to estimate flow direction.
2) How were the groundwater elevations established as indicated in Section 0 on pages 5 and 6?
Were they estimated solely from the Washington County Atlas?
3) Please provide boring logs for the 3 borings shown on plate C1. The CUP indicates the boring
logs are included with Appendix 3. VVe did not receive Appendix 3,
4) What time Vf year(0onth)were the borings drilled if not indicated on the logs?
5) Were the borings completed as temporary piezomoters that depth the groundwater levels were
measured? If, eo are there survey data for these wells and provide map showing there
locations.
6) What time of year were the initial depth the groundwater levels estimated in the borings or wells?
7) Section 01, page 6, 3rd paragraph: What is"separating"the drift aquifer from the Prairie du
Chien—Jondan ot this site? Is this based on |oom| or regional data provided in the Washington
County Atlas? (Notn, this may be explained after we review the boring logs)
8) Are there any site-specific groundwater level comparisons between the drift aquifer(sand and
gravel) and the underlying Prairie du Chien — Jordan (i.e. from monitoring wells)? Tabulated
values or well hydrognophu would besufficient.
Q) LBGio missing cross-sections A'A' and D-D' from plates C4 and C7.
10) Please provide any historical groundwater levels for the on-site water supply well and any
associated survey data.
11) Is on-site water supply well actually located where the CWI has it shown on Figure 2? Please
provide a map with the location of the water supply well.
12) Provide a cross-section location mop.
13) Please provide the appropriation permit number for the Bracht water supply well.
TKDA
ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS•PLANNERS 444 Cedar Street,Suite 1500
Saint Paul,MN 55101-2140
(651)292-4100
(651)292-0083 Fax
www.lkda.com
March 27, 2008
Mr. Mike Caron
Tiller Corporation
7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 200
P.O. Box 1480
Maple Grove, Minnesota 55311-6480
Re: Application for CUP for a Mining and Processing Operations
Request for Information and Participation in a Site Visit
TKDA Project 14059.001
Dear Mr. Caron:
The City of Scandia is continuing to review your application for a CUP for mining and
processing operations. As a part of the review, we are requesting more detailed information to
assist us in analyzing your request in relationship to the City's ordinance requirements. The
items requested are listed below.
We also want to let you know that the City's staff and consultants, Planning Commission
members, and Council members will be visiting the site during April. We hope that you and the
other Applicants will join us and lead the tours that include the city officials. We have included
a list of the requirements from the City's Mining Ordinance that will be evaluated during the site
visits for your information. We will contact you on potential dates for the site visits as soon as
dates are available.
The City staff will walk the entire site at another site visit, and take pictures that will provide
baseline information for the review of the Annual Operating Permit (AOP). TKDA's Traffic
Engineer and Planner/Landscape Architect will also complete site visits during April to complete
their analysis of site issues.
Information Requested
The City is requesting the following detailed information for the CUP review process:
• Reclamation Plan-Each Applicant must submit a revised concept Reclamation Plan
identifying the ultimate proposed use of the site, and showing that this use of the site is
feasible. The Reclamation Plans submitted with the applications do not provide sufficient
An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affilmative Action and Equal Opportunity
Tiller Corporation
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 2
detail regarding the proposed site use after reclamation. The concept plan should include a
graphic representation of the proposed use, as required in Section 5 of the Ordinance, along
with text as needed. The concept plan should include the following:
o A sketch plan identifying the ultimate use proposed for the site. All current mining
operations are in the Agricultural District. Allowable uses in the District include
agriculture, residential, park/open space, and other uses identified in the City's Zoning
Ordinance. This district allows for one residential unit per ten (10) acres. While ultimate
redevelopment of a site may be years off, the City needs a sketch identifying an allowable
use and showing that it is feasible on the reclaimed site. Feasibility includes elements
such as appropriate site grades, vegetation, potential septic system location, and site
access for proposed use.
The concept plan will form the basis for review of the Reclamation Plan. The City will
not give preliminary or final approval to the concept plans as a part of the CUP review,
but needs to evaluate whether the proposed use of the site after reclamation meets the
ordinance requirements, and is feasible.
The Reclamation Plan should include a "catch-up"plan for reclamation. This plan is
needed if reclamation to date has not been concurrent with mining activities. The
ordinance states "restoration shall proceed concurrently and proportional to actual mining
operations and will be subject to review and approval at each annual inspection and at the
end of the permit period." The intent of this provision is that if three (3) acres are mined
out in one (1) year, then three (3) acres need to be reclaimed the next year.
The plan should include definite boundaries of the necessary staging area and active
mining area. Areas not proposed to be actively mined (used at least once a year)or for
the staging area, buffers/berms, access roads, and non-minable areas, must be reclaimed.
o The revised concept Reclamation Plans should be submitted to the City by April 23,
2008, to allow for review and comments for the May 6, 2008, Planning Commission
meeting.
• Soil balance calculation-The City needs an estimate of soil that will be needed for site
reclamation, and an estimate of soil that is being removed and stockpiled for reclamation as
mining occurs. The City needs to be assured there will be enough material left on site to
complete the proposed reclamation. If not, the City needs to know how much material will he
imported to complete the reclamation.
Tiller Corporation
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 3
• Seed mixtures and maintenance for reclamation-Please indicate the native seed mixes that
will be used for stabilizing berms and reclaimed areas, and maintenance that will be provided
to ensure the success of the reclamation (for example, Mn/DOT native mixes and
specifications for planting and maintenance may be referenced).
Traffic Information
The City is requesting more detailed information related to the traffic generated by the mining
operations to assist in determining potential traffic impacts. Please provide estimates of the
following:
• Estimate of the average daily traffic to and from your site, including estimates of truck traffic
and other traffic (employees, deliveries, etc.).
• Estimate of the maximum daily traffic expected to and from the site.
• Estimates of the routes that truck traffic will use to and from the site, by percentage of total
traffic (for example, 30% to 1-35 via 97, or 10% south to the Twin Cities via Manning Trail).
Hydrogeologic Information
The Hydrogeologist reviewing the applications on behalf of the City has requested some
additional detail on a number of issues. The list of information requested is attached.
Operating Conditions to be Reviewed at the Site Visits
This is an outline of issues to be addressed when the City of Scandia visits the mining sites as
part of the review of the CUP's. The Operators/Applicants are encouraged to attend and lead the
site visits that include the City Council and Planning Commission. City staff will complete
additional site visits as needed. These items are required by the City's mining ordinance:
• Setbacks-setbacks shall be verified based on the Ordinance requirements
(103 Sect 7 (1) (A-E).
• Fencing-where deemed necessary for the protection of the general public, a minimum of a
three(3) strand wire fence with warning signs shall enclose the authorized area to he mined.
o Signs shall be at a minimum of 1000' foot intervals and at all access points.
Tiller Corporation
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 4
o The fence shall be maintained until final reclamation and will be verified with the AOP
annually,
• Screening-a continuous screen must be maintained to minimize the impacts on the
surrounding properties. The screening must be 6 foot high per the ordinance.
o Upon issuance of the CUP and the AOP, a continuous screen needs to be in place within
24 months.
o The screening plan must be prepared by a licensed landscape architect
(103 Sect 4 (A) (5)).
o Plant materials shall consist of a majority of dense evergreen plant materials to provide a
year round screen.
o The Annual Operators Permit shall evaluate the screening on an annual basis and verify
that maintenance is occurring.
• Dust Control-the owner must construct, maintain and operate all equipment in such a
manner as to minimize on-site dust conditions.
o The Owner must prepare a dust control plan (103 Sect 5 (A)).
o All gravel pit access roads shall be dustless, non-oiled surfaces to a point within 100 feet
of the loading area.
o The access roads shall be constructed and maintained so that the deposit of earth
materials on public roads is minimized.
o The Operator shall be responsible for dust control of the public way if the access road
does not access onto a paved road
• Site Clearance-all debris resulting from the excavation or related activities of the mining
shall be disposed of by approved methods.
o All stumps or dead trees shall be cleaned up from the site prior to the issuance of the
AOP.
Tiller Corporation
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page 5
• Appearance/Condition of the Site-the operation shall be kept in a neat condition and the
appearance of the landscaped areas shall be preserved.
o Weeds and other noxious vegetation shall be controlled.
o Trees and topsoil along the existing Rights-of-Way shall be supplemented for the depth
of the setback.
Please call me at (651) 292-4582 if you have questions regarding the requests for additional
information, or the issues to be covered on the site visits.
Sincerely,
% ,
Sherri Buss, R.L.A.
City Planner
SAB:cme
Enclosure
cc: Kirsten Pauly, P.E., Sunde Engineering
Anne Hurlburt, Steve Thorp, City of Scandia
Dick Thompson, TKDA
�
^
]]Uor Corporatiori
CUP Application
March 27, 2008
Page
L8'3. |nc—Request for Information for Sonndio Mining Operations
This summary focuses on data that in missing and nsquinaj for LGB. Inc, to complete the Hydnogeo|ogic
evaluation of the identified site,
Tiller Site
1) Please provide well logs for the Production Well, Scale House Well, PZ-1, PZ-2' and PZ'3. What
are their IVIN Unique |D #s?
2) What is the proposed well construction and expected depths ofPZ-4. PZ'5. and PZ'6? Are these
hobecompleted in the sand and gravel? Bedrock?
3) Are any of the existing wells completed in the bedrock or are they in sand and gravel?
4) Section QO. page 0. 3rd paragraph states that Figure 5 illustrates locations ofwe)b/piezumehars
and soil borings. The soil borings are not shown on Figure 5. Please provide a map showing the
locations of the soil borings and provide the boring logs.
5) Are the buildings on Figure 5, midway between the Production Well and PZ-1, the refueling area
and asphalt plant? If not, please provide map showing these site features and identify them as
such.
G) Please provide historical groundwater level measurements from observation wells on site or
adjacent tothe site that have monitored by Tiller, Tabulated values or well hydmgrapho would be
sufficient.
7) Are there survey data for the nui/ borings (ie., grade elevation at the boring location when it was
drilled)? If so, please provide. This will help determine/verify the accuracy ofthe groundwater
o|ovohono used to estimate flow direction.
8) The EAW(Aug, 1999; Section 13) indicates the DNR Appropriations Permit Number for a 16"
onui0e well(Permit No, 05'G1S3. K8N Unique |D#168714). |n this for the Production Well orScale �
House Well? Is there a permit for the other well? If so, please provide the permit number. Also,
an indicated above, please provide the MN Unique |D #a, The well log forCVV| Unique |D#
1O8714 does not indicate the name of the well (Production Well or Scale House VVeU).
0) Are the drift and and Prairie du Chien—Jordan aquifers hydraulically separated? |f so, provide
any site-specific data ntraUgnaphic data and /or head data to indicate separation of the two flow
systems.
10) The Carnelian-Marine Watershed District(C/NVVD) completed a study of German Lake (indicated
on page 4 of the April 21, 2006 letter from Barr to Ann Terwedo, Washington County). |/this iu
avai|mb|e, please provide e copy? Were there any concluding statements aotothe hydraulic
connection between German Lake and the water table aquifer in this report?
�
March 25, 2008
Scandia City Council 1
1
Scandia Planning Commission 1
OF ScA
14727 209th Street North
Scandia, MN 55073 Now
Re: Tiller Mining Use Permit
Scandia Council and Planning Commission:
With this letter I offer the following recommendations as conditions on the Tiller Minning
Corporation Conditional Use Permit. I am also submitting the following information for
consideration by the Council and Planning Commission: 1) copies of a letter that I have sent
to Mr. Korstad of the Larkin Hoffman Attorneys representing Tiller Corporation regarding
environmental questions related to Tiller's proposal to excavate below the water table; 2) a
Biennial Report of the EQB; and 3) a DNR Lake Water Level Report for German Lake.
I would recommend that the Tiller mining conditional use permit have the following
conditions:
• A 20 foot high berm be created along the southern border of the Tiller property along
the back of the Stevens property and adjacent to the Lindell property. Currently there
is a berm along the back of the Lindell property and this should be extended easterly
along the full length of the Stevens property. The berm should be planted with trees
given that there will no longer be further excavation along this border. The top of the
berm should be 50 feet from the property line consistent with the Scandia mining
ordinance.
• Along the southern and easterly border of the Tiller property it is my understanding
that the mining has been completed. A large area has been sloped and planted with
grass. This area should also be planted with trees as part of the reclamation. As
part of its continued mining towards the east of its property, Tiller in the past 3 years
has removed 30 to 50 acres of old growth oaks, maples and basswood. Planting
trees along the southeastern part of the property would restore areas for wildlife and
environmental protection.
• Some adjacent property wells should be tested, in particular those that are in the
unconfined aquifer, to monitor over time, whether the water is being contaminated
from mining operations. This may avoid future disputes of claims of contamination
from mining operations. Tiller has tested some adjacent property wells in the past
and this should be continued.
Regards,
/
I
,John Lindell
. '
'
March 25. 2D0O
Mr. Greg Korstad
Larkin Hoffman
15OO Wells Fargo Plaza
7900 Xerxes Avenue South
W1inneapo|is, K8N. 55431-1194
Re: Tiller Mining in Soandia
Mr. Korstad:
This letter is in response to your letter dated January 15. 2008 to the City nfScendia
indicating that the Tiller Mining Permit for operations, including the authority to excavate
below the water table, should be granted. According to your letter the mining operation
in Snandia has had an environmental review in the past that satisfies statutory
obligations for further review despite the Scandia mining code requirement that anEAVV
is required for any proposal to excavate be|nvv the vvotnr table. Despite your |a0a|
opinion, Tiller's intention to excavate into the aquifer that provides drinking and
nmonaodonm| water use in the surrounding area nyisoo significant environmental
concerns. Enclosed with this letter in my request for additional inh)nnmdnn about the
impacts that the planned excavation may have on the water quality and quantity in the
8candia area and Tiller's evaluation of those impacts. This information should
appropriately be addressed inanEAVV.
Regards,
AJohn Lienell
cc: 8condio City Council
Scmm1io Planning Commission
~ .
Questions Regarding Environmental Impacts of Tiller Mining Below Water Table
1) What evaluation has Tiller conducted concerning the naba of evaporation of lake water from
the lake that will be created in the 3candia pit asproposed?
2) What engineering or other scientific analysis should or has been considered to evaluate the
loss of ground water due bz evaporation of water from the lake esproposed?
5) Is there any known mining operation in Minnesota with excavation below the water table that
will be in close proximity to an asphalt plant similar tnTiller's proposal?
4) Explain how fuel and ohonnioa|o are handled on the site. How frequently are each of the
tanks filled? How is the fuel transported onto the site? Mow is it transferred from tank storage
ho use in the operations?
5\ What kinds cf chemicals are used, stored or transported on the site?
6) What are the hazardous vvos1a classifications by EPA or W1PCA for each of the fuels or
chemicals that are used, stored or transported on the site?
7) If the mining or plant operations cause ChRnn)oo| contamination of the |oke, how would the
Company address the cleanup and remediation in the lake and the groundwater?
8) If there were ohernioo| contamination of the lake that sank to the bottom of the lake, would
Tiller bm emptying the lake to cleanup the contamination?
S\ Is the cleanup and rarnediaUon of contamination in the groundwater from chemicals used on
the site an insurable event according to the Company's insurance policies? If so, what is the
dollar amount of insurance coverage?
10) Tiller represents that the excavation into the groundwater will not have any significant
impacts. An earlier engineering analysis by Barr Engineering found that their could be potential
impact on the vvotar level of German Lake. Note that German Lake has dropped in depth by
four feet since 2003 and now has on average depth of three to four feet, how can one conclude
that any potential impact on German Lake's depth would be insignificant?
11) The EAW conducted in1SQS stated that the final stage of mining will include the creation of
o lake (in 30to30years). Why has Tiller accelerating its plans to excavate into the ground
water currently rather than waiting until the end of the planned period in 20-30 years as
previously proposed?
12) The MPCA and EPA utilize a calculation om||ed TK8[)L (total rnoxinnurn daily load) to
measure the maximum amount oyopollutant that a water body can receive from all sources and
aU|| meet water quality standards. For the potential impacts on German Lake water levels and
in recognition of increased residential and commercial development on German Lake. has there
been a similar analysis of the water level innpmot3 from all sources on German Lake including
Tiller's?
Lake water level report: Minnesota DNR Page 1 of 1
! • ,
--f--,1* • Enter Keywords Lcjh
• .4"„i,,,•"1,7r,fit..e4r.c1,- -'-z
I d Ar40-11PrttA __ E
Site Map I Contact the DNR I What's New? I Newsroom I Events & Seasons
> MN DNR Home> Lake Finder >
Lake water level report
Lake name: German County: Washington
Water Level Data
Gernan — 82005600
958
Period of record: 04/15/1986 to 08/10/2007
#of readings: 44 56.5
/
Highest recorded: 957.13 ft (06/25/2003)
Lowest recorded: 952.55 ft (08/10/2007)
0 955
Recorded range: 4.58 ft
Average water level: 955.34 ft
Last reading: 952.55 ft (08/10/2007) al 953.5
OHW elevation: 955.5 ft
Datum: 1929 (ft) 952
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Download lake level data as: [dBase] [ASCII] Last 10 years of data, click to enlarge.
(If you have trouble try right clicking on the appropriate link and choosing the "Save ... As"
option.)
Benchmarks
Elevation: 961.02 Date Set: Benchmark Location
ft 05/21/1986
Township: 32 Range: 20 Section: 18
Datum: 1929 (ft)
Description: 60d spike in NE root of a 1.9' oak 25' from waters edge and northerly
most tree on the east side of a pint extending from the west side fo the lake on the
Steve Hursh property (SE-NW-SE, Section 18)
Elevation: 958.96 Date Set: 04/15/2003 Benchmark Location
ft
Township: 32 Range: 20 Section: 18
Datum: 1929 (ft)
Description: Found 2006. At 10860 213th St, Scandia, 60d spike inlakeside of a 0.9'
popple, southerly of 3 popple on bank north of yard area.
0 2008 Minnesota Department of Natural Resources. Copyright Notice.
Web site policies: Accessibility, Linking, Privacy
http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/lakefind/showlevel.html?id=82005600 2/14/2008
st
Environmental Quality Board
300 Centennial Building
658 Cedar Street
St. Paul,MN 55155
a40\1\ s,.4401,,y Voice: 651.201,2499
SC" ---
Fax: 651.296.3698
State board presses for clean water,
water-supply and wetlands initiatives
Environmental Quality Board adopts state water priorities
May 10, 2007 Contacts: John Wells
For Immediate Release John.Wells@state.mn.us
651-201-2475
Princesa VanBuren
Princesa.VanBuren( state.mn.us
651-201-2478
A Minnesota Environmental Quality Board report released today calls for resolving competing
plans for financing the cleanup of impaired waters, new water supply studies and increased
protections for the state's wetlands.
"Water is Minnesota's lifeblood,"said Gene Hugoson, Environmental Quality Board chair.
"This has never been more apparent as communities wrestle with decisions about how to provide
clean water to citizens and as businesses place new demands on water resources." Hugoson
continued, "With so much happening in the water arena across the state and at the Capitol, a set
of state priorities is needed today more than ever."
The report, "Protecting Minnesota Waters: Priorities for the 2008-2009 Biennium, "is
available online at www.eqb.state.mn.us.
Today, 1,300 Minnesota lakes and streams have 2,250 listed impairments—but only small
portion of the state's surface waters have been tested. Identifying and correcting additional
impairments will necessitate a significant increase in the number of water quality studies and
restoration activities.
Accordingly, EQB recommends dedicating significant new resources to implementing the Clean
Water Legacy Act, including the development of pollutant load studies called TMDLs, in order
to accommodate economic growth and provide the blueprints for effective, focused cleanup of
polluted waters.
The board also recommends increased landowner assistance for practices targeted at protection
and restoration of waters and technical assistance to small unsewered communities.
<MORE>
.
NEWS RELEASE: State board presses for clean water
May 10\ 2007
Page 2
Last year's drought was a reminder to Minnesotans of just how important water is to their well-
being. In addition, while citizens consider water resources the cnnvvo jewels of the a\ntc. {bcsc
resources have limits.
hna report released last month, the board found that counties io the Twin Cihca'3i Cloud growth
corridor place significant demands on their water resources. Ramsey, Washington, Hennepin and
Dakota counties expect to reach or exceed sustainable use levels in the next two decades.
Because u number nf signs bndicutedhutuxciuhcuhnnioQioovcr*'hchutbcrcaourou, dbchourd
cconromcudx several measures to safeguard water supplies across the s(oic. Tbcac include
development of a water supply interconnect between Minneapolis and Saint Paul and better
definition o[the location and characteristics o[ground water resources. Areas subject to new
ethanol production and population growth should be given priority, the board argues.
Minnesota has approximately 10noiUiun acres of wetlands, half the amount that existed utthe
beginning of European settlement. The state Wetland Conservation Act, enacted in |99\, has
been successful in dramatically slowing wetland losses. But the uct'u goal ofnonet loss remains
unattained within the scope o[regulatory programs. Lo response, the board sees changes |othe
Wetland Conservation Act and rule aou priority, ao well ao funding to implement u range nf
efforts to monitor and reduce wetland losses.
Minnesota law requires the k()B tn prepare the report.
The Environmental Quality Board draws together the Governor's Office, five citizens and tile
heads of nine state agencies in order tudevelop policy, create long-range plans and review
proposed projects thutvvnu|dxignificuodyioOucnccMioucxoiu'scovironnucu\ uuddevc|npnmcnt.
<END>
Pro ectin ' Minn�esc e's a ers
Priorities for the 2008 -- 2009 ,Biennium
. RECEIVED
C'1AR 2 6 2008
CITY OF SCAND!A
4 i j 11. ��C
a
t �al�3��ti 1. i _ '„" ., �`
np.` Y. § .R 4 @.qy
E 'd
y
•
t •
x� ;, T
4
•
�. j x :� r'. . §t.hem y a! ,, *i F ° t }t . ac , 5 ,aX�a rA aft .. ,.:g,
•
ems« �. � fi. � 6 .„..'` � o � �, m - � ,, � �,� .:�
m
to.,t y:�s Y 1
''a tI rt,� Y v `', :� .. �` ,p art;
' n wane i, , '' q , ems ,4; , �. , 4ie.,u r ..a 5.. C ..'.. a.. .... *a tea-., a
ro�fr+ a
x
t a
A Biennial Report of the Environmental Quality Board
May 2Q�7
, .
The Environmental Quality Board draws together the Governor's Office, five citizens and the heads of nine state agencies in
order to develop policy, create long-range plans and review proposed projects that would significantly influence Minnesota's
environment and development.Minnesota Statutes(see Chapters 103A, 103B, I I 6C, I I 6D and 116G)directs the EQB to:
. Ensure compliance with state environmental policy
• Oversee the environmental review process
s, Develop the state water plan and coordinate state water activities
. Coordinate environmental agencies and programs
. Study environmental issues
. Convene environmental congresses
• Advise the Governor and the Legislature
Today,the Board staff is housed in the Office of Geographic and Demographic Analysis of the Department of Administration.
Statutory Authority
This document was prepared in response to Minnesota Statutes,sections 103A.43 and 103B.151.
The Clean Water Cabinet includes commissioners of the departments of Agriculture, Health and Natural Resources, and the
Pollution Control Agency,the executive directors of the Board of Water and Soil Resources and the Metropolitan Council,and
the Governor's director of cabinet affairs.Tim Scherkenbach serves as cabinet director.
Acknowledgements
Protecting Minnesota's Waters:Priorities for the 2008-2009 Biennium was prepared by Princesa VanBuren,EQB water policy
planner, and John Wells, EQB strategic planning director, with assistance from the Clean Water Cabinet's Water Resources
Leadership Group. Group members include: Agriculture (Greg Buzicky and Paul Burns), Board of Water and Soil Resources
(Steve Woods and Doug Thomas),Health(John Linc Stine),Metropolitan Council(Keith Buttleman),Natural Resources(Kent
Lokkesmoe and Jim Japs), Pollution Control (Tim Scherkenbach, Lisa Thorvig, and Gaylen Reetz), and Administration (John
Wells).Additional contributors included Paul Eger,Jeff Risberg and Dave Weirens.John Wells served as project director.
Upon request, Protecting Minnesota's Waters: Priorities for the 2008-2009 Biennium will be made available in alternate
format, such as Braille, large print or audio tape. For TTY, contact Minnesota Relay Service at 800-627-3529 and ask for the
Environmental Quality Board.
For more information or for paper copies of Protecting Minnesota's Waters:Priorities.*the 2008-2009 Biennium,contact the
Environmental Quality Board at:
001%
658 Cedar Street
Room 300
St. Paul,MN 55155
(651)201-2464
May 2007
Protecting Minnesota's Waters: Priorities far the 2008-2009 Biennium is available at the Environmental Quality Board's
Internet site:www.eqb.state.mn.us.
The cost of preparing the report was$9,000.
Cover photo http://www.bridgewatersbandb.cominhotos/B&B%20Photos%202°/020002.jug. Photos inside report by Princesa
VanBuren.
Protecting£Minnesota's Waters: (Priorities for the 2008 — 2009 Biennium
Introduction
As Minnesotans, we pride ourselves on our Each of these highlights the benefits of people
clean waters and abundant natural resources. working together across boundaries to develop
These provide us with jobs, drive our quality of solutions to pressing water issues. Each
life, and are the cornerstone of recreation and illustrates what is needed for the state to
tourism. However, the demands of an increasing successfully address a priority issue.
population and expanding industry put the
quality and availability of our water resources at The Charge
risk and challenge us all to respond. A number
of examples make the point. Minnesota Statutes, sections 103A.43 and
103B.151, directs the Environmental Quality
The drought of 2006 reminded Minnesotans just Board to coordinate state water programs and
how important water is to their well being and develop a biennial water policy and priorities
that, while the state is blessed with a wealth of report. In furtherance of this mission, a
water resources, these resources have limits. committee of the board—the Clean Water
Water is scarce or unreliable in parts of the state; Cabinet—and staff in the state's water agencies
elsewhere, signs indicate that use is beginning to have worked to coordinate the Governor's Clean
overwhelm the resource. The work of the Water Initiative and define state water priorities.
Drought Task Force to coordinate agency The cabinet and board present the 2008-2009
responses to existing and potential shortages biennial water priorities based on this work,. The
demonstrates the power of interagency priorities demonstrate a commitment to
cooperation. protecting the economic, social and ecological
value of Minnesota's water resources.
Just like the drought, many other issues illustrate
Minnesota's challenges, opportunities and 1 Clean Water Cabinet Vision
strengths, but also the need to set priorities: As Minnesotans, we expect our waters to be
• The upcoming federal Farm Bill offers clean and plentiful, both today and long into the
Minnesota a huge opportunity to make
1 future. This requires all Minnesotans to:
progress in water quality while fostering the I' • Guard their waters from present and future
health of the farm economy, but state and threats
local authorities need the resources to help • Restore waters that are impaired
put practices on the land. • Maintain an accurate picture of waters for
• The detection of perfluorochemicals in the citizens, managers and policy-makers
ground waters of Washington County • Ensure adequate reserves of safe water to
concerns citizens who need to know if their keep Minnesota prosperous and sustain
water is safe to drink, but it also i healthy communities
demonstrates the commitment the ,MATff
Department of Health and the Pollution
Control Agency have made to find the The Partners
answers.
• The city of Ramsey faces future water Protecting Minnesota's waters is a huge task,
shortages and may not be able to meet one that relies on the knowledge, authorities,
demands with ground water alone. A partnerships, commitment and resources of state
regional advisory committee of state and and local governments, the academic
community leaders, the Northwest Metro community, environmental organizations,
Water Supply Group, is considering options agricultural groups, private firms, citizens and
for financing a treatment plant that can draw others. Each of these players is important and
from the Mississippi River. necessary in the effort to protect the state's
waters.
- I -
ftotecting
Minnesota's
/ (Pn,o//ti^` for the 2008 - 2OU964i,enni'umn
The Priorities What is a TMDL?
The Clean Water Cabinet and Environmental A TMDL,or total maximum daily load, is a
Quality Board identify the following priority that a water body can receive and still meet water
areas for the ZO08'2U0qbiennium: quality standards, It also is an allocation of that
0 Water quality and the Clean Wateramount to the pollutant's sources. A TMDL sums the
Legacy Act allowable loads of a single pollutant from all
• Water supply contributing point and nonpoint sources.The
calculation must include a margin of safety to ensure
• Wv<\oodx that the water body can be used for the purposes the
state has designated.The calculation must also
Water Quality and the account for seasonal variation in water quality.'_J
Clean Water Legacy Act
Conup|chono[T�YDLxhuoud�n:c\ �0000mio
9oUudonin ��ioncuo<u^o |ubeu rivers
� ' in�puctoo0�iooeooN. The 6deru| C�uuVVuier
»0rmoxudvcmc|y �nopuc�mccononn�o Act prohibits new or expanded discharges |o
development, erodes quality of life and ho,nm impaired waters until uTMDLix completed and
ccouy»(cnox. "Impaired waters" are lakes and the discharges are assigned waste load
rivers that do not meet water quality standards allocations. & 2005 state Appeals Court decision
for one or more pollutants; thus, they are iu the case o[Maple Lake and Annandale, two
impaired for their designated uses under the Minnesota cities that had been issued u permit\o
federal Clean Water Act. The act requires that build and jointly operate u new wastewater
atu/ra�
� treatment plant, forced the MPC& k/revoke the
° Assess all waters nfthe state to identify and pcooiL With their existing plants at capacity,
list impairments these cities effectively cannot grow until the
• Conduct total maximum daily load studies TMDLstu `� i» completed and approved bvthe
ofimpaired wo�r iuorder\n»dpoUu&m\ U.S. Bovinnnuotu| Protection Agency. ~
reduction goals decision has been appealed om the state Supreme
• Implement corrective measures<o meet o Court; meanwhile, over |00 new o,expanding
TMD)L`o pollutant reduction goals and wastewater facilities are affected by this
restore waters {ostandards
uKuuhoo.
� The 2N06Clean Water Legacy Act launched The Governor recommends ail increased
� Minnesota onuu accelerated path toward appropriation from the General Fund o[$2O
addressing impaired waters. Nearly $25million million per year for the Fy2U08'20O9
was appropriated io one-time funding ioincrease biennium. This recoonocndrd funding will
monitoring and assessment, and start unumber enable continued progress in assessing the
nfncv/ TMDL studies and restoration and
� quu|/tyof lakes, rivemand x/reunus; increase the
protection projects. This funding represents an number o[TMDLstudies iuhiuooJ to address
important step forward for Minnesota's impaired impaired waters as required by federal |uvv; and
waters onoun� noubinthcimp1rnncntu6onofaddi6ona| �
nonpoiut and point source protection and
Minnesota currently hus2,25U |io1cd restoration practices. Minnesota has opvoud
impairments on |,30O lakes and streams. With legacy of clean, abundant water; It's ucritical
only o small percentage o[the »»mte'» waters foundation block io the gu1c`x economy and way �
assessed for impoinnen\u, the MpCAanticipates of life. But even more importantly, Minnesotans
many more listings in the conning years, which want polluted v/u1cm restored and the state has
will necessitate usignificant increase ioTMDLs embarked noupath /o cleaning up its waters,
undertaken and restoration activities
implemented.
xuapteufr"~°"°-,»".*.,m°""xmu 'in wliw"/m/,n"*""
-2 -
Protecting Minnesota's Waters: (Priorities for the 2008— 2009 (Biennium
Why Must Impaired Waters be Addressed? water Legacy Act(M.S. I 14D). This
1 Besides the need to protect our states most
recommendation represents a significant
t ilvestment in water quality assessment. TMDL
i treasured environmental and recreational
development, and nonpoint and point source
t resources,Minnesota needs to address impaired
protection and restoration.
i waters to allow continued economic
1 development within impaired watersheds. Once
a water body is added to the federal impaired T le Clean Water Cabinet and Environmental
ality Board recommend that the
waters list,Minnesota has 15 years to complete a L•gislature support efforts to:
TMDL report on each pollutant impairing the
ii • Increase the amount of water quality data
water body.Until a TMDL report is completed collected by state, local and federal
and approved by the EPA,the federal Clean agencies, as well as citizens
Water Act restricts any new or expanded
discharges of the pollutant of concern that would •
Direct significant new resources to the
contribute to the problem,resulting in added development of TMDLs in order to
4 t accommodate economic growth and provide
expense and time to obtain permits.
# the blueprints for effective, focused cleanup
of polluted waters
Recommendations • Provide additional landowner assistance for
implementation of specific practices targeted
Clean water is critical to preserving ecosystem at protection and restoration of waters
health and quality of life,as well as • Conduct additional applied research on best
accommodating and sustaining Minnesota's management practices effectiveness
future economic growth. The Legislature should • Continue providing technical assistance to
continue its commitment to advancing the small unsewered communities
policies enacted in 2006,contained in the Clean
w ", Wit' +•r
i .Q ,sw x• �- "f LL
rr{.
, i9 rJ'Y • Yip. J }. +t! k
4.
a .s 1� ,. Y <t ,4: to . - - , ,ttJ' 1" i c
��'t ; t� ;, : j a14' ck'"' 6 ''bay .1.� *V..- V ` .':t�.
'- §' P , P > e sSaeT ,,dFs�.° + k- yriv j tb
{ ' +>c " spa k414 . '# ri
t kk r a ,tom i. ", ,` "4. rF
y' x °'mot : ` $ 4; k �:' :"^� .... %'; 4
, Y ''','*''4; x} d 1 sae,�y) � 4 l
4, d+ t _& 'J# ' �.. �ffi ka ki"A e'.'` 4. € X
" ' t4 44s � ,� R�i4k n, . icy,-,,r e•v" A „ ,,' ?.
•
� � 'f F 3
h¢ , ,. " 4 A:::, 'd ++" a ..y � k# T- + t 'x
ti x f, 44 ROr,,,,, '' +,,,?�?f :,Aq , ��' y,kmk :vrA`
Aip
„ ,. • , A,,4dn . AA t' *` e ",14 M -; �z+ "i § t .ya w: ,x "?. .� ,
-3 -
Protecting Minnesota's Waters: Priorities for the 2008 — 2009 (Biennium
Water Supply safety, security and reliability. The Council
identified several next steps and
In a state known for its lakes and rivers, some recommendations based on the work of the first
find it hard to imagine that water quantity is a phase for improving and streamlining the water
topic needing discussion. However, Minnesota's resource evaluation, planning, decision-making
water resources are not evenly distributed across and approval process. Second phase activities
the landscape. In some regions, there isn't will define a process for evaluating water
enough water to sustain high volume users. In availability early in the decision-making process
the metropolitan area, the mere density of people prior to growth management decisions. The
strains the resources. For this reason, Minnesota Council also will assess the need for a regional
needs to proactively evaluate its water resources approach to improving safety, security,
and manage them for future growth. reliability and efficiency of the region's water
supplies.
Two specific water supply priorities address
these concerns: The master water supply plan will include an
• Minneapolis and Saint Paul interconnect assessment of water resource availability and
• Sustainable water use statewide water demand projections based on regional
growth forecasts. For areas where potential local
Minneapolis and Saint Paul Interconnect water supply limitations exist, the Council, in
cooperation with municipalities and regulatory
agencies, will identify water supply alternatives.
The drought that Minnesota experienced in 2006
renewed discussions about water supply options The master water supply plan will also present
and the necessity for planning. This need is opportunities for regional involvement in
heightened in areas of limited water supply or in improving the safety, security, reliability and
efficiency of the region's water supplies.
areas of dense populations and high
consumption.
Interconnecting the Twin Cities
The 2005 Legislature directed the Metropolitan
Council to"carry out planning activities A majority of metropolitan area communities
addressing the water supply needs of the have at least one emergency connection with a
metropolitan area" (Minnesota Statutes, section neighboring community (Figure 1). Most of
473.1565). Specifically, the Council is charged these interconnections occur using relatively
with developing a base of technical information small-diameter pipes and are capable only of
for water supply planning decisions and augmenting supplies, rather than completely
preparing a metropolitan area master water replacing them.
supply plan. The Legislature also established a
water supply advisory committee to assist the The two largest water suppliers in the
Council in its planning activities, and directed metropolitan region, the city of Minneapolis
the Council to submit regular reports to the Water Works and the St. Paul Regional Water
Services, are not interconnected. Some of the
Legislature detailing progress.
suburban communities they serve have
The Council organized its water supply planning interconnections with neighboring utilities.
efforts in two phases. The master water supply These small connections could supplement
plan to be completed in late 2008 will reflect the supplies for those communities,but could not
work performed during the two phases. During provide backup supplies to either major system.
the first phase, which culminated in a report to
the 2007 Legislature, the Council conducted a Since the 1930s, officials in both cities have
preliminary assessment of water supply sought to connect the two systems to provide
availability, evaluated the decision-making and ongoing, emergency water to one another should
approval process, and addressed water supply the need arise. Historically, however, the project
has lacked interest by both parties
-4 -
Protecting[Minnesota's Waters: Priorities for the 2008— 2009 (Biennium
simultaneously. While both systems are well Sustainable Water Use Statewide
suited to supplement the needs of the other, they
simply lack the facilities to transfer the water. The health of Minnesota's freshwater habitats is
threatened by physical and chemical changes
from many causes, including runoff and water
• , ,
appropriation. A rapidly growing population,
t..;i k;,,.' f i increased water consumption rates, emerging
21,-, 1 1 , rs. water demands,and other factors challenge our
WHLIILTOI s,•.'4 , r"—!-- 771-- r '.1 ability to maintain adequate water supplies for
'''z, 4., 1 -:,.', ,t ' z, —
, •!.., \,,,i -- ' ''1'4;''''' ''' ''' Minnesota's people and habitats. Between 1995
-77,1 -IT 'r I 1,1,, Z.,,,,,Ir and 2005,water use grew 50 percent faster than
*isto4o, • 071' ir,S.,, .1 .1, i1 population. Population will grow another 26
percent by 2030. In addition,the emerging issue
of ethanol production requires special state
t eik-e
attention. Given that the production of 1 gallon
of ethanol requires 4-5 gallons of water,
' ' "i' *'„,„,s,'‘4•H. F---,, r 1 ,,,t,L i ,,
t—iiiiitA-T-,--,5—: increasing ethanol production has significant
,Tts-„t,,,,_ ,s4 r ,1 , , implications for water supplies. In 2006
, ,s ‘, ,,,,,,„,,,., , 4„,.7•- ,,,7 ,,7,k',M .1., , 5---
7,,;,, ti. k, ,„,,, Minnesota ethanol production will require about
2.5 billion gallons of water—more than the
'
water used by Washington County in one year.
The state must act strategically to ensure
Figure 1.Community emergency water interconnections
sustainable water use to meet the needs of an
increasing—and increasingly demanding—
Recommendations population.
Prior to the 2006 legislative session,the In the metropolitan area,water levels in the
Minnesota Department of Health recommended major water supply aquifers have not been
the issuance of a$10 million state grant to the measured regionally in more than 15 years. An
utilities for construction of an interconnection, effort is underway to collect those measurements
The grant would match similar amounts in 2008.
contributed by the two water utilities. The
Governor recommended waiting until Water supply planning is becoming increasingly
completion of the Council's report to the 2007 important to ensure adequate water supplies for
Legislature before making a decision on the current and future demands. Public water
matter. The Council reaffirmed the regional suppliers are required to have a DNR approved
benefit of the interconnection during the first water supply plan that addresses projected water
phase of water supply planning activities and needs,the adequacy of existing resources,
recommended state funding for the emergency preparedness and conservation.
interconnection. Water supply plans must be updated every 10
years, and the second-generation plans are
The Clean Water Cabinet and Environmental currently being developed with a specific focus
Quality Board recommend that the on resource sustainability and monitoring. The
Legislature: DNR is working with communities on long-term
▪ Provide funding for the development of a water supply planning efforts, but recently staff
water interconnect between the cities of resources have been diverted to deal with
Minneapolis and Saint Paul potential impacts of increased water demand for
... Continue efforts to ensure water supply ethanol production. An administration budget
reliability and proper water supply safety initiative has been introduced to help address
and security ethanol issues so that long-term water supply
planning efforts can continue.
-5 -
Protecting.Minnesota's Waters: Priorities for the 2008 — 2009 (Biennium
Minnesota Ethanol Production and Consumption ir;�;,;,;:, _,�,,1_,;s!
600 Si Production 572
550
550 ■Consumption
500
450
400 all
400
359 1111
350
300
300
240
248252
250 2001y. I
17 145 1`
150 1t
99 1.1LLFLL ■
100 se �
50 1 i [ 1 II
1 1 1 ■
O^ry
Figure 2.Estimated consumption based on 20%blend ethanol by 2012
Source:Agricultural Marketing Services Division, MN Department of Agriculture
Assessing Water Sustainability water resources have not been fully quantified.
Since 1980,the state has supported a county
In April 2007, the Environmental Quality Board geologic atlas program vital to understanding
adopted a joint EQB-DNR report, Use of water resources. However, because of limited
Minnesota's Renewable Water Resources: funding,only 15 of the state's 87 counties have
Moving toward Sustainability, summarizing completed their atlases,and critical
information about the quantity and use of water hydrogeologic characteristics have not been
resources in Minnesota. The study was carried measured. Thus,the EQB analysis relied on the
out in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, best science available for estimating water
section 103A.43,which directs the two agencies resources on a county scale, with methods
to coordinate a biennial assessment of the focused on the characteristics of system recharge
availability of water to meet the state's long and discharge.
range needs.
The work looked at water permit information for
The project findings suggest Minnesota's the period 1995-2005 and estimated
reputation as"water rich"may be at risk. consumption trends to the year 2030. The results
Counties in the Twin Cities-St. Cloud growth conclude that one county—Ramsey—appeared
corridor already place significant demands on to use more water than considered sustainable in
their water resources, making water supply the long term,reporting use at 135 percent of
management a special concern. In the remainder renewable levels. The study also concluded that
of the state,because water is not evenly water use in the vast majority of counties was
distributed,care must be taken by local and state less than 50 percent of renewable levels. In
officials in planning to meet new demands. particular, the Greater Minnesota story was less
dramatic, with the range from less than 1 percent
Determining how much water exists in in seven counties to 46 percent in Wright
Minnesota is a challenge,because the state's County.
-6-
(Protecting Minnesota's Waters: Priorities for the 2008 — 2009 Biennium
Recommendations
2030 Net Water Use as a Percent
of the Renewable Resource
Future economic growth and quality of life in
Minnesota hinge on having adequate water
supplies to sustain economic growth, maintain a
high quality of life, and preserve ecosystem
health.
��. The Clean Water Cabinet and Environmental
Net Water Use Quality Board recommend that the
as a Percent of
Renewable Resource Legislature:
• Support research to:
o Better define the location and characteristics
., of ground water resources,giving priority to
areas subject to ethanol or population
demands
o Understand what volume of water is
renewable; that is, how much can be taken
for use on a long-term, sustainable basis
without drawing down the resource
Figure 3.Estimated metropolitan area 2030 water use2 o Understand the impacts of drainage or other
land use practices on rates of recharge and
The report calls for better information about
means to quantify these impacts
Minnesota's water resources,including
accelerated research to map and evaluate ground o Understand the impacts of global warming
on climate,rates of recharge and water
waters and define important connections to demand
surface waters, It also argues for better o Characterize the interactions of surface and
understanding of how land use activities and ground waters, including the implications of
water quality may affect future water supplies. water quality and quantity
o Quantify the timing, amount and quality of
The metropolitan area and adjacent developing water to better understand ecosystem needs
areas are overdue for water-level measurements • Support the evaluation of how public water
of major aquifers collected on a regional basis. suppliers integrate sustainability into the
Last done in 1990,these regional water-level second generation of water emergency and
measurements provide essential data for water
supply analysis and modeling. The U.S. conservation plans
• Support completion of mass water-level
Geological Survey is leading a multi-agency measurements of the major water supply
effort to conduct two mass water-level aquifers in the Twin Cities and associated
measurements in 2008 of the major water supply developing areas in 2008 and once each
aquifers in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. decade thereafter.
The data will be compared to historical regional • Use the biennial water availability
data and will provide a current picture of water assessment as a benchmark for what we
supply conditions in the region's most used know or need to know about the allocation
aquifers. These measurements are needed at of Minnesota's water resources and the
least every 10 years to provide accurate policies and priorities that guide allocation
information on the status of aquifers. The decisions, supporting EQB and DNR efforts
agencies involved should plan and commit to enhance the analysis and apply the
resources to routinely acquire these data. findings of future editions
2 From Use of Minnesota's Renewable Water Resources:Moving
toward Sustainability,A report of the Environmental Quality
Board and Department of Natural Resources,April 2007.
7
Protecting . / � i /� �" i J 4P��0/7/"" °yC,^^ ��V� — ]�0� �� � D/�Un/
Wetlands - --- ---------'---------------------
i Clean Water Cabinet Wetland Strategies
Minnesota is blessed with an abundance of
Minnesota has approximately l0 million acres o[
I wetlands. They help support diverse and
wetlands, half the un`ounithat existed at the abundant fish and wildlife populations and play
beginning of European settlement. Tile state
an integral part in protecting water quality,
Weiland Conservation Act was enacted in 1991
replenishing ground water resources and
to halt these losses. The law has been xoccouo[ul
minimizing flooding. An evolving recognition of
in dramatically slowing losses, but the nct'xgoal li wetland values and benefits has led Minnesota
w{oo net loss remains onmuincd within the
scope of regulatory programs. Changes Nthe away from programs that encourage drainage
and filling to those that restore wetlands and
cxistiugVVC& law and rule should hn pursued W regulate impacts. Today the state and its partners
reduce wetland losses, improve administrative are undertaking a number of initiatives to further
efficiency and improve data.
protect and enhance wetlands.
Vision
|o addition to the efforts of the regulatory We will protect, restore and enhance the values
programs\o reduce wetland |osxcx, uunnonouo and benefits Minnesotans receive froin wetlands,
state and federal conservation programs are adding to their quantity,quality and biological
actively engaged in restoring wetlands onthe diversity. We will do this by coordinating
landscape. These programs have restored spending, policy and
thousands of acres ofwnUundo throughout theourpriority partnershipsimplement
state.
Buckpr*wnd Do6vLiioitatiwnx
Loou|unimnfgnvcrnnocnt-cooutics, cities, Current data do not adequately uUon for
townships, soil and water conservation districts detcominiogif Minnesota iooriu not achieving u
and watershed districto- mrphmuri|y ,no net loss" in wetlands. Examining "vcx�nd
k rcupouxihh \�nC/\ i Tile c dukomouhKcundprivate activities can
Board o[Water and Soil Resources administers provide an approximation o[wetland change,
the progm/nstatewide and the DY4D eoDomm it. hu/concccoxovcrdup|ica ion and incomplete
data impede analysis of the extent o[compliance
The law established u goal of achieving u "no with the nonet loss policy. 7o address these
net loss"nf wetlands iu the state. Towork issues u group o[federal and state agencies have
towards this goal, WCf\ requires anyone collaborated to develop the Comprehensive
proposing to fill, drain or excavate u wetland to Wetland Assessment, Monitoring and Mapping
first try to avoid disturbing the wetland; second, Strategy. This strategy cuUu for the state and its
to try and minimize any impact; and lastly, to partners to:
replace the wetland acres, functions and values. 0 Develop and implement un integrated, geo'
Certain wetland activities are exempt, allowing rr0roucrd online database for tracking
projects with noioimo| impact orprojects located wetland pcnubdngand conservation
oo land where certain land uses are present^n program activities
proceed without regulation. a Update the National VVcdond Inventory in
Minnesota on u regular basis
VVC/\ has been the frequent subject o[ n Initiate statewide, random sample survey
legislation and has been amended in over half o[ using remote sensing data to track wetland
the years since its enactment in 1941. \Ycduods gain and loss
hcncfita for wildlife habitat, water quality and Of these items, the survey has been implemented
flood control have been unongoing focus of using umixo[DND and U.S. Environmental
attention. Protection Agency funding. This project x/iU
cmui\ random sample surveying of the state in
"
Protecting Minnesota's Waters: Priorities for the 2008 — 2009 Biennium
three-year cycles. The first three-year cycle (to • Amending wetland replacement
be completed in 2008) will develop the base requirements to increase coordination with
data. Future three-year sampling cycles will federal regulations, improve administrative
build on this base to analyze and identify efficiency and reduce wetland losses
wetland change. The first data on wetland
change will be available in 2012. The hope is that recommendations will be
implemented via statutory amendments and rule
Following the August 2005 issuance of the changes. Full implementation of suggested
2001-2003 Minnesota Wetland Report that WCA program changes should occur by summer
documented an annual net loss of wetlands of 2009.
450 acres under WCA, Governor Pawlenty
directed the Clean Water Cabinet to undertake The proposed changes to the wetland law will
an assessment of the WCA. In this directive, the reduce wetland losses, but increase state and
Governor asked the CWC and BWSR to report local government administrative costs. In
to him on how to align policies more closely addition, current workloads are increasing even
with the principle of"no net loss"of wetlands. without changes to the program. From 2001-
The WCA assessment examined ways to: 2003, local governments report an increased
• Improve wetland accounting and reporting number of landowner contacts. Appeals to
• Do more to limit the loss of wetlands by BWSR have also increased, as have enforcement
examining the existing WCA exemptions activities by DNR conservation officers,
and replacement requirements
• Streamline regulatory efforts through The Governor is recommending additional
changes to WCA and improved coordination funding of$1.12 million in FY2008 and $1.06
with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers million in FY 2009. This additional funding will
increase the capacity of local governments and
The BWSR led the assessment with the BWSR to work in partnership to protect
participation of more than 35 organizations. Key wetlands and ensure quality replacement when
portions of the law were examined during a impacts are unavoidable. This funding will also
process that evaluated WCA data and reporting increase the ability of BWSR to collect and
by local governments, the 10 categories of analyze data to measure trends in program
exempt activities, wetland replacement and effectiveness.
administration.
Recommendations
The BWSR and the CWC reviewed the
recommended changes to address the priority The Clean Water Cabinet and Environmental
issues identified by the Governor. The most Quality Board recommend that the
significant of the 21 recommended changes Legislature:
called for: • Support changes to the existing Wetland
• Study of existing exemption data and Conservation Act and rule to reduce wetland
improve local government reporting losses, improve administrative efficiency
• Amending the Agricultural Activities and and improve data; and provide funding for
Drainage Exemptions to reduce unregulated implementation
wetland impacts and improve administrative • Fund activities of the Comprehensive
efficiency Wetland Assessment, Monitoring and
• Amending the de minimis exemption to Mapping Strategy
reduce unregulated wetland impacts
-9 -
Protecting Minnesota's Waters: (Priorities for tie 2008— 2009 (Biennium
Summary • Support statewide research to, among other
projects,better define the location and
Protecting Minnesota's waters is no easy task. characteristics of ground water resources,
Many people and agencies must be involved and giving priority to areas subject to ethanol or
much needs to be done to preserve the quality population demands
•
and availability of our waters for fishing, Use the biennial water availability
swimming, drinking and economic use. The assessment as a benchmark for what we
Clean Water Cabinet and Environmental Quality know or need to know about the allocation
Board recommend that the state focus efforts in of Minnesota's water resources and the
three priority areas over the coming biennium. policies and priorities that guide allocation
decisions, supporting EQB and DNR efforts
Recommendations to enhance the analysis and apply the
findings of future editions
for the 2008-2009 Biennium
Protect Minnesota's wetlands
•
Implement the Clean Water Legacy Act Support changes to the Wetland
• Increase the amount of water quality data Conservation Act and rule,and fund their
collected by state, local and federal implementation to reduce wetland losses,
agencies,as well as citizens improve administrative efficiency and
• Direct significant new resources to the improve data
development of TMDLs in order to • Implement the Comprehensive Wetland
accommodate economic growth and provide
Assessment, Monitoring and Mapping
the blueprints for effective, focused cleanup Strategy
of polluted waters
■ Provide additional landowner assistance for ' �' _ � t ZZ
,d tom.. ��. i �
implementation of specific practices targeted 4 �
at protection and restoration of waters
on
• Conduct additional applied research on best � °� �'�
q�' ;twok 3Y.ax4 '�w,t) �35,p 4
management practices effectiveness
• Continue providing technical assistance tom
a H 5a
small unsewered communities jt
Safeguard water supplies '
• Develop a water supply interconnect
between Minneapolis and Saint Paul
• Support completion of mass water-level
measurements of the major water supply t`"
aquifers in the Twin Cities and associated
� y
developing areas in 2008 and once each
decade thereafter
■ Continue efforts to ensure metropolitan
water supply reliability and proper water
supply safety and security KK,
• Evaluate how public water suppliers
integrate sustainability into the second
generation of water emergency and »
conservation plans
"More so than any other state, the quality and quantity of water in Minnesota is
central to our way of life. It helps define who we are and what we value."
Governor Tim Pawlent ,June 23,2003, St.Cloud,Minnesota
- 10-
Protecting Minnesota's Waters: Priorities for the 2008— 2009 Biennium
2005-2007 Accomplishments For impaired waters
■ Enacted the Clean Water Legacy Act,
Much has been accomplished in our state since providing a new operational framework,
the last biennial report,although much more tools and first year start-up funding to
remains. The Clean Water Cabinet and protect and restore water quality
Environmental Quality Board recommended the • Created the Clean Water Council,a
following priorities for the 2005-2007 biennium: citizen/state advisory group charged with
• Protect core state water activities and meet making recommendations on
strategic long range needs implementation
• Make the commitment to restoring impaired • Accelerated testing of Minnesota's waters
waters • Began to develop specific plans(TMDLs)to
■ Promote Twin Cities water supply clean up Minnesota's most contaminated
sustainability waters
■ Targeted additional financial resources to
In response,Minnesotans took important steps. existing state and local programs to improve
water quality
For core water activities • Leveraged additional federal, local and
■ Evaluated state wetland conservation efforts private resources
■ Protected core water functions funded
through the General Fund For water supply sustainability
• Increased drinking water protection fees to ▪ Adopted legislation directing Metropolitan
fund needed water testing Council to create a Metropolitan Water
• Brought citizens into Environment and Supply Plan
Natural Resources Trust Fund decisions, • Created a Metropolitan Region Water
creating the new Legislative Citizen Supply Advisory Committee
Commission on Minnesota's Resources • Funded development of a regional water
supply master plan
■ Began work to understand the issue
statewide
:W a,�; -*, , s tt'*J * N 2t4 to y , ,t
Vfr"RV**§CtrtttAttkW".S4WSZIWtta.VV**ViWtknqXtftgkagkfi,N%IN
p
1
A �i� gy a
tt is , . y. , ` x 4
,,,, a t„ �a ,-,,,, 'mot ^e ` S , .; - `i e
' t �dt z, i,,f a t\tea :Q
Tom'4. ', Y t ti M .�N
A't.*:1,<eiv,A64t,,4,7r:'.`4‘'''‘v tt,!AV,,V,t''', A,'''.?t,:4 fEt ttl,441010,41111Attitt,e'Zi4hIEL.4
e " '� y.�, .'' � �`
w, w4 ai�t��'- '` s+ t
- 11 -
l
'i .,o i 4 e
,, i i } it �
�\ t } 1 y1 1 tr } S 1 t.
}
� }
2
i
�'lt\1 }} $ � 'l
i` } rt 1T4iZ It At;_1 dll } 1,.
S 2 5' i t i}2
W
p 4 4 d
V
id
Fiw.
}
Environmental Quality Board
300 Centenniial Buildin
658 Cedar Street
St. Paul,; N"�55 ,55" "