The URL can be used to link to this page

8.f)1) Update on Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project , r Meeting Date: 12/15/2009 Agenda Item: �� V ! , /� . . � C�ty Counc�l Agenda Re ort `� p City of Scandia 14727 209`h St. North Scandia, MN 55073 (651)433-2274 Action Requested: None—receive an update from staff on the status of the Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project EIS. Deadline/Timeline: N/A Background: • The City Council approved a Final Scoping Decision Document for the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS) for the Zavoral Mining and Reclamation project in April, 2009. In August, 2009 the City hired AECOM as the consultant to complete the EIS, and AECOM completed a work plan for the EIS based on the Scoping Decision Document. The City published a Notice of Intent to Prepare the Environmental Impact Statement in the EQB Monitor on September 7, 2009. • The Scoping Decision Document identified and described the project alternatives that will be analyzed in the EIS, the issues that will be analyzed, and the proposed schedule for the EIS. • On December 1, Tiller Corporation sent a letter to the City indicating that they are proposing changes to the Zavoral Mine project as described in the Scoping Decision Document. The changes include the following: o Tiller is proposing to eliminate the processing activities that were originally proposed as part of the project at the Zavoral site. o The aggregate material mined at the site will be transported to the Scandia Mine site, located on Manning Avenue near 225th Street. This site is also operated by Tiller Corporation. The material would be processed at that site. Tiller indicates in its letter that the material that will be transported to the Scandia Mine site will replace aggregate material that is currently transported to the site from deposits in Chisago County, Minnesota and Polk County, Wisconsin. • The revision would change the EIS alternatives and analysis, and will require changes in the Scoping Decision Document and the work plan for the EIS. Page 1 of 3 12/10/09 , • According to the Rules for the Environmental Review Program the procedure for amending the Scoping Decision is for the RGU (the City Council to approve a revised Scoping Decision Document and publish a revised Notice of Intent to Prepare the Environmental Impact Statement that includes the revised Scoping Document in the EQB Monitor(Minnesota Rules 4410.2100, subparts 8 and 9). The process to revise the scope does not include a requirement for a public hearing. • The elimination of processing activities at the Zavoral site and transfer of the proposed processing to the Scandia Mine site will affect several elements of the EIS: o The changes will require revision of the alternatives to be examined in the EIS from four to three. Alternative#3— Impacts of Washing and Alternative#4- Impacts of Seasonal Scheduling of Processing Activities would be eliminated. Tiller is proposing a new alternative that would examine the potential impacts of compressing the length of time that the Zavoral Mine would be operated to up to five years, rather than up to 10 years as proposed in the Preferred Alternative. The proposed alternatives to be examined in the EIS would be amended in the new scope to include the following: o Alternative#1 –Applicant's Preferred Alternative o Alternative#2–No Build Alternative o Alternative#3 –Revised Schedule o The scope of the EIS analysis and consultant work plan would be revised in several areas. Staff and consultants are currently working with the proposer to revise the scope. The revised scoping document is expected to be available for the City Council's review at the January 5, 2010 meeting. • One of the issues for the revised scope is how the EIS would include analysis of the potential impacts on the Scandia Mine site from transferring material to the Scandia Mine site and processing it there, instead of at the Zavoral Site. Some guidance has been received from the EQB staff that the city should include the analysis of all potential impacts at both sites in the EIS. Exactly how that should be done is still the subject of discussions between the proposer and the city staff and consultants. � The first meeting of the Project Advisory Committee(PAC)was held on December 8, 2009. The handouts for the PowerPoint presentations made at that meeting are attached and have been posted on the city website. The PAC will meet three more times. The dates for the next two meetings were set(Wednesday, February 3, 2010 and Tuesday, Apri127, 2010 from 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) The third meeting will be schedule for when the draft Page 2 of 3 12/10/09 EIS is available for review. • Meeting notes from the PAC meeting are being compiled by the consultant team, and will be provided to the Council and posted on the website as soon as they are available. • One of the issues raised at the PAC meeting was whether the city's review of the mining project Conditional Use Permit(CUP) application(which has been suspended during the environmental review) was properly based on the former city Comprehensive Plan. The CUP application was made in 2008,before the adoption of the current plan in March, 2009. The city has been advised to review the application under the plan that was in affect when the application was submitted, which allows mining as a conditional use in agricultural areas. Members of the PAC questioned whether a written legal opinion regarding this matter was available, and whether Tiller's recent modification of the project would affect that opinion. The City Council may wish to discuss this. Recommendation: No action is requested. Staffwill be available to answer questions about the progress of the EIS, and will also provide any additional information that might be known following a meeting with the proposer scheduled for Tuesday, December 15. Attachments/ • December 1, 20091etter from Tiller Corporation Materials provided: . PowerPoint Handouts, December 8, 2009 PAC Meeting Contact(s): Prepared by: Anne Hurlburt, Administrator (Zavoral EIS Update) Page 3 of 3 12/10/09 TILLER Tiller Corporation mid its opemting divisions CORPORATION Barton Sand&Gravel Co. Commercial Asphalt Co. Corporate Office: Barton Enterprises,Inc. PO Box 1480 general:(763)425-4191 7200 Hemlock Lane,Suite 200 facsimile:(763)425-7153 Maple Grove,Minnesota 55311 web: www.tillercorp.com December 1,2009 The Mayor and City Council Members of the City of Scandia 14727 209�Street N. Scandia,MN 55073 Re: Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project Dear Mr. Mayor and City Council Members: Tiller Corporation(Tiller) recently conducted addiHonal exploration activities within the proposed m;,,;ng limits of the Zavoral Mining and Reclamation Project(the Project). This was done to obtain a better understanding of the deposit and to develop a mining plan needed for the Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)being prepared for the Project. The exploration reconfirms that this is an excellent deposit of sand and gravel and after evaluating the Project deposit more thoroughly,we have determined the material meets the requirements of add rock for our existing Scandia facility. Most recently,add rock for this facility is being obtained from deposits in Chisago County,Minnesota and Polk County, Wisconsin. Tiller has also heard the comments and concerns expressed by the Scandia community during the Environmental Assessment Worksheet process and EIS scoping process. Sorne of the concerns have focused on impacts to water resources from aggregate washing activities, impacts from noise and dust created by processing equipment and visual impacts from stockpiles and processing equipment. Tiller firmly believes these concerns and all other concerns can be adequately addressed through the EIS and City permitting processes. However,we understand the community has concerns and after considering our need for add rock at our existing Scandia facility and understanding that the deposit contained within the Project can meet those needs,Tiller has decided to use this deposit as an add rock source. This decision will eliminate the need for processing at the Project site. In other words crushing,screening, aggregate washing,stockpiling of aggregate material and transporting finished aggregate materials internally for subsequent processing are being eliminated as proposed activities for the Project. This Company is an Equal Opportunity Employer Noveinber l],2009 Pnge 2 of 2 With this change,activities proposed at the Project site will primarily consist oE clearing vegetation and overburden from the areas to Ue mined,exca��ation of raw aggregate materials,transporting the raw aggregate materials from the Project site and reclamation activities. These activities have always been proposed as part of the project. Please understand,the decision to use the deposit from the Project site as an add rock source for our existing Scandia facility does not impact this existing facility. As stated above we currently obtain add rock from deposits north and northeast of the Project site. Add rock from the Project site will replace add rock from the other locations. Simply changing the source of add rock will not have an impact our existing Scandia facility. The amount and type of processing at our existing Scandia facility 11as always been determined by market demand and it will continue to be determined by market demand. Tiller believes the decision to use this deposit as an add rock source is positive and beneficial to both the community and the Project. Please contact me if you have questions or need additional information. I may be reached at(763)425-4191. Respectfully, Tiller Corporation � ,� /�� Michael Caron Director of Land Use Affairs c: Anne Hurlburt,City Administrator PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 . ��'-�t� - Thank you for being involved � PAC Meeting 1 Zavoral Mine& Reclamation � � _ _ Project EIS � _ � _ � � � � _ , . Agenda �� ■ Introductions ■ Review PAC roles,responsibilities,&schedule ■ Overview of EIS,CUP,��,��9 P�o�esses PAC Members ■ Gravel mining ■ Til�er proposal ■ EIS content ■ Recent developments&scoping implications •Introductions ■ Group identfication of issues&concems •Brief summary of what made ■ NeM steps you interested in serving on ■ Public questions PAC? City & Local Representatives Agency Representatives ■ Jed CheStnut ■ Jim Shaver-Camelian-Marine-St.Gdx Watershed Distrid ■ Bfll Clapp � JIm Larsen-Metrapolitan Coundl ■ Lisa Schlingerman ■ Melissa Doperalski—MN Depanment oi Natura�Resources ■ Kristin Tuenge ■ Karen Kromar-Minnesota Pdlution Control Agenq ■ Mlchael Whlte ■ JIII Medland-NPSSt.Croix National Scenic Riverway ■ Thomas Krinke-Scandia Planning Commission ■ Jyneen Thatcher-washington Conservation Distria ■ Dan Seemon-US Army Corps of Engineers (continued) PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 .r � - �� PAC Roles _s� - PAC Roles & � � Responsibilities . . . � ;�,�P,� y •.: •e�s e�� •��ry�,�8 �� •ia�r�eerma� mmpetlon meswes �ReWe�w DroR EIS,, �� tia�: ■ � . . .:r:�,:.,,,:, � . . ,�.,,..,. PAC Support PAC Input . ` � ■ Input&results of PAC discussions will be collected&documented in meeting notes &posted on Ciry's project web site � �` ■ PAC members are encouraged to communicate with others in community/agency to broaden outreach& � � information exchange for EIS ■ PAC Responsibilities PAC Meetings ■Timely review of materials ■4 meetings(Feb 3,Apr 27, May/June) ■ Participation in all meetings ■4-6 pm ■ Representation of communiry&/or agency ■ Next 2 meetings as a whole ❑Focus on technical issues as information is ■ PrOviding non-voting, advisory input to City devetoped during preparation of EIS& potential mitigation measures Council ■4"'meeting ❑Review&comment on the draft EIS PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 ■� ,.�:� ■,� .�,,.. , . PAC Protocol PAC Protocol ■ Meetings are for PAC to receive ■All members need to have in front of them information, ask questions, &discuss any information a PAC member refers to issues during a meeting.(If you have something ■ Questions from public allowed at end of you intend to refer to, please bring copies meeting;comment cards are available for each member) ■ If ineeting extends beyond scheduled ■Anne Hurlburt is the point of contact for ending time,will continue only if majority of information sharing between meetings PAC members can remain (contkiued) �� ■ PAC Protocol �'^� ■ PAC meeting notes comprise written Overview of documentation of PACs advisory role ■ PAC members are likely to comment on PI'OC@SS@S EIS when published as individuals/or as agencies Environmental Review(EIS), CUP, 8 other permits Environmental Review Process Environmental Review Process ■ EQB Rules required EAW for project to ■ Ciry held public meeting to"scope" EIS determine whether or not it had potential (April 7, 2009)&approved a Scoping for significant environmental impacts, Decision Document(April 21,2009),which which would require an EIS determined required contents of EIS ■ EAW completed(Dec 2008) ■ City is preparing EIS, approved contract ■ City Council determined EIS required with AECOM(August 2009) (Mar 2009) ■ EIS process will take about 1 year c��> � � • • � • � � •' i �� • • . � � EISAnalyses C�ty 8 A�COPA collec�da:a 8 conduc!ar•alyses req_�red Cy Scop�ng Dcasion Documentt� rorrplcl��heFIS Nr.z'twoPACmcelmGswi'I •• - revoWe arounc these analyses. � • •' • • • ' ' • •�• '• . .- . . �' Oraft EIS Preparation �.�'� � � �• � • Crty 8 AECOM orepare Ihe draH GIS nAC w�il provitic revicw commentson he tlra!t EIS atthe � " - " 4'PAC mceLng.pnor to pubhc distrmuUon. � • •' � • - •• • -• - .• - - DawmentPreparallonComplete �'�� Dreft EIS is completed for public nolice. - • •. • - i i�� Notifica6on in the EQB MonAor City 8 AECOM Prepare Final EIS Document � CRy provitles necessary informahon to publish City B AECOM respontl to comments,ob;am noticeof draft EIS m EOB MonRor,newspaper any req�ued addilionai information.8 prepare final EIS oocument. PublieCommeMPeriod Begina City Distributes Final EIS W�en Eo8 Mon�tor Is pubhsnetl oNicialiy Cey shall provide copms of the final E!5 to all not:ci�g availa6�lityofthe tlrah EIS,publ.c � oe'sons rece,v�ng cop�es o'!�e tlrafl Ei5&aoy comment penotl(typically 3D days)begins ne�sen whc submiL•ed su6stantwe commen�s on Durmg this time interestetl parties can review t�c crafl cIS,and to the ez!ent possib��.c,to aoy EIS 8 submitwntter commenisto Ci!y pe�son recuestlnq,he Onal FIS Pu6licCommentPenod Ends,City Reviews � City Notices Final EIS Availa6ilily � Comments , rity sends nolice tc CQ3 Momror d newspaper .VJher p�6iic comrent oeroo is over,C�ty E o�ava-labi ity Gomment period on Final AECOM ieview al fime y R substentrve 'Decision&Resoonse to Cor�me�tsentls no �tomments Thc City&ALCUM�esportl tc socne-than 10 business tlays alte�pu�l�ca:ion suhstantrve comments of ro[icc CitymakesElSAtlequacyDecision-an � � EIS is edequate it • • • Adtlresses potentially signifiwnt issues raise0 m scoping,prov�tlesresponses to substantivecommenlsrecervedduring �' ' - � � draREIS review concernmg issues raised � in srnpin9 was preparetl In compliance ' • -• .�• • � with procedures of the ed an0 parts I 4410.020010 4410.8500. 1 1: •- • • • 1 .• - � • - �' - •• - •�- CflyNoHficationofFinalDecidon • : - -• ' - -• • Citywill notity ell persons receiving copres Mthe final EIS pursuarrt of its � ��• • • • �� atlequecy decis�on withm trve days �Public noBce ef the decision shall be - � _�� - �-� :published in the EQB Mondor • • ' •" • • ' '• PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 . ._t'�,=�.:. Other Permits s� ■ EIS is not a generic permit application, it does not replace permit applications or supporting data requirements GI'aV@� MlClltlg �� ■Tiller will need to file any necessary permit � information directly with permitting agencies (By Tiller Corp.) ■ Ciry&other permitting entities may not issue permits for project until EIS has been completed Saravel Minina 101 Every yeer—�2,�te pounds ot ne.w mmerou muat ee proWdea tor Productlon of Constructlon Aaareaates e�r enon In die UnneO steles to meKe the mxqs we uee,ev�ry ay � . . ,..,. v..�� ,..�.......a.d...tl..� .,..�..:......�.,.. �'St .,...,..._..a m.,,m,� � ,:a�,�.��..... �� ......_... . .......... � iAt��rYw�s� mrur. ' , : .. � n �tl � ��Ysl�w p.CwrliY�we � �W��M'��.o��Y�s.Y�e�n�'.��nr. •ti4�,PUP'.Wa�s � �wY�.�r.�ue.ss�m�en�w-evrm � uM��1MMe�1��YM�pM�a• r�rt�r�w��W�sY�w. �O�M.��wr � �m Vsyre �'�'~+M�vO � ]b.�wrM�`irnssi�ln�YY4 � � .4sY��e�w`�r��s�rw. � art�.�woRuo�.s4w.a�Nr.�s •Yw.Mb��s��SOM� f � � MMYw�Oew�rWn�r�rsP � X t�reMesb.T'�WumM1nw.'stn Onawn�.�e�.�ws �'��•R ��!1'� Ru�TI�Enwqy Fwla •919WbMdMaMwn •].9]B�.dCeY .]B}73cu.�dNwrMf.0 .�/etdYnnMm A��w� •w�ybiW�PM��KuvMtlwasulv�rnau�. � YEr��T r�� M1I064 .��,: —_ .�' �if�� ..07'-Vt.�. . f � t 'Economically viable ;� � + ��" ? — deposits M sand and gravel, ��`,� �r or bedrodc appropriate for ` i crushing,are where they / 4u �h are,whether oonvenient a wcwc; ` � � %/ ns.,va, __— �,,.�,., ' not' ��!/L1�� __ � (Southwick et al.,2000) y�" `{«.R • i � � ay� � '�� a.G��_ �. I '1"TPa k�� . t_I '��i � ,._ f \ x�rv�u:4 l�� .:� • p.. � ;� H i �� EurcS.M�pdMlrmon�sMwiqtnormund'rceabnmd �' � m eatmi d Superia-la6e im.�nd tlie latrr Des At�dnes- hrke.Notr�Irnaiheas��cPoenedfraMrbirgsuAbtrofiM � � s AM�ivs bM. Sarthwick et al.2000 PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 � � ' 'A pit in sec6on 18 �.T * - 'The availability of tlie � /• near the intersecUon of ' ,� best remaining Superior- t � luinnesota FGghways ,�. lobe sand and gravel 95 and 97 produced ,� � ' . . . deposits in eastem -� - �� samples that average $, hr II -.� Washington and centrel _, !�y�;„. a 025 percent each of ; Y3�`� �� Dak�a counUes,is shale,iran obde,and � + threatened by suburban �� unsound chert." ' r - "r• Sp2NA' r r _'r 1 � '"= � (Southwick et al.2000) , . y ,,,:. '.� (SoWiwick et al.,2000) �t., $�� . y � +�{� /;,. � � � 0 Exnosed mining face �rain size asmtu�on and aassi�cauon cnart w � Num�na�*rJ_4oa�«nbm� vnal�wanwnaaeam �,��! .:,''"R� •DemOnsVales Me �� ae .ae 'i��°S�. �9C" 4�!? „�.,.Ai unconsdidaled naWre d �'�� ac � ao � gladal deposits �� e_�ceu. ��, •To meke a producl,matufal . � o��, must be aoAed eaading to 115 ��` • u -- �. groin size •Note the range of grain j �x . . u.�"-` �I � SIZES: �Oe C� M�W j �a cewnm •Material is passed thraqh �. �"`�", � �M1v"�n and •F�"'a�•�a..e-�..a�.av.w .m aso xo ,� �� F sieves(sc�eens)roachievethe .9` t y�"�� oa no :c - - 1° requlred grein size disfrib�Non �.''. ��,�y�'.c �i-� ��T�R%�1 .Amin rnwe I �' :Ca �t, x..,p.,� . Mp ske tl�at i5 �e o�a us u - I, for e aPalfic Droduct �-a�� ;,-iv• . ��'^�. IacicirgapBrtiWlergraln .�.,e ems� n u ��"��0 � � size mey need to brin9� �mw r. . - "add rotk'to supplement ��.�.'� am� . - r .. . e[ .-___ w�s..w the SpeCMiCetlorl5 for '�.�r ome�- ne ao �.. . _ R�� % diReront produCtS ��:ina omre- ia � ia ��, . . : ��4ryheM '.� ___a�__. oc ___. ee---- ��I 0000a[ oa wn � [ONSLPUCf10N AGGAEWTE SVECIFIUTIWS Tabb 3138-1 Base Surfacirg Aggregate Evampk d varkry d podurn Tolal Percert Passing Cl�l Clu3 Clul CL� Clrf M6 • Bagged Portland 4ment �' vs� • Fine Aggregate for Portland Cement(must be washed) �� - - - - - - • Fine Aggregate for Bituminous Seal Coat ��e� - - �� - - • Coarse Aggregate for Concrete »3^•^ _ _ _ _ _ _ • MortarSand ��x�� ss.o� • Base and Surfacing Aggregate(Gushing requtred for qass 5 °"'� �� end CI235 6) �wmnl 10° - - 90-10° B0'10° • Stab(IiiingAggreQate �� es-ss. s�-sa - - w.uo was • Aggregate Backfill •.a"•,, m.es. �sw 3�-iao asioo »-w >s�ro • Aggregate Bedding �� 200mm 25-'IO 35�5 30.IU0 OI00 SOdfO A!J • CoarxfilterAggregate�nofinn—Generallyrequkes �""� • washing) �««> io<s uao sw sas ioas io-w • FineFilterAggfegate '6�'"' e.o-is.o s.au.o s.o�io.o . . n.aioo �.a-v.o �w me� •umem�r.d.s+ae-i am.s�.�ma s �o�.v«c�.m�:ms eoeo�:�ww. w r PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 operations Overview-Mapb Grove,MN ComoaraNva Loeal Water Usaae ;:r'�'�:. . . . . _ Pert�itled • ,;� MG/Year �° Abrahamson 7.3 Nurseries Barton Sand ,�8 0 ; and Grevel Eco Bakken $$,Q -;�; Forest Hills 37.0 Gdf qub city a Forest 2g50 Lake =��=-:i�. ,SCANDLA „* Asld Rockc The Modern Plan �� # ❑Add Rock allows grovel mining lo operate elfiqeMly. ❑Add Rock dces nal exlentl C�e life of a minirp operatbn,k�steaA�R albws the f producers lo use 100%of the materiel to make e producl—ALL of Ihe rosource T i I I e r s P ro posa I is utllized. O The amount d Atld Rock requked Is e functlon oF gradations exisdng at the mine,an0 the malerial specification required for specific prpducts. OAggregale is too precbus a msource to bt go to wasffi. Tiller's Mining Proposal Tiller's Mining Proposal ■Operate sand&gravel mine on site of ■ Maintain minimum 3-foot separation dormant, unreclaimed gravel mine between bottom of excavation& ■ Mining&restoration of 64 acres within groundwater table 114-acre Zavoral Site ■ Mining area&processing activities located ■ Mine to average depth of 15 feet&expand outside St. Croix River District Zone. limits of past mining by 8 acres ■About 4 acres of previously-mined area in St. Croix River District Zone&scenic easement area reclaimed in first year (continued) (continued) PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 .� -.:=��-. Tiller's Mining Proposal s�.,�, �.. ;�.: �"'� ■ Mining conducted on seasonal basis, typicallyfrom April through mid-November E�S COntent ■ Develop&reclaim site in phases ■ Duration of mining up to 10 years Scoping Decision Document . _ . ` Project Alternatives EAW Items Screened & Removed from Further Review ■ ApplicanYs preferred alternative • Item 15:Water surface use-impacis to boating& ■ No-build altemative recreationa/use . Item 18:Water quality:wastewafers-impacts to muniCipa/or on-site sewage treatment Sca/e of Magnitude Alternatives sysrems ■ Item 22:Vehicle-related air emissions ■ 3 washing altematives(based on water use) ■ Item 25a:Archaeological,historical,or arcnitecrura� ■ Impacts&seasonal scheduling of processing resources ■ Item 256:Prime or unique farmlands ■ Item 28:Impact on infrastructure 6 public services ■ „;�:,: � �,. Topics to be included in EIS: Topics to be included in EIS: ■ Item 17:Surface water quality&quantity ■ Item 9:Land use/potential environmental ■ Item 19:Geologic hazards&soil conditions hazards/reclamation p/an ■ Item 20:b-Solid waste&c-Hazardous waste, ■ Item 10:Cover types storage tanks ■ Item 11: a-Fish,wildli/e,&ecologically-sensitive ■ Item 21:Tra�c resources 8 6-Threatened&endangered ■ Item 23:Sfationa source air emissions species rY ■ Item 12:Physical impacts on water resources ■ Item 24:Odors,noise,&dust ■ Item 13:Water use ■ Item 26:Visual Impacts ■ Item 14:Water-related/and use management districts ■ Item 27:Compatibility with plans&land use regulations ■ Item 16:Erosion&sedimentation ■ Item 29:Cumulative impacts (confinued� PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 . � �,..r �� f^l Tiller's Revised Proposal �� ` ■ Cost-benefit related j,:: Recent ■ Recent additional characterization of Develo ments deposit indicated use as add-rock for p Scandia Mine site ■ Reinitiating use of Zavoral site well at No processing at Zavoral site levels suitable for washing gravel would require significant investment to address DNR water appropriation requirements ��i� ■ ■ Tiller's Revised Proposal Tiller's Revised Proposal ■ No washing, processing,or stockpiling at ■ Dec 1, 2009-Tiller proposes changes to Zavoral site project ■ Load aggregate into trucks&haul to ■Changes will: Scandia Mine site for processing ❑Affect EIS alternatives 8 analyses ■ Reduces impacts at Zavoral site ❑Require changes in Scoping Decision ■Add-rock is currently brought to Scandia Document&AECOM's EIS work plan Mine site from other locations (cont,,wea� (�onr,x,ea/ ■ ■ Tiller's Revised Proposal Revised EIS scope & work plan ■ Eliminate on-site processing activities originally City staff contacted EQB&reviewed state's proposed for Zavoral site rules regarding EIS process to amending ■ Transport aggregate mined at Zavoral site to scope of the EIS Tiller's Scandia Mine site for processing ■ Tiller indicates material transported will replace aggregate material currently transported to Scandia Mine site from deposits in Chisago County,MN&Polk County,WI (Minnesda Rules 4470200§8) PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 �4� ■ Amend EIS Scope Alternatives ■ Revisit EIS SCOpe to refleCt revised Tiller ■ #1 -ApplicanYs Preferred Altemative(10 years proposal or less) ■ Conduct formal scope amendment process ■ �-No Build Alternative ■ #3-Reduced mining timeframe(5 years or ■ Notice in EQB monitor �ess) ■ EQB provided guidance that EIS consider ■ Deleted: Impacts of Washing Scenarios potential impacts at Zavoral&Scandia ■ Deleted: Impacts of Seasonal Scheduling of Mine sites Processing Activities ■ , � ■ EIS scoping items to be Water Use modified ■Zavoral Site ■ Project description modifications-add-rock& timeframe ❑Water use for dust control only-low usage ■ Item 13-Water Use ❑Reduces water use from up to 1,200 gpm (864,000 gpd)to< 10,000 gpd&<1 mgy ■ Item 17-Surface Water Quality 8 Quantity ❑No water appropriation permit required ■ Item 21 -Tra�c ■ Item 23-Stationary Source Air Emissions ❑Comparison nursery is permitted to use up to ■ Item 24-Odors,Noise,8 Dust �•2 mgy(420 gpm) ❑Potential impacts&mitigation measures of ■ Item 26-vsual Impacts lower usage rate will be addressed in EIS (corfinued) .. r..... � 1 �,_..,.,.. Water Use Water Use Monitoring ■ Impacts of current water appropriation levels at ■ Scandia site Scandia Mine site were addressed in Scandia ❑Currently permitted 18 mgy for washing,2 EAW&as part of DNR water appropriation mgy for dust control permit process ❑Actual usage<2 mgy ■ Annual water use at Scandia is reported to DNR ❑Add-rock is currently processed at Scandia ❑Dust control(daily) Mine site ❑Hours operating washing plant 8�amount of ❑The EIS will identify&evaluate potential water used(daily) additional impacts on water use at Scandia ❑Zavoral annual water use reported to City as Mine site part of Annual Operating Permit �COrtinued) PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 ., �. ,. �. � SurFace Water Quality & Traffic Quantity ■ Review historic operational data for ■ Review historic operational data for Scandia Mine site Scandia Mine site ■ Identify if potential for additional impacts at ■ Identify if potential for additional impacts at Scandia Mine site, including areas of Scandia Mine site(traffic,safety,& disturbance impacts to downstream water infrastructure) resources ■ Evaluate any identified impacts&identify ■ Evaluate any identified impacts 8�identify mitigation measures mitigation measures � ■ �. _ � , Stationary Source Air Odors, Noise & Dust Emissions ■ Identify&evaluate potential noise&dust ■ Identify&evaluate potential for additional impacts of mining only at Zavoral site& air impacts at Scandia Mine site&mining processing material from Zavoral at only impacts at Zavoral site. Scandia Mine site ■ Identify mitigation measures ■ Identify mitigation measures VISUB� �,'~�;� ` . Identify&evaluate visual impacts ofi � GC'OIJp (C�@11t1f CatlOtl � mining only at the Zavoral site& � of Issues & processing material from Zavoral at � Scandia Mine site Concerns ■ Identify mitigation measures PAC Meeting, Zavoral Project EIS December 8, 2009 .k ,•. .'�`�:,;e R . .,.. �- � sc,� ; EIS Schedule r- March 23,2009 Record of Decision&Positive Dedaratlon fa � EIS puWished in E�B Monita Apnl 7,2009 Public Scaping MeeUng Apri121,2009 Final Sooping Decision Next S te p s December 2009 Revise Scoping Decision Document Jan-May 2010 Draft EIS preparatlon Feb 3 8 Apr 27 2010 PAC Meedngs ; MayJune 2010(TBD) PAC Mee6ng-comments on draft EIS SChed uIG June�luly 2010 Draft EIS Comment Period 8 Public Meedng July-Aug 2010 Fnal E�S Preparation Sept 2010 Fnal EIS Adequacy Detertnineti0n v1�h�--. �'$CANDIt1 � Public Questions