STATE OF MINNESOTA MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY FINDINGS OF FACT

Transcription

1 STATE OF MINNESOTA MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY IN THE MATTER OF THE DECISION ON THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE PROPOSED METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES (MCES) RIVERVIEW SIPHON IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT RAMSEY COUNTY ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA FINDINGS OF FACT CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER FINDINGS OF FACT Pursuant to Minn. R (2003), the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) staff has prepared an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the proposed project. Based on the MPCA staff environmental review, comments, and information received during the comment period, and other information in the record of the MPCA, the MPCA hereby makes the following Findings of Fact,, and Order: FACILITY HISTORY Overview MCES is proposing to modify and expand its Riverview Siphon system in St. Paul. The siphon system collects wastewater from St. Paul and West St. Paul and conveys it under the Mississippi River. The original system was constructed in 1938 and improved in The proposal is to add an additional siphon barrel (pipe), modify the existing headbox to better facilitate operations and maintenance, and install a cured-in-place liner in existing pipes. The proposed ultimate capacity of the expanded siphon system would increase to an average flow of 6.55 million gallons per day (mgd) from 4.57 mgd. Permitting History The siphon flows to the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF), which was permitted most recently on May 3, Previous Environmental Review While this segment of the MCES collection system has not undergone previous environmental review, the MCES has had numerous EAWs for projects within its system. Compliance/Enforcement History No recent compliance or enforcement actions have been issued at the Metropolitan WWTF that would affect the proposed project. TDD (for hearing and speech impaired only): (651) Printed on recycled paper containing at least 30% fibers from paper recycled by consumers

2 PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed Modification Concerns with the current siphon system include headbox overflows during storm events, intermittent odors at the headbox, the age and condition of some system components, and a lack of capacity for the projected increase in population and employment in the service area. To correct these issues, MCES proposes to add a new 24-inch siphon barrel (pipe) parallel to the existing barrels from the headbox on Wabasha Street in the Del Sol neighborhood of St. Paul to the Riverview Lift Station, located inside the floodwall on the south side of the Mississippi River. Installation will be by open cut between the headbox and Clean Out Structure Number 1, then the pipe will be jacked the remaining length of the run. The three existing siphon barrels will be lined with a cured-in-place liner for the entire length from the headbox through to the tailbox as part of the project. The improvements to the existing headbox include replacing the exterior fascia and roof and adding ventilation to the interior. An odor control structure will be added to house a carbon treatment unit to reduce air emissions of sulfide gases. Construction of the project will involve excavation, temporary storage of excavated materials, backfilling, compacting, grading, re-vegetation, and potential de-watering. Environmental Concerns Typical environmental concerns associated with an interceptor include the potential for noise and dust during construction; stormwater runoff and erosion during construction of the interceptor and enabled development, and impacts of enabled development on farmlands, infrastructure, and public services. Additional Concerns Described in Comment Letters No comment letters were received during the 30-day comment period. Community Involvement in Process Community involvement regarding the EAW, per se, is limited to the standard Environmental Quality Board (EQB) required activities (mailing of the public notice to media and others who have expressed an interest in Public Notices and wastewater issues, publication in the EQB Monitor, distribution to EQB Monitor list plus all the added local contacts, copies available at proposer's office and local library, etc). The extra step taken by the MPCA has been to post the document on their Web site. PROCEDURAL HISTORY 1. Pursuant to Minn. R , subp. 18.A, an EAW was prepared by MPCA staff on the proposed project. Pursuant to Minn. R (2003), the EAW was distributed to the EQB mailing list and other interested parties on July 29, The MPCA notified the public of the availability of the EAW for public comment. A news release was provided to interested parties on August 1, In addition, the EAW was published in the EQB Monitor on August 1, 2005, and available for review on the MPCA Web site at on August 3,

3 3. The public comment period for the EAW began on August 1, 2005, and ended on August 31, During the 30-day comment period, the MPCA received no comment letters. 4. No response to comments was necessary. CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING THE POTENTIAL FOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 5. Under Minn. R (2003), the MPCA must order an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for projects that have the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur. In deciding whether a project has the potential for significant environmental effects, the MPCA must compare the impacts that may be reasonably expected to occur from the project with the criteria set forth in Minn. R , subp. 7 (2003). These criteria are: A. the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects; B. cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects; C. the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority; and D. the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs. THE MPCA FINDINGS WITH RESPECT TO EACH OF THESE CRITERIA ARE SET FORTH BELOW Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Environmental Effects 6. The first criterion that the MPCA must consider, when determining if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur, is the "type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects" Minn. R , subp. 7.A (2003). The MPCA findings with respect to each of these factors are set forth below. 7. Reasonably expected environmental effects of this project to air quality: A. Noise B. Dust 3

4 8. The extent of any potential air quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: Noise Construction of a wastewater interceptor is accomplished by the use of typical construction equipment, including trucks, backhoes, graders, compactors, bobcats, cranes, loaders, compressors, and possibly de-watering pumps. This equipment generates noise during its operation. Noise from construction activity would be temporary. The hours of construction will be in conformance with the city s ordinances. Dust During construction, particulate emissions will temporarily increase due to the generation of fugitive dust. Dust control measures will be undertaken as necessary, such as minimizing the period and extent of areas being exposed or graded at any one time and/or spraying construction areas and haul roads with water, especially during periods of high wind or high levels of construction activity. 9. The reversibility of any potential air quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: Dust and noise will cease upon the end of construction, and these impacts are completely reversible. There is no reason to believe that this project is reasonably expected to cause a significant negative effect on air quality. 10. Comments received that expressed concerns regarding potential effects to air quality: No comment letters were received during the 30-day comment period. 11. The MPCA finds that the environmental review is adequate to address the concerns because: All potential impacts to air quality that are reasonably expected to occur from the proposed project have been considered during the review process and methods to prevent these impacts have been developed. 12. The MPCA finds that the project, as it is proposed, does not have the potential for significant environmental effects based on the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects reasonably expected to occur as a result of its air emissions. 13. Reasonably expected environmental effects of this project to water quality: A. Stormwater B. Wastewater 14. The extent of any potential water quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: Stormwater The construction of the sewer extension will not result in the addition of impervious surface, nor will it change existing runoff rates or patterns. Therefore, no change in the quality or quantity of runoff from the site is anticipated from the interceptor project. During construction, the disturbance of the soil will increase the chances of erosion and 4

5 sedimentation. Erosion control measures will be implemented as detailed in the erosion control plans required as part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction Stormwater Permit from the MPCA and the grading permit from the Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District. Nearby parcels have known or possible contamination. Siphon construction in areas with known contamination, or areas where contamination is discovered during construction, would be performed in conjunction with MPCA rules and regulations and the contractor will be required to follow health and safety regulations. Wastewater The siphon is used to convey wastewater to the Metropolitan WWTF. The wastewater conveyed through the Riverview Siphon system consists of normal strength domestic wastewater. The expansion of the interceptor is intended to serve proposed additional development within the service area. A proposed redevelopment of the Riverview Flats area is projected to increase population by 4,890 and employment by 3,975 by the year The Bridges of St. Paul development in the Riverview Flats area was the subject of a separate environmental review document, an Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR), in The proposed project is not anticipated to result in additional cumulative impacts with that project, but rather would address the already identified need for additional sewer capacity in the area to serve the future development. 15. The reversibility of any potential water quality effects that are reasonably expected to occur: The MPCA finds that any potential effect that is reasonably likely to occur from this project would be reversible. There is no reason to believe that this project is reasonably expected to cause a significant negative effect on water quality. 16. Comments received that expressed concerns regarding potential effects to water quality: No comment letters were received during the 30-day comment period. 17. The MPCA finds that the environmental review is adequate to address the concerns because: All potential impacts to water quality that are reasonably expected to occur from the proposed project have been considered during the review process, and a method to prevent these impacts has been developed. 18. The MPCA finds that the project as it is proposed does not have the potential for significant environmental effects on water quality based on the type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects reasonably expected to occur. 5

6 Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects 19. The second criterion that the MPCA must consider, when determining if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur, is the "cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects," Minn. R , subp. 7.B (2003). The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below. 20. The EAW did not disclose any related or anticipated future projects that may interact with this project in such a way as to identify any potential cumulative environmental impacts that are reasonably expected to occur. A. Enabled Development The availability of an expanded wastewater service will allow additional development in the surrounding area, most likely as described in the Bridges of St. Paul AUAR. The AUAR process includes a discussion of potential impacts and proposed mitigation. B. Treatment plant/trunkline capacity The siphon discharges into a joint interceptor and eventually into the Metropolitan WWTF. No concerns have been identified regarding the Metropolitan WWTF s ability to treat the wastewater to be conveyed through the expanded siphon. 21. Public comments concerning cumulative impacts: No comment letters were received during the 30-day comment period. 22. In considering the cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects, the MPCA finds that the reasonably expected effects from this project will not be significant. The Extent to Which the Environmental Effects Are Subject To Mitigation by Ongoing Public Regulatory Authority 23. The third criterion that the MPCA must consider when determining if a project has the potential for significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur is "the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority," Minn. R , subp. 7.C (2003). The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below. 24. The following permits or approvals will be required for the project: Unit of Government Permit or Approval Required Status A. MPCA NPDES General Permit for discharge of To Be Submitted stormwater during construction activities B. MPCA Approval of Facility Plan and of Construction In Process Plans and Specifications (for Minnesota Public Facilities Authority funding eligibility) C. MPCA Sewer Extension Permit To Be Submitted 6

7 Unit of Government Permit or Approval Required Status D. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) General Permit for Temporary Water Appropriations To Be Submitted E. Minnesota Department of Transportation (MNDOT) F. Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District Application for utility permit for work in highway right-of-way Grading Permit Application To Be Submitted To Be Submitted G. Ramsey County Application for utility permit for work in a To Be Submitted Highway Department highway right-of-way H. City of St. Paul Site plan approval To Be Submitted 25. A. MPCA NPDES General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activity A NPDES General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activity is required when a project disturbs one or more acres. It provides for the use of Best Management Practices, such as silt fences, rock dam checks, and prompt re-vegetation to prevent eroded sediment from leaving the construction site. The project proposer must have an erosion and sediment control plan that will provide more detail as to the specific measures to be implemented and will also address phased construction, vehicle tracking of sediment, inspection of erosion control measures implemented, and time frames in which erosion control measures will be implemented. The permit also requires adequate stormwater treatment capacity be provided to assure that water quality will not be impacted by runoff once the project is constructed. B. MPCA Sewer Extension Permit This permit assures that sufficient hydraulic capacity exists in receiving interceptor systems and the WWTF. C. Facility Plan Approval and Plans and Specifications Approval Construction plans and specifications for the project are submitted to the MPCA for technical review and approval. This review is performed to ensure that the facility design is consistent with good engineering practice and state and federal criteria. D. DNR General Permit for Temporary Dewatering This permit is required for any appropriation of more than ten thousand gallons per day or one million gallons per year and is intended to minimize the potential for depletion impacts on drinking water supply wells. E. MNDOT Utility Crossing Permit The Right-of-Way Permit ensures that the work will be accomplished in a manner that will not be detrimental to a roadway s Right-of-Way and that will safeguard the public, and that the right of way on trunk highways is restored to its original condition. 7

8 F. Ramsey Washington Metro Watershed District Grading Permit The watershed s permit regulates grading, surface paving and runoff. The permit assures that the facility will be constructed or installed in accordance with the watershed district s rules. G. Ramsey County Highway Department Utility Crossing Permit The permit assures that the utilities will be constructed or installed in accordance with the county s ordinances and codes. H. City of St. Paul Site Plan Approval The city s site plan approval process provides for staff review of proposed projects to ensure that the project will be constructed or installed in accordance with the county s ordinances and codes. 26. The MPCA finds that ongoing public regulatory authority will address any significant potential environmental effects that were identified as reasonably expected to occur. The Extent to Which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled as a Result of Other Available Environmental Studies Undertaken by Public Agencies or the Project Proposer, Including Other EISs. 27. The fourth criterion that the MPCA must consider is "the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs." Minn. R , subp. 7.D (2003). The MPCA findings with respect to this criterion are set forth below. 28. The following documents were reviewed by MPCA staff as part of the potential environmental impact analysis for the proposed reconstruction and extension of the interceptor. This list is not intended to be exhaustive. The MPCA also relies on information provided by the project proposer, commenters, staff experience, and other available information. A. EAW data B. Permit file 29. There are no elements of the project that pose the potential for significant environmental effects that cannot be addressed in the project design and permit development processes or by regional and local plans. 30. Based on the environmental review, previous environmental studies, and MPCA staff expertise on similar projects, the MPCA finds that the environmental effects of the project that are reasonably expected to occur can be anticipated and controlled. 8

9 CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 31. The MPCA has jurisdiction in determining the need for an EIS for this project. The EAW, the permit development process, the facility planning process, and the evidence in the record are adequate to support a reasoned decision regarding the potential significant environmental effects that are reasonably expected to occur from this project. 32. Areas where the potential for significant environmental effects may have existed have been identified and appropriate mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design and permits. The project is expected to comply with all MPCA standards. 33. Based on the criteria established in Minn. R (2003), there are no potential significant environmental effects reasonably expected to occur from the project. 34. An EIS is not required. 35. Any findings that might properly be termed conclusions and any conclusions that might properly be termed findings are hereby adopted as such. ORDER The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency determines that there are no potential significant environmental effects reasonably expected to occur from the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services (MCES) Riverview Siphon Improvements Project and that there is no need for an Environmental Impact Statement. IT IS SO ORDERED Sheryl A. Corrigan, Commissioner Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Date 9