Northern Metals, LLC - Becker EAW · The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency will host a public meeting on the proposed expansion of the Northern Metals, LLC – Becker project May

www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • Use your preferred relay service • Available in alternative formats p-ear2-134a Page 1 of 2

Notice of Availability of an Environmental Assessment

Worksheet (EAW) Northern Metals, LLC - Becker

Doc Type: Public Notice

Public comment information EAW public comment period begins: April 16, 2018

EAW public comment period ends: 4:30 p.m. on May 18, 2018

Notice published in the EQB Monitor: April 16, 2018

Permit public comment period begins: April 16, 2018

Permit public comment period ends: May 18, 2018

Facility specific information Facility name and location: Facility contact: Northern Metals, LLC - Becker City of Becker Industrial Park Becker, MN Sherburne County

Northern Metals, LLC Scott Helberg, Chief Operating Officer 2800 Pacific Street North Minneapolis, MN 55411 Phone: 657– 529 - 9221 Fax: 612-529-2548 Email: [email protected]

MPCA contact information

MPCA EAW contact person: MPCA Permit contact person: Kevin J. Kain Resource Management and Assistance Division Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone: 651-757-2482 Fax: 651-297-2343 Email: [email protected] Admin staff phone: 651-757-2100

Kelsey Suddard Industrial Division Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Road North St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone: 651-757-2767 Fax: 651-297-2343 Email: [email protected]

General information The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is distributing this Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for a 30-day review and comment period pursuant to the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules. The MPCA uses the EAW and any comments received to evaluate the potential for significant environmental effects from the project and decide on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

An electronic version of the EAW is available on the MPCA Environmental Review webpage at https://www.pca.state.mn.us/eaw. If you would like a copy of the EAW or Individual State Air Permit or have any questions on the EAW or Individual State Air Permit, contact the appropriate person(s)

http://www.pca.state.mn.us/

mailto:[email protected]



https://www.pca.state.mn.us/eaw

www.pca.state.mn.us • 651-296-6300 • 800-657-3864 • Use your preferred relay service • Available in alternative formats p-ear2-134a Page 2 of 2

Description of proposed project Northern Metals, LLC plans to construct a scrap metal recycling center in the general industrial area in the City of Becker. The Project consists of an enclosed metal shredder, an enclosed metal recovery plant, an end of life vehicle process, and a Community Recycling Center.

The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency will host a public meeting on the proposed expansion of the Northern Metals, LLC – Becker project May 10, 2018 at the Becker Community Center located at 11500 Sherburne Avenue, Becker MN 55308. The event will begin with an informal open house from 6:00 to 6:30, followed by a presentation from the MPCA and a question and answer session. The MPCA will provide information about the draft air emissions permit and the environmental assessment worksheet (EAW). Copies of the EAW document and the Air Quality Permit will be available at the meeting.

To submit written comments on the EAW and Individual State Air Permit Written comments on the EAW must be received by the MPCA EAW contact person within the comment period listed above.

Comments on the air permit must be received at the MPCA in writing on or before the public commenteperiod end date and time identified above. To submit comments or petitions to the MPCA on the draft air permit through the mail or email, you must state:

(1) Your interest in the permit application or the draft permit. (2) The action you wish the MPCA to take, including specific references to the section of the draft permit you believe should be

changed. (3) The reasons supporting your position, stated with sufficient specificity as to allow the MPCA to investigate the merits of the

position.

NOTE: All comment letters are public documents and will be part of the official public record for this project.

Need for an EIS The MPCA Commissioner will make a final decision on the need for an EIS after the end of the comment period.

http://www.pca.state.mn.us/

Printed on recycled paper containing 30% fibers from paper recycled by consumers

July 2013 version

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET This Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) form and EAW Guidelines are available at the Environmental Quality Board’s website at: http://www.eqb.state.mn.us/EnvRevGuidanceDocuments.htm. The EAW form provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW Guidelines provide additional detail and resources for completing the EAW form. Cumulative potential effects can either be addressed under each applicable EAW Item, or can be addresses collectively under EAW Item 19. Note to reviewers: Comments must be submitted to the RGU during the 30-day comment period following notice of the EAW in the EQB Monitor. Comments should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that warrant further investigation and the need for an EIS. 1. Project title: Northern Metals, LLC – Becker 2. Proposer: Northern Metals, LLC 3. RGU: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Contact person: Scott Helberg Contact person: Kevin Kain Title: Chief Operating Officer Title: Project Manager Address: 2800 Pacific Street North Address: 520 Lafayette Road North City, State, ZIP: Minneapolis, MN. 55411 City, State, ZIP: St. Paul, MN 55155 Phone: 651-529-9221 Phone: 651-757-2482 Fax: 612-529-2548 Fax: 651-297-2343 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

4. Reason for EAW Preparation: (check one)

Required: Discretionary: EIS Scoping Citizen petition Mandatory EAW RGU discretion T Proposer initiated If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number(s) and name(s): Not mandatory under EQB Rules.

5. Project Location:

County: Sherburne City/Township: City of Becker PLS Location (¼, ¼, Section, Township, Range): SE ¼, SE ¼, S36, T34N, R29W

Watershed (81 major watershed scale): Mississippi River – St. Cloud GPS Coordinates: (45.389706, -93.883585) Tax Parcel Number: 60-336-1100

http://www.eqb.state.mn.us/EnvRevGuidanceDocuments.htm



Northern Metals, LLC. – Becker Environmental Assessment Becker, Minnesota 2 Worksheet

At a minimum attach each of the following to the EAW: · County map showing the general location of the project; (Figure 1) · U.S. Geological Survey 7.5 minute, 1:24,000 scale map indicating project boundaries (photocopy

acceptable); and (Figure 2) · Project Site plans showing all significant project and natural features. Pre-construction Project

Site plan and post-construction Project Site plan. (Figure 3, Figure 4) Figures and Attachments available with the EAW:

· Figure 1. County Map showing general location · Figure 2 U.S. Geological Survey Maps of Project Site · Figure 3. Pre-construction Project Site Map · Figure 4. Post-Construction Project Site Map · Figure 5. City of Becker Zoning Map · Figure 6. Project Site Topographic Map · Figure 7. Project Site Soil Map · Figure 8. Impaired Waters Within One Mile of the Project · Figure 9. Wetlands Within One Mile of the Project · Figure 10. Wells With-in One Mile of the Project · Figure 11. Wellhead Protection Areas · Figure 12. Existing Drainage Areas · Figure 13. Proposed Drainage Areas · Figure 14. Proposed Becker Facility Surfacing Plan · Figure 15. Erosion Control Plan · Figure 16. What’s in My Neighborhood Review · Figure 17. Trout Angling Opportunities Map · Figure 18. Native Plant Communities Map · Figure 19. Natural Communities and Rare Species in Sherburne County · Figure 20. Areas of Biodiversity Significance in Minnesota · Figure 21. Natural Heritage Review of the Project · Figure 22. Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office Inquiry Results

· Attachment 1. Example Shredder Equipment · Attachment 2. Feedstock Control Plan · Attachment 3. Fugitive Dust Control Plan · Attachment 4 Project Noise Review

6. Project Description:

a. Provide the brief project summary to be published in the EQB Monitor, (approximately 50 words).

Northern Metals, LLC plans to construct a scrap metal recycling center in the general industrial area in the City of Becker. The Project consists of an enclosed metal shredder, an enclosed metal recovery plant, an end of life vehicle process, and a Community Recycling Center (CRC).


b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction, including infrastructure needs. If the project is an expansion include a description of the existing facility. Emphasize: 1) construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes, 2) modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes, 3) significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures, and 4) timing and duration of construction activities.

Northern Metals, LLC (NM) plans to construct a scrap metal recycling complex, including a CRC where area residents can receive payment in exchange for recyclable commodity metals, in the general industrial (I-GEN) zone within the City of Becker (Project Site) (Figure 1). The proposed complex consists of an enclosed scrap Metal Shredder (Shredder), an enclosed ferrous process and an enclosed Metal Recovery Plant (MRP), an End of life Vehicle (ELV) process, and the CRC (Project) (Figure 4). Regarding construction, NM will begin construction by clearing of trees, brush and vegetation at the Project Site. The topsoil is stockpiled and the Project Site graded to the proposed elevations. NM will install underground utilities. NM will use large earthmoving equipment such as excavators, dozers, scrapers, dump trucks, compactors, water trucks and other equipment for clearing, grading, and utility installation.

Building construction and equipment installation produces waste such as concrete scraps, packaging, building scraps, and other waste which will be disposed of or recycled as appropriate and allowed by law. The existing buildings onsite will be removed or demolished. The demolition materials will be removed from the Project Site, disposed of or recycled as appropriate and allowed by law. NM will also construct stormwater ponds, roadways and parking lots on the Project Site. Regarding scrap metal processing, scrap metal material arrives at the Project Site by truck and a minimal amount by rail. NM places restrictions on what type of scrap material is acceptable at the Project Site according to their Feedstock Control Plan (Attachment 2). NM visually inspects all incoming material as it arrives onsite, and then directs the material to either the “main stockpile” area or “commodities stockpile” area. Each of these stockpile areas will contain multiple storage piles. The “main stockpile” area (located directly south of the Shredder building) contains piles of material NM intends to shred, and separate piles of material NM does not intend to shred. As discussed below, NM visually inspects all material to ensure only shreddable material enters the Shredder. NM loads all non-shredded material into railcars and trucks for shipment and processing off-site. The “commodities stockpile” area (located in the southeast corner of the facility) contains piles of material that does not require shredding. NM loads the material from the commodities stockpile area into railcars using cranes and front-end loaders for shipment and processing off-site.


Examples of commodities:

Commodities Processed by the Shredder · Auto Hulks - shredder ready automobiles · Appliances - shredder ready microwaves, refrigerators, stoves, hot water heaters, furnaces,

etc. · Bales - shredder ready sheet iron, appliances, autos · Loose Sheet Iron - tin, siding, paneling, demolition steel, loose steel, cast iron, etc. · Miscellaneous Metals - steel, copper, stainless steel, brass, etc. · New Production Clip - new steel that gets shredded into foundry grade shredded clips Shredder Produced Commodities · FRAG - shredded miscellaneous steel · ASR - auto shredder residue, aluminum, stainless steel, steel, copper, brass and waste · HMS - Heavy Melt Steel with dimensions of 3’long X 18”wide X 1/8” thick · Shredded Armatures - copper windings from electric motors that get picked out of the

shredder · Shredded Clip - new production clip that gets shredded into foundry grade clips. Metal Shredder and Ferrous Sorting NM material handlers load the shreddable material from the main stockpile area onto the infeed Shredder conveyor. The infeed conveyer carries the incoming material into the Shredder building. NM uses close circuit cameras to monitor the incoming material on the infeed conveyer as it enters the Shredder building, checking for non-shreddable materials that need to be removed. If NM identifies any non-shreddable materials on the infeed conveyor, they remove the material and return it to the non-shred portion of the main stockpile area. NM’s Shredder has a capacity to shred 400 tons per hour (tph). NM has not selected a manufacture vendor yet for its Shredder. However, Attachment 1 provides an example (which may not actually be selected) of a shredder and safety feature explanation from a potential equipment supplier. Next, shredded material is conveyed in a covered conveyor to the ferrous building where it is sorted into ferrous material and Automotive Shredder Residue (ASR). Once the ferrous material reaches this point in the process, it does not go through further processing. Rather, NM conveys the shredded ferrous material from the ferrous building into a temporary stockpile directly outside the ferrous building before placing into railcars or trucks for shipment and processing off-site. NM also receives clips (flat sheet metal free of any foreign elements) which are stored, processed, and shredded separately from other ferrous material. Shredded clips are stored in a covered, three-sided building immediately north of the ferrous building. NM ships the shredded clips off-site via trucks.


Regarding emission controls, NM collects air within the Shredder building and sends it through a centrifugal collector, two fabric filters, and a regenerative thermal oxidizer in order to control the air emissions created during the shredding process. NM also collects air within the ferrous process building and sends it through a centrifugal collector and two fabric filters to control the air emissions created from the ferrous process. The processed air vents out both buildings through a stack. Metal Recovery Plant NM transfers the ASR from the Shedder building in a covered conveyor to the MRP, which has an input capacity of 50 tph. The ASR process conducted in the MRP further separates the remaining ferrous material from the nonferrous material. The ASR travels through the MRP where nonferrous material such as aluminum, stainless steel, copper, brass, and steel is sorted using screens, vibratory feeders, and other separation equipment including eddy current machines. NM conveys the different non-ferrous material to separate bins within the MRP for storage until shipped off-site. NM ships the non-ferrous material from the MRP out through a load out area in the northeast corner of the MRP to trucks when necessary. The remaining material, called “waste fluff,” is transferred via conveyor to a covered, three-sided storage area specifically for waste fluff, located immediately outside the MRP building. NM ships waste fluff to an approved landfill for disposal. NM controls air emissions from the MRP process using the MRP baghouse, and vented through a stack. Community Recycling Center NM has located the CRC area on the east side of the Project Site, separated from the main operations. NM inspects and segregates materials provided by the public into commodity and scrap metals. NM weighs the commodity metals and reimburses the public for recycling these metals. The End of Life Vehicle process NM accepts ELV vehicles that are driven onsite (e.g., in the CRC) and ELV vehicles delivered by towing companies, flatbed trucks, or semi-trailers. NM moves ELV vehicles around the facility with front-end loaders equipped with forks. NM decommissions the vehicles by removing batteries, gas tanks, lead-containing materials, and mercury switches and draining all fluids on a commercially manufactured ELV rack. NM intends to have the ELV system be a stationary arrangement within a building built with impermeable flooring. While the exact ELV model and supplier has not been selected, NM plans on the ELV secondary containment system being designed out of chemical and oil resistant powder coated metal with a catch basin. An example system has a catch basin sized at approximately 8’ x 20’, and a capacity of 200 gallons. At this size, the basin will encompass the entire area where the vehicle will be drained of fluids. Information on battery storage can be found in the Feedstock Control Plan (Attachment 2). NM stores the removed fluids in double walled tanks, and stores mercury switches in labelled containers prior to shipment from the facility as part of the National Vehicle Mercury Switch Recovery Program. NM will use less than 10 doubled wall 500 gallon above ground storage tanks for the collection and storage of liquids drained from vehicles in the ELV system, including antifreeze, washer fluid, oil, gasoline, and diesel. The tanks will be located immediately outside the ELV in a covered area (no walls, but a roof extending over the tanks) with secondary containment. All tanks will be double walled tanks, and will satisfy applicable SPCC requirements. These tanks are included in the EAW Question 12 tables.


c. Project magnitude:

Total Project Acreage 75 acres Linear project length N/A Number and type of residential units 0 Commercial building area (in square feet) 0 Industrial building area (in square feet) 242,000 ft2 Institutional building area (in square feet) 0 Other uses – specify (in square feet) 0 Structure height(s) See below

NM will construct the following permanent structures on the Project Site. · Motor Control and Operator Facility – 20 ft · Shredder Building – 70 ft · Shredder Control Equipment Building – 20 ft · Shredder Control Equipment Building (Downstream Ferrous) – 20 ft · Shredder Employee Locker Room – 22 ft · Truck Maintenance Building – 25 ft · Shredder Maintenance Building – 25 ft · MRP Building – 45 ft · MRP Baghouse Building – 40 ft · Waste fluff Storage – 40 ft · Office Building – 32 ft (maximum height) · Shredded Clips Storage – 40 ft · Ferrous Building – 45 ft · Feeder Yard Building – 25 feet (maximum height) · End of Vehicle Life Building – 25 feet · Downstream Ferrous Stack - 160 ft

The Project Site is currently an agricultural field with trees lines, a farm site, power lines, and an irrigation system. The existing irrigation system will be removed from the Project Site to be reused elsewhere.

d. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain

the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries. NM, in response to a consent decree signed on March 15, 2017 (Court File Number 62-CV-15-3827), must shut down the Shredder at their current Minneapolis facility. In accordance with the agreement, NM submitted permit applications for a Shredder at an alternate location. NM has selected Becker, Minnesota as the alterative location for the new Shredder.

e. Are future stages of this development including development on any other property planned or likely to happen? Yes T No


If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, timeline and plans for environmental review.

f. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? Yes T No If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review.

7. Cover types: Estimate the acreage of the Project Site with each of the following cover types before

and after development:

Before After Before After Wetlands 0 0 Lawn/landscaping 4.2 9.9 Deep water/streams 0 0 Impervious surface 1.8 39.8 Wooded/forest 7.9 0 Stormwater Pond 0 4.5 Brush/Grassland 0.5 0.5 Other (describe) 0 0 Cropland 40.3 0 TOTAL 54.7 54.7

8. Permits and approvals required: List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals,

certifications and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure. All of these final decisions are prohibited until all appropriate environmental review has been completed. See Minnesota Rules, Chapter 4410.3100.

Unit of government Type of application Status

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)

Individual State Air Emissions Permit

Submitted

Minnesota National Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems/State Discharge System (NPDES/SDS) Construction Stormwater General Permit

Draft Submitted

Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Draft Submitted Minnesota NPDES/SDS General Permit MNR050000

for Industrial Stormwater Multi-Sector (ISW) Draft application submitted, permit sought upon completion of construction

Very Small Quality Generator License for Hazardous Waste

To be submitted

Industrial Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Draft Submitted Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit Application submitted Permit by Rule Solid Waste Recycling Facility

Notification Form Draft Submitted

Hazardous Waste Generators License In Progress Emergency Response, Inspection, and Closure Plan Draft Submitted State of Minnesota Dealer License In Progress


Unit of government Type of application Status

Sherburne County License for Construction and Operation of a Solid Waste Facility

Draft Submitted

Land Use Permit In Progress Solid Waste Facility License Application for

Construction and Operation In Progress

City of Becker Building Permit In Progress Industrial Sewer Agreement In Progress Becker Township Building Permit In Progress

Cumulative potential effects may be considered and addressed in response to individual EAW Item Nos. 9-18, or the RGU can address all cumulative potential effects in response to EAW Item No. 19. If addressing cumulative effect under individual items, make sure to include information requested in EAW Item No. 19 9. Land use:

a. Describe: i. Existing land use of the site as well as areas adjacent to and near the site, including

parks, trails, prime or unique farmlands.

The Project Site is currently zoned general industrial, as shown in the zoning map included in Figure 5. The Project Site is currently vacant agricultural land and developed office and warehouse buildings. The Xcel Sherco Power Plant is located to the southwest of the proposed project location, and various industrial buildings are located directly to the east. Highway 10 is located less than a half mile away to the northeast from the Project Site. Across Minnesota Highway 10 to the north are various commercial entities and residential subdivisions. Becker Intermediate School, Becker Primary School, Becker High School, Red Balloon Child Care Center, and various recreational fields are located between 0.5 miles and one mile from the Project Site. The Pebble Creek Golf Club is located approximately 1.2 miles northeast of the Project Site.

ii. Plans. Describe planned land use as identified in comprehensive plan (if available) and any other applicable plan for land use, water, or resources management by a local, regional, state, or federal agency. The City of Becker adopted a Comprehensive City Plan (CCP) in December 2012. The Project Site is located within the limits of the City of Becker. NM will comply with the guidelines outlined in the CCP.

iii. Zoning, including special districts or overlays such as shoreland, floodplain, wild and scenic rivers, critical area, agricultural preserves, etc.

Based on the City of Becker Zoning Map (March 2014), the zoning classification for the Project Site is General Industrial (I-GEN) which is surrounded by areas classified as Power Generation (I-PG) and Industrial Park (I-PRK).


b. Discuss the project’s compatibility with nearby land uses, zoning, and plans listed in Item 9a above, concentrating on implications for environmental effects.

NM will follow the guidelines for I-GEN districts as noted in the City of Becker zoning ordinances, or will obtain approval from the City of Becker if any deviations from the ordinances are required.

c. Identify measures incorporated into the proposed project to mitigate any potential

incompatibility as discussed in Item 9b above.

None 10. Geology, soils and topography/land forms:

a. Geology - Describe the geology underlying the project area and identify and map any susceptible geologic features such as sinkholes, shallow limestone formations, unconfined/shallow aquifers, or karst conditions. Discuss any limitations of these features for the project and any effects the project could have on these features. Identify any project designs or mitigation measures to address effects to geologic features.

The Project Site is located in the physiographic province often designated as the Anoka Sand Plain (Wright 1972). The Anoka Sand Plain follows along the Mississippi River in central Minnesota. The Mississippi River and its valley forms the western boundary. The boundary of the Anoka Sand Plain forms the eastern and northern edges. The Anoka Sand Plain consists of a flat, sandy lake plain and terraces along the Mississippi River containing small dunes, kettle lakes, and tunnel valleys. Near the Project Site, the gently undulating surface of the sand plain has been extensively farmed. Based on NM’s review of geologic mapping and karst mapping inventory conducted by the Minnesota Geological Survey (Tipping et. al., 2004), no springs or sinkholes associated with karst are present in this area of Sherburne County. Given the depth to bedrock, future formation of karst features are unlikely.

b. Soils and topography - Describe the soils on the site, giving NRCS (SCS) classifications and descriptions, including limitations of soils. Describe topography, any special site conditions relating to erosion potential, soil stability or other soils limitations, such as steep slopes, highly permeable soils. Provide estimated volume and acreage of soil excavation and/or grading. Discuss impacts from project activities (distinguish between construction and operational activities) related to soils and topography. Identify measures during and after project construction to address soil limitations including stabilization, soil corrections or other measures. Erosion/sedimentation control related to stormwater runoff should be addressed in response to Item 11.b.ii.

NM used the Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey to assess existing soil resources within the Project area. Based on the Soil Survey for Sherburne County, the following soil is found within the Project area: Hubbard-Mosford complex (D62A) as shown in the soil map found in Attachment 3b. This soil is identified as a loamy sand or a sandy loam. The soil onsite is somewhat excessively drained to excessively drained.


The Project area is located within soils that have not been previously disturbed except by historical farming activities. The soil characteristics for the Project area provide a high to very high saturated hydraulic conductivity, and are susceptible to wind and rill or sheet erosion. The topography of the Project area is generally flat (as shown in the topographic map in Attachment 3a.

Construction of the Project will result in the disturbance of existing ground cover resulting in the potential for erosion. NM will obtain coverage under MPCA’s general National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES/SDS) Construction Stormwater (CSW) Permit and implement Project Site area-appropriate requirements. The CSW Permit also require the development and implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP requires the utilization of temporary soil stabilization techniques and erosion prevention and sediment control requirements during construction. NM will permanently stabilize disturbed soils after project construction using vegetation or will return the land to agricultural production.

NM expects to excavate approximately 141,000 cubic yards of soil aver a 57-acre area. NM will stock pile the stripped topsoil onsite for reuse at the Project Site. NM will use the excavated subsoil onsite for earthwork balance and drainage improvements.

NOTE: For silica sand projects, the EAW must include a hydrogeologic investigation assessing the potential groundwater and surface water effects and geologic conditions that could create an increased risk of potentially significant effects on groundwater and surface water. Descriptions of water resources and potential effects from the project in EAW Item 11 must be consistent with the geology, soils and topography/land forms and potential effects described in EAW Item 10.

11. Water resources: a. Describe surface water and groundwater features on or near the site in a.i. and a.ii. below.

i. Surface water - lakes, streams, wetlands, intermittent channels, and county/judicial ditches. Include any special designations such as public waters, trout stream/lake, wildlife lakes, migratory waterfowl feeding/resting lake, and outstanding resource value water. Include water quality impairments or special designations listed on the current MPCA 303d Impaired Waters List that are within 1 mile of the project. Include DNR Public Waters Inventory number(s), if any.

NM reviewed the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) database (Figure 9) and identified the Elk River located approximately 5,000 feet to the east of the Project Site as impaired. The Elk River segment has an approved Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) the following impairments: Fecal Coliform; Mercury in Fish Tissue; Turbidity and Fishes Bio-assessments impairments. Surface water from the Project Site does not flow to the Elk River.

ii. Groundwater – aquifers, springs, seeps. Include: 1) depth to groundwater; 2) if project is

within a MDH wellhead protection area; 3) identification of any onsite and/or nearby wells, including unique numbers and well logs if available. If there are no wells known onsite or nearby, explain the methodology used to determine this.

NM conducted geotechnical borings in the vicinity of the Project Site in September 2016 generally indicate that the depth to groundwater at the Project Site is approximately 20 feet below the ground surface. This is also consistent with the water well logs for wells in the vicinity of the Project Site.


The Project Site is not within a Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) wellhead protection area, based on a search of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) database presented at https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-wellhead-protection-areas. Figure 10 presents the location of the Project Site relative to the MDH wellhead protection area for the City of Becker. The northeast corner of the Project Site is approximately 500 feet from the boundary of the wellhead protection area and down gradient relative to the flow of groundwater in the area. NM evaluated the water wells within 1 mile of the Project Site. Figure 9 indicates the locations of water wells based on a review of the Geologic Atlas of Sherburne County, Minnesota. NM noted that according to the MDH Well Inventory, Minnesota Unique Well Numbers 225788 and 526036 are located on the Project Site. Well 225788 is a 12-inch diameter irrigation well constructed to a depth of 65 feet below ground surface. Well 526035 is a 4-inch domestic well constructed to a depth of 60 feet below ground surface.

b. Describe effects from project activities on water resources and measures to minimize or mitigate the effects in Item b.i. through Item b.iv. below.

i. Wastewater - For each of the following, describe the sources, quantities and composition of all

sanitary, municipal/domestic and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site. 1) If the wastewater discharge is to a publicly owned treatment facility, identify any

pretreatment measures and the ability of the facility to handle the added water and waste loadings, including any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal wastewater infrastructure.

The Project will generate sanitary, municipal/domestic wastewater from restrooms, lunchrooms and locker rooms onsite. The Project will employ 100 full-time employees and generate approximately 25 gallons per employee per day or approximately 600,000 gallons per year. Wastewater discharges to the municipal wastewater management system operated by the City of Becker. A new wastewater collection system and pump station will be constructed to service this Project Site. The wastewater treatment plant for the City of Becker has sufficient capacity to treat the anticipated sanitary wastewater from the Project Site. The Project will generate the following Industrial wastewaters.

Table 1. Anticipated Industrial Wastewater Generation

Name Estimated Quantity (Gallons/year)

Onsite Management Method

Offsite Management Method

Metal turning water

200,000 Turning sumps/tanks – temporary holding

Lube Tech

Equipment wash water

70,000 Washing bay with grit removal and oil-water separator

Discharge to sanitary sewer and City of Becker WWTP

Oil-water separator cleanout

500 Temporary holding within oil-water separator

Lube Tech

Total 270,500

https://gisdata.mn.gov/dataset/water-wellhead-protection-areas


The Becker City Engineer has indicated that the proposed sanitary sewer infrastructure extension and the wastewater treatment plant for the City of Becker have sufficient capacity to convey and treat the anticipated domestic wastewater and equipment wash water from the Project. NM will pay Sewer Access Charge (SAC) fees to the City of Becker based on the anticipated volume of wastewater discharged.

2) If the wastewater discharge is to a subsurface sewage treatment systems (SSTS),

describe the system used, the design flow, and suitability of site conditions for such a system.

None

3) If the wastewater discharge is to surface water, identify the wastewater treatment methods and identify discharge points and proposed effluent limitations to mitigate impacts. Discuss any effects to surface or groundwater from wastewater discharges.

None

ii. Stormwater - Describe the quantity and quality of stormwater runoff at the site prior to and post construction. Include the routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site (major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters). Discuss any environmental effects from stormwater discharges. Describe stormwater pollution prevention plans including temporary and permanent runoff controls and potential BMP site locations to manage or treat stormwater runoff. Identify specific erosion control, sedimentation control or stabilization measures to address soil limitations during and after project construction.

1. Pre-construction stormwater:

The Project Site is currently irrigated agricultural land. The soils on Project Site are classified as Hydrologic Soil Group A, consisting of loamy sand. See also response to Item 10.b.of the EAW. A significant percentage of precipitation naturally infiltrates with this type of soil conditions. Currently there are three drainage areas for the Project Site (Figure 12): · Area A: Northeast corner: drains to low spot to the northeast outside of the project

area but within the property boundary · Area B: Southern portion: drains to low spot in southwest part of Project Site · Area C: Northwest corner: drains to a low spot in the northwest part of the Project

Site

Descriptions used to characterize runoff stormwater quality. Poor: Runoff flows across unvegetated soils with steeper slopes with sediment carried off site. Rills and channels in flow path. Fair: Runoff flows across unvegetated soils with flatter slopes so some sediment is carried in the runoff. Small rills or channels in flow path.


Good: Runoff flows across unvegetated soils with flatter slopes, but flows through a vegetated buffer before going offsite so most sediment remains onsite. Minimal rills or channels in flow path.

Drainage Area A: 4.8 Acres Area A has slopes that are generally less than 2%. Part of this drainage area includes the old farm site that is impervious gravel and buildings while the remainder is agricultural field and trees. The stormwater runoff from Area A generally flows overland to an existing low point northeast of the project area where it infiltrates within the property boundary. Stormwater quality is good due to flat slopes and seasonal vegetation with minimal runoff leaving the Project Site. Drainage Area B: 40.5 Acres Area B has slopes that are generally less than 2%. The surfaces are agricultural field and trees. All stormwater runoff flows overland to an existing low point in the southern portion of the Project Site. Stormwater quality is good due to flat slopes and seasonal vegetation with minimal runoff leaving the Project Site. Drainage Area C: 9.4 Acres Area C has slopes that are generally less than 2%. The surfaces are agricultural field and trees. All stormwater runoff flows overland to an existing low point in the northwestern portion of the Project Site. Stormwater quality is good due to flat slopes and seasonal vegetation with minimal runoff leaving the Project Site.

2. Post-construction stormwater:

Summary for the stormwater management system for the Project Site is as follows: Total pond live storage level: 7.30 million gallons - Live Storage” defined as the volume of water that is above the lowest outlet elevation, and can be discharged by gravity without pumps and used for flood control. “Dead Storage” defined as the volume of water stored below the level of the lowest outlet, which cannot be accessed under normal operating conditions. Total pond dead storage: 0.62 million gallons - Dead Storage” defined as the volume of water stored below the level of the lowest outlet, which cannot be accessed under normal operating conditions. Total Yearly Landscaping Irrigation: 0.8 million gallons Total Average Annual Runoff: 32.3 million gallons Storm sewer control system includes the following: · Pavement · Concrete curb and gutter · Underground storm sewer piping · Shallow ditches/swales · Lined stormwater ponds


· Developed areas with runoff directed away from the Project Site (outside of production area).

· Potentially a truck fill station (pump and fill pipe) to fill site water truck NM Project Site grading plan places the majority of buildings in the middle of the Project Site as the high point so runoff flows away from the buildings. On the north side of the Project Site, runoff flows directly into the stormwater pond. On the south side of the Project Site, runoff flows to a perimeter curb and gutter and is directed to the lined stormwater pond on the south. At the Project Site perimeter, the pavement will be raised to prevent runoff from leaving the Project Site or curb and gutter will be utilized to direct to the stormwater ponds. The stormwater ponds are designed to contain the 100-year, 24-hour storm event without overtopping. The ponds will be emptied offsite by opening a slide gate or pumping. Drainage Area 1: 19.6 Acres This area consists of the northern portion of the plant area. The majority of the area is impervious with the exception of small pervious area to the northeast and northwest. Slopes in the area are generally less than 3%. The stormwater runoff travels by overland flow on the paved area directly to the stormwater pond. The curb and gutter around the perimeter tips in to direct runoff to the stormwater pond. The stormwater pond improves water quality by allowing sediment to settle out of the runoff before discharging. Stormwater quality is expected to remain good due to detention time in the stormwater pond. The stormwater pond in this area will be discharged to the north. Drainage Area 2: 20.6 Acres This area consists of the southern portion of the plant area. The majority of the area is impervious with the exception of small pervious area to the east. Slopes in the area are generally less than 3%. The stormwater runoff travels by overland flow to the curb and gutter around the perimeter of the paved area, then travels in the gutter to the stormwater pond on the south side of the Project Site. The stormwater pond improves water quality by allowing sediment to settle out of the runoff before discharging. Stormwater quality is expected to remain good due to detention time in the stormwater pond. Drainage Area 3: 4.3 Acres This area in the northwest corner of the Project Site consists of pervious grass surfaces and impervious material (railroad subballast). The slopes in this area are generally less than 2.0%, with the exception of the slopes down from the railroad subballast to the ditch bottom, which is up to 33%. Stormwater collects in a vegetated ditch. Stormwater quality is expected to remain good due to flatter slopes and vegetation with minimal runoff leaving the Project Site. Drainage Area 4: 1.2 Acres This area in the southwest corner of the Project Site consists of pervious grass surfaces and impervious material (railroad subballast). The slopes in this area are generally less than 2.0%, with the exception of the slopes down from the railroad subballast to the


ditch bottom, which is up to 33%. Stormwater collects in a vegetated ditch. Stormwater quality is expected to remain good due to flatter slopes and vegetation with minimal runoff leaving the Project Site.

Drainage Area 5: 3.0 Acres This area consists of the southern stormwater pond. The majority of the area is impervious (lined pond) with the exception of small pervious areas outside the pond liner to the south and west of the pond. Slopes in the area are generally between 25% and 33% on the pond slopes. The stormwater runoff from this area will be directed into the pond, joining stormwater from drainage area 2. The stormwater pond improves water quality by allowing sediment to settle out of the runoff before discharging. Stormwater quality is expected to remain good due to detention time in the stormwater pond. This stormwater pond will be discharged to the south. Drainage Area 6: 3.3 Acres This area in the east side of the Project Site consists of pervious grass surfaces and impervious surface (office buildings and parking). The slopes in this area are generally less than 2.0%. Stormwater collects in vegetated areas between the plant and road to the east. Stormwater quality is expected to remain good due to flatter slopes and vegetation with minimal runoff leaving the Project Site. Drainage Area 7: 2.7 Acres This area in the south side of the Project Site consists of pervious grass surfaces. The slopes in this area are generally less than 2.0%. Stormwater collects in vegetated areas to the south. Stormwater quality is expected to remain good due to flatter slopes and vegetation with minimal runoff leaving the Project Site.

iii. Water appropriation - Describe if the project proposes to appropriate surface or

groundwater (including dewatering). Describe the source, quantity, duration, use and purpose of the water use and if a DNR water appropriation permit is required. Describe any well abandonment. If connecting to an existing municipal water supply, identify the wells to be used as a water source and any effects on, or required expansion of, municipal water infrastructure. Discuss environmental effects from water appropriation, including an assessment of the water resources available for appropriation. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental effects from the water appropriation.

Because no water wells will be drilled, there is no water appropriation planned for the Project. NM will use Becker city water for employees and equipment wash water.

NM intends to use water from the stormwater ponds located throughout the Project Site for much of the other water needed for the Project. During periods of dry weather when recycled stormwater is insufficient to meet the operational needs, NM will use city water. (See Table 2 below)


Table 2. Anticipated Water Use

Name Use/ Location Primary Source of Water Estimated Quantity (Gallons/year)

Cooling water

Cooling/shredder Stormwater Collection System or City of Becker 900,000

Equipment wash water

Equipment washing/designated wash bay within operations area

City of Becker 70,000

Landscaping Irrigation of plantings/ throughout Project Site

Stormwater Collection System or City of Becker 800,000

Dust control Reduce dust from traffic/paved areas throughout Project Site

Stormwater Collection System or City of Becker 4,800,000

Employee Support

Drinking and Sanitary/operations and office buildings

City of Becker 600,000

Total 7,170,000 The Becker city engineer has indicated the City’s water supply is sufficient to meet all water demand needs for Project operations. The City will extend new water mains to serve the Project Site. NM will pay the Water Access Charge (WAC) fees to the City of Becker based on the anticipated volume of water consumed.

NM designed the Project Site to provide the maximum reuse of stormwater, from the stormwater management system for Project operations.

iv. Surface Waters a) Wetlands - Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to wetland features

such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging and vegetative removal. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from physical modification of wetlands, including the anticipated effects that any proposed wetland alterations may have to the host watershed. Identify measures to avoid (e.g., available alternatives that were considered), minimize, or mitigate environmental effects to wetlands. Discuss whether any required compensatory wetland mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts will occur in the same minor or major watershed, and identify those probable locations.

There are no wetlands on or adjacent to the Project Site. Therefore, NM anticipates no impacts to wetlands resulting in the development and operation of the Project.

b) Other surface waters- Describe any anticipated physical effects or alterations to surface water features (lakes, streams, ponds, intermittent channels, county/judicial ditches) such as draining, filling, permanent inundation, dredging, diking, stream diversion, impoundment, aquatic plant removal and riparian alteration. Discuss direct and indirect environmental effects from physical modification of water features. Identify measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate environmental effects to surface water features, including in-water Best Management Practices that are proposed to avoid or minimize turbidity/ sedimentation while physically altering the water features. Discuss how the project will change the number or type of watercraft on any water body, including current and projected watercraft usage.


There are no surface waters on or adjacent to the Project Site. There is no existing surface water management infrastructure in the Project area, and there will not be any surface water management infrastructure after the project is completed.

12. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes:

a. Pre-project site conditions - Describe existing contamination or potential environmental hazards on or in close proximity to the project site such as soil or ground water contamination, abandoned dumps, closed landfills, existing or abandoned storage tanks, and hazardous liquid or gas pipelines. Discuss any potential environmental effects from pre-project site conditions that would be caused or exacerbated by project construction and operation. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from existing contamination or potential environmental hazards. Include development of a Contingency Plan or Response Action Plan.

NM reviewed the MPCA “What’s in My Neighborhood” (WIMN) database to identify any onsite or adjacent sites listed under the legend “Investigation and Cleanup.” The WIMN tool identified no sites or immediately adjacent sites within the proposed project boundary. The WIMN map is included in Figure 16. The property underwent a Phase I environmental assessment in 2011.

b. Project related generation/storage of solid wastes - Describe solid wastes generated/stored

during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from solid waste handling, storage and disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of solid waste including source reduction and recycling.

During construction, NM expects to generate normal construction debris such as scrap wood, plastics, sheet rock, packing material, cardboard, scrap metals, and electrical wire. Table 3 lists the expected solid wastes generated during operations along with onsite storage location and method of disposal. NM is responsible for the solid waste disposal. Table 3. Expected Solid Wastes

Waste Name Quantity Onsite Storage Method Method/Location of Disposal

Processed Shredder Waste - Ferrous 1 1,100,000 tons per year

Ferrous Storage Pile, Clips Storage Pile Shipped offsite

Processed Shredder Waste - Ferrous/Nonferrous 1 90,000 tons per year MRP Building Shipped offsite Shredder Fluff 1 360,000 tons per year Waste Fluff Storage Area Vonco Landfill Mixed Municipal Solid Waste 2 72,000 tons per year - Disposal


Waste Name Quantity Onsite Storage Method Method/Location of Disposal

Industrial Solid Waste 3 180 tons per year

Will be transferred to the Waste pile in the MRP Vonco Landfill

Filter Media 4 6,400 filters per year Maintenance Building Recycle/Vonco Landfill

Sweeping Yard/Inside Shredder/inside MRP

25 tons per year (estimated) Waste Fluff Storage Area Vonco Landfill

1. Values based on maximum shredder throughput and estimated percentages of shredder/MRP output. Annualized based on estimated operating hours per year. 2. Includes dirt work and construction debris at the Becker site. 3. Includes garbage picked off the pick line. 4. As the final filter media has not been chosen at this point, a worst-case estimate is provided in this table.

c. Project related use/storage of hazardous materials - Describe chemicals/hazardous materials

used/stored during construction and/or operation of the project including method of storage. Indicate the number, location and size of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum or other materials. Discuss potential environmental effects from accidental spill or release of hazardous materials. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the use/storage of chemicals/hazardous materials including source reduction and recycling. Include development of a spill prevention plan.

NM is responsible for the safe handling, storage and disposal of any hazardous materials used during the construction phase. Table 4 provides a list of chemicals/products, expected quantities and their storage locations at the Project Site during construction and operations. Table 4. Hazardous Materials Inventory List

Chemical/Product Name Location

Estimated Quantity Per Year

Onsite Storage Method

Method/ Location of Disposal

Acetylene Gas Maintenance Building 200 pounds

Cylinder Tank, Rack Toll Company

Antifreeze Maintenance Building 330 gallons Drum Recycled/Lube Tech

"First Aid" Brand Metal Parts/Brake Cleaner

Maintenance Building

27 cases (24 cans per case) Fire Box Recycled





75%Carbon Dioxide/25% Argo Gas

Maintenance Building 1,000 pounds


Diesel Fuel Additive

Maintenance Building

5 cases (24 cans per case) Fire Box Recycled






Gear & Chain Lube Maintenance Building 100 gallons Drum Lube Tech

Glass Cleaner with Ammonia

Fire Box in maintenance Building 78 gallons Fire Box Recycled

Hydraulic Oil In Shredder Equipment 1,700 gallons

Hydraulic Room/Shredder Building Lube Tech

Kerosene

Maintenance Building/Shredder Building 110 gallons Drum Lube Tech

Liquid Oxygen Shredder Building 2,400 pounds Cylinder Tank

Minneapolis Oxygen Service

Mineral Oil Electrical Transformers 2,500 gallons

Aboveground Storage Tanks, in Transformers Xcel Energy Company

New Motor/Hydraulic Oil in Drums

Maintenance Building/South Warehouse 715 gallons Drum Lube Tech

Nitrogen Refrigerated Liquid

Shredder Building 300 pounds


Oxygen Gas Maintenance Building 7,500 pounds


Propane Gas Maintenance Building 7,980 pounds Tank, Rack

Quality Propane Gas Company

First Aid Starting Fluid

Fire Box in maintenance Building

5 cases (24 cans per case) Fire Box Recycled Can

Transmission Fluid Maintenance Building 55 gallons Drum Recycle/Lube Tech

PB Blaster

Fire Box in maintenance Building

4 cases (24 cans per case) Fire Box Recycled Can

50% Ethylene Glycol

In Shredder Equipment 250 gallons

Aboveground Storage Tanks Lube Tech

0.2% Soda Ash Solution

In Shredder Equipment 1,500 gallons

Aboveground Storage Tanks Lube Tech

NM will have onsite hazardous material aboveground storage tanks as outlined Table 6. The above ground storage tanks will have secondary containment (Permit requirement) to provide protection for tank leakage or failure to minimize the risk of any spills entering the groundwater or surface water. NM may store fuel oil on the Project Site in storage tanks, which is a hazardous material during the construction phase of the Project.


d. Project related generation/storage of hazardous wastes - Describe hazardous wastes generated/stored during construction and/or operation of the project. Indicate method of disposal. Discuss potential environmental effects from hazardous waste handling, storage, and disposal. Identify measures to avoid, minimize or mitigate adverse effects from the generation/storage of hazardous waste including source reduction and recycling.

The existing Minneapolis site is a Very Small Quantity Generator (VSQG) for hazardous waste. NM expects the Project at Becker will also be a VSQG of hazardous waste and licensed appropriately. .

Table 5. Expected Hazardous Wastes 1

Waste Name Estimated Quantity Per Year Onsite Storage Method

Method/Location of Disposal

Cathode Ray Tubes 300 lb Cardboard box on skid, labeled Dynamic Recycling Circuit Boards 37,000 lb Cardboard box on skid, labeled Dynamic Recycling

Machine Coolant 75,000-100,000 gal Turning Bin Under Rain Shed Lube Tech-Chief Waste treatment

Mercury Switches & Probes 1 5lbs Non-leaking plastic bucket, labeled Retrofit Recycling Inc

Parts Washing Solution 1 60 gal Aboveground Storage Tanks Lube Tech-Chief Waste treatment

Rags 400 lb Plastic bag in metal container G & K Services

Used Antifreeze 1,800 gal Aboveground Storage Tanks Lube Tech Trans-Pioneer Env, Group

Used Fluorescent Lamps 1 130 lb Cardboard box on skid, labeled Retrofit Recycling Inc

Used Lead Acid Batteries 600,000lbs Plastic box with cover, labeled Interstate Battery System of Twin City S

Used Oil 1 3,000gal Aboveground Storage Tanks Lube Tech-LTI Liquid Recycling

Used Oil Filters 1 4,000lbs Non-leaking 55 gallon drum, labeled

Lube Tech-CRI Recycling Service

Used Oily Sorbent Material 10,300 lb Non-leaking 55 gallon drum, labeled

G & K Services--CRI Recycling Service

Used PCB Ballasts and Capacitors 1 Less than 20 lb Non-leaking plastic bucket, labeled Retrofit Recycling-Veolia

Electronic Scrap 44,000lbs cardboard box on skid / labeled transported-Dynamic Recycling

Freon 500lbs Freon Tanks Cylinder Tank, Rack

Evaporation Sludge 12 lb non leaking plastic bucket/labeled Lube Tech Trans-Chief Waste treatment

1. The Feedstock Control Plan, included in Attachment 2, lists any hazardous waste, explosive or flammable materials, mercury or any mercury containing device or material, PCB capacitors, and vehicle used oil filters on its Unacceptable Material List, found in Appendix A. While NM will not accept any of these materials in the CRC or from their suppliers, these materials will be present onsite as vehicles brought onsite are processed in the ELV (e.g., mercury switches will not be accepted from the public, but mercury switches present in vehicles that are brought onsite by the public will be accepted). In addition, NM will have a parts washer onsite; the parts washer solution will be flammable. NM will not accept parts washer solution in the CRC or from suppliers, but NM does expect this solution to be onsite.


Except for the electrical transformers and gas cylinders, all chemicals/products listed in the above table are stored indoors, and the risk of these materials entering the groundwater or surface water is minimal. In addition, the facility is expected to have onsite hazardous material aboveground storage tanks as outlined in Table 6. Mitigation The Feedstock Control Plan included as an appendix to the Becker facility’s air permit application to address the following items:

1. New regulations that affect the control of feedstock 2. The removal or segregation of hazardous material(s) from new scrap stream(s) 3. Initial and periodic employee training for identification and removal or segregation of

hazardous material(s) from new scrap stream(s) 4. Supplier education on new regulations or restrictions on new scrap streams NM will ensure that the contractors hired know how to safely handle, store, and dispose of any hazardous waste used or produced during the construction phase. NM will place conditions in contracts it enters into with contractors that will require contractors and/or subcontractors to take necessary precautions to, safely handle, store, and dispose of hazardous waste and to comply with applicable environmental regulations.

Table 6. Expected Aboveground Storage Tank Inventory

Storage Tank Description Number of Tanks

Aboveground or Underground Storage Tank Location of Tank

Tank Capacity (gallons)

Diesel Fuel Tank 1 Aboveground Fueling Station 490 Gasoline Fuel Tank 1 Aboveground Fueling Station 500

SAE 10W30 Motor Oil Tank 1 Aboveground Maintenance Building 250

SAE 85W140 Motor Oil Tank 1 Aboveground Maintenance Building 250

HS 32 Hydraulic Oil 1 Aboveground Maintenance Building 250

SAE 15W30 Motor Oil 1 Aboveground Maintenance Building 250

SAE 30W Motor Oil 1 Aboveground Maintenance Building 250

Used Motor Oil 1 Aboveground Maintenance Building 265

Parts Washing Solution 1 Aboveground Maintenance Building 30

Processed Water 1 Aboveground Evaporator Area 2,600 Hydraulic Oil 1 Aboveground Evaporator Area 275 Hydraulic Oil 1 Aboveground Evaporator Area 300


Storage Tank Description Number of Tanks

Aboveground or Underground Storage Tank Location of Tank

Tank Capacity (gallons)

Used Oil 1 Aboveground Evaporator Area 960 Oily Water 1 Aboveground Evaporator Area 500

Oil/Water Mix 1 Aboveground Metal Turnings/Borings Pad 5,500



Mineral Oil 1 Aboveground

Shredder Building; in Electrical Transformers 1,750


Shredder Building; in Electrical Transformers 465


Shredder Building; in Electrical Transformers 300

Hydraulic Oil 1 Aboveground Shredder Building; in Hydraulic Equipment 200




50% Ethylene Glycol Tank 1 Aboveground Shredder Building 250

0.2% Soda Ash Solution Tank 1 Aboveground Shredder Building 1,580 Gasoline Tank 1 Aboveground ELV 490 Gasoline Tank 1 Aboveground ELV 490 Oil Tank 1 Aboveground ELV 490

Antifreeze Tank 1 Aboveground ELV 490

Secondary containment is provided as indicated in the above table for any tank leakage or failure, and the risk of any spills entering the groundwater or surface water is minimal.


13. Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources (rare features): a. Describe fish and wildlife resources as well as habitats and vegetation on or in near the site.

The Project Site is within the Sherburne Soil and Water Conservation District (SWCD), but not near or included in any Reinvest in Minnesota (RIM) easements.

Per Minn. R. Part 7050.0335, subp. 1(D)(6), the section of the Mississippi River from County State-Aid Highway 7 Bridge in St. Cloud to the northwestern city limits of Anoka is considered a Designated Outstanding Resource Value Water. This portion of the river passes about 1.3 miles south of the Project Site.

NM reviewed the DNR Native Plant Communities GIS database representing locations of native plant communities throughout Minnesota. According to NM there are no native plant communities on or near the Project Site, as represented in Figure 20.

b. Describe rare features such as state-listed (endangered, threatened or special concern) species, native plant communities, Minnesota County Biological Survey Sites of Biodiversity Significance, and other sensitive ecological resources on or within close proximity to the site. Provide the license agreement number (LA-____) and/or correspondence number (ERDB _____________) from which the data were obtained and attach the Natural Heritage letter from the DNR. Indicate if any additional habitat or species survey work has been conducted within the site and describe the results.

On March 15, 2018, NM requested that the DNR conduct a National Heritage Information Services Review of the PLS section where the Project Site is located in order to evaluate any potential rare features at the Project Site. This request has not been completed at this time; however, a review of the section of the PLS section immediately to the southeast of the Project Site (T33N, R28W, S6) was completed at an earlier date, and is included in Figure 19. NM anticipates that the results of the new review will return the same findings. The query returned by the DNR included information on rare species and other significant natural features known to occur within one mile of the Project Site. The loggerhead shrike (a state-listed endangered bird) has been documented near the Project Site. In order to minimize impacts on the loggerhead shrike, NM will follow the recommendations by the DNR, and avoid tree and shrub removal during the loggerhead shrike breeding season (April through July) and will report any loggerhead shrike sightings to the DNR. In addition, NM reviewed of Natural Communities and Rare Species of Sherburne County, as well as Minnesota’s Sites of Biodiversity Significance (Figures 20 and 21, respectively). Based on these documents, the Project Site and surrounding area are listed as being of low biodiversity significance. While there are four markings of rare animals near the Project Site as listed in Figure 20, NM assumed that these siting’s are of loggerhead shrikes, as the DNR review did not return any other rare species siting’s within the area.

c. Discuss how the identified fish, wildlife, plant communities, rare features and ecosystems may be

affected by the project. Include a discussion on introduction and spread of invasive species from the project construction and operation. Separately discuss effects to known threatened and endangered species.


NM will incorporate the policy and procedures for the prevention of the spread of invasive species listed in DNR Operational Order 113, into the contracts for the contractors hired to construct the Project.

d. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to fish,

wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources.

NM will follow the DNR’s recommendations for minimizing impacts on the loggerhead shrike by avoiding tree and shrub removal during the loggerhead shrike breeding season (April through July) and reporting any loggerhead shrike sighting’s to the DNR.

14. Historic properties:

Describe any historic structures, archeological sites, and/or traditional cultural properties on or in close proximity to the site. Include: 1) historic designations, 2) known artifact areas, and 3) architectural features. Attach letter received from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). Discuss any anticipated effects to historic properties during project construction and operation. Identify measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to historic properties.

NM requested a review of by the Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office for historical, archaeological, and traditional cultural properties of the new Project Site location and surrounding area. The Minnesota Historic Preservation Office identifies no archaeological sites in the Minnesota Archaeological Inventory or Historic Structures Inventory databases (Figure 22).

15. Visual:

Describe any scenic views or vistas on or near the project site. Describe any project related visual effects such as vapor plumes or glare from intense lights. Discuss the potential visual effects from the project. Identify any measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate visual effects.

NM identified lights and water vapor plumes from the Project Site as possible visual impacts.

NM intends to face all of the lights at the Project Site towards the south to minimize glare to the residential areas towards the north. The vapor plumes will mostly be water vapor only and potentially present when the shredder operations are running.

16. Air: a. Stationary source emissions - Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any

emissions from stationary sources such as boilers or exhaust stacks. Include any hazardous air pollutants, criteria pollutants, and any greenhouse gases. Discuss effects to air quality including any sensitive receptors, human health or applicable regulatory criteria. Include a discussion of any methods used assess the project’s effect on air quality and the results of that assessment. Identify pollution control equipment and other measures that will be taken to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects from stationary source emissions.

The proposed Becker facility will have the following emission sources:


· 400 tph Shredder. The Shredder shreds metal into ferrous and ASR. This unit will be controlled by one centrifugal collector/cyclone, two fabric filters, and one regenerative thermal oxidizer (RTO) in series. The Shredder will have emissions of: particulate matter (PM), particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 10 microns (PM10), and particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 microns (PM2.5), volatile organic compounds (VOC), and hazardous air pollutants HAPs.

· 300 tph ferrous sorting. The ferrous sorting process will complete the initial sorting of ferrous and ASR. This unit will be controlled by a centrifugal collector/cyclone and two fabric filters in series, and will have emissions of PM, PM10, PM2.5, VOCs and, HAPs.

· 50 tph MRP. The MRP will be used to further separate ferrous material and non-ferrous from the ASR. The MRP will be controlled by a fabric filter, and will have emissions of PM, PM10, PM2.5, and HAPs.

· 50 tph Waste Fluff Handling. One of the products of the MRP is waste fluff, which will be stored in a covered, three-sided area adjacent to the MRP Building. PM, PM10, PM2.5, and HAP emissions are expected from this process due to material drop points.

· Paved road truck traffic. Employee vehicle, vendor vehicle, shipping/receiving trucks, and front-end loaders will be present at the Project Site, and will travel via paved routes.

· 300 tph Shredded Ferrous Product Handling. Ferrous product from the ferrous building is conveyed from the building to storage piles. PM, PM10, and PM2.5 emission are expected from this process due to material drop points. The conveyor is equipped with spray bars and the storage pile is sprayed with water cannons to control emissions.

· Insignificant activities, such as aboveground storage tanks, boilers, and space heaters.

The only greenhouse gas emissions will come from the combustion associated with the RTO and various insignificant activities. The shredding process will emit mercury emissions. NM will accept a permit limit of 3 pounds per year of mercury on emissions from its combined stack. As such, the MPCA’s “Guidelines for New and Modified Mercury Air Emission Sources,” published December 6, 2012, do not apply to the Project.


Table 7. Facility-Wide Predicted Maximum Emissions of Regulated Air Pollutants Including Criteria Pollutants

Equipment Description Limited Emissions (tons/y)

PM PM10 PM2.5 NOx CO SO2 VOC3 CO2e Lead Total HAP Shredder 3.28 3.28 3.28 7.56 6.35 0.05 7.16 9,026.86 2.20E-03 2.14 Downstream Ferrous 0.72 0.72 0.72 - - - 6.69 - 5.76E-04 1.65 MRP 1 6.34 6.34 6.34 - - - - - 4.67E-06 5.73E-05 Truck Traffic - Paved Roads 130.86 26.17 6.42 - - - - - - - Waste Fluff Handling 0.18 0.09 0.01 - - - - - - 6.69E-04 Outdoor Ferrous Pile 0.38 0.18 0.03 - - - - - - -

Insignificant Activities 0.08 0.08 0.08 1.09 0.92 6.55E-03 0.06 1,303.76 - 0.02 Total 141.84 36.86 16.89 8.65 7.27 0.05 13.92 10,330.62 2.78E-03 3.81 Part 70 Major Source Threshold (7007.0200) N/A 100 100 100 100 100 100 100,000 10 25

Exceeds Threshold? -- NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO State Permit Threshold (7007.0250) 100 25 N/A N/A N/A 50 100 N/A 0.5 N/A

Exceeds Threshold? YES YES NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

1. MRP is the nonferrous/metal recovery plant.


Air Dispersion Modeling To assess whether the facility operations will cause or contribute to ambient air concentrations that violate the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, NM completed a Significant Impact Level (SIL) analysis using the EPA regulatory plume dispersion model AERMOD. Facility operations were set up to run 8,760 hours in the model. Pollutants modeled in the SIL analysis were SO2, CO, particulate matter less than 10 (10) microns (PM10), particulate matter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), and NO2. The modeled concentrations of each pollutant were compared to their respective SIL value using High First High (H1H) modeled impacts. Table 9 lists the SIL modeling analysis results for the modeled pollutants and their respective averaging periods. Table 8. Significant Impact Level Modeling Results

Pollutant Averaging Period

Modeled Impact H1H SILs

Percent of SIL (%) Exceed SIL?

(μg/m3) (μg/m3)

PM10 24-Hour 2.50512 5 50.1 NO

PM2.5 24-Hour 0.82080 1.2 68.4% NO Annual 0.06239 0.3 20.8% NO

NO2 1-Hour 1.51646 7.52 20.2% NO Annual 0.03076 1 3.1% NO

SO2

1-Hour 0.00912 7.86 0.12% NO 3-Hour 0.00851 25 0.03% NO

24-Hour 0.00334 5 0.07% NO Annual 0.00018 1 0.02% NO

CO 1-Hour 1.53381 2000 0.08% NO 8-Hour 0.85049 500 0.17% NO

AERMOD predicted no exceedances of the SIL for any of the modeled pollutants; therefore, a dispersion modeling analysis was not required. MPCA Staff approved the Air Dispersion Modeling Report on April 3, 2018.


Table 9. Facility-Wide Potential Annual Emissions of Hazardous Air Pollutants

Pollutant ton/yr Acetonitrile 7.00E-03

Acrolein 6.98E-03

Acrylonitrile 7.02E-03

Allyl chloride 7.04E-03

Antimony 6.23E-04

Arsenic 2.39E-03

Benzene 1.80E-01

Benzo(k)fluoranthene 1.36E-07

Benzo[a]anthracene 1.36E-07

Benzo[a]pyrene 9.07E-08

Benzo[b]fluoranthene 1.36E-07

Benzo[g,h,i]perylene 9.07E-08

Benzyl chloride 7.03E-03

Beryllium 1.71E-04

Bromoform 7.27E-03

Butadiene, 1,3- 7.05E-03

Cadmium 1.85E-03

Carbon disulfide 7.00E-03

Carbon tetrachloride 7.07E-03

Chlorobenzene 7.12E-03

Chloroform 7.09E-03

Chromium 2.31E-03 Chromium (Hexavalent) (particulate) 7.13E-04

Cobalt 2.88E-04

Cumene 1.59E-02

Dibenz[a,h]anthracene 9.07E-08

Dibromo-3-chloropropane, 1,2- 7.24E-03

Pollutant ton/yr Dichlorobenzene(p), 1,4- 7.04E-03

Dichlorobenzenes 1.04E-04 Dichloroethylene (1,1-) (Vinylidene chloride) 7.06E-03

Dimethylbenz[a]anthracene, 7,12- 1.00E-06

Dioxane, 1,4- (1,4-Diethylene dioxide) 7.09E-03

Ethyl benzene 1.64E-01

Ethyl chloride (Chloroethane) 7.05E-03

Ethylene dibromide (Dibromoethane) 7.20E-03

Ethylene dichloride (1,2-Dichloroethane) 7.01E-03

Ethylidene dichloride (1,1-Dichloroethane) 7.02E-03

Fluoranthene 2.59E-07

Formaldehyde 6.49E-03

Hexachlorobutadiene 7.00E-03 Hexachlorodibenzodioxins, All Isomers 6.77E-09

Hexachlorodibenzofurans, All Isomers 6.77E-09

Hydrochloric acid (hydrogen chloride) 3.88E-01

Indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene 1.36E-07

Lead 2.78E-03

m- and p-Xylenes 5.70E-01

Manganese 5.93E-03

Mercury (elemental) 1.50E-03

Pollutant ton/yr Methyl bromide (Bromomethane) 7.10E-03

Methyl chloride (Chloromethane) 7.06E-03

Methyl isobutyl ketone (Hexone) 3.43E-02

Methyl methacrylate 1.40E-02

Methyl tert butyl ether 7.10E-03

Methylcholanthrene, 3- 1.36E-07

Naphthalene 1.55E-02

Nickel 1.20E-02

Phenanthrene 1.00E-06

Polychlorinated biphenyls (Aroclors unspeciated) 2.88E-02

Polycyclic Organic Matter (POM) 4.00E-06

Propylene dichloride (1,2-Dichloropropane) 6.93E-03

Selenium 4.49E-03

Styrene 1.28E-01

Tetrachloroethane, 1,1,2,2- 7.08E-03

Toluene 7.42E-01

Trichlorobenzene, 1,2,4- 6.95E-03

Trichloroethane, 1,1,2- 7.16E-03

Trichloroethylene 5.04E-02

Vinyl acetate 7.09E-02

Vinyl chloride 7.07E-03

Xylenes, o- 2.07E-01


Air Emissions Risk Analysis The MPCA required an Air Emission Risk Analysis (AERA) as a condition of the consent decree. The AERA includes both a quantitative analysis of potential impacts to human health using MPCA’s Risk Assessment Screening Spreadsheet (RASS), and a qualitative analysis using information from the site and the surrounding community. The Proposer submitted the AERA with the air permit application. The MPCA received the final AERA on March 23, 2018, reviewed and approved it for inclusion in the EAW on April 4, 2018. The Proposer used the MPCA’s RASS to evaluate the acute toxicity, chronic toxicity, cancer, and non-cancer risks associated with emissions from the Project. The RASS conservatively considers the relative health risk for each pollutant with a health benchmark, emitted by the Project. The results of this assessment determine the need for additional evaluation. The Proposer calculated the total inhalation acute hazard index using upper end proposed emission inputs and conservative exposure parameters and resulted in a value of under one. The health risks from exposures to pollutants known to be carcinogens were also evaluated and cancer risk was found to be below RASS health risk guidance. Therefore, the MPCA does not expect acute emissions to adversely affect human health. The chronic multi-pathway hazard analysis yielded results less than one. The chronic lifetime excess cancer risk estimate was less than the threshold of 1E-5, or one in 100,000. Both the acute and the chronic risk values are acceptable because they are at or less than the health risk guidance. The qualitative risk analysis describes the area surrounding the Project Site. The Project should not affect day cares and schools located within the 1.5 kilometer radius from the Project Site. The results of the air emissions risk analysis show that the Project as proposed does not add any additional health risks to the sensitive receptors around the Project site. The Proposer and MPCA do not expect the Project to have adverse effects to human health and the environment. The Proposer also completed the MMREM (Minnesota Mercury Risk Estimation Method) spreadsheet. This spreadsheet calculates the local mercury hazard quotient due to fish contamination from Mercury emissions of a project. The Project will emit less than 3 lb/yr of mercury. The closest fishable waterbody is the Mississippi river. The area of maximum deposition is an area of 3,567 acres of fishable waterbody between St. Cloud dam and Coon Rapids dam on the Mississippi River. There is no expected increase in the ratio of incremental fish mercury concentration from the Project relative to the existing water quality.

b. Vehicle emissions - Describe the effect of the project’s traffic generation on air emissions. Discuss the project’s vehicle-related emissions effect on air quality. Identify measures (e.g. traffic operational improvements, diesel idling minimization plan) that will be taken to minimize or mitigate vehicle-related emissions.

NM calculated the maximum emissions expected from the paved roads at the Project Site (Tables 7 and 8). As noted above, a final modeling analysis is being completed; the results of the final modeling analysis shows the impacts of vehicle emissions on ambient air quality. NM follows MPCA guidance on the consideration of roads in an ambient air quality analysis. NM currently follows practices to minimize diesel idling at the Minneapolis site will implement these measures for the Project. NM works to efficiently get the trucks in and out of the yard as quickly as possible. However, if unavoidable conditions create a lengthy wait at the Project Site,


NM will instruct drivers to turn off their trucks during the late spring, summer, and early fall months. During the winter months, the trucks remain in idle mode in order to maintain comfortable and safe cabin conditions for drivers.

c. Dust and odors - Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of dust and odors generated during project construction and operation. (Fugitive dust may be discussed under item 16a). Discuss the effect of dust and odors in the vicinity of the project including nearby sensitive receptors and quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of dust and odors.

NM expects odors from operations to be minimal based on the operations at the current Minneapolis site. Northern Metals will install a RTO at the Project Site to control air emissions including odors that may occur from the shredding process. NM expects odors from the Project to be minimal and nuisance conditions are not expected. The Fugitive Dust Control Plan (Attachment 3) describes the active and passive control measures and operational practices and procedures to curtail and control fugitive dust emissions, including the employee procedures and training, as well as the recordkeeping and reporting to demonstrate compliance with said procedures. Active measures include sweeping and watering of roads, watering storage piles, ensuring buildings with recycling recovery activities (i.e., Shredder, MRP) are totally enclosed, and storing material indoors or in 3-sided sheds when possible. Passive measures include paving roads and use of covered conveyors to minimize fugitive dust from transfer operations.

7. Noise Describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of noise generated during project construction and operation. Discuss the effect of noise in the vicinity of the project including 1) existing noise levels/sources in the area, 2) nearby sensitive receptors, 3) conformance to state noise standards, and 4) quality of life. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate the effects of noise.

Noise generation sources associated with the Project

· Construction equipment during construction · Feedstock conveyor for shredder · Trucks and railcars delivering material to the Project Site · Trucks and railcars removing processed materials from the Project Site · Processing equipment consisting of conveyors, screens and a shredder inside the Shredder

Building and Ferrous Metals Building.

Short term Construction and excavation equipment

· Noise impacts from construction equipment will last for a period of 12-18 months

On-going · A summary of on-going noise estimates can be found in Attachment 4.


Mitigation Construction equipment - Construction equipment must be in proper operating condition including mufflers. Construction equipment will operate between the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

Material delivered to the Project Site - Trucks must be in proper operating condition including mufflers. Cranes and front-end loaders must be in proper operating condition including mufflers.

The Project must meet state and local noise ordinances.

NM did a preliminary noise analysis to estimate the noise from the Project (Attachment 4).

18. Transportation a. Describe traffic-related aspects of project construction and operation. Include: 1) existing and

proposed additional parking spaces, 2) estimated total average daily traffic generated, 3) estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of occurrence, 4) indicate source of trip generation rates used in the estimates, and 5) availability of transit and/or other alternative transportation modes.

1) There are currently zero parking spots at the Project Site. NM will have parking spaces for

approximately 156 cars and 30 trucks. 2) There are currently zero parking spots at the Project Site. NM will have parking spaces for

approximately 156 cars and 30 trucks. 3) NM expects up to 549 vehicles per day at the Project Site.

a. Shredder Truck Route – 109 vehicles per day (route includes 15 vehicles from Trucks to Shredded Clips Storage Loadout, 5 vehicles from Trucks to MRP Container Loadout, and 20 Vehicles from Truck to Waste Loadout)

b. Material Receiving Area Truck Route – 265 vehicles per day (route includes 5 vehicles from Trucks to Commodities Stockpile)

c. CRC Receiving Area Route – 60 vehicles per day d. Trucks to Commodities Stockpile – 5 vehicles per day (included in Shredder Truck Route) e. Trucks to Shredded Clips Storage Loadout – 15 vehicles per day (included in Shredder

Truck Route) f. Trucks to MRP Container Loadout – 5 vehicles per day (included in Shredder Truck

Route) g. Trucks to Waste Loadout – 20 vehicles per day (included in Shredder Truck Route) h. Office Parking – 30 vehicles per day i. Employee Parking – 30 vehicles per day j. Maintenance/vendor vehicle – 55vehicles per day k. Various front end loader traffic.

4) Peak traffic is expected to occur between 6 a.m. – 7:30 a.m.; 9 a.m. – 10 a.m.; 11:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.; and 1:30 p.m. – 3 p.m.

5) The estimates used in items 2) and 3) above are based on the expected maximum production rate of the facility, and the trucking numbers needed to fulfill the maximum production rate.

6) Becker, Minnesota has the following public transportation options available: a. Tri-Cap Bus Service. This service includes routes to Monticello and Elk River. b. Route 877 Express Bus Route. This route runs from St. Cloud to Big Lake, and

includes a stop in Becker. c. Becker Public School buses.


In addition, the Northstar Commuter Rail runs from Minneapolis to Big Lake, Minnesota, and could potentially be connected to Becker through the Route 877 Express Bus, noted above.

b. Discuss the effect on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic

improvements necessary. The analysis must discuss the project’s impact on the regional transportation system. If the peak hour traffic generated exceeds 250 vehicles or the total daily trips exceeds 2,500, a traffic impact study must be prepared as part of the EAW. Use the format and procedures described in the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s Access Management Manual, Chapter 5 (available at: http://www.dot.state.mn.us/accessmanagement/resources.html) or a similar local guidance,

The annual average daily traffic (AADT) count on Highway 10 at Hancock Street is 17,700 per the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) traffic data website. While specific information from MDOT is not available for Hancock Street, as noted above, the AADT count for the traffic count location closest to the Highway 10 and Hancock Street intersection is 17,700 vehicles per day. Based on the proposed 549 vehicles per day entering or exiting the site per day and the AADT values, NM expects the Project to show about a 1% increase in traffic.

NM expects the maximum hourly traffic count to be 40 vehicles per hour, and the maximum daily traffic count to be 549 vehicles per day. Due to the location of the Project Site and the available public transportation, NM assumes that most employees will drive personal vehicles to work, and the Project will not affect the regional transportation system.

c. Identify measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate project related transportation effects.

Road dust NM will minimize dust at the Project Site by paving all roads. NM will sweep and water the paved roads at the Project Site as necessary and in accordance with its Fugitive Dust Plan to minimize dust. NM will comply with a Fugitive Dust Control Plan (Attachment 3) as part of its air permit. Active measures include sweeping and watering of roads, watering storage piles, and ensuring buildings with recycling recovery activities (i.e., Shredder, MRP) are totally enclosed. Passive measures include paving roads and use of covered conveyors to minimize fugitive dust from transfer operations. NM does not expect nuisance conditions from dust at the Project Site.

19. Cumulative potential effects: (Preparers can leave this item blank if cumulative potential effects are addressed under the applicable EAW Items)

a. Describe the geographic scales and timeframes of the project related environmental effects

that could combine with other environmental effects resulting in cumulative potential effects.

b. Describe any reasonably foreseeable future projects (for which a basis of expectation has been laid) that may interact with environmental effects of the proposed project within the geographic scales and timeframes identified above.

According to the City of Becker, no foreseeable future projects are known at this time.

4-16-18

4-16-18

4-16-18

Figure 4: Post-Project Site Map4-16-18

4-16-18

Figure 6: Project Site Topographic Map 4-16-18

0

1,/\ ..-�

...

)

The Slate or Minnesota and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources makl!s no representations or warranties e,qiressed or Implied, with respa;t ID the use of maps or !lf!0!1'ilphlc datl provided herewf1h n,gardess of ilS lortnat or the means d' Ms transmlsslon. There is no guarantee or rep-esenration ID the user as to the aa:urac;y, OJrffllCY, suitabllty, or relabtlty of this data ror any purpose. The Ll5ef aca,pts the data ·as 1s. •

The Slate of Mlnot.'SOia a:swmes no responsilUity ror loss or c1a.._ 1� as a � of any user relance on 1hls data. All maps and oiner matenal ptoYlded herein ano p,ob.'Cted by copyright.

Extreme c= w.u use, wnng llll! compili\lion of this prodUa. ttov,,i,er, due !D ctwioes In o,'lrlenhlp and the need !(I rely on <Xi!Side inforn,alk>o, ...ars or omissions may ..ist. If ',1)11 should dlsa7ver ill1 Olle>S1g,t, we encourage '11)11 ID let us know by calng the ONR at l-88&-646-6367 or by e-mail at [email protected].

Note: Elevation Images and= were generated from LIDAR derived elevation surfaces acquired 2007-2012.

-

l\ber\'I\,..<'

OJS 0..3 U

Scale: 1:38,013

Becker

.,

N

i

""

V)

£

�

0

•

1

0

Created on 3/26/2018

4.S,;i 2l' TN

Figure 7: Project Site Soil Map4-16-18

Soil Map-Sherburne Counly, Minnesota

Map Scale: 1 :5,o20 f printed OIi A portral (8.5" X 111 sheet ---====------======� 0 100 D)

---===------======feet 0 200 400 800 1200

Map proJecllon: web Ml!n:alor caner CXlOldi'lall!s: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zooe 15N WGS84

Natural Resources

Conservation Service

Web Soll Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey

431C1Xl 431100 431:!X)

3/26/2018 Page 1 of 3

'49' 23"40"N

Figure 8: Impaired waters within one mile of the facility4-16-18

Figure 9: Wetlands within one mile of the facility4-16-18

Figure 10: Wells within one mile of the facility4-16-18

Figure 11: Wellhead protection areas4-16-18

Figure 12: Existing drainage areas4-16-18

Figure 13: Proposed drainage areas4-16-18

Figure 14: Proposed Becker facility surfacing plan4-16-18

Figure 15: Erosion Control Plan4-16-18

Figure 16 - Northern Metals, LLC - Becker, MN Environmental Assessment Worksheet

MPCA "What's In My Neighborhood" Review

···- ... w

I

I

i

...._. ......... ,i-'Rau!IMU.£

.. -··.....,.-W.-1••

.,__ u, .... , ,_ ·'" -- ��,....,, ... ,.-i.h, __ ........... ,_;,,.,At.-� ··-

............ -.. ···V1'_1:."'lzr.

� WJ1,:1t's In /vly Ne iqhlJorhood �l.o,,s.dl,l,,i,,•1u,,1

·-

• Hat.Mlo(aWate

• bmsttpllonaCJNl'lllP

• SolldWat.

--.. • sm

"- Tanb

• W#lr-..,_.,k

*Red outline indicates proposed project location.

l

Figure 16: What's in My Neighborhood Review4-16-18

4-16-18

4-16-18

/ j

Figure 19: Areas of biodiversity significance in Minnesota 4-16-18

Areas of Biodiversity Significance in Minnesota As determined by the Minnesota Biological Survey

(MBS), 1987 - 2014

'

+ 0 IS JO 60"4dH L--�--·-�-�--•

Boundary Waters Canoe Arna Wilderness Boundary (based on 1978 legialationl

Peatland Watorehed Protec lion Areas in Littlefork Vormlllon Uplands and Agassiz Lowlands ECS Subaecliona 1

MBS Sitea of Bioderaity Significance' • Outstanding Biod,vers1ty Significance'

• High Biodiversity Significance'

Moderate Biodiversity Signilicance'

Area. Where MCBS Sito of Biodlveralty Significance Dale Are Preliminary or Are Nol Currently Available'·'

Large Lakea

0 Ecological Clanllicatlon System (ECSI Subaection Boundaries'

i Ecological Claaaificatlon System (ECSI ' : Section Boundaries'

tr MNDNR

111N11tM �WtfthocJ Pt'�kflonAI tu «o di �J "VlirH "'°'""" p,1,k<.t cJ\,t Scatt\llfto tt1G lhl"-.,., ltOU tnlf ,-, .. f'W $dc-ftl'\c r"lo(tc.lon A,t1 c:ottit hom lt0fl<4r'II dt..-00rMn.l lho Ooiund_,H ol l'lt W41W_lh0cft WN• MIMt>e410 ll'ICbioo efl ••• '�· � ktP,0\4dt en�- �'1'ftOfflOIY'"°P'MN writd Oft 1ft -�IC«tl ., .... (fto,RU\11 (tpcHI Rto),..-no.Jtd.l.,a, flOf 11tt �-�Sy ....... ,.,,�.-- �lHOl't. UN IJtA. t944) ,� � CtOd'I lM 0:,,0 MCI O&,alltt MOit 1Slwof ••"""'61...,._.,..., 1,1gnftcM1to,,...t m.,oN '1'(11'-o tAWIOMM OtQliogilc.llSuwr1�ISt ,, OI IVNt aou. ll'IHod•'- ,.,,. .......... Win �a.'tlth r,1n.-1w �oct .. unv 11'111 m.a)'ooo\lJ.rl 1,tO!JQu.a11tyflft..,.Jll6l'll�1iH, '*' �IL IW9 ltl'lffll)e,. � tN!'lill tO;tltOaUOnl-, lnt\lOr, DotihOll'ltl OI ll4e I .,, dt1trf'l'Wlil0 b:, tl'MW ot ttftll �y n etdtl IO IOtf'H/ 9fUMlll lfft11 of n1M DilOCIIYlrld')I battd Off Ml .... \ollo,tlMOl"l. t\ 1um..,.t11 Wei iift¥1'M1Q-uc,n1, �ft$a.M .... tlN��1*>otV,•--i.MdN,:WMl'IQtot1-.1•---t.AMcloffffltrJ�01•Ai1t•�onlhtN�,ofV,t111,1iro."efrf1t10tdf .. '1119�n&CyolNrr.Ow,-.Clkn1'Mlllllrt..Ul•of ... 1,c9,Mdcoot•II WCl'lln#l911tl111"41,MI f � htll ..,,,_.�� Ill• t,,Ol,lndlll'Mt tc,1'1'1,t� 111• t9Wtwel,<lf 11111, 11dJtd, fo lne:Dpou,,,,. Qi*-I\.IMal IOI! t••iPJ,,1111 Md flil'I ••� In fl•N .,_,""'311,, IN �IY o( ntlrtl �I ON,Vii,,.c,iltaa, b,� lfMi PfitMry UMdon fot Ill�"° t.10. IM 411.11 Dll*-b' ttlltcl Ult a:w'W1tkin otu.11 61 W.emt, OI J.U)S' DddnM ln aretJO'I M'4 taavo Ml Nan C)",11111uoc,i., ",0.1611 IO IIC'CO*.IM k:lrCftll'OOI 10 N WQOUIUiao04' tpci(NI pop� ..-.C. IIN'ft II�� M obt1-I fOf l'Ml•tJ old10 ..,..,'*'11 Pf•�• ,�ool Mh"Mi\a.�1:1 atlfW)'I, bfll•n in. 1H1, follc:Jri,,od II:, 11Ck,,ilhtt1.11No"'1Mt,o,1,1 md •••tom Tw.1• C..-1 RMltO �tlh!il'l.hllt not� 11 tMH (tf 111tl'll"H1 c.'°"'191:t,tt ... ��- IJ ll&MJ wf\lle 4'11111..., pllfll UMU"l1'CI, l"li ... Offfli �tttod ot Oll"'°')"tet Or f'K.t'nilft �I MICII •• fll'-"ll'IQ, O'IOll)IIRllt\l)..Mln- IVloUilf'lltiot """'* lun,tll 0� IJl,..W"t.e,ptdaJ. ,.., 0.�Nl tl'ld n OCOlfftnc,1 cl Mll\i'l!II (Mll\t OCll'N'llnlikl fwi1 ffe100 ilMlf IOt'lllffl � tU• 1.landlfd1.i>p n-.o,ipW'lg Ai-1111111 llt.OI dO•.:i& '"'"'I IM&S Otlthl lil,'lt -�� .,.,.., ..... ra:»rN\1"1du� &Md•'*l�CDllli"119ofl "'"'° 1111 ht lual ltfd. '""'' n• hClbltrtt to, RQ!h, .. ,r,,.,b•nd ,,,,ilt .. h."°'diSOI• rA ...... lf1'10"'7IM'°U, bt.lf,ajl

��=:oa;:,:r::t�;!�nr,:.::: ::·�: �-=:�:::.°::!:,�;:!':: �l

t1attsl � .. lho ,noU oultLa�O •�0-1 ,ot �- ,_,.1,,,1 ... ,,,.nlwnmulJlllf._ -� IN W0,1& rnoUli\lOU 1t,ncGoNU�Dt1 ptot,ft\l

hlh.eat,h1 's1111otH1tr-OIOdlwe1•rt,,., •• -.c:Hl�·on,11!o•l.'O'IWIM,Q.,,.,,,ooad�M,oc.oJM'-AMl'lncM•lll060•'hlofHt!J .. V)'•l.dlf,.,...o/,Na1t��IMJIU.IV)dlo1�11t.Hlf\1�11,ncJIUI� 'S/&n Cl Moo,11,1, tSlodl<tt11h1 S1a,.uk1ru;• ere ''" <.attl*"""' OC1011tt1.v.io1 olt11.,..u,e._._ 1'I06'11t� 61bul>C'G nr.A• •• �1L. Wldl'O, •�• \alt h..,, a llJtllf'O "'°'tMtlf• ,t<4YI,.,11J8S .ail.a dotlon, t(I -P,Olff'IINty' en dtlQo �I o fll4110tlahii� MIYQJ 01 WYl: rDO• llld OD� buJ 010 ilO! t'lnti'IOd lol"'I �H '-0 :J\O 0�1• f'M/ OIOM' .. lnolO ., 1ro flftal(ed 'A.tt,,� M-95 dt&;a .-.noc Qlrt� •'f'Ml1.Wit�IJ11.1u1.....,.,, MJlS k.l,wpll.1.'iOI\AI .,,1 bM.,,,t'OftOuctodnwtl H tttAt .._._.. MOS ....,..,...,.10'9Nfil,....,1:iutd1ta "4l'fllllnol Diftll � 1Soo ltilfp•rtl"IYl'ftdnl 1a.10Mn \414CI.Wo1 I\Wi1 'SM hlfo:111¥wWGn1 &Uf•mllVIIIC:M.IICM)I I\,,_

Figure 20: Natural Communities and Rare Species in Sherburne County 4-16-18

w=:::....:::= la..��

NATURAL COMMUNITIES AND RARE SPEOES OF SHERBURNE COUNTY. MINNESOTA

"'"

1i-1r.'-ll1� 1':lo-Ll�, ;,l,,m.,.c,v,;:r-..1

A/ [pp <.!M:.<l ,,,tnr,l.-r

·-=·---.. -___ -;.-

--- ,� f J �-

,�

?

\

-·-

I � -�li-

\�

j -· .. _,

#I ...

....,.

��

�

·=-•

. I

-:·

�� • ...

fHf OKIGl'\:Al V�GET,\TIO:,,;

Of'iHt--:Rtlt.lll:.'\'E,:rn.1r-.n

T---'-·-- _ ··

•::.- --------·· -·--- -·--- ·-·-. --- ...

-_-_._-_ =-- -·----------� :c .. :-;_-_

•··-·---------- ·"'··· �--

----... -- -- - --

--·· - -- ·- ., ___ -

.. �' -�--'

t

L

,·-,:- -;;;.p;;34: .-_ •. -ca �_______.r...__, ..

�--.'• - ·�

' --·---=:;:=:;:__-· � - ··:.-::=::.::__·----

\.

·�

4

,--

....

·-

-=-=--=:::.·::.::.: ·---... _,_,: .. .'�,--:--:-�·== -�

•·Y>o .... ,-····� ·- .... ,

.... 1 ........ - ..... - -..... _ -- ·-·· -...,_. ------·· -

• ·:;:; .... =�::-:---;;:-=: - __ ......... .

- -·� -· .. - ----··· �-- - _ ...

-�-

- .. .--. .,, -·- ,_.,.

8 :�=-�:: � ... �.�:-;:_-:... - ·-··--"""' -·-·- --.. ..=.--·-

-��·-· ·-:-::-.::6:'::·-··

w----.. --------�

111!1:=.-:-.�-::..�-�- .. 4--

- -··-.... - .. ,,, ·-·-- --- ···--�--..-;::.--

--.----· .... - ...

- ........... _

I:

. ---=- -�-____ ..

�

-.

�·· -- -- �- -,-�-

'..::...·.:.:._:_-_-....:.:.... ·----,

- -- -

4-16-18

4-16-18

4-16-18

ATTACHMENT 24-16-18

4-16-18

ATTACHMENT 44-16-18