6.3. SR 07-09-2012REQUEST FOR ACTION
TO ITEM NUMBER
~Ia~or and Cirn Council 63
AGENDA SECTION MEETING DATE PREPARED BY
~Crork Session Jul~r 9, 2012 Rebecca Haug, En~-ironmental
administrator
ITEM DESCRIPTION REVIEWED By
Coal Tar-Based Sealant (;al Pormer, Citj- administrator
REVIEWED BY
Peter Beck, City ~ttornei
ACTION REQUESTED
Discuss the en~-ironmental effects of using coal tar-based sealer products.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
Coal tar, a byproduct of coal processing, is a sealant used to renew and protect the surface of parking lots
and dri~Tewai s. Though it is more resilient and resistant to petroleum products like gasoline and oil than
other types of sealants, it is also l~io«n to contain high levels of chemicals called pol~cj-clic aromatic
ln~drocarbons (I' CHs). Some P CHs are known human carcinogens. Studies have shown when coal tar-
based sealants are applied them can flake or breakdown and release P CHs that can be deposited into
adjacent land, tracked into homes, and carried b~ surface water il~noff into nearb~r waters. These particles
then accumulate to potentially harmful le~Tels in sediments. This is a growing concern for local
go~Ternments responsible for managing stormwater ponds and disposing of sediments dredged from them
as the sediments mad- require disposal as hazardous «-aste.
Disposal costs of P ~H contaminated sediments depend on the concentration of P CHs in the sediment.
T~-picall~, contaminated sediment is disposed of as a solid waste at a Municipal Solid R'aste (~1ISl~~
landfill that has a liner and a leachate collection system. Disposal costs include testing and laboratory-
anahrsis of the sediment to characterize the waste. Other costs include ezca~ration, transportation, and
tipping fees. The ~1IPC ~ estimates that for metro communities, disposal costs can be as much as
$20,000 per pond when sediment removal projects include significant P_~I contamination and require
disposal at a hazardous ~~aste landfill. For ponds with low to non-detect P ~H contamination, the t~rpical
costs range from $7,000 to $12,000 per pond and the sediments need to be disposed of at an ~IS~ti'
facility.
~lternati~-es to coal tar-based sealer formulations are asphalt-based sealants that ha~-e far lower levels of
P CHs. (attachment 1: ~IPC ~ Coal Tar-based Sealcoat En~-ironmental Concerns). asphalt-based sealers
are readih a~railable. The ~IPC_~ has compiled a list of home impro~-ement stores which ha~re stopped
selling coal tar-based sealant and which cari-~~ asphalt based sealant instead. This list includes stores like
SCE Hardware, Home Depot, Lowe's, and ~Ienards.
In ~Ia~ 2009, the 1innesota Legislat~ire restricted state agencies from purchasing coal tar sealants (2009
Session La«-s, Chapter 172, and HF1231, sections -4, 26, and 28). The 20091egislation restricts ~llinnesota
state agencies from purchasing undiluted coal tar sealant effecti~-e Juhr 1, 2010. In addition, 20 Minnesota
rawEnlo ar
N:',Public Bodies ~Ctty C~unal'~,Council RCS. agenda Pacbet ~)`-09-30L`.6.3 Coal Tac Sealantdoct ~~~~
cities ha~Te passed their own ordinances to ban the use of coal tar-based sealers within their jw-isdiction.
(_~ttachment 2: 1lu~nesota Cities with Ban). The Lague of Minnesota Cities has de~-eloped a sample
ordinance for use b~ cities that ma~wish to restrict the use of coal tar-based sealants. (~ttlchment 3:
L\IC Sample Ordinance)
Because adopting an ordinance banning coal tar-based sealants main affect current blacktop sealer
practices within the cit<~s jurisdiction, st<Ztt will send public notices of the ordinance to an~r sealcoat
applicators operating in the Cit<r of Elk Ri~-er, independent retail establishments selling sealants, and
general contractors that have conducted business within the city. The responses to the public notices will
be compiled ~u~d presented at a future council meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
N ~_~
ATTACHMENTS
^ ~IPC ~ Coal Tar-based sealcoat Enti ironmental Concerns
^ Minnesota Cities with Ban
^ LAIC Sample Ordinance
^ Packet from city resident
ID-Ct1011 Motion br Second br Vote
Follow Up
N:~~Pubhc Bodies CitcrConn~il~,Counal RC~,_lgenda Pacbet 0 U~) 3U12~~.63 Coal Tac Sealantdoc~:
~lir~r~esl~ta
~~I I uti+~r~
~C~rttrl
A~~n~y
Coal Tar-based Sealcoat
Environmental concerns
wq-strm4-12 September 2009
f ~ ou decide to Sealcoat ~rour asphalt
diiti~e~~ a~ this rear, these are a feR°
things ~~ou should kno« . Sealcoating
makes old asphalt look ne« and protects its
surface, but there are serious environmental
concerns with its use.
Sealcoat comes iii t«~o basic vai7eties: coal
tar-based and asphalt-based. The coal tar
variety- is more resilient, but it contains
much higher levels of a class of chemicals
called PAHs (poh-c~ clic aromatic
hti-drocarbons) that harm fish, and «ith
prolonged eiposure, pose a risk of cancer
in humans (see Figure 1).
Environmental problems
Coal tar is a «~aste material generated in the
conversion of coal to coke. Manufacturers
choose coal tar for Sealcoat because of its
resistance to petroleum products like
gasoline and oil, wl>ich drip from cars quid
deteriorate asphalt surfaces. In time,
sunlight and vehicle traffic wears do~~n
Sealcoat and Sealcoat flakes are ~~-ached
a~~~a~~ b~- rain or carried a« a~- b~T wind,
contaminating stonm~-ater ponds. streams
and lakes ~~=ith PAHs.
PAHs cause tumors in some fish, disrupts
the reproduction of aquatic organisms, and
causes some «ater-bottom species to avoid
sediment altogether. Health risks to
humans related to PAHs are based on the
length of exposure to vapors or sediments
contaminated «ith PAHs.
PAH Concentrations
Coal tar contains as much as 30 percent
PAHs by ~~eight. A stud~~ in Austin, Texas,
compared the level of PAHs in ~~ ater
coming off parking lots without Sealcoat to
«~ater coining off parking lots coated «~ith
asphalt- and coal-tar Sealcoat (Figure 2).
Figure 1: Relative amounts of PAHs in
Sealcoat products
- ~
_.~`.
~li~~~t
~~~lial# bx~~ ~
r~
An Austin, Texas, study determined that
Sealcoat products based on coal tar
contained up to 1,000 times more PAHs than
asphalt-based products. Consider asphalt-
based Sealcoat if you choose to coat your
driveway.
Figure 2: Concentrations of PAHs in runoff
Asphalt-based Sealcoat runoff (B) can contain
10 times more PAHs than an uncoated
driveway (A) and runoff from acoal-tar
sealcoated driveway (C) may have
concentrations of PAH 65 times higher than
an uncoated driveway.
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette Rd. N., St. Paul, MN 55155-4194 www.pca.state.mn.us
651-296-6300 800-657-3864 TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 Available in alternative formats
'~"
The sttidv revealed that the asphalt-based sealcoat runoff
contained 10 tunes snore PAH than the uncoated parking
lot and the coal-tar sealcoat runoff had concentrations of
PAH that «ere 65 times higher than the uncoated lot.
Maintenance expenses
Besides the health effects and the danger to the
environment, PAHs are making routine maintenance of
stoi7n« ater ponds b~- cities and to~~mships many, many
tunes more expensive because sediment with high-
enough concentrations of PAHs must be disposed of
differently.
In Minnesota, when some cities removed sediment from
their stoi7nwater ponds as part of regular maintenance,
they found elevated levels of PAHs. This discovei-~r
required them to find special disposal areas, costing
them many thousands of dollars more.
Current regulation
Because of the enviromnental problems associated with
PAHs, the City of Austin, Teias, Dane County,
Wisconsin, and Washington D.C. have banned use of
coal tar-based sealcoat iu their jurisdictions (asphalt-
based sealcoat may still be used).
Recent legislation passed in Minnesota bans the
purchase of coal-tar sealcoat products by state agencies
by July 1, 2010. Recently, two national home-
Coal-tar-based Driveway sealcoat wq-strm4-12 September 2009
page 2
improvement retailers, Lowe's and Hoene Depot, took
coal tar-based sealcoat off their shelves. Check «ith ti-our
local unit of government to see if there are and,
restrictions.
Make the right choice
The best choice may be to not sealcoat your driveway at
all. But if you do choose to sealcoat, study labels
carefully to be sure to find an asphalt-based product.
Lower concentrations of PAHs in waten~,a~Ts will
prevent costly maintenance for your city and keep
waten~-ays safe for fish and other aquatic organisms.
If you have leftover material after sealing your
driveway, you can re-use or recycle it at your
community's household hazardous ~yaste facility. To
find your local facility.
visit: «~~w.pca.state.mn.us/waste/lilies
References
Van Metre, P.C., Mahler, B.J., Scoggins, M., and
Hamilton, P.A., 2006. Parking Lot Sealcoat: A
Major Source of Polvcyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons
(PAHs) in Urban and Suburban Environments. A
USGS report prepared in cooperation with the City_
of Austili. Teias.
Mine§~[3 Pallldtl4f~
Cantrnl,~c~n~y
Minnesota Cities (20 Total
1. White Bear Lake
2. Roseville
3. Maplewood
4. Grove Heights
5. Falcon Heights
6. Buffalo
7. Rosemount
8. Cannon Fall
9. Centerville
10. Circle Pines
11. Eden Prairie
12. Edina
13. Golden Valley
14. Inver Grove Heights
15. Little Canada
16. New Hope
17. Newport
18. Prior Lake
19. Shoreview
20. Vadnais Heights
LMC SAMPLE ORDINANCE
A CITY ORDINANCE REGULATING THE USE OF COAL TAR-BASED
SEALER PRODUCTS
INTRODUCTION AND INSTRUCTIONS:
This ordinance contains a number of provisions a city may adopt. A city wishing to adopt this
ordinance should review it with the city attorney to determine which provisions are suited to the
city's circumstances. A city can modify this ordinance by eliminating provisions that concern
activities it does not seek to regulate. The city attorney should review any modifications to
ensure they conform to state law.
Tlus model ordinance is drafted in the form prescribed by Minn. Stat. § 412.191, subd. 4, for
statutory cities. Home rule charters often contain provisions concerning how the city may enact
ordinances. Home n~le charter cities should consult their charter and city attorney to ensure that
the city complies with all charter requirements. If your city has codified its ordinances, a copy of
any ordinance regulating the use of coal tar-based sealers must be furnished to the county law
library or its designated depository pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 415.021.
This ordinance may affect current blacktop sealer practices within the city's jurisdiction.
Therefore, prior to ordinance adoption, the city may want to provide commercial sealer
companies, city residents, and other interested persons an opportunity to provide input.
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE USE OF COAL TAR-BASED SEALER
PRODUCTS WITHIN THE CITY OF ,MINNESOTA
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE.
The City of understands that lakes, rivers, streams and other bodies of water
are natural assets which ei~llance the environmental, recreational, cultural and economic
resources and contribute to the general health and welfare of the commuiuty.
The use of sealers on asphalt driveways is a common practice. However, scientific
studies on the use of driveway sealers have demonstrated a relationship between stormwater
nu7off and certain health and environmental concerns.
The purpose of this ordinance is to regulate the use of sealer products within the City of
in order to protect, restore, and preserve the quality of its waters.
SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS.
Except as may otherwise be provided or clearly implied by context, all terms shall be
given their commonly accepted defintions. For the purpose of this ordinance, the following
definitions shall apply unless the context clear indicates or requires a different meaning:
ASPHALT-BASED SEALER. Apetroleum-based sealer material that is commonly used
on driveways, parking lots, and other surfaces and which does not contain coal tar.
COAL TAR. A byproduct of the process used to refine coal.
UNDILUTED COAL TAR-BASED SEALER. A sealer material containing coal tar that
has not been mixed with asphalt and which is commonly used on driveways, parking lots and
other surfaces.
CITY. The City of
MPCA. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
PAHs. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons. A group of organic chemicals formed during
the incomplete burning of coal, oil, gas, or other organic substances. Present in coal tar and
believed harmful to humans, fish, and other aquatic life.
SECTION 3. PROHIBITIONS.
A. No person shall apply any undiluted coal tar-based sealer to any driveway, parl~ing
lot, or other surface within the City of
B. No person shall contract with any commercial sealer product applicator, residential or
commercial developer, or any other person for the application of any undiluted coal tar-based
sealer to any driveway, parlang lot, or other surface within the City.
C. No commercial sealer product applicator, residential or commercial developer, or
other similar individual or organization shall direct any employee, independent contractor,
volunteer, or other person to apply any undiluted coal tar-based sealer to any driveway, parking
lot, or other surface within the City.
SECTION 4. EXEMPTION.
Upon the express written approval from both the City and the MPCA, a person
conducting bona fide research on the effects of undiluted coal tar-based sealer products or PAHs
on the environment shall be exempt from the prohibitions provided in Section 3.
SECTION 5. ASPHALT-BASED SEALCOAT PRODUCTS.
The provisions of this ordinance shall only apply to use of undiluted coal tar-based sealer
in the City and shall not affect the use of asphalt-based sealer products within the City.
SECTION 6. PENALTY.
Any person convicted of violating any provision of this ordinance is guilty of a
misdemeanor and shall be puiushed by a fine not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or
imprisonment for not more than ninety (90) days, or both, plus the costs of prosecution in either
case.
SECTION 7. SEVERABILITY.
If any provision of this ordinance is found to be invalid for any reason by a court of
competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining provisions shall not be affected.
SECTION 8. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This ordinance becomes effective on the date of its publication, or upon the publication
of a summary of the ordinance as provided by Minn. Stat. § 412.191, subd. 4, as it may be
amended from time to time, which meets the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 331A.01, subd. 10, as
it may be amended from time to time.
Passed by the Council this day of , 20
Mayor
Attested:
Clerk
Dear Elk River council Member:
Last week a man in a truck came to my home and offered to "seal-coat" my
driveway for a pretty reasonable price. I asked him is he used coal-tar sealant and
he smirked and said yes, he did. I asked him if he was aware of how dangerous
this was to the environment and us. f-1e basically indicated that he did not care. He
also told me he had just done seven driveways in our development. We live in the
Park Point Development in Elk River which abuts Klever Marsh.
Goal Tar is a toxic compound that is carcinogenic and linked to several cancer and
other health problems. Two articles in the star Tribune (April 21, 20~ 2 and October
~, ~J1 # enclosed) reported that the i~se ofi th6:~ chemical on driveways in the city
have rendered some of the inner city ponds and lakes "'uninhabitable". Fifteen
cities in Minnesota have a ban on coal tar sealants. Even breathing the dust from
this sealant is dangerous. Are we using this on our playgrounds and parking lots
as well?
There are alternatives and in the interest of our health and our lakes and rivers
please consider banning this harmful sealant! Might we be listed among those
cities that are not only progressive but as our slogan suggests (Powered by Nature)
also a guardian of nature.
sincerely hopeful
~ n ~
~, ,~....~. ~,_ t=~~
v'
Pat Roles
Elk River
v
;. ~ ~ ~ '
Ar€icle by: ~A;..a~ei~ l~i..A~{~
Star ~"ribune
c~ctober ~ , 2~i ~ R - : ~ £~ €~
is, the ~ mants~s since'~l~ite dear l~asce became the first iinnesota city to forbid a cowman type of driveway sealant,
about a dozen others have followed, as evidence mounts that chemicals from the seaiants are creating a hazardous anti
expensive problem in storm~water ponds.
'l-he bans on coal-t:ar seaiants apply to homeowners who seal their own driveways ants contractor s who apply seaiants
commerciail~y. both are now expected to choose safer, asphalt based sealers.
Although the sealant industry disputes the findings, research by the Minnesota saollution Control Agency snows a
connection between coal-tar sealants pu€: on driveways anti parking iota and the A='Ahes l;~oiy aromatic hydrocarbons that
are showing up in cit~r storm-water ponds, said ton merger, state program administrator of storm4water policy in the
-'CA's municipal division. the ~'Ahes are believed to be harmful to humans, ~~sh and other art~atic ilfe.
""data we have collected over the last year indicate that there is a good percentage of these poiiatants tied to coal~tar
seaiants," verger said.
" ~ he l%v~~'CA wll= continue to support municipalities who choose to phase Out the use of coal-tar-based sealants to reduce a
known source of contamination to storm-water collection systems," he said.
nth an estimated 2~,~ storm ponces in the metro area, cities are discovering that many pontes contain i~Ahes. because
the INCA repuires cities to keep storm ponds clean and in good working order, and to dispose of contaminated pond
sediment in specific ways, some cities face astronomical storm-water costs.
indeer~, the cities that !lave outlawed the sealants have done so era becorne eligible for li'CA cleanup grants.
Circle Fines put a ban in place and received 5,~Q from the state to help pay ~ l~l~,0i~~ in pond sediment disposal costs,
said City Administrator Jim l~einath.
Inver drove heights, the latest city to forbid use of the seaiants, also is counting on a grant aver its ban takes effect, City
engineer `l^om l~aldunski toil City Council members.
After testing dust 'l2 of the city's 57 storm-wafer ponds, he has found three ponds with contaminated sediments -- two with
such high levels of la,~,i•les that the`y' must be disposed of in a sanitary landfill at a cost ranging from e2t~,~~9 to ~~,f~C?4.
"very city is in the same situation -- it's a huge problem," said ~}t#hite bear l-ake public works director mark i~urc.
Before the end Of the year, an 1.~~~:A wOCk Cr01~ IS ex~eCted ~0 release neW reSeSrGh and reCOrnmendasOns ~0 IVe Ci~:ieS
further options for disposing of pond sediments.
industry dispr~tes l'CA claim
`i"~e ICA is taiicing with the ~'avement Coatings ~'echnoiogy Council -~ which represents the sealant industry _- in hopes
of encouraging the group to voluntarily phase out the material.
Anne iael-luray, executive director of the group, said the council will look over the ~t~CA's latest research, but "it remains
our view -- and i think we have the science o back it up -- that the original claim made by €I~CA is incorrect."
_..,,aust anti wood smoke are greater sources o ~'ai~es than cool-tar seaiants, L ei-i~ray said. "°i'he bans wiii not d
what they think they wiii do."
0
but outlawing the sealants has worker weii for y'ite dear Lake, lurch said. "r=rom our ~ers~aective there
side.° wasn`t a down
~o cooperate with the ban, many large retai?ers have taken caai-tar sealants off their shelves anti re~iaced th
asphalt-based sealants, he said. em with
~,cceptabie products carry a label that says "alpha€t immersion," he said.
businesses also switched to a;; Whait products, lurch saki. "t"he sealant induSt!~~ was ve--y concerned, but i talked t
private commercial guys doing ~ ~~`` Jations on driveways. they told me that they've oat aiE types of oroducts " o
`fhe cost of disposing of sedimen ~ starts when a city biros someone to take a sample and test it. Meaner sediments ca
be scooped out of ~aonds arrd spread an the ground as ~ ii, but costs climb if it must tze taken o a landfill i~er n
ger saio.
given if cities coud afford it, there isn't roam in lane ~ s to accept ail the contaminated pond sediments.
`:/`kith that in mind, y`tite dear Lake is now testing the prospects for storing sediments in a berm c=os
where they were removed. eta ~/arney Lake,
"`;/`Jd wiii deposit the sediments, Cover it over, seed it and puf a trail on top," torch said. if follow-R~o monitoring shows that
the contaminants stay put and don't become a problem, wiii be aTess-expensive option for hanc ~:~ the Sediments, urc4°~
~ait~i,
Laurie Make ®g52-76-327
~ 2011 Soar Tribune
F-;
Art~cEe ~~: ~As„a€ ifs. ~sv.A~s~
Star °l~ribune
Apri' 2'l, 2'12 - ~;~~~ ~'
~osemqunt w'~i add its name tq a iEs~ q about 'I5 Cat=es rnat ban a
common type oo driveway sealant to stop chemicals from running
a into norm-water ponds anti creating expensive and hazardous
poi=utic~n problems.
A neW grdpnanGe that gees Intq eeCt £his weep prghibitS the Use
q?` Cgal mar Seaiant~a t'qr b~aC~Ctgp Ciriveways, taar~cing i0ts and ether
surfaces.
~osemqunt residents will be expected to use °° and hire
contractors who use -- safer, asphalt-based sealers. A vioiation
would be punishable as a misdemeanor.
~~he t~iinnesota PoSlution Controi Agency has found that coal-tar
sealants are a fey contributor tq PAI-ales ~polycyciic aromatic
hydrocarbgnw ; gat are showing ~~ in norm-water holding ponds
rn tinnesbta. ' ~~e PAles mai{e the si[t that builds yap in storm-
water ponds bath hazardous and expensive to dispgse off.
fans by cities on cgal tar seaPants heip reduce this pol€utant, said
Don verger, SPCA program administratgr qt' norm-water policy.
"~'he longer that coal-tar sealants are Taut down on hard sur€aces,
~~@ more it eXt"ends the prObierri.° can o~ ~~~n stormrwa ear~poil.~c s~aar3raa~es~causi o~ saa'ants
expens?v~ anc' hazarCous prc~a'e~~s.
Other cries that have banned cgai-tar sealants incii.~de Inver
~!erry : got, Star -i ribuno
Grove I-leigh~s, prior Lase, Edina, l=alcon I-leighs, Golden Valley,
Lithe Canada, ta.plewood, I\lew I-~o€ae, osevi(le, VaCinais
heights and ~',Ihite dear La~e_
he ~~CA cqunted it a mayor victory in larch when ~#e~ lack In~erna~ional, a lame national rancl~iser o~ pavement seal_
coming based in pagan, announced tha it would voiuntariiy phase out coa=-tar-based sealants nor all 25 Minnesota
Franchises this year and change tq a sayer asphalt emulsion by 2~~ ~.
"Coal-tar residues that can contaminate norm-water ponds may become a thing of the past thanks to a voluntary phase-out
by ....~et~iac~ International," the iIPCA said on its website in t~larch.
"~1`Jhen an industry leader embraces science-based recgmmendatigns die this, it really helps," SPCA Commissioner Paul
Aasen said.
An extensive survey by the t~r'CA found that the aniy retailers still selling coal tar-based driveway seaiers are dears and
I-hardware i~lank, Rosemount Public "J`~`gr~s Director Andrew ~rotzler reposed tq the Cit4~ Council April ~,
oser~~ount stag found no retailers seliing the coal tar prgducts in Rosemount.
't'he i~PCA soli has no idea. hqw many o the 23,~~ storm ponds in the metro area contain pollutants, verger said. "fie
don't. have an answer tq hoW many are Contaminated tp the point where their sediment needs tq gq to a municipal solid
W~st4 i~rl' ~~
~i~i~s ere i~a ~~ rrlit~s~ o~ ~°itina ~ sl~rvey o~ ~ieir iaoncis ~o report ~;ileir nt~mi~er ~nci cani~ion ~o ~i~~e s~e~e. C:~nce ~~F.
in~orrne~ion comes in, ~i~e sire o ei~e norm pond poiia~ion proiem wiii iao deer, ~a~x w~te~ ~o o i~o-~~ i~ ilea nod been
eressed, erer s~ici.
i».ea~rie i~i<e ®52-~~6-:~2~7
~~ 2Q11 Star Tribune