Loading...
5 PCSR 12-28-1993 \\ek? ITEM 5 ty of TO: PLANNING COMMISSION �lk/ FROM: STEPHEN ROHLF, BUILDING & ZONING River ADMINISTRATOR DATE: DECEMBER 28, 1993 _ L SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE FACILITY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT RENEWAL BY NORTHERN STATES POWER (NSP) / PUBLIC HEARING, CASE NO. CU 87-01 ISSUE NSP is requesting a two year renewal of their conditional use permit to process municipal solid waste into refuse derived fuel (RDF) . The City Council will also consider a solid waste facility license for this plant. LOCATION East of US Highway 10 and north of 165th Avenue ( 10700-165 Avenue NW, Elk River, MN) . ATTACHMENTS Location Map, Site Plan, Correspondence from NRG dated November 30, 1993, Memo from City Engineer Terry Maurer dated December 7, 1993, Memo from City Environmental Consultant John Lichter dated December 22, 1993, and a revised conditional use permit. SITE ZONING The zoning of NSP ' s site is Solid Waste Facility (SWF) with an underlying Light Industrial ( I1) zone. BACKGROUND NSP made application in 1986 and first received approval of a conditional use permit for a solid waste facility to process municipal solid waste into refuse derived fuel in 1987 . According to NSP' s conditional use permit, it must be renewed with the City every two years . The City Council also acts on a solid waste facility license every two years . NSP also needs a license from Sherburne County and a permit from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) to operate their facility. Staff has coordinated with Sherburne County Environmental Officer Dave Lucas regarding NSP' s permit. TRAFFIC 411 Staff has asked Terry Maurer to review certain traffic issues regarding NSP ' s plant. These issues are addressed in Mr. P.O. Box 490 • 13065 Orono Parkway • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420 • Fax: (612) 441-7425 Northern States Power, CUP Page 2 December 28, 1993 • Maurer' s memo. Staff does not believe that these traffic issues warrant changes to roads or the operation of NSP' s plant at this time, with the possible exception of #3 of Mr. Maurer' s memo, an eastbound acceleration lane on Highway 10, opposite 165th Avenue. Mr. Maurer is trying to get a count on how many loaded trucks head eastbound on Highway 10 before making a final recommendation on this acceleration lane. Staff will update the Planning Commission on this issue at Tuesday night' s meeting. GROUND WATER The City requires that NSP test run-off from their facility three times during the year after a rain fall (spring, summer, and fall) . These samplings have shown no exceedences in standards . However, the Department of Health has raised a concern with the lead level in NSP ' s potable water supply. Staff believes this problem is caused by NSP ' s plumbing and not ground water contamination. We will follow-up with NSP to the conclusion of this issue. FENWAL SYSTEM The NSP processing plant grinds municipal solid waster inside of bunkers to produce RDF. The nature of this process can • cause explosions because of improper waste contained in the waste stream. To counteract these explosions, the bunkers are armed with a Fenwal System. This system instantly reacts to an explosion with a counter explosion. NSP has had ten Fenwal System discharges this year. The Fenwal System did its job and reduced the damage due to these explosions and kept subsequent fires to a minimum. Although this seems like a high number of incidences, staff does not view it as a problem, but rather, that this extremely sensitive system is doing its job. The NSP plant is also diked so that any fire suppression water that may be produced is contained within the building. Because of the concern with CFC' s, NSP has switch from a halon to a sodium bicarbonate Fenwal System. SPOT CHECKS The real key to reducing the number of explosions at the plant is to keep improper items out of the waste stream. Staff has inspected the NSP plant several times in the past year. Staff has checked the work of the grapple operator who removes improper waste prior to processing and the NSP employees who periodically spot check loads of waste as they are being delivered. The City' s license requires that these spot checks • be done and if possible, the generator of improper waste is identified and prosecuted. Staff wants to stress that NSP needs to keep up with these spot checks . Northern States Power, CUP Page 3 December 28 , 1993 • DUST COLLECTION SYSTEM The grinding of waste into RDF can produce large amounts of dust . NSP has a dust collection system that filters this dust. In the last year, NSP has modified this system by removing every other filter. They indicated this was necessary since items were getting stuck between the filters and reducing the system' s efficiency. This situation will be followed-up by performance testing on March 1, 1994 , to prove whether or not the removal of these filters aided in dust collection. TRANSFER OF PERMIT NSP is proposing that NRG, Inc . , a wholly owned subsidiary of NSP, takes over the operations of the RDF processing facility. Representatives from NSP/NRG can explain their need to do this at Tuesday night ' s meeting. Staff was concerned with losing NSP as the ultimate party responsible for the operations of the facility. NSP/NRG is proposing to alleviate staff ' s concerns by having NSP co-sign the City' s permit, indicating that they will ultimately stand behind the operations at the plant. RECOMMENDATION City staff has had a good relationship working with NSP and has • found them very cooperative. Staff has no problem recommending approval of a two year renewal of their conditional use permit to operate a solid waste facility with the following conditions : 1 . THE CITY ENGINEER FINDS AN EASTBOUND ACCELERATION LANE ON HIGHWAY 10, OPPOSITE 165TH AVENUE, IS NOT NEEDED OR THAT THIS LANE IS CONSTRUCTED IF THE ENGINEER FINDS IT IS NEEDED. 2 . THE POTABLE WATER ISSUE (LEAD) IS RESOLVED TO STAFF' S SATISFACTION. This condition would not would not take an amendment to NSP ' s conditional use permit. 3 . NSP ' S DUST COLLECTION SYSTEM MEET STATE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS . This condition does not take an amendment to NSP ' s conditional use permit. 4 . NRG BE NAMED AS THE PERMITEE ON THE CITY' S CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND THAT NSP CO-SIGNS THE PERMIT. If the transfer from NSP to NRG falls through, staff recommends the two year renewal of this permit be in the name of NSP without additional meetings . • J7-------. ----71...___• 1 r.__—________, - ,.,______, _ x_____ Y3elv . „ • 1 yi „ x A • 1 _ " r ---) (---- i 1 . x I 1 e _ ... I x C) 1 . I I 1 • - — SXDt• x m li\N:-1111 1\s':SNDA4112Isv41.,... I . LI r. L I X I )5g-g i 1 l L7 Pi...• • • X I CC ...- 1. \ \ ..,,• . \ ...,.... . • 1 \ 1 .-1_,..-,_;•< . ' X , , ..,...-,..) .,.., 1 , I x 0-§ 1 8 • . I I t:',0 \ ,...-•Y l 47 ..---1.7-",,--- • • • 0(4.i 1 ! I. I L4r7' l gP7' I CiDiei•:-- Z 1 'eJz' 0 114 U to, I .., . z 0 1:3 I IaIPA 2% •c.1 ,-, , me -- • 0 z- ZcLic C_JwCh . <co..... . 1 . . . ...,.0 ,.... , 1 tdc> \ ,,,,,, 0 • -9. Lill . 1 0. 1 L.81.3 C) . wk u., S.tg.-7\-- ‘,,v, . WO LI...1 0 w . ET w .6% 1.1 oc— c. — — 0 Mill 40 -i. ,-III\ ilk lili\k' V32:1V— . 1 x_ cr..% c. • • L..1 I I C *_, 0 t•\ tgr7///////////IL I X '7, CC% 5 i iniinind s, ......, ..„, Ul , „ \\ (.97.--------- -,,..-.....„ DNIIIXerdx1--•••- I i • % 111.1,01.11,1,illot Z 1 (......)) ,,. 1 1. ;2 ) % ilii,../ H w, 0 . . x ...s.'i- • 1 ....-- I , I it,Ig'il . ' ,,, -67.1,. . ... ........ ! I I x . I 1 , mo / Neoz„ i i . • . 0-1Th..., gx<OL- ,CC.C.X ... . , .. I X I ••••11. I 1 \ \ _1 . i-- _____ . x , • ! I 68 ....-.., I x 66o • Id ...,o .0 Q.. . - \''..----------..„.............„...\\ I 1 . I I II • . ! L , . . . '• ........____.. %�_K-OU L.10., �—%--%—x— I Du Ow 0 \ / SSVdAE 31Vos i -(-------..--- ----`C >Jn ! AC'a 7.V.— w 4- ---r -- x�n_?-3—I__:r_.:sh / SSVdAfi 3lV'JS �\ x w / N \ / YJ \ \q (!! w \ C Y.,_ E� Nr sU I V ', Naw NIjO 'UN \ Uig G �� aM$ \I 1 4 4 1 -0 I 7\E I 1 I . 1 1 I / I 11 :-.D S33A��du; s,x�zul� � fi / w UN U Y h G �Nr X I LL ° au i IA" §¢:2 - I 1 3 n a VVN,a ' I i iI 111�> o d 1 Ott 1 I % I 1 9� I I i:i 414 1 I ILt -, ii ' i 1 I 1 I 1 „:// % .) t I I 1 I 1 1 I i 1 I \ 1 I t X I La U 3 ZZ� Jff Z� _5 I VW i /. 10 N ? I / X I 7 Er /' ea • IRS Energy,Inc Elk River-Resource Recovery 10700 165th Avenue NW Elk River,MN 55330 Telephone(612)441-3800 Fax November 30, 1993 Mr. Pat Klaers, City Administrator City of Elk River P.O. Box 490 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, MN 55330 Dear Mr. Klaers: RE: Elk River Resource Recovery Facility Application for Conditional Use Permit & Solid Waste License Renewal Pursuant to Part 604.14 of the City of Elk River Ordinance, Northern States Power Company (NSP) is submitting this letter of application • for the renewal of the Conditional Use Permit and Solid Waste License for the Elk River Resource Recovery Facility. We recently reviewed Mr. Steven Rohlf's letter of November 3, 1993 advising us that the transfer of the City's License and Conditional Use Permit from NSP to NRG would be considered at the City Council's January 1994 meeting. Unfortunately, we are attempting to transfer the Elk River Resource Recovery facility assets (identified in our October 27 , 1993 letter to you) prior to the end of this year. In order to do so, we must have a more affirmative statement regarding the City's Administration's support for the transfer, than that which was contained in Mr. Rohlf's letter. We are currently talking with Steve about the City's requirements/limitations in providing such a statement. There has been one amendment to the Conditional Use Permit since the last renewal. On March 15, 1993, the City Council approved an amendment allowing municipal solid waste (MSW) to be delivered to the facility by transfer trailers between the hours of 6 a.m. and 9 p.m. Monday through Saturday. A stipulation that no hauling to the facility be done between the hours of 5 p.m. and 7 p.m. on Friday evenings during May 1 through October 1 was included in this amendment. Two changes have been made to the site during the 1992-1993 period. The first change was the enclosing of the dust collection dust return • system. This change was made to prevent the escape of fugitive material onto the site. The second change was an extension to the • Page 2 sanitary drain field which was completed this fall. This change was necessitated when it was discovered that the drainfield wasn't able to handle the facility sewage volume. Investigation revealed that the number of employees currently on the facility site was greater than original design and the individual employee usage of potable water was higher than anticipated. The following statistics have been achieved at the facility since the first full year of operation in 1990. TONS OF MATERIAL (to date) 1990 1991 1992 1993 Municipal Solid Waste 409,983 414,031 427,849 390,000 Refuse Derived Fuel 292,856 303,845 319,680 311,000 Ferrous 15,740 15,988 15,156 13,000 Residue 60,643 72, 549 67 ,927 44,000 • If you have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact me at 441-3800. Sincerely, � r Glen Kaas Plant Manager cc: Steven Rohlf, City of Elk River R. J . Will J . W. Weinhold John C. Lichter, P.E. 11110 DEC 9 1993 • IllSt CONSULTING ENGINEERS December 7, 1993 File: 230-100-30 Mr. Steve Rohlf Building & Zoning Administrator City of Elk River CIVIL ENGINEERING: 13065 Orono Parkway Elk River, MN 55330 ENVIRONMENTAL RE: RDF PLANT TRAFFIC ISSUES MUNICIPAL Dear Mr. Rohlf: PLANNING As you requested, I have done a brief review of the four traffic issues you raised relative to the RDF plant. Given the short period of time, we have not been able to do any in-depth STRUCTURAL analysis. However, I will give you my thoughts on each of those issues. They are as follows: SURVEYING 1. TH 101 Traffic Concerns TRAFFIC As we have discussed before, I do not believe that restricting the RDF traffic to TRANSPORTATION specific hours outside of the peak traffic times on TH 101 or restricting the RDF traffic from utilizing TH 101 will make any kind of significant impact on the current traffic conditions on TH 101. I believe that the number of vehicles headed for the RDF plant is minimal at best, compared to the total traffic on TH 101 at any given time. Therefore, it would be my recommendation to not restrict the amount nor the times that RDF traffic may utilize TH 101. 2. Eastbound TH 10 Left Turn Lane You had indicated that when more than one tractor-trailer was stopped in the left 1326 Energy Park Drive turn lane waiting to turn eastbound onto 165th, they oftentimes are partially blocking the eastbound through lane of TH 10. In reviewing the plans for the construction St.Paul,MN 55108 of that left turn lane from 1990, the total length is 400 feet plus a taper section of 612-644-4389 approximately 180 feet. I would assume that these tractor-trailers would fall in a Fax:612-644-9446 total length of 60 to 80 feet; therefore, at least three to four of these types of vehicles ought to be able to line up and stop in the left turn lane without blocking the through lane on TH 10. Attached to this letter is a copy of Plan Sheet #3 of 4 •9800 Shelard Parkway from the 1990 construction of the improvements at this intersection. This will give Minneapolis,MN 55441 you the specific detail on the length of the turn lane in question. 612-546-0432 Fax:612-544-6398 TJM:tp 100-0705.dec Mr. Steve Rohlf • December 7, 1993 Page Two 3. Eastbound TH 10 Acceleration Lane The next issue you asked about was the desirability of constructing an acceleration lane for vehicles headed eastbound on TH 10 from 165th Avenue. As you are aware, and as is also shown on the attached Plan Sheet, an acceleration lane was constructed for westbound traffic coming from 165th Avenue on TH 10. That acceleration lane is approximately one-quarter mile long and had a total cost three years ago of approximately $35,000-$40,000. There is no doubt that an acceleration lane for eastbound TH 10 would be of benefit to those large and loaded vehicles leaving the plant trying to merge with traffic on eastbound TH 10. The real question that I do not have sufficient information to answer at this point in time is what is the cost benefit ratio. If there is a limited number of large vehicles that would actually use this acceleration lane, there may not be sufficient benefit to justify an expenditure of that amount of money. If there are a substantial number of vehicles making this movement, then clearly there would be a cost benefit ratio to justify that type of expenditure. 4. TH 169 Crossover at UPA • Although a full crossover on TH 169 would keep vehicle traffic between the RDF and UPA plants off of some local roads and away from the TH 10/Main Street intersection, it does create some other problems. Basically, this proposal would require large, fully loaded tractor-trailers to come up the TH 10 off-ramp at TH 169, reach the acceleration lane, and immediately begin to cross two lanes of traffic to reach the left turn lane at UPA. This would likely be viewed as very negative by MnDOT due to the large number of conflicting vehicle movements it adds to a relatively short stretch of trunk highway. I hope that this quick analysis and comments on these four traffic issues are helpful. Given more time, we could certainly provide more in-depth information on any or all of these issues. Please let me know how you would like us to proceed. Sincerely, MSA, CONSULTING ENGINEERS 2 124 f !, Terry J. Maurer, P.E. Attachment i TJM:tp 100-0705.dec 12/22/93 10:23 12612 559 2202 B.A. LIESCH Z002/003 • LIEXH - B.A. LIESCH ASSOCIATES,INC, 13400 15TH AVE.N. MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55441 612/559-1423 FAX;612/559-2202 MEMORANDUM TO: STEVEN ROHLF - CITY OF ELK RIVER FROM: JOHN LICHTER - B.A. LIESCH ASSOCIATES DATE: DECEMBER 22, 1993 RE: RENEWAL OF NRG CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT Based on our recent telephone conversations, I have reviewed several issues in regard to the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) renewal request forwarded by NRG. At this time, I have not received all information that has been requested from NRG, however, based on • our discussions, I believe the information they submit will not impact the findings of this memorandum. I had conversations with Mr. Joseph Weinhold of NRG concerning environmental issues at the NRG facility. I have confirmed the following issues with Mr. Weinhold: 1. The Fen wall system has been switched from halon to a sodium bicarbonate system thus eliminating the discharge of CFCs from the halon system. 2. Mr. Weinhold indicated that their water supply testing in the plant exceeded MDH EPA standards for copper in the softened water supply based on two samples taken in the janitor's sink and the bathroom sink. It is anticipated by Mr. Weinhold that these levels may fall within drinking water standards in the unsoftened drinking water source. Samples confirming test results from the drinking water sources will be collected in January and analyzed shortly thereafter. 3. The metals levels present in run-off water on-site has been below the drinking water standard dr RAL for lead and cadmium, the two metals that we have been analyzing in surface water run-off on the facility. 01 Based on my conversations with you and Mr. Weinhold, it is not likely that NSP has exceeded the tonnage requirement of 1526 tons per day on an average annual through-put basis in their existing permit and license from the City. 12/22/93 10:24 $612 559 2202 B.A. LIESCH 41003/003 4111 Page 2 December 22, 1993 I also spoke with Mr Weinhold regarding the renovation of the dust collection system. It has been enclosed and some bags have been removed from the bag house system. This was necessitated by bridging of light materials that were separated from the air classification process. (A typical example would be sandwich wrap plastic film.) These materials were bridging between the bags causing a reduction in air flow and head loss through the system. By eliminating the bags, the bridging has been reduced and the system is working more effectively then it was previously. Mr. Weinhold had indicated that there would be some correspondence forwarded to the City documenting their testing results. Steve, if you have any questions, please call me. maw:ENV/39003/memo122293.wp • I B,A, LIESCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 13400 15TH AVENUE NORTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55441 EXHIBIT A • AMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 86-86 For Northern States Power Company Refuse Derived Fuel Resource Recovery Facility This Amended Conditional Use Permit No. 86-86 was approved by the City Council of the City of Elk River on December 1, 1986, subject to the following terms: 1 . This Conditional Use Permit No. 86-86 (the Permit) is issued to NRG Energy, Inc. and Northern States Power Company (together referred to as Permittee) for the construction and operation of the Anoka County Refuse Derived Fuel Resource Recovery Facility as described in the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements for the Facility dated April 1986 and July 1986; and as described in the Combined Air and Solid Waste Permit No. 147A-86-OT-1 for an Air Emission Facility, Air Pollution Control Equipment and Solid Waste Processing System and Permit for the construction and operation of a Waste Processing Facility and System, No. SW-305, issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) ; and as described in (1) "Response to RDF Information Sheet Issued by the Concerned Citizens • Against the Proposed Garbage Project, " transmitted to the City by correspondence dated July 24, 1986, and (2) "Responses to the City of Elk River Concerns" transmitted to Mayor Richard Hinkle on August 19 , 1986; and (3) correspondence from the Permittee to Mayor Richard Hinkle dated October 13 , 1986; and as further described in Permittee's November 28, 1989 application for renewal of conditional use permit and Permittee 's correspondence of April 2, 1990, April 17, 1990, July 2 , 1990, August 3, 1990, and September 6, 1990, to the City; and in Permittee's November 20, 1991, and November 30, 1993 applications for renewal of the Conditional Use Permit; all of which have been provided to the City by the Permittee in support of the application for this Amended Conditional Use Permit and collectively describe the Facility authorized by this Permit . The Facility consists of three (3) integrated components located in the City: (1) A facility for receiving municipal' solid waste and processing it into refuse-derived fuel (Processing Facility) ; (2) A facility for the incineration of refuse-derived fuel (Burn Facility) ; and (3) The movement of vehicles transporting municipal solid waste (MSW) , refuse-derived fuel (RDF) , rejected municipal solid waste (Rejects) , and incineration residue (Residue) . So long as RDF is incinerated in • the City, the conditions of this Permit which relate to the Burn Facility and Residue shall be in full • force and effect. Construction or operation in violation of any of the material statements of fact, factual information, or representations in the referenced documents shall be deemed to be a violation of the Permit and all such documents are considered to be and are hereby made a part of the Permit. 2 . Building construction, driveways, parking, grading, utilities, surface water management, erosion control, landscaping, fencing, and screening for the Processing Facility shall be provided substantially in accordance with the plans submitted by Northern States Power Company with the original application for a conditional use permit and the November 28, 1989 application for renewal of conditional use permit, which are hereby made a part of this Permit. In addition, these plans shall be further revised to provide a hard surfaced, diked area to drop hot loads of processed RDF so that they can be put out and fire suppression water retained; and to further provide that all areas on the facility site are either hard surfaced parking and drive areas, pea rock or asphalt shavings for equipment storage, or landscaped areas with grass. There shall be no gravel or dirt areas on the facility site. The revised plans shall be submitted by December 31, 1990, and all improvements installed by September 30, 1991. 3 . All utility and street construction plans and • specifications as presented by Northern States Power Company for the Facility and servicing streets must be prepared by a Registered Civil Engineer in accordance with directions of and approved by the City Engineer. 4. All building plans and specifications must be approved by the City Building Inspector and Fire Chief. 5 . Approval of driveway entrances, if needed, on State and County highways shall be secured from the appropriate agencies and filed with the City Zoning Administrator prior to issuance of any building permit. Street lighting and acceleration and deceleration lanes for Highway 10 at the intersection of 165th Street and Highway 10 shall be installed by City to provide safe access to Highway 10 for trucks entering and leaving the Facility. Failure by Permittee to reimburse the City for the installation of said improvements within thirty (30) days of receiving an invoice for all or any part of said improvements shall be cause for revocation of this Permit. 2 . • 6 . The City shall have the right of access to all areas of the Processing Facility and site for the purpose of • inspection to ensure compliance with all of the terms and conditions of this permit and the Solid Waste Facility License for the Facility. The City need not give prior notice to the Permittee for personnel to access the Processing Facility or site during the normal waste receiving hours of 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. , Monday through Saturday, or if an explosion or other emergency occurs . At any other time, at least twelve (12) hours prior notice to the Permittee is required. Such access shall be in accordance with reasonable safety standards and reasonable proprietary information requirements . Alternatively, the City may, in its discretion, upon 30 days notice to Permittee, to further ensure compliance with the restrictions in this Conditional Use Permit and in Section 604 of the City Code of Ordinances on the handling and processing of hazardous and dangerous waste, and to protect the public health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Elk River, place full-time City inspectors at the Facility twenty-four (24) hours a day. These inspectors shall have the right of access to all areas of the Facility, twenty-four (24) hours a day, for the purposes of inspection to ensure compliance with all of the terms Sand conditions of this Conditional Use Permit, the license for the Facility, and Section 604 of the City Code. The on-site City inspector shall have the right, at any time, to take one or more of the following actions : A. Order a load of MSW inspected, pursuant to the procedures set forth in the license for the Facility; B. Order the Facility cleaned, if a violation of the dust control plan for the Facility is observed; or C. Order the Facility shut down if necessary to bring it into compliance with the dust control plan or any other term or condition of this Conditional Use Permit, the license for the Facility, or Section 604 of the City Code. 7 . All employee or visitor motor vehicles associated with Facility operation shall be parked on Facility property, and not on adjacent lands not owned by Permittee or Qn adjacent streets. Adequate facilities must be provided to ensure that no vehicle desiring entry into the Processing Facility during permitted • 3 . receiving hours will have to wait outside the 411 perimeter of the Processing Facility site. 8 . The City shall be notified by the Permittee immediately upon the occurrence of any explosion, fire, or other emergency at the Facility; upon the discovery, release or spill of hazardous or dangerous materials, as defined in the City of Elk River Solid Waste Ordinance, at the Facility; and of any violations of the conditions of the Permit, Air Emission Facility Permit No. 147A-86-OT-1 or Permit for a Waste Processing Facility and System, No. SW- 305. The specific requirements for how, when and who to notify at the City shall be set forth in a separate letter from City Staff to permittee. This letter may be revised or supplemented by City Staff from time to time as necessary to address the City' s needs for notification. 9 . This Permit authorizes an average annual throughput of one thousand five hundred twenty-six (1, 526) tons per day of MSW. 10. All MSW, RDF, Reject or Residue-hauling truck traffic entering or exiting the Processing Facility or the Burn Facility shall use only those highways and streets as allowed in writing by the City Council, avoiding the use of Main Street and residential streets, if at all possible. Truck traffic originating in the City may use other public streets . • 11. The Facility may operate twenty-four (24) hours a day. However, the City reserves the right to restrict the hours of operation of the Facility to normal business hours if noise emanating from the Facility to surrounding residential properties is unacceptable. Hours of receiving and transporting MSW at the Processing Facility shall be limited to 6 :00 a.m. to 9 : 00 p.m. Monday through Saturday, provided that from 6: 00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. the Facility may only receive MSW from transfer stations, and that the Facility shall not receive any MSW between the hours of 5 :00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Fridays during the months of May through September. The City reserves the right to restrict further the hours of receiving and transporting MSW at the processing facility if necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. Rejects may be transported during the hours of 4 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Saturday, and during the hours from 9 :00 a.m. to 2 :00 p.m. on Sundays, provided that hauling of rejects on Sundays shall be limited to Highway 10 east of the intersection of Highway 10 and Highway 169 and Highways 169 and 101. RDF may be transported outside 4, those hours, but not to UPA during the hours of 4 : 00 p.m. to 6 : 30 p.m. on any day. Permittee, in • cooperation with the City Council , shall designate one (1) night of the Monday-Friday week when individual citizens may enter and exit the Facility until 8 : 00 p.m. 12 . At the Processing Facility, all truck ,and Processing Facility wash water shall be diverted and captured in a retention tank so that it does not enter the groundwater system. No RDF or Residue trucks may be washed at the Burn Facility. 13 . The Processing Facility shall be enclosed by a minimum six-foot and no more than eight-foot high chain link fence. 14 . The Processing Facility shall undertake no processing of MSW until all appropriate items in this Permit and the building permit are completed and finally inspected by the City of Elk River Zoning Administrator and a written certificate of occupancy has been issued. 15 . Permittee shall test storm water run-off captured in the on-site retention/detention pond, and shall provide written reports on these test results to the 411 City, as provided in the rain water run-off sampling plan submitted by Permittee. If the required tests indicate water quality problems in rain water run-off, Permittee shall submit to the City for approval a plan for addressing such problems and shall implement such solutions as are required by City. 16. The Permittee shall engage in a regular and routine litter maintenance and removal program extending (a) one-half mile east of the Processing Facility entrance on 165th Street Northwest, (b) southeast on Highway 10 from the intersection of 165th Street Northwest with Highway 10 to the eastern city limits, (c) northwest on Highway 10 from said intersection to the intersection of Highway 10 and Highway 169 , and (d) any other areas adversely impacted by debris related to Facility operations as may be determined by the City. Litter shall be removed from these areas no less than once per week, and more often if necessary because of spills or complaints from neighboring property owners, to ensure that these areas are kept free of litter generated by truck traffic traveling to and from the Facility. In addition, Permittee shall inspect all trucks leaving the plant to ensure that they are either fully enclosed or covered, and/or clean, and will not spread litter on surrounding 11, streets and roadways as they leave. 5. 17 . The Permittee shall immediately pay to reimburse the • City for any and all expenses associated with initial Processing Facility-related improvements on 165th Street from the Processing Facility entrance to the intersection with Highway 10, and on any other city streets used by vehicles transporting RDF or Residue which may serve as primary access for the Burn Facility. For the foregoing street, the Permittee shall also reimburse the City for all patching and repair expenses in excess of the City' s normal street maintenance program. Permittee shall also reimburse the City for any and all expenses associated with installation of the acceleration and decelerations and lighting at the intersection of Highway 10 and 165th Street. 18 . No exterior storage of MSW, RDF, Rejects or Residue shall be allowed, except in enclosed trailers or trucks. 19 . The Permittee represents and warrants to the City that the Facility shall at all times comply with all applicable city, county, state, and federal laws and regulations, including without limitation, environmental laws and regulations . 20 . All Mixed Municipal Solid Waste not burned, including • unburned RDF, RDF process Rejects and RDF Residues, shall be disposed of in strict compliance with the requirements of Section 604 of the City Code and Chapter 7035 of Minnesota Rules . 21. Responsibility for Costs: A. The Permittee shall pay all direct costs incurred by it or the City in conjunction with the application for this Permit and development of the Facility, including without limitation legal, planning, consulting, engineering, and inspection expenses (including a reasonable charge for City staff time) incurred in connection with approval of the Facility, the preparation of this Permit, and all costs and expenses incurred by the City in monitoring and inspecting the construction of the Facility, except those costs and expenses normally covered by the building permit fee. B. The Permittee shall defend and hold the City, its officers, and employees harmless from all claims made by third parties for damages sustained or costs incurred resulting from Facility approval, construction, and operation. The Permittee shall • indemnify the City, its officers, and employees for all costs, damages, or expenses which the 6. City may pay or incur in consequence of such • claims, including attorneys ' fees . The aforesaid defense, indemnity, and hold harmless provisions shall not be in effect from and after the date that the occurrence giving rise to the claim in question is determined by a court with jurisdiction over the matter to have been caused solely by the wilful conduct or negligence of the City, its officers or employees . Until the date of such judicial determination, the defense, hold harmless and indemnification provisions shall be in full force and effect and in the event of such judicial determination, the City shall reimburse the Permittee all of its costs and expenses incurred on behalf of the City in connection with the foregoing. Nothing herein shall be construed to prohibit the City from selecting its own counsel to act as co-counsel in the defense of such matters . The Permittee agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of Elk River, its Council members, officers, and employees from any claims or damages arising out of any acts or omissions on the part of the Permittee and any of the participating counties or their commissioners, agents, or employees in the performance of the counties ' contractual obligations under the agreements with the • Permittee, from any strict liability imposed upon the City pursuant to Minn. Stat . § 115B. 01, sea. for the release of hazardous waste at the Facility and from any remedial actions, clean- ups, removal, closure, post-closure activities, or monitoring requirements or costs associated therewith. This indemnity, hold harmless , and defense obligation on the part of the Permittee shall include, but not be limited to, any and all actions, claims, requirements, or claims for damages arising out of the granting of this Permit for the Facility or any variance associated with the height of the proposed Processing Facility and the inability of the City to properly respond to fire calls at the Processing Facility due to the limitations of its equipment or personnel, but shall not include willful and unjustified failure to respond to fire calls at the Processing Facility. The indemnities provided in this paragraph B are subject to the limits of liability set forth in Minnesota Statutes Section 466 . 04 and 466 . 06, as amended from time to time, if effective as to the particular indemnified action or claim. Nothing in this Permit is intended to waive the • immunities to which the City is entitled by law. 7 . C . The Permittee waives and releases the City from • all claims, direct or indirect, arising or claimed to have arisen out of all actions or inactions relating to the City' s consideration or issuance of the Permit . D. The Permittee shall reimburse the City for all costs incurred in enforcement of this Permit, including consultant and attorneys ' fees . Failure by Permittee to reimburse City within 45 days of receiving an invoice for any costs for which reimbursement is required by the terms of this Conditional Use Permit or the License for the Facility, shall be cause for revocation of this Permit . 22 . Miscellaneous : A. This Permit and its conditions shall be binding upon each of the Permittees, jointly and severally, referred to collectively in this Permit in the singular as Permittee, and the successors and assigns of any one of them. The assignment by any Permittee of its interest in the Facility shall not relieve it of responsibility and liability under this Permit without the written consent of the City, which • consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. B. Violation of the terms of this Permit or of MPCA Permit No. SW-305 or Air Emission Facility Permit No. 147A-86-OT-1 by the Permittee shall entitle the City to any and all remedies available at law or in equity. If the City determines that such violation results in a clear and imminent danger to the health and safety of the City' s residents, the City' s remedies shall include immediate cessation of operation or construction, or both, without the necessity of a judicial order in advance of the same. In all other instances, the immediate cessation remedy shall be preceded by a judicial order. A revocation or suspension of this Permit shall be only as to the violating component of the Facility, not as to the components not in violation. C. If any portion, section, subsection, sentence, clause, paragraph, or phrase of this Permit is for any reason held invalid, such decision shall not effect the validity of the remaining portions of the Permit . • D. The action or inaction of the City shall not constitute a waiver or amendment to the 8 . provisions of this Permit . To be binding, amendments or waivers shall be in writing, signed 411 by the Permittee, and approved by written resolution of the City Council . The City' s failure to promptly take legal action to enforce this Permit shall not be a waiver or release. 23 . Notices : Required notice to the Permittee shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the Permittee, its employees or agents, or mailed to the Permittee by certified or registered mail at the following addresses : Elk River Resource Recovery Facility 10700 165th Avenue N.W. Elk River, Minnesota 55330 Attention: Plant Superintendent United Power Association ATTN: General Manager 17845 U.S. Highway 10 Elk River, Minnesota 55330-0800 Notice to the City shall be in writing, and shall be either hand delivered to the City Administrator, or mailed to the City by certified or registered mail in care of the City Administrator at the following • address: City of Elk River City Hall Elk River, Minnesota 55330 Attention: City Administrator 24 . Biennial Review: The terms and conditions of this Permit and compliance by the Permittee shall be subject to review by the City every two (2) years from the original date of approval, December 1, 1986 . The City reserves the right to revoke, amend, or impose additional conditions on the Facility or the Permittee at such time taking into account the advancement of scientific knowledge relative to the health effects of the Facility, the Permittee ' s degree of compliance with current Permit conditions, and the criteria and standards of the City Code and Minnesota law. The undersigned, on behalf of the respective Permittees, jointly and severally, represent and bind their respective Permittees to the terms of this Permit, having fully examined this Permit and all materials referred to herein and agree to all the conditions set forth. Each person signing below on behalf of a Permittee does so upon the authority of the Board of Directors of the respective Permittee, and a resolution documenting such authority is attached hereto. This approval 9 . shall expire two years from the date of City Council approval • unless the proposed work described herein has not been substantially completed or unless extended as provided in Section 900 . 42 of the City Code. In no case shall the Facility be used for the uses designated in the Permit until all of the conditions have been met by the Permittee and are inspected by the City. PERMITTEE: NRG ENERGY, INC. By: Its : NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY By: Its : STATE OF MINNESOTA ss. COUNTY OF SHERBURNE The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1993 , by , the of NRG Energy, Inc. , a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA S8 . COUNTY OF SHERBURNE The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 1993 , by , the of Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: LARKIN, HOFFMAN, DALY & LINDGREN, LTD. 1500 Norwest Financial Center 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Bloomington, Minnesota 55431 (PKB) PKB:BA7 10. MSII— ' EMti I%ENGINEERS December 27, 1993 File: 230-000-00 Mr. Stephen Rohlf Building and Zoning Administrator City of Elk River 13065 Orono Parkway CIVIL ENGINEERING Elk River, MN 55330 ENVIRONMENTAL RE: RDF PLANT TRAFFIC ISSUES MUNICIPAL Dear Mr. Rohlf: As requested, we have reviewed the traffic concerns for the RDF plant relative to vehicles PLANNING exiting 165th Avenue and heading eastbound on TH 10. Specifically, the issue we were asked to review was whether or not there is a need to construct an acceleration lane for STRUCTLRAL these movements. In reviewing this issue, we have talked to Mr. Glen Kaas, manager of the RDF plant. Mr. Kaas was able to provide us with information relative to these types SURVEYING of movements over the last year. His information indicated the following: -AFF,c ■ During the last year, there were 2,264 semi-trailer type of units which turned left. Based on a five or six day week, this would mean 7.3 to 8.7 vehicles per day turned -RANSPCRTA Tleft. • There were 22,054 other types of single axle vehicles which made this left turn, which results in an average of 71.8 to 80.6 vehicles based on a five or six day week. Some of the other thoughts that we had relative to analyzing this issue are as follows: • Most of the vehicles making this left turn to eastbound TH 10 are empty when they leave the plant, which should ease the length the vehicle needs to accelerate up to 1326 Energy Park Drve the speed of traffic on TH 10. St.Paul,MN 55108 • We are not aware of any significant accident record at the intersection of 165th and 612-644-4389 TH 10. Fax:612-644-9446 ■ Of all the vehicles turning left, the large portion of these would be able to stop in the median between east and westbound TH 10 and wait for an appropriate gap to •9800 Shelord Parkway continue their left turn into TH 10 traffic. This, of course, is not true for the seven Minneapolis,MN 55441 to eight semi-tractor trailer trips per day. 612-546-0432 Fax:612-544-6398 • Mr. Stephen Rohlf December 27, 1993 Page Two • The number of semi vehicles making this left turn onto east TH 10 is significantly lower than the vehicles that make a right-hand turn utilizing the existing acceleration lane and go westbound on TH 10. The majority of the vehicles making a westbound right turn movement would also be loaded and would take a longer length to accelerate up to highway speed. There is no clear, concise analysis that can be applied to this situation to determine whether or not an acceleration is needed. We have concerns that constructing an acceleration lane in this location would be somewhat out of the norm. Typically, acceleration lanes are on the outside of the highway, much like the westbound lane is. We do have some concerns that constructing one on the inside may lead to confusion to the motoring public and could create safety issues above and beyond those trying to be corrected by such an installation. It is not clear to us from the information we have been able to gather and analyze that there clearly is a need for one at this point in time. We would recommend at this time that an acceleration lane not be constructed but that the situation continue to be monitored and reviewed on an ongoing basis. One other consideration that may be appropriate in the future would be consideration of signalizing the intersection rather than constructing an • acceleration lane. There are warrants for traffic signals based on the delay of the side street. Certainly the low volume of traffic on 165th would never meet signal warrants based on total traffic volumes. However, the warrants for interruption or delay on the minor leg of the intersection may be met now or in the future. If you have any additional questions or would like us to do more work on this issue, please call. Sincerely, MSA, CONSULTING ENGINEERS e2L 2ee--/4-0 Terry J.-Maurer, P.E. TJM:tp 000-2710.dec • Lead Levels Measured To-Date at the Elk River Resource Recovery Facility Compared with Reference Levels s '111 50 al40 NOPILead Concentration og30 __.: ' I 0 Runoff Lead ( g ) 20 I_ ' ® Plant Water Taps 100Airi , ai �: Action Level r::..:::.:r Drinking Water Std. 31- 22- Mar- $- 93 May_ Oct- 93 93 0 0 • IY/as'l4 174TY. •I 173RD o \ z 1 172ND A 1 171ST o a � u I � + 170TH a W W W 169TH !66TH 0 0 e .. w 167TH z W 166TH iatee lnc. p 165TH 0 n 164TH 163RD 162ND e i 161ST LOCATION 1 \ 160TH s W \�` V Z O ¢ 0 o of aI ` 159TH - \ LOCATION MAP 10700 165TH AVE °IV v im" CASE CU 87.01 41? River P.O. Box 490.13065 Orono Parkway • Elk River, MN 55330 • (612) 441-7420