LP-191 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

,- !. 7 --, '~ The site is within the metropolitan urban service area and is compatible with existing and planned systems for highways, airports, parks and sewers. The facility should have a favorable impact in its industrial setting. Access by . Interstate Hwy. 35W, Hwy. 8 and 1st Av. NW. is on better than nine-ton weight- bearing roadways that are not primarily residential collector streets. Upon eventual closure of the facility, there is no reason to expect contamination of soils on the site that would preclude potential future site uses. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (CRITERION 5) The faciiity will not adversely impact environmentally sensitive areas. Peat soils may be present on the site and may have to be replaced with fill suitable for the building foundation. The major environmental impact associated with combustion facilities is from air emissions. The possibility exists for both heavy metal and toxic organic air emissions. The control technology for capturing particulates contaminated with heavy metals including lead is more than 96 percent efficient. The ambient air quality impacts of the emissions should be modeled by the MPCA, however, to evaluate the potential health impacts associated with this installation. The MPCA should then determine what reasonably available control technologies should be required. The worst case risk from the two pollutants of most direct concern, lead and dioxins, appears to be remote. If all the Metropolitan Area waste, 5,000 TPO, were burned in an incinerator with 95 percent efficient control technology, it is estimated that 43 pounds per day of lead and 0.084 pounds per day of dioxin would escape. Lead from the use of leaded gasoline in the Twin Cities is esti- .. mated at 728 pounds per day or 17 times the maximum emission from combusting all the metropolitan refuse. The cancer risk from lifetime exposure to the pro- jected dioxin level from all the metropolitan refuse can be conservatively estimated to be about 1 in 155,000. The 200 TPD facility will actually receive only about 4 percent of the refuse generated from the Metropolitan Area. The combined 'lifetime health risk associated with all emissions from the 200 TPD facility is conservatively estimated at less than 1 in 100,000. Aesthetic and nuisance impacts should be minimal. Deposit of the waste on an eaclosed tipping floor should nearly eliminate litter. Odors should be effec- tively controlled by negative air pressure and combustion of the air that is collected. Visually, the site will be ringed with a variety of planted trees. Storm water runoff will flow to a detention pond adjacent to the site. Criterion 5e requires that environmental monitoring and contingency plans be prepared as directed by the Council. Two conditions require contingency plan- ning,shutdown risks and hazardous waste identification and handling. The plan for waste disposal requirements in the event of a plant shutdown should address the removal of wastes on the tipping floor and the diversion of waste con- tracted for delivery to the facility. This plan should minimize dependence on landfills and be revised in 1990 to specify new alternatives to landfills that are expected to be available. Although hazardous wastes are prohibited at the facility, there is a likelihood that some will materialize at least occasionally. Federal and state standards . for handling of these wastes are likely to be clarified before the facility is completed. Nevertheless, a plan for the identification, collection and dis-