Attachment_F_Final_Scoping_Decision_Document_(FSDD).pdf

p-ear2-215i

STATE OF MINNESOTA

MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY

FINAL SCOPING DECISION DOCUMENT (FSDD)

ELK RIVER LANDFILL NORTH DEVELOPMENT AREA

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT

The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) is preparing an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on a proposal by Elk River Landfill, Inc. (Proposer) for the northward expansion (Project) of the existing landfill (Facility) into Livonia Township, Sherburne County. The Project will accept municipal solid waste (MSW). A mandatory EIS is being prepared pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.4400, subp. 13:

(A) for construction of an MSW land disposal facility for 100,000 cubic yards or more of waste fill per year; and

(E) for expansion by 25 percent or more of the previous capacity of a mixed municipal solid waste land disposal facility for 100,000 cubic yards or more of waste fill per year.

Contacts for the environmental review of the Project are as follows:

Responsible Government Unit:

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Chris Green, Project Manager 504 Fairgrounds Road, Suite 200 Marshall, Minnesota 56258 507-476-4258 chris.green@state.mn.us

Project Proposer:

Elk River Landfill, Inc.

Ralph Collins, District Manager 22460 U.S. Highway 169 Elk River, Minnesota 55330 612-231-5914 rcollin4@wm.com

Introduction Elk River Landfill (ERL) is an existing municipal solid waste (MSW), industrial waste, and construction and demolition (C&D) waste landfill five miles north of the City of Elk River, adjacent to US Highway 169 in Sherburne County, Minnesota. ERL sits on a 550.24-acre parcel of land (Facility) owned by Elk River Landfill, Inc. and/or its parent company, Waste Management, Inc. (WM) and permitted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) under Solid Waste Permit SW-74, as well as licensed and permitted by both Sherburne County and the City of Elk River.

The Project involves the continuation of landfill operations immediately north, adjacent to and as a contiguous part of the existing landfill waste limit. The Project Site (Site) encompasses 202.89 acres of land, which includes area already owned by the Facility as well as land to be acquired from Capital Land Group as part of the Project. The Project involves an expansion of MSW capacity by approximately 26.67 million cubic yards over a 162.36-acre waste limit, which accounts for a 7.21-acre overlap of previously permitted and filled C&D disposal cells. The expansion will be north of the Facility where Martin- Marietta Corporation (Martin Marietta) has sand and gravel mining operations. Project development will occur in cells concurrent with the phased closure of mining activities, progressing south to north.

Following Project completion, the Site will include a composite-lined MSW disposal area, leachate collection sumps, buried leachate force mains, a haul road, stormwater ponds, and a vegetated final cover system.

Attachment F mailto:chris.green@state.mn.us mailto:rcollin4@wm.com

The EIS will discuss the details of landfill design in relation to operating with differential setbacks associated with construction of a new cell over an existing cell. The EIS will discuss how leachate flow, liner design, liner choice, engineering considerations and other relevant issues associated with differential settling. The EIS will also note slope considerations in regards to the proposed expansion and differential settling.

Elk River Landfill applied for a solid waste permit modification to the MPCA and will apply for a Certificate of Need (CON) concurrent with environmental review to justify the need for the Project. The CON application process includes letters from counties, data from current solid waste management plans, estimates of MSW capacity required from each county, documentation demonstrating the Facility as the designated destination for MSW, and coordination of the CON application with the solid waste permit cycle. The CON application process will begin prior to the remaining CON being consumed, allowing for coordination of the planning period with the solid waste permit cycle. The EIS will analyze the CON in relation to the proposed expansion and the associated impacts. The EIS will note the slope (see note language) variance.

Project purpose The Project’s purpose is to provide an additional 26.67 million cubic yards of MSW capacity to ERL.

Based on current disposal rates, the ELR is expected to reach its permitted capacity within three years.

The Project will extend the operational lifespan of the Facility, allowing ERL to continue serving the region's waste disposal needs. During the CON process, relevant information will be collected to support and reinforce the identified need.

Previous environmental review In 2021, a Mineral Excavation Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was completed for the Tiller Corporation, now Martin Marietta, detailing environmental impacts associated with sand and gravel mining activities and close-out procedures. The geographic scope of the review was for the land presently owned by Capital Land Group. Environmental issues addressed in the 2021 Mineral Excavation EAW included impacts to 6.64 acres of wetlands, of which 0.88 acres proposed for removal under a Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) permit. Groundwater use for the mining process estimated to require up to 33 million gallons per year, which may cause localized drawdown. Mining activities are projected to result in the loss of wildlife habitat within a Site of Moderate Biodiversity and a Regionally Significant Ecological Area ranked as Outstanding. Additionally, the operations generate fugitive dust from equipment and haul traffic and produce noise from earthwork machinery.

In 2023, Barr Engineering performed a Phase I and Phase II hydrogeological evaluation within the Site, approved by the MPCA. The evaluations identified water supply wells within one mile of the Site and high-capacity wells within three miles. These studies were used to gain an understanding of the groundwater capacity and movement.

WM applied for a solid waste permit modification to the MPCA in August 2024.

In November 2024, rare plant community and state-threatened Blanding’s turtle habitat surveys were conducted within the Site. No rare plant communities’ presence were identified. No Blanding’s turtles or their nests were seen during the walkthrough, however, ideal Blanding’s turtle habitat was present.

Two wetland delineations have been conducted within the Site; one in 2002 by Graham Environmental Services and another in 2017 by Critical Connections Ecological Services in preparation for the 2021 sand and gravel mining EAW. The 2002 wetland delineation includes areas outside of the mining boundary but still within the Site.

Additionally, the Facility to the south of the Project has undergone two EISs. The first was in 1994 for sand and gravel mining activities, followed by an EIS in 2005 for the 73.7-acre expansion of the Facility to the south into the area where mining had previously occurred. The 2005 EIS analyzed the potential impacts on groundwater, surface water, air quality, visual aesthetics, land use compatibility, and economic and social impacts. In 2003, an EAW was published for the construction of C&D cells at the Facility.

EIS scoping process The purpose of an EIS is to evaluate and disclose information about the environmental effects of a proposed action. The EIS is not intended to justify a project or to recommend approval or denial of future permits. Rather, the information in the EIS is for use by governmental units as a guide in considering permits or approvals for the Project and in identifying measures necessary to avoid or mitigate adverse environmental effects.

The preparation of this Draft Scoping Decision Document (DSDD) and the companion Scoping Environmental Assessment Worksheet (SEAW) are pursuant to Minn. R. 4410.2100. As stated in rule, “The purpose of the scoping process is to reduce the scope and bulk of the EIS, identify only those potentially significant issues relevant to the proposed project, define the form, level of detail, content, alternatives, time table for preparation, and preparers of the EIS, and to determine the permits for which information will be developed concurrently with the EIS.” The function of the SEAW is to delineate issues and analyses included in the EIS, summarized in this DSDD, providing a preliminary view of the intended scope of the EIS, including Project alternatives. Agencies and the public can provide comments on these scoping documents; the information presented in this DSDD is subject to modification based on comments received. Following public comment, a Final Scoping Decision Document (FSDD) will be issued. EIS preparation will begin after publication of an EIS Preparation Notice in the EQB Monitor within 45 days of the MPCA receiving payment from the Proposer’s EIS cost payment (Minn. R. 4410.2100, subp. 9), after which the MPCA has 280 days to determine if the EIS is adequate (Minn. R. 4410.2800, subp. 3).

Schedule The timeline for the scoping period and EIS preparation will follow the time limits set forth in Minn. R. 4410.0200 to 4410.6500. The EIS schedule will coordinate with the submittal of a Certificate of Need (CON) request to the MPCA and the development of MPCA permits. A tentative schedule for the development and review of a draft and final EIS for the Project is below. The schedule is contingent upon the publication dates for the SEAW, SDD, and EIS Preparation Notice.

Table 1. Scoping decision document timeline.

Timeline Environmental review step March 2025 - October 2025 MPCA prepares SEAW and DSDD. (Minn. R. 4410.2100, subp. 1-2)

November 2025 - December 2025

MPCA publishes SEAW and DSDD in EQB Monitor, distributes to required agencies, and issues a press release within five days of publication. Reviewers have 30 days to submit written comments. (Minn. R. 4410.2100, subp. 3(A), 5)) MPCA hosts public scoping meeting. (Minn. R. 4410.2100, subp. 3(B)) MPCA issues response to public comments in FSDD with 15 days of 30-day comment period closure. (Minn. R. 4410.2100, subp. 3(C))

Table 2. Tentative EIS timeline.

Timeline Environmental review step

Spring 2026 MPCA issues EIS Preparation Notice in EQB Monitor and issues a press release in Sherburne County. (Minn. R. 4410.2100, subp. 9)

Summer 2026

– Winter 2027 Preparation of Draft EIS (DEIS)

Winter 2027

MPCA publishes notice of DEIS in EQB Monitor and issues a press release of availability.

Distribution of the DEIS to those identified in Minn. R. 4410.2600, subp. 3.

MPCA holds an informational meeting in Sherburne County (Minn. R. 4410.2600, subp. 2).

Public comment on DEIS remains open not less than ten days after the informational meeting.

(Minn. R. 4410.2600 subp. 9)

Spring 2027 MPCA issues responses to substantive comments on DEIS and prepares Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). (Minn. R. 4410.2600, subp. 10)

Summer 2027

MPCA publishes FEIS in EQB Monitor and issues a press release of availability. FEIS distributed to those in Minn. R. 4410.2600, subp. 3 as well as anyone who submitted substantive comments or who otherwise requests a copy. (Minn. R. 4410.2700, subp 3-5)

Fall 2027

MPCA makes EIS adequacy determination of FEIS. (Minn. R. 4410.2800) MPCA notifies those identified in Minn. R. 4410.2600, subp. 3 of Final EIS adequacy determination and publishes determination in EQB Monitor. (Minn. R. 4410.2800, subp. 6)

Permits and approvals Air Emissions Permit (Title V Permit) No. 14100041-101, which allows for the operation of the stationary sources at the landfill. An application for a minor permit amendment submitted in May 2024 (and resubmitted in June 2024) to replace the removed landfill gas to energy (LFGTE) plant (comprising four engine-generator sets) and enclosed and open flares with a new open flare, thermal oxidizer and an RNG plant.

Table 3. Permits and approvals.

Unit of Government Type of application Status

MPCA

Solid Waste Permit Modification Submitted and under review by MPCA Certificate of Need Application forthcoming Title V Air Permit Amendment Application forthcoming NPDES/SDS (Industrial Stormwater Multi Sector General Permit) Application forthcoming

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 Permit Amendment Application forthcoming

Sherburne County

Solid Waste Facility License Modification Application forthcoming Wetland Conservation Act Permit Amendment Application forthcoming Host Fee Agreement Application forthcoming Amendment to Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Application forthcoming Zoning Change Application submitted Shoreland Alteration Permit Application forthcoming Wetland Delineation Notice of Decision Application forthcoming

Livonia Township Amendment to CUP Application forthcoming

Unit of Government Type of application Status Zoning Change Application forthcoming

Scope and content of the draft and final EIS:

Per Minn. R. 4410.2300, the EIS will be in plain and objective language and will use a format that encourages good analysis and clear presentation of the proposed action and alternatives. A standard EIS format includes the following:

• Cover sheet

• The EIS cover sheet will include the name of the Responsible Government Unit (RGU, MPCA); Project title and location; the name, address and telephone number of the RGU and Proposer (Elk River Landfill, Inc.); a designation of the statement as a draft or final; one paragraph abstract of the EIS; and if applicable, date of DEIS public meeting and date the RGU must receive comments on the DEIS.

• Summary

• The EIS summary will highlight the key findings, areas of controversy, and unresolved issues, including alternative(s).

• Table of contents

• List of preparers

• The EIS will contain the names and qualifications of the individuals who were primarily responsible for preparing the EIS or the background papers listed within.

• Project description

• The EIS project description will include enough detail so the public can identify the purpose, size, scope, environmental setting, geographic location, and anticipated phases of the Project.

• List of government approvals

• All known government permits, approvals, and their corresponding unit of government will be identified.

• Alternatives

• The EIS will compare the Project to other reasonable alternatives, including alternative technologies, designs, scales, or mitigation measures. Additionally, the “no action” alternative will be addressed. The EIS will briefly discuss alternatives considered but ultimately eliminated, along with reasons for their elimination. For any alternative analyzed in the EIS, the analysis will include a discussion of potentially significant direct or indirect, adverse, or beneficial effects associated with that major alternative.

• Environmental, economic, employment, and sociological impacts

• The EIS will clearly and concisely discuss the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the

Project’s environmental, economic, employment, and sociological impacts, as well as highlight any major differences of opinion about the Project’s environmental impacts.

• Mitigation measures

• The EIS will identify measures that could reasonably eliminate or minimize the Project’s adverse environmental, economic, employment, or sociological effects.

• Appendix

• The EIS Appendix shall include, at a minimum:

o material created specifically for the EIS;

o supporting analysis; and o permit-related information.

Alternatives The EIS will evaluate the environmental, economic, employment, and sociological impacts of the Project per Minn. R. 4410.2300, Item H. The EIS will compare the potentially significant impacts of the Project with a No Action Alternative and other reasonable alternatives. The Minnesota Environmental Review Rules require the EIS to address at least one alternative of each of the following types of alternatives or provide an explanation of why no alternative of a particular type is in the EIS (Minn. R. 4410.2300, Item G):

• no action alternative;

• alternative sites;

• alternative technologies;

• modified designs or layouts;

• modified scale or magnitude; and

• alternatives incorporating reasonable mitigation measures identified through the SEAW and

DEIS process.

An alternative may be excluded from analysis in the EIS if:

• It would not meet the project’s underlying purpose or need.

• It would likely not have any significant environmental benefit compared to the project as proposed.

• Another alternative, of any type, would likely have similar environmental benefits but substantially less adverse economic, employment, or sociological impacts.

Proposed project The EIS will include an evaluation of the Project, as described in the introduction to the DSDD and in Item 6 of the companion SEAW. This evaluation will include a comprehensive analysis of potential environmental, economic, employment and sociological impacts listed in the EIS Studies, below. The analysis serves as the foundation for comparing reasonable alternatives.

No action alternative The EIS will include a No Action Alternative, which assumes that ERL will continue operations under its current permits, with no change to its waste allocations, area, or design. This alternative will include an analysis of MSW waste loads routed to other MSW permitted facilities. It will also include an analysis of all facilities permitted to accept MSW for materials recovery in Minnesota. The analysis of these facilities will consider how one or several facilities could manage the waste capacity previously disposed of at the Facility, with consideration of environmental, economic, employment and sociological impacts, including transportation logistics. Under the No Action Alternative, waste from Livonia Township and surrounding areas would need to be redirected to other landfill facilities.

Alternative sites – new landfill An Alternative Site analysis will be excluded from the alternatives studied in the EIS. The Project Area is proposed on a disturbed post-mining property, offering beneficial geological conditions for waste containment. Mixed Municipal Solid Waste (MMSW) landfills permitted after January 1, 2011, that are not a contiguous expansion of a permitted facility must meet requirements of Minn. R. 7001.3111 subp. 3(A-D), as well as meet the location standards provided in Minn. R. 7035.2555 and 7035.2815. Therefore, an alternative site is unlikely to provide significant environmental benefits compared to the Project as proposed. Additionally, the need for the expansion arises from the projected MSW capacity reached within the next three years; timing associated with relocation of the landfill to an alternative site would not meet the Project’s purpose and need.

Alternative technologies The EIS will evaluate several Alternative Technologies that may reduce the volume of waste placed in the landfill. Technologies will be assessed in the EIS to determine their environmental, economic, employment and sociological impacts. Technologies identified for this evaluation include:

• Anaerobic digestion: An anaerobic digester is a sealed system designed to intentionally process organic waste in the absence of oxygen, accelerating the production of methane-rich biogas for controlled energy recovery or emission management. The EIS will assess the environmental, economic, employment and sociological implications of building an anaerobic digester at the Facility. Additionally, the impacts of diverting organic materials from the landfill will be considered in terms of waste reduction, energy recovery, and reduction of odors and methane emissions. This alternative will consider the presence of the proposed Renewable Natural Gas (RNG) Plant at the Facility.

• Metal separation: The EIS will evaluate the environmental, economic, employment and sociological implications of implementing ferrous and non-ferrous metal separation techniques on-site. The EIS will examine the feasibility and impacts of metal sorting at the landfill as a means of increasing area recycling rates and decreasing MSW waste volumes.

• Composting: The EIS will evaluate composting to intentionally process, remove, and utilize organic waste to reduce the amount of waste and leachate produced, and extend the landfill’s life.

• Source-separated materials: The EIS will evaluate source separated materials to intentionally process and transfer different types of waste, to reduce the amount of waste produced and extend the landfill’s life.

• Mixed waste processing: The EIS will evaluate mixed waste processing at the landfill to reduce the amount of waste generated and extend the landfill’s life.

• Incineration: The EIS will not evaluate incineration because the system-wide incineration capacity does not currently exist to replace the land disposal capacity proposed for the Project.

Modified designs or layouts Modified designs or layouts will be excluded from alternatives studied the EIS. The Project is designed to maximize was disposal volume while meeting specific design specifications required by federal, state, and local regulations. The Project is designed in accordance with Minn. R. 7035.28, and deviations from the proposed design (i.e. height, slopes, development sequencing) would not likely have significant environmental benefits compared to the Project as proposed.

Modified scale or magnitude The EIS will not consider modified scale or magnitude as an alternative separate from other alternatives being evaluated. Landfills are sized to reach optimal capacity to maximize the life of the Facility and reduce the need to build additional landfills in a service area, therefore, modified scale or magnitude would not meet the Project’s purpose or need. The no action alternative, and alternative technologies will be considered in terms of their impact on the size and lifetime of the Project.

Incorporation of reasonable mitigation measures identified through public comment The EIS will evaluate reasonable mitigation measures identified through the EIS Scoping and DEIS development.

EIS topics The SEAW a companion document to the DSDD, identifies potentially significant issues relevant to the Project. Only potentially significant impacts need to be addressed in an EIS. The MPCA has evaluated the prescribed topics in the SEAW and determined how each topic will be treated in the EIS using the following criteria:

• Topic has been adequately analyzed in the scoping EAW. Topic is not relevant or has been adequately analyzed in the SEAW and will not be addressed in the EIS. The Scoping EAW will be appended to the EIS for reference; the relevant EAW item number is provided in parentheses after each topic. (Scoping Criteria A)

• Significant impacts are not expected: Relevant topic information will be included in the EIS.

Topic is not anticipated to result in significant impacts; however, EAW provides insufficient information to make a decision on the significance. Information beyond what is in the SEAW will be included in the EIS. (Scoping Criteria B)

• Potentially significant impacts may result: Relevant topic information will be included in the EIS. Topic may result in potentially significant impacts. Relevant topic information and studies will be included in the EIS. (Scoping Criteria C)

The scoping criteria for addressing a topic in the EIS as determined by the SEAW is in Table 4.

Table 4. Scoping criteria.

SEAW Item number1 and EIS content topic EIS scoping criteria

7. Climate Adaptation and Resilience B

8. Cover Types A

9. Permits B

10. Land Use C

11. Geology, Soils and Topography/Landforms A

12. Water Resources C

13. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes A

14. Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources B

15. Historic Properties B

16. Visual A

17. Air C

18. Greenhouse Gas/Carbon Footprint C

19. Noise C

SEAW Item number1 and EIS content topic EIS scoping criteria

20. Transportation C

1 Numbers correlate to the Item numbers in the SEAW.

Cumulative environmental effects Cumulative environmental effects from the Facility’s existing landfill, south of the Site, which will be entering the post-closure period as the Site begins operations, as well as environmental effects resulting from the integration of the Project with the RNG plant, will be discussed in the EIS within each of the applicable topic areas.

Scoping criteria B topics The companion SEAW identified the following topics as important, but information provided in the SEAW was determined to be adequate for use in the EIS with only minor edits or updates. The EIS will compile and analyze existing, updated, and additional information for the following topics.

Climate adaptation and resilience The EIS will address climate adaptations and resilience within the context of individual items throughout the EIS. Climate considerations as they pertain to other environmental resources will be discussed where relevant sections of the EIS. Potential environmental impacts of the Project from climate, as well as the Project’s vulnerability to climate-related factors (such as temperature, precipitation, and extreme weather events), will be discussed where relevant.

Permits and approvals All known government permits and approvals, including identification of the governmental unit responsible for each permit or approval, are required to be in the EIS. Information provided in the SEAW is adequate for use in the EIS without the need to rewrite or edit extensively. This topic is mandatory in the EIS according to Rule.

Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources Fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources (rare features) will be in the EIS due to the potential impacts of the Project on wildlife habitat, particularly species of concern such as the gopher snake and the Blanding’s turtle. The Project Site includes habitat that may support these species, and portions of this habitat will be directly altered or permanently lost because of current mining operations and/or the Project. The EIS will evaluate the extent of habitat loss, potential effects on local populations, and any fragmentation of remaining habitat. The EIS will consider avoidance, minimization, and mitigation strategies through the alternatives analysis as it relates to these resources. This section will discuss the removal/destruction of the UPs14a2 NPC, and the Southern Dry-Mesic Oak Woodland will be mapped in the project area. The EIS will also discuss mitigation methods for the critically imperiled NPC.

Historic properties The Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) was consulted about the Project and determined no properties listed in the National or State Registers of Historic Places, and no known or suspected archaeological properties in the area would be affected by the mining expansion. The Office of State Archaeology (OSA), Minnesota Indian Affairs Council (MIAC) and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers (THPOS) have been requested to review the Project; responses are pending. Given the Project will be in an area previously disturbed by mining activity, the potential for impacts on historic properties is minimal.

Scoping criteria C topics This section describes the compilation and analysis of existing information and/or new studies to conduct and present in the EIS for topics identified as having a potentially significant impact and assigned a scoping criteria C.

Land use The Project Site will require partial re-zoning by Livonia Township and Sherburne County. The EIS will examine the potential impacts of the proposed rezoning on surrounding land uses and compatibility with local land use plans. This assessment will ensure that the proposed land use changes are properly considered within the broader context of environmental, economic, employment, and sociological impacts. Land use will be addressed in the EIS given that the Project Site will require partial re-zoning by Sherburne County and Livonia Township. The evaluation will examine the potential impacts of the proposed rezoning on surrounding land uses and compatibility with local land use plans. This assessment will ensure that the proposed land use changes are properly considered within the broader context of environmental, economic, employment, and sociological impacts.

Water resources Project impacts on water resources will be in the EIS due to several factors that could impact nearby surface water and groundwater resources. This EIS will identify and discuss the water resources near the Project Site and describe regulations associated with development and/or water quality standards that may apply to these resources. Identification and evaluation of mitigation measures will be part of the EIS, including avoidance and minimization through alternatives analysis.

Project impacts on water resources will be studied in the EIS due to several factors that could impact both surface water and groundwater in the Project Area. The Project includes the potential for discharge to wetlands, which will be studied to assess potential effects on water quality, wetland ecosystems, and surrounding water bodies. Climate considerations will also be incorporated into the analysis, specifically focusing on how anticipated changes in precipitation patterns, temperature, and extreme weather events may affect surface and groundwater resources in the region. This will include examining how these climate variables may alter runoff, infiltration, and water availability over time.

Transportation The EIS will complete a traffic study and will include a review of Minnesota Department of Transportation’s Road Safety Audit (RSA) for US Highway 169 from Elk River to Princeton, as it relates to the Project. The traffic study will include a discussion of possible modifications to US Highway 169 to address safety concerns, as related to the Project.

Groundwater The Project is expected to generate leachate, which presents a concern for groundwater quality. The Project incorporates protective systems into the landfill design, including a liner and leachate collection system, an enhanced final cover system, and a groundwater monitoring system that will be under the ongoing regulatory authority of the MPCA solid waste permit. An analysis of the groundwater monitoring plan and contingencies for if groundwater contamination exceeds thresholds will be examined in the EIS. The EIS will study the existing groundwater plume, associated with the historic unlined landfill, and how it relates to the Project.

Also in this section, the EIS will study the differential settlement that may be associated with constructing a new landfill over the existing landfill including settlement effects on liner systems, closure cap systems, leachate collection systems, groundwater monitoring systems, leak detection and other reasonable considerations. There will be further discussion on the liner and 40 CFR 258.40, the geosynthetic clay liner and the aforementioned considerations. The EIS will include discussion on construction and operation considerations such as void prevention, inspection, removal of hazard and sharp materials, The EIS will study how corrective or remedial actions regarding the present groundwater plume will be affected by the proposed expansion.

Although mining closeout procedures include backfilling excavated areas with reclaimed gravel or similar materials, shallow groundwater conditions are still expected to be present post-mining. The Project will generate leachate, which presents a concern for groundwater quality. An analysis of the groundwater monitoring plan and contingencies for if groundwater contamination exceeds thresholds will be in the EIS. The EIS will include a discussion of nearby wellhead protection areas. The EIS will review current and proposed groundwater quality standards related to solid waste disposal facilities.

Analysis of groundwater impacts will be based on a geotechnical analysis utilizing data collected previously in hydrogeologic investigations conducted by WM, Barr Engineering, and the MPCA of the ERL and Project Site. This groundwater impact analysis will be used to evaluate the following five items:

1. A description of the soils and geologic conditions at the ERL and Project Site.

2. Quality, quantity, and depth of groundwater in the vicinity of the Project Site.

3. The existing groundwater monitoring plan for ERL and the groundwater monitoring plan for the Project.

4. A prediction of future groundwater levels and flow direction under the Project Site.

5. PFAS analysis.

Surface water Once sand and gravel mining are complete, 6.39 acres of natural wetlands will remain within the Facility boundary. Of those, 2.24 acres will be removed by the Project, and 4.13 acres will remain adjacent to the Project Site. The Project includes the potential for impact to the adjacent wetlands, which will be studied to assess potential effects on water quality, wetland ecosystems, and surrounding water bodies.

Climate considerations will be in the analysis, focusing on how anticipated changes in precipitation patterns, temperature, and extreme weather events may affect surface and groundwater resources in the region. This will include examining how these climate variables may alter runoff, infiltration, and water availability over time. Potential indirect impacts will be addressed through a discussion of permitting and compensatory mitigation within the EIS. A study on the possible Project impacts to manoomin will be conducted. Baseline samples for sulfates will be taken as part of this study. Nearby Rice Lake (71-0015-00) is designated as a Class 4A, more specifically a "water used for production of wild rice," see Minn. R. 7050.0224 Subp. 2. This designation imparts a water quality standard of 10 mg/L of sulfate for the protection of wild rice for that waterbody. Therefore, monitoring the concentrations of sulfate in Rice Lake will provide valuable insight into the attainment of the standard and potential impacts to wild rice from this proposal. The sulfate testing will follow the MPCA General Lakes SOP.

Air quality The EIS will include a technical report on air quality and air permitting considerations related to the Project. The EIS will address the cumulative environmental impacts of the RNG plant as it pertains to the Project.

The Clean Air Act (CAA) established six major air pollutants—carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide, commonly referred to as "criteria pollutants." Under the CAA, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to define maximum allowable concentrations of these pollutants, aiming to protect public health and the environment.

In Minnesota, the state also enforces its own Minnesota Ambient Air Quality Standards (MAAQS), which may be more stringent than federal limits. Additionally, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) uses the Air Emissions Risk Analysis (AERA) process to evaluate the potential health risks from air emissions at a local level. AERA incorporates site-specific data and health benchmarks to ensure that new or modified facilities do not pose unacceptable risks to nearby communities, further strengthening air quality protection efforts in the state.

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) outlines the standards for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills in 40 C.F.R. pt. 63, subp. AAAA. These standards are designed to address the release of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), ensuring that landfills minimize the emissions of toxic substances into the air. Additionally, the New Source Performance Standard (NSPS), outlined under CAA section 111(d), establishes emission limits for new or modified industrial sources, including Municipal Solid Waste Landfills That Commenced Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification After July 17, 2014, as outlined in 40 C.F.R. pt. 60, subp. XXX. Since the landfill accepts asbestos waste, it is also subject to 40 C.F.R. pt. 61, subp. M, National Emission Standards for Asbestos, which requires that all asbestos waste be tracked and covered promptly.

Anticipated emission sources from the Project include uncaptured landfill gas (LFG), waste decomposition emissions, and fugitive dust from vehicle traffic and waste handling equipment.

Pollutants emitted by these sources include criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), particulate matter (PM) with a diameter less than or equal to 10 microns (PM10), particulate matter with a diameter less than or equal to 2.5 microns (PM2.5), lead (Pb), sulfur dioxide (SO2), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), as well as non-criteria volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and greenhouse gas (GHG) pollutants.

The landfill expansion is expected to increase LFG generation, with peak production rising from 3,100 to 5,008 scfm by 2077, according to EPA’s LandGEM model. As part of the model’s assumption, approximately 75% of the LFG produced by the facility will be collected and processed at the existing renewable natural gas (RNG) facility, with no design changes needed. The model assumes that the remaining 25% will be released as fugitive emissions. The project triggers a modification under 40 C.F.R. 60, subp. XXX, requiring a major air permit amendment, which ERL will submit after completing air quality modeling as part of the EIS.

The EIS will include the following analyses:

• The development of the Project’s potential to emit calculations.

• The development of air dispersion modeling, including Source Impact Analysis (SIA) for NO2, CO, SO2, PM10, and PM2.5, which evaluates impacts of the Project’s potential emissions against applicable significant impact levels (SIL) to determine if the Project may cause or contribute to a violation of the NAAQS. Note that the SIA modeling will consider Project-related emissions increases assuming the installation of the RNG Plant.

• A Cumulative Impact Analysis (CIA) for criteria pollutants with a significant impact as determined by the SIA, as well as for lead (Pb) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S), to compare the Facility’s impacts to applicable NAAQS/MAAQs.

• An evaluation of the health risks related to air emissions using the MPCA Risk Assessment Screening Spreadsheet (RASS).

• An evaluation of direct, indirect, and cumulative ambient air quality impacts consistent with the MPCA Air Quality Modeling Practices Manual and MPCA’s Air Emissions Risk Assessment (AERA) program.

• An estimate of the volume of LFG currently generated at the Facility.

• An estimate of the volume of LFG currently captured at the Facility.

• An estimate of the percentage of the captured LFG flared, used in other ways, or discharged to the atmosphere at the Facility.

• An estimate of the volume of LFG generation expected by the Project at the Facility.

• An estimate of the percentage of LFG capture expected by the Facility gas collection system for the Project.

• An estimate of the percentage of the captured LFG flared, used in some other method, and allowed to escape to the atmosphere at the Facility for the Project.

Based on the results of these assessments, the EIS will:

• Evaluate the ability of the Facility to meet applicable MPCA air quality regulations, including both NAAQS and MAAQS requirements.

• Assess the applicability of NSPS for the Project once it reaches completion and develop a plan for implementation to follow the standards.

• Include an in-depth analysis of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) expected emissions and mitigation measures implemented to minimize environmental impact.

• Incorporate an AERA to assess potential health risks from facility emissions on nearby communities and ensure adherence to MPCA guidelines.

• Evaluate mitigation options for controlling air emissions at the Facility for the Project.

• A review of odor issues that may arise as part of the Project and a description of planned odor control protocols and mitigation measures.

• Evaluate LFG collection and fugitive emissions.

• Evaluate modern technology of LFG collections and fugitive emissions and its applicability to the

Project.

GHG assessment The EIS will evaluate GHG emissions associated with the Project, including emissions from waste decomposition (e.g., methane), construction and operational activities, and transportation of waste materials. An evaluation of the net lifetime GHG emissions for the Project will be in the EIS. The analysis will quantify both direct and indirect GHG emissions and assess the effectiveness of proposed mitigation measures, including the Facility’s gas collection and control system and final cover system. The study will also consider the project’s consistency with local, state, and federal GHG reduction goals and climate policies. A comparison of estimated project emissions amongst EIS alternatives will be in the EIS. The EIS will include a discussion of alternative technologies to use for measuring and monitoring GHGs and the possibility of implementation in conjunction with the Project. This discussion will also include information about available GHG data from alternative measuring and monitoring technologies. The EIS will also review the fugitive emission assumption made in SEAW Item 17 that 75% of the LFG is collected and 25% is emitted as fugitive, as this value can vary based on facility size, operations and weather.

Noise An updated noise study, with hours of operation, will be in the EIS to reflect the additional noise associated with the Project along with proposed mitigation measures.