Loading...
Memo 7th ST Landfill Issues . CITY OF HOPKINS MEMORANDUM Date: July 28, 1994 To: Honorable Mayor and City council From: James Gessele, Engineering Superintendent .JTGr Subject: Seventh Street Landfill Issues This memo serves as an introduction to a Doherty Rumble and Butler report regarding continuing landfill issues faced by the city. Jon Scoll will discuss the newly enacted legislation creating the Landfill Cleanup Program and how that program will have an impact on Hopkins. Almost every facet of the city's relationship with the MPCA concerning the Seventh Street Landfill will undergo change. In some cases it may mean placing efforts . on a new track. In others it may simply require expedited actions. Mr. Scoll will provide in summary what has evolved as a framework for the City's future dealings with the MPCA. JG/rr . 07/29/1994 11:09 D.R.EMINNERPOLIS P,02 ." . MEMOR~NDUM TO: James C1essele Engineering Superintendent City of Hopkins FROM: Jonathan Stoll DATE: July 29. 1994 RE: Overview for City Council of Compliance by Seventh Street Landfill with Landfill Cleanup Program This memorandum is prepared as an update for the City Council at its Tuesday. August 2, 1994 meeting on the status of the Seventh Street Landfill under the: recently-enacted . Landf1l1 Cleanup Program. 1. In General. The Hopkins Landfill was preliminarily designated by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for inclusion in the Landfill Cleanup Program. Under this program, beginning in October 1995, the state will begin to pay reimbursement for "eligible costs" which owners or operators of eligible landfills have incurred in connection with future closure and postclosure. In general, reimbursable costs will include environmental studies, engineering, cleanup and post closure care. It will not include legal or administrative costs. Reimbursement will be subject to a $250,000.00 deductible for each governmental unit. Reimbursements will be made at the total rate of $7 million per year for all qualified landfills, and it is anticipated that funding will come from a higher solid waste fee on commercial solid waste, $90 million in bonding to be issued in bonding over ten years. and by the transfer of the balance in the Metropolitan Landfill Contingency Action Trust Fund (MLCA T) into a new cleanup account. 2. CO}l)pliance by Seventh Street Landfill. It is anticipated that on or before September 1. 1994. the MPCA will furnish the city notice of the work needed to bring th.e landfill into compliance with the new law and otherwise qualify it for eventual state takeover of funding responsibilities. Under me statute, the deadline for completion of closure work is one year from the date of MPCA notification. During this one year. the city will carry OUI the required actions, using city funds, in close coordination with the MPCA, so as to make sure that . all amounts advanced are eligible for ultimate reimbursement. At a recent conference between representatives of the city and the MPCA, the MPCA indicated that it would make available staff to work with the city and its engineers as the city 07/29/1994 11:10 D.R.BMINNERPOLIS P.03 . Memorandum James Gessele July 29 I 1994 Page 2 brings the landfill into compliance during the statutory one year period. At this point, the foUowing items are most likely to require attention: (a) Continued post closure care, i.e., the methane and ground water monitoring which is ongoing; (b) Finalization of "institutional controls" on the property west of the landftll (Rappaport). It will be recalled a "no build" strip of the Rappaport property is necessary at a minimum for methane control on this side and that it had appeared that the Rappapon property on the whole could be acquired by the city as part of a transaction involving some of Rappaport's other property along Highway 3. In the event this transaction does not come to pass, it is probable that the city can simply acquire either title to or easement over the necessary buffer area of the Rappaport property, and a preliminary indication bas been received from MPCA staff that acquisition costs associated with such a buffer . might be eligible expenses under the Landfill Cleanup Program. (c) Methane at or a~jacent to the Westbrook townhomes is the subject of a remedial proposal prepared by Dr. Lofy and submitted to the MPCA in late May. This would involve final rehabilitating (dayIighting) of the membrane area and installation of PVC pipe, looking to possible installation in the future of an active extraction system. The MPCA continues to favor passive venting solutions along with entombment of the landfill, so it is anticipated that Lot)'"s proposal may be rejected. The city will be exploring approvable solutions with the MPCA once the selection of a design engineer for this latest (and hopefully, last) component of work on the barrier is undertaken. (d) The ABI/Rutledge situation is summarized in Jim Gessele's accompanying memorandum. The gas control ordinance will, it is anticipated. address the need for institutional controls on these properties as well. 3. fjnancial As.surance. MPCA staff have advised the city that the $152,000.00 currently in trust at Firststar Trust Company of Minnesota under a trust agreement dated March 16, 1992, pursuant to the existing Closure Order by Consent, could be disbursed, with MPCA approval, to pay eligible costs of the landfill under the Landfill Cleanup Bill (subject to later reimbursement to the city as provided under that statute). . 4. MLCA T Reimbursement. 'fhe funding of the LandfiU Cleanup Program is separate from the MLCA T, which, technically. has been terminated and most of its funds turned over to the Landfill Cleanup Program itself. However. the funds previously set aside by special 07/29/1994 11: 10 D.R.BMINNEAPOLIS P.04 e Memorandum James Gessele July 29, 1994 Page 3 legislation for Hopkins will not he turned over to the new program and remain available for reimbursement to the city for past expenditures on the landfill. Reimbursement of such expenditures is governed by a separate standard, in tllis case, thl.: requirement of both an MPCA plan (which was submitted to the MPCA this past spring and accepted by it) and the requirement that expenditures pursuant to such plan be for "remediation for methane at the landfllllt subject to proper documentation of qualified costs actually incurred. Jim Gessele is tracking the status of expenditures and reimbursements under (he speciallegislation. :skb SR67j cc: Dick Nowlin, Esq. . .