Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-03-27 City Council Meeting Packet AGENDA MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. Monday, March 27, 2023 City Hall, Council Chambers Meeting No. 06-23 A. CALL TO ORDER B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE C. ROLL CALL D. APPROVAL OF AGENDA E. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes F. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS 1. Administrative Presentations a. Council Calendar Update 2. Council Presentations 3. Resolution for Commissioner Appointment G. CONSENT AGENDA – Items on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and non- controversial and are approved by one motion of the council. If a councilmember requests additional information or wants to make a comment regarding an item, the vote should be held until the questions or comments are made then the single vote should be taken. If a councilmember objects to an item it should be removed and acted upon as a separate item. 1. Approval of Claims 2. Resolution Authorizing Maplewood City Staff to Execute All Necessary Documents to Ensure Maplewood City Participation in the Multistate Settlements Relating to Opioid Supply Chain Participants, and in the Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement 3. Conditional Use Permit Review, McCarrons Water Treatment Plant, 1900 Rice Street North 4. Conditional Use Permit Review, Scooter’s Coffee, 2228 Maplewood Drive North 5. Purchase of a 1 Ton Truck Chassis (Unit 540) 6. Purchase of a 1 Ton Truck Chassis (Unit 546) 7. Purchase of a 1 Ton Truck Chassis (Unit 651) 8. Purchase of Two ¾ Ton Truck Chassis (Units 500 and 614) 9. Purchase of Road Salt for 2023-2024 Winter Season H. PUBLIC HEARINGS – If you are here for a Public Hearing please familiarize yourself with the Rules of Civility printed on the back of the agenda. Sign in with the City Clerk before addressing the council. At the podium please state your name and address clearly for the record. All comments/questions shall be posed to the Mayor and Council. The Mayor will then direct staff, as appropriate, to answer questions or respond to comments. None I. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None J. NEW BUSINESS 1. Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Reuter Walton Project, 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East 2. Resolution Approving Third Amendment to the Purchase Agreement, 1160 Frost Avenue East 3. Myrtle-Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16 a. Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Advertising for Bids. b. Resolution Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll 4. Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-17 a. Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Advertising for Bids. b. Resolution Ordering Preparation of Assessment Roll K. AWARD OF BIDS None L. ADJOURNMENT Sign language interpreters for hearing impaired persons are available for public hearings upon request. The request for this must be made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Clerk’s Office at 651.249.2000 to make arrangements. Assisted Listening Devices are also available. Please check with the City Clerk for availability. RULES OF CIVILITY FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, BOARDS, COMMISSIONS AND OUR COMMUNITY Following are rules of civility the City of Maplewood expects of everyone appearing at Council Meetings - elected officials, staff and citizens. It is hoped that by following these simple rules, everyone’s opinions can be heard and understood in a reasonable manner. We appreciate the fact that when appearing at Council meetings, it is understood that everyone will follow these principles: Speak only for yourself, not for other council members or citizens - unless specifically tasked by your colleagues to speak for the group or for citizens in the form of a petition. Show respect during comments and/or discussions, listen actively and do not interrupt or talk amongst each other. Be respectful of the process, keeping order and decorum. Do not be critical of council members, staff or others in public. Be respectful of each other’s time keeping remarks brief, to the point and non-repetitive. E1 MINUTES MAPLEWOOD CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. Monday, March 13, 2023 City Hall, Council Chambers Meeting No. 05-23 A.CALL TO ORDER A meeting of the City Council was held in the City Hall Council Chambersand was called to order at7:00p.m. byMayor Abrams. Mayor Abrams declared this the worst pothole winterand thanked our snow plow drivers for their great job plowing. Public Works Director Love explained the repair process, notification options and differing responsibilities for state, county, or city maintained streets. B.PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE C.ROLL CALL Marylee Abrams, MayorPresent Rebecca Cave, CouncilmemberPresent Kathleen Juenemann, CouncilmemberPresent Chonburi Lee, CouncilmemberPresent Nikki Villavicencio, CouncilmemberPresent D.APPROVAL OF AGENDA The following items were added to Council Presentations: Spring Clean-Up Newsletter CouncilmemberJuenemannmoved to approve the agenda as amended. Seconded by CouncilmemberLee Ayes – All The motion passed. E.APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1.February 27, 2023 City CouncilWorkshopMeeting Minutes CouncilmemberJuenemannmoved to approve the February 27, 2023 City Council Workshop MeetingMinutes assubmitted. Seconded by CouncilmemberLee Ayes – Mayor Abrams Councilmember Juenemann Councilmember Lee Abstain – Councilmember Cave March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 1 Council Packet Page Number 1 of 347 E1 Councilmember Villavicencio The motion passed. 2.February 27, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes oved to approve the February 27, 2023 City CouncilMeeting CouncilmemberLeem Minutes assubmitted. Seconded by Councilmember Juenemann Ayes – Mayor Abrams Councilmember Juenemann Councilmember Lee Abstain – Councilmember Cave Councilmember Villavicencio The motion passed. F.APPOINTMENTSAND PRESENTATIONS 1.Administrative Presentations a.Council Calendar Update City ManagerColemangave an update to the council calendar and reviewed other topics of concern or interest requested by councilmembers. 2.Council Presentations Spring Clean-Up Councilmember Juenemann relayed Spring Clean-Up will be held Saturday, April 22 from 8:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.at Aldrich Arena. Newsletter Councilmember Leerecommended articles be added to the Maplewood Living newsletters highlighting “Did you know?” or “Small business highlights”. G.CONSENT AGENDA – Items on the Consent Agenda are considered routine and non- controversial and are approved by one motion of thecouncil. If a councilmember requests additional information or wants to make a comment regarding an item, the vote should be held until the questions or comments are made then the single vote should be taken. If a councilmember objects to an item it should be removed and acted upon as a separate item. Agenda item G3 and G6 were highlighted. CouncilmemberCavemoved toapprove agenda items G1-G6. Seconded by CouncilmemberJuenemann Ayes – All The motion passed. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 2 Council Packet Page Number 2 of 347 E1 1.Approval of Claims vemoved to approve the approval of claims. CouncilmemberCa ACCOUNTS PAYABLE: $ 249,216.21Checks # 110502 thru # 110515 dated 2/28/23 $ 1,080,247.22Checks # 110516 thru # 110556 dated 3/07/23 $ 920,180.77Disbursements via debits to checking account dated 02/20/23 thru 03/05/23 $ 2,249,644.20Total Accounts Payable PAYROLL $ 643,786.67Payroll Checks and Direct Deposits dated 3/03/23 $ 643,786.67Total Payroll $ 2,893,430.87GRAND TOTAL Seconded by CouncilmemberJuenemannAyes – All The motion passed. 2.Ordinance Repealing the Housing and Economic Development Commission CouncilmemberCavemoved to approve the ordinance repealing the Housing and Economic Development Commission. Ordinance1036 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE IV, DIVISION 9OF THE CITY CODE REGARDING THE MAPLEWOOD HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA ORDAINSAS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Chapter 2, Article IV, Division 9 of the city code is amended by repealing Secs. 2-335 through 2-345 in full and renumbering the remaining sections as follows: DIVISION 9. – Reserved. Secs. 2-335 – 2-345. Reserved. SECTION II. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its adoption and publication. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 3 Council Packet Page Number 3 of 347 E1 Seconded by CouncilmemberJuenemann Ayes – All The motion passed. 3.Ramsey County Public Works to Perform 2023 Street Striping vemoved to authorize Ramsey County Public Works to perform City CouncilmemberCa pavement striping needs, in an amount estimated at $30,000. Seconded by CouncilmemberJuenemann Ayes – All The motion passed. 4.Bituminous Material Purchases for 2023 Season CouncilmemberCavemoved to authorize the Street Superintendent to purchase bituminous materials in an amount up to $85,000 for the 2023 street maintenance season. Seconded by CouncilmemberJuenemann Ayes – All The motion passed. 5.Resolution for a Lawful Gambling Premises Permit for White Bear Lake Lions Club at Johnny Kitchen & Bar Inc., 1900 County Road D E #135 CouncilmemberCavemoved to approve the resolution for a lawful gambling premises permit for White Bear Lake Lions Club to conduct gambling activities at Johnny Kitchen & Bar Inc., 1900 County Road D E #135. Resolution 23-03-2182 LAWFUL GAMBLING PREMISES PERMIT FORWHITE BEAR LAKE LIONS CLUB AT JOHNNY KITCHEN & BAR INC. WHEREAS, White Bear Lake Lions Club has submitted an application to the City of Maplewood requesting City approval of a Lawful Gambling Premises permit application, to be used at Johnny Kitchen & Bar Inc., 1900 County Road D E #135, Maplewood, MN; WHEREAS, local approval is required prior to the Gambling Control Board’s issuance of a premises permit; BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of Maplewood, MN, that the premises permit for lawful gambling is approved for White Bear Lake Lions Club to conduct gambling activities at Johnny Kitchen & Bar Inc., 1900 County Road D E #135, Maplewood, MN. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 4 Council Packet Page Number 4 of 347 E1 FURTHERMORE, that the Maplewood City Council requests that the Gambling Control Board approve said permit application as being in compliance with Minnesota Statute §349.213. NOW, THEREFORE, be it further resolved that this Resolution by the City Council of Maplewood, MN, be forwarded to the Gambling Control Board for their approval. Seconded by CouncilmemberJuenemann Ayes – All The motion passed. 6.Resolution to Accept Assistance to Firefighters Grant CouncilmemberCavemoved to approve the resolution accepting the Assistance to Firefighters Grant. Resolution 23-03-2183 EXPRESSING ACCEPTANCE OF AND APPRECIATION OFA GRANT TO THE MAPLEWOOD FIRE DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has presented to the Maplewood Fire Department a grant for an estimated amount of $42,909.09; and WHEREAS, this grant is intended for the purpose to benefit the Department; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, that: 1.The grant is accepted and acknowledged with gratitude; and 2.The grant will be appropriated for the Fire Department as designated Seconded by CouncilmemberJuenemann Ayes – All The motion passed. H.PUBLIC HEARINGS– If you are here for a Public Hearing please familiarize yourself with the Rules of Civility printed on the back of the agenda. Sign in with the City Clerk before addressing the council. At the podium please state your name and address clearly for the record. All comments/questions shall be posed to the Mayor and Council. The Mayor will then direct staff, as appropriate, to answer questions or respond to comments. None I.UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1.Resolution Ordering Improvement for the Myrtle-Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16 (4 Votes) Public Works Director Love gave the staff report. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 5 Council Packet Page Number 5 of 347 E1 CouncilmemberJuenemannmoved to approve the Resolution Ordering the Improvement for the Myrtle-Sterling Area Street improvements, City Project 22-16 (4 affirmative votes are required to approve this resolution). Resolution 23-03-2184 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT th WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution of the City Council adopted February 13, 2023, a date for a council hearing was set on the proposed street improvements for the Myrtle-Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16; and WHEREAS, a notice was mailed ten days in advance to residents and a notice of the hearing was published, and the hearing was dulyheld on February 27, 2023; and the council has heard all persons desiring to be heard on the matter and has fully considered the same; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1.That it is necessary, cost-effective and feasible, as detailed in the Feasibility Report, that the City of Maplewood make improvements to the Myrtle-Sterling Area Street improvements, City Project 22-16. 2.Such improvements ordered as proposed in this Council resolution th adopted on the 13day of March 2023. 3.The City Engineer, or his designee, is the designated engineer for this improvement project and is hereby directed to prepare final plans and specifications as previously directed by the City Council at the February 13, 2023 councilmeeting. 4.The Finance Director was authorized to make the financial transfers necessary for the preparation of plans and specifications at the February 13, 2023 council meeting. A budget of $5,391,700 was established at that time. The proposed financing plan shall be implemented and is as follows: Estimated Project Cost Recovery Funding SourceTotal Amount% of Total General Obligation (G.O.) Improvement Bonds$2,142,10040% Environmental Utility Fund$1,287,10024% Sanitary Sewer Fund$70,7001.5% Water Area Fund$25,6000.5% St. Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS)$1,041,70019% Special Benefit Assessments$824,50015% Total Estimated Project Funding:$5,391,700100% Seconded by CouncilmemberLee Ayes – All March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 6 Council Packet Page Number 6 of 347 E1 The motion passed. 2.Resolution Ordering Improvement for the Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-17 (4 Votes) Public Works Director Love gave the staff report and answered questions of the council regarding sidewalks. CouncilmemberJuenemannmoved to approve the Resolution Ordering the Improvement for the Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street improvements, including a sidewalk on Radatz Avenue, City Project 22-17 (4 affirmative votes are required to approve this resolution). Resolution 23-03-2185 ORDERING IMPROVEMENT th WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution of the City Council adopted February 13, 2023, a date for a council hearing was set on the proposed street improvements for the Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-17; and WHEREAS, a notice was mailed ten days in advance to residents and a notice of the hearing was published, and the hearing was duly held on February 27, 2023; and the council has heard all persons desiring to be heard on the matter and has fully considered the same; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1.That it is necessary, cost-effective and feasible, as detailed in the Feasibility Report, that the City of Maplewood make improvements to the Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street improvements, City Project 22-17. 2.Such improvements ordered as proposed in the Council resolution adopted th on this 13day of March 2023. 3.The City Engineer, or his designee, is the designated engineer for this improvement project and is hereby directed to prepare final plans and specifications as previously directed by the City Council at the February 13, 2023 council meeting. 4.The Finance Director was authorized to make the financial transfers necessary for the preparation of plans and specifications at the February 13, 2023 council meeting. A budget of $3,527,800 was established at that time. The proposed financing plan shall be implemented and is as follows: Estimated Project Cost Recovery Funding SourceTotal Amount% of Total General Obligation (GO) Bonds$348,60010% Environmental Utility Fund$227,0006% March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 7 Council Packet Page Number 7 of 347 E1 Sanitary Sewer Fund$73,5002% Water Area Fund$58,3002% Street Revitalization Fund$1,822,70052% Special Benefit Assessments$997,70028% Total Estimated Project Funding:$3,527,800100% Seconded by Councilmember LeeAyes – All The motion passed. J.NEW BUSINESS 1.Conditional Use Permit Amendment Resolution, InTech, Inc., 1055 Gervais Avenue East Community Development Director Parr gave the presentation. Patrick Kasper, owner of InTech, Inc.,addressed council and provided additional information. CouncilmemberCavemoved to approve a conditional use permit amendment resolution for a building addition at 1055 Gervais Avenue East, subject to certain conditions of approval. Resolution 23-03-2186 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AMENDMENT RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. Background. 1.01Patrick Kasper, on behalf of Intech, Inc., has requested to amend the Conditional Use Permit for the property to allow for a building addition. 1.02The property is located at: The South 290.4 feet of the East 150 feet of the Northwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 29, Range 22, Ramsey County, Minnesota. The East half of the East half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 29, Range 22, less the North 24 rods thereof is subject to a cartway over and across the South 16 feet, more or less thereof; and that the North 56 rods of the West half of the East half of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 29, Range 22, is subject to a cartway over and across the South 16 feet more or less thereof. PID: 092922240038 1.03City Ordinance Sec. 44-12 allows for the expansion of a nonconforming structure within the required setback through a conditional use permit approved by the city council. Section 2. Standards. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 8 Council Packet Page Number 8 of 347 E1 2.01 General Conditional Use Permit Standards. City Ordinance Section 44- 1097(a) statesthat the City Council must base approval of a Conditional Use Permit on the following nine standards for approval. 1.The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Code ofOrdinances. 2.The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3.The use would not depreciate property values. 4.The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5.The use would not exceed the design standards of any affected street. 6.The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7.The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8.The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site’s natural and scenic features into the development design. 9.The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. Section 3. Findings. 3.01The proposal meets the specific Conditional Use Permit standards. Section 4. City Review Process 4.01The City conducted the following review when considering this conditional use permit request. 1.On February 21, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing. City staff published a hearing notice in the Pioneer Press and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The Planning Commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 9 Council Packet Page Number 9 of 347 E1 present written statements. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this resolution. 2.On March 13, 2023, the City Council discussed this resolution. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and City staff. Section 5.City Council 5.01The City Council hereby approvesthe resolution. The conditional use permit resolution approves a building addition within the required front yard setback. Approval is based on the findings outlined in section 3 of this resolution. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.The proposed project must achieve all city code requirements. 2.The proposed project requires a 15-day minor construction project application. This application is required to be reviewed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3.The applicant is required to obtain a building permit before construction. 4.The approved exterior storage is limited to equipment, trailers, and vehicles associated with the business. All vehicles and trailers must be licensed and operable and stored on an approved parking surface. 5.The owner or applicant installing and maintaining a screening fence that is 100 percent opaque around the perimeter of the outdoor storage area. The owner shall maintain and repair the fence so that it remains in good conditionand 100 percent opaque. 6.There shall be no noise-making business activity conducted on the property, or made by vehicles entering or leaving the lot, between 7 p.m. and 7 a.m., Monday through Saturday, and not on Sunday as required by city code. This condition shall not prohibit business activity on the property during these hours so long as the business activity does not otherwise violate the provisions of the city ordinance regulating noise. 7.The proposed construction and the outdoor storage on the property must be substantially started within one year of council approval or the permit shall become null and void. The council may extend this deadline for one year. 8.The city council shall review this permit in one year. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 10 Council Packet Page Number 10 of 347 E1 9.The property shall meet the hard surface parking and minimum space requirements as required by ordinance. 10.All construction shall follow the project plans as approved by the city. This shall include providing a driveway to the gate of the storage yard, subject to the requirements of the firemarshal. 11.The property owner shall keep the site clean of debris and shall cut or remove any noxious weeds. 12.The owners and operators shall only use Maplewood Drive and Gervais Avenue for access to the site. There shall be no truck traffic from this business on Cypress Street or on Keller Parkway. 13.The owner shall not make any changes or modifications to the north 44 feet of the property which will have a negative impact on the managed B wetland to the north of the property. Any changes or modifications proposed by the owner shall be submitted to the city for approval prior to implementation Seconded by Councilmember JuenemannAyes – All The motion passed. 2.Assisted Living and Memory Care Project, 1910 County Road C East a.Conditional Use Permit and Wetland Buffer Setback Variance Resolution b.Design Review Resolution Community Development Director Parr gave the presentation. Lucas Larson, with Galahad Development, addressed council and provided additional information. CouncilmemberJuenemannmoved to approve a resolution for a conditional use permit and wetland buffer setback variance for a two-story assisted living and memory care facility to be constructed on the vacant land at 1910 County Road C East. Resolution 23-03-2187 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND WETLAND BUFFER SETBACK VARIANCE RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. Background. 1.01Lucas Larson, of Galahad Development, LLC, has requested approval of a conditional use permit to permit a multi-family senior housing building in the Business Commercial zoning district. 1.02Lucas Larson, of Galahad Development, LLC, has also requested approval for a 100-foot wetland buffer setback variance. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 11 Council Packet Page Number 11 of 347 E1 1.03The property is located at 1910 County Road C East and is legally described as: PIN: 112922220041 – That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 29 North, Range 22 West , Ramsey County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence West, assumed bearing, along the north line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 170.00 feet to the west line of the East 170.00 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and the point of beginning; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 08 seconds East along said west line 225.00 feet to the south line of the North 225.00 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence East along said south line 170.00 feet to the east line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter ofthe Northwest Quarter; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 08 seconds East along said east line 429.00 feet to the south line of the North 654.00 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence West along said south line 396.50 feet to the west line of the East 396.50 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter: thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 08 seconds West along said west line 321.00 feet to the south line of the North 333.00 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence East along said south line 166.50 feet to the west line of the East 230.00 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter: thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 08 seconds West along said west line 333.00 feet to said north line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence East along said north line 60.00 feet to the point of beginning. Abstract Property Section 2. Standards. 2.01City OrdinanceSection 44-512 (1) of the Business Commercial zoning district requirements states that a conditional use permit may be granted for “all permitted uses in the R3 district.” 2.02City Ordinance Section 18-221 (d) (1) requires a minimum buffer width of 100 feetfrom Manage A Wetlands and Streams where no building, grading, or mowing is permitted. 2.03General Conditional Use Permit Standards. City Ordinance Section 44- 1097(a) states that the City Council must base approval of a Conditional Use Permit on the following nine standards for approval. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 12 Council Packet Page Number 12 of 347 E1 1.The use would be located, designed, maintained, constructed and operated to be in conformity with the City’s Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances. 2.The use would not change the existing or planned character of the surrounding area. 3.The use would not depreciate property values. 4.The use would not involve any activity, process, materials, equipment or methods of operation that would be dangerous, hazardous, detrimental, disturbing or cause a nuisance to any person or property, because of excessive noise, glare, smoke, dust, odor, fumes, water or air pollution, drainage, water run-off, vibration, general unsightliness, electrical interference or other nuisances. 5.The use would not exceed the design standards of any affected street. 6.The use would be served by adequate public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, water and sewer systems, schools and parks. 7.The use would not create excessive additional costs for public facilities or services. 8.The use would maximize the preservation of and incorporate the site’s natural and scenic features into the development design. 9.The use would cause minimal adverse environmental effects. 2.04Wetland Buffer Variance Standards. City Ordinance Section 18-221 (h) (1) provides procedures for granting a variance to the wetland ordinance requirements and refers to the state statute where a variance may be granted when: (1) the variance is in harmony with the general purposes and intent of this ordinance; (2) when the variance is consistent with the comprehensive plan; and (3) when the applicant establishes that there are practical difficulties in complying with the ordinance. Practical difficulties mean: (1) The proposed use is reasonable; (2) the need for a variance is caused by circumstances unique to the property, not created by the property owner; (3) the proposal will not alter the essential character of the locality. Section 3. Findings. 3.01The proposal meets the specific conditional use permit standards. 3.02The proposal meets the specific procedures for granting a variance to the wetland ordinance requirements for the following reasons. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 13 Council Packet Page Number 13 of 347 E1 1.Wetland buffer mitigation will improve the existing buffer with native plants and seed. 2.The existing conditions on this property are unique and not caused by the property owner. 3.The proposed building would complement the surrounding buildings without altering the essential character of the area. Section 4. City Review Process 4.01The City conducted the following review when considering this conditional use permit request. 1.On January 25, 2023, the Environmental and Natural Resources Commission reviewed the request. The Environmental and Natural Resources Commission recommended that the City Council approve this resolution. 2.On February 21, 2023, the planning commission helda public hearing. The city staff published a hearing notice in the Pioneer Press and sent notices to the surrounding property owners. The planning commission gave everyone at the hearing a chance to speak and present written statements. The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this resolution. 3.On March 13, 2023, the city council discussed this resolution. They considered reports and recommendations from the planning commission and city staff. Section 5.City Council 5.01The city council hereby approvesthe resolution. Approval is based on the findings outlined in section 3 of this resolution. Approval is subject to the following conditions: 1.All construction shall follow the approved plans, date-stamped January 4, 2023. The director of community development may approve minor changes. 2.The proposed construction must be substantially started within one year of council approval, or the permit shall become null and void. 3.The city council shall review this permit in one year. 4.A parking waiver of 14 parking spaces is approved. If a parking shortage develops, the city council may require additional parking spaces to be constructed. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 14 Council Packet Page Number 14 of 347 E1 5.For the new parking lot to connect to the existing parking lots located on the properties at 2603and 2607 White Bear Avenue, the applicant shall provide copies of cross-access and parking agreements with all affected, adjacent parcels before the issuance of any permits. If agreements are not in place, the applicant must maintain a five-foot setback between the new parking lot and the shared property lines to the east. 6.Before any permits are issued, the applicant must submit a plan to city staff showing how the potential queuing of cars onto County Road C East due to the shared drive used by the proposed senior housing use and the adjacent car wash will be mitigated. 7.This permit allows 72 senior housing units consisting of assisted living and memory care units. Minor changes to this unit count may be approved by staff. 8.The conversion of this building to independent senior housing or multifamily housing is not approved. The applicant must seek city council approval to revise the uses approved with this permit. 9.Storage of refuse containers should be accommodated inside the buildings. However, outdoor storage can be provided if adequately screened both architecturally and with landscaping. The location should minimize visibility from the street and neighboring buildings. No refuse storage is allowed in front of the building, adjacent to the street. 10. Satisfy the requirements set forth in the engineering review authored by Jon Jarosch, dated January 11, 2023. 11.Satisfy the requirements set forth in the environmental review authored by Shann Finwall and Carole Gernes dated January 11, 2023. Seconded by Councilmember CaveAyes – All The motion passed. CouncilmemberJuenemannmoved to approve a resolution for design review for a two- story assisted living and memory care facility to be constructed on the vacant land at 1910 County Road C East. Resolution23-03-2188 DESIGN REVIEW RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota, as follows: Section 1. Background. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 15 Council Packet Page Number 15 of 347 E1 1.01Lucas Larson, of Galahad Development, LLC, has requested approval of a design review for a multi-family senior housing building 1.02The property is located at 1910 County Road C East and is legally described as: PIN: 112922220041 –That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 11, Township 29 North, Range 22 West, Ramsey County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence West, assumed bearing, along the north line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter a distance of 170.00 feet to the west line of the East 170.00 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and the point of beginning; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 08 seconds East along said west line 225.00 feet to the south line of the North 225.00 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence East along said south line 170.00 feet to the east line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter ofthe Northwest Quarter; thence South 00 degrees 00 minutes 08 seconds East along said east line 429.00 feet to the south line of the North 654.00 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence West along said south line 396.50 feet to the west line of the East 396.50 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter: thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 08 seconds West along said west line 321.00 feet to the south line ofthe North 333.00 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence East along said south line 166.50 feet to the west line of the East 230.00 feet of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter: thence North 00 degrees 00 minutes 08 seconds West along said west line 333.00 feet to said north line of said Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter; thence East along said north line 60.00 feet to the point of beginning. Abstract Property Section 2. Site and Building Plan Standards and Findings. 2.01 City ordinance Section 2-290(b) requires that the community design review board make the following findings to approve plans: 1.That the design and location of the proposed development and its relationship to neighboring, existing or proposed developments and traffic is such that it will not impair the desirability of investment or occupation in the neighborhood; that it will not unreasonably interfere with the use and enjoyment of neighboring, existing or proposed developments; and that it will not create traffic hazards or congestion. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 16 Council Packet Page Number 16 of 347 E1 2.That the design and location of the proposed development are in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and are not detrimental to the harmonious, orderly and attractive development contemplated by this article and the city's comprehensive municipal plan. 3.That the design and location of the proposed development would provide a desirable environment for its occupants, as well as for its neighbors, and that it is aesthetically of good composition, materials, textures and colors. Section 3. City Council Action. 3.01The above-described site and design plans are hereby approved based on the findings outlined in Section 3 of this resolution. Subject to staff approval, the site must be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the design plans date-stamped January 4, 2023. Approval is subject to the applicant doing the following: 1.Obtain a conditional use permit from the city council for this project. 2.Repeat this review in two years if the city has not issued a building permit for this project. 3.All requirements of the fire marshal and building official must be met. 4.Satisfy the requirements set forth in the engineering review authored by Jon Jarosch,dated January 11, 2023. 5.Satisfy the requirements set forth in the environmental review authored by Shann Finwall and Carole Gernes dated January 11, 2023. 6.The applicant shall obtain all required permits from the Ramsey- Washington Metro Watershed District. 7.Rooftop vents and equipment shall be located out of view from the single-family homes to the north and northwest of the sides of the property. 8.Any identification or monument signs for the project must meet the requirements of the city’s sign ordinance. Identification or monument signs shall be designed to be consistent with the project’s building materials and colors. 9.Before the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit for staff approval the following items: March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 17 Council Packet Page Number 17 of 347 E1 a.The applicant shallprovide the city with a cash escrow or an irrevocable letter of credit for all required exterior improvements. The amount shall be 150 percent of the cost of the work. b.For the new parking lot to connect to the existing parking lots located on the properties at 2603 and 2607 White Bear Avenue, the applicant shall provide copies of cross-access and parking agreements with all affected, adjacent parcels. If agreements are not in place, the applicant must maintain a five-foot setback between the new parking lot and the shared property lines to the east. c. The applicant must submit a plan to city staff showing how the potential queuing of cars onto County Road C East due to the shared drive used by the proposed senior housing use and the adjacent car wash will be mitigated. d.The applicant shall submit photos of building materials to city staff and members of the CDRB for review. e.The applicant shall provide adequate screening so the kitchen venting is screened visually from other businesses. 10.The applicant shall complete the following before occupying the building: a.Replace any property irons removed because of this construction. b.Provide continuous concrete curb and gutter around the parking lot and driveways. c. Install all required landscaping and an in-ground lawn irrigation system for all landscaped areas. d.Install all required outdoor lighting. e.Install all required sidewalks and trails. 11.If any required work is not done, the city may allow temporary occupancy if: a.The city determines that the work is not essential to public health, safety or welfare. b.The above-required letter of credit or cash escrow is held by the City ofMaplewood for all required exterior improvements. The owner or contractor shall complete any unfinished exterior improvements by June 1 of the following year if occupancy of the building is in the fall or winter or within six weeks of March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 18 Council Packet Page Number 18 of 347 E1 occupancy of the building if occupancy is in the spring or summer. 12.All work shall follow the approved plans. The director of community development may approve minor changes. Seconded by Councilmember VillavicencioAyes – All The motion passed. 3.Renewable Energy Ordinance a.Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter 18, Article V of the Maplewood City Code Pertaining to Renewable Energy b.Resolution Authorizing Publication by Title and Summary (4 Votes) Environmental Planner Finwall gave the staff report. CouncilmemberJuenemann moved to approvethe Renewable Energy Ordinance. Ordinance1037 AN ORDINANCE REGULATING RENEWABLE ENERGY SYSTEMS (WIND, SOLAR, GEOTHERMAL) The Maplewood City Council ordains as follows: Section I. Sections 18-201 and 18-202 (Environment and Natural Resources Purpose and Intent) of the Maplewood City Code are hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 18-201. - Purpose. The purpose of this article is to protect significant natural features and promote energy independence and local food production which: (1)Preserve the natural character of neighborhoods. (2)Protect the health and safety of residents. (3)Protect water quality and minimize stormwater runoff. (4)Prevent erosion or flooding. (5)Control or eliminate soil erosion and sedimentation. (6)Encourage renewable energy systems that have a positive impact in energy conservation, with limited adverse impact on the community. (7)Maintain slope stability and existing drainage patterns. (8)Promote local production of food with Community and Market Gardens. Sec. 18-202. - Applicability. This article shall apply to any person or use that would alter a significant natural feature, add a renewable energy source, or create a Community or Market Garden. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 19 Council Packet Page Number 19 of 347 E1 Section II. Sections 18-301 and 18-302 (Renewable Energy Scope and Purpose) of the Maplewood City Code are hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 18-301. - Scope. This division applies to the regulations of renewable energy systems within the City of Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota. The division focuses on wind turbines, solar systems, and geothermal ground-source heat pumps. Sec. 18-302. - Purpose. It is the goal of the city to provide a sustainable quality of life for the city's residents, making careful and effective use of available natural resources to maintain and enhance this quality of life. Cities are enabled to regulate land use under Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462 (Zoning and Planning) for the purpose of "promoting the health, safety, morals, and general welfare of the community." As part of this regulatory power, Maplewood believes it is in the public interest to encourage renewable energy systems that have a positive impact in energy conservation, with limited adverse impact on the community. While Maplewood strongly encourages increased energy conservation and improved energy efficiency, the city also finds that increased use of appropriate renewable energy systems will be an important part of improving urban sustainability. The renewable energy regulations are intended to supplement existing zoning ordinances and land use practices, and ensure these systems are appropriately designed, sited and installed. These regulations are in place to balance the need to improve energy sustainability through increased use of renewable energy systems with concerns for preservation of public health, welfare, and safety, as well as environmental quality, visual and aesthetic values, and existing neighborhood social and ecological stability. With these regulations, Maplewood is concerned that renewable energy systems, particularly wind energy systems, be designed to minimize the negative impacts on bird and bat species that are vulnerable to mortality from these energy- gathering machines. Section III. The following definitions contained in Section 18-321(a) (Wind Energy Sources and Systems) are hereby added and/or amended to read as follows: Sec. 18-321. - Wind energy sources and systems. Feeder line means any power line that carries electrical power from one or more wind turbine(s) or individual transformers associated with an individual wind turbine to the point of interconnection with the electric power grid. In the case of interconnection with the high-voltage transmission systems, the point of interconnection shall be the substationserving the WECS. Hybrid Small WECS include light fixtures and mechanisms for powering electric vehicle charging stations, light fixtures, or other mechanical equipment for use in parking lots or in public right of way with a wind power element. Large WECS means a WECS of equal to or greater than 100kW in total nameplate generating capacity. Small WECS means a WECS of less than 100kW in total nameplate generating capacity. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 20 Council Packet Page Number 20 of 347 E1 WECS means a wind energy conversion system which is an electrical generating facility comprised of one or more wind turbines and accessory facilities, including, but not limited to, power lines, transformers, substations and metrological towers that operate byconverting the kinetic energy of wind into electrical energy. Section IV. Section 18-322 (a)(1)(a) and (d) (Wind Energy Conversion System Districts) is hereby amended to read as follows and Section 18-322 (a)(2) is deleted. Section 18-322 (b) is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 18-322. - WECS districts. (a) Large WECS districts. (1)Ground- and roof-mounted large WECS shall be allowed as an accessory use with approval of a conditional use permit in the following zoning districts and land use designations: a.In all properties located in commercial zoning districts (heavy manufacturing, light manufacturing, business commercial, business commercial modified, limited business commercial, commercial office, neighborhood commercial and shopping center). . . . d.In all properties guided as government, institutional, or park in the city's land use designations of the comprehensive plan. (b) Small WECS districts. (1)Roof-mounted small WECS are a permitted accessory use in all zoning districts. (2)Ground-mounted and Hybrid small WECS are a permitted accessory use in the following zoning districts and land use designations: a. In all properties located in commercial zoning districts (heavy manufacturing, light manufacturing, business commercial, business commercial modified, limited business commercial, commercial office, neighborhood commercial and shopping center). b.In all properties located in multiple dwelling residential zoning districts (multiple dwelling residential and multiple dwelling residential townhouse) for purposes of shared WECS energy production among the residential dwelling units. c. In all properties approved as a planned unit development for purposes of shared WECS energy production among the businesses/organizations, residential dwelling units, or adjoining businesses/organizations/residential dwelling units. d. In all properties guided as government, institutional or park in the city's land use designations of the comprehensive plan. (3) Ground-mounted small WECS are a permitted accessory use in double or single dwelling residential zoning districts if the following neighborhood consent requirements are met: March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 21 Council Packet Page Number 21 of 347 E1 Written consent of 60percent of the owners or occupants of privately- or publicly- owned real estate that are located adjacent (i.e., sharing property lines) on the outer boundaries of the premises for which the permit is being requested, or in the alternative, proof that the applicant's property lines are 150 feet or more from any house. Where an adjacent property consists of a multiple dwelling or multi-tenant property, the applicant need obtain only the written consent of the owner or manager, or other person in charge of the building. Such written consent shall be required on the initial application and as often thereafter as the city deems necessary. Section V. Section 18-323 (Placement and Design) is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 18-323. - Placement and design. (a) Ground-mounted WECS. (1)Height. a. Large WECS shall have a total height, including tower and blade to its highest point of travel, of no more than 125 feet. b. Small WECS shall have a total height, including tower and blade to its highest point of travel, of no more than 60 feet. c. Hybrid small WECS shall have a total height as outlined in Section 44- 20(c)(1)(f). (2)Placement. a.Large WECS shall be located as follows: 1. Shall not be located between a principal structure and a public street, unless the city determines that such a location would lessen the visibility of the large WECS or would lessen the impacts of such a WECS on nearby properties. 2. Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the monopole of one times the height from any property line, electric substation, transmission line, or other WECS. 3.Maintain setbacks to bluffs as outlined in Section 18-463. b.Small WECS shall be located: 1. Shall not be located between a principal structure and a public street, unless the city determines that such a location would lessen the visibility of the small WECS or would lessen the impacts of such a WECS on nearby properties. 2. Have a minimum setback distance from the base of the monopole of one times the height from any property line, public right-of-way, electric substation, transmission line, or other WECS. c. Hybrid Small WECS shall follow requirements outlined in Section 44- 20(1). March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 22 Council Packet Page Number 22 of 347 E1 (3)Number. a.Large WECS. One large WECS shall be allowed on a single lot up to five acres. All other larger parcels will be limited to one large WECS per five acres of land. b.Small WECS. One small WECS shall be allowed on a single lot up to one acre. All other larger parcels will be allowed one small WECS per one acre of land. (4)Design. a. Tower Configuration. All ground mounted WECS shall: 1.Be installed with a tubular, monopole type tower. 2.Have no guyed wires attached to the tower or other components. 3.Have no ladder, step bolts, rungs, or other features used for tower access to extend within eight feet of the ground. Lattice-style towers shall have a protective barrier to prevent unauthorized access to the lower eight feet of the tower. b. Signs. A WECS operator is required to provide a single posting, not to exceed four square feet, at the base of a WECS prohibiting trespassing, warning of high voltage, and providing the emergency contact information for the operator. (b)Roof-mounted WECS. (1) Height. a. Large roof-mounted WECS: 1.Total height of not more than 25 feet, measured from the top of the roof to the blade tip at its highest point of travel. b.Small roof-mounted WECS: 1. Total height of not more than 25 feet, measured from the top of the roof to the blade tip at its highest point of travel. 2. Residential installation. In addition to the 25-foot height restriction for the small roof-mounted WECS, the height of the WECS and the structure on which it is attached must not exceed the maximum height allowed in the residential zoning district for which it is installed. (2) Placement. Roof-mounted WECS must be erected above the roof of a building or structure. The mounts associated with the WECS may extend onto the side of the building or structure. (3) Number. a. Large roof-mounted WECS. To minimize flickering shadows caused by the rotors spinning and visual impacts of roof-top large roof-mounted WECS, the maximum number shall be subjected to general architectural March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 23 Council Packet Page Number 23 of 347 E1 considerations including the height, bulk and area of the building; colors and materials to be used; and the physical and architectural relationship of the proposed large roof-mounted WECS with existing building. b. Small roof-mounted WECS. No more than three roof-mounted small WECS shall be installed on any rooftop. Section VI. Section 18-325(a)(6) (Wind Energy Conversion Systems General Standards) is hereby deleted and sections 18-325(a)(7), 18-325 (b)(1) and (c)(1) are amended to read as follows: (a)The following provisionsshall apply to all WECS erected under the provisions of this division: (7) Feeder lines: Any lines accompanying a WECS, other than those contained within the WEC’s tower or those attached to on-site structures by leads, shall be buried within the interior of the subject parcel, unless there are existing lines in the area that the lines accompanying a WECS can be attached. (b) In addition to the provisions outlined in Section 325 (General Standards) above, the following provisions will apply to large WECS erected under the provisions of this division: (1) Color. Turbine paint color and high levels of ultraviolet and infrared components of paint could have an impact on the attraction of insect species to the structure, which may attract birds and bats and cause bird and bat mortality. As such, turbine paint color may be approved as part of the conditional use permit process and must be shown to reduce the impacts to birds and bats and be a non- obtrusive color so not to cause visual impacts to surrounding properties. (c) In addition to the provisions outlined in Section 325 (General Standards) above, the following provisions will apply to small WECS erected under the provisions of this division: (1) Color. Turbine paint color must be a nonobtrusive color so not to cause visual impacts to surrounding properties. Section VII. Chapter 18, Article V, Division 5, Subdivision III (Solar Energy) is hereby amended to read as follows: Subdivision III. - Solar Energy Sec. 18-351. - Solar energy sources and systems. (a) Definitions, solar energy sources and systems. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this section, shall have the meaning provided herein, except where the context clearly indicates otherwise: Beneficial Habitat Standards means standards consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 216B.1642, or successor statutes and guidance as set by the Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources (BWSR). Building-integrated solar system means an active solar system that is an integral part of a principal or accessory building, rather than a separate mechanical device, replacing or substituting for an architectural or structural component of the building. Building- March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 24 Council Packet Page Number 24 of 347 E1 integrated systems include, but are not limited to, photovoltaic or hot water solar systems that are contained within roofing materials,windows, skylights, and awnings. Community Solar Garden means a solar energy system that provides electric power (or a financial proxy for electric power) to multiple community members or businesses residing or located off-site from the location of the solar energy system. Ground-mounted solar energy system means freestanding solar panels mounted to the ground by use of stabilizers or similar apparatus. Hybrid Solar Fixtures include light fixtures and mechanisms for powering electric vehicle charging stations, light fixtures, or other mechanical equipment for use in parking lots or in public right of way with a wind power element. Photovoltaic system means an active solar energy system that converts solar energy directly into electricity. Roof-or building-mounted Solar Energy System means solar energy system that is mounted to the roof or building using brackets, stands or other apparatus. Roof pitch means the final exterior slope of a building roof calculated by the rise over the run, typically, but not exclusively, expressed in twelfths such as 3/12, 9/12, 12/12. Solar acc essmeans a view of the sun, from any point on the collector surface that is not obscured by any vegetation, building, or object located on parcels of land other than the parcel upon which the solar collector is located, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. standard time on any day of the year. Solar canop y means a structure that provides shade to vehicles or people and includes a solar energy system that provides electric power. Including, but not limited to, car ports, mass transit shelters, pavilions, pergolas with solar arrays. Solar collecto r means a device, structure or a part of a device or structure for which the primary purpose is to transform solar radiant energy into thermal, mechanical, chemical, or electrical energy. Solar energy means radiant energy received from the sun that can be collected in the form of heat or light by a solar collector. Solar energy system (SES)means an active solar energy system that collects or stores solar energy and transforms solar energy into another form of energy or transfers heat from a collector to another medium using mechanical, electrical, or chemical means. SES can be roof, building, structure, or ground mounted. Solar hot water system means a system that includes a solar collector and a heat exchanger that heats or preheats water for building heating systems or other hot water needs, including residential domestic hot water and hot water for commercial processes. Sec. 18-352. - Districts. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 25 Council Packet Page Number 25 of 347 E1 (a)Ground, roof, building mounted SES and hybrid solar fixtures are a permitted accessory use in all zoning districts. (b)Solar canopies are a permitted accessory use in all zoning districts. (c) Community Solar Gardens: (1)Roof or building mounted community solar gardens are a permitted accessory use in all zoning districts. (2)Ground mounted community solar gardens that are one acre in size and under are a permitted accessory use in all zoning districts. (3)Ground mounted community solar gardens that are greater than one acre in size shall be allowed as an accessory use with approval of a conditional use permit in all zoning districts. (4)Ground mounted community solar gardens of any size shall be allowedas a primary use with approval of a conditional use permit in all zoning district. Sec. 18-353. - Placement and design. (a) Height. (1)Roof or building mounted SES are allowed to be ten (10) feet higher at maximum tilt than the height of a building in any zoning district. (2)Solar canopies: a.Residential: shall not exceed the height of an accessory building in any residential zoning district when oriented at maximum tilt. b.Commercial: shall not exceed the height of a primary building in any commercial zoning district when oriented at maximum tilt. (3) Ground-mounted SES: a.Residential: shall not exceed the height of an accessory building in any residential zoning district when oriented at maximum tilt. b.Commercial: shall not exceed the height of a primary building in any commercial zoning district when oriented at maximum tilt. (4)Hybrid solar fixtures: shall have a total height as outlined in Section 44- (20)(c)(1)(f). (b) Location. (1)Roof or building-mounted SES may be located two (2) feet beyond the required setbacks of the building on which the system is mounted. (2)Solar canopies: a.Residential: shall maintain the required setbacks of an accessory building. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 26 Council Packet Page Number 26 of 347 E1 b.Commercial: shall maintain the building setbacks for the district in which the system is located. (3) Ground-mounted SES: a.Residential: shall maintain the required setbacks of an accessory building. b.Commercial: shall maintain the building setbacks for the district in which the system is located. (4)Hybrid solar fixtures: shall follow requirements outlined in Section 44-20(1). (c) Visibility. (1)SES are a visible sign of the City’s commitment to sustainability. The color of the solar collector is not required to be consistent with other roofing or building materials. (2)Building-integrated solar systems shall be allowed regardless of visibility, provided the building component in which the system is integrated meets all required setback, land use or performance standards for the zoning district in which the building is located. (3)Ground Mounted Community Solar Gardens shall be screened from view from the public right-of-way and affected properties to the extent possible by setbacks, berming, existing vegetation, landscaping, or a combination thereof. (d)Design. (1)Ground Mounted Community Solar Gardens: a.Large-scale removal of mature trees on the site is discouraged. Removal of significant trees on the site must comply with the tree preservation ordinance. b.The project site design shall include the installation and establishment of ground cover meeting the beneficial habitat standard consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 216B.1642, or successor statutes and guidance as set by Minnesota Board of Water and Soil Resources. c. Beneficial habitat standards shall be maintained on the site for the duration of operation, until the site is decommissioned. d.The applicant shall submit a financial surety to equal 150 percent of the costs to meet the beneficial habitat standard. The financial guarantee shall remain in effect until vegetation issufficiently established. Sec. 18-354. - General standards. (a)Feeder lines. Any lines accompanying a SES, other than those attached to on-site structures by leads, shall be buried within the interior of the subject parcel, unless there are existing lines in the area that the lines accompanying a SES can be attached. (b) Restrictions on SES limited. No homeowners' agreement, covenant, common interest community, or other contract between multiple property owners within a subdivision of March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 27 Council Packet Page Number 27 of 347 E1 Maplewood shall restrict or limit solar systems to a greater extent than Maplewood's renewable energy ordinance. (c) Maplewood encourages solar access to be protected in all new subdivisions and allows for existing solar to be protected consistent with Minnesota Statutes. Any solar easements filed must be consistent with Minn. Stats. § 500.30. Sec. 18-355. – Conditional Use Permit Procedure for Solar. Procedures for granting conditional use permits from this ordinance are as follows: (a)In reviewing the conditional use permit the city council will follow the requirements for conditionaluse permit approvals as outlined in Article V (conditional use permits). (b)Before the city council acts on a conditional use permit the environmental and natural resources commission and the planning commission will review the following conditions of approval prior to making a recommendation to the city council: (1)Large-scale removal of significant trees on the site is discouraged. (2)The project site design shall include the installation and establishment of ground cover meeting the beneficial habitat standard. (3)Beneficial habitat standards shall be maintained on the site for the duration of operation, until the site is decommissioned. Sec. 18-356. - Abandonment. A SES that is allowed to remain in a nonfunctional or inoperative state for a period of 12 consecutive months, and which is not brought in operation within the time specified by the city, shall be presumed abandoned and may be declared a public nuisance subject to removal at the expense of the operator. Secs. 18-357—18-400. - Reserved. Section VIII. The following definition contained in Section 18-401(a) (Geothermal Energy Sources and Systems) is hereby amended to read as follows: Subdivision IV. - Geothermal Energy Sec. 18-401. - Geothermal energy sources and systems. (a)Definitions, geothermal energy sources and systems. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this section, shall have the meaning provided herein, except where the context clearly indicates. Ground source heat pump system (GSHPS)means a system that uses the relatively constant temperature of the earth or a body of water to provide heating in the winter and cooling in the summer. System components include closed loops of pipe, coils or plates; a fluid that absorbs and transfers heat; and a heat pump unit that processes heat for use or disperses heat for cooling; and an air distribution system. Section IX. Section 44-1092 (Conditional Uses) is hereby amended as follows: March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 28 Council Packet Page Number 28 of 347 E1 Sec. 44-1092.Conditional uses. The city council may issue conditional use permits for the following uses in any zoning district in which they are not specifically prohibited: . . . (10)Large Wind Energy Conversion Systems (WECS) (11)Ground mounted community solar gardens that are greater than one acre in size as an accessory use. (12)Ground mounted community solar gardens as a primary use. Section X. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective following its adoption and publication. Seconded by Councilmember CaveAyes – All The motion passed. CouncilmemberJuenemannmoved to approvethe Resolution Authorizing Publication and Title and Summary (4 Votes). Resolution 23-03-2189 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PUBLICATION OF ORDINANCE NO.1037 BY TITLE AND SUMMARY WHEREAS, the city council of the city of Maplewood has adopted Ordinance No.1037,an ordinance amendingChapter 18, Article V,Division 5 (Renewable Energy); and WHEREAS, MinnesotaStatutes, §412.191, subd. 4, allows publication by title and summary in the case of lengthy ordinances or those containing charts or maps; and WHEREAS, the ordinance is ten pages in length; and WHEREAS, the city council believes that the following summary would clearly inform the public of the intent and effect of the ordinance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Maplewood that the city clerk shall cause the following summary of Ordinance No. 1037to be published in the official newspaper in lieu of the entire ordinance: Public Notice The Maplewood city council has adopted Ordinance No.1037,which amendsChapter 18, Article V,Division 5 (Renewable Energy) of city code regarding regulations of on-site renewable energy systems. The ordinance amends regulations for renewable energy systems including wind turbines, solar systems, and geothermal ground-source heat pumps. In particular, it allows excess wind, solar, and geothermal energy to be stored on site; creates regulations for hybrid wind energy systems; modifies neighborhood consent requirements for ground-mounted small wind energy systems; modifies maximum number of large roof-mounted wind energy systems; and creates regulations for community solar March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 29 Council Packet Page Number 29 of 347 E1 gardens and solar canopies. The ordinance shall be effective upon adoption and publication. A full copy of the ordinance is available in the office of the city clerk. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the city council of the city of Maplewood that the city clerk keep a copy of the full ordinance in her office at city hall for public inspection. Seconded by Councilmember LeeAyes – All The motion passed. K.AWARD OF BIDS None L.ADJOURNMENT Mayor Abramsadjourned the meeting at8:29 p.m. March 13, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes 30 Council Packet Page Number 30 of 347 F1a CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: City Council REPORT FROM: Melinda Coleman, City Manager PRESENTER: Melinda Coleman, City Manager AGENDA ITEM: Council Calendar Update Action Requested: Motion Discussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution Ordinance Contract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: This item is informational and intended to provide the Council an indication on the current planning for upcoming agenda items and the Work Session schedule. These are not official announcements of the meetings, but a snapshot look at the upcoming meetings for the City Council to plan their calendars. Recommended Action: No motion needed. This is an informational item. Upcoming Agenda Items and Work Sessions Schedule: TBD: EDA Meeting: Discussion of TIF Plan and Development Agreement for Enclave/Myth Project TBD: Workshop: Draft Snow Removal Policy April 24: Council Meeting: Community Survey Results May 18 (all day) City Council / Staff Retreat Council Comments: Comments regarding Workshops, Council Meetings or other topics of concern or interest. 1. Appoint Council Member Lee to Century Avenue Coalition 2. Review/Evaluation of Snow Removal Policy Council Schedule for Maplewood Living through September 2023: Issue Contributor Due Date Lee April 14, 2023 May 2023 Abrams May 17, 2023 June 2023 Juenemann June 15, 2022 July 2023 Cave July 17, 2023 August 2023 Villavicencio August 17, 2023 September 2023 Lee September 15, 2023 November 2023 Council Packet Page Number 31 of 347 F1a 2023 Major Community Outreach Events /źƷǤ ƚŅ ağƦƌĻǞƚƚķ 9ğƭƷĻƩ 9ŭŭ IǒƓƷ Saturday, April 8, 2023 (09:00-11:30) Edgerton Community Gym wźĭĻ ğƓķ \[ğƩƦĻƓƷĻǒƩ {ƦƩźƓŭ /ƌĻğƓΏǒƦ No Date or Time set yet Rice and Larpenteur /źƷǤ ƚŅ ağƦƌĻǞƚƚķ {ƦƩźƓŭ /ƌĻğƓΏǒƦ Saturday, April 22, 2023 (08:00-13:00) Aldrich Arena (starting time is the busiest time) CźƩĻ 5ĻƦğƩƷƒĻƓƷ .źƉĻ wƚķĻƚ Tuesday, May 9, 2023 (evening Hours) North Fire Station /ƚƦ ƚƓ ğ wƚƚŅƷƚƦ Λ{ƦĻĭźğƌ hƌǤƒƦźĭƭ CǒƓķƩğźƭĻƩΜ Friday, May 19, 2023 (early morning Hours) Dunkin Donuts (Co Rd D and Hwy 61) ƚǒĭŷ ğ ƩǒĭƉ Wednesday, June 14, 2023 (evening hours) YMCA Parking lot Ʒŷ \[źŭŷƷ źƷ Ʀ ağƦƌĻǞƚƚķ ΛЍ ƚŅ WǒƌǤ ĻǝĻƓƷΜ Tuesday, July 4, 2023 (16:00-23:00) Hazelwood Park Council Packet Page Number 32 of 347 F3 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager REPORT FROM: Lois Knutson, Administrative Services & Performance Measurement Coordinator PRESENTER: Melinda Coleman, City Manager AGENDA ITEM: Resolution for Commissioner Appointment Action Requested: MotionDiscussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution Ordinance Contract/AgreementProclamation Policy Issue: During the Council Workshop on March 27, 2023 the City Council interviewed two candidates for one commission opening on the Planning Commission. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the attached resolution to appoint the candidate to the commission as indicated below: Planning Commission (one opening) Tom Oszman or Tom Schmidt (to be determined) term expires December 31, 2025 Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $0.00 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: n/a Strategic Plan Relevance: Community InclusivenessFinancial & Asset MgmtEnvironmental Stewardship Integrated CommunicationOperational EffectivenessTargeted Redevelopment The CityÓs Commissions and Boards provide an opportunity for citizens to become involved in City government and be a part of the decision making process. Background The City has advertised and accepted applications from interested individuals. During the City th Council Workshop on March 27, the Council interviewed two candidates for one opening on the Council Packet Page Number 33 of 347 F3 Planning Commission. Upon completion of the interviews, Council members ranked the candidates and submitted their score sheets to staff. The rankings were tallied and staff is recommending the top candidate be appointed to the Planning Commission. Per City ordinance, commissions have uniform terms of 3 years with staggered term dates of April ththst 30, September 30 and December 31. Newly appointed commissioners take over the term vacated by the prior commissioner. Therefore, the position they are appointed to may not be for a full three year term. Attachments 1. Resolution for Appointment Council Packet Page Number 34 of 347 F3, Attachment 1 RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: Hereby appoints the following individuals, who the Maplewood City Council has reviewed, to be appointed to the following commission or board: Planning Commission (one opening) Tom Oszman or Tom Schmidt (to be determined) term expires December 31, 2025 Council Packet Page Number 35 of 347 THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Council Packet Page Number 36 of 347 G1 Council Packet Page Number 37 of 347 G1, Attachments Council Packet Page Number 38 of 347 G1, Attachments Council Packet Page Number 39 of 347 G1, Attachments Council Packet Page Number 40 of 347 G1, Attachments Council Packet Page Number 41 of 347 G1, Attachments Council Packet Page Number 42 of 347 G1, Attachments Council Packet Page Number 43 of 347 G1, Attachments Council Packet Page Number 44 of 347 G1, Attachments Council Packet Page Number 45 of 347 G1, Attachments Council Packet Page Number 46 of 347 G1, Attachments Council Packet Page Number 47 of 347 G2 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman REPORT FROM: Joe Rueb, Finance Director Ron Batty, City Attorney PRESENTER:Joe Rueb, Finance Director AGENDA ITEM: Resolution Authorizing Maplewood City Staff to Execute All Necessary Documents to Ensure Maplewood City Participation in the Multistate Settlements Relating to Opioid Supply Chain Participants, and in the Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement Action Requested: Motion Discussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution Ordinance Contract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: Minnesota could receive around $235 million of additional funding by participating in a new multistate settlement involving several opioid supply chain participants. This is a continuation of Resolution 21- 12-2021 and a Memorandum of Agreement approved by Council in December 2021. This settlement comes as part of the national opioid litigation against Teva, Allergan, CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the Resolution Authorizing Maplewood City Staff to Execute All Necessary Documents to Ensure Maplewood City Participation in the Multistate Settlements Relating to Opioid Supply Chain Participants, and in the Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is to be determined. Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: N/A Strategic Plan Relevance: Financial Sustainability Integrated Communication Targeted Redevelopment Operational Effectiveness Community Inclusiveness Infrastructure & Asset Mgmt. The purpose of the settlement funding is to repair the harm done to communities through irresponsible and misleading marketing and inadequate monitoring of prescriptions flowing to the state Council Packet Page Number 48 of 347 G2 Background The amount of the settlement will depend on how many local governments enter into the agreement with the State of Minnesota. Minnesota receives more funding based on the number of local governments entering into the agreement. Data from the Minnesota Department of Health shows that from 2020 to 2021, opioid-involved overdose deaths increased by 44%, to an all-time high of 978 deaths in 2021. Fentanyl, a highly potent synthetic opioid, was involved in the majority of the deaths. In July 2021, the Attorney General’s Office joined historic $26 billion multistate settlement agreements with pharmaceutical distributors McKesson, Cardinal Health, and AmerisourceBergen, and opioid manufacturer Johnson & Johnson. These settlements will bring more than $300 million into Minnesota over the next 18 years to fight the opioid crisis. In December 2021, the Attorney General’s Office reached an agreement with Minnesota cities and counties on how funds from these settlements will be allocated: 75% to counties and cities, and 25% to the State. The agreement also details how the funds can be used to combat the opioid crisis, including detailed programs and strategies focused on treatment, prevention, and harm reduction. In December 2022, the Attorney General’s Office joined five additional multistate settlements worth $20.4 billion with major opioid manufacturers Teva Pharmaceuticals and Allergan, and three of the nation’s largest retail pharmacy chains—Walmart, CVS, and Walgreens. Minnesota’s share of these settlements could be around $235 million. In 2023, the agreement with cities and counties was amended to apply to the five additional settlements above. http://www.ag.state.mn.us/opioids/ Attachments 1. Resolution Authorizing Maplewood City Staff to Execute All Necessary Documents to Ensure Maplewood City Participation in the Multistate Settlements Relating Opioid Supply Chain Participants, and in the Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement. 2. Amended Minnesota Opioids State-Subdivision Memorandum of Agreement (Amended MOA) 3. Participation Forms for Teva, Allergan, CVS, Walgreens, and Walmart, including a release of any claims. Council Packet Page Number 49 of 347 G2, Attachment 1 Council Packet Page Number 50 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 51 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 52 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 53 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 54 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 55 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 56 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 57 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 58 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 59 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 60 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 61 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 62 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 63 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 64 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 65 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 66 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 67 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 68 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 69 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 70 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 71 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 72 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 73 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 74 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 75 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 76 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 77 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 78 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 79 of 347 G2, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 80 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 81 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 82 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 83 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 84 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 85 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 86 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 87 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 88 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 89 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 90 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 91 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 92 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 93 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 94 of 347 G2, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 95 of 347 G3 CITY COUNCILSTAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager REPORT FROM: Elizabeth Hammond, Planner PRESENTER: Danette Parr, Community Development Director AGENDA ITEM: Conditional Use Permit Review, McCarrons Water Treatment Plant, 1900 Rice Street North Action Requested: MotionDiscussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution OrdinanceContract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: The conditional use permit (CUP) review for McCarrons Water Treatment Plant, located at 1900 Rice Street North, is due for its annual review. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the CUP review for McCarrons Water Treatment Plant, located at 1900 Rice Street North, and review again in one year. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $0 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: n/a Strategic Plan Relevance: Community InclusivenessFinancial & Asset MgmtEnvironmental Stewardship Integrated Communication Operational EffectivenessTargeted Redevelopment City ordinance requires conditional use permits to be reviewed by the council within one year of the date of initial approval unless such review is waived by council decision. At the one-year review, the council may specify an indefinite or specific term for subsequent reviews, not to exceed five years. Background: The city approved a conditional use permit amendment and design plans for Saint Paul Regional Water Services to construct improvements to its McCarrons Water Treatment Plant. The project includes demolition, tree removal, and construction related to expanding the facility both above and underground. The project is in good standing with the city. Site work is underway and will continue into the middle of 2026. Council Packet Page Number 96 of 347 G3 The city has issued the tree removal and grading permit. All trees proposed for removal have been cleared. The city holds an escrow to ensure all trees are replaced once the grading and construction work is complete. The building official is working with the applicant to finalize building permit submittal documents related to fire sprinkler provisions. Once this item is addressed, a full building permit will be issued. In the meantime, a phased partial building permit has been issued for the current site work. Staff recommends reviewing the CUP again in one year. Timeline/Previous Actions December 15, 1988: The city council approved a CUP for SPRWS to construct a clear-water pond west of Sylvan Street and north of Larpenteur Avenue. June 10, 1996: The city council approved a CUP and design plans for the expansion of the solids dewatering facility. August 11, 1997: The city council approved a CUP and design plans for the construction of two building additions and a new building at the water treatment plant. December 10, 2001: The city council approved a CUP and design plans for the expansion and renovation of the water treatment plant. June 23, 2003: The city council approved a CUP and design plans for the construction of three new buildings on the water services campus. April 23, 2018: The city council approved a CUP for the construction of a new lime sludge storage tank. February 28, 2022: The city council approved a CUP amendment and design plans for a facility expansion. Reference Information Site Description Site Size: 127 acres Existing Land Use: Water Treatment Plant Surrounding Land Uses North: Single Dwelling Residential, Educational Facilities, Commercial South: Single Dwelling Residential, Larpenteur Avenue East: Single Dwelling Residential West: Commercial Planning Existing Land Use: Institutional Existing Zoning: Farm Residential Attachments: 1.Overview Map 2.City Council Meeting Minutes Council Packet Page Number 97 of 347 G3, Attachment 1 Council Packet Page Number 98 of 347 G3, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 99 of 347 G3, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 100 of 347 G3, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 101 of 347 G3, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 102 of 347 G3, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 103 of 347 G3, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 104 of 347 G4 CITY COUNCILSTAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager REPORT FROM: Elizabeth Hammond, Planner PRESENTER: Danette Parr, Community Development Director AGENDA ITEM: Conditional Use Permit Review, Scooter’s Coffee, 2228 Maplewood Drive North Action Requested: Motion Discussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution Ordinance Contract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: The conditional use permit (CUP) review for Scooter’s Coffee, located at 2228 Maplewood Drive North, is due for its annual review. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the CUP review for Scooter’s Coffee, located at 2228 Maplewood Drive North, and review again in one year. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $0 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: n/a Strategic Plan Relevance: Community InclusivenessFinancial & Asset MgmtEnvironmental Stewardship Integrated Communication Operational Effectiveness Targeted Redevelopment City ordinance requires conditional use permits to be reviewed by the council within one year of the date of initial approval unless such review is waived by council decision. At the one-year review, the council may specify an indefinite or specific term for subsequent reviews, not to exceed five years. Background: The city approved a conditional use permit, design plans, and a setback variance for Scooter’s Coffee shop to be constructed at 2228 Maplewood Drive North. The project is complete and in good standing with the city. Staff inspected the site on November 7, 2022, to review the required landscaping installation. All plantings were installed per the approved plans. The city released a portion of the escrow last fall upon planting and retained an amount to ensure landscaping is Council Packet Page Number 105 of 347 G4 established over the next year. Staff recommends reviewing the CUP again in one year to ensure that site conditions remain compliant and that the required plantings are well established. Timeline/Previous Actions February 14, 2022: The City approved a resolution for a conditional use permit, setback variance, and design review for a Scooter’s Coffee shop to be constructed on the property. Reference Information Site Description Site Size: 0.97 acres Existing Land Use: Scooter’s Coffee Shop Surrounding Land Uses North: Highway 36, Menards South: Keller Golf Course East: Single Dwelling Residential West: Highway 61, Keller Lake Planning Existing Land Use: Commercial Existing Zoning: Light Manufacturing Attachments: 1. Overview Map 2. City Council Meeting Minutes Council Packet Page Number 106 of 347 G4, Attachment 1 Council Packet Page Number 107 of 347 G4, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 108 of 347 G4, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 109 of 347 G4, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 110 of 347 G4, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 111 of 347 G4, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 112 of 347 G4, Attachment 2 Council Packet Page Number 113 of 347 G5 CITY COUNCILSTAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman REPORT FROM: Steven Love, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Scott Schultz, Utility/Fleet Superintendent PRESENTER:Steven Love AGENDA ITEM: Purchase of a1Ton Truck Chassis(Unit 540) Action Requested: MotionDiscussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution OrdinanceContract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: The City of Maplewood’s 2023-2027 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identifies the replacement of a 1 ton street maintenance truck. City Council approval is needed to move forward with this purchase. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the purchase of a 1 ton street maintenance truck chassis and direct the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a contract with North Country GM for the purchase under MN State Contract #188747 in the amount of $55,560.00. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $55,560.00 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: The 2023-2027 CIP identifies $94,500.00 for the replacement of a street maintenance truck. Due to supply chain issues the truck chassis needs to be ordered in advance of the truck body/equipment buildout. The cost of the purchase of the truck chassis is $38,940 below the 2023 CIP value. The Finance Director has reviewed the fleet fund balance and there are sufficient funds to move forward with this purchase. Strategic Plan Relevance: Community InclusivenessFinancial & Asset MgmtEnvironmental Stewardship Integrated Communication Operational EffectivenessTargeted Redevelopment The new replacement truck will increase work efficiencies and better serve the current and future needs of the Public Works department. Council Packet Page Number 114 of 347 G5 Background: The current 2008 1 ton street maintenance truck (Unit 540) is in need of replacement. This unit is utilized by the street division for year round maintenance of streets including asphalt work and snow removal. As part of the City’s asset management program, fleet assets use a Vehicle Replacement Rating (VRR) score to reflect the current condition of vehicles and to establish priority of replacement. The VRR score is based on a scale of 0 to 30 where 0 is a brand new vehicle and 30 is the highest priority for replacement. VRR scores are generated by rating a vehicle in six categories. These categories include the age of the vehicle, usage (distance driven or time used), maintenance and repair costs (not including accident repairs), reliability (frequency the vehicle is in the shop for repairs), type of service the vehicle receives, and condition based on mechanic’s inspection. Due to the high mileage (79,400 miles) and a VRR rating of 25.69, this piece of equipment is recommended for replacement. For past purchases of vehicles, the agenda reports included both the cost for ordering the chassis and the cost for the vehicle body/equipment buildout. Due to supply chain issues, it is estimated that the chassis may take 1 to 1.5 years before the chassis is delivered to the City. Ordering the vehicle body/equipment buildout is not recommended at this time because inflation and supply chain issues could drastically change the cost of the buildout by the time the chassis is delivered. To help control purchasing costs and equipment funding levels staff is recommending to purchase the chassis and then get quotes for the buildout once the City receives the chassis. This allows the City to secure a spot in line for the chassis purchase. After the chassis is delivered, staff will then be able to receive an accurate buildout quote, review available funding, and bring the vehicle body/equipment buildout to council for approval. The old unit will be sent to state auction once the new unit is ready. All proceeds from the auction will be deposited in the Fleet Fund for future purchases Following is the cost for the chassis for this truck: North Country GM $55,560.00 (cost of truck chassis) Attachments: 1.Quote/Specs from North Country GM Council Packet Page Number 115 of 347 G5, Attachment 1 QUOTATION NORTH COUNTRY GM 1502 E HOWARD ST CONTRACT # 188747 HIBBING, MN 55746 218-263-7578 BOB O'HARA EST DELIVERY TIME 218-263-7576 218-349-8955 90 - 120 ARO rwohara01@aol.com RCC-10 BASE MODEL 2024 CHEV SILVERADO 3500 4x4 CK31003$ 43,895.00 REG CAB CHASSIS CAB 60" CA GVW 14,000 LBS. Maplewood Unit 540 3,843.00 LT TRIM UPGRADE 3LT - ADDED OPTIONS 6.6L V8 L8T STD 10 SPEED AUTO MYDx STD 3.73:1 AXLE RATIO GT4x STD AIR CONDITIONING FRT x STD Engine, Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 B20-Diesel compatible, (445 hp 8,703.20LP5X$8,703.20 \[332 kW\] @ 2800 rpm, 910 lb-ft of torque \[1220 Nm\] @ 1600 rpm) Transmission, Allison 10-speed N/CMGM- automatic Transmission, Allison 10-speed automatic with integrated Power Take-Off (PTO) (Requires (L5P) N/CMGU- Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 engine. Included and only available with (PTO) Power Take-Off.) Power Take-Off (Requires (L5P) Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 - 875.60PTO engine and (K34) Cruise Control. WT Fleet Convenience Package includes (AQQ) Remote Keyless Entry, (K34) Cruise Control and (DBG) power trailer mirrors with heated upper glass and manual 1,100.00ZLQX$1,100.00 extending/folding, (AXG) power windows, express up/down driver, (AED) power windows, express down passenger and (AU3) power door locks 176.00 LT235/80R-17E ALL TERRAIN QZTX$176.00 Council Packet Page Number 116 of 347 G5, Attachment 1 BRAKE CONTROLLER 242.00JL1X$242.00 Snow Plow Prep Package includes (KW5) 220-amp alternator, includes increased front GAWR on Heavy Duty models, (NZZ) skid plates (transfer case and oil pan), pass through dash grommet hole and 264.00VYUX$264.00 roof emergency light provisions. (Requires 4WD model. Upgradeable to (KHF) Dual alternators (220-amp primary, 170-amp auxiliary). Not available with (F60) Heavy Duty Front Spring Package.) DPF, diesel particulate filter, manual regeneration customer regeneration 220.00 will not be allowed until the DPF FPFX$220.00 load percentage has reached 100% full 689.00 BLACK ASSIST STEPS RVQX$689.00 AUX BATTERY (std w/diesel) 118.80K4BX$118.80 176.00 DASH SWITCH AUTO TRAC 4X4 NQH- Chrome Front Bumper 88.00 V46- N/C VINYL FLOORING BG9- 120 VOLT OUTLET IN CAB AND 132.00KJ4- BOX UPFITTER SWITCHED (kit shipped 132.009L7X$132.00 loose, req additional upfitter wiring) - 166.00 ADDITIONAL KEY/FOB COMB EA 0$- Add Block Heater X Add Back Up Alarm X EXT COLOR SCHOOL BUS YELLOW GAZX STD INT TRIM COLOR VINYL SEAT TRIM H2G STD CLOTH SEAT TRIM H1TX N/C TOTAL$ 55,540.00 3,610.106.5% SALES TAX- 199.25LICENCE TITLE & REG- 20.00 TRANSIT TAXX$20.00 TOTAL per UNIT$ 55,560.00 QTY 1$ 55,560.00 Council Packet Page Number 117 of 347 G5, Attachment 1 purchase order number contactSCOTT SCHULTZ customerCITY OF MAPLEWOOD phone(651) 249-2430 email billing address delivery address date ordered order # Council Packet Page Number 118 of 347 G6 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman REPORT FROM: Steven Love, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Scott Schultz, Utility / Fleet Superintendent PRESENTER:Steven Love AGENDA ITEM: Purchase of a 1 Ton TruckChassis (Unit 546) Action Requested: MotionDiscussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution OrdinanceContract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: The City of Maplewood’s 2022–2031 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identified the replacement of a street sign maintenance truck in 2022. The purchase of this vehicle was delayed due to supply chain issues in 2022. City Council approval is needed to move forward with this purchase. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the purchase of a street sign truck chassis and direct the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a contract with North Country GM under MN State Contract #188747 in the amount of $55,892.00. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $55,892.00 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: The 2022-2026 CIP identified $45,000.00 for the replacement of one street sign truck. Due to supply chain issues the truck chassis needs to be ordered in advance of the truck body/equipment buildout. The cost for the purchase of the truck chassis is $10,892 above the 2022 CIP Value. The Finance Director has reviewed the fleet fund balance and there are sufficient funds to move forward with this purchase. Strategic Plan Relevance: Community InclusivenessFinancial & Asset MgmtEnvironmental Stewardship Integrated Communication Operational EffectivenessTargeted Redevelopment The new replacement street sign truck will increase work efficiencies and better serve the current and future needs of the Public Works department. Council Packet Page Number 119 of 347 G6 Background: The current 2007 streetsign truck (Unit 546) is in need of replacement. This unit is utilized by the street division to install and repair street signs throughout the City year round. The City of Maplewood owns/maintains approximately 5,700 signs. As part of the City’s asset management program, fleet assets use a Vehicle Replacement Rating (VRR) score to reflect the current condition of vehicles and to establish priority of replacement. The VRR score is based on a scale of 0 to 30 where 0 is a brand new vehicle and 30 is the highest priority for replacement. VRR scores are generated by rating a vehicle in six categories. These categories include the age of the vehicle, usage (distance driven or time used), maintenance and repair costs (not including accident repairs), reliability (frequency the vehicle is in the shop for repairs), type of service the vehicle receives, and condition based on mechanic’s inspection. Due to the vehicle condition and a VRR rating of 25.38, this piece of equipment is recommended for replacement. For past purchases of vehicles, the agenda reports included both the cost for ordering the chassis and the cost for the vehicle body/equipment buildout. Due to supply chain issues, it is estimated that the chassis may take 1 to 1.5 years before the chassis is delivered to the City. Ordering the vehicle body/equipment buildout is not recommended at this time because inflation and supply chain issues could drastically change the cost of the buildout by the time the chassis is delivered. To help control purchasing costs and equipment funding levels, staff is recommending to purchase the chassis and then get quotes for the buildout once the City receives the chassis. This allows the City to secure a spot in line for the chassis purchase. After the chassis is delivered, staff will then be able to receive an accurate buildout quote, review available funding, and bring the vehicle body/equipment buildout to council for approval. The old unit will be sent to state auction once the new unit is ready. All proceeds from the auction will be deposited in the Fleet Fund for future purchases. Following is the cost for the chassis for this truck: North Country GM $55,892.00 (cost of truck chassis) Attachments: 1. Quote/Specs from North Country GM Council Packet Page Number 120 of 347 G6, Attachment 1 QUOTATION NORTH COUNTRY GM 1502 E HOWARD ST CONTRACT # 188747 HIBBING, MN 55746 218-263-7578 BOB O'HARA EST DELIVERY TIME 218-263-7576 218-349-8955 90 - 120 ARO rwohara01@aol.com RCC-10 BASE MODEL 2024 CHEV SILVERADO 3500 4x4 CK31003$ 43,895.00 REG CAB CHASSIS CAB 60" CA GVW 14,000 LBS. Maplewood Unit 546 3,843.00 LT TRIM UPGRADE 3LT - ADDED OPTIONS 6.6L V8 L8T STD 10 SPEED AUTO MYDx STD 3.73:1 AXLE RATIO GT4x STD AIR CONDITIONING FRT x STD Engine, Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 B20-Diesel compatible, (445 hp 8,703.20LP5X$8,703.20 \[332 kW\] @ 2800 rpm, 910 lb-ft of torque \[1220 Nm\] @ 1600 rpm) Transmission, Allison 10-speed N/CMGM- automatic Transmission, Allison 10-speed automatic with integrated Power Take-Off (PTO) (Requires (L5P) N/CMGU- Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 engine. Included and only available with (PTO) Power Take-Off.) Power Take-Off (Requires (L5P) Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 - 875.60PTO engine and (K34) Cruise Control. WT Fleet Convenience Package includes (AQQ) Remote Keyless Entry, (K34) Cruise Control and (DBG) power trailer mirrors with heated upper glass and manual 1,100.00ZLQX$1,100.00 extending/folding, (AXG) power windows, express up/down driver, (AED) power windows, express down passenger and (AU3) power door locks 176.00 LT235/80R-17E ALL TERRAIN QZTX$176.00 Council Packet Page Number 121 of 347 G6, Attachment 1 BRAKE CONTROLLER 242.00JL1X$242.00 Snow Plow Prep Package includes (KW5) 220-amp alternator, includes increased front GAWR on Heavy Duty models, (NZZ) skid plates (transfer case and oil pan), pass through dash grommet hole and 264.00VYUX$264.00 roof emergency light provisions. (Requires 4WD model. Upgradeable to (KHF) Dual alternators (220-amp primary, 170-amp auxiliary). Not available with (F60) Heavy Duty Front Spring Package.) DPF, diesel particulate filter, manual regeneration customer regeneration 220.00 will not be allowed until the DPF FPFX$220.00 load percentage has reached 100% full 689.00 BLACK ASSIST STEPS RVQX$689.00 AUX BATTERY (std w/diesel) 118.80K4BX$118.80 176.00 DASH SWITCH AUTO TRAC 4X4 NQH- Chrome Front Bumper 88.00 V46- N/C VINYL FLOORING BG9- 120 VOLT OUTLET IN CAB AND 132.00KJ4- BOX UPFITTER SWITCHED (kit shipped 132.009L7X$132.00 loose, req additional upfitter wiring) - 166.00 ADDITIONAL KEY/FOB COMB EA 2$ 332.00 Add Block Heater X Add Back Up Alarm X EXT COLOR WHITE GAZX STD INT TRIM COLOR VINYL SEAT TRIM H2G STD CLOTH SEAT TRIM H1TX N/C TOTAL$ 55,872.00 3,631.686.5% SALES TAX- 199.25LICENCE TITLE & REG- 20.00 TRANSIT TAXX$20.00 TOTAL per UNIT$ 55,892.00 QTY 1$ 55,892.00 Council Packet Page Number 122 of 347 G6, Attachment 1 purchase order number contactSCOTT SCHULTZ customerCITY OF MAPLEWOOD phone(651)249-2430 email billing address delivery address date ordered order # Council Packet Page Number 123 of 347 G7 CITY COUNCILSTAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman REPORT FROM: Steven Love, Director of Public Works / City Engineer Scott Schultz, Utility/Fleet Superintendent PRESENTER:StevenLove AGENDA ITEM: Purchase of a 1 Ton TruckChassis(Unit 651) Action Requested: MotionDiscussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution OrdinanceContract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: The City of Maplewood’s 2022–2026 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identified the replacement of a 1 ton park maintenance truck in 2022. The purchase of this vehicle was delayed due to supply chain issues in 2022. City Council approval is needed to move forward with this purchase. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the purchase of 1 ton park maintenance truck chassis and direct the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a contract with North Country GM for the purchase under MN State Contract #188747 in the amount of $55,892.00. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $55,892.00 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: The 2022-2026 CIP identified $80,000.00 for the replacement of a park maintenance truck. Due to supply chain issues the truck chassis needs to be ordered in advance of the truck body/equipment buildout. The cost for the purchase of the truck chassis is $24,108 below the 2022 CIP value. The Finance Director has reviewed the fleet fund balance and there are sufficient funds to move forward with this purchase. Strategic Plan Relevance: Financial SustainabilityIntegrated CommunicationTargeted Redevelopment Operational EffectivenessCommunity InclusivenessInfrastructure & Asset Mgmt. The new replacement park maintenance truck will increase work efficiencies and better serve the current and future needs of the Park Maintenance department. Council Packet Page Number 124 of 347 G7 Background The current 2008 1 ton park maintenance truck (Unit 651) is in need for replacement. This truck is utilized year round in the park maintenance division. The unit is equipped with a flat bed, lift gate, and snow plow. It used for trash removal operations throughout the parks system as well as snow plowing in the winter months. As part of the City’s asset management program, fleet assets use a Vehicle Replacement Rating (VRR) score to reflect the current condition of vehicles and to establish priority of replacement. The VRR score is based on a scale of 0 to 30 where 0 is a brand new vehicle and 30 is the highest priority for replacement. VRR scores are generated by rating a vehicle in six categories. These categories include the age of the vehicle, usage (distance driven or time used), maintenance and repair costs (not including accident repairs), reliability (frequency the vehicle is in the shop for repairs), type of service the vehicle receives, and condition based on mechanic’s inspection. Due to the high mileage (110,617 miles) and a VRR rating of 25.70, this piece of equipment is recommended for replacement. For past purchases of vehicles, the agenda reports included both the cost for ordering the chassis and the cost for the vehicle body/equipment buildout. Due to supply chain issues, it is estimated that the chassis may take 1 to 1.5 years before the chassis is delivered to the City. Ordering the vehicle body/equipment buildout is not recommended at this time because inflation and supply chain issues could drastically change the cost of the buildout by the time the chassis is delivered. To help control purchasing costs and equipment funding levels, staff is recommending to purchase the chassis and then get quotes for the buildout once the City receives the chassis. This allows the City to secure a spot in line for the chassis purchase. After the chassis is delivered, staff will then be able to receive an accurate buildout quote, review available funding, and bring the vehicle body/equipment buildout to council for approval. The old unit will be sent to state auction once the new unit is ready. All proceeds from the auction will be deposited in the Fleet Fund for future purchases. Following is the cost for the chassis for this truck: North Country GM $55,892.00 (cost of truck chassis) Attachments 1.Quote/Specs from North Country GM Council Packet Page Number 125 of 347 G7, Attachment 1 QUOTATION NORTH COUNTRY GM 1502 E HOWARD ST CONTRACT # 188747 HIBBING, MN 55746 218-263-7578 BOB O'HARA EST DELIVERY TIME 218-263-7576 218-349-8955 90 - 120 ARO rwohara01@aol.com RCC-10 BASE MODEL 2024 CHEV SILVERADO 3500 4x4 CK31003$ 43,895.00 REG CAB CHASSIS CAB 60" CA GVW 14,000 LBS. Maplewood Unit 651 3,843.00 LT TRIM UPGRADE 3LT - ADDED OPTIONS 6.6L V8 L8T STD 10 SPEED AUTO MYDx STD 3.73:1 AXLE RATIO GT4x STD AIR CONDITIONING FRT x STD Engine, Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 B20-Diesel compatible, (445 hp 8,703.20LP5X$8,703.20 \[332 kW\] @ 2800 rpm, 910 lb-ft of torque \[1220 Nm\] @ 1600 rpm) Transmission, Allison 10-speed N/CMGM- automatic Transmission, Allison 10-speed automatic with integrated Power Take-Off (PTO) (Requires (L5P) N/CMGU- Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 engine. Included and only available with (PTO) Power Take-Off.) Power Take-Off (Requires (L5P) Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 - 875.60PTO engine and (K34) Cruise Control. WT Fleet Convenience Package includes (AQQ) Remote Keyless Entry, (K34) Cruise Control and (DBG) power trailer mirrors with heated upper glass and manual 1,100.00ZLQX$1,100.00 extending/folding, (AXG) power windows, express up/down driver, (AED) power windows, express down passenger and (AU3) power door locks 176.00 LT235/80R-17E ALL TERRAIN QZTX$176.00 Council Packet Page Number 126 of 347 G7, Attachment 1 BRAKE CONTROLLER 242.00JL1X$242.00 Snow Plow Prep Package includes (KW5) 220-amp alternator, includes increased front GAWR on Heavy Duty models, (NZZ) skid plates (transfer case and oil pan), pass through dash grommet hole and 264.00VYUX$264.00 roof emergency light provisions. (Requires 4WD model. Upgradeable to (KHF) Dual alternators (220-amp primary, 170-amp auxiliary). Not available with (F60) Heavy Duty Front Spring Package.) DPF, diesel particulate filter, manual regeneration customer regeneration 220.00 will not be allowed until the DPF FPFX$220.00 load percentage has reached 100% full 689.00 BLACK ASSIST STEPS RVQX$689.00 AUX BATTERY (std w/diesel) 118.80K4BX$118.80 176.00 DASH SWITCH AUTO TRAC 4X4 NQH- Chrome Front Bumper 88.00 V46- N/C VINYL FLOORING BG9- 120 VOLT OUTLET IN CAB AND 132.00KJ4- BOX UPFITTER SWITCHED (kit shipped 132.009L7X$132.00 loose, req additional upfitter wiring) - 166.00 ADDITIONAL KEY/FOB COMB EA 2$ 332.00 Add Block Heater X Add Back Up Alarm X EXT COLOR SCHOOL BUS YELLOW GAZX STD INT TRIM COLOR VINYL SEAT TRIM H2G STD CLOTH SEAT TRIM H1TX N/C TOTAL$ 55,872.00 3,631.686.5% SALES TAX- 199.25LICENCE TITLE & REG- 20.00 TRANSIT TAXX$20.00 TOTAL per UNIT$ 55,892.00 QTY 1$ 55,892.00 Council Packet Page Number 127 of 347 G7, Attachment 1 purchase order number contactSCOTT SCHULTZ customerCITY OF MAPLEWOOD phone(651)249-2430 email billing address delivery address date ordered order # Council Packet Page Number 128 of 347 G8 CITY COUNCILSTAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman REPORT FROM: Steven Love, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Scott Schultz, Utility/Fleet Superintendent PRESENTER:Steven Love AGENDA ITEM: Purchase of Two ¾ Ton Truck Chassis (Units 500 and 614) Action Requested: MotionDiscussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution OrdinanceContract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: The City of Maplewood’s proposed 2023-2027 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identifies the replacement of two public works 3/4 ton trucks. City Council approval is needed to move forward with this purchase. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the purchase of two public works 3/4 ton truck chassis and direct the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a contract with North Country GM for the purchase under MN State Contract #168931 in the amount of $ 115,873.60. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $115,873.60 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: The 2023-2027 CIP identifies $120,750.00 for the replacement of one Utility truck and one Fleet Shop truck. Due to supply chain issues the truck chassis need to be ordered in advance of the truck body/equipment buildout. The cost of the purchase of the two truck chassis is $4,876.40 below the 2023 CIP value. The Finance Director has reviewed the fleet fund balance and there are sufficient funds to move forward with this purchase. Strategic Plan Relevance: Community InclusivenessFinancial & Asset MgmtEnvironmental Stewardship Integrated Communication Operational EffectivenessTargeted Redevelopment The new replacement trucks will increase work efficiencies and better serve the current and future needs of the Public Works department. Council Packet Page Number 129 of 347 G8 Background: The 2001 fleettruck(Unit 500)is in need ofreplacement. This unit is used by the mechanics in the fleet division to perform service calls for the public works trucks and equipment fleet. The new truck will also be equipped with a plow to assist in winter snow maintenance as needed. The 2009 utility truck (Unit 614) is in need of replacement. This unit is used by the utility department year round. It is used in the summer months for utility work including sanitary sewer and lift station maintenance. In the winter months it is used for snow removal on campus properties and trail snow plowing. As part of the City’s asset management program, fleet assets use a Vehicle Replacement Rating (VRR) score to reflect the current condition of vehicles and to establish priority of replacement. The VRR score is based on a scale of 0 to 30 where 0 is a brand new vehicle and 30 is the highest priority for replacement. VRR scores are generated by rating a vehicle in six categories. These categories include the age of the vehicle, usage (distance driven or time used), maintenance and repair costs (not including accident repairs), reliability (frequency the vehicle is in the shop for repairs), type of service the vehicle receives, and condition based on mechanic’s inspection. Due to the high mileage (Unit 500 = 85,974 miles & Unit 614 = 97,957 miles), a VRR ratings of 22.24 (Unit 500), and a VRR rating of 25.04 (Unit 614) these pieces of equipment are recommended for replacement. For past purchases of vehicles, the agenda reports included both the cost for ordering the chassis and the cost for the vehicle body/equipment buildout. Due to supply chain issues, it is estimated that the chassis may take 1 to 1.5 years before it are delivered to the City. Ordering the vehicle body/equipment buildout is not recommended at this time because inflation and supply chain issues could drastically change the cost of the buildout by the time the chassis are delivered. To help control purchasing costs and equipment funding levels, staff is recommending to purchase the chassis and then get quotes for the buildouts once the City receives the chassis. This allows the City to secure a spot in line for the chassis purchase. After the chassis is delivered, staff will then be able to receive an accurate buildout quote, review available funding, and bring the vehicle equipment buildout purchase to council for approval. The old unit will be sent to state auction once the new unit is ready. All proceeds from the auction will be deposited in the Fleet Fund for future purchases. Following is the cost for the two ¾ ton chassis for these trucks: North Country GM$57,936.80 (cost of Unit 500 truck chassis) North Country GM$57,936.80 (cost of Unit 614 truck chassis) Total Cost$115,873.60 Attachments: 1.Quote/Specs from North Country GM. Council Packet Page Number 130 of 347 G8, Attachment 1 QUOTATION NORTH COUNTRY GM 1502 E HOWARD ST CONTRACT # 168931 HIBBING, MN 55746 218-263-7578 BOB O'HARA EST DELIVERY TIME 218-263-7576 218-349-8955 90 - 120 AROrwohara01@aol.com GTR17 BASE MODEL 2024 GMC SIERRA 2500 TK20753$ 46,175.60 4X4 DBL CAB w/6'9" BOX Maplewood Unit 500 ADDED OPTIONS 6.6L V8 L8T STD 10 SPEED AUTO MYDx STD 3.73:1 AXLE RATIO GT4x STD AIR CONDITIONING FRTSTD STD CHROME BUMPERS X STD Transmission, Allison 10-speed automatic (Included and only INCL w/Diesel MGM- available with (L5P) Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 engine Engine, Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 B20-Diesel compatible, (445 hp \[332 kW\] @ 2800 rpm, 910 lb-ft of torque \[1220 Nm\] @ 1600 rpm) 8,703.20(Requires (JL1) trailer brake LSPX$8,703.20 controller. Regular Cab model requires (ZLQ) WT Fleet Convenience Package or (PCV) WT Convenience Package.) Council Packet Page Number 131 of 347 G8, Attachment 1 Convenience Package includes (AQQ) Remote Keyless Entry, (QT5) EZ Lift power lock and release tailgate, (AKO) tinted glass, (UF2) LED cargo bed lighting, (C49) rear- window defogger, (DBG) outside power-adjustable vertical trailering with heated upper glass and (K34) cruise control; (Not available with 1,152.80(ZLQ) Fleet Convenience Package. PCI- When ordered with (ZW9) pickup bed delete, deletes (QT5) tailgate and (UF2) lighting. Note: (QT5) EZ Lift power lock and release tailgate can be upgraded to (QK2) GMC MultiPro Tailgate. Note: (DBG) outside power-adjustable vertical trailering with heated upper glass can be upgraded Council Packet Page Number 132 of 347 G8, Attachment 1 Fleet Convenience Package includes (AQQ) Remote Keyless Entry, (K34) cruise control, (QT5) EZ Lift power lock and release tailgate and (DBG) outside power-adjustable vertical trailering with heated upper glass; (Not available with (PCI) 668.60 Convenience Package. When ZLQX$668.60 ordered with (ZW9) pickup bed delete, (QT5) EZ Lift power lock and release tailgate is deleted. Note: (DBG) outside power-adjustable vertical trailering with heated upper glass can be upgraded to (DWI) trailer mirrors.) 176.00 LT265/70R-17E ALL TERRAIN QXT- 182.00 LT275/70R-18E TRACTION TIRES QF6X$182.00 273.00 18" STEEL WHEELS (req w/QF6)PYT- 88.00 BLOCK HEATER K05X$88.00 242.00 BRAKE CONTROLLER JL1X$242.00 264.00 PLOW PREP PKG VYUX$264.00 198.00 MOLDED MUD FLAPS VQK- 660.00 BLACK ASSIST STEPS VQ0X$660.00 SPRAY BEDLINER 479.00 CGN- DASH SWITCH AUTO TRAC 4X4 176.00 NQH- AUX BATTERY 118.80 K4B- 120 VOLT OUTLET IN CAB AND 198.00 KC9X$198.00 BOX UPFITTER SWITCHED (kit shipped 132.00 9L7X$132.00 loose, req additional upfitter wiring) 48.40 ROOF MARKER LIGHTS U01- 110.00 LED Box Lighting UF2- 633.60 CAMPER MIRRORS AUTO DIMMIN DW1- 198.00 REAR WINDOW DEFROSTER C49- 121.40 BACKUP ALARM 8S3X$121.40 445.00 REMOTE START DLR1- - 241.00 ADDITIONAL KEY/FOB COMB EA 2$ 482.00 435.60 STERLING METALLIC GXO - N/C WHITE GAZX N/C N/C BLACK CLOTH TRIM H1TX N/C N/C BLACK VINYL TRIM H2G - TOTAL$ 57,916.80 Council Packet Page Number 133 of 347 G8, Attachment 1 3,764.59 6.5% SALES TAX- 199.25 LICENCE TITLE & REG- 20.00 TRANSIT TAXX$ 20.00 TOTAL per UNIT$ 57,936.80 QTY 1$ 57,936.80 purchase order number contact SCOTT SCHULTZ customer CITY OF MAPLEWOOD phone(651)249-2430 email billing address delivery address date ordered order # Council Packet Page Number 134 of 347 G8, Attachment 1 QUOTATION NORTH COUNTRY GM 1502 E HOWARD ST CONTRACT # 168931 HIBBING, MN 55746 218-263-7578 BOB O'HARA EST DELIVERY TIME 218-263-7576 218-349-8955 90 - 120 AROrwohara01@aol.com GTR17 BASE MODEL 2024 GMC SIERRA 2500 TK20753$ 46,175.60 4X4 DBL CAB w/6'9" BOX Maplewood Unit 614 ADDED OPTIONS 6.6L V8 L8T STD 10 SPEED AUTO MYDx STD 3.73:1 AXLE RATIO GT4x STD AIR CONDITIONING FRTSTD STD CHROME BUMPERS X STD Transmission, Allison 10-speed automatic (Included and only INCL w/Diesel MGM- available with (L5P) Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 engine Engine, Duramax 6.6L Turbo-Diesel V8 B20-Diesel compatible, (445 hp \[332 kW\] @ 2800 rpm, 910 lb-ft of torque \[1220 Nm\] @ 1600 rpm) 8,703.20(Requires (JL1) trailer brake LSPX$8,703.20 controller. Regular Cab model requires (ZLQ) WT Fleet Convenience Package or (PCV) WT Convenience Package.) Council Packet Page Number 135 of 347 G8, Attachment 1 Convenience Package includes (AQQ) Remote Keyless Entry, (QT5) EZ Lift power lock and release tailgate, (AKO) tinted glass, (UF2) LED cargo bed lighting, (C49) rear- window defogger, (DBG) outside power-adjustable vertical trailering with heated upper glass and (K34) cruise control; (Not available with 1,152.80(ZLQ) Fleet Convenience Package. PCI - When ordered with (ZW9) pickup bed delete, deletes (QT5) tailgate and (UF2) lighting. Note: (QT5) EZ Lift power lock and release tailgate can be upgraded to (QK2) GMC MultiPro Tailgate. Note: (DBG) outside power-adjustable vertical trailering with heated upper glass can be upgraded Council Packet Page Number 136 of 347 G8, Attachment 1 Fleet Convenience Package includes (AQQ) Remote Keyless Entry, (K34) cruise control, (QT5) EZ Lift power lock and release tailgate and (DBG) outside power-adjustable vertical trailering with heated upper glass; (Not available with (PCI) 668.60 Convenience Package. When ZLQX$668.60 ordered with (ZW9) pickup bed delete, (QT5) EZ Lift power lock and release tailgate is deleted. Note: (DBG) outside power-adjustable vertical trailering with heated upper glass can be upgraded to (DWI) trailer mirrors.) 176.00 LT265/70R-17E ALL TERRAIN QXT- 182.00 LT275/70R-18E TRACTION TIRES QF6X$182.00 273.00 18" STEEL WHEELS (req w/QF6)PYT- 88.00 BLOCK HEATER K05X$88.00 242.00 BRAKE CONTROLLER JL1X$242.00 264.00 PLOW PREP PKG VYUX$264.00 198.00 MOLDED MUD FLAPS VQK - 660.00 BLACK ASSIST STEPS VQ0X$660.00 SPRAY BEDLINER 479.00 CGN - DASH SWITCH AUTO TRAC 4X4 176.00 NQH - AUX BATTERY 118.80 K4B - 120 VOLT OUTLET IN CAB AND 198.00 KC9X$198.00 BOX UPFITTER SWITCHED (kit shipped 132.00 9L7X$132.00 loose, req additional upfitter wiring) 48.40 ROOF MARKER LIGHTS U01 - 110.00 LED Box Lighting UF2 - 633.60 CAMPER MIRRORS AUTO DIMMIN DW1 - 198.00 REAR WINDOW DEFROSTER C49 - 121.40 BACKUP ALARM 8S3X$121.40 445.00 REMOTE START DLR1 - - 241.00 ADDITIONAL KEY/FOB COMB EA 2$ 482.00 435.60 STERLING METALLIC GXO - N/C SCHOOL BUS YELLOW GAZX N/C N/C BLACK CLOTH TRIM H1TX N/C N/C BLACK VINYL TRIM H2G - TOTAL$ 57,916.80 Council Packet Page Number 137 of 347 G8, Attachment 1 3,764.59 6.5% SALES TAX- 199.25 LICENCE TITLE & REG- 20.00 TRANSIT TAXX$20.00 TOTAL per UNIT$ 57,936.80 QTY 1$ 57,936.80 purchase order number contact SCOTT SCHULTZ customer CITY OF MAPLEWOOD phone(651)249-2430 email billing address delivery address date ordered order # Council Packet Page Number 138 of 347 G9 CITY COUNCILSTAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager REPORT FROM: Steven Love, Public Works Director/City Engineer Bryan Nagel, Street/Storm/Building Superintendent PRESENTER:Steven Love AGENDA ITEM: Purchase of Road Salt for 2023-2024 Winter Season Action Requested: MotionDiscussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution OrdinanceContract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: City Council will consider authorizing the purchase of de-icing salt under a State cooperative purchasing agreement for the 2023-2024 winter season. Recommended Action: Motion to authorize the Street Superintendent to purchase de-icing salt under a State contract for the 2023-2024 winter season in an estimated amount of $105,282.00. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $105,282.00 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: n/a Strategic Plan Relevance: Community InclusivenessFinancial & Asset MgmtEnvironmental Stewardship Integrated Communication Operational EffectivenessTargeted Redevelopment The use of de-icing salt is a vital part of the City’s snow and ice program and essential for vehicle safety on City streets. Background: An allocation is made in the Public Works operating budget each year for the purchase of de-icing salt for winter street maintenance. Each year the street maintenance division purchases de-icing salt under the State cooperative purchasing agreement. In order to be included in this program, the State requires the City to submit salt needs for the upcoming winter season, in March of this year. The State contract offers regular road salt and treated road salt under an 80/120 purchasing rule. The 80/120 rule requires the City to purchase 80% of the placed order and the vendor Council Packet Page Number 139 of 347 G9 guarantees to supply up to 120% of the placed order at the locked price. We estimate regular road salt needs to be 700 ton (estimated at $86.06, estimate based on 5% increase from last year) and treated road salt needs of 400 ton (estimated at $112.60 based on 5% increase from last year) for an estimated purchase cost of $105,282.00 for the 2023-2024 winter season. Attachments: None Council Packet Page Number 140 of 347 J1 CITY COUNCILSTAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager REPORT FROM: Danette Parr, Community Development Director Steve Love, Public Works Director PRESENTER:Danette Parr, Community Development Director Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Reuter AGENDA ITEM: Walton Project, 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East Action Requested:MotionDiscussionPublic Hearing Form of Action: Resolution OrdinanceContract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: Reuter Walton Development has proposed a new five-story, 150-unit market-rate development over below-grade parking on the properties located at 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East. On December 12, 2022 the City Council approved the necessary land use applications, allowing the project to proceed to the next steps of the development process. On February 17, 2023 the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) notified the City of Maplewood that a citizen petition had been received, requesting an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Reuter Walton Development site. The City Council shall consider the citizen petition request and determine if an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is warranted. Recommended Action: A motion to approve a resolution denying a petition for preparation of an EAWfor the Reuter Walton residential development project at 1136 and 1160 Frost Avenue East. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $0 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: N/A Strategic Plan Relevance: Community InclusivenessFinancial & Asset MgmtEnvironmental Stewardship Integrated CommunicationOperational EffectivenessTargeted Redevelopment The City Council approved the necessary land use applications for the project after consideration by the Planning Commission and Community Design Review Board. Council Packet Page Number 141 of 347 J1 Background: The development proposal involves a five-story, 150-unit market-rate development over below- grade parking on the properties located at 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East. The proposed apartment building will include a mix of studio, one bedroom, one bedroom plus den, two bedroom, and three bedroom apartments. All units will have either a concrete patio or a recessed deck. One level of below-grade parking and surface parking will be provided – amenities will include a clubroom, fitness room, roof deck, outdoor pool, pickleball court, and dog run. In order to proceed with the project, the developer previously applied for and received approval for a comprehensive plan amendment, conditional use permit, lot combination, public vacation, and design review. On February 17, 2023 the City of Maplewood was notified by the EQB that a citizen petition request had been received, requesting an EAW for the Reuter Walton Development site. After additional information was received from the petitioner, the EQB re-published the petition request in the EQB Monitor on March 14, 2023. The petition involves concerns regarding potential soil and groundwater contamination on the site, as well as concerns regarding potential impacts to the Rusty Patched Bumble Bee. As a result of the petition, the City of Maplewood retained the engineering firm, Kimley-Horn, as a consultant to review the petition, analyze the environmental data from the development process (Phase I and Phase II Environmental Assessments) and determine if the proposed project would trigger the mandatory requirements for an EAW. If an EAW was not found to be mandatory, the consultant was tasked with determining if the proposed project has the potential for creating significant environmental impacts. The Kimley-Horn analysis took into account the Minnesota Rules, part 44110.4300, subpart 19, which specifies the development would need to propose 375 attached units or more to meet the threshold necessary to require a mandatory EAW. The proposed 150-unit development does not meet the mandatory threshold. Additional environmental areas were considered and are detailed in the Kimley-Horn March 21, 2023 memo, included with this report. Recommendation Per the findings and recommendations of the March 21, 2023 Kimley-Horn memo, an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is not warranted. The following conclusion is in summary from the Kimley-Horn March 21, 2023 memo: The material evidence presented in the petition fails to demonstrate that the proposed development may have the potential for significant environmental effects. This is based on the review of the available information listed in Section 3 and the factors listed in Minnesota Rules, part 4410.1700, subpart 7: A.Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects. The project does not exceed a mandatory threshold for an EAW. Reuter Walton Development is proposing less than 375 attached residential units (See Section 1 for additional information). The environmental effects identified in the petition are localized and can be mitigated through the City’s land use application process in conjunction with the MPCA and other applicable agencies. The identified effects are reversible until the potential final discretionary approvals of granted through the City approval process. Council Packet Page Number 142 of 347 J1 B.Cumulative potential effects. The Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) shall consider the following factors: whether the cumulative potential effect is significant; whether the contribution from the project is significant when viewed in connection with other contributions to the cumulative potential effect; the degree to which the project complies with approved mitigation measures specifically designed to address the cumulative potential effect; and the efforts of the proposer to minimize the contributions from the project. The project is not part of a prior or future project that would contribute to cumulative effects. Any potential impacts from reasonably foreseeable nearby future projects would be addressed through regulatory permitting and approval processes, minimizing the potential for cumulative effects. C.The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority. The RGU may rely only on mitigation measures that are specific and that can be reasonably expected to effectively mitigate the identified environmental impacts of the project. Environmental effects from the project can be anticipated and avoided, mitigated, or minimized, as described in the preliminary review summarized in Section 3. The developer will complete the recommended mitigation that was identified in the Phase II ESA for vapor intrusion and comply with MPCA requirements. The City’s development review process will subject the project design and site plan to City approval. D.The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs. The proposed development is a known event with known effects. Redevelopment of this type within an urban setting is neither unique nor unanticipated. The environmental effects of this redevelopment can be anticipated and controlled by the City’s formal land use application and regulatory processes. Attachments: 1.Resolution Denying EAW Petition 2.Location Map 3.March 21, 2023 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc Memo 4.Voluntary Response Action Plan and Response Action Design 5.MN Environmental Quality Board (EQB) Correspondence 6.Citizen Petition Material Council Packet Page Number 143 of 347 J1, Attachment 1 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA OLUTION _____ RES RESOLUTION DENYING A PETITION FOR PREPARATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR THE REUTER WALTON RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AT 1136 AND 1160 FROST AVENUE EAST WHEREAS, in September, 2022, the City of Maplewood (the “City”) receivedan application from Reuter Walton Development, LLC (the “Proposer”) for a residential development consisting generally of a five-story building with 150 apartment units, underground parkingand interior and exterior amenities located at 1136 and 1160 Frost Avenue East (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, the Proposer had received a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment in April, 2022 and a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment in August, 2022 regarding the Project and site; and WH EREAS, City land use approvals required for the Project included a comprehensive plan amendment, right-of-way vacations, conditional use permit and design review; and WHEREAS, the Project was the subject of public hearings before at the City’s Planning Commission in connection with the land use applications on September 20, 2022 and October 18, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the land use applications and took additional testimony regarding the Project at its meeting on November 14, 2022; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2022, the City Council unanimously approved all of the land use applications, subject to numerous terms and conditions; and WHEREAS,on February 17, 2023 the City received a citizen petition (the “Petition”) from the Environmental Quality Board (the “EQB”) requesting that the City require an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (“EAW”) for the Project; and WHEREAS, the City subsequently received supplemental material related to the Petition from the EQB and the full Petition was formally published in the EQB Monitor on March 14, 2023; and WHEREAS, the EQB has designated the Cityas the Responsible Governmental Unit (“RGU”) for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Project is neither exempt from an EAW nor subject to a mandatory EAW; and WHEREAS, the EQB’s rules (Minnesota Rules, Part 4410.1100, subpart 6) require the City to determine whether the evidence presented by the petitioners, proposers, and other persons or otherwise known to the RGU demonstrates that, because of the nature or location of the Project, the Project may have the potential for significant environmental effects; and MA745-36-863006.v4 Council Packet Page Number 144 of 347 J1, Attachment 1 WHEREAS, the EQB rules (Minnesota Rules, Part 4410.1700, subpart 7) further require the City to consider the following factors in making such determination: a. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects; b. Cumulative potential effects: whether the cumulative potential effect is significant; whether the contribution from the project is significant when viewed in connection with other contributions to the cumulative potential effect; the degree to which the project complies with approved mitigation measures specifically designed to address the cumulative potential effect; and the efforts of the proposer to minimize the contributions from the project; c. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority; and d. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other environmental impact statements; and WHEREAS, at its meeting on March 27, 2023, the City Council considered the request for the EAW and a response to the Petition prepared by the City’s staff and consultants, including a memorandum from Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. dated March 17, 2023 (the “Memorandum”). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, after careful consideration and based on all of the evidence presented by the petitioners, proposers, and other persons or otherwise known to the RGU, including the Petition and the Memorandum and the evidence and testimony presented to the Planning Commission and City Council, and upon consideration of the factors and criteria set forth in Minnesota Rules, Part 4410.1100, subpart 6 and Part 4410.1700, subpart 7, the City Council determines that the Project does not present the potential for significant environmental effects beyond those which are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority or can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the Project proposer. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Petition to require preparation of an EAW is hereby deniedbecause the evidence presented fails to demonstrate that the Project may have the potential for significant environmental effects. BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City staff and consultants are hereby authorized and directed to act in accordance with this Resolution and denial of the Petition. The CityClerk is specifically authorized and directed to mail a copy of this Resolution to the representative for the petitioners, the EQB staff, the property owners, and the Project developer within five days of the date it was adopted. The City Clerk is also specifically authorized to complete the online submission form for the EQB Monitor found on the EQB’s website and to upload a copy of this Resolution. 2 MA745-36-863006.v4 Council Packet Page Number 145 of 347 J1, Attachment 1 Adopted this 27th day of March, 2023. Marylee Abrams, Mayor ATTEST: Andrea Sindt, City Clerk 3 MA745-36-863006.v4 Council Packet Page Number 146 of 347 J1, Attachment 2 11361160 Frost Avenue EastOverview Map City of Maplewood Legend ! I 0475 Feet Source: City of Maplewood, Ramsey County Council Packet Page Number 147 of 347 J1, Attachment 3 Page 1 MEMORANDUM Danette Parr and Steve Love, To: City of Maplewood Leila Bunge, From: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Date: March 21, 2023 Citizen Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Proposed Subject: 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East Development SECTION 1. SUMMARY Reuter Walton Development has proposed a new development at 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East in the city of Maplewood (see Attachment 1 for location). The proposed development consists of a newly constructed 5-story building with 150 apartment units, a belowground parking structure, clubroom, fitness room, roof deck, outdoor pool, pickleball court, and dog run (the project). On February 17, 2023, the City of Maplewood received notification from the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) that a citizen petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was submitted regarding the project, and the EQB had determined that the City of Maplewood is considered the responsible governmental unit (RGU). The notice was re-published in the EQB Monitor on March 14, 2023 due to new information received. The citizen petition outlined concerns pertaining to potential soil and groundwater contamination at the project location and concerns regarding potential project related impacts to the federally endangered rusty patched bumble bee. The City of Maplewood retained Kimley-Horn for a consultant review of the citizen petition and documents pertaining to the proposed development to determine if the project triggers the requirements for an EAW and if an EAW is not required, does the petition evidence indicate that, because of the nature or location of the proposed project, there may be potential for significant environmental effects, taking into account the factors listed in Minnesota Rules 4410.1700, subpart 7. The City provided the following documents for Kimley-Horn’s review: Notification of citizen petition from the EQB to the City of Maplewood, dated February 17, 2023 Additional information received from the EQB related to the petition, dated March 8, 2023 A Citizen Petition for Submission to the EQB with material evidence, dated February 13, 2023 City Council Staff Report, Meeting Date November 14, 2022 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) prepared by Landmark Environmental on behalf of Reuter Walton Development, dated April 2022 kimley-horn.com 767 Eustis Street, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55114 651-645-4197 Council Packet Page Number 148 of 347 J1, Attachment 3 Page 2 Phase II ESA prepared by Landmark Environmental on behalf of Reuter Walton Development, dated August 2022 According to Minnesota Rules, part 4410.4300, subpart 19, a residential development in Maplewood must have 375 attached units or more to meet the threshold for a mandatory EAW; therefore, the Reuter Walton Development at 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East does not trigger a mandatory EAW. SECTION 2. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET OVERVIEW An EAW is a Minnesota state specific process as outlined in state statute and Minnesota Rules, part 4410. An EAW is brief document designed to layout the basic facts of a project to determine if an environmental impact statement (EIS) is required for the proposed project. The EAW form consists of 22 sections and is published by the EQB. Minnesota Rules, part 4410.4300, describes the thresholds for whether a project requires an EAW to be completed. If a project is required to complete an EAW, it is completed by the Responsible Government Unit (RGU). The purpose of completing an EAW is to: Inform the public about the project Provide information on future permitting and approvals Help identify potential impacts and mitigation strategies An EAW does not approve or deny a project. It is a source of information to guide other approvals and permitting decisions. The resource areas that an EAW covers are described below. Climate Adaptation and Resilience: In this section, the proposed project is reviewed to analyze how the project will impact and be impacted by local climate trends. Project specifics including building materials and potential adaptations are provided. Cover Types: In this section, an estimate of pre-development and post-development land cover, including the amount of green infrastructure and tree coverage, is provided. Permits and Approvals Required: All local, state, and federal permits, approvals, certifications, and financial assistance required for a project, including current status, are provided. Land Use: In this section, historical, current, and proposed land use, plans, and zoning within and in the vicinity of the project are summarized. The project is reviewed for compatibility with the surrounding area, and measures are addressed, as needed, to mitigate incompatibility. Geology, Soils, and Topography/Land Forms: In this section, the underlying geology for the project is reviewed. Any potential limitations that geologic features may have on the project and impacts the project may have on local geology are addressed with mitigation measures, if needed. Soils and topography within the project area are reviewed for suitability relating to project features including erosion potential, soil stability, slopes, and permeability. Measures to address soil limitations during and after construction are reviewed. kimley-horn.com 767 Eustis Street, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55114 651-645-4197 Council Packet Page Number 149 of 347 J1, Attachment 3 Page 3 Water Resources: In this section, the project must address all water related aspects of a proposed project including surface water, groundwater, wastewater, stormwater, and water appropriation. Effects from project activities on these resources are described and minimization or mitigation measures are summarized. Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes: In this section, pre-development site conditions including any existing contamination or potential environmental hazards are summarized. Additionally, project related generation and storage of solid wastes, use and storage of hazardous materials, and generation and storage of hazardous wastes are reviewed. Measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects are presented. Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (Rare Features): In this section, fish, wildlife, plant communities, and sensitive ecological resources within and in the vicinity of the project are reviewed, and project impacts to these resources are presented. Mitigation measures the project has incorporated to minimize effects to these features are discussed. Historic Properties: In this section, any historic structures, archaeological sites, and/or traditional cultural properties within or nearby the project, and any potential effects to historic resources are reviewed. Mitigation measures the project has incorporated to minimize effects to these features are discussed. Visual: In this section, any scenic views or vistas near the project are described. Potential visual effects and measures to avoid, minimize, or mitigate visual effects from the project are identified. Air: In this section, the project is reviewed for stationary source emissions, vehicle emissions, and dust/odors, and any control or mitigation measures for these three air emissions are described. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions/Carbon Footprint: GHG emissions are quantified using project- specific emissions sources. Any mitigation efforts that could reduce the project’s GHG emissions are reviewed, and selected methods are described in detail. Noise: In this section, all sources, characteristics, duration, quantities, and intensity of noise generated during project construction and operation are identified. Post-project noise levels should be compared to pre-project noise levels. Measures that will be taken to minimize or mitigate noise effects are identified. Transportation: In this section, an estimate of impacts on transportation and traffic associated with the project are summarized. Measures to minimize or mitigate project related transportation effects are summarized. SECTION 3. ENVIRONMENTAL TOPICSOVERVIEW In order to address if the petition material evidence presented results in the potential for significant environmental effects, Kimley-Horn reviewed the environmental topics included in the EQB’s EAW form (December 2022 version) that are relevant to the proposed project. kimley-horn.com 767 Eustis Street, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55114 651-645-4197 Council Packet Page Number 150 of 347 J1, Attachment 3 Page 4 Climate Adaptation and Resilience According to the City Council Staff Report provided by the City of Maplewood, the City’s Environmental Planner has recommended that the project utilize green building techniques to foster a sustainable design. Additionally, the City has recommended the project employ the “Green Street” concept to foster a walkable community. The City will also require the project to meet Maplewood’s “Green Building Code” if city financing is involved in the project. Cover Types According to the City Council Staff Report provided by the City of Maplewood, the City will require the project to comply with landscape and tree replacement guidelines specified in the City’s Gladstone Area Redevelopment Plan. Permits and Approvals Required According to the City Council Staff Report provided by the City of Maplewood, the project will require a conditional use permit (CUP). The project is located within the R3 – multi-family zoning district, which requires a CUP for any residential buildings that exceed 3 stories or 35 feet in height. Beyond the CUP, any local, state, or federal permits will need to be acquired prior to project implementation. Land Use According to the City Council Staff Report provided by the City of Maplewood, Reuter Walton Development has provided land use considerations in their project proposal. This includes amending the 2040 Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use guide for the project area from medium density residential to high density residential, which was approved by the City Council and adopted by the Metropolitan Council. Additionally, the project design minimizes the project building footprint to 18 percent of the site and maximizes project green space at 55.8 percent of the site, which meets city code requirements. Based on the provided information, Reuter Walton Development intends to design the project to embrace the adjacent open space of Gladstone Savanna. The project is anticipated to meet City land use requirements. Geology, Soils, and Topography/Land Forms According to the City Council Staff Report provided by the City of Maplewood, the project is required to meet requirements set by the city regarding grading and erosion control. This includes compliance with Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) programs, slope restrictions, and construction erosion control measures. Water Resources There are no mapped National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) surface water resources within the project area. According to the City Council Staff Report, the project is supplied with municipal water and sanitary sewer and will be required to meet the City’s stormwater quality, rate control, and other stormwater management requirements. The project will also require review by the Saint Paul Regional Water Services for water supply systems. kimley-horn.com 767 Eustis Street, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55114 651-645-4197 Council Packet Page Number 151 of 347 J1, Attachment 3 Page 5 Contamination/Hazardous Materials/Wastes Landmark Environmental completed a Phase I ESA on behalf of Reuter Walton Development for the project in April 2022 to understand potential environmental conditions associated with the parcels ahead of project implementation. The Phase I ESA identified two recognized environmental conditions (RECs) for the property: the historic use of the property involved the use of petroleum compounds or hazardous substances, and the demolition of former buildings on the property may have resulted in buried building materials and debris on site. Landmark Environmental completed a Phase II ESA on behalf of Reuter Walton Development for the project in August 2022 to evaluate the RECs identified in the Phase I ESA. Landmark collected soil samples to assess impacts to soil and soil vapor. Groundwater was not encountered in the field. Soil samples were tested for a suite of parameters, and all laboratory results were below applicable Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) risk-based criteria. The soil vapor results were also all below applicable MPCA risk-based criteria, with the exception of one detection of Tetrachloroethene (PCE). No impacted soils were reported; however, fill/debris material was observed on portions of the project area. Based on the results of the Phase II ESA, Landmark provided several recommendations to Reuter Walton Development to address environmental concerns. Landmark recommended proper disposal of any fill/debris materials encountered during excavation in a permitted landfill. Additionally, based on the reported PCE concentration detected in one soil vapor sample, Landmark recommended that Reuter Walton Development design and install a vapor mitigation system (VMS) for the project, and submit a Voluntary Response Action Plan (VRAP) to the MPCA for review. The project is eligible to request a No Association Determination from the MPCA, which would require submission of the VRAP to the MPCA for review and approval, and Reuter Walton Development has already submitted to begin this process. A condition of the No Association Determination would require a second round of soil vapor sampling at the project. In January 2023, Landmark prepared a VRAP and Response Action Design (RAD) for the project. The VRAP and RAD includes several elements to implement the redevelopment plans in accordance with MPCA guidelines. The elements are designed to address the demolition of existing buildings, potential buried building materials and debris, soil and fill materials onsite and from offsite locations, soil vapor sampling, dust and runoff control, an Environmental Construction Contingency Plan (ECCP), a Site Safety Plan (SSP), VMS design and installation, and an operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan for the VMS. Landmark also recommended submission of the VRAP, RAD, ECCP, and SSP to the MPCA prior to redevelopment activities, although correspondence with the MPCA was not included as part of this review. Provided Reuter Walton Development designs and implements a VMS for the project and follows guidance in the VRAP and RAD, existing vapor intrusion concerns will be addressed and mitigated. Fish, Wildlife, Plant Communities, and Sensitive Ecological Resources (Rare Features) The project design does not infringe on the Gladstone Savanna adjacent to the east, which could provide habitat for pollinator species including the federally endangered rusty patched bumble bee. Based on a review of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) rusty patched bumble bee map, the kimley-horn.com 767 Eustis Street, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55114 651-645-4197 Council Packet Page Number 152 of 347 J1, Attachment 3 Page 6 project is located within a high potential zone for known populations of the rusty patched bumble bee. The high potential zone is defined as areas where presence of the rusty patched bumble bee should be presumed for Endangered Species Act Section 7 purposes. It is unlikely that there is suitable habitat within the project area based on a review of current aerial photography; however, mowing and vegetation disturbance can occur in late winter/early spring, prior to the active season, and disturbed areas can be reseeded using native mixes to minimize potential for impacts to the rusty patched bumble bee. Given that there is tree removal proposed on site, consultation with the USFWS is recommended by the developer to comply with Section 9 of the federal Endangered Species Act for any potential impacts to the Northern Long-eared Bat (NLEB) and its habitat. According to the MN Department of Natural Resources (DNR), NLEB is documented within Ramsey County. In summer, the species is often found within forested habitats, especially around wetlands. Summer roosts may include under loose tree bark, in buildings, behind signs or shutters, caves, mines, and quarry tunnels. The spread of white-nose syndrome across the eastern portion of the United States is the major threat to the NLEB. According to the DNR, there are no known maternity roost trees or hibernacula are located within the township the project is located in (Township 29 and Range 22W). However, potential habitat for the NLEB may be located in the wooded portions of the site. To reduce regulatory risk, the DNR recommends that projects clear trees during the bat inactive season (i.e., Nov. 1 to March 31). Historic Properties Based on a preliminary review of publicly available historic resources including the National Register of Historic Places and Ramsey County’s list of historic places, the project is not located on, nor in the vicinity of, listed historic resources. However, according to the City of Maplewood’s Neighborhood Preserves website, the Gladstone Savanna adjacent to the project was historically the site of a roundhouse and repair shops for the St. Paul and Duluth Railroad. Based on a review of the Minnesota Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA) map viewer, the public land survey section that the project is located within has known archaeological resources and known cultural sites. If archaeological or cultural resources are encountered during construction, unanticipated discovery protocols should be followed. Visual Adjacent to the east of the project is the open space of Gladstone Savanna. Based on the provided information, Reuter Walton Development intends to design the project to be compatible with the Savanna. Additionally, the City will require the development to comply with landscape and tree replacement guidelines specified in the City’s Gladstone Area Redevelopment Plan. The Redevelopment Plan specifies that the project should foster connection between the Savanna and other nearby parks and prioritize views of the Savanna. Air Although not addressed in the provided documents, temporary increases in air emissions can be anticipated during construction and mitigation measures can be utilized. This could include construction best management practices aimed at reducing dust and debris and enforcing idling restrictions on construction vehicles. kimley-horn.com 767 Eustis Street, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55114 651-645-4197 Council Packet Page Number 153 of 347 J1, Attachment 3 Page 7 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions/Carbon Footprint Although not addressed in the provided documents, temporary increases to GHG emissions can be anticipated during construction and mitigation measures can be utilized. This could include, but is not limited to, employing construction best management practices to reduce on-site emissions. Noise Although not addressed in the provided documents, temporary increases in noise can be anticipated prior to project construction. Typical construction noise will be temporarily generated by construction activities and the contractor will adhere to Maplewood’s noise ordinance Sec. 18-111, which states “There shall be no excessive noise or disturbance between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Saturday and all day Sunday.” Operations of the project will generate noise consistent with multifamily residential uses and are not anticipated to affect quality of life for nearby properties. Transportation According to the City Council Staff Report provided by the City of Maplewood, the project intends to install a single drive from Frost Avenue to the east side of the site. Additionally, the project has designed underground and surface parking for a combination of 250 total parking spaces. The project does not anticipate that it will result in additional traffic on nearby roads. SECTION 4. CONCLUSION The material evidence presented in the petition fails to demonstrate that the proposed development may have the potential for significant environmental effects. This is based on the review of the available 1 information listed in Section 3 and the factors listed in Minnesota Rules, part 4410.1700, subpart 7: A. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects. The project does not exceed a mandatory threshold for an EAW. Reuter Walton Development is proposing less than 375 attached residential units (See Section 1 for additional information). The environmental effects identified in the petition are localized and can be mitigated through the City’s land use application process in conjunction with the MPCA and other applicable agencies. The identified effects are reversible until the potential final discretionary approvals of granted through the City approval process. B. Cumulative potential effects. The RGU shall consider the following factors: whether the cumulative potential effect is significant; whether the contribution from the project is significant when viewed in connection with other contributions to the cumulative potential effect; the degree to which the project complies with approved mitigation measures specifically designed to address the cumulative potential effect; and the efforts of the proposer to minimize the contributions from the project. 1 Source: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/4410.1700/ kimley-horn.com 767 Eustis Street, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55114 651-645-4197 Council Packet Page Number 154 of 347 J1, Attachment 3 Page 8 The project is not partof a prior or future project that would contribute to cumulative effects. Any potential impacts from reasonably foreseeable nearby future projects would be addressed through regulatory permitting and approval processes, minimizing the potential for cumulative effects. C. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority. The RGU may rely only on mitigation measures that are specific and that can be reasonably expected to effectively mitigate the identified environmental impacts of the project. Environmental effects from the project can be anticipated and avoided, mitigated, or minimized, as described in the preliminary review summarized in Section 3. The developer will complete the recommended mitigation that was identified in the Phase II ESA for vapor intrusion and comply with MPCA requirements. The City’s development review process will subject the project design and site plan to City approval. D. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs. The proposed development is a known event with known effects. Redevelopment of this type within an urban setting is neither unique nor unanticipated. The environmental effects of this redevelopment can be anticipated and controlled by the City’s formal land use application and regulatory processes. Based on the information documented above, Kimley-Horn recommends that the City of Maplewood deny the citizen petition for an EAW. kimley-horn.com 767 Eustis Street, Suite 100, St. Paul, MN 55114 651-645-4197 Council Packet Page Number 155 of 347 J1, Attachment 3 p 36 Legend Project Area C opeAv eE Lar kAvekAve Lar A t l La urieRdE a n KellerLake C o t u i n c B t y R i 61 SSandhurstAve RdE and Lel o r a m d t B N i E n t g S h ay ma l c S r r ta D B d o A o EnglishSt AveE ldridge E r w c e l a p d a e D M ntAve Belmo S u t l u KellerGolf t h Course S Gloster t N C D li a 61 e rt FlicekPark ee r n c S FrostAve e t S I d t e W E S r l a D n t P l y tg a e n l w i r k e s r l a e SummerAv S h P a t h S P t ve FrisbieA leyAve Rip I d e S N E t r Nt N d D S Round t wr B y S D a c a i i Lake r r t h n w m d t n e k B u i r a S g l n a l a t t a ur g FrankStN c P A Hh D l a a y m S S t t rAveE penteu Lar E acob n g ry l i D s CA uIdahoveE h l h u S a t t m h b S e FrostLakePark t LakePhalen r t N S S t e H oytA veE c A n r e c r E a PhalenPark t a l d S S GolfCourse M e C r h e c o S t A r t e e i f D e D r e S t Project Location Map 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East Development 05001,000 US Feet City of Maplewood Council Packet Page Number 156 of 347 J1, Attachment 3 E e v A Legend n a y R Project Area FlicekPark Fro stAv e W a l t e l r P S tn e l a h P ve FrisbieA F r a d o n n A vk e E S t N AeAeAeAeAAAAeAAAeAeeeerririrriririiaalaalalaalalIIIImamamamamamammmamamagggeggeggggegegeeCCCCCCouououououououoouuurtrtrrtrtrtttesesesesessssyyyyyyyyyyyyy y y ofooooofooooooooofUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU SSDSDSDSDDDDA AAAA AAAAAAAAAAANNANANANANANANAAAAAAAAIPIIPIPIIPPPP0000000000006/6/6/6/666/666///////18181818181818888888/2/2/2/2/2/2///////////222220000202020020000022222221111 Project Aerial Map 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East Development 0100200 US Feet City of Maplewood Council Packet Page Number 157 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Voluntary Response Action Plan and Response Action Design 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East, Maplewood, Minnesota Prepared for: Reuter Walton Development January 2023 Landmark Environmental, LLC 9555 James Avenue South, Suite 262 | Bloomington, MN 55431 | Phone: 952-295-9400 | www.landmarkenv.com Council Packet Page Number 158 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction and Background ........................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Background .......................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Phase I ESA Report Findings ............................................................................... 2 1.4 Phase II Summary and Results ............................................................................. 3 2.0 Response Actions ............................................................................................. 6 2.1 Redevelopment Plan ............................................................................................. 6 2.2 Chemicals of Concern and Cleanup Objectives ................................................... 6 2.3 Response Actions ................................................................................................. 7 2.4 Vapor Mitigation System ..................................................................................... 8 2.5 Environmental Construction Contingency Plan ................................................... 8 2.6 Site Safety, Run-off Control and Dust Control .................................................... 8 2.7 Institutional Controls ............................................................................................ 9 2.8 Response Action Implementation Report ............................................................ 9 2.9 Schedule ............................................................................................................... 9 3.0 Planned Pre-Mitigation Diagnostic Testing .................................................... 10 3.1 Diagnostic Testing Activities ............................................................................. 10 4.0 Response Action Design ................................................................................. 11 5.0 Planned VMS Performance Verification ......................................................... 14 5.1 Post-Mitigation Diagnostic Testing ................................................................... 14 5.2 Verification Sampling and Monitoring .............................................................. 14 5.3 Operation, Maintenance and Monitoring ........................................................... 15 Figures Figure 1 Property Location Map Figure 2 Property Layout Map with Previous Investigation Locations Figure 3 Property Layout Map with Vapor Intrusion Area of Concern Figure 4 Property Layout Map with Proposed VMS Layout Figure 5 Property Layout Map with Proposed Verification Sampling Locations Appendices Appendix A Proposed Redevelopment Plans Appendix B Excerpts from Previous Investigations Appendix C MPCAÓs Best Management Practices for the Off-Site Reuse of Unregulated Fill, dated February 2012 Council Packet Page Number 159 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Appendix D MPCAÓs Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document, dated September 2016, MPCAÓs Draft Risk Based Site Characterization and Sampling Guidance, Section 7.0 and Petroleum Remediation Program Guidance Document entitled Excavation of Petroleum-Contaminated Soil and Tank Removal Sampling dated March 2017 Appendix E MPCAÓs Vapor Mitigation Best Management Practices Council Packet Page Number 160 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 1.0 Introduction and Background 1.1 Introduction This Voluntary Response Action Plan (VRAP)/Response Action Design (RAD) was prepared by Landmark Environmental, LLC (Landmark) on behalf of Reuter Walton Development regarding property located at 1136 and 1160 Frost Avenue East, Maplewood, Minnesota (Property). The location of the Property is shown on Figure 1. This VRAP/RAD is being submitted to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) for review and approval in preparation for the redevelopment of the Property that will involve the construction of a residential building. Redevelopment plans are included in Appendix A. The redevelopment activities are planned to begin April 2023. The following environmental reports were previously prepared by Landmark with respect to the Property: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Maplewood, Minnesota 55109, dated April 2022 (Phase I ESA Report). Phase II Environmental Investigation Report, 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Maplewood, Minnesota, dated August 2022 (Phase II Report). Previous environmental assessments and/or investigations were conducted at the Property and consisted of the following: Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation, Proposed Frost Avenue Apartments, Frost Avenue and Edward Street North, Maplewood, Minnesota, prepared by Chosen Valley Testing, Inc. (CVT), for Reuter Walton and dated October 26, 2021. (Geotechnical Report) Copies of the reports listed above have been submitted to the MPCA Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) Program for review, along with an enrollment application form. An Environmental Construction Contingency Plan (ECCP) will also be submitted to the MPCA VIC Program under a separate cover for review and approval. The findings from the Phase I ESA Report and the results presented in the Phase II Report are discussed in Sections 1.3 and 1.4 of this VRAP/RAD, respectively. As stated, redevelopment plans are included in Appendix A. The VRAP describes the response actions (RAs) that will be necessary to implement the redevelopment plans in accordance with applicable MPCA guidelines. The existing Site 1 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 161 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Safety Plan (SSP) will be updated and submitted to the MPCA for reference purposes prior to the start of the RAs and redevelopment activities. Upon completion of the RAs, a RA Implementation Report will be prepared and submitted to the MPCA for review and approval. 1.2 Background The Property consists of three (3) parcels of land that are zoned for commercial use. The Property Identification Numbers for the Property are as follows: Parcel 1: 162922420004 (0.34 acres/parking lot) Parcel 2: 162922420003 (1.17 acres/retail commercial buildings corresponding to 1136 & 1146 street addresses) Parcel 3: 162922420112 (2.37 acres/currently vacant parcel with small shed corresponding to 1160 street address) Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 are owned by Nessco LLC (Nessco) and Parcel 3 is owned by the city of Maplewood (City). The Property consists of 3.88 acres of land that currently is zoned for commercial use. The general Property vicinity has been developed since the 1930s for residential and agricultural use. The current use of the Property is light industrial (Precision Resources, Inc.) and residential; these uses are not likely to involve the use, treatment, storage, disposal, or generation of significant quantities of hazardous substances or petroleum products. Parcel 1 is a paved surface parking lot. Parcel 2 has two (2) adjacent commercial/retail buildings currently occupied by Precision Resources, Inc., and used for the assembly and packaging of light industrial packaging machinery. Parcel 2 includes a largely undeveloped area used for boat storage. Parcel 3 has one shed with the remainder being vacant grassland/scrub-wooded land. 1.3 Phase I ESA Report Findings As stated in the Phase I ESA Report, given the PropertyÓs historic uses as a marine service facility as well as a fabrication business and automotive repair, historical activities at the Property did likely involve the use of hazardous substances and/or petroleum products. The Phase I ESA Report also stated that the adjacent and potentially upgradient regulatory sites (sites within ½ miles northeast of the Property with respect to 2 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 162 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 anticipated groundwater flow to the southwest) identified in the regulatory search likely will not have the potential for impacting soil vapor or groundwater beneath the Property. Based on the previous geotechnical investigation, the potential exists for buried demolition debris or building materials to be present on the Property as a result of historic development. The previous geotechnical investigation conducted on the Property by CVT in 2021 identified buried debris and or building materials at one location. During the geotechnical investigation, groundwater was observed by CVT at a depth of 20.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). As discussed in the Phase I ESA Report, recognized environmental conditions (RECs) indicate the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on the Property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substance or petroleum products into structures on the Property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the Property. Historical recognized conditions are defined as past releases that have been addressed to a degree allowing for unrestricted use of the Property. Controlled recognized conditions are defined as past releases that have been addressed but allow contamination to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls. The Phase I ESA Report identified the following findings: Finding: Historic or current Property uses involving the use of petroleum compounds or hazardous substances. There may have been releases of contamination to the Property from historic and current uses. This finding is considered a REC based on the planned future use of the Property. Finding: Demolition of former Property buildings potentially resulting in buried building materials and debris located on the Property. It is not known if all of the former building materials were removed from the Property during demolition. Buried building materials and debris could be present on the Property. This finding is considered a REC based on the planned future use of the Property. 1.4 Phase II Summary and Results Landmark completed the field work portion of the Phase II on August 11 and 12, 2022, at the locations shown on Figure 2. The Phase II focused on assessing soil and characterizing soil/fill material at selected locations on the Property and assessing the 3 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 163 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 potential for soil vapors impacts. Geoprobe type hand tooling was used for the collection of soil and soil vapor samples provided by Landmark. Fifteen (15) hand Geoprobe borings were advanced by Landmark throughout the Property to investigate the RECs, based on the planned future use of the Property. Geoprobe borings facilitated the collection of soil and soil vapor samples and were advanced to a depth of six (6) feet bgs. Soil samples were submitted for laboratory analysis based on field screening indications of contamination and to primarily characterize soil across the Property. All soil samples were screened in the field for organic headspace values with a photoionization detector (PID). Soil Sampling Results Native soil material was observed across the Property to depths of 2 to 6 feet bgs. The soil on Parcels 1 and 2 was mainly comprised of silty sand soils and poorly graded sand. On Parcel 3, soils were mainly comprised of silty sand soils, poorly graded sand, as well along the northeastern, eastern side, and southeastern, soils from zero to 2 feet were mainly comprised of what appeared to be mainly comprised of street sweepings. Hand Geoprobe boring locations: LGP-12, LGP-14, and LGP-10 were attempted multiple times to reach 6 feet bgs, but had to be moved due to what appeared concrete pieces of debris. A possible concrete debris field mirrors the fence along the north, east, and portions of the south at Parcel 3. No field screening indications of contamination were observed by elevated PID readings \[greater than 10 parts per million (ppm)\] in any of the sampling locations. A total of 15 soil samples were submitted to Pace Analytical Services, Inc. (Pace). One soil sample was collected from each boring. Five (5) soil samples were submitted for the analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Fifteen (15) soil samples were collected and submitted for the analysis of diesel range organics (DRO) and Resource Conversation and Recovery Act (RCRA) metals. Results are presented in the Phase II Investigation Report, and excerpts are included in Appendix B. The following is a summary of the laboratory results for the soil samples as presented in the Phase II Report: Without exception, none of the RCRA metals detections from the 15 samples exceeded the relevant MPCA criteria. In addition, none of the detections were high enough to request a toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) analysis from Pace. Without exception, none of the DRO detections from the 15 samples exceeded the MPCA Unregulated Fill Criteria for DRO. Without exception, none of the 5 samples submitted for VOC analysis had detection above the laboratory method detection limit (MDL). 4 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 164 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Soil Vapor Sampling Results A total of seven (7) soil vapor samples were collected from the 15 hand Geoprobe boring locations. The soil vapor samples were submitted to Pace and analyzed for VOCs. Detected results for the soil vapor samples are listed in Table 2 of the Phase II Report, which is included in Appendix B, along with the MPCA action criteria of thirty-three times the Residential Intrusion Screening Values (33X R-ISVs) and thirty-three times the Residential Expedited Intrusion Screening Values (33X R-EISVs) for comparison purposes. In total, 22 VOCs were detected in the 7 samples that were submitted for laboratory analysis. With the exception of a detection of tetrachloroethylene (PCE) in one soil vapor sample, the detections were not reported above the 33X R-ISVs or the 33X R-EISVs. PCE was detected in LSV-15 at a concentration of 567 micrograms per cubic 3 meter (g/m). This concentration exceeds the applicable MPCA action criteria (33X R- 3 ISV) of 110 g/m. 5 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 165 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 2.0 Response Actions This section describes the proposed RAs, based on the results from the previous environmental reports, including the Phase II Report and the Geotechnical Report, applicable MPCA Property Use guidelines, and the proposed redevelopment plans, which are included in Appendix A. This section summarizes environmental issues for the Property, lists proposed cleanup goals to be addressed as part of the VRAP implementation, and explains elements of the proposed RAs necessary to obtain approval from the MPCA, based on the redevelopment plans and taking into account the planned future use of the Property. 2.1 Redevelopment Plan As stated, redevelopment plans are included in Appendix A. The redevelopment plans will involve the construction of a 5-story building that will include a 150-unit apartment building with amenity spaces, as well as one level of underground parking garage and surface parking. The proposed building footprint will cover most of the Property and the ground surface surrounding the building and surface parking will be greenspace and stormwater ponds. 2.2 Chemicals of Concern and Cleanup Objectives Based on the results of the previous investigation, there are no chemicals of concern in soil. All detections in soil are below applicable MPCA criteria. Therefore, unless buried debris is encountered during redevelopment, there are no proposed RAs for soil. Excavated soil and fill can be reused on-site or transported off-site for reuse at a commercial/industrial site, if it meets the definition of Unregulated Excess Fill criteria. The Unregulated Excess Fill criteria is listed in the MPCAÓs Best Management Practices for the Off-Site Reuse of Unregulated Fill guidance document, dated February 2012, which is included in Appendix C. Groundwater beneath the Property is not expected to be encountered during redevelopment and will not be used in the future. Therefore, RAs are not being proposed with respect to groundwater. Based on the results of the previous investigation, PCE was detected at one location (LSV-15) above MPCA action criteria. The approximate vapor intrusion area of concern (VI AOC) is shown on Figure 3. As such, a vapor mitigation system will be installed beneath the northwest portion of the proposed building, which is within the VI AOC. For all remaining environmental issues associated with the redevelopment, field screening and contingency sampling will be conducted in accordance with the ECCP. 6 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 166 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 2.3 Response Actions The proposed RAs generally consist of the following elements and are described in more detail in the following sections: An updated SSP specifically pertaining to RAs and redevelopment activities will be prepared and necessary permits will be obtained prior to redevelopment. The existing buildings will be removed and the asphalt pavement will be removed, recycled or disposed of prior to redevelopment. The fill containing buried debris will be excavated and reused on-site or transported off-site to a permitted landfill. Soil and fill that is excavated may meet the definition of unregulated fill criteria, as described in the MPCAÓs Best Management Practices for the Off-Site Reuse of Unregulated Fill, dated February 2012 (See Appendix C). If such soil or fill is encountered and properly characterized, it may be used onsite or transported off- site to another commercial/industrial property for reuse. All excavated soil will be properly characterized prior to reuse off-site. The excavated soil will be field- screened in accordance with applicable MPCA sampling guidelines (See Appendix D). In the event the soil does not meet the MPCAÓs definition of unregulated excess fill, the soil will be transported off-site to a permitted landfill. If changes to the redevelopment plans require additional soil excavation, then additional soil samples may be collected and analyzed to meet the MPCA sampling guidelines. All changes will be documented in the RA Implementation Report. If necessary, fill material that is imported to the Property that is from a commercial gravel pit does not need to be sampled. If soil is imported from another redevelopment, the sampling ratio of this material will be 1 sample per 500 cubic yards (cy) for fill material and 1 sample per 2,000 cy for native soil. Additional soil vapor sampling will be conducted to confirm the VI AOC on the Property. This soil vapor sampling will be completed at each of the 7 previous sampling locations, as shown on Figure 2, during the MPC AÓs designated heating season to meet MPCA guidance. A VMS will be installed beneath the northwest portion the proposed building. Detailed plans and specifications for this work will be included in the design 7 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 167 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 documents, which will be submitted to the MPCA for reference under a separate cover. Standard dust and runoff control measure will be implemented during redevelopment and RA implementation activities. The MPCA-approved ECCP will be implemented during subsurface redevelopment and RA implementation activities. An operation, maintenance and monitoring (OM&M) plan related to the VMS will be prepared and submitted to the MPCA along with the RA Implementation Report. 2.4 Vapor Mitigation System The VMS will be constructed in accordance with applicable MPCA guidelines and the VMS will also be used as an active radon system. The VMS will be constructed of perforated or slotted polyethylene piping with a geotextile sock embedded in a sandy, gravel, or pea rock aggregate layer under a vapor barrier beneath the floor slab of the proposed building. The perforated pipe is connected to solid pipe extending through the floor slab and running through pipe run corridors to the roof to connect to an active fan that would actively vent vapors outside the proposed building. The perforated or slotted polyethylene piping may also serve as drain tile system as approved for other MPCA projects. As stated, the details relating to the design documents for the VMS will be submitted to the MPCA for reference before RA implementation. 2.5 Environmental Construction Contingency Plan As stated, an ECCP will be completed to address any unexpected environmental issues that are encountered during RA and redevelopment activities. 2.6 Site Safety, Run-off Control and Dust Control Possible short-term risks include the risk of the workers coming into direct contact with contaminated soil and construction equipment. Standard MPCA recognized surface water run-off and dust control procedures will be implemented, as necessary, during earthwork activities and onsite workers will operate under the updated SSP when dealing with potential unexpected hazardous materials. The updated SSP will be submitted to the MPCA prior to implementation of RAs and any redevelopment activities. 8 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 168 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 2.7 Institutional Controls An environmental covenant that will apply to the ongoing operation of the active VMS will be prepared and filed with Ramsey County following review and approval by the MPCA. 2.8 Response Action Implementation Report Upon completion of the proposed RAs, a report summarizing the RAs and any analytical results will be submitted to the MPCA for review and approval. The RA Implementation Report will include the following: (1) data, results, and drawings of the RA (maps of soil excavation and placement); (2) follow-up actions, if any; (3) discussion of any changes in the RAs with a discussion of why the changes were necessary; (4) discussion of any difficulties encountered during the implementation, which may alter or impair the effectiveness of the RAs and (5) spatial data requirements. Following review of the RA Implementation Report, the MPCA VIC Program are requested to issue a RA Implementation Report Approval letter and a No Further Action Letter. 2.9 Schedule The following VRAP implementation schedule is anticipated; MPCA staff will be notified of schedule changes: Submit VRAP, RAD and ECCP to MPCA January 2023 MPCA Reviews and Approves VRAP, RAD and ECCP Within 30 Business Days Submit SSP to the MPCA Prior to RA Implementation Activities Begin Redevelopment Activities April 2023 Submit RA Implementation Report within 60 Days Following RAs Completion MPCA Issues No Further Action Letter Within 30 Business Days 9 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 169 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 3.0 Planned Pre-Mitigation Diagnostic Testing Based on the findings and results from the previous investigations and taking into account the redevelopment plans, a VMS consisting of an active venting system with a vapor barrier is proposed to be installed to address potential vapor intrusion into the northwest portion of the proposed Property building. Diagnostic testing will be completed at each one-foot riser pipe stub for the VMS. The goal of the diagnostic testing is to measure the pressure field extension (PFE) as a function of applied vacuum at various locations within the proposed Property building and to determine final design basis criteria pertaining to riser pipe manifolds, fan selection and other factors. This testing is also used to indirectly identify any significant vapor entry point locations in the newly poured floor slab so these locations can be properly sealed. 3.1 Diagnostic Testing Activities The diagnostic testing is planned for each one-foot riser pipe stub, as shown on Figure 4, to evaluate the PFE beneath the slab. Permanent monitoring points (vapor pins) will be installed in the floor of the proposed Property building and additional temporary monitoring points may be installed to comply with MPCA guidance for diagnostic testing. As part of the diagnostic testing, each monitoring point will be measured using an electronic digital manometer (EDM) at varying distances and directions from the one- foot riser pipe stub location. Temporary monitoring points will be installed using 3/8- inch diameter holes through the floor slab. The permanent monitoring points will be installed using vapor pins and placed where repeat sampling will occur. Differential pressure measurements will be collected using silicon tubing and an EDM. As part of the diagnostic testing, a maximum of three different radon fans will be used to create the PFE. Exhaust will be monitored continuously using a PID. Regardless of the PID readings, the exhaust will be routed out of the building through flexible piping. 10 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 170 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 4.0 Response Action Design As previously discussed, diagnostic testing is necessary to determine final design basis criteria pertaining to fan selection and other factors. The Property building will have sub- slab vent piping connected to riser pipes that are routed to the roof and connected to a fan. This VRAP and RAD proposes RAs involving the installation of a VMS consisting of an active venting system with a vapor barrier beneath the northwest portion of the proposed Property buildingÓs slab. It is almost certain that the diagnostic testing will show that the VMS is an applicable technology for creating a negative PFE beneath the floor slab of the proposed Property building. Figure 4 shows the proposed VMS layout under this VRAP and RAD. A 6- inch layer of ventilation aggregate will be placed beneath the proposed concrete slab across the entire building along with a vapor barrier. The ventilation aggregate will meet the gradation requirements found in the technical specifications in the design documents. In the areas for the sub-slab vent piping, a trench will be created so that there will be at least 2-inches of ventilation aggregate surrounding the sub-slab vent piping to connect the sub-slab vent piping to the ventilation aggregate layer. The sub-slab vent piping will consist of 4-inch diameter drain tile pipe with a filter sock and end caps covering any open ends. The sub-slab vent piping is elbowed up along a column or wall to connect to 4-inch diameter solid riser piping. The riser piping will be temporarily stubbed at 1-foot for diagnostic testing. Diagnostic testing will be performed on each 1-foot riser pipe stub after the floor slab is poured and cured. Diagnostic testing can determine if riser pipes can manifold together and verify the fan selection used to create the necessary negative PFE beneath the floor slab of the proposed Property buildings. The goal of the VMS is to create a negative pressure differential field beneath the slab capable of maintaining a negative (-) 5 pascals (Pa), (-0.02 inches of water column \[WC\]), pressure differential relative to indoor stst pressures in the non-heating season (April 1 to October 31) and a -3 Pa, (-0.012 inches stst of WC), in the heating season (November 1 to March 31). The technical specifications, and design plans and details for the VMS will be provided in the design documents. After diagnostic testing, the riser piping network will be installed from the 1-foot riser pipe stubs to extend to the roof and connect to the fan. The fan for the VMS will be installed on the roof of the proposed Property building. The weight of the riser piping network will be supported overhead by attachment to building columns, walls and/or joists. Vertical pipe runs will be supported every 4 to 10-feet along the run and include one of the supports near the base of the riser piping. Horizontal piping runs will slope slightly downward towards the sub-slab piping so that condensation can drain through the sub-slab vent piping. The exhaust stacks will extend a minimum of 2-feet above the roof 11 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 171 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 and 1-foot above the height of any HVAC air intake or operable building opening, and must be a minimum of 10-feet from any building air intake or operable building openings. Any pipe penetration(s) through any floors, walls and roof will be sealed according to building code. During construction of the VMS, pressure testing will be conducted to verify there are no leaks in the piping. Sample ports will be installed in the piping near each riser piping base for post-construction verification monitoring. The VMS will consist of the following system components: Sub-slab vent piping consisting of 4-inch diameter drain pipe with a filter sock; Ventilation aggregate and vapor barrier; Riser piping from the sub-slab vent piping to a fan-unit mounted on the roof of the proposed Property buildings; Fans, size determined using diagnostic testing; An electrical circuit and connection for each fan; Disconnect switches located within 3-feet of each fan; Differential pressure gauges at the riser pipe base, range determined after diagnostic testing is completed; Sample port(s) for obtaining micro-manometer pressure readings at the riser pipe base; Labeling of system components; and, Sealing around observed cracks, gaps and openings in the floor slab to prevent air leakage between the soil and interior space. Several factors have been considered in the RAD, including: Source concentrations and type of VOCs; Subsurface physical conditions (e.g., depth to water, soil properties, presence of footings); Integration of the system into the overall proposed Property building design; Potential for short-circuiting sometimes observed with VMS; Potential safety and environmental hazards; Construction quality assurance/quality control testing; Short-term and long-term maintenance and management requirements; Installation of monitoring points for vapor monitoring and/or measurement of PFE; and, Inspection of the proposed Property building foundation for points of entry and sealing any gaps wider than 1/8 of an inch. 12 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 172 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 The VMS conforms to standard sub-slab mitigation principles and practices and is consistent with similar RAs approved by the MPCA for comparable residential buildings. 13 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 173 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 5.0 Planned VMS Performance Verification Following the installation of the VMS, post-mitigation diagnostic testing and verification sampling and monitoring will be completed in accordance to the MPCAÓs guidance documents, included in Appendix E. 5.1 Post-Mitigation Diagnostic Testing Post-mitigation diagnostic testing will be conducted immediately following start-up of the VMS and between seven to 30 days of the VMS operation. The goal of the diagnostic testing is to confirm the VMS is creating an effective pressure field extension (PFE) beneath the Property buildingÓs floor slab. In the MPCA defined heating season (November 1st to March 31st), a pressure differential, relative to indoor pressures, of negative (-) 3 pascals (Pa) or -0.012 inches of water column (WC) is required to produce an effective PFE for a VMS. In the MPCA defined non-heating season (April 1st to October 31st), a pressure differential, relative to indoor pressures, of -5 Pa or -0.020 inches of WC is required to produce an effective PFE for a VMS. If post-mitigation diagnostic testing takes place during the MPCA defined non-heating season, another round of post-mitigation diagnostic testing will take place during the MPCA defined heating season. In addition, post-mitigation diagnostic testing will be completed after construction is completed, but prior to building occupancy. Post-mitigation diagnostic testing locations will be the same locations used during pre- mitigation diagnostic testing, which include temporary and permanent monitoring points. 5.2 Verification Sampling and Monitoring Between seven to 30 days of the VMS operation, verification sampling and monitoring will be conducted. Verification monitoring will consist of collecting differential pressure readings to measure the effectiveness of the VMS. Verification sampling will consist of an ambient outdoor air sample and one indoor air samples paired with three sub-slab soil vapor samples in the building. If verification sampling and monitoring takes place during the MPCA defined non-heating season (April 1st to October 31st), another round of verification monitoring and sampling will take place during the MPCA defined heating season (November 1st to March 31st). The location of the ambient outdoor air sample will upgradient of the Property based on wind direction at the time of sampling. The locations of the indoor air and sub-slab soil vapor samples will be collected in the underground parking garage at the locations shown on Figure 5. 14 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 174 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 5.3 Operation, Maintenance and Monitoring Following installation of the VMS and completion of the verification sampling and monitoring by Landmark, the Property owner or the Property ownerÓs representative will be trained by Landmark to conduct long-term OM&M. Long-term OM&M activities will consist of documenting the riser pipe pressure readings from pressure gauges on a quarterly or semi-annual basis as long as the Property building exists and the VMS is operating. The VMS OM&M Plan will be submitted to the MPCA for review and approval along with the RA Implementation Report after installation of the VMS and verification sampling and monitoring has been completed. 15 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD Council Packet Page Number 175 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Figures Council Packet Page Number 176 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 THE PROPERTY Legend FIGURE 1 Property Boundary PROPERTY LOCATION MAP USA Topo Maps 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Maplewood, MN 55109 05001,0002,000Feet LANDMARK ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC 1 inch = 1,000 feet Council Packet Page Number 177 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 LGP-6LGP/LSV-4 LGP/LSV-15 Parcel 1 LGP/LSV-8 LGP/LSV-12 LGP-1 LGP-9 Parcel 2 LGP-7LGP-14 LGP/LSV-2 LGP-13 Parcel 3 LGP-3 LGP/LSV-10 LGP-5 LGP/LSV-11 FIGURE 2 Legend PROPERTY LAYOUT MAP WITH Boring Locations PREVIOUS INVESTIGATION LOCATIONS 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Property Boundary Maplewood, MN 55109 015000200Feet Ramsey Parcels LANDMARK ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC 1 inch = 100 feet Council Packet Page Number 178 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 LGP-6LGP/LSV-4 LGP/LSV-15 LGP/LSV-8 LGP/LSV-12 Parcel 1 LGP-1 Parcel 2 LGP-9 LGP-7LGP-14 LGP/LSV-2 LGP-13 LGP-3 Parcel 3 LGP/LSV-10 LGP-5 LGP/LSV-11 Legend Boring Locations FIGURE 3 Approximate Vapor Intrusion Area of Concern Underground Parking Garage Footprint PROPERTY LAYOUT MAP WITH VAPOR INTRUSION AREA OF CONCERN Property Boundary 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Ramsey Parcels Maplewood, MN 55109 015000200Feet LANDMARK ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC 1 inch = 100 feet Council Packet Page Number 179 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Parcel 1 Parcel 2 Parcel 3 Legend Approximate Location of VMS Riser Pipe FIGURE 4 Approximate Location of VMS Sub-Slab Piping PROPERTY LAYOUT MAP WITH PROPOSED VMS LAYOUT Approximate Vapor Intrusion Area of Concern 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Underground Parking Garage Footprint Maplewood, MN 55109 Property Boundary LANDMARK ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC Ramsey Parcels 015000200Feet 1 inch = 100 feet Council Packet Page Number 180 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Parcel 1 Parcel 2 Parcel 3 Legend FIGURE 5 Proposed Verification Indoor Air Sample Location PROPERTY LAYOUT MAP WITH Proposed Verification Sub-Slab Soil Vapor Sample Location PROPOSED VERIFICATION SAMPLING LOCATIONS Approximate Vapor Intrusion Area of Concern 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Underground Parking Garage Footprint Maplewood, MN 55109 Property Boundary LANDMARK ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC Ramsey Parcels 015000200Feet 1 inch = 100 feet Council Packet Page Number 181 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Appendices Council Packet Page Number 182 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Appendix A Council Packet Page Number 183 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 184 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C000 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED TITLE SHEET © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX BENCHMARKS (BM) Sheet Title TITLE SHEET UTILITY PLAN GRADING PLAN SWPPP DETAILS GENERAL NOTES SWPPP NOTES - 1SWPPP - PHASE 1 SWPPP - PHASE 2DETAILS - WATER SWPPP NOTES - 2 GRADING DETAILS DETAILS - PAVEMENT DETAILS - STORM SEWER DETAILS - ACCESSABILITY DETAILS - GENERAL UTILITY ENLARGED GRADING PLANSDETAILS - SANITARY SEWER Sheet List Table JOSH WILDT, PLATEL: 952-688-6500 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTPLAN-TYPE, PLLC1408 92ND AVENUE NORTHBROOKLYN PARK, MN 55444 C001C201C211C901 C000C100EXISTING CONDITIONS AND REMOVALS PLANC200C202C210C300PAVING, SIGNAGE, AND DIMENSIONAL PLANC400C410C420C500C900C902C904 C903C905C906DETAILS - PAVEMENT AND MARKINGS Sheet Number SURVEYORALLIANT ENGINEERINGSUITE 700 733 MARQUETTE AVENUEMINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402 FORFOR JAY KOESTER, PE CIVIL ENGINEERTEL: (M) 563-419-8335 MINNETONKA, MN 55343TEL: 612-758-3080 UTILITIES, AND LANDSCAPING SITE, GRADING, DRAINAGE, EROSION CONTROL, PROJECT CONTACTS MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA ARI PARRITZ4450 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD6110 BLUE CIRCLE DRIVETEL: (M) 612-763-9258 DEVELOPER/OWNERREUTER WALTON DEVELOPMENTSOLUTION BLUE, INC.ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416SUITE 230 FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS PRELIMINARY PLANS PROJECT LOCATION SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION THE SUBSURFACE UTILITY INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS CONCERNING TYPE ANDTHESE QUALITY LEVELS WERE DETERMINED ACCORDING TO THE GUIDELINES OF CI/ASCE 38-02.SUBSURFACE UTILITY DATA". LOCATION OF UTILITIES HAS BEEN DESIGNATED UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL 'C'.ENTITLED "STANDARD GUIDELINES FOR THE COLLECTION AND DEPICTION OF EXISTING PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:27 PMJay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C000 - COVR.DWGCADD USER: Council Packet Page Number 185 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION C001 JRKJRK 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE GENERAL NOTES XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX STANDARDS.CROSSINGS. PIPE DIAMETERS IS REQUIRED AT ALL WATERMAIN AND SEWER MAIN (BUILDING, STORM AND SANITARY) GENERAL UTILITY NOTES APPROVED BY THE CITY. THE CITY SHALL BE NOTIFIED 48-HOURS PRIOR TO COMMENCING WITH THE UTILITYCONSTRUCTION OR ANY REQUIRED TESTING. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT OPERATE, INTERFERE WITH, CONNECT ANY PIPEOR HOSE TO, OR TAP ANY WATER MAIN BELONGING TO THE CITY UNLESS DULY AUTHORIZED TO DO SO BY THE CITY.ANY ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES OF SCHEDULED OR UNSCHEDULED DISRUPTIONS OF SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC ARE TO BETHE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.GRADE. RELOCATION OF EXISTING UTILITIES AFFECTED BY SITE IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING PORTIONS OF WORK WHICH MAYBE PERFORMED BY UTILITY COMPANY'S FORCES. ALL PERMITS, APPLICATIONS, FEES AND CHARGES ARE THERESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR.PUBLIC WATER, SANITARY SEWER AND STORM SEWER UTILITIES AND WORK WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY,INCLUDING PROVIDING AN APPROVED TRAFFIC CONTROL PLAN AS NECESSARY.ESTABLISHED AND PRIOR TO PROJECT CLOSEOUT. 7.1.SANITARY SERVICE CONNECTIONS TO BUILDING SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40 CONFORMING TO ASTM D2665.7.2.SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUTS SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7.3.SHOWN PLAN LENGTHS ARE CENTER-TO-CENTER OF STRUCTURES.8.1.ALL WATERMAIN TO HAVE 8.0-FEET OF COVER OVER TOP OF WATERMAIN MINIMUM.8.2.PROVIDE THRUST BLOCKING AND MECHANICAL JOINT RESTRAINTS ON ALL WATERMAIN JOINTS PER CITY8.3.A MINIMUM VERTICAL SEPARATION OF 18-INCHES AND HORIZONTAL SEPARATION OF 10-FEET BETWEEN OUTSIDE9.1.ROOF DRAIN LEADERS SHALL BE PVC, SCHEDULE 40.9.2.SHOWN PLAN LENGTHS ARE CENTER-TO-CENTER OF STRUCTURES; OR TO END OF THE FLARED END SECTION (FES). 4.SHALL OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS FOR UTILITY CONNECTIONS AND UTILITIES SHALL BE INSPECTED AND8.WATERMAIN PIPE SHALL BE PVC, C900, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.9.STORM SEWER PIPE SHALL BE HDPE 1.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATION WITH UTILITY PROVIDERS FOR REMOVAL AND/OR2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LOCAL GOVERNING AUTHORITIES FOR CONNECTION TO5.CONTRACTOR TO ADJUST ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED CATCH BASINS AND MANHOLES TO BE FLUSH WITH FINAL6.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CLEAN ALL SURFACE FLOW CHANNELS, PIPES AND STRUCTURES AFTER FINAL SURFACES ARE7.SANITARY SEWER PIPE SHALL BE PVC, SDR 35, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.10.ALL SEWER CONSTRUCTION TO COMPLY WITH CITY ENGINEERING DESIGN STANDARDS. (OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER/INDEPENDENT FOR BMP CONSTRUCTION DETAILS AND NOTES. XXXX . ALL SOIL TESTING SHALL BE COMPLETED BY THE OWNER'S SOILS ENGINEER. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOILS REPORT GENERAL GRADING NOTES APPLICATION FOR THE MPCA GENERAL STORMWATER PERMIT FOR CONSTRUCTIONACTIVITY WHEN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FOR THE PROJECT DISTURBS GREATER THAN 1ACRE. ALL CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS INVOLVED WITH STORMWATER(NPDES PERMIT) AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH THE CONTENTS. THE SWPPP AND ALLOTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION.WASTE MATERIAL TO BE HANDLED, AND FOR THE AMOUNT OF GRADING TO BE DONE.ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH IMPORTING SUITABLE MATERIAL AND EXPORTINGTO ADJACENT PROPERTIES DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THIS PROJECT.CONTRACTOR WILL BE HELD SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO THEADJACENT PROPERTIES OCCURRING DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASES OF THISCONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, CONTRACTOR WILL BE SOLELY AND COMPLETELYAND PROPERTY DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK. THIS REQUIREMENT WILLAPPLY CONTINUOUSLY AND NOT BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS. THE DUTYOF THE ENGINEER OR THE DEVELOPER TO CONDUCT CONSTRUCTION REVIEW OF THECONTRACTOR'S PERFORMANCE IS NOT INTENDED TO INCLUDE REVIEW OF THEADEQUACY OF THE CONTRACTOR'S SAFETY MEASURES IN, ON OR NEAR THECONSTRUCTION SITE.THE STREET AND PARKING AREA SUBGRADE. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A LOADEDTANDEM AXLE TRUCK WITH A GROSS WEIGHT OF 25 TONS. THE TEST ROLLING SHALL BEAT THE DIRECTION OF THE SOILS ENGINEER AND SHALL BE COMPLETED IN AREAS ASCOMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILS ENGINEER.SITE AND IMPORT SUITABLE SOIL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST TO THE OWNER.SEE SITE REMOVALS PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. PROVIDE ADDITIONALWHERE WATER DRAINS AWAY FROM CURB. ALL OTHER AREAS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTEDAS "GUTTER IN" CURB.SHOWN OR BETWEEN SUCH POINTS AND EXISTING GRADES.OPERATIONS IN A MANNER TO MINIMIZE THE POTENTIAL FOR EROSION. BEGINNING SITE GRADING ACTIVITIES.POLLUTION PREVENTION SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THE SWPPP AND THE STATE OFMINNESOTA NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM GENERAL PERMITUNSUITABLE/EXCESS/WASTE MATERIAL SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE BID PRICE.PROJECT.RESPONSIBLE FOR CONDITIONS ON THE JOB SITE, INCLUDING SAFETY OF ALL PERSONSDIRECTED BY THE SOILS ENGINEER. CORRECTION OF THE SUBGRADE SOILS SHALL BEUNSUITABLE AND WILL NOT PASS A TEST ROLL. REMOVE UNSUITABLE SOIL FROM THEMATERIAL IS APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND/OR SPECIFICATIONS.PROVIDE A UNIFORM THICKNESS OF 6" MINIMUM IN ALL DISTURBED AREAS TO BELANDSCAPED.DIRECTED.INFORMATION.PROTECTION AS NECESSARY AS WORK PROGRESSES.NOTED.FINISHED SURFACE WITH UNIFORM SLOPES BETWEEN POINTS WHERE ELEVATIONS ARE ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THESOILS ENGINEER)A GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING SOILS REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED BY:ADDRESS: CONTRACTOR SHALL COMPLETE THE SITE GRADING AND UTILITY CONSTRUCTION INCONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING ALL REQUIRED SOIL TESTS ANDINSPECTIONS WITH THE SOILS ENGINEER.COMPANY: PHONE:DATE:CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF THIS REPORT. 2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLETING & SUBMITTING THE3.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING QUANTITIES OF CUT, FILL AND4.CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE ALL PRECAUTIONS NECESSARY TO AVOID PROPERTY DAMAGE5.SAFETY NOTICE TO CONTRACTORS: IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERALLY ACCEPTED6.PRIOR TO PLACEMENT OF THE AGGREGATE BASE, A TEST ROLL SHALL BE PERFORMED ON7.REPLACE ALL SUBGRADE SOIL DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION THAT HAVE BECOME8.CONTRACTOR SHALL STRIP, STOCKPILE AND RE-SPREAD EXISTING ONSITE TOPSOIL, IF9.CONTRACTOR SHALL DISPOSE OF ANY EXCESS SOIL MATERIAL UNLESS OTHERWISE 1.ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE IN PLACE BEFORE10.REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR PERMANENT TURF RESTORATION AND PLANTING11.MAINTAIN TEMPORARY PROTECTION MEASURES DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.12.PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE GRADE.13.PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM BUILDINGS AT ALL TIMES.14.CONTRACTOR SHALL REVIEW PAVEMENT GRADIENT AND CONSTRUCT "GUTTER OUT"15.NO GRADED SLOPES SHALL EXCEED 3:1 (HORIZONTAL TO VERTICAL) UNLESS OTHERWISE16.UNIFORMLY GRADED AREAS WITHIN LIMITS OF GRADING AND PROVIDE A SMOOTH17.LIMIT THE DISTURBED AREA AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE AND CONDUCT GRADING18.SEE DETAIL SHEET . XXXX FOR BITUMINOUS & CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTION DEPTHS FOR TRUNCATED DOME DETAILS AND NOTES. XXXX XXXX FOR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE LOCATIONS AND DETAILS. . SIGNAGE AND MARKING NOTES GENERAL GEOMETRIC AND PAVING NOTESGENERAL ACCESSIBILITY NOTES ALL PLAN AND DETAIL DIMENSIONS. PAVING SHALL BE LAID OUT ON SITE BY AOF CURB IS ASSUMED TO BE 8 INCHES FROM THE BACK OF CURB, ALL CURB & GUTTERTO BE B612 UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, SEE DETAIL SHEET XXXX.SHALL BE 5.0% UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS, SEE DETAIL SHEETXXXXCONSTRUCTION DETAILS. SEE GRADING PLAN SHEET XXXX FOR CURB TAPERS.XXXX & XXXXAREAS.TRANSITION ACROSS NEW AND EXISTING JOINTS.AND SPECIFICATIONS.AND SIZE INFORMATION.ACCESSIBLE SIGN AND POST DETAIL ON SHEET OTHERWISE.STATE ACCESSIBILITY CODE REGULATIONS AND IS TO NOTIFY ENGINEER IF FIELDCONDITIONS PROHIBIT COMPLIANCE.CROSS SLOPE OF 2.08% (1:48). MAXIMUM SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION ON AN ADAVERSUS THE DESIGN GRADIENT. COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH PAVING CONTRACTOR. REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR.DIMENSIONS OF EXIT PORCHES, RAMPS, PRECISE BUILDING DIMENSIONS AND EXACTBUILDING UTILITY ENTRANCE LOCATIONS.MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE SHALL BE 2.0% AND THE MAXIMUM LONGITUDINAL SLOPELINES, ALLOWING NO PONDING OF WATER AT JOINTS. PROVIDE SMOOTH GRADEBITUMINOUS PAVING.MEET TEXTURE, COLOR AND PATTERN REQUIREMENTS AS SHOWN ON ARCHITECTURALPLANS.INFORMATION.PER MN MUTCD, ADA AND LOCAL CODE.REPLACED IN-KIND. IF IT IS LATEX OR EPOXY PAINT, ALL COSTS ASSOCIATED WITHPAVEMENT MARKING REPLACEMENT SHALL BE BORNE BY THE CONTRACTOR.LONGITUDINAL SLOPE OF 5% (1:20), EXCEPT AT CURB RAMPS (1:12), AND A MAXIMUMPARKING STALL OR ACCESS AISLE SHALL BE UP TO 2.08% (1:48). CONTRACTOR SHALLREVIEW AND VERIFY THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD ALONG THE ADA ROUTE(S) PRIOR TOPLACING CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEERIMMEDIATELY IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE GRADIENT IN THE FIELD(1:48) IN ALL DIRECTIONS IN A MINIMUM 4'X4' AREA. 4.ALL SIDEWALKS SHALL HAVE POSITIVE SLOPE AWAY FROM THE BUILDING. THE4.PROVIDE 4" WIDE SOLID WHITE STRIPING IN PARKING AREAS, UNLESS NOTED4.ALL TURNING LOCATIONS SHOWN SHOULD PROVIDE AT MAXIMUM SLOPE OF 2.08% 1.SITE DIMENSIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAN SHALL BE USED FOR ALL LAYOUT WORK. CHECK2.ALL PAVING DIMENSIONS ARE TO FACE OF CURB UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. THE FACE3.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR EXACT LOCATIONS AND5.FOR ALL PEDESTRIAN CURB RAMPS, SEE MNDOT STANDARD PLANS ON SHEET XXXX FOR6.ALL CURB RADII SHALL BE 5' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.7.DETECTABLE WARNING SHALL BE USED ON ALL ACCESSIBLE ROUTE RAMPS, SEE SHEETS8.NO SLOPE IN ANY DIRECTION SHALL EXCEED 2% IN ACCESSIBLE PARKING AND LOADING9.MATCH NEW AND EXISTING PAVEMENT SURFACES, SIDEWALKS AND CURBS AT SAWCUT10.ALLOW MINIMUM OF SEVEN DAYS CURE FOR CURB AND GUTTER PRIOR TO PAVING.11.ALLOW MINIMUM OF 24 HOUR COOLING PRIOR TO ALLOWING TRAFFIC ON12.SEE DETAIL SHEET 13.PATTERNED CONCRETE PAVING AND PATIO AREAS AS DEFINED BY HATCHING SHALL14.SEE ELECTRICAL PLANS BY OTHERS FOR SITE LIGHTING.15.SEE ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR SIGNAGE AND FENCING1.ALL SIGNS SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MN MUTCD, CURRENT VERSION.2.SEE REGULATORY SIGN DETAIL FOR SIGN AND POST DETAILS AND SIGN DESIGNATION3.ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGNS SHALL BE PER MINNESOTA MUTCD SIGN R7-8M, SEE5.PROVIDE PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND PAINT SYMBOLS AT ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES6.PAVEMENT MARKINGS THAT EXIST PRIOR TO THE START OF THE PROJECT MUST BE1.PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO FINISHED SURFACE GRADE.2.CONTRACTOR IS TO ENSURE ADA ROUTE IS COMPLIANT WITH ADA AND MINNESOTA3.ALL GRADIENT ON SIDEWALKS ALONG THE ADA ROUTE SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM5.SEE DETAIL SHEET GENERAL NOTESGENERAL SITE DEMOLITION AND CLEARING NOTES SUBMIT IT TO THE OWNER FOR REVIEW.ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.ARE TO REMAIN. REPAIR OR REPLACE, TO OWNER'S SATISFACTION, ANY DAMAGE TOTEMPORARY UTILITIES AS NECESSARY TO MAINTAIN BUILDING SERVICES.AREAS DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION.ALL "TO REMAIN" TREES HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. TREES THAT ARE TO BE PROTECTEDAND REMOVE EXCESS FROM SITE.THE CONTRACTOR THROUGH FIELD EXPLORATIONS PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.TAKE PRECAUTIONARY MEASURES TO PROTECT THE UTILITY LINES SHOWN AND ANYA THICKNESS OF NOT LESS THAN ONE (1) PIPE DIAMETER. REMAINING PIPE SHALL ALSO CONDITIONS BASED UPON THE FIELD SURVEY COMPLETED BY ALLIANT ENGINEERING ONMAY 5, 2022. IF THE CONTRACTOR DOES NOT ACCEPT EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY ASSHOWN ON THE PLANS WITHOUT EXCEPTION, CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE MADE, ATOWN EXPENSE, A TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BY A REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR ANDSTAGING AREAS.SEQUENCED, INSTALLED, AND MAINTAINED BY THE CONTRACTOR.PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) FOR THE PROJECT. SEE SWPPP PLAN AND NOTES FORSHALL REMAIN OPEN FOR THE DURATION OF CONSTRUCTION.REMOVAL, INCLUDING MINIMIZING DISTURBANCE OF SOILS WITHIN THE TREES'DRIPLINE ZONES. CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT STOCKPILE MATERIAL INSIDE THE TREEDRIPLINES.SHALL NOT BE ALLOWED.PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION TO OBTAIN A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THE INTENDEDSCOPE OF WORK.IMPROVEMENTS AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROTECTING EXISTING SITE FEATURES(STRUCTURES, CURBS, WALKS, PAVEMENTS, UTILITIES, SIGNAGE, FENCES, ETC.) WHICHEXISTING PROPERTY OR SITE FEATURES WHICH ARE TO REMAIN, AT NO ADDITIONALCOST.REPRESENTATIVE AND UTILITY OWNER, PUBLIC OR PRIVATE. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDEEXISTING BUILDINGS PRIOR TO DEMOLITION OF THE BUILDINGS.ENCLOSURES, ETC. TO THE BEST PRACTICES.MEASURES SHALL BE IN PLACE. SEE EROSION CONTROL PLAN OR SWPPP FOR DETAILS.CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR RE-SEEDING OR SODDINGCLEARING. CONTACT OWNER'S PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE FOR SITE INSPECTION AFTERSHALL HAVE TEMPORARY FENCING PLACED AT THE DRIP LINE AROUND EACH TREE.SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED USE. VERIFY THE AMOUNT OF TOPSOIL NEEDEDUSABLE CONDITION. TEMPORARY PROTECTED STORAGE ON-SITE MAY BE REQUIRED.BE REMOVED IS NOT PERMITTED WITHOUT PRIOR OWNER APPROVAL.CONTRACTOR SHALL REPORT TO THE ENGINEER ANY DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN THEIRMEASUREMENTS AND THESE PLANS. CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO MAKE EXPLORATIONEXCAVATIONS AND LOCATE EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES SUFFICIENTLY AHEADOF CONSTRUCTION TO PERMIT REVISIONS TO PLANS. IF REVISIONS ARE NECESSARYBECAUSE OF ACTUAL LOCATION OF EXISTING FACILITIES, CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TOOTHER EXISTING LINES NOT OF RECORD OR NOT SHOWN ON THESE PLANS.WHERE IT IS REQUIRED AS SHOWN ON THESE CONSTRUCTION PLANS. IF ANY DAMAGE ISINCURRED ON ANY OF THE SURROUNDING PAVEMENT, ETC. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BERESPONSIBLE FOR ITS REMOVAL AND REPAIR.SHALL BE BULKHEADED SHUT WITH A WATERTIGHT NON-SHRINK CONCRETE GROUT ATBE FILLED WITH FLOWABLE FILL.STANDARDS. COORDINATE ALL WORK WITH THE CITY. ALL STREET RESTORATION SHALLBE COMPLETED IN COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL STANDARDS. 2.ALL STOCKPILES SHALL BE LOCATED WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS OR DESIGNATED3.ALL CONTROL OF WATER AND EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES SHALL BE4.ALL WORK SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STORMWATER POLLUTION5.ALL PUBLIC ROADWAYS AND PRIVATE DRIVEWAYS INSIDE THE CONSTRUCTION LIMITS6.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MINIMIZE DISTURBANCE OF TREES/SHRUBS NOT MARKED FOR7.NO CONCRETE OR RUBBLE SHALL BE BACKFILLED ONSITE. BURNING OF DEBRIS ON SITE2.CONTRACTOR SHALL COORDINATE LIMITS OF REMOVALS WITH PROPOSED3.COORDINATE DISRUPTION OF UTILITY SERVICES WITH THE OWNER'S PROJECT4.CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DISCONNECTION OF UTILITY SERVICES TO5.CONTRACTOR MUST PROTECT THE PUBLIC AT ALL TIMES WITH FENCING, BARRICADES,6.PRIOR TO START OF ANY WORK, ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PROTECTION7.CONTRACTOR SHALL PRESERVE ALL VEGETATION NOT TO BE REMOVED BY8.CLEARLY IDENTIFY AND LABEL EACH TREE THAT IS TO REMAIN PRIOR TO STARTING SITE9.STOCKPILE TOPSOIL FOR REUSE ON SITE. VERIFY THE STRIPPED TOPSOIL MEETS 1.THE DESIGN SHOWN IS BASED ON ENGINEER'S UNDERSTANDING OF EXISTING1.DEMOLITION NOTES ARE NOT COMPREHENSIVE. CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT THE SITE10.ALL MATERIAL REMOVED SHALL BE DISPOSED OF OFF-SITE AND IN A LEGAL MANNER.11.MATERIAL TO BE SALVAGED FOR REUSE BY OWNER SHALL BE REMOVED UNDAMAGED IN12.ON-SITE BROKERAGE OF MATERIALS SALVAGED BY CONTRACTOR FROM MATERIALS TO13.LOCATION AND ELEVATIONS OF IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MET SHALL BE CONFIRMED BY14.CONTRACTOR SHALL LIMIT SAW-CUT AND PAVEMENT REMOVAL TO ONLY THOSE AREAS15.WHERE EXISTING PIPES ARE TO BE ABANDONED IN PLACE, THE EXPOSED PIPE ENDS16.ABANDON OR REMOVE ALL SANITARY, WATER AND STORM SERVICES PER CITY - NOTES.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:27 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C001 Council Packet Page Number 186 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C100 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX AND REMOVALS PLAN EXISTING CONDITIONS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ REMOVALS ~ ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE BENCHMARKS (BM) BI N S TREE PROTECTION CURB AND GUTTER REMOVALSAWCUT (FULL-DEPTH)CONCRETE SIDEWALK REMOVALCONCRETE REMOVALGRAVEL REMOVAL FENCE REMOVALUTILITY REMOVALBUILDING REMOVALBITUMINOUS PAVEMENT REMOVALEXISTING FEATURE REMOVAL 02 | 00 88 800.00 KEYNOTESNOTES TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.ALL FEATURES NOT MARKED FOR CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON C001 PRIORREMOVAL. EXISTING 2.REMOVE BITUMINOUS3.REMOVE CONCRETE4.REMOVE CONCRETE SIDEWALK8.REMOVE GRAVEL9.REMOVE CURB & GUTTER2.UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, PROTECT 1.REMOVE BUILDING & FOUNDATION10.REMOVE CHAIN LINK FENCE11.REMOVE WOOD FENCE12.REMOVE RETAINING WALL13.REMOVE SIGN14.REMOVE BOLLARD15.REMOVE TREE16.PROTECT FENCE17.PROTECT POWER POLE18.PROTECT TREE19.PROTECT RETAINING WALL1.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CO 1 LEGEND TOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURTELEPHONE CURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERSANITARY SEWERWATERMAINDRAINTILEGAS LINEOVERHEAD ELECTRICUNDERGROUND ELECTRICSWALESOIL BORINGSSPOT ELEVATIONFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPSIGN & BOLLARDLIGHT POLEADA PAVEMENT MARKINGPARKING STALL COUNT PROPERTY LINEBUILDING 8888 11 22 8888 REMOVE AND SALVAGEEXISTING CROSSWALK POSTSSIGNAGE, LIGHTS, ANDRELATED FEATURES. RETURNEXTRA TO CITY. 88 66993388 88 4488 88 66 || 99 88 TRTR EMEM 55 8888 SS SS 2 TRTR FRANK STREETFRANK STREET HH 66 88 88 44 668888 99 44''7711°°0000NN 337799..449933 WW""00 ))PP((4411..339933 77 88 388 REMOVE AND SALVAGEEXISTING SIGNAGE AND POST 8899 8822 HH 99 11 88 ~~~~~~~~15 ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ 99~~~~~~~~~ 00~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ TYP. 88~88 99996688 55 888888~ 99 77 REMOVE AND SALVAGEEXISTING BRICK EDGING 88 8888~ 77 88 88~ 888815 10 ~TYP. 8888TYP. ||15 ~ 88 TYP. HHHH HH 288 ~ ~ EE // ~ ~ CC88 88 77 ~ 88 55 ~ 88 99 88 88~ 9 66 ~ 88 88 4~ ~ 9 ~ ~ 77 ~ ||55 ~88 99 88 88 ~ ~ EE //~ ~ CC 15 ~ ~ TYP. ~ ~ 88 ~88 .. ~ 55 99 00 ~ .. 55 ~ 0022 ~ 66 ~ || 22 EE "" 88 ~ WW~ 55 '' "" VACATED ALLEYVACATED ALLEY 11 33 EE~ 10 55//~33 '' EXISTING CASTING °°TYP. 22CC 99 ~ ~ 33 88 °° NN 99~ 55 ~ 66 8888 REMOVE AND SALVAGE 77 99 88 88~ 88SS ~ 88 66 ~ ~ 99 88 ~ || ~ ~ ~ 10 ~ ~ TYP. EE // ~ ~ CC ~ ~ ~ ~ 2~ 66 ~ 99 66 ~ 88 99 || ~ TT 88 ~ REMOVE EXISTING ELECTRICMETER, SERVICE, AND POWERPOWER. COORDINATE WITHRESPECTIVE UTILITY OWNER(S). ~ ~ 4 377 88 88 ~ REMOVE AND SALVAGE ~ TYP. EE~ ~ //15 ~ ~TYP. CC ~ ~88 88 77 EXISTING SIGNAGE AND POST EMEM ~ ~ 9 ~ 1 ~ 15 ~ TYP. 77TYP. 88~ 88 ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ || 11''9911°°0000NN 3300..559933 WW""22 ))PP((5511..339933 EE 15 TYP.10 TYP. 15 TYP. 2 77 EDWARD STREETEDWARD STREET SS 88 88 99 1100TYP.14 2277 338888 88 449988 559988 TYP. 99 66 9988 99 888888 99 9988 88 88 88 88 |||||||||||| 8888 77 ))PP((0011..339933 5500..559933 WW""2211''9911°°0000NN 8888 88 88 88 88 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ 77 99~ 899 ~ 8888 9988 8888 TYP. 9 ~ 99 88 1288 ~ ~ 11 TYP. 00 ~99 88 ~ || ~ 9944 1 88 99 .. 88 ~~ TYP. 99 ~22 ~ ~ 11 ~ 99 11 88 ~ ~009988 ~ ~88 2299 EE 10 9988 33 449988"" ~ ~TYP. 2 8888 91199~ ~~~ 55 '' TYP. ~ ~11 55 229988 99 33 12 88 ~ °° TYP. ~ LIGHTING AND 6699 88 33998899 99 887788 88 99~ 88 NN 88 4499 ||88 REMOVE EXISTING 99 2 99 88 99 RELATED FEATURES 99 35500 400 WINCH AND 8899~ 00 99 TYP.11 66 99 00 8822 99 ~ 77 0099 33 88 99 12 88 0099 44~ TYP. 88 55 99 REMOVE EXISTING 99 0099 55 00 ..RELATED FEATURES 99~ 00 88 00 00 EMEM 9999 00 9966 8814 6600 11~ 221 99 007700 99 22 VACATED ALLEYVACATED ALLEY TYP.~ 99 00 3388 0099 FROST AVE. E.FROST AVE. E. WW 88 440099 "" 99 99 ~~~~~ 3310~~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~~ 99~~ 88||//// 55TYP. ~ '' 88 22 33 TRTR 2266..997722 WW""8855''9911°°0000NN °° 99 TT 88 TT TRTR HH SS HH 00 2 00 99 00 UTILITY OWNER(S). ||00 .. 00 33 FENTON AVENUEFENTON AVENUE 11 2 11 EE SERVICE AND CURB STOP.TYP. "" REMOVE EXISTING WATER 00 00 99 11 '' 99 33 22 COORDINATE WITH RESPECTIVE°° 00 99 METER. COORDINATE WITH 99 88 REMOVE EXISTING ELECTRIC 9 NN 33 00 RESPECTIVE UTILITY OWNER(S). 99 ||99 99 UTILITY OWNER(S). 88 15 TYP. ))PP(( 0011..3311112222..551111 WW""5544''0022°°0000NN REMOVE EXISTING GAS METER. COORDINATE WITH RESPECTIVE ||UTILITY OWNER(S). PHALEN PLACEPHALEN PLACE 33 22 00 11 00 99 SS0000 99 99 00 99 REMOVE EXISTING ELECTRIC METER AND TRANSFORMER. || COORDINATE WITH RESPECTIVE 00 00 99 R REMOVE EXISTING GAS SERVICE. COORDINATE WITH RESPECTIVE UTILITY OWNER(S). Know what's - EC & REM.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:30 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C100 Council Packet Page Number 187 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C200 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM DATE SWPPP NOTES - 1 XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE: XX IMPACT TO THE THE FINAL COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT OR VEGETATION HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, WHICHEVER IS LATER.WITH ACCEPTED ENGINEERING PRACTICES, DOSING SPECIFICATIONS AND SEDIMENT REMOVAL DESIGNSPECIFICATIONS PROVIDED BY THE MANUFACTURER OR SUPPLIER. THE PERMITTEES MUST USE CONVENTIONALTO A SEDIMENT CONTROL SYSTEM FOR FILTRATION OR SETTLEMENT OF THE FLOC PRIOR TO DISCHARGE.STORMWATER. PERMITTEES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO COVER OR PROTECT PRODUCTS WHICH ARE EITHER NOT ASOURCE OF CONTAMINATION TO STORMWATER OR ARE DESIGNED TO BE EXPOSED TO STORMWATER.APPROPRIATE CONTAINERS. INCLUDING SECONDARY CONTAINMENT TO PREVENT SPILLS, LEAKS OR OTHERAND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTE MUST COMPLY WITH MPCA REGULATIONS, SEE SECTION 12.4 OF THETEMPORARY ROOFS, ETC.) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE CONTACTWITH STORMWATER.THE CONCRETE MIX PLANT INSTEAD OF ON-SITE.SAID CHEMICALS.AVAILABLE AT ALL TIMES TO CLEAN UP DISCHARGED MATERIALS AND THAT AN APPROPRIATE DISPOSAL METHOD COMPLETED BEFORE A RAINFALL EVENT.UNTIL ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS CEASED AND THE TRIBUTARY SURFACES ARE CLEANED OF SEDIMENT.DURING INSTALLATION .EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROLS PRIOR TO CHEMICAL ADDITION AND MUST DIRECT TREATED STORMWATERROOFS) OR PROTECT THEM BY SIMILARLY EFFECTIVE MEANS DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE CONTACT WITHCONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION DEBRIS AND OTHER WASTES MUST BE DISPOSED OF PROPERLY AND MUSTCOMPLY WITH MPCA DISPOSAL REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 12.5 OF THE GENERAL PERMIT.PERMITTEES MUST PROPERLY DISPOSE SANITARY WASTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH MINN. R. CH. 7041.DISCHARGES. RESTRICTED ACCESS TO STORAGE AREAS MUST BE PROVIDED TO PREVENT VANDALISM. STORAGEGENERAL PERMIT.EQUIPMENT. NO ENGINE DEGREASING IS ALLOWED ON SITE.LEAK-PROOF WITH AN IMPERMEABLE LINER. OR ALTERNATIVELY, CONCRETE WASHOUT SHALL BE PERFORMED ATNEGATIVE GRADIENT TO ANY WATER RESOURCE AREA. A CONTINGENCY PLAN MUST BE CREATED BY THECONTRACTOR IN THE EVENT OF A SPILL OR LEAK OF ANY CHEMICAL, INCLUDING PETROCHEMICALS, DEEMEDHARMFUL TO THE ENVIRONMENT, AND HAVE ON HAND THE MATERIALS NECESSARY TO CAPTURE AND CONTAININCLUDING FUEL, FROM ANY AREA WHERE CHEMICALS OR FUEL WILL BE LOADED OR UNLOADED INCLUDING THEUSE OF DRIP PANS OR ABSORBENTS UNLESS INFEASIBLE. PERMITTEES MUST ENSURE ADEQUATE SUPPLIES AREIS AVAILABLE FOR RECOVERED SPILLED MATERIALS. PERMITTEES MUST REPORT AND CLEAN UP SPILLSIMMEDIATELY AS REQUIRED BY MINN. STAT. 115.061, USING DRY CLEAN UP MEASURES WHERE POSSIBLE. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR IMPLEMENTING THE FOLLOWING POLLUTION MANAGEMENT MEASURESALLOWABLE NON-STORMWATER DISCHARGES, AS DEFINED BY THE GENERAL PERMIT, ARE LIMITED TO DEWATERINGAND BASIN DRAINING. DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING THAT MAY HAVE TURBID OR SEDIMENT LADEN DISCHARGEWATER MUST BE DISCHARGED TO A TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT SEDIMENTATION BASIN ON THE PROJECT SITEWHENEVER POSSIBLE. IF THE WATER CANNOT BE DISCHARGED TO A SEDIMENTATION BASIN PRIOR TO ENTERING THESURFACE WATER, IT MUST BE TREATED WITH THE APPROPRIATE BMPS, SUCH THAT THE DISCHARGE DOES NOTADVERSELY AFFECT THE RECEIVING WATER OR DOWNSTREAM LANDOWNERS. THE CONTRACTOR MUST ENSURETHAT DISCHARGE POINTS DISPERSED OVER NATURAL ROCK RIPRAP, SAND BAGS, PLASTIC SHEETING OR OTHERACCEPTED ENERGY DISSIPATION MEASURES. ADEQUATE SEDIMENTATION CONTROL MEASURES ARE REQUIRED FROOR ON DOWNSLOPE PROPERTIES, OR INUNDATION IN WETLANDS CAUSING SIGNIFICANT ADVERSEWETLAND. IF THE CONTRACTOR ELECTS TO UTILIZE FILTERS WITH BACKWASH WATER, THE CONTRACTOR MUST HAULTHE BACKWASH WATER AWAY FOR DISPOSAL, RETURN THE BACKWATER TO THE BEGINNING OF THE TREATMENTTHE CONTRACTOR MUST REPLACE AND CLEAN THE FILTER MEDIA USED IN DEWATERING DEVICES WHEN REQUIREDTO RETAIN ADEQUATE FUNCTION. CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN A WATER USE (APPROPRIATION) PERMIT FROM THE POLLUTION PREVENTION MEASURESON THE SITE:DEWATERING AND BASIN DRAININGDISCHARGE WATER THAT CONTAINS SUSPENDED SOLIDS. ALL WATER FROM DEWATERING OR BASIN DRAINING MUSTBE DISCHARGED IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE NUISANCE CONDITIONS, EROSION IN RECEIVING CHANNELSPROCESS, OR INCORPORATE THE BACKWASH WATER INTO THE SITE IN A MANNER THAT DOES NOT CAUSE EROSION.MN DNR FOR DEWATERING ACTIVITIES THAT WILL WITHDRAW MORE THAN 10,000 GALLONS OF WATER PER DAY OR1 MILLION GALLONS PER YEAR. 2.SOLID WASTE: COLLECTED SEDIMENT, ASPHALT, CONCRETE MILLINGS, FLOATING DEBRIS, PAPER, PLASTIC, FABRIC,3.PERMITTEES MUST POSITION PORTABLE TOILETS SO THEY ARE SECURE AND WILL NOT TIP OR BE KNOCKED OVER.4.HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: OIL, GASOLINE, PAINT AND ANY HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES MUST BE STORED IN5.PESTICIDES, FERTILIZERS AND TREATMENT CHEMICALS MUST BE PLACED UNDER COVER (PLASTIC SHEETING OR6.A DEFINED AREA OF THE SITE MUST BE DESIGNATED FOR USE AS A WASH AREA FOR TRUCKS AND OTHER7.CONCRETE WASHOUT CONTAINMENT SHALL BE PROVIDED ON SITE. THE CONTAINMENT METHOD MUST BE8.ANY FUEL OR CHEMICAL TANK STORAGE ON THE PROJECT AREA MUST BE PROTECTED BY A SOIL BERM OR HAVE A9.PERMITTEES MUST TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO PREVENT THE DISCHARGE OF SPILLED OR LEAKED CHEMICALS, 11.INFILTRATION BASIN PERIMETER CONTROL AND EROSION CONTROL PRACTICES SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL12.INSTALLATION OF INFILTRATION/FILTRATION PRACTICES SHALL BE DONE DURING PERIODS OF DRY WEATHER AND13.EXCAVATION OF INFILTRATION AREAS SHALL BE COMPLETED USING A BACKHOE WITH A TOOTHED BUCKET.14.SOILS IN THE INFILTRATION AREAS SHALL BE LOOSENED UP TO A MINIMUM OF 18" IN DEPTH.15.THE BOTTOM EXCAVATION SURFACE OF THE INFILTRATION AREAS SHALL BE LEVEL WITHOUT DIPS OR SWALES.16.DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE INFILTRATION AREAS, STORMWATER MUST BE ROUTED AROUND THE AREAS17.THE ENGINEERED SOILS WITH IN THE INFILTRATION AREAS SHALL REMAIN UNCONTAMINATED BEFORE AND18.POLYMERS, FLOCCULANTS, OR OTHER SEDIMENTATION TREATMENT CHEMICALS MUST BE USED IN ACCORDANCE1.BUILDING PRODUCTS AND LANDSCAPE MATERIALS UNDER COVER (E.G., PLASTIC SHEETING OR TEMPORARY J. I. 24 24 24 HOURS OF 7 DAYS AND WITHIN 24 HOURS. 14 DAYS AFTER 0.50 INCHES. 14 DAYS AFTER THE CONSTRUCTION IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING SOIL AND/OR IMMEDIATELY OR NO LATER THAN 24 HOURS OF A STORM EVENT OF AT LEAST 75 FEET OR LESS. 0.50 INCH OVER 24 HOUR RAIN EVENT DURING ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION. CONTROL ACTIVITIES FOR THE PROJECT ENGINEER'S AND OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE'S APPROVAL.CONTROL BMP'S, CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES PRIOR TO SITE GRADING, EXCAVATION, STOCKPILING ORSTORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP).CONTROL BMPS AS SHOWN ON PLANS & IN CONFORMANCE WITH NPDES PERMIT EVERY VEGETATION DISTURBANCE ACTIVITIES AND MUST BE COMPLETED NO LATER THAN CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY HAS CEASED.CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM ITEMS 6-9 FOR AREAS BOUND BY PHASE II DEMOLITION WORK, AND FOR ANYAPPROPRIATE AND FUNCTIONAL MANNER.SOILS AND ADEQUATE PREVENTION OF SEDIMENT TRANSPORT OFF-SITE. AT A MINIMUM, THE FOLLOWINGSTORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FIELD REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE FURNISHED BYTHE CONTRACTOR.WILL OCCUR.TOPSOIL.COVER TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE. THE LOCATION OF AREAS NOT TO BE DISTURBED MUST BE DELINEATED ON THESITE BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS.AS NEEDED.ACTIVITY IN THAT PORTION OF THE SITE HAS TEMPORARILY OR PERMANENTLY CEASED, INCLUDING STOCKPILESWITH SIGNIFICANT SILT, CLAY OR ORGANIC COMPONENTS.200 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY EDGE, OR FROM THE POINT OF DISCHARGE TO ANY SURFACE WATER WITHIN SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM DO NOT NEED TO BE STABILIZED UNTIL THEY ARE NO LONGER USED AS ASEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM, AFTER WHICH THEY MUST BE STABILIZED WITHIN CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER.AN UNBROKEN LENGTH OF ACCOMMODATE SHORT-TERM ACTIVITIES SUCH AS CLEARING AND GRUBBING OR VEHICLE PASSAGE. ANYSHORT-TERM ACTIVITY MUST BE COMPLETED AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE AND THE SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICESSTOCKPILES SHALL NOT BE PLACED WITHIN SURFACE WATERS OR STORMWATER CONVEYANCES. CONTRACTORSHALL INSTALL SILT FENCE PROTECTION AROUND THE LIMITS OF ALL TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILE AREAS. ALLSOIL STOCKPILES THAT REMAIN UNDISTURBED FOR A PERIOD GREATER THAN 48 HOURS SHALL BE PROTECTED BYCONTRACTOR WITH COVER OF MULCH, EROSION CONTROL MATS, OR PLASTIC SHEETING.AFTER SWEEPING SEDIMENT FROM THE AREAS.TRAFFIC, AND PRIVATE AND PUBLIC PROPERTIES.THIS RESPONSIBILITY SHALL REQUIRE CONTRACTOR TO SUSPENDCONSTRUCTION OR HAUL TRAFFIC UNTIL SUCH TIME AS CONTRACTOR CAN AND DOES PREVENT AIRBORNE DUST.CONTRACTOR SHALL NOT OVER SPRAY SO AS TO CREATE PROBLEMS, SUCH AS TRACKING OF MATERIAL ONTO DISTURBING EXISTING VEGETATIVE COVER.HOURS FOLLWING A FUNCTIONING PROPERLY WITHIN REMAINING WORK WITHIN THE CONSTRUCTION BOUNDARIES.(NOT).PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES UTILIZED TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE PROTECTION OF DISTURBEDEQUIPMENT USE IN INFILTRATION/FILTRATION BMP AREAS, AND AREAS WHERE FULL VEGETATIVE STABILIZATIONLOCATIONS SHOWN ON THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN DRAWING, OR AS MODIFIED IN THE FIELD BY THEENGINEER.FROM A CONSTRUCTION SITE OR DIVERTS WATER AROUND A SITE MUST BE STABILIZED BY CONTRACTOR WITHINHOURS OF CONNECTING TO A SURFACE WATER. TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DITCH SWALES BEING USED AS APERFORMED WILL BE SNOW MULCHED OR SNOW BLANKETED AND SNOW SEEDED.DISTURBANCE BEGINS. CONTRACTOR SHALL MAINTAIN PERIMETER CONTROLS UNTIL FINAL STABILIZATION.MUST BE INSTALLED IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE ACTIVITY IS COMPLETED AND IN ALL CASES PRIOR TO THE NEXTPRECIPITATION EVENT.BMP'S DURING THE WORK. THESE PRACTICES SHALL REMAIN IN PLACE UNTIL THE POTENTIAL SOURCES FORDISCHARGING SEDIMENT TO INLETS HAVE BEEN STABILIZED BY CONTRACTOR.ENTRANCES OR EQUIVALENT SYSTEM MUST BE INSTALLED BY CONTRACTOR TO MINIMIZE TRACKING FROM SITE.PRIVATE PAVEMENT AREAS. REMOVE SOIL AND SEDIMENT ON A DAILY BASIS. STREET WASHING IS ONLY ALLOWEDBY SPRAYING WITH UNCONTAMINATED WATER AS TO PREVENT AIRBORNE DUST FROM LEAVING THE SITE. THISMAY INCLUDE SPRAYING AND SWEEPING FINISHED SURFACES ADJACENT TO THE PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC, VEHICLEPAVED SURFACES, OR MUDDY HAUL ROADS, DUE TO THE APPLICATION OF EXCESS MOISTURE.FILTER SYSTEM BEFORE DISCHARGING TO THE DOWNSTREAM SYSTEM. CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY FIELD REQUIREMENTS:ALL FIELD REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE PERFORMED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMITAND STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP).SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICESCONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FOLLOWING SEDIMENT CONTROL PRACTICES: EROSION PREVENTION PRACTICES 4.CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ALL PERIMETER AND DOWN-GRADIENT EROSION CONTROL AND SEDIMENT4.AREAS OF COMPACTION SHALL BE UNCOMPACTED TO A DEPTH OF 18 INCHES BEFORE THE PLACEMENT OF4.ALL EXPOSED SOILS MUST BE STABILIZED 4.IF PRESENT, ALL STORM SEWER INLETS AND OUTLETS SHALL BE PROTECTED BY CONTRACTOR WITH APPROPRIATE 5.CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM PHASE I DEMOLITION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DEMOLITION PLAN.6.CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM SITE GRADING, EXCAVATION, STOCKPILING WORK IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE7.CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL, INSPECT, MONITOR AND MAINTAIN TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT EROSION8.CONTRACTOR MUST INITIATE SOIL STABILIZATION METHODS 9.CONTRACTOR SHALL REPLACE OR REPAIR EROSION CONTROL AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S THAT ARE NOT10.CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM PHASE II DEMOLITION IN ACCORDANCE WITHE THE DEMOLITION PLAN.11.CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM SITE RESTORATION ACTIVITIES FOR PERMANENT VEGETATIVE ESTABLISHMENT.12.CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES PRIOR TO SUBMITTING NOTICE OF TERMINATION13.SUBMIT NOT TO MPCA WITHIN 30 DAYS OF FINAL STABILIZATION.1.THE CONTRACTOR MUST IMPLEMENT THE SWPPP AND PROVIDE BMPs IDENTIFIED IN THE SWPPP IN AN2.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL RESPOND TO CHANGING SITE CONDITIONS AND IMPLEMENT/SUPPLEMENT EROSION3.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TAKE CAUTION TO MINIMIZE COMPACTION OF SOILS AND RESTRICT VEHICLE AND1.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ATTEMPT TO PHASE ALL WORK TO MINIMIZE EROSION AND MAINTAIN VEGETATIVE2.INLET PROTECTION, SILT FENCE, ROCK LOGS, AND ROCK CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES SHALL BE INSTALLED AT3.INLET PROTECTION FOR OFF SITE DRAIN INLETS NOT SHOWN IN THE EROSION CONTROL PLAN WILL BE INSTALLED5.THE NORMAL WETTED PERIMETER OF ANY TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT DRAINAGE DITCH THAT DRAINS WATER6.TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT ENERGY DISSIPATION AT PIPE OUTLETS MUST BE PROVIDED WITHIN 7.ALL EXPOSED SOIL AREAS WILL BE STABILIZED PRIOR TO THE ONSET OF WINTER. ANY WORK STILL BEING1.CONTRACTOR MUST INSTALL ALL DOWN GRADIENT PERIMETER CONTROLS BEFORE ANY UP GRADIENT2.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE GRADING AND BMP INSTALLATION TO LIMIT ALL SLOPES OF 3H:1V OR STEEPER TO3.TIMING AND INSTALLATION OF SEDIMENT CONTROL DEVICES CAN BE ADJUSTED BY CONTRACTOR TO5.TEMPORARY SOIL STOCKPILES MUST HAVE SILT FENCE OR OTHER EFFECTIVE SEDIMENT CONTROLS. SOIL6.CONTRACTOR SHALL IMPLEMENT MEASURES TO CONTROL VEHICLE TRACKING OFF SITE. ROCK CONSTRUCTION7.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS AS REQUIRED BY THE PERMIT.8.CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE ALL SOIL AND SEDIMENT TRACKED OR OTHERWISE DEPOSITED ON PUBLIC OR9.CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP THE SURFACE OF ANY AND ALL CONSTRUCTION WORK AREAS AND HAUL ROADS MOIST10.CONTRACTOR SHALL TREAT ANY SEDIMENT LADEN WATER WITH APPROPRIATE SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT OR CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FOLLOWING EROSION PREVENTION PRACTICES: G. F.H. TRAINING GENERAL PERMIT AUTHORIZATION TRAINING REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT TO 72 HOURS UPON REQUEST BY MPCA. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A MIX OF GRAVELLY SAND IN THE NORTH PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, AND CLAYEY SAND FROST AVENUE EAST FILTRATION SWALE & CHAMBER SYSTEM CROSS SECTION DETAILS, PERSERVER DETAILS, PROJECT LOCATION DESCRIPTION1136 FOR XXXX THE PROJECT SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN A DWSMA EMERGENCY RESPONSE AREA THAT IS CLASSIFIED AS MODERATETREATING RUNOFF FROM THE ROOF, PER MPCA AND WATERSHED STANDARDS.THE PROJECT'S STORMWATER DISCHARGE IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO IMPACT ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES OR ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITES.THE PROJECT'S STORMWATER DISCHARGE IS NOT SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL REGULATION DUE TO OTHER FORMALTHE BUILDING AND PAVEMENT AREAS WILL BE COLLECTED INTO MULTIPLE ABOVE-GROUND MANAGEMENTACTIVITIES OF ALL OF CONTRACTOR'S SUBCONTRACTORS.ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE PERMIT. ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) MUST BE AVAILABLE FORAN ON-SITE INSPECTION WITHIN SPECIAL AND/OR IMPAIRED WATERSOUTSTANDING RESOURCE VALUE WATERS, TROUT WATERS, WETLANDS, CALCEROUS FENS, PROPERTIES LISTED BYSYSTEM THAT DISCHARGES TO THE EXISTING SWALE ALONG THE EASY BOUNDARY. GRADING OUTSIDE THEGRAVEL AND BITUMINOUS PARKING SURFACES THAT ARE IN POOR CONDITION WITHIN THE PROPERTYCONDUCT INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF ALL EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMP'S INWITH ALL PERMITS N/APLACEMENT OF FILL IN WATERS OF THE STATEN/ADRINKING WATER SUPPLY MANAGEMENT AREAFROM THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, THEREFORE INFILTRATION BMP'S ARE PROHIBITED, UNLESSENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS. THE PROJECT'S STORMWATER DISCHARGE IS SUBJECT TO ADDITIONAL REGULATIONDUE TO ENDANGERED OR THREATENED SPECIES: BLANDING TURTLEFILL IN THE SOUTH HALF.BOUNDARIES OF THE SITE. THERE IS NO STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE ON THE EXISTING SITE, STORM RUNOFFFLOWS OVERLAND TO THE EAST AND SOUTH CURB PROPERTY LINES INTO EXISTING AND UNUSED RIGHT-OF-WAY.BUILDING AND PAVEMENT AREAS WILL MATCH EXISTING FLOW PATTERNS.BOUNDARY. VEGETATION IMPACTED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WILL BE REMOVED, AND SITE WILL BEREVEGETATED AFTER CONSTRUCTION AND PAVING ACTIVITIES HAVE BEEN COMPLETED PER THE LANDSCAPINGPLANS.USUALLY FALL IN MAY THROUGH SEPTEMBER. THE AVERAGE ANNUAL SNOWFALL IS 57.3 INCHES.EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES (BMP'S) TO OVERSEE ALLINSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF BMP'S AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP.DOCUMENTATION FOR THESE INDIVIDUAL(S) AS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMIT. THIS TRAININGDOCUMENTATI ON SHALL BE RECORDED IN OR WITH THE SWPPP BEFORE THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. THE STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) IS REQUIRED FOR THE TO DISCHARGE STORMWATER ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (NPDES PERMIT) AS REQUIRED BY THETHE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MPCA NPDES PERMIT IS INCLUDED IN THIS CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT.THIS PROJECT INCLUDES REDEVELOPING THE EXISTING PROPERTY FOR A NEW APARTMENT COMPLEX.THE FOLLOWING SIZING CRITERIA APPLY TO THE DESIGN OF STORMWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES. N/A INDICATESSEE SHEET THE FOLLOWING SEQUENCE DESCRIBES, IN GENERAL, THE WORK ON THE SITE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION:MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY (MPCA) UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATIONSYSTEM/STATE DISPOSAL SYSTEM (NPDES/SDS). IN ADDITION TO THE SWPPP, AN EROSION CONTROL PLAN MEETINGPROJECT NAME:FROST AVENUE APARTMENTSDESCRIPTION:SITE ADDRESS:CITY:MAPLEWOODSTATE:MINNESOTAZIP CODE:55109COUNTY:RAMSEYLATITUDE:93.0519°W (DECIMAL)LONGITUDE:44.9986°N (DECIMAL)CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY WILL INCLUDE DEMOLITION OF EXISTING PARKING LOTS AND BUILDINGS, CONSTRUCTINGUNDERGROUND PARKING WITH APARTMENTS ABOVE, ADJACENT PARKING, FILTRATION BASINS AND STORMWATERINFRASTRUCTURE, AND LANDSCAPING.ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION START DATE: 01-02-2023ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION END DATE: 10-20-2023REGULATORY CONTEXT:SOILS, SLOPES VEGETATION, AND CURRENT DRAINAGE PATTERNSSTORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES:STORMWATER DISCHARGE DESIGN REQUIREMENTSCONSTRUCTION NOTES, AND DESIGN CALCULATIONS.SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION NOT APPLICABLE OR NOT CONSTRUCTED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) NARRATIVE (1/2) - FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS 3.3.DRAINAGE PATTERNS WILL BE GENERALLY MAINTAINED FOR PROPOSED CONDITIONS. SURFACE RUNOFF FROM4.THE EXISTING SITE IS A MARINE STORAGE AND REPAIR FACILITY WITH SHORT GRASS COVERED WITH SOME TREES,5.THE AVERAGE TOTAL ANNUAL PRECIPITATION IS ABOUT 28.32 INCHES. OF THIS, ABOUT 17.31 INCHES (61%)3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A PERSON(S) KNOWLEDGEABLE AND EXPERIENCED IN THE APPLICATION OF4.CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE PERSON(S) MEETING THE 3.PERMANENT INFILTRATION/FILTRATION BMP: TWO (2) FILTRATION BASINS.4.PERMANENT REGIONAL PONDS: N/A5.ALTERNATIVE METHODS: N/A3.CONTRACTOR SHALL PREPARE AND SUBMIT A WRITTEN, NOT ORAL, WEEKLY SCHEDULE OF PROPOSED EROSION 1.2.1.THE SOILS ONSITE ARE 2.GRADES GENERALLY SLOPE DOWN FROM THE NORTH AND WEST BOUNDARIES TO THE SOUTH AND EAST1.THE OWNER AND CONTRACTOR ARE PERMITTEE(S) AS IDENTIFIED BY THE NPDES PERMIT.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ON-SITE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP, INCLUDING THE1.TEMPORARY SEDIMENTATION BASINS: N/A2.PERMANENT WET SEDIMENTATION BASINS: N/A1.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY THAT ALL PERMITS HAVE BEEN OBTAINED AND/OR OBTAIN THE NECESSARY PERMITS.2.CONTRACTOR SHALL PERFORM SITE INSPECTIONS, RECORD KEEPING AND RECORD RETENTION IN ACCORDANCE A. B.C.D.E.E. - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:30 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C200 Council Packet Page Number 188 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION C201 JRKJRK 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM DATE SWPPP NOTES - 2 XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE: XX PROJECT SITE 1.25 AC0.91 AC2.73 AC2.17 AC FROST AVENUE FROST AVENUE APARTMENTSXXX5510993.0519°W (DECIMAL)44.9986°N (DECIMAL) 1136MAPLEWOODMINNESOTARAMSEY PROJECT SITE AREA SUMMARY PROJECT INFORMATION ZIP CODE PROJECT NAMEDESCRIPTIONSITE ADDRESS:CITYSTATECOUNTYLATITUDELONGITUDEPAVEMENT AREABUILDING AREASEEDING AREAPRE-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS0.90 ACPOST-CONSTRUCTION IMPERVIOUS SITE LOCATION MAP(NOT TO SCALE)(NOT TO SCALE) USGS MAP OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE(S) CONTRACTORON-SITE REPRESENTATIVE(S) THEY SHALL OVERSEE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SWPPP, INSPECTION, AND MAINTENANCE OF RESPONSIBLE PERSONS:BELOW IS A LIST OF PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS PROJECT WHO ARE KNOWLEDGEABLE ANDEXPERIENCED IN THE APPLICATION OF EROSION PREVENTION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS.EROSION PREVENTION, AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BMPS BEFORE AND DURING CONSTRUCTION. 30 DAYS IF ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING 0.50 INCHES. 24 HOURS OF A RAINFALL EVENT GREATER THAN APPLICABLE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS OR THE SWPPP DOES NOT INCORPORATE THE REQUIREMENTS RELATEDTO AN APPROVED TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL). STABILIZATION.ON SITE MAY BE LEFT IN PLACE IF INDICATED BY THE PLAN.WITHIN CONSISTENT WITH THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS PERMIT. INCLUDING THE REMOVAL OF ALL TEMPORARY MEASURES SUCH AS SILT FENCE.DENSITY OF 70% OVER THE ENTIRE PERVIOUS SURFACE HAS BEEN ACHIEVED, INCLUDING STABILIZATION OF ALLDITCHES AND SWALES.IS NOT EFFECTIVE. AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES, PRECIPITATION AND ALL OTHER RECORDS REQUIRED BY THE NPDES PERMITTHE SUBMITTAL OF THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION. INCLUDING THE RECORDS OF ALL INSPECTION ANDTHE PERMITTEE MUST AMEND THE SWPPP AS NECESSARY TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS, SUCH ASADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED BMPS, DESIGNED TO CORRECT PROBLEMS IDENTIFIED OR ADDRESS SITUATIONSTHIS STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN WAS PREPARED BY INDIVIDUAL(S) TRAINED IN ACCORDANCE RECORD RETENTIONCONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP APPROPRIATE RECORDS OF INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF EROSION PREVENTIONDURING THE DURATION OF THE WORK. THE SWPPP, ALL CHANGES TO IT, AND INSPECTIONS AND MAINTENANCERECORDS MUST BE KEPT AT THE SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION BY THE PERMITTEE WHO HAS OPERATIONAL CONTROLOF THE PORTION OF THE SITE. CONTRACTOR AND OWNER MUST KEEP THE SWPPP ON FILE FOR THREE YEARS AFTERMAINTENANCE CONDUCTED DURING CONSTRUCTION.NOTICE OF TERMINATIONPERMITTEE MUST SUBMIT A NOTICE OF TERMINATION WITHIN CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN MET:PERMITTEE MUST ENSURE FINAL STABILIZATION OF THE SITE AND SUBMIT THE NOTICE OF TERMINATION WITHIN 30DAYS OF FINAL STABILIZATION.FINAL STABILIZATION CAN BE ACHIEVED IN THE FOLLOWING WAY:CHANGES TO SWPPPWHENEVER:SWPPP CERTIFICATIONWITH THE PERMIT'S TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION OF SWPPPS. INDIVIDUAL(S) PREPARING THISSWPPP:BENJAMIN LUCAS, PEPROJECT ENGINEERSOLUTION BLUE, INC.blucas@solutionblue.com651-294-0038 STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) NARRATIVE (2/2) - FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS 3.REMOVAL OF ALL TEMPORARY SYNTHETIC AND STRUCTURAL BMPS. ALTHOUGH BMPS DESIGNED TO DECOMPOSE4.REMOVAL OF SEDIMENT FROM STORM WATER CONVEYANCES AND PERMANENT WATER QUALITY BASINS.3.INSPECTION OR INVESTIGATION BY SITE OPERATORS, LOCAL, STATE OR FEDERAL OFFICIALS INDICATE THE SWPPP4.THE SWPPP IS NOT ACHIEVING THE GENERAL OBJECTIVES OF CONTROLLING POLLUTANTS OR THE SWPPP IS NOT5.THE MPCA DETERMINES THAT DISCHARGE MAY CAUSE OR CONTRIBUTE TO NON-ATTAINMENT OF ANY 1.FINAL STABILIZATION HAS BEEN ACHIEVED ON ALL PORTIONS OF THE SITE FOR WHICH PERMITTEE IS RESPONSIBLE2.ANOTHER OWNER HAS ASSUMED CONTROL OVER ALL PORTIONS OF THE SITE THAT HAVE NOT ACHIEVED FINAL1.ALL SOIL DISTURBING ACTIVITIES ARE COMPLETE AND A UNIFORM PERENNIAL VEGETATIVE COVER WITH A2.ALL PERMANENT STORMWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE NPDES PERMIT.1.THERE IS A CHANGE IN DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION, OPERATION OR MAINTENANCE.2.WEATHER OR SEASONAL CONDITIONS THAT HAVE SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON DISCHARGE. INSPECTION IS REQUIRED K.L.M.N. - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:30 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C200 Council Packet Page Number 189 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C202 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 SWPPP DETAILS DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX EROS 09: 4/22 45° ANGLE WITH THE TOP OF THESTAKE POINTING UPSTREAM. PROVIDE8-10" OF EMBEDMENT DEPTH.ANGLE WITH THE TOP OF THE STAKEOF EMBEDMENT DEPTH. 1"x2"x18" LONG WOOD STAKES AT 2'MAX SPACING. DRIVE THROUGH BACKHALF OF SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG AT1"x2"x18" LONG WOOD STAKES ASNEEDED. DRIVE OVER LOG AT 45°POINTING UPSTREAM. PROVIDE 8-10" ° 5 4 ° 5 4 DETAIL FOR TYPES: STRAW, WOOD FIBER OR COIR SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG STAKING NOT TO SCALE DETAIL FOR TYPES: WOOD CHIP, COMPOST OR ROCK FLOWPLACE IN SHALLOWFLOW TRENCH 1-2" OF DEPTH SOIL FROM TRENCH X C90X BACKFILL AND COMPACT EROS 08: 4/22 STRAW OR WOOD FIBER6" ROLL OF ENCLOSED IN PLASTIC OR POLYESTERNETTING 2'' X 2'' X 18'' LONG WOODEN STAKESAT 2'-0'' SPACING. DRIVE THROUGH NETTING AND FIBER ROLL. SECURED WITH ZIP TIE ENDS SECURELY CLOSED TO PREVENT LOSS OF FILL SEDIMENT CONTROL LOG NOT TO SCALE X C90X EROS 06 (ALT): 4/22 CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE - AGES MUD MAT NOT TO SCALE X C90X EROS 06: 4/22 . N I M ' 0 2 . N I M ' 0 5 D A O R DEPTH C I L B U P 6" MINIMUM MINIMIZE RUNOFF FROM SITE 2"-3" WASHED ROCK MIGRATION THROUGH ROCKMAY BE USED FOR EXIT STABILIZATION WITH ENGINEER APPROVAL 18" MINIMUM CUT OFF BERM TO ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT NOT TO SCALE NOTES: 1.FILTER FABRIC SHALL BE PLACED UNDER ROCK TO STOP MUD2.OTHER METHODS BESIDES ROCK (SLASH MULCH, RUMBLE PAD, ETC.) X C90X - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:30 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C200 Council Packet Page Number 190 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C210 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE SWPPP - PHASE 1 XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX 02 00 88 800.00 ( IN FEET ) EXISTING GRAPHIC SCALE BENCHMARKS (BM) QUANTITY 1,485 LFLF0 CY0 EA0EA6 02 UNIT 00 LoD88SF 800.00 BI PROPOSED N S KEYNOTESNOTES CONSTRUCTION. NOTES ON C001 PRIOR TO THE START OF 4.EROSION CONTROL BLANKET (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX) 1.ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)2.SILT FENCE (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)3.FILTER LOG (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)5.TREE PROTECTION FENCE (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)6.INLET PROTECTION (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)1.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION 1 TREE PROTECTION FENCE ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXITEA1SILT FENCEFILTER LOGEROSION CONTROL BLANKETSY0INLET PROTECTIONRIP RAP ITEM EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS QUANTITIES - PHASE 1 LEGEND TOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERSWALESOIL BORINGSSPOT ELEVATIONGUTTER OUT CURBSILT FENCETREE PROTECTION FENCE PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGDRAINTILEFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPDIRECTION OF OVERLAND FLOWFILTER LOGROCK CONSTRUCTION EXITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETINLET PROTECTION 8 8 1 28 8 983 688 SILT FENCE (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX) 48 8 6 | 9 TR 8 EM 5 88 SFSF SFSF SFSF SF SSF S TR H 6 8 8 4 6 88 9 3 7 8 898 82 H 9 1 8 9 0 8 988 596 888 9 7 8 88 87F 8 8 8 S 88 | 8 HH H 8 E / F C8 S 8 7 8 5 8 9 8 8 6 8 8 F 7 S 5 | 8 9 8 8 E / F C S F | S E / F C S 5 6 8 97 8 8 8 8 6 9 8 F | S E / F C S SILT FENCE (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX) 6 9 6 8 9 | T F 8 S 7 88 E / F C S 8 8 7 EM 7 8 8 | E 1 F S 7 S 88 19 0 27 388 48 998 58 69 98 98 88 9 8 9 8 8 8 8 | 8 78 88 8 8 8 8 7 9 F 9 88 9 8 88S 9 8 8 0 9 8 | 9 8 8 1 F 9 8 S098 98 2 98 398 4 198 5 298 9 8 6 98 398 9 87 8 9 8 98 4 |8F 9 9 8 99S 0 5 0 9 8 0 9 1 6 9 0 82 9 7 09 3 8 F 9 8 409 S8 9 (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)9 509 9 0 8 0 9 EM 9 0 96 8 0 1 9 7 00 9 2 INLET PROTECTION (TYP.) 09 3 80 9 FROST AVE. E. 8 409 9 9 8|9 // 8 TR T T TR H F H S 0 0 9 SILT FENCE (SEEDETAIL X/CXXX) | FENTON AVENUE 1 0 F 9 S 2 0 9 3 0 9 |9 9 8 | PHALEN PLACE 3 2 0 1 0 09 S0 99 0 9 | 0 0 9 R Know what's - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:32 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C200 Council Packet Page Number 191 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION C211 JRKJRK 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE SWPPP - PHASE 2 XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX 02 00 88 800.00 ( IN FEET ) EXISTING GRAPHIC SCALE BENCHMARKS (BM) QUANTITY 1,420 ADDITIONAL LFLF82 CY0 EANO ADDITIONALEA5 ADDITIONAL 02 UNIT 00 LoD88SF 800.00 BI PROPOSED N S KEYNOTESNOTES CONSTRUCTION. NOTES ON C001 PRIOR TO THE START OF 4.EROSION CONTROL BLANKET (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX) 1.ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXIT (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)2.SILT FENCE (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)3.FILTER LOG (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)5.TREE PROTECTION FENCE (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)6.INLET PROTECTION (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)1.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION 1 TREE PROTECTION FENCE ROCK CONSTRUCTION EXITEA1SILT FENCEFILTER LOGEROSION CONTROL BLANKETSYNO ADDITIONALINLET PROTECTIONRIP RAP ITEM EROSION CONTROL MATERIALS QUANTITIES - PHASE 2 LEGEND TOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERSWALESOIL BORINGSSPOT ELEVATIONGUTTER OUT CURBSILT FENCETREE PROTECTION FENCE PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGDRAINTILEFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPDIRECTION OF OVERLAND FLOWFILTER LOGROCK CONSTRUCTION EXITEROSION CONTROL BLANKETINLET PROTECTION 8 8 1 28 8 983 688 SILT FENCE (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX) 48 8 6 | 9 TR 8 EM 5 88 58 8 68 8 8 68SFSF SFSF688 SFSF SF SSF8 S 8 8788 97788 TR 8 8 H 08 8886 98 8788 18 8 88SF 8 8 2998688 3 8 90 588 9 498 988 8 94488 1 869 88 8 0 8998 3 2 57 98 898 8 9 828 93 9 91 8 8 1 8 4 9 09 8 8 89 988 5926 8885 9 7 9 8 888 87F 88 84 8 486 S 9 34 9588 88 28 | 99 8 98 8688 8 8 8 1 788 X E / 5 2 C8 9 9 8 8 837F 87 ||| 5| 9 298 8 8S 98 394 8 88 8 498 6 9 8 9 8 8 8 X 38 9 8 198 8 9F 4 8 7 5 S 5 | 88 96 9 8 98 88 8 6 9 5 X E 94 8 /098 8 788 C8 988 5 98 9 8 88 F 4 8 F 5 8S 9 S8 88 8 95 98 X 88 6 6 (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX) 6 8 9 8 88 F 6 78 |9 8S 9 7 F 7 8 8 INLET PROTECTION (TYP.) S8 8 8 E / 9X 9 8 C7 8 F 8 F 5 6 7S 9 8 87 9 8S 9 88 87 8 98 8 68 98 8 8 8 F | 9 S 8 F0 9 8 S E 8 / 9 8 0 C0 9 SILT FENCE (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX) 8 9 F 8 F S 1 9 8 S 9 6 9 9 6 8 89 90 0 9 | T 9 89F 8 92 8 9S 8 98 8979 F9 9 8 89 S 7 88 8 E99 0 0 9 / 8 C 8 8 7 3 9 8 8 8 78 8 8 | 9 8 4 9 8 8 F 5 90 8 S 79 F S 88 8 19 0 S 27 388 48 998 58 69 98 98 88 9 8 9 8 8 8 8 | 8 78 6 9 8 1 88 8 9 8 8 8 8 2 7 79 9 9F 9 8 8 88 9 8 88S CO 9 8 8 FS SFFS SF3 8998999 80 9 8 898 8988 9 |8 0 089798974 089 0 896896 8 98 9 598 1 F 9 5 8 9 S098 48 698 92 88 9 398 94 1988 998 7 9 5 52988 9 8 GEN 9 XFMR 6 98 6 98 83988 99 87 878 8 99 98 9F8 5 F898899 4 |S8F 88 99 89 S9 6 98 9 9099S 00 85 0 98 897 9 8 0 99 1 68 9 8 899 80 80 12 9 8 979 9 9 09 3 889 F 990 92 80 0 8409 9 S 80 93 (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)9 9509 0 F 9S4 009 81 809 0 99 59 900 96 8F2 S09 8 10 99 306 (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX) 9 997 90000 49 27 INLET PROTECTION (TYP.) 8 509 099 30 880 9 FROST AVE. E. 6 8009 409 900 90 9 9 8|9 INLET PROTECTION (TYP.) // 8 TR T T H F H S 0 0 9 SILT FENCE (SEEDETAIL X/CXXX) | FENTON AVENUE 1 0 899 F 9 S 9 2 9 0 0 8 9 0 1 9 3 0 0 92 9 |9 0 9 3 9 8 0 9 | PHALEN PLACE 3 2 0 1 0 09 S0 99 0 9 | 0 0 9 R Know what's - EROS.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:35 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C200 Council Packet Page Number 192 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C300 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN DIMENSIONAL PLAN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX PAVING, SIGNAGE, AND ( IN FEET ) X/CXXX) EXISTING GRAPHIC SCALE DETAIL BENCHMARKS (BM) X LoD X BI PROPOSED N S KEYNOTESNOTES ON C001 PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. TALL GRADING PLAN)NOTE XXXXX)LOCATION) 2.BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT - HEAVY DUTY (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)3.BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT - MATCH IN KIND4.CONCRETE SIDEWALK (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)5.CONCRETE SIDEWALK - MATCH EXISTING6.CONCRETE PAVEMENT (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)7.CONCRETE PAVEMENT - MATCH IN KIND8.CONCRETE STOOP (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)9.B-612 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)30.TRASH ENCLOSURE WITH DUMPSTER (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)31.BICYCLE RACK (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)32.MONUMENT SIGN (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)33.SECURITY LIGHT (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)34.TRANSFORMER (SEE ELECTRICAL PLANS FOR SIZE AND EXACT 1.BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT - NORMAL DUTY (SEE 10.D-412 CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)11.FLUSH CONCRETE CURB (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)12.TRANSITION FROM FLUSH CONCRETE CURB TO 4" OR 6" CURB (SEE13.CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER - MATCH IN KIND14.CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER - MATCH EXISTING15.CONCRETE VALLEY GUTTER (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)16.CURB CUT (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)17.CURB CUT WITH RIP RAP (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)18.TRENCH DRAIN19.ACCESSIBLE STALL STRIPING (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)20.ACCESSIBLE RAMP (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)21.4" HIGH VISIBILITY SOLID WHITE PAINT (SEE NOTE XXXXXXXX)22.4" POLY PREFORMED PERMANENT PAVEMENT MARKINGS (SEE23.CROSSWALK PAVEMENT MARKINGS (SEED ETAIL X/CXXX)24.X' TALL, BLACK COATED, CHAIN LINK FENCE (SEE NOTE XXXXXXXX)25.X' WIDE CANTILEVER SLIDE GATE (BLACK COATED CHAIN LINK, 6'26.RETAINING WALL27.LANDSCAPE AREA (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS)28.RAIN GARDEN (SEE GRADING PLAN)29.CANOPY (SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS)1.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES 1 LEGEND CURB & GUTTERSOIL BORINGSSIGNADA PAVEMENT MARKINGSTANDARD DUTY BITUMINOUSCONCRETE SIDEWALKCONCRETE PAVING PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGFENCELIGHT POLEPARKING STALL COUNTHEAVY DUTY BITUMINOUS SIGN SCHEDULE (PER MN MUTCD) ACCESSIBLE SIGN R7-8B (12" X 6") - 4 SIGN A.STOP SIGN R1-1 (30" X 30") - 1 SIGNC.HANDICAP PARKING SIGN R7-8M (12" X 18") WITH VAN B.HANDICAP PARKING SIGN R7-8M (12" X 18") - NO SIGND.KEEP RIGHT SIGN R4-7c (24" X 30") - 1 SIGN REINSTALL EXISTINGCROSSWALK POSTS SIGNAGE,LIGHTS, AND RELATEDFEATURES.RETURN EXTRA TO CITY. A ARCHITECTURAL PLANS ENTRANCE SIGNAGE(TYP.) - SEE TR EM S S TR 5 H A 3 TYP. 9 TYP. 219 TYP.TYP. ARCHITECTURAL PLANS PICKLEBALL COURT - SEE 1 TYP. X 2 E /TYP. 4 TYP. C 9 TYP. SWIMMING POOL - SEEARCHITECTURAL PLANS X 9 D 9TYP. 26 26 TYP. TYP.TYP. 26 5 21 TYP. EX / C FEET FEET FEET 2 XXXXXX TYP. X 6 18 1 TYP. 1 21 TYP. TYP. E ) / X C ) 8 ) 4 TYP. 9 TYP. NORTH SOUTH EAST & WEST 4 TYP. SIGNAGE AND POST REINSTALL EXISTING E / C 4 TYP. 8 9 TYP.4 T TYP. 21 FRONT YARD SETBACK (NORTH)30 FEETSIDE YARD SETBACK (EAST & WEST)20 FEETREAR YARD SETBACK (SOUTH)20 FEETFRONT YARD SETBACK (SIDE YARD SETBACK (REAR YARD SETBACK ( TYP. C 1 1920 TYP. E PARKING - SEE / ARCHITECTURAL PLANS C 19 BUILDING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS:PARKING SETBACK REQUIREMENTS: PATIO AND FIRE PIT - SEE 9 9 TYP. TYP. ARCHITECTURAL PLANS 4 EDGE OF UNDERGROUND 20 TYP. 8 5 C S 14 4 SPACES 4 SPACES SIGNAGE AND POST REINSTALL EXISTING CO 8 PROVIDED:167 SPACESPROVIDED:83 SPACES 4 TYP. 14 TOTAL PROVIDED:250 SPACES 4 TYP. GEN XFMR ADAADA 2 STALLS/UNIT * 150 UNITS300 SPACES1.5 STALLS/UNIT * 150 UNITS225 SPACES (BY VARIANCE)9.5' X 20'33 SPACES9.5' X 18'130 SPACES9.5' X 20'28 SPACES9.5' X 18'51 SPACES FROST AVE. E. REQUIRED PARKING SPACES:PROPOSED PARKING SPACES (UNDERGROUND - SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS):PROPOSED PARKING SPACES (OUTSIDE): // TR T T H H GAZEBO - SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS DOG PARK - SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FENTON AVENUE 14 2.17 AC5 STORIES (BY VARIANCE) PHALEN PLACE S R (IMPERVIOUS AREA/4.90 AC)44.2% BUILDING HEIGHT PROPOSED:SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS SITE DATA TOTAL HARDCOVER AREA: ZONING: R-3B, RESIDENCE (MULTIPLE DWELLING) LOT AREA (OVERALL)213,259 SF = 4.90 ACEXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA:0.90 AC(TO BE REMOVED)PROPOSED NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA:NET IMPERVIOUS CREATED:2.17 AC MAXIMUM HARDCOVER 65% MAX.BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA:39,044 SFBUILDING HEIGHT MAXIMUM ALLOWED:35 FEET (3 STORIES)DISTURBED AREA:4.90 AC Know what's - SITE.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:37 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C300 Council Packet Page Number 193 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C400 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 GRADING PLAN DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX 02 00 88 800.00 ( IN FEET ). EXISTING GRAPHIC SCALE XXXX BENCHMARKS (BM) . FOR DETAIL. XXXX XXXX 02% 00 0 . EOF LoD88 800.00 800.00 1 G 800.00 TC 800.00 MA 800.00TW 800.00 BW 800.00 BI PROPOSED N S FOR CURB ELEVATIONS & SHEET KEYNOTESNOTES STANDARD PLAN 5-297.250 ON SHEET XXXXC001 PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION. FROM MNDOT STANDARD PLAN 5-297.250 ON SHEET FINISHED SURFACE GRADE. LEGEND 1.ONE WAY DIRECTIONAL PEDESTRIAN RAMP. SEE DETAILS2.PARALLEL PEDESTRIAN RAMP. SEE DETAILS FROM MNDOT3.TRANSITION FROM FLUSH CURB TO 6" CURB, SEE SHEET1.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES ON2.PROPOSED CONTOURS AND SPOT ELEVATIONS ARE TO 1 TOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERSWALESOIL BORINGSGUTTER OUT CURBSPOT ELEVATIONTOP OF CURBGUTTERTOP OF WALL PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGDRAINTILEDRAINAGE SLOPEEMERGENCY OVERFLOWFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPMATCH EXISTINGBOTTOM OF WALL SPOT ELEVATIONS SHALL BE ADDED STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES SHALL BE REVIEWED 8 18 28 8 8 93 688 4 88 6 | 9 8 TR EM 58 8 588 8 8688 868 S98 S78 88 8788788 TR 0 H 1 9 6 88888 887 2 9 8 3 8 8 8688 98988 49 8 88588 09 9 8 8 849488 98 61 88 5 9 398 82 997 8 8908 828 839 9 8 198 9 814 9 0 8 9 5 88 9988 596 2 888 9 7 8 88 7 8 8488 8 8 4 8588 38 |9 2 9 8858 69688 9 8 9 88 788 8X E / C2 8 9 8 7 8 8 ||||7 5 89 9238 388 8 498 8 99 6 98 8 88 48 9X 8 3 8 9 8 198 8 9 4 3 57 5 | 928 9 9 88 8199 8 8 6 8 6 29 8 4 9918 EX 55 8 /8908 899 8 3 98 8 8 8 C7 98 8 4 99 88 8 5 888 4 88 08 0 9 8892 98 9 8 5 9 8 8 8 8 6 8 X 8 6 6 8 96 98 8 899 8 8 |7 8 77 9 88 8 8 7 9 E7 /8 X 9 8 9 C8 8 8 5 6 8 7 99 8 9 8 88 878 98 68 9 8 8 8 8 8 |9 8 0 9 8 E / 0 C 0 89 9 8 9 1 9 8 9 9 9 8 8 6 9 6 80 90 9 | T 8 2 9 8 7 88 9 E 99 0 /0 8 4 C 88 58 7 8 8 6 8 3 8 9 7 88 8 7 8 8 9 9 9 88 7 98 8 8 8 8 8 | 9 4 98 8 8 5 9 8 7 S 88 109 27 38 88 4 998 508 9 6 98 98 88 99 8 9 8 8 88 8 | 8 78 6 9 8 88 8 1 8 8 98 8 7 97 9 29 8 8 8 9 8 988 8 CO 9 8 8 899899 3 0 9 98 898898 8 9 |88 0 897 8979 0 8 896 9698 84 9 895 8 1 9 8 0098 5 0 6298 99 9 8 89 398 84 1984 6 79 95 8 998 9 8 98 99 75 82989 989 8 88 GEN 8 XFMR 6 9898 39 8 87 8 9 998 9 8 98 858 9998 |4 8 9 9 8 869 999 00 50 0 8 9 7 89 90 81 6 89 89 80 919 0 8 2 99 88 79 9 89309 80 92 9 8 0 099 40 0 83 89 99 9 050 4 9 9 009 819 00 8 5 9 9999 00 926 89 0 0 16 9909 3 9 9 88907 000 479 2 9 9500 09 388 0 9 FROST AVE. E. 6 8009 409 90 9 9 8|9// 8 TR T T 900 H H 0 0 9 | FENTON AVENUE 1 0 9 2 899 0 99 9 3 0 8 00 1 9 |99 90 2 8 9 0 3 9 0 9 | PHALEN PLACE 3 2 0 1 0 09 S0 99 0 9 | 0 0 9 R Know what's - GRAD.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:40 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C400 Council Packet Page Number 194 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS PLANS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C410 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX ENLARGED GRADING 02 00 88 800.00 EXISTING ( IN FEET ) GRAPHIC SCALE BENCHMARKS (BM) 02 % 00 0 . 88 EOF 800.00 1 800.00 PROPOSED BI N S RIP RAPGUTTER OUT CURBADA ROUTEADA LANDING PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF CONSTRUCTIONBUILDINGTOPOGRAPHIC INDEX CONTOURTOPOGRAPHIC CONTOURCURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERDRAINTILESWALESOIL BORINGSSPOT ELEVATIONDRAINAGE SLOPEEMERGENCY OVERFLOWFLARED END SECTION INLETFLARED END SECTION OUTLET LEGEND ENLARGED VIEWS SHALL BE ADDED R ACCESSIBLE ROUTE SPOT ELEVATIONS XXXX Know what's - GRAD.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:40 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C400 Council Packet Page Number 195 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C420 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX ACCESSIBILITY DETAILS ADA 05: 4/22 SLOPE DOWN, WELD ALL SIDESWHITE LEGEND AND BORDER ONACCESSIBILITY PER ICC/ANSIA117.1, SECTION 703.6.3.1ATTACH 6" X 12" VAN ACCESSIBLESIGN TO POST IF APPLICABLE. SEETS 4" X 4" X .375" STEEL TUBE, FILLWITH CONCRETE AND PAINTWHERE CONCRETE OCCURS AT4" LONG STUDS WELD AT 3/8" STEEL PLATE AT TOP,METAL SIGN WITH LETTERING PERICC/ANSI A117.1, SECTION 703.BLUE BACKGROUND, FULLYREFLECTORIZED.INTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OFPLAN FOR LOCATIONSBASE, USE 1-1/2" EXPANSIONMATERIAL AND URETHANE CAULK10:1 SLOPEQUARTER POINTS 8" ONCENTERCONCRETE BASE (3,000 PSI) FINISHED GRADE 15" 12" MIN 2" 6" 2'-6" 18" MIN. 4'-0" MIN. 60" - 66" ACCESSIBLE SIGN AND STEEL POST NOT TO SCALE AND LOCAL CODES AND REGULATIONS NOTES: 1.ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN SHALL CONFORM WITH ALL CURRENT STATE SPACE AND PLACED A THE HEAD OF THE PARKING X SIGN SHALL BE CENTERED AT MAXIMUM 8 FEET FROM THE HEAD OF THE PARKING SPACE C90X ADA 04: 4/22ADA 11: 4/22 6" HEIGHTW VARIABLE HEIGHT, H. 1" R 1/2" R 8' MIN. SYMBOL OFACCESSIBILITY INTERNATIONALMARKING 4" WIDESTRIPE (TYP.) NO PARKINGMARKING PARKING STALL CENTER - CENTER 6" (W) CURB WIDTH CURB RAMP OR FLUSH RIBBONCURB WITH WARNING PANELS(SEE PLAN AND DETAILS) END TAPERS AT AT TRANSITIONSECTION SHALL MATCH INPLACE SIDEWALK GRADES 6" LANDSCAPE (H) < 6"4" 1 8' MIN. CONCRETE CURB DESIGN V CURB HEIGHT GACCESS AISLE V CURB ADJACENT TO N K I L T ACCESS AISLE SHALL EXTEND THE FULL LENGTH OF THE CURB OUTSIDE SIDEWALK LIMITS PARKING SPACE IT SERVES A S NO PARKING I X W E 1 ADA V-CURBACCESSIBILITY PARKING PAVEMENT MARKINGS NOT TO SCALENOT TO SCALE S TOP OF SIDEWALK ELEVATIONS. BOND BREAKER SHALL BE USED BETWEEN EXISTING STRUCTURE AND PLACED VCURB. N S E A I L R NOTES:1.ALL V CURB SHALL MATCH BOTTOM OF ADJACENT WALK.2.ALL V CURB CONTRACTION JOINTS SHALL MATCH CONCRETE WALK JOINTS.3.V CURB SHALL BE PLACED OUTSIDE THE SIDEWALK LIMITS WHEN ROW ALLOWS.4.V CURB NEXT TO BUILDING SHALL BE A 4" WIDTH AND SHALL MATCH PREVIOUS5.EDGE BETWEEN NEW V CURB AND IN-PLACE STRUCTURE SHALL BE SEALED AND P A E V E S XX C90XC90X ADA 03: 4/22ADA 09: 4/22 CONCRETE SIDEWALKSLOPE REFER TO PLAN FOR CHANNEL TOP4" STEEL CHANNEL SIGN POST PER MNDOT 3401FINISHED GRADE 30" X 30" (SINGLE LANE)36" X 36" (MULTI-LANE)36" X 36" X 36"24" X 30"30" X 30" 18" X 24" 5' CLEAR VARIESR1-1R1-1R1-2R2-1R7-112" X 18"R5-130" X 30" W11-2 R6-2 (R OR L) 2" GENERAL LAYOUT 3'-6" CONCRETE WALK AT ACCESSIBLE PARKING NOT TO SCALE REGULATORY SIGN NOT TO SCALE SIGN NAMEDESIGNATIONSIZE 7'-0" MIN. REQUIREMENTS EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. 2.SIGN SHALL BE REFLECTORIZED PER MNDOT 3352.2A2B, STANDARD NO. 2.3.SIGN SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF ALUMINUM PER MNDOT 3352.2A1 NOTES:1.DESIGN SHALL CONFORM TO MN MUTCD CURRENT ADDITION AND THESE PARKING STALLS BEHIND GUTTER. POST W/FOOTING STOPSTOPYIELDSPEED LIMIT NO PARKING ANYTIMEDO NOT ENTERONE WAYPEDESTRIAN CROSSING* *COLOR SHALL BE FLOURESCENT YELLOW-GREEN NEAR EDGE OF PAVEMENT SEE DETAIL SITE-36. FROM BOTTOM OF SIGN TO ON THE DRAWINGS TO MN MUTCD AND AS XX METAL SIGN ACCORDING CONCRETE GUTTER FLUSH BITUMINOUS FLUSH C90XC90X SPECIFIED AND/OR SHOWN WITH TOP OF GUTTER ACROSS FRONT OF CCESSIBLE ADA 01: 4/22ADA 06: 4/22 MAX 2.0% BITUMINOUSPAVEMENT ACCESSIBILITY PER ICC/ANSIA117.1, SECTION 703.6.3.1ATTACH 6" X 12" VAN ACCESSIBLESIGN TO POST IF APPLICABLE. SEE3-1/2" FLANGED CHANNELSIGN POST PER MNDOT 3401 POST TOPINTERNATIONAL SYMBOL OFMETAL SIGN WITH LETTERING PERICC/ANSI A117.1, SECTION 703.169.346 WHITE LEGEND ANDBORDER ON BLUE BACKGROUND,FULLY REFLECTORIZED.PLAN FOR LOCATIONS.FINISHED GRADE ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL SIDEWALK 5.0%MAX 6" INTEGRAL SIDEWALK 2.0% ACCESSIBLE 6" INTEGRAL PARKING STALL (8.0' ACC. AISLE) . X AMAX M 2.0% % 0 . 5 12" MIN ACCESSIBLE 2" 2% MAX. PARKING STALL SIDEWALK ISOMETRIC OF RAMP ELEVATION OF RAMPPLAN VIEW OF RAMP 6" INTEGRAL 5.0% MAX. SLOPE 2.0%MAX 4'-0" MIN. 18" MIN. 5.0%MAX ACCESSIBLE . PARKING STALL X A 3'-6" M 60"-66" % 0 MAX . 5 ACCESSIBLE SIGN AND CHANNEL POST INTEGRAL SIDEWALK PEDESTRIAN RAMP NOT TO SCALENOT TO SCALE 2.0% AND LOCAL CODES AND REGULATIONS PER ADA SPECIFICATIONS. TO BE TRUNCATED DOMES ASNOTES: 1.ACCESSIBLE PARKING SIGN SHALL CONFORM WITH ALL CURRENT STATE 2.0% SPECIFICATIONS. DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE SPACE AND PLACED A DOMES AS PER ADA 5.0% MAX. SLOPE XX DETECTABLE WARNING C90XC90X THE HEAD OF THE PARKING SIGN SHALL BE CENTERED AT MAXIMUM 8 FEET FROM THE HEAD OF THE PARKING SPACE SURFACE TO BE TRUNCATED - GRAD.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:40 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C400 Council Packet Page Number 196 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C500 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM UTILITY PLAN 08/XX/2022 DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX | ( IN FEET ) EXISTING GRAPHIC SCALE CO R-1642 EQUAL R-3067-VR-3067-VR-3067-V BENCHMARKS (BM) NEENAH CASTING OR | EOF LoD 800.00 BI PROPOSED SIZE N S CO STRUCTURE CB 124" X 36"CB 224" X 36"CB 324" X 36" MH 148" DIA. KEYNOTESNOTES STORM SEWER SCHEDULE TYPE & NO. SEWER PIPE AND WYES ARE SHOWN PER RECORD PLAN.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY LOCATION AND INVERT OF THE EXISTINGWYE.ON C001 PRIOR TO THE START OF CONSTRUCTION.WITH THE GRADING PLANS. RIM ELEVATIONS. SEE DETAIL X/CXXX. 2.SANITARY SERVICE CLEANOUT (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)3.CONNECT TO EXISTING WATERMAIN (SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)4.CURB STOP & BOX (SEE SEE DETAIL X/CXXX)5.INFILTRATION CB WITHIN RAIN GARDENS: SEE GRADING PLAN FOR2.CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY RIM AND FES ELEVATIONS 1.CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY SERVICE WYE. EXISTING SANITARY1.CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO CONSTRUCTION NOTES LEGEND 1 CURB & GUTTERSTORM SEWERSANITARY SEWERWATERMAINGAS LINEOVERHEAD ELECTRICALTELEPHONESWALESOIL BORINGS PROPERTY LINELIMITS OF DISTURBANCEBUILDINGDRAINTILEUNDERGROUND ELECTRICALEMERGENCY OVERFLOWFLARED END SECTIONRIP RAPLIGHT POLE CB 3 @ 2'x3'INV = 886.69 (8",W)INV = 886.11 (15",S) RIM = 891.25 | TR EM CB 1 @ 2'x3'RIM = 895.14INV = 884.50 (15",N)INV = 884.40 (15",S) S S TR H INV=883.60 15" FES 80 LF - 15" HDPE @ 1.00% HYDRANT6" GATE VALVE(BEHIND C&G) CB 2 @ 2'x3'RIM = 892.03INV = 885.70 (15",N)INV = 885.62 (15",S) 111.5 LF - 15" HDPE @ 1.00% 14' @ 8" PVC, C9008" X 8" X 6" TEE2 @ 8" GATE VALVE 1 @ 6" GATE VALVE41 LF - 15" HDPE @ 1.00% | X E / C |||| X | EX / C 6" - 45° BEND X | WATER SERVICE STUB 6" FIRE PROTECTION E / X TD 1 89 LF - 8" HDPE @ 0.91% C NEENAH R-3205, TYPE L REPLACE CASTING WITH RIM = 889.40 TRENCH DRAIN INV = 888.90 (S)INV = 888.70 (N) | E INV = 887.50 (ELBOW) / C | T E / C | ADJUST CASTING TOOUTSIDE OF C&G. EX. SAN MHFINISHED GRADE.ROTATE CONE 119 LF - 12" HDPE @ 1.00% 8" PVC, C900 COMBINED FIREWATER SERVICE (SEE DETAILSX/CXXX AND X/CXXX) PROTECTION AND DOMESTIC 12" FES PROTECT AND MAINTAINEXISTING FIRE HYDRANT,VALVES, AND RELATEDFEATURES. ADJUST TOFINISHED GRADE. HYDRANT RADIUS S INV=883.60 SERVICE LOCATIONS -SEE ARCHITECTURALAND MEP/T PLANS FIELD VERIFY UTILITY PROPOSED 300' FIRE | MH 1 @ 48" DIA.RIM = 897.51INV = 885.12 (12",NW)INV = 884.79 (12",SE) CO | 32 LF - 12" HDPE @ 4.62% 12" FESINV=897.21 GEN XFMR SAN CO |INV=888.35 RIM=899.6 +/- (SEE MEP/T PLANS) 12" FES RIM=897.19 +/-12" FES INV=895.59 67 LF - 8" PVC (SDR 35) @ 1.00% MIN. (VERIFY) INV=887.67 (8",SE) FROST AVE. E.INV=894.00 INV=887.34 (8",EX.) 35.5 LF - 12" HDPE @ 25.00% |// TR T MEP/T PLANS T SAN MH ON EXISTING MAIN H H EXISTING 300' FIRE ROTATE CONE OUTSIDE OF C&G. AND GENERATOR - SEE HYDRANT RADIUS (TYP.) | PROPOSED TRANSFORMER FENTON AVENUE | | PHALEN PLACE S | R Know what's - UTIL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:42 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C500 Council Packet Page Number 197 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS UTILITY DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C900 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN DETAILS - GENERAL SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:42 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C900 Council Packet Page Number 198 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS SEWER DESCRIPTION C901 JRKJRK 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY DETAILS - SANITARY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX SAN 14: 4/22 FLOW DIRECTION AGGREGATE BASE BENEATHWYE BRANCH OR SADDLE 6" MIN. DEPTH CLASS 5CONCRETE COLLARCOMPACTED TO 100%STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY LANDSCAPE AREAFINISHED GRADE 6" LONG RADIUS ELBOW THREADED CAP OR APPROVED NEENAH CASTING R-1970 WITHEQUIVALENT 6" RISER 6" MIN. GRADE. HEIGHT. TOP OF 12" CONC. COLLAR CONCRETE COLLARGRADE TO MATCH FINISHED SANITARY SEWER CLEAN OUT NOT TO SCALE 6 - W1.4 X W1.4) PAVEMENT FINISHED SAN.SEWER PIPE PREVENT BONDING WITH X SQUARE CONCRETE COLLAR MATERIAL AROUND PIPE TO POURED CONCRETE COLLAR.C90X (18" MIN. DIMENSION) WITH WIRE MESH REINFORCING (6 X PROVIDE FELT OR EQUIVALENT - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:42 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C900 Council Packet Page Number 199 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS SEWER DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C902 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE DETAILS - STORM XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX G N I STM 33: 4/22 L D L L I A U BW 4" 6" 8" " EF Y O 2 T V TO I I 1 S T DN I N AN I N E N M A Y D L E A BR W M O LO O R T L LT OOF DOWNSPOUT. EAC FD BI HO E S LNTR AUCPNOTE:1.SEE ARCHITECTURAL FOR EXACT LOCATIONS E I RA RD D P U E ER TT CM A C A A OD DOWNSPOUT CONNECTION NOT TO SCALE UL C MN RP A CENTER DRAIN ON EXISTINGL TD OR PROPOSED DOWNSPOUT E LT S I N B S F F A F KD O 8" NYLOPLAST INLINE DRAIN. SEE S CO N T S A A F E % IPLAN FOR LOCATIONS AND DEPTHS. B L DL0 I I 9 S O S X C90X STM 26: 4/22 SEE PLAN SEE PLANS FOROUTLETADJACENT PAVEMENT #4 @16" O.C 5-#5 CONT. 4" SEE PLANS FOROUTLET TO DRAIN SLOPE BOTTOM 6" 12"10" PLAN TRENCH SECTION CONCRETE REINFORCED 1 1 6" GRATE AS SPECIFIED 6" MANUFACTURER'S RECOMMENDATIONS.OF OPEN TRENCH. SEE UTILITY PLAN FOR BOTTOMINVERTS, SLOPE, AND DEPTH. TRENCH DRAIN NOT TO SCALE NOTES: 2.SEE GRADING PLAN FOR ELEVATIONS EITHER SIDE 1.CONSTRUCT TRENCH DRAIN STRUCTURE PER VARIES WITH TYPE C GRATE R-4990-CX (HEAVY DUTY) X C90X STM 13: 4/22 BACK OF CURBFACE OF CURB 2'8" 12" LIP OF CURB CATCH BASIN CASTING TYPE CORNER CATCH BASIN NOT TO SCALE B6 STYLE CURB & GUTTER SEE CASTING SCHEDULE FOR X C90X - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:42 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C900 Council Packet Page Number 200 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C903 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE DETAILS - WATER XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX 1' - 6" WAT 12: 4/22 AB2' - 1" AA 1' - 6" 90° BENDTEE SHALL BE THRUST BLOCKED AND ENOUGH TO MAKE ANGLE 'Z' 45° ORLARGER.POSSIBLE WITHOUT INTERFERING WITHMECHANICAL JOINT BOLTS.LONG AS POUR IS AGAINST FIRM,UNDISTURBED SOIL.PLACE CONCRETE.MEGALUGGED. 2' - 1" NOTES:1. DIMENSION 'C' SHOULD BE LARGE 2. DIMENSION 'A' SHOULD BE AS LARGE AS3. BACK OF BUTTRESS SHAPE MAY VARY AS4. ALL BLOCKS TO BE 3000 PSI POURED IN5. ALL WATERMAIN BENDS AND TEES D 1' - 6"2' - 8"2' - 0"2' - 8"2' - 0" C 45° BEND 6" MAX BUTTRESS DIMENSIONS 2' - 1" CONCRETE THRUST8 MIL. POLYETHYLENEWRAPPING BETWEEN PIPE& CONCRETE (TYP.) BLOCK (TYP.) SECTION A-A B A CONCRETE THRUST BLOCKING NOT TO SCALE A BDBDBDBD 22-1/2° BEND SOIL Z BEDDING PIPE, MINIMUM MATERIAL X 90° QUADRANT OF 6"1' - 5"1' - 5"1' - 5"1' - 5"8"1' - 5"1' - 5" C90X UNDISTURBED SIZE CONTACT WITH THIS PIPE A 10" - 12"1' - 10"1' - 10"3' - 4"2' - 0"4' - 9"2' - 6"4' - 9"2' - 6"14" - 16"3' - 0"2' - 0"3' - 10"3' - 0"6' - 2"3' - 6"6' - 2"3' - 6" CONCRETE SHALL BE IN WAT 06: 4/22 A COMPACTED GRANULAR BACKFILLUNDISTURBED EARTH RESILIANT WEDGE VALVECONFORMING TO AWWAC-509 STANDARDS COPPER CONDUCTIVITY STRAP WATER MAINTAPPING SLEEVE CADWELD TO EXISTING 8" CONC. BLOCK PLAN VIEW SECTION A-A THRUST BLOCK A WET TAP NOT TO SCALE THRUST BLOCK TAPPING SLEEVE X C90X 8' MIN. COVER WAT 05: 4/22 VALVE BOX CENTERING BRACKET TO AWWA C-509 RESILIANT WEDGEVALVE CONFORMINGSTANDARDS 8" CONC. BLOCK ADJUST TOP TO 1/2"TYLER NO. 6860 MUELLER NO. BELOW GRADE. BOX TOBE SET TO PROVIDE 12"OF ADJUSTMENTH-10357 BIBBY-STE-CROIXB-5001 TYPE OR APPROVEDEQUIVALENT NOTE:7.5' MINIMUM COVER REQUIREDOVER TOP OF WATER MAIN. GRADE NO. 59 18"NO. 6024"NO. 59 20" GATE VALVE AND BOX NOT TO SCALE TYLER NO.6860EXTENSIONTYLERNO.5814"VB520 NO.57 9"VB521NO.58 14"VB522 NO.59 20"VB523 NO.6026"BOTTOMTYLER NO.6860 65" DROP LIDMUELLER NO.H-10361BIBBY-STE-CROIXNO.B-5160TOPTYLER NO.686026"MUELLERNO.58 14"BIBBY-STE-CROIXMUELLER NO.H-10361 65"BIBBY-STE-CROIX NO.VB516 60"BASE MUELLER NO.H-10361 26"BIBBY-STE-CROIX NO.VB502 27" X WATER C90X - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:42 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C900 Council Packet Page Number 201 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C904 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN DETAILS - GRADING SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX GRAD 09: 4/22 SOIL UNSUITABLE MINIMUMEXCAVATIONLMITS 1 1 SUITABLE SOIL DEPTHVARIES FINISHED GRADE SECTION VIEW 10' ENGINEERED FILL ENGINEERED FILL NOT TO SCALE VARY DEPENDING ON SOIL TYPE AND O.S.H.A. REGULATIONS ENGINEER AND ELEVATIONS RECORDED BY SURVEYOR PRIOR TOPLACEMENT OF ANY FILL. NOTES:1.BOTTOM OF EXCAVATION MUST BE APPROVED BY THE OWNERS SOILS2.ANGLE OF REPOSE SHOWN AS 1:1 (VERTICAL TO HORIZONTAL) MAY OTHERS X C90X FOOTING, BY FINISHED FLOOR GRAD 04: 4/22 12" 5' 10' FRONT VIEW FLOW ZONE SECTION VIEW 1 4 4 10' 1 EMERGENCY OVERFLOW NOT TO SCALE X C90X GRAD 02: 4/22 INFILTRATION BASIN NOTES NOT TO SCALE VERTICAL +/- 0.2 FEETVERTICAL +/- 0.1 FEET HORIZONTAL +/- 1.0 FEETHORIZONTAL +/- 0.5 FEET THE PLANTING SOIL/TOPSOIL SO THAT A SURVEY OF THE FINISHED GRADE CANTHAT DO NOT MEET THE TOLERANCES SPECIFIED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SHALL BE ALLOWED TO COMPLETE THE WORK. RUBBER TIRED EQUIPMENT ISSTRICTLY PROHIBITED FROM WORKING WITHIN THE INFILTRATION BASINS.CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE EVERY EFFORT POSSIBLE TO AVOID COMPACTION OFCONTRIBUTING WATERSHED IS STABLE. EXCAVATION SHALL BE COMPLETEDWITH A BACKHOE TO MINIMIZE COMPACTION OF THE SOILS.CONTRACTOR.GRADE OF THE TOPSOIL OR PLANTING SOIL.SPECIFIED.AREAS IS SHOWN ON THE INDIVIDUAL DRAWINGS AND DETAILS.CORRECT THE WORK ACCORDINGLY.X NOT POSSIBLE FOR SOME AREAS, ONLY LOW GROUND PRESSURE EQUIPMENTINFILTRATES WITHIN 48 HOURS.POND AND INFILTRATION BASIN SOILS.POND AND INFILTRATION BASINS UPON COMPLETION OF THE SUB CUT ANDPROVIDE THE SURVEY INFORMATION TO THE ENGINEER. THE ENGINEER SHALLNOTIFY THE CONTRACTOR OF AREAS THAT DO NOT MEET THE TOLERANCESBE COMPLETED. THE ENGINEER SHALL NOTIFY THE CONTRACTOR OF AREAS C90X 3.IN ORDER TO MAXIMIZE THE INFILTRATION RATE OF THE SOILS, THE4.INFILTRATION AREA MAY ONLY BE EXCAVATED TO ITS BASE AFTER THE5.ANY COMPACTION OF INFILTRATION BASIN SOILS MUST BE LOOSENED BY THE6.THE FINISHED GRADE ELEVATIONS ON THE PLANS INDICATE THE FINISHED7.GRADING TOLERANCE FOR SUB CUT:8.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL SURVEY THE BOTTOM ELEVATION OF THE RETENTION9.THE TYPES OF SOILS INSTALLED IN THE RETENTION POND AND INFILTRATION INFILTRATION BASIN NOTES:1.THE BASIN SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FROM OUTSIDE THE BASIN LIMITS. IF THIS IS2.THE INFILTRATION BASIN SHALL BE OVER EXCAVATED TO ENSURE THE WATER10.GRADING TOLERANCES FOR THE FINISHED GRADE OF THE BASINS:11.THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT THE ENGINEER UPON FINAL PLACEMENT OF GRAD 01: 4/22 ) . E P Y V I T T( A S N G 1N :I T 4 N A L P WASHED SAND NONCONFORMING TOTHE FOLLOWING GRADATION:90 TO 100% BETWEEN THE 0.2 MM TO50 TO 70% OF THE PARTICLES SHALL BE UNCOMPACTED IN 12" LIFTS OF1.0 MM SIZEIN THE RANGE OF 0.25 MM TO 0.5 MMMEET SPECIFICATION ASTM F2396-04MAX OF 3% PASSING THE 200 SIEVE 18" VARIES, SEE GRADING PLAN VARIES 24" FINISHED GRADE RAIN GARDEN MIX 80/20 SOILS. OBTAIN APPROVAL BY ENGINEER, PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OFCORRECT SOIL MIX, PROTECTION DURING CONSTRUCTION ANDCOMPACTION RATES. PERIOD, UNLESS DESIGNED OTHERWISE.PLANTS AND MULCH. COVER WITH 4" DEPTH OF PLASTAD INFILTRATION BASIN CROSS SECTION NOT TO SCALE NOTES:2.CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE BASIN INFILTRATION TESTING AND3.IT SHALL BE THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO INSTALL THE 1.INFILTRATION RATE OF BASIN TO BE DRY WITHIN 48 HOUR E D E DSLOPED SUBGRADE HTHE FIELD TO AT LEAST 3 FEET A SCONTRACTOR SHALL EXCAVATEREPLACE WITH WELL DRAINING R IBELOW BOTTOM OF BASIN AND X G N I C90X F ANY TYPE D SOILS ENCOUNTERED IN - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:43 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C900 Council Packet Page Number 202 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C905 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX DETAILS - PAVEMENT 10.5" 12" T N E SITE 10: 4/22SITE 19: 4/22 R12" M E V A 6" P " 14 6" R28" SLOPE BACK OF CURB PER FOOT MINIMUM 6" BEHIND 6" 4 " 3 28" AGG. BASE MIN. OF 4" R68"UNDER CURB 12" MAX. 2% SLOPE AWAYFROM BUILDING (TYP.) 1/4 " LIP SPACING, EXPANSION JOINTS AT 60' MAXIMUM SPACING. DIRECTION OF ADJACENT PAVEMENT SLOPE. 6" 4.OPTION FOR SITE ENTRANCE ALONG FROST AVENUE. NOTES:1.DIRECTION OF TRANSVERSE GUTTER SLOPE TO MATCH2.PROVIDE TOOLED OR SAWN CONTRACTION JOINTS AT 10'3.CONSTRUCT CURB AND GUTTER PER MNDOT 2531. SIDEWALK SECTION WITH INTEGRAL CURB NOT TO SCALE SURMOUNTABLE CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER NOT TO SCALE SIDEWALK CONCRETE AS NEEDED EXPANSION JOINT, BASE CL V VARIES 6" AGGREGATE PAVEMENT SECTION XX C905C90X VARIES AGG. BASE 5 . 1 1 4" SITE 06: 4/22SITE 18: 4/22 " RADIUS 12 12" 3 BACK OF CURB 1 MINIMUM 6" BEHIND L" SLOPE GUTTER (3/4" PER FT. TYP.)TIP GUTTER OUT AS REQUIRED PER PLAN - CENTERED IN THE SLABAGG. BASE, CLASS V AGGREGATE (100%CRUSHED) BASE PER MNDOT 3138, COMPACTEDAPPROVED SUBGRADE TO BE COMPACTED PERSPECIFICATIONS FINISHED GRADEPORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE (P.C.C.) - SEE NOTESFOR CONCRETE SIDEWALK SLABS WIDER THAN 6',PROVIDE 6 X 6 - W1.4 X W1.4 WELDED WIRE FABRICPER SPECIFICATIONS - SEE NOTES A" AGG. BASE MIN. OF 4" DIRECTION OF ADJACENT PAVEMENT SLOPE.SPACING, EXPANSION JOINTS AT 60' MAXIMUM SPACING. UNDER CURB 2.PROVIDE TOOLED OR SAWN CONTRACTION JOINTS AT 10'3.CONSTRUCT CURB AND GUTTER PER MNDOT 2531.4.OPTION FOR SITE ENTRANCE ALONG FROST AVENUE. NOTES:1.DIRECTION OF TRANSVERSE GUTTER SLOPE TO MATCH " S 7 E I R P I A L V " 4 N / O 1 I T TYPICAL CONCRETE SIDEWALK SECTION C NOT TO SCALE D4 STYLE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER NOT TO SCALE E S T N"A""L"12"24"18" E OTHERWISE NOTED.OTHERWISE NOTED. M E V 2.SIDEWALKS TO HAVE 2% MAXIMUM CROSS SLOPE UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE.3.CONTRACTION JOINTS AT 5' SPACING, EXPANSION JOINTS EVERY 60' OR LESS.4.SIDEWALK THICKNESS SHALL BE 4" TYPICALLY, WITH 4" AGGREGATE BASE - UNLESS5.RAMP THICKNESS SHALL BE 6" TYPICALLY, WITH 6" AGGREGATE BASE - UNLESS NOTES:1.REFER TO MnDOT SPECIFICATION 2521 FOR SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION.A TYPED412D41830" PCURB XX C90XC90X (VARIES) AGG. BASE SITE 05: 4/22SITE 17: 4/22 1/2" R1/2" R 7"7" 3" R3" R T F T E / F E P " / P "O4 / OL 4 L/S3 AA S 3 "" 28 "A" 11 XX" 33 28 XX" PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE (P.C.C.)6 X 6 - W1.4 X W1.4 WELDED WIRE FABRICXX" AGG. BASE, CLASS V AGGREGATE PERMNDOT 3138, COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 100%STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITYAPPROVED SUBGRADE TO BE COMPACTED TO A FINISHED GRADEMINIMUM OF 100% STANDARD PROCTORMAXIMUM DENSITY 11 11 66 XX" AGG. BASE, CLASS V AGGREGATE PER XX" PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE (P.C.C.)MNDOT 3138, COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 100%STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITYAPPROVED SUBGRADE TO BE COMPACTED TO A FINISHED GRADEMINIMUM OF 100% STANDARD PROCTORMAXIMUM DENSITYB62424" BB TYPE CURB 8"8" CONCRETE PAVEMENT 6"6" INFALL CURB & GUTTER OUTFALL CURB & GUTTER REINFORCED CONCRETE PAVEMENT 6"6" 13-1/2"13-1/2" 1/2" R1/2" R TYPICAL CONCRETE PAVEMENT SECTIONS NOT TO SCALE B6 STYLE CURB INFALL-OUTFALL NOT TO SCALE XX C90XC90X 13.5" 1/2"RADIUS " 6 SITE 01: 4/22SITE 16: 4/22 8" BACK OF CURB 1 MINIMUM 6" BEHIND 3 L 3" RADIUS 3" RADIUS XX" BIT. WEARING COURSE TYPESPWEXX40X PER MNDOT SPEC. 2360TACK COAT, MNDOT SPEC. 2357XX" BIT. BASE COURSE TYPESPNWXX30X PER MNDOT SPEC. 2360XX" AGG. BASE, CLASS V AGGREGATE PERSTANDARD PROCTOR DENSITYAPPROVED SUBGRADE TO BE COMPACTED TO AXX" BIT. WEARING COURSE TYPESPWEXX40X PER MNDOT SPEC. 2360TACK COAT, MNDOT SPEC. 2357XX" BIT. BASE COURSE TYPESPNWXX30X PER MNDOT SPEC. 2360XX" AGG. BASE, CLASS V AGGREGATE PERSTANDARD PROCTOR DENSITYAPPROVED SUBGRADE TO BE COMPACTED TO A FINISHED GRADEMNDOT 3138, COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 100%MINIMUM OF 95% STANDARD PROCTORMAXIMUM DENSITYFINISHED GRADEMNDOT 3138, COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 100%MINIMUM OF 95% STANDARD PROCTORMAXIMUM DENSITY NORMAL DUTY AGG. BASE MIN. OF 4" A UNDER CURB DIRECTION OF ADJACENT PAVEMENT SLOPE.SPACING, EXPANSION JOINTS AT 60' MAXIMUM SPACING. HEAVY DUTY (TRUCK ROUTE) 2.PROVIDE TOOLED OR SAWN CONTRACTION JOINTS AT 10'3.CONSTRUCT CURB AND GUTTER PER MNDOT 2531. NOTES:1.DIRECTION OF TRANSVERSE GUTTER SLOPE TO MATCH 1/4 " LIP " 6 2 TYPICAL BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT SECTIONS NOT TO SCALE B6 STYLE CONCRETE CURB AND GUTTER NOT TO SCALE " 8 "A""L"12"20"1 8 1 6 B62424"32" TYPEB612B CURB PAVEMENT SECTION VARIES XX C90XC90X GUTTER OUT AS REQUIRED PER PLAN SLOPE GUTTER (3/4" PER FT. TYP.) TIP VARIES AGG. BASE - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:43 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C900 Council Packet Page Number 203 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 08/19/2022 220801 44433 JRK 1136 FROST AVENUE, MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA REG. NO. DRAWN: INITIAL ISSUE: FROST AVENUE APARTMENTS DESCRIPTION JRKJRK C906 2022 BY SOLUTION BLUE INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED © PRELIM 08/XX/2022 AND MARKINGS DATE XX/XX/2019XXXX DJR ARCHITECTUREMINNEAPOLIS, MN SOLUTION BLUE PROJECT NO:COPYRIGHT REVISION HISTORY # SUMMARY DESIGNED:REVIEWED:PHASE:CERTIFICATION I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECTSUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULYLICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERUNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OFMINNESOTA.JAY RONALD KOESTER, P.E.DATE: XX DETAILS - PAVEMENT SITE 35: 4/22SITE 51: 4/22 FLOWLINE WITH FIELD PAINT (COLOR TOTOP OF PAVEMENTCONCRETE BASE ROUND OFF TOP OFPIPE W/CONC. FILL6" DIA. GALVANIZED STEEL PIPEBE OWNER APPROVED)FILL W/ CONCRETE(3,000 PSI MIN.) 8" 6" 8" CONC.(NO MESH)NO LIP 8" CURB AND GUTTER B612 CONCRETEEXPANSION JOINT 3'-6" 4'-0" TYP. 3'-0" MIN. 4" NOTE:1.EACH DRIVEWAY PANEL SHALL NOT EXCEED 100 SF. CONCRETE APRON CURB NOT TO SCALE FIXED BOLLARD NOT TO SCALE MATCH EXISTINGCURB AND GUTTER JOINT XX C90XC90X EXPANSION SITE 34: 4/22SITE 46: 4/22 1'-0" 2'-8" 1'-0" 6'-7" 4' 3'-8" 4"5'-0" 1'-11" 5'-0" 1'-4" 8'-0" 9'-5" 2" EXPANSION JOINT SEE PLAN 18' MIN. 32' MAX. CONC. APRON MIN. 6" THICK TRAFFIC LANE TYP. CENTER LINE OF WHITE REFLECTIVE TOP VIEW TRAFFIC PAINT, TYP. FRONT VIEW 6' MIN SEE SITE PLAN 4" 1'-0" 4'-0" 4' COMMERCIAL CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON 4'-0"TRAFFIC ARROW PAVEMENT MARKINGS NOT TO SCALENOT TO SCALE CONCRETE (AT DRIVEWAY) ON 4" OF CLASS 5 AGGREGATE; 4" OFCONCRETE ON 4" OF CLASS 5 AGGREGATE AT OTHER LOCATIONS.OF BITUMINOUS MATERIAL AND 8" OF CLASS 5 AGGREGATE OR MATCHAND GUTTER IN PLACE. EXISTING STREET SECTION. 8'-0" NOTES:1.SIDEWALK SECTION SHALL BE REPLACED WITH A MINIMUM OF 6" OF2.STREET PAVEMENT SECTION SHALL BE REPLACED WITH A MINIMUM OF 4"3.CURB AND GUTTER SHALL BE REPLACED TO MATCH THE EXISTING CURB GUTTER LINE XX C90XC90X TOP OF CURB SITE 32: 4/22SITE 36: 4/22 ABUTS PAVEMENTOR STRUCTUREJOINT (TYP) EXPANSION JOINT IF EXPANSION N A L P ' R 2WIDTH E 1 P. 18" GUTTER 7" N HN I T T O I M N D SI I5' EXPANSION JOINT NO J W A 1" P X E AA N T O I N SI PSE NO I J LUG A SECTION A I PLAN VIEW P DBITUMINOUSDRIVE " D X WIDTH PER PLAN E 2 E A / RN 1 - "O 1 2 / 1 STREET CURB AND GUTTER. NOTES:1.NO CONTRACTION JOINTS IN VALLEY GUTTER.2.GUTTER WIDTH TO MATCH WIDTH OF EXISTING WIDTH 18" GUTTER CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON WITH BOULEVARD CONCRETE THRU GUTTER NOT TO SCALENOT TO SCALE 3 - #4 CONT. OR MORE DRIVEWAY AND GUTTER POURED BASE PER MNDOT 3138, JOINT (TYP) TOGETHER. COMMERCIAL DRIVE 8" THICK RESIDENTIAL DRIVE 6" THICK. XX CONTRACTION JOINT MIN. 4" CLASS 5 AGGREGATE C90XC90X FIRST SECTION OF SIDEWALK 6" STANDARD PROCTOR DENSITY THICK IF NEXT TO COMMERCIAL CENTER IF WIDTH IS 16' DRIVEWAY OR ALLEY APPROACH CONTRACTION JOINT AT COMPACTED TO AT LEAST 100% AND GUTTER MATCH EXISTINGCONCRETE CURB EXPANSION " 5 . 8 1/2"RADUIS SITE 20: 4/22 SITE 35A: 4/22 K ADA RAMP PERJOINT (TYP) MNDOT STANDARDPLATES (TYP)EXPANSION C A B " 1 8" FLOWLINE BACK OF CURB 6" X 6" 10/10 W.W.F. MINIMUM 6" BEHIND . X A LIPM 3 % 1 2 2 4' MIN. SECTION SIDEWALK 3" RADUIS 6" . X A AGG. BASE MIN. OF 4" UNDER CURB10/10 W.W.F.) 18"SECTION A-A M 6" CONC. (6" X 6" CURB AND GUTTER3 B612 CONCRETE 1 2 % ELEVATION VIEW 5 . 8 2-#4 BARS ON HEAVY DUTY DRIVEWAY ONLY 1/4 " LIP NOTE:1/2" EXPANSION JOINTEXPANSION JOINT NOT REQUIRED IF ADJACENTSECTIONS ARE POURED MONOLITHICALLY.SEE GRADING PLAN FOR SLOPES 7" SPACING, EXPANSION JOINTS AT 60' MAXIMUM SPACING. DIRECTION OF ADJACENT PAVEMENT SLOPE. 23 NOTE:1.EACH DRIVEWAY PANEL SHALL NOT EXCEED 100 SF.1 4.LOCATED AT ADA SIDEWALK RAMPS. NOTES:1.DIRECTION OF TRANSVERSE GUTTER SLOPE TO MATCH2.PROVIDE TOOLED OR SAWN CONTRACTION JOINTS AT 10'3.CONSTRUCT CURB AND GUTTER PER MNDOT 2531. DEPRESSED CURB AND GUTTER (18")NOT TO SCALE CONCRETE DRIVEWAY APRON NOT TO SCALE ECURB AND GUTTER MATCH EXISTING B618 B618 CONCRETECURB & GUTTER SLOPE GUTTER (3/4" PER FT. TYP.)S S PAVEMENT SECTION VARIES A E I B XX R . C90XC90X A GSIDEWALK (TYP) V TIP GUTTER OUT AS REQUIRED PER PLAN G A EXPANSIONJOINT (TYP) - DETL.DWG PLOT SCALE: 1:1 PLOT DATE: 8/19/2022 12:43 PMCADD USER: Jay FILE: C:\\USERS\\JAY\\DROPBOX\\PROJECTS\\220801 - RW FROST APT MAPLEWOOD - DJR\\WORKING FILES\\CAD\\DWG\\PLAN SHEETS\\C900 Council Packet Page Number 204 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Minneapolis, MN info@plan-type.com SITE PLANNING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PLAN-T ype 55597 JOSEPH L. SCHEFFLER 08-19-2022 J + L LOUIEXXXX ISSUE LOG PLAN FROST AVE APARTMENTS 1136 FROST AVE,MAPLEWOOD, MN L100 AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPEARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT ISTATE OF MINNESOTA.SIGNATURE:____________________ License #:Date:PROJECT MANAGERDRAWN BYPROJECT NAMEPROJECT NUMBERSHEET TITLESHEET NUMBER LANDSCAPE 983 688 4 88 6 | 9 8 TR EM 5 88 ЏЏЏЏЏЏЏ БББББББББББББББ Џ Б S S ББББ А TR БААБББББББББ H Б 6666666 H А 8888888888 ББББББББББ 888888888 А ББББББББББ БББББББББББ Б Б ЏББББББББ ЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎБББББББББББ Б Б ББББ В ББББ 4 ЍЍЍЍЍЍЍЍЍЍББЍББББ 6 88 Б 9 ББББББББ H3 Б H8 В 77777777 Љ 888 9 ББББББББ 8888 8 2 H 9 Б В 8 Њ 1 9 0 8 9 Б 8 5968 В Ћ 8 98 8 7 88 8 Ѝ 8 7 В 8 Ќ 8 Б 8 ЍЍЍЍБББББББББББ і В 8 Ћ БЏ 8 ББЎББББББББ ͵ |В 8 Б Љ ЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏББББББББББББ HH H8 БАБББББББББАБ Ў 8 В Ѝ Ќ 8 Б ВВ 8 Ћ 7 Б Б 5 В 8 Ћ 9 ЌБ 8 В 8 ЍБ ВБ Б В 6 Б Б Б 8 8 | Џ В Б ЊВБ 7 58 8 9 8 Ў ВБББ Б Б ЌБВЊБ Ѝ БВЋ Б ЎВ В ЏА В Б ББ |ВВ Б ВВ ББ В БА Б Б ББ А ЏЏ В ББББББ Б БББББББ Џ В Ў Б А БББББББ ББББББББ Б Б ЍЍЍЍЍ БББББ | ББББ АА Б ±3 02 БББББББ 2 . 5 3 .6 . 59 6 ± 98 9 5 5 6 8 8 8 5 3C 9.8 7777777 A 52C2 . 8 9M3 В 88888888 6 .Б 8 БЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏ 96 А 88888888 Б 8 A9 В БББББББ 8 В MC Б 6 іЉ͵ЋББББББББ Ώ C 9 8 | ЎЎ ББББ ЉБББББББ В Б Ѝ ББ Б Б В Б Џ Њ ВВ Б В В Б Б | 6 А 9 В 6 8 Б 9 8 T Ћ В Б БВБ 7 88 В В В В Б Б | Ѝ 8888888888 8888 Б 77777 Б ЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎ БББББББББББ БББББББ Ќ ВЏЏ БББББББББ Б ААААААА Б БББББББ А БББББББ БББББББ 7 8 8 А БББББББ БББББББ Ѝ В Б БББББББ | ББ ББ і Њ͵ БΏ В ББББ БББББББ Ў В Б 7 S 8 8 9 10 8 28 Љ 7777777 3 888888888888 99 4 88888888888 598 ВВВВВВВ 98 68 8 9 98 ББ 98 8 8 8 | 8 Њ 78 Џ ВВВВВВВВ Б Б 8 88 Ћ 888 ВВВ 8888888888 88888888888 Б ЌЌЌЌЌЌЌ В 7 ББББ 9 А В Б 9999999 8 88888888888888 ЍЍЍЍЍЍЍ 9 88888888888888888888888888888 8 В ББББББББ |9999 8888888 8 Ў ВВВВВВВ БВВ БББ 000000 9 8888888 ББВБ ЏЏЏ Б В Б ВВВВВВВ 999999999 ВВВВВВВБВА БББББББ ББ 8888888888 ВВВВВВВВ АААААААА 888888888888 ЏЏЏЏЏЏЏВБВЏББББББББ БББББББ ВВВВВВВВ ЏЏЏЏ АААА БББББББ ВВВВВВВВВ ЎЎЎВБВЎБББВ ЎЎЎЎ ББ ЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏ БББББББ В 111 В 9999999 8888888 БББББ ЉББББББЍЍЍ ЉВВВВ 00099988 ВБББББ БББББББ 88888888 22222222999999999999999999 8 ВВВВВВВ 39999 988 |44 ЍЍЍ Б 9999888 11 ВВВВВВ ББББББ ЎЎЎЎ 555 ВВ 9 222222998888 8888888 ВВ ББББ D9b ВВ ББББББ –Caw 66666666 99 88888888 33998888888888 9 77777777 Б В В 8 9999999 ББ ЎВВВВВ 8888888 Ў 8888 99999 Б 44 8888 999999 ББББ 99 ВВВВВВВВВВВ ЏЏЏЏ 88888 Б 99999 5555555555 00 0000000000 Б ВВВВВВВ А Б 99999999 В 888888888 Б 000000000 999999999999 1 66 Б ВВВВВВВ Б 9999 |0 2222222 8888 ВВВВВВВВ 9 Б ВЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉ 7 В Љ 0000000999 3333333 ВВВВВВВВ 8 Љ 9 ВЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊ Љ 8 Љ В FENTON AVENUE В 0000000009999 4 ЉЉЉЉЉЉЉ ВЋЋЋЋЋЋЋ 8 9 9 В БЉЉЉ 555555555009 ЌЌЌЌЌЌЌ В 9 8 Љ Б 0 Њ БВЍЍЍЍЍЍВЉЍВЉ 0 9 8 В 9999999 Љ Ћ 00000 ЎЉЉЉЉЉЉВЉЎВ 66 9 0 1 В ЌЉ ЏЉЉВВВВВВВВВ 9 ВБЉВ 7777777 В 0 Ѝ 00009999999 2 ААААААВЉАВВВВВВ ЎЉ 9 В 0 3 ЉБЉЉЉЉЉВЉБ 88888888 0000000099 FROST AVE. E. 8 ЏЉ В 409 В ЉЉ 99 // ////////// 8 9 //// | 8 ВЉЉ TR T T H H 0 0 | 9 1 0 9 В В | Б 2 0 В 9 В 5'H x 5'W5'H x 4'W Б Љ Љ 3 В 0 Њ 99 Љ POT6'H x 6'WPOT6'H x 4'WPOT5'H x 6'WPOTPOTPOT3'H x 4'WPOT2'H x 8'WPOT4'H x 3'WPOT1.5'H x 2'WPOT1.5'H x 2'WPOT2.5'H x 2.5'W 9 В 8 Ќ Љ | В REMOVE DEAD &BROKEN BRANCHESGRADE4" DEPTH MULCHFINISH GRADESCARIFY & SPREADROOT MASSOVER-EXCAVATE 6"SUBGRADE #5 CONT.POT20'H x 10'W#2 CONT.#2 CONT.#2 CONT.#3 CONT.#2 CONT.#2 CONT.#2 CONT.#1 CONT.#1 CONT.#1 CONT.#1 CONT.#1 CONT.POT4'H x 3'W#1 CONT.POT4'H x 2.5'W#1 CONT.POT3'H x 3'WEXCAVATE ROOT FLARE,PLACE AT FINISH | PHALEN PLACE 3 20 109 S 0 0 9 9 0 9 | APPROVED ALTERNATE). MN STATE SEED MIX 34-262 WET PRAIRIE (OR APPROVEDEQUAL).MN STATE SEED MIX 35-221 - DRY PRAIRIE GENERAL (OR 0 0 9 AMBER JUBILEE NINEBARK Physocarpus opulifolius 'Jefam'Juniperus chinensis 'Maneyi'Hydrangea paniculata 'Jane'ARCTIC FIRE DOGWOODTAUNTON YEW Rhus aromatica 'Gro-Low'Salvia yangii AUTUMN FIRE Sedum x 'Autumn Fire'Hemerocallis 'Ruby Stella'Panicum virgatum 'Northwind'Sporobolus heterolepis NANNYBERRY VIBURNUM Viburnum lentago COMPACT AMERICAN VIBURNUM Viburnum trilobum 'Bailey Compact'MANEY JUNIPERLITTLE LIME HYDRANGEA Cornus stolonifera 'Farrow'Taxus x media 'Tauntonii'GRO-LOW FRAGRANT SUMACRUSSIAN SAGERUBY STELLA DAYLILYWALKER'S LOW CATMINT Nepeta faassenii 'Walkers Low'KARL FORESTER FEATHER REED GRASS Calamagrotis x acutiflora 'Karl Forester'NORTHWIND SWITCH GRASSPRAIRIE DROPSEED 846422348602226809581 12118105119 NO SUMMER SEEDING ALLOWED.PROVIDE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET ON ALL SIDE SLOPES -- SY-- SY SPRING SEEDING TO BE BETWEEN MARCH 15TH - MAY 15TH. FALL SEEDING TO BE BETWEEN AUGUST 15TH - OCTOBER 15TH. AJAFTYWL SHRUBSNVCVMJLLGLPERENNIALSRSSERDORNAMENTAL GRASSESKFNSPD SOD - --- SYEDGING - --- LFMULCH - --- CY 15'H x 4'W B&B20'H x 20'WB&B50'H x 30'WB&B40'H x 30'WB&B30'H x 15'WB&B25'H x 10'WB&B10'H x 6'WB&B 2.5" CAL.B&B60'H x 45'W2.5" CAL.B&B50'H x 50'W2.5" CAL.B&B50'H x 35'W2.5" CAL.B&B50'H x 30'W2.5" CAL.B&B50'H x 25'W2" CAL.B&B40'H x 20'W2" CAL.1.5" CAL.B&B30'H x 8'W6' HT6' HT6' HT6' HT36" HT4' HT STAKE & GUY AS NEEDEDWRAP TREE, FALLINSTALLATION ONLYGRADE4" DEPTH MULCH, DOOF TRUNKCUT & REMOVE ALLTWINE, BURLAP & WIRESUBGRADE PROTECT MAIN LEADER,REMOVE DEAD &BROKEN BRANCHESEXCAVATE ROOT FLARE,PLACE AT FINISHNOT PLACE WITHIN 2"FINISH GRADEBASKET, PLACE ONUNDISTURBED SOIL WASHED RIVER ROCK INSTALLED TO 3" DEPTH WITH Platanus x acerifolia 'Morton Circle'COMMON HACKBERRY Celtis occidentalisAcer rubrum 'Northwood'SKYLINE HONEYLOCUST Gleditsia tricanthos var. inermis 'Skycole'QUAKING ASPEN Populus temuloidesBetula platyphylla 'Fargo'Pinus resinosa SCOTCH PINE Pinus sylvestris CONCOLOR FIR Abies concolorPinus flexillis 'Northern Blue'Pinus mugo 'Tannenbaum'SPARTAN JUNIPER Juniperus chinensis 'Spartan' EXCLAMATION! SYCAMORENORTHWOOD MAPLEBOULEVARD LINDEN Tilia americana 'Boulevard'NORTHERN REDBUD Cercis canadensis DAKOTA PINNACLE BIRCHNORWAY PINELIMBER NORTHERN BLUE PINEMUGO TANNENBAUM 119566124211491413624 NO WEED FABRIC BARRIER BENEATH ORGANIC MULCHES.NO EDGING AROUND TREES OUTSIDE OF SHRUB BEDS.COORDINATE INSTALLATION OF ALL PVC SLEEVES UNDER DRIVE AREAS WITH GENERALCONTRACTOR. SYCHSLQAORNAMENTAL TREESSPCFSJ LANDSCAPE PLANT LEGEND DECIDUOUS TREESNMBLNRDBEVERGREEN TREESNPLPMT ALL PLANT MATERIALS TO BE GUARANTEED ONE (1) FULL YEAR FROM THE COMPLETION ANDACCEPTANCE BY OWNER, WITH ONE TIME REPLACEMENT AT APPROPRIATE TIMEVERIFY TOPSOIL DEPTH AND NOTIFY OWNER OF ANY DEFICIENCY.APPROVED WEED FABRIC BARRIER.ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS WITH SOD AND PLANTINGS. R.O.W. TO BE IRRIGATED FROM SPRINKLER OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY PERMITS FOR PLANTING IN ALL R.O.W. AND VERIFY ALL UTILITIES WHICHCOMPLETE WORK PER OWNERS CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE AND COORDINATE WORK WITH OTHERSON SITE.WEEDS.SOD TO BE A KENTUCKY BLUEGRASS SEED VARIETY. NO GUARANTEE ON SOD EXCEPT SOD THAT ISWHERE EXISTING HARDSCAPE AREAS ARE TO BE REPLACED WITH LANDSCAPING, PROVISIONSSHOULD BE TAKEN TO COORDINATE EXCAVATION OF SUBSOIL TO A DEPTH OF 6" WITH GRADINGCONTRACTOR. REPLACE WITH COMPACTED TOPSOIL. ALL AREAS TO BE LANDSCAPED AND SODDEDSHALL BE GRADED SMOOTH AND EVEN.SOD ALL AREAS WHICH ARE DISTURBED BY CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING ALL R.O.W. AND ADJACENTSEEDED AREAS SHALL BE HYDROMULCH OR DISCED STRAW DEPENDING ON SEED TYPE.INSTALL BLACK VINYL EDGING AROUND ALL PLANTING BEDS AS SHOWN ON PLAN.INSTALL IRRIGATION SYSTEM PER IRRIGATION PLAN. IRRIGATION DESIGN SHOULD ENCOMPASSHEADS LOCATED WITHIN PROPERTY BOUNDARY. MINIMIZE OVER SPRAY.CLEAN ALL PAVEMENT AREAS AFTER ALL LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION IS COMPLETE AND ACCEPTED BYOWNER, DAILY CLEANING TO BE COMPLETED IF REQUIRED BY THE MUNICIPALITY.ONE (1) OVERSTORY TREE PER PARKING LOT ISLAND MAY EFFECT THEIR WORK.REPLACEMENT TOPSOIL (WHEN REQUIRED) SHOULD BE CLEAN, FREE OF DEBRIS, ROCKS ANDNOT ACCEPTABLE AT TIME OF COMPLETION. STAKE SOD ON SLOPES 3:1 AND GREATER.PROPERTIES.PROVIDE BLANKET ON ALL SEEDED AREAS THAT ARE SLOPED. MULCH APPLICATION FOR ALL OTHERMULCH TO BE FINELY SHREDDED, UNDYED, HARDWOOD ORGANIC MULCH INSTALLED TO 4" DEPTH.ROCK MULCH SHALL BE 1-1/2" DIAMETER BUILDING PERIMETER LANDSCAPINGBOULEVARD TREES AT REGULAR INTERVALSBETWEEN SIDEWALK AND ROAD (MIN. WIDTH 5') NOTES:LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS Council Packet Page Number 205 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Minneapolis, MN info@plan-type.com SITE PLANNING & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PLAN-T ype 55597 JOSEPH L. SCHEFFLER 08-19-2022 J + L LOUIEXXXX ISSUE LOG PLAN FROST AVE COVER APARTMENTS 1136 FROST AVE,MAPLEWOOD, MN L200 GROUND AM A DULY LICENSED LANDSCAPEARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN,SPECIFICATION, OR REPORT WASPREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MYDIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT ISTATE OF MINNESOTA.SIGNATURE:____________________ License #:Date:PROJECT MANAGERDRAWN BYPROJECT NAMEPROJECT NUMBERSHEET TITLESHEET NUMBER 983 688 4 88 6 | 9 8 TR EM 555555 88888888888 ЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏ ББББББББББББББББББ ЏЏЏ БББ S RR S БББББ АА TRTRTR ББААААБББББББББББББ HHHHH ББ 666666666 H ААААА 888888888888 ББББББББББ 888888888 АА ББББББББББББ ББББББББББББ ББ ББ ЏЏББББББББББ ЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎБББББББББББ ББББ ББ ББББББББ ВВ БББББ 44444444444444444444444444444444444 ЍЍЍЍЍЍЍЍЍЍББЍББББББЍ 666 888888 ББББ 999999999999999999999999 БББББББББББББ HHH333333333333333333333333333333333 ББ H8888888888888888888888 ВВ 7777777777 ЉЉ 88888 999999999 БББББББББББ 888888 888 2222 H 9999 БББ ВВВ 8888 ЊЊЊ 111 999 000 8888 999999 ББ 8888 5999999966668888 ВВ ЋЋ 88888 9888 888 7777777 8888 8888 ЍЍ 88888 7777777 ВВ 888 ЌЌЌЌ 8888 ББ 8888 ЍЍЍЍЍБББББББББББББ ііііі ВВВВВ 888 ЋЋЋ ББББЏЏЏ 888 ББЎББББББББЎ ͵͵ ||ВВВВ 88888 ББББ ЉЉЉ ЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏБББББББББББББББ HHHH H8888 БАБББББББАББББА ЎЎ 88888 ВВ ЍЍ ЌЌ 8888888 ББ ВВВВ 888888 ЋЋЋ 777 ББ ББ 5555555555555 ВВВ 888 ЋЋ 999 ЌЌББ 888 ВВ 888 ЍЍЍЍЍЍЍББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББ ВВВББ ББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББ ВВВВВВВ 666 БББ ББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББ БББ 888 888 || ЏЏЏ ВВ ББ ЊЊЊЊВВВВБББ 777 555888 888 999 888 БББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББ БББББББББББББББББББББББББББББ ЎЎ ЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊ ВВББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББ ЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋ ВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВЊВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВЊВЊВВВВВВВВВВВВВЊВВББ ББ ВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВЋ ЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌБВЊБББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББВБББВЊББББББББВБВБВБББВБББББББВББ ЍЍЍЍЍЍЍЍЍЍ БВЋБББББББББББББББББББВЋББББВБВЋ ББ ЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВЌВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВЌВВВВВВЌВВВВВЌ ВВ В ЏЏЏАААЏЏАЏЏАЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏАЏЏАЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏАА ВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВ ББББВББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББВБВБББББВБВБББВБВБББББВБВББ БББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББ ||||ВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВЏВ БББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББ ВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВ БББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББВБББББББББВБВБББББ ВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВ ББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББАА БББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББББ ББ БББ АА ЏЏ ВВ БББББББ ББ БББББББ ЏЏ ВВ Ў ББ А БББББББ БББББББ Б Б ЍЍЍЍЍ БББББ || ББББ АА Б ±±±±±±±±±±333 000000000222 БББББББ 22 ... 555555 333 ...666666 ... 5555599999 666 ±±±±±± 999998888 99 5 555555 666 88888 88 888 5555 333CCCC 9...888 777777777 AAAAAA 55555222CCCCCCCCCC22 .. 8 99999MMMM33 ВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВВ 8888888888 66 ..ББ 888888 ББББЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏ 99966 АА 8888888888 ББ 888 AAAA99 ВВ БББББББ 88 ВВ MMMMCCC ББ 6666 ііііЉЉЉЉЉ͵͵ЋЋЋЋБББББББББББ ΏΏΏ CC 9999999999 888888888888 || ЎЎ ББББ ЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉББББББББ ВВ ББББ Ѝ ББ Б ББ ВВ ББ ЏЏЏЏЏ ЊЊЊЊ ВВВВВВ ББББББББББ ВВВВВВВ ВВ ББББББ ББ || 6 АА 9 ВВ 666 8 ББ 999 888 TTT ЋЋЋЋ ВВВВВ ББББ БВББВБ 777 888888 ВВВВ ВВ ВВВ ВВ ББ ББББ || Ѝ 88888888888 8888 Б 77777 Б ЎЎЎЎЎЎЎЎ БББББББББББ БББББББ ЌЌЌЌЌЌ ВВВВВЏЏ ББББББББББББ Б ААААААА Б БББББББББ А БББББББ БББББББ 7777 8888 8888 А БББББББ БББББББ ЍЍЍЍ ВВВВ ББББ БББББББ || ББ ББ ііі ЊЊЊ͵͵ ББΏΏ В ББББ ББББББББ ЎЎЎЎ ВВВВ ББББ 777 SSSSSSSSS 888 88 999 11000 888 22288 ЉЉ 7777777 333 88888888888888 999999 444 88888888888 555999888 ВВВВВВВВ 999888 66666888 888 999 99988 ББ 99999888 888 888 88888 ||| 888 ЊЊ 777888 ЏЏЏЏ ВВВВВВВВВВВВ ББББ ББ 888 8888888 ЋЋЋЋ 888 ВВВВВВ 8888888888 88888888888 ББ ЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌ ВВ 7 БББББ 9 АААА ВВВ БББББ 9999999 8 88888888888888 Ѝ ЍЍЍЍЍЍЍЍ 9 88888888888888888888888888888 8 ВВВ БББББББББ ||9999 8888888 8 ЎЎ ВВВВВВВВ БВВБВВ ББББ 000000 9 888888888 БББББВВВВББББ ЏЏЏЏЏ БББББ ВВВВВ ББББББББ ВВВВВВВВВВВ 999999999999 ВВВВВВВБВАБВА БББББББББББББ БББ 888888888888 ВВВВВВВВВВВВ ААААААААА 88888888888888 ЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏВБВЏБББББББББВЏ ББББББББББББ ВВВВВВВВВ ЏЏЏЏЏ ААААА ББББББББ ВВВВВВВВВВ ЎЎЎЎВБВЎББББВЎВВ ЎЎЎЎЎЎЎ БББ ЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏ ББББББББ ВВ 111 ВВ 9999999 8888888 ББББББ ЉЉЉЉБББББББЍЍЍЍ ЉЉЉЉВВВВВ 00000999998888 ВВВВББББББ БББББББББББ 88888888 22222222999999999999999999 8 ВВВВВВВВВВ 39999 988 |||44 ЍЍЍЍ БББ 9999988888 1111 ВВВВВВВВВ ББББББББ ЎЎЎЎЎЎЎ ww 555 ВВВВВ 9 aa99 22222222999988888 888888888 ВВВ C ББББББББ D9bDDDDDDDD9b ВВВ ББББББББ –Caw––––––––Caw–Caw 6666666666 99 88888888 33339999888888888888 9 77777777 ББ ВВ ВВ 8 9999999 ББББ ЎВВВВВВВ 8888888 ЎЎЎ 888888 9999999 ББ 4444 8888 999999 ББББББ 99 ВВВВВВВВВВВВВВ ЏЏЏЏЏ 8888888 БББ 9999999 555555555555 00 0000000000000 БББ ВВВВВВВВВ АА БББББ 99999999 ВВВВ 88888888888 ББББББ 000000000 99999999999999 1 6666 БББББ ВВВВВВВВВВВ БББББ 9999 ||0 222222222 88888888 ВВВВВВВВВВ 99999 БББ ВВВЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉ 77777 ВВВ ЉЉЉ 0000000999 333333333 ВВВВВВВВВВВ 888 ЉЉ 999 ВВВВВВВВВЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊЊ ЉЉЉЉЉЉЉ 888 ЉЉЉЉЉЉЉ ВВВ FENTON AVENUE ВВВ 0000000009999 4 ЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉ ВВВЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋЋ 8888888 999999 9999 ВВ БББЉЉЉЉЉ 555555555009 ЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌЌ ВВВ 999999 88888888888 ЉЉЉЉ ББ 000000 ЊЊЊЊЊ ББВВЍЍЍЍЍЍЉЍВЉЍВЉВВЉЍ 0000 9999 8888 ВВ 99999999 ЉЉ ЋЋЋ 00000 ЎЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉВЉЎВВЉЎВЉЎ 66 9999 0000 11111 ВВВВ ЌЌЌЌЉЉЉЉ ЏЏЏЏЉЉЉЉЉВВВВВВВВВВВВ 999 ВВВБББЉЉЉВВВ 7777777 ВВВ 000 ЍЍЍ 00009999999 222 ААААААААВЉАВВВВВВВЉА ЎЎЎЎЉЉЉЉ 999 ВВВ 000 333 ЉБЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉБВЉБВЉБ 88888888 0000000000099 FROST AVE. E. 8 ЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЏЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉ ВВВВВВВВВВВ 44444444444000000000099999999 ВВВВВВ ЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉЉ 99999 ////// //////////// 8 ЉЉ 999999 //////// || ЉЉ 8888 ВЉЉВВЉЉВВВЉЉ TRTRTR TTTTT TTT HHHHHH HHH 00 000 || 999 111 000 999 ВВ ВВ || ББ 222 00000 ВВ 99999 ВВ ББ ЉЉ ЉЉ 33333 ВВ 00000 ЊЊ 99999 ЉЉ 9 ВВ 8 ЌЌЌ ЉЉЉ || ВВВВВВ | PHALEN PLACE 3 20 109 S 0 0 9 9 0 9 | APPROVED ALTERNATE). MN STATE SEED MIX 34-262 WET PRAIRIE (OR APPROVEDEQUAL).MN STATE SEED MIX 35-221 - DRY PRAIRIE GENERAL (OR 0 0 9 NO SUMMER SEEDING ALLOWED.PROVIDE EROSION CONTROL BLANKET ON ALL SIDE SLOPES -- SY-- SY SPRING SEEDING TO BE BETWEEN MARCH 15TH - MAY 15TH. FALL SEEDING TO BE BETWEEN AUGUST 15TH - OCTOBER 15TH. SOD - --- SYEDGING - --- LFMULCH - --- CY Council Packet Page Number 206 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 207 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 208 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 209 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 210 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 211 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 212 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 213 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 214 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 215 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 216 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 217 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 218 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 219 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 220 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 221 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Appendix B Council Packet Page Number 222 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Page 1 of 1 1.22.0 ND 84.861.70.2139.0<1.1 <0.53 <0.020 0.71.71.8 NA 25.1<1.0 <10.2<0.15<0.51 <0.019 1.81.21.9 NA 2/20228/12/20228/12/2022 19.2<1.0 <10.2<0.15<0.51 <0.018 0.62.68.3 ND 51.60.12 <1.1 <10.3<0.16<0.53 0.61.34.4 NA 65.20.16<1.1 <10.9<0.53 <0.021 0.21.6 ND 12.535.814.0<1.1 <0.17<0.55 <0.021 0.21.14.0 NA 36.0 <1.1 <10.7<0.16<0.53 <0.021 1.62.2 NA 22.3 <10.0<0.99<0.15<0.99<0.50 <0.019 1.03.0 NA <1.0 39.6<1.0 <10.1<0.15<0.51 <0.018 0.81.88.48.19.611.411.89.712.38.68.611.54.5 NA Table 1 38.0 <10.4<0.15<0.97<0.48 <0.019 (Results in mg/kg) Laboratory Soil Data - Detected Parameters 1.55.03.1 NA 20.1 <3.8 <0.98<0.15<0.98<0.49 <0.020 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Maplewood, Minnesota 2.11.12.0 ND 28.2 <10.1<0.15<0.97<0.49 <0.019 3.22.27.5 ND 89.1<1.0 <10.8<0.15<0.50 <0.021 2.52.34.5 NA 54.3 <1.1 0.022 <11.1<0.16<0.54 0.42.1 NA <5.4 85.20.1910.811.411.89.210.1<1.0 0.03 <0.52 9 107878 1.62.7 200 3,100 MPCALGP-1LGP-2LGP-3LGP-4LGP-5LGP-6LGP-7LGP-8LGP-9LGP-10LGP-11LGP-12LGP-13LGP-14LGP-15 Varies 100 (1) April 20220-2'2-4'0-2'1-2'4-6'0-2'0-22-4'0-2'0-2'0-2'0-2'4-6'2-4'0-2' Residential/ Recreational Chronic SRVs8/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/12/20228/12/20228/12/20228/12/20228/1 10 5.88.82.67.93.3 2013 SLVs 1,7002,700 Tier 1 MPCA Varies 100 (1) 1000000000/3623000/2.3 Sample Name/LocationDepth/Sample TypeSoil TypeDate Collected Petroleum PID Readings (ppm)DRO RCRA Metals Arsenic BariumCadmiumChromium (III/VI)LeadSeleniumSilverMercury VOCs (Various)Footnotes:(1) Meets MPCA Unregulated Fill Criteria for DRO and GRO.BaP Eq: benzo(a)pyrene equivalentDRO: diesel range organicsmg/kg: milligrams per kilogramMPCA: Minnesota Pollution Control AgencyNA: not analyzedND: not detected above laboratory method detection limitsPID: photoionization detectorppm: parts per millionRCRA: Resource Conservation Recovery ActVOCs: Volatile Organic Compounds F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD\\Appendix B\\Soil Results Table Council Packet Page Number 223 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Page 1 of 1 14 4.93.8 4-5'567 28.5 <1.8<2.8 17.6<1.7<5.2<4.8<2.2<1.9<1.7 <0.81 8/12/2022 15 2.91.45.68.52.64.0 5-6' <1.9<1.7<5.3<5.0<1.4<2.0<1.7 2.82.03.39.74.55.3 5-6' <1.9<2.0<2.8 20.4<5.3<1.4<2.3 13.7 2.52.54.0 5-6' 22.214.1 <1.3<1.3<1.3<1.9<2.0<2.9<1.8<5.4<1.4<2.0<1.8 <0.85 2.52.61.16.43.65.23.32.64.25.96.34.53.14.4 5-6' 41.8<2.1<6.4 23.312.28.426.488.7<2.1<1.7<1.7<1.7<1.7 12.6 LVS-8LSV-10LSV-11LSV-12LSV-15 ) 3 g/m 2.54.3 1-2' 0.9411.44.524.969.318.419.6 <1.8<2.8<1.7<1.6<2.0<1.7<1.6<1.6<1.6<1.4<5.2<1.7<1.7 <0.81 LSV-4 Table 2 (Results in 0.10.60.30.30.30.40.6 1.62.28.12.45.15.25.71.61.73.14.33.72.37.94.14.33.24.6 42.221285.785.286.381.110813.211.220.530.228.824.255.4<1.1<1.7<2.6 13.4<1.6<1.2<2.1<2.2<2.7 13.5 <0.76 LSV-2 Laboratory Vapor Data - Detected Parameters 1136-1160 Frost Ave East, Maplewood, Minnesota ) 3 NSNSNS g/m 310930 5,3009,3001,4001,1006,300 MPCA 21,00010,00010,000 )( 3 43 NSNSNS g/m 140310110 1,7003,1007,0002,1003,3003,300 MPCA 28,00083,00014,00043,00024,00073,00031,00093,00033,000100,000 ( 100,000310,000100,000310,000140,000430,000 33X ISVs33X EISVs 1,100,0003,200,000 ResidentialResidential8/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/12/20228/12/20228/12/2022 January 2021January 20215-6' : micrograms per cubic meter 3 g/m Sample Name/LocationDepth/Sample TypeDate Collected PID Reading (ppm)VOCs AcetoneBenzene2-Butanone (MEK)Carbon disulfideChlorobenzeneChloromethaneDichlorodifluoromethaneDichlorotetrafluoroethaneEthan olEthylbenzenen-Heptanen-HexaneNaphthalene2-PropanolPropyleneStyreneTetrachloroethene (PCE)TolueneTrichlorofluoromethane 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzenem&p-Xyleneo-XyleneFootnotes:EISV: Expedited Intrusion Screening ValueISV: Intrusion Screening ValueMPCA: Minnesota Pollution Control AgencyNS: no standardPID: photoionization detectorppm: parts per millionVOCs: Volatile Organic Compounds F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\VRAP & RAD\\Appendix B\\Soil Vapor Results Table Council Packet Page Number 224 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Appendix C Council Packet Page Number 225 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 ǞǞǞ͵Ʀĭğ͵ƭƷğƷĻ͵ƒƓ͵ǒƭ .ĻƭƷ ağƓğŭĻƒĻƓƷ tƩğĭƷźĭĻƭ ŅƚƩ ƷŷĻ hŅŅΏ{źƷĻ wĻǒƭĻ ƚŅ ƓƩĻŭǒƌğƷĻķ Cźƌƌ wĻƒĻķźğƷźƚƓ 5źǝźƭźƚƓ This document defines ǒƓƩĻŭǒƌğƷĻķ Ņźƌƌ and provides guidance from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Remediation Division regarding Best Management Practices for its off-site reuse. Off-site reuse of excess soil as fill or aggregate is a common practice at many development and road construction projects. If no known or potential sources of contamination are identified during environmental due diligence and subsequent field observations, then sampling of excess soil for laboratory analysis is not necessary. However, when excess soil originates from a site with known or potential sources of contamination, characterization of the soil is warranted prior to off-site reuse in order to ensure the protection of public health and the environment. If contamination is detected in the soil, the unregulated fill criteria and best management practices described herein provide a framework for making good decisions about the off-site reuse of the soil. If the soil does not meet the criteria for unregulated fill, the soil should be managed or disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. 5ĻŅźƓźƷźƚƓ ƚŅ ǒƓƩĻŭǒƌğƷĻķ Ņźƌƌ Unregulated fill, for the purpose of this guidance, is defined as excess soil in which a release of contaminants has been identified at concentrations ƌĻƭƭ ƷŷğƓ ƷŷĻ at/!͸ƭ ƒƚƭƷ ĭƚƓƭĻƩǝğƷźǝĻ ƩźƭƉΏĬğƭĻķ values (see complete criteria on the next page). Thus, the identified contaminants in the fill are present at concentrations that are not of regulatory concern to the MPCA. Unregulated fill is not a solid waste.* 9ǣĭƌǒƭźƚƓƭ 1.Some excess soil and other material generated at a redevelopment site is regulated as either solid or hazardous waste and must be managed according to applicable solid or hazardous waste laws, including: Soil that is characteristically hazardous or contaminated due to a release of a listed hazardous waste, as defined in Minn. R. ch. 7045. Such soil must be managed in accordance with the ƩĻƨǒźƩĻƒĻƓƷƭ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ at/!͸ƭ wĻƭƚǒƩĭĻ /ƚƓƭĻƩǝğƷźƚƓ ğƓķ wĻĭƚǝĻƩǤ !ĭƷ Λw/w!Μ ƦƩƚŭƩğƒ͵ Waste material such as salvaged bituminous, crushed concrete, bricks, fly ash, etc. proposed to be reused as fill. The beneficial reuse of solid wastes is governed by Minn. R. 7035.2860. Information regarding the beneficial reuse of solid waƭƷĻƭ ĭğƓ ĬĻ ŅƚǒƓķ ƚƓ ƷŷĻ at/!͸ƭ ǞĻĬƭźƷĻ ğƷ http://www.pca.state.mn.us/waste/sw-utilization.html . 2.The management and reuse of dredged material may be regulated by permit or subject to other regulations. Information about the management of ķƩĻķŭĻķ ƒğƷĻƩźğƌƭ ĭğƓ ĬĻ ŅƚǒƓķ ƚƓ ƷŷĻ at/!͸ƭ website at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/water/dredgedmaterials.html. ΫLŅ ƭĻƓƷ Ʒƚ ğ ƦĻƩƒźƷƷĻķ ƌğƓķŅźƌƌ ŅƚƩ ķźƭƦƚƭğƌͲ ǒƓƩĻŭǒƌğƷĻķ Ņźƌƌ ƒğǤ ĬĻ ƭǒĬƆĻĭƷ Ʒƚ ğ ƭƚƌźķ ǞğƭƷĻ Ʒğǣ͵ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency February 2012 | c-rem1-01 651-296-6300 | 800-657-3864 | TTY 651-282-5332 or 800-657-3864 Available in alternative formats Council Packet Page Number 226 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 /ƩźƷĻƩźğ ŅƚƩ ǒƓƩĻŭǒƌğƷĻķ Ņźƌƌ Unregulated fill is excess soil that meets all of the following field screening and contaminant concentration criteria: free from solid waste, debris, asbestos-containing material, visual staining, and chemical odor organic vapors less than 10 parts per million, as measured by a photoionization detector (PID) for petroleum-impacted soil, less than 100 mg/kg diesel range organics (DRO)/gasoline range organics (GRO) for contaminants detected in soil, less than the at/!͸ƭ wĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌ {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻƭ Λ{wƭΜ and Tier 1 Soil Leaching Values (SLVs)* ΫbğƷǒƩğƌƌǤΏƚĭĭǒƩƩźƓŭ ĭƚƓĭĻƓƷƩğƷźƚƓƭ ƚŅ ƭƚƒĻ ƒĻƷğƌƭͲ ƭǒĭŷ ğƭ ğƩƭĻƓźĭͲ ƭĻƌĻƓźǒƒͲ ƚƩ ĭƚƦƦĻƩͲ ƭƚƒĻƷźƒĻƭ ĻǣĭĻĻķ ƷŷĻ {w ƚƩ {\[͵ {ǒĭŷ ƭƚźƌƭ ğƩĻ ƓƚƷ ĭƚƓƭźķĻƩĻķ źƒƦğĭƷĻķ źƓ ƷŷĻ ğĬƭĻƓĭĻ ƚŅ ğ ĭƚƓƷğƒźƓğƓƷ ƭƚǒƩĭĻ ƚƩ ƚƷŷĻƩ ŅźĻƌķ ƚƩ ƌğĬƚƩğƷƚƩǤ źƓķźĭğƷźƚƓƭ ƚŅ ĭƚƓƷğƒźƓğƷźƚƓ͵ A list of current SRVs can be fƚǒƓķ źƓ ƷŷĻ at/!͸ƭ wźƭƉΏ.ğƭĻķ Dǒidance for the Soil-Human Health Pathway. A list of current SLVs can be found in the Risk-Based Guidance for Evaluating the Soil Leaching Pathway. Both documents can be found at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/cleanup/riskbasedoc.html. For contaminants detected in soil that do not have established SRVs or SLVs, additional evaluation may be needed to determine whether the soil can be considered unregulated fill. Some detections of DRO in soil may stem from the presence of natural organic material or non- petroleum contaminants in the soil, such as coal tars or other material containing polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Evaluation of DRO data should take into consideration the history of the property, including the known or likely presence of a petroleum source, the presence (or lack thereof) of other contaminants in the soil sample, and the type of soil. If positive DRO results are related to non- petroleum contaminants, risk-based criteria for the non-petroleum contaminants should be applied. If necessary, laboratory analytical methods are available to help determine if the DRO is from natural organic material in the soil. tƌğĭĻƒĻƓƷ ƚŅ ǒƓƩĻŭǒƌğƷĻķ Ņźƌƌ To avoid potential problems or public concern stemming from the placement of unregulated fill in sensitive settings, the MPCA recommends the following Best Management Practices: Avoid placing unregulated fill at schools, playgrounds, daycares, and residential properties. Unregulated fill is most suitable for use at industrial or commercial properties. Avoid placing unregulated fill in gardens where food for human/animal ingestion will be grown. Observe a minimum ten-foot separation distance between unregulated fill and the water table. Avoid placing unregulated fill where contaminants may be transported by run-off to lakes, rivers, wetlands, or streams. {ğƒƦƌźƓŭ ķĻĭźƭźƚƓƭ Decisions of whether to sample soil for contamination prior to off-site reuse should be based on the history of the source area, the nature of the source material, the extent to which the soil has been previously characterized, and other factors that are part of a due diligence assessment of the environmental condition of the source property. If the soil originates from a site where known or potential sources of contamination are present, samples of the soil should be collected for field screening and laboratory analyses. Examples of sites where environmental due diligence may reveal known or potential sources of contamination include sites where contamination was previously identified as a result of regulatory action or voluntary Page 2 of 3 c-rem1-01 Council Packet Page Number 227 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 investigation, previously developed sites (commercial, industrial, recreational, or residential), agricultural properties, or land that may have been subject to dumping, spills, or historic filling activities. If no known or potential sources of contamination are identified during environmental due diligence and subsequent field observations, then sampling of excess soil for laboratory analyses is not necessary. {ğƒƦƌĻ ƷǤƦĻ ğƓķ ŅƩĻƨǒĻƓĭǤ When soil sampling is appropriate, the frequency and type of samples should be based on the potential sources of contamination, the depth, volume, and heterogeneity of the source material, and the availability of existing data. At a minimum, analytical parameters should include volatile organic compounds, PAHs, RCRA metals, DRO, and GRO. Other contaminants of concern should be included as appropriate, based on the history of the source location. Analytical data should be age-appropriate and representative of the source material. Some soils even lightly impacted by heavy metals have the potential to leach at concentrations at or above the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP) regulatory limit. As a rule-of-thumb, a TCLP analysis for RCRA metals should be conducted if the soil concentration of a metal is 20 times or greater the TCLP regulatory criteria. A typical frequency for the field screening of potentially contaminated soil using a PID is one measurement for every ten cubic yards of soil. For analytical samples, the stockpile sampling guidance ƦƩĻƭĻƓƷĻķ źƓ {ĻĭƷźƚƓ А͵Ќ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ at/!͸ƭ {źƷĻ /ŷğƩğĭterization and Sampling Document can be used as a frame of reference for the appropriate sampling frequency based on soil volume: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/cleanup/pubs/sitechar.pdf . Soil sampling guidelines for the Petroleum Remediation Program are presented in guidance Document 4-04: http://www.pca.state.mn.us/publications/c-prp4-04.pdf. Flexibility in the number of samples may be warranted, depending on the site-specific circumstances. Sound professional judgment, taking into account all of the factors discussed above, should be used when developing a sampling plan to determine whether excess soil meets the criteria for unregulated fill. LƒƦƌĻƒĻƓƷğƷźƚƓ All parties are encouraged to use the best management practices described herein in order to make good decisions about the off-site reuse of unregulated fill. It is the responsibility of the property owners and other parties engaged in development and construction activities to make sure that their activities include appropriate environmental due diligence and that excess soil and other materials generated by these activities are managed in an environmentally responsible manner. Note that some local units of government, including Dakota County, may have local ordinances which restrict the off-site reuse of unregulated fill within their boundaries. Parties seeking to import unregulated fill should check with local regulators to determine if such ordinances are in effect in their project area. Nothing in this guidance excuses anyone from compliance with any law, rule, or other legal obligation (including any environmental covenant) that applies to any development or construction activity, including the generation, management, transport, and reuse of excess soil. CƚƩ ƒƚƩĻ źƓŅƚƩƒğƷźƚƓ Questions about the information presented above can be directed to the MPCA at 651-296-6300 or 1-800-657-3864. Page 3 of 3 c-rem1-01 Council Packet Page Number 228 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Appendix D Council Packet Page Number 229 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 230 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 231 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 232 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 233 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Council Packet Page Number 234 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 www.pca.state.mn.us Excavation of petroleum-contaminated soil and tank removal sampling Petroleum Remediation Program This document describes the requirements for excavating petroleum-contaminated soil and for sampling during regulated petroleum tank removal when a release has occurred. General soil excavation requirements are provided as well as requirements for specific circumstances such as tank removal and installation. Sampling is required following tank removal to quantify residual contaminant levels and to determine whether further investigation is needed. Release Reporting Detection of any amount of contamination in soil or groundwater must be reported to the Minnesota Duty Officer, even if contaminant levels are lower than the action levels stated below. Emergency Conditions If there was a recent release, or there are vapor impacts, drinking water impacts, surface water impacts, free product, or a potentially unstable condition, immediately contact the MinnesotaDuty Officer. Additional Information Additional guidance on release reporting, release response, and emergency conditions is found in Reporting of Petroleum Releases, Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid Management Strategy, Recent Releases at Petroleum Tank Sites,and the Petroleum Remediation Program General Policy. I.General excavation requirements A.Excavation prior to a limited site investigation Contaminated soil may be excavated prior to completing a limited site investigation (LSI) in the situations listedbelow. Otherwise, contaminated soil should remain in place until an LSI has been completed. Identifying receptors, defining the extent and magnitude of contamination, and evaluating risk during the LSI will determine if excavation is appropriate. 1.All contaminated soil meeting any of the field screening criteria listed in Table 1 can be excavated within a maximum of 200 cubic yards, providing that groundwater is not impacted or likely to become impacted. See subsection B below for more details. Prior Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) approval is required to excavate more than 200 cubic yards of soil. Minnesota Pollution Control AgencyMarch 2017 | c-prp3-01 Available in alternative formats 651-296-6300 |800-657-3864 or use your preferred relay service| Info.pca@state.mn.us Council Packet Page Number 235 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Table 1. Field screening criteria Soil headspace screening level Petroleum product(ppmv*)Visual evidencePetroleum sheen test Gasoline, ethanol-blended fuel, and 40 or above aviation gasoline Visual evidence of Positive sheen test petroleum staining result Diesel fuel, fuel oil, used or waste oils, 10 or above jet fuel, kerosene *ppmv (parts per million by volume) 2.Petroleum-saturated or grossly contaminated soil is accessible such as during tank removal or installation. Excavation Limits Excavate up to 200 cubic yards of contaminated soil that is The total excavation volume allowed petroleum saturated or grossly contaminated.Use the under subsections 1 and 2, applied petroleum sheen test to determine if soil is petroleum separately or in combination, cannot saturated. Use soil headspace screening with a exceed 200 cubic yards without prior photoionization detector (PID) to determine if soil is grossly MPCA approval. This limit is not contaminated. Soil with PID readings of 200 parts per applicable to subsections 3, 4, or 5, million by volume (ppmv) or above is considered grossly where site-specific circumstances contaminated. Soil headspace screening and petroleum dictate excavation volume. sheen test procedures are described in Soil Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures. In certainsituations, the site-specific risk scenario may justify excavating more than 200 cubic yards. Please contact the MPCA foƩ ğƦƦƩƚǝğƌ Ʒƚ ĻǣĭĻĻķ ƷŷĻ ЋЉЉΑĭǒĬźĭ ǤğƩķ ƌźƒźƷ͵ 3.A recent release has occurred. Quick removal of contamination can prevent the expansion of a contaminant plume. See Recent Releases at Petroleum Tank Sites for more information. 4.An obvious emergency condition exists where soil excavation is an appropriate interim corrective action. Refer to the Petroleum Remediation Program General Policy for more information on emergency conditions, and contact the MPCA for site-specific guidance. 5.Excavation is necessary to facilitate tank system installations (see Section II). B.Situations requiring a limited site investigation An LSI is necessary if any of the following situations exist: 1.Contamination cannot be addressed by excavation of 200 cubic yards or less of soil. 2.Groundwater is present in the excavation and has been in contact with either petroleum product or petroleum-contaminated soil, or groundwater contamination is suspected. 3.Contamination intercepts a seasonally high water table (indicated by mottling on the excavation sidewalls) or bedrock. 4.Other impacts are known or suspected (e.g., discharge of contaminated water to surface waters or sewers, vapor impacts to buildings or utilities, etc.). 5.Residual soil contaminationmeets any of the field screening criteria in Table 1 or has a soil analytical result greater than 100 mg/kg gasoline range organics (GRO) or diesel range organics (DRO). 6.Contaminated groundwater is encountered in post-excavation soil borings (see subsection C below). March 2017 | c-prp3-01 Page 2of 10 Council Packet Page Number 236 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 C. Post-excavation soil borings A soil boring(s) is necessary at sites with sandy or silty sand soil (Unified Soil Classification System/American Society for Testing Materials) and where the water table is within 25 feet of the ground surface. The purpose of this boring(s) is to determine whether or not an LSI is necessary. Advance a soil boring directly through each suspected source area (e.g., former tank locations, dispensers, and piping runs) in the following situations: a. Soil contamination from a suspected source area excavation is between 1 and 100 mg/kg GRO/DRO; or b. Visual or other evidence of contamination remains in a suspected source area. Collect and analyze soil samples following the procedures and analytical requirements described in Soil Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures. Collect and analyze groundwater samples following the procedures and analytical requirements described in Groundwater Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures. If the boring(s) encounters contaminated groundwater, an LSI is necessary. If the boring(s) encounters historical contamination that does not intersect the water table and the groundwater sample is not contaminated, an LSI may not be necessary depending on the likelihood of groundwater becoming contaminated. D. Returning contaminated soil to the excavation basin When an LSI is necessary, return contaminated soil to the excavation basin except petroleum-saturated or grossly contaminated soil as described in subsection A.2 above. E. Field screening during excavations All soil samples collected for field screening must be labeled so as to designate the sample type, sample location, and sample depth (see below). All excavation soil sample locations must be shown on a map of the excavation. Field screening includes completing soil headspace screening with a PID and the petroleum sheen test as described in Soil Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures. As excavation proceeds, collect and field screen soil samples frequently, enough to verify the need for soil removal (at least one sample for each 10 cubic yards of soil removed). Label removed samples with the prefix "R", the sample ID, and the sample depth. Accurately show the sample locations on a scaled map. The field technician should carefully document successive PID readings vertically below the source of release, indicating the location and depth of each sample on a map of the excavation. Exampleʹ wΏЊΛЋ͸ΜͲ wΏЊΛЍ͸ΜͲ wΏЊΛЏ͸ΜͲ wΏЋΛЍ͸ΜͲ ĻƷĭ͵ bƚƷĻʹ wΏЊ ƭğƒƦƌĻƭ ğƩĻ ŅƩƚƒ ƷŷĻ ƭğƒĻ ƌƚĭğƷźƚƓ but successively deeper. Following excavation, screen soil samples from the bottom and sidewalls of the excavation, along removed piping runs, and beneath removed dispensers. Collect and label field screening sidewall and bottom samples as discussed in subsection F below. F. Sampling requirements following soil removal After the excavation is complete but before returning any soil to the excavation basin, collect soil samples for laboratory analysis to document the contamination remaining in place. Also, in order to document the contamination removed, stockpile soil samples must be collected (see subsection G.2 below). Label soil samples collected for laboratory analysis according to the sample type, location, and depth (see below). All soil sample locations must be shown on a map of the excavation. The map must show site features and the two- dimensional extent of the final excavation footprint at the ground surface, along with final excavation depth contours using a contour interval of 1 to 2 feet. Collect and analyze soil samples following the procedures and analytical requirements described in Soil Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures according to the following schedule: 1. Sidewall samples. Remove at least one foot of exposed soil prior to collection to ensure collecting a representative sample. Collect sidewall samples at a rate of one sample per 25 linear feet of sidewall; however, a minimum of four sidewall samples (i.e., one from each side) must be collected to document March 2017 | c-prp3-01 Page 3 of 10 Council Packet Page Number 237 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 the contaminant levels remaining in place. Collect samples at the depth interval where the highest ĭƚƓƷğƒźƓğƓƷ ƌĻǝĻƌ Ǟğƭ ķĻƷĻĭƷĻķ źƓ ƷŷĻ ƩĻƒƚǝĻķ ƭƚźƌ Λź͵Ļ͵Ͳ ͻwͼ ƭğƒƦƌĻƭΜͲ ƷǤƦźĭğƌƌǤ ƓĻğƩ ƷŷĻ ĬƚƷƷƚƒ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ ĻǣĭğǝğƷźƚƓ ĬğƭźƓ͵ \[ğĬĻƌ ƭźķĻǞğƌƌ ƭğƒƦƌĻƭ ǞźƷŷ ƷŷĻ ƦƩĻŅźǣ ͻ{ͼͲ ƷŷĻ ƭğƒƦƌĻ L5Ͳ ğƓķ ƷŷĻ ƭğƒƦƌĻ ķĻƦƷŷ͵ Accurately show the sample locations on a scaled map. Exampleʹ {ΏЊΛЏ͸ΜͲ {ΏЋΛБ͸ΜͲ {ΏЌΛЎ͸ΜͲ ĻƷĭ͵ 2. Bottom samples. Remove at least one foot of exposed soil prior to collection to ensure collecting a representative sample. Collect bottom samples from the bottom of the excavation basin at a rate of one bottom sample per 100 square feet of bottom area and beneath removed dispensers. Label bottom ƭğƒƦƌĻƭ ǞźƷŷ ƷŷĻ ƦƩĻŅźǣ ͻ.ͼͲ ƷŷĻ ƭğƒƦƌĻ L5Ͳ ğƓķ ƷŷĻ ƭğƒƦƌĻ ķĻƦƷŷ͵ !ĭĭǒƩğƷĻƌǤ ƭŷƚǞ ƷŷĻ ƭğƒƦƌĻ ƌƚĭğƷźƚƓƭ on a scaled map. Exampleʹ .ΏЊΛА͸ΜͲ .ΏЋΛЊЍ͸ΜͲ .ΏЌΛЊЉ͸ΜͲ ĻƷĭ͵ Note: Laboratory analysis to document remaining contamination is not generally required after removing contaminated surface soil as a corrective action (see Section IV). 3. Groundwater samples. When groundwater is encountered in an excavation basin, collect one sample per basin to assess groundwater contamination. If obvious evidence of contaminated groundwater exists such as visible or measureable petroleum product on the water, including petroleum sheen, a sample is not required. Collect and analyze groundwater samples following the procedures and analytical requirements described in Groundwater Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures. G. Management of petroleum-contaminated soil after excavation 1. Storage Stockpile contaminated soil on an impervious surface or on minimum 40-mil plastic. Cover the stockpile at the end of each day with minimum 6-mil reinforced plastic or 10-mil unreinforced plastic. Securely anchor the stockpile cover with clean soil or other suitable material. Remember to obtain local government and MPCA approval prior to moving contaminated soil for off-site storage. Storage at land treatment sites must be in accordance with Minn. R. 7037.0810 . Improper storage of contaminated soil may cause an additional release to the environment and result in a reduction in Petrofund reimbursement. 2. Stockpile sampling Collect and analyze soil samples from representative portions of the stockpile following the procedures and analytical requirements described in Soil Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures. Label stockpile samples with the prefix "SP" and the sample ID. Example: SP-1, SP-2, etc. Note: If less than 10 cubic yards of contaminated soil is removed for treatment, soil samples will not normally be necessary if the soil will be land treated, unless the soil is a potential hazardous waste as described in Soil Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures. 3. Soil treatment and disposal Petroleum-contaminated soil may be land treated, composted, thermally treated, or disposed of at a sanitary landfill. There are specific documents detailing the requirements for land treatment and composting. Contact the MPCA is you wish to thermally treat contaminated soil. Soil disposal at a landfill źƭ ƩĻŭǒƌğƷĻķ ĬǤ ƷŷĻ at/!͸ƭ Solid Waste Program. Contact the landfill to obtain soil disposal requirements. See Thin Spreading Small Quantities of Petroleum-Contaminated Soil as a treatment option for soil volumes less than 10 cubic yards. H. Excavation report Complete a General Excavation Report in all cases where petroleum contamination is encountered during an excavation completed prior to an LSI, even if no soil is removed for off-site treatment. If an LSI is not being completed, promptly submit the General Excavation Report for MPCA review. If an LSI is being completed, include the General Excavation Report as an appendix in the Investigation Report. The reporting deadline is March 2017 | c-prp3-01 Page 4 of 10 Council Packet Page Number 238 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 10 months from the date the MPCA issues a Petroleum Storage Tank Release Investigation and Corrective Action letter. The MPCA will establish a shorter deadline for high-priority sites. I. Endangering structures Do not allow excavations to endanger structures, including buildings, roads, utility lines, etc. Excavations must comply with Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards. II. Excavation during tank system removals or installations A. Planning ahead It is in your best interest to obtain at least two bids on the work before you hire a contractor. By doing this, you will have met the Petrofund bidding requirement should contaminated soil be encountered. Bid forms are available from the Department of Commerce , or call 651-539-1515 (800-638-0418). Note: Regulated underground storage tanks (USTs) must be removed by an MPCA-certified contractor. Prior to any tank work, plan ahead for storage and treatment of contaminated soil (see Section I.G). Remember to obtain local government and MPCA approval prior to moving contaminated soil for off-site storage. Arrange for an environmental consultant with appropriate equipment to field screen soil and collect soil samples for laboratory analysis during and after excavation as described in Sections I and III. B. Installation or removal of underground storage tanks Refer to Appendix A for a flowchart on managing petroleum-contaminated soil during UST removals or installations. 1. Excavation when new UST systems are being installed and: a. The site is a closed petroleum release site. If the site is a closed release site, refer to Assessment of Petroleum Contamination at Closed Sites. b. The site is an open petroleum release site or contamination is discovered during installation. Remove and separate contaminated soil meeting any of the field screening criteria in Table 1, up to the volume allowed by Table 2. Screen soil from around any removed tanks, piping, or dispensers. If excavation removed all contaminated soil meeting the criteria in Table 1 and groundwater is not likely to be impacted, collect sidewall and bottom samples from the tank basin, piping, and dispenser areas. Analyze soil samples following the procedures and analytical requirements described in Soil Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures. If groundwater is likely to be impacted or test pits indicate the volume of contaminated soil remaining after removing the allowable volume based on Table 2 exceeds 200 cubic yards, an LSI is necessary. Do not remove additional soil beyond the volume allowed for the tank installation at this phase of work, unless it is petroleum saturated or grossly contaminated as described in Section I.A.2. March 2017 | c-prp3-01 Page 5 of 10 Council Packet Page Number 239 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Table 2. Allowable contaminated soil removal during new UST installation Table 2A Table 2B For each tank For each tank to be New tank size to be installed add: Old tank size removed subtract: (gallons) (cubic yards) (gallons) (cubic yards) 550 30 550 3 1,000 40 1,000 5 2,000 70 2,000 10 3,000 90 3,000 15 4,000 110 4,000 20 5,000 130 5,000 25 6,000 140 6,000 30 8,000 170 8,000 40 10,000 210 10,000 50 12,000 240 12,000 60 15,000 260 15,000 75 20,000 320 20,000 100 25,000 400 25,000 125 Note: For new pipe trenching allow one-third (0.33) cubic yard for every one (1) linear foot of contaminated trench. Example 1: Two 10,000-gallon tanks are to be installed in the old tank basin, where one 4,000-gallon tank and one 6,000-gallon tank will be removed. (210 + 210) - (20 + 30) = 370 Up to 370 cubic yards of contaminated soil may be removed. Example 2: Two 10,000-gallon tanks are to be installed in the old tank basin, where one 4,000-gallon tank and one 6,000-gallon tank will be removed. Test pits indicate the removal of an additional 130 cubic yards of petroleum-contaminated soil would remove all the soil contamination meeting the field screening criteria in Table 1 and groundwater impacts are not likely. (210 + 210) - (20 + 30) + 130 = 500 Up to 500 cubic yards of contaminated soil may be removed. 2. Excavation when USTs are removed but new tank installation will not occur If the site is a closed petroleum release site, refer to Assessment of Petroleum Contamination at Closed Sites. If the site is an open release site or a newly discovered release, refer to Section I of this document. C. Excavation when upgrading, installing, or removing aboveground storage tanks Excavation requirements at AST sites are similar to those for UST sites. The main difference is that contaminated surface soil at AST sites often occurs at loading and transfer areas, valve locations, piping runs, and from tank releases. Contaminated surface soil can pose a risk to surface water, groundwater, and direct human contact and requires corrective action. Except for the site-specific situations listed in Section I.A and subsection 1 below, contaminated soil should remain in place until an LSI has been completed. For additional guidance, refer to Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about Investigation and Remediation of Above-Ground Storage Tank Facilities. 1. Excavation when upgrading or installing AST systems March 2017 | c-prp3-01 Page 6 of 10 Council Packet Page Number 240 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 If contaminated surface soil (meeting field-screeningcriteria in Table 1) is encountered during an AST upgrade or new system installation, you may remove up to two (2) feet of contaminated soil in the following areas: a.below the footprint of the new AST containment berm b.below piping, dispenser areas, and loading and transfer areas If the contaminated soil encountered appears to pose a human or environmental risk and the upgrade or installation will make the soil inaccessible, additional removal beyond the limits stated above may be appropriate prior to an LSI. Obtain prior MPCA approval before excavating beyond the stated limits. If contaminated surface soil exists in areas of the site other than those listed above, removal or other corrective actions will probably be necessary but should wait until an LSI has been conducted. Soil removal prior to an LSI may be conducted if excavating up to 200 cubic yards completely addresses the release and eliminates the need for an investigation at the site, as described in Section I.A.1. Contaminated Surface Soil Excavating contaminated surface soil when upgrading or installingAST systems should not be confused with excavating contaminated surface soil when completed as a corrective action (Section IV). Excavation during an upgrade or installation occurs before an LSI, with removal criteria based solely on field evidence (Table1). When addressing a release by excavation alone during an AST upgrade or install (Section I.A.1), field screening and soil sampling are required as described in Section I. Contaminated soil must be managed in accordance with Section I.G. 2.Excavation at the time of AST decommissioning Refer to Section I to determine if excavation alone will adequately address the release or if an LSI will be required. III.Soil sampling requirements during tank or tank system component removal The following requirements apply when there is evidence of a release from a regulated tank system. For sampling requirements when there is no evidence of a release, refer to Site Assessment for Underground Storage Tanks With No Apparent Contamination and Out-of-Service Above-Ground Storage Tank Systems. The requirements below are in addition to the sampling requirements described in Section I.F, which include excavation sidewall and bottom sampling. 5­±¤¦´« ³¤£ 4 ­ª² The MPCA strongly encourages owners of unregulated petroleum tanks to follow the sampling requirements described in this section when there is evidence of a release at the time of removal. Soil sample results may be used to justify not requiring a costlier site investigation when a release has occurred. Petroleum release reporting requirements apply to all tanks regardless of their regulation status. A.Sample collection requirements Collect soil samples for soil analysis according to the requirements in Tables 3 and 4. Collect samples following the methods and procedures described in Soil Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures. Note: AST sampling is required in any circumstance when a release has occurred or visible contamination is present, including tank facility upgrades and tank decommissioning. March 2017 | c-prp3-01 Page 7of 10 Council Packet Page Number 241 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Table 3. Underground storage tank sampling requirements Sample location Sampling specifics Tanks One tank, any size, in an individual tank basin two samples; one sample directly below each end of the tank More than one tank, less than 10,000 gallons, in a single tank basin one sample directly below the center of each tank More than one tank, 10,000 gallons or larger, in a single tank basin two samples; one sample directly below each end of each tank Tank system components Dispensers one sample below each removed dispenser one sample below each suspected point of release, or every 20 feet if Leaking pipes the release point is unknown Collect any additional samples needed to adequately characterize the excavation(s) as described in Section I.E. Table 4. Aboveground storage tank sampling requirements Sample location Number of samples Sampling specifics Tanks (type and size) Vertical tank up to 15-foot diameter one sample 2 feet below the center of the tank divide tank bottom surface area in square feet Vertical tank greater than 15-foot by 113 square feet and round to the nearest 2 feet below the tank, evenly diameter whole number (see example below*) spaced Horizontal tank up to 10,000 gallons one sample 2 feet below the center of tank Horizontal tank greater than 10,000 gallons two samples 2 feet below each end of the tank Ϋ9ǣğƒƦƌĻʹ 27-foot diameter tank: 573/113 = 5.07. Round to the nearest whole number, 5. Five soil samples are required. Tank system components one sample in each area if there is more than Transfer area(s) one transfer area 2 feet below the loading rack one sample below each suspected point of release, or every 20 feet if the release point is 1 Leaking pipesunknown 2 feet below the sampling location submit sample from the most Visible contamination one sample from each distinct stained area heavily stained soil Collect any additional samples needed to adequately characterize the release(s). 1 Field screen soil two feet below the following areas: pipefittings, joints, and any other area where there is evidence of a suspected release from the piping. B. Analytical requirements Analyze soil samples following the procedures and analytical requirements described in Soil Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures. All analytical requirements must be met, including volatile organic compounds (VOCs), as well as metals and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) when applicable to the product type. March 2017 | c-prp3-01 Page 8 of 10 Council Packet Page Number 242 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 IV. Excavation as corrective action after a limited site investigation Soil excavation can be an appropriate corrective action to address actual or potential impacts where risks are high (e.g., drinking water or surface water impact, vapor intrusion, or direct human contact). Design, implementation, and reporting of soil excavation as a corrective action are described in Corrective Action Design and Implementation. When soil is excavated as a corrective action after a limited site investigation, the results are reported in a Corrective Action Excavation Report. Two scenarios for excavation as corrective action following a limited site investigation include: excavation of a light non-aqueous phase liquid (LNAPL) body and excavation of contaminated surface soil. The general excavation requirements for field screening, soil sampling, and management of petroleum-contaminated soil described in Section I are typically applied to these two scenarios with exceptions noted below. A. Excavation of an LNAPL body Excavation of an LNAPL body can be a cost-effective method for reducing or eliminating long-term risks if the LNAPL body is accessible given depth, soil types, groundwater occurrence, and the absence of obstructions such as buildings or utilities. Excavation of the LNAPL body can result in nearly complete removal of the contaminant source mass and, depending on the site-specific risk scenario, subsequent site closure. Source removal by excavation should be considered as an option when remediation is necessary. Field screen overburden soil as it is removed to assure that no portion of it is contaminated with LNAPL. In addition, screen soil near the lateral and vertical extents of the LNAPL body to confirm the final excavation extent. Screening can be accomplished using direct evidence of LNAPL, including visual observation for staining and sheen and/or use of the petroleum sheen test. Soil headspace screening may be used to pre- screen soil, but positive detections should not be considered sufficient evidence of LNAPL impacts. If soil headspace is used to pre-screen soil, LNAPL impacts should be confirmed using the other, more direct methods. The MPCA will consider the use of other screening methods (e.g., ultraviolet black box, mobile laboratory) on a case-by-case basis. Contact the MPCA for approval to excavate beyond the approved extent or to exceed the approved volume. Remove and segregate all LNAPL-impacted soil for treatment or disposal. Collect final excavation sidewall and bottom samples for laboratory analysis as described in Section I unless the excavation is being completed solely to address LNAPL migration risk. Re-use clean overburden soil to backfill the interval from which it was originally removed and import clean fill to backfill the interval from which the targeted LNAPL-impacted soil was removed. If the LNAPL body is present in fine-grained soil, imported fill should consist of fine-grained soil. See Corrective Action Design and Implementation for additional considerations regarding LNAPL body excavation design and implementation. B. Excavation of contaminated surface soil Contaminated surface soil is excavated following an approved corrective action design based on petroleum sheen test and soil analytical results. Field screening during surface soil excavation is generally limited to the petroleum sheen test. Screen soil at the edges of the approved excavation extent using the sheen test to determine if additional excavation is necessary. Contact the MPCA for approval to excavate beyond the approved extent or to exceed the approved volume. Post-excavation soil sampling is not required to document contamination remaining in place after a surface soil excavation. Sampling of the removed soil, however, may be required prior to soil treatment or disposal approval. Backfill excavated areas with clean fill to restore the site to its original surface grade. See Risk Evaluation and Site Management Decision at Petroleum Release Sites for additional information regarding the contaminated surface soil pathway. Refer to Soil and Groundwater Assessments Performed During Site Investigations for information on completing a surface soil assessment. March 2017 | c-prp3-01 Page 9 of 10 Council Packet Page Number 243 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Appendix A.UST removal/installation flowchart March 2017 | c-prp3-01 Page 10of 10 Council Packet Page Number 244 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Remediation and Environmental Analysis and Outcomes Divisions Minnesota Pollution Control Agency September2016 Council Packet Page Number 245 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Authors Principal Author Other author Other author Contributors/acknowledgements Name Name Editing and graphicdesignphicdesign PIO staff The MPCA is reducing printing and mailing costs ng and mailing costs by using tby using the Internet to distribute reports and he information to wider audience. Visit our website for more information.Visit our website for mor MPCA reports are printed on 100%post-consumer post-consumerrecycled content paper manufactured without re chlorine or chlorine derivatives. Graphic design staff Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 520 Lafayette RoadNorth | Saint Paul, MN 55155-4194 | 651-296-6300| 800-657-3864 |Or use your preferred relay service.|Info.pca@state.mn.us This report is available in alternative formats upon request, and online at www.pca.state.mn.us. Document number:c-r1-05 Council Packet Page Number 246 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Contents 1.0 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................1 2.0 Land use categories .................................................................................................................1 3.0 Derivation of soil reference values ........................................................................................ 10 3.1 Methodology ...................................................................................................................................... 10 3.1.1 Cancer SRV methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 11 3.1.2 Noncancer chronic SRV methodology .................................................................................................................... 12 3.1.3 Noncancer acute SRV methodology ....................................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Exposure parameters ......................................................................................................................... 13 3.2.1 Exposure duration .................................................................................................................................................. 13 3.2.2 Exposure frequency ................................................................................................................................................. 13 3.2.3 Body weight ............................................................................................................................................................ 14 3.2.4 Ingestion rate .......................................................................................................................................................... 14 3.2.5 Surface area ............................................................................................................................................................ 15 3.2.6 Adherence factor .................................................................................................................................................... 15 3.2.7 Volatilization factor ................................................................................................................................................ 15 3.2.8 Particulate emission factor ..................................................................................................................................... 16 3.3 Toxicity values .................................................................................................................................... 16 3.3.1 Toxicity value hierarchy .......................................................................................................................................... 17 3.3.2 Acute toxicity values ............................................................................................................................................... 17 3.3.3 Benzo\[a\]Pyrene equivalents ................................................................................................................................... 18 3.3.4 2,3,7,8 - Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin equivalents ................................................................................................. 19 3.4 Chemical specific parameters ............................................................................................................ 19 4.0 wźƭƉ ĻǝğƌǒğƷźƚƓ Α aźƓźƒǒƒ ƩĻƨǒźƩĻƒĻƓƷƭ ͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵ ЋЊ 4.1 Identify LUC and contaminants of potential concern ........................................................................ 21 4.2 Exposure pathways and receptors ..................................................................................................... 21 4.3 Risk evaluation conceptual site model ............................................................................................... 22 4.4 Exposure area/point and exposure concentrations ........................................................................... 22 4.5 Sampling ............................................................................................................................................. 22 4.6 Risk characterization .......................................................................................................................... 24 4.7 Uncertainty......................................................................................................................................... 26 4.8 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................................... 26 5.0 References ............................................................................................................................ 27 Appendix A: Derivation of acute RfDs ............................................................................................... 29 A.1 Arsenic ................................................................................................................................................ 29 A.2 Barium ................................................................................................................................................ 29 A.3 Cadmium ............................................................................................................................................ 30 Council Packet Page Number 247 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 A.4 Copper ................................................................................................................................................ 30 A.5 Cyanide ............................................................................................................................................... 31 A.6 Fluoride .............................................................................................................................................. 32 A.7 Nickel .................................................................................................................................................. 33 A.8 Pentachlorophenol ............................................................................................................................. 33 A.9 Phenol ................................................................................................................................................ 34 !ƦƦĻƓķźǣ .ʹ {źƷĻ ƭƦĻĭźŅźĭ ƩźƭƉ ğƭƭĻƭƭƒĻƓƷ Α aźƓźƒǒƒ ƩĻƨǒźƩĻƒĻƓƷƭ ͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵͵ ЌЎ B.1 Identify LUC and contaminants of potential concern ........................................................................ 35 B.2 Exposure pathways and receptors ..................................................................................................... 35 B.3 Risk assessment conceptual site model ............................................................................................. 36 B.4 Exposure area/Point and exposure concentrations ........................................................................... 36 B.5 Sampling ............................................................................................................................................. 37 B.6 Risk characterization .......................................................................................................................... 39 Additive risks ........................................................................................................................................................................ 46 B.7 Uncertainty ............................................................................................................................................................. 46 B.8 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................. 46 Council Packet Page Number 248 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Acronyms 95 UCL 95% Upper Confidence Level of the Mean ADAF Age Dependent Adjustment Factor ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry B\[a\]P Benzo\[a\]pyrene BMD Benchmark Dose BTV Background Threshold Value CAEPA California Environmental Protection Agency CDC Centers for Disease Control COC Contaminant of Concern COPC Contaminant of Potential Concern cPAH Carcinogenic Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Csat Soil Saturation Limit CSF Cancer Slope Factor CSM Conceptual Site Model EAO Environmental Analysis and Outcomes ELCR Excess Lifetime Cancer Risk EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPA's SSG Environmental Protection Agency's Soil Screening Guidance HBV Health Based Value HEAST Health Effects Assessment Summary HI Hazard Index HQ Hazard Quotient HRL Health Risk Limits IRIS Integrated Risk Information System ISV Intrusion Screening Value IUR Inhalation Unit Risk LOAEL Lowest Observed Adverse Effect Level MERLA Minnesota Environmental Response and Liability Act MDH Minnesota Department of Health MOA Mode of Action MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency MRL Minimum Risk Limits NOAEL No Observed Adverse Effect Level Council Packet Page Number 249 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon PEF Potency Equivalency Factor PF Particulate Emission Factor PPRTV Provisional Peer Reviewed Toxicity Values Q/C Inverse Mean Concentration at the Center of a Source QA/QC Quality Assurance/Quality Control RAA Risk Assessment Advice RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RDA Recommended Daily Allowance RfC Reference Concentration RfD Reference Dose RME Reasonable Maximum Exposure RPF Relative Potency Factor RSL Regional Screening Level LUC Land Use Category SLV Soil Leaching Value SRV Soil Reference Value SVOC Semi-Volatile Organic Compound TCDD 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin TEF Toxicity Equivalency Factors UF Uncertainty Factor VF Volatilization Factor VIC Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup VOC Volatile Organic Compound WHO World Health Organization Council Packet Page Number 250 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 1.0 Introduction This technical support document (TSD) provides the basis for derivation of the Soil Reference Values (SRVs) and lists the risk evaluation concepts that were considered. It is a foundation document intended to be used by the Minnesota Pollution Control AgĻƓĭǤ͸ƭ Λat/!Μ ƚƌǒƓƷğƩǤ źƓǝĻƭƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ğƓķ /ƌĻğƓǒƦ (VIC), Superfund and Resource Conservation and RecoǝĻƩǤ !ĭƷ Λw/w!Μ ƦƩƚŭƩğƒƭ ΛğĬĬƩĻǝźğƷĻķ ğƭ ͻa9w\[! ğƓķ w/w! ƦƩƚŭƩğƒƭͼ źƓ Ʒŷźƭ ŭǒźķğƓce) to create program specific guidance for using SRVs in a soil pathway investigation. It may also be used by other programs or entities to understand how the SRVs were derived and what items should be included in a soil pathway investigation that uses the SRVs. It is ƓƚƷ źƓƷĻƓķĻķ Ʒƚ ĬĻ ğƓǤ ƦƩƚŭƩğƒ͸ƭ ƭƦĻĭźŅźĭ ƭƚźƌ pathway investigation guidance. Program specific guidance should be followed to conduct a soil pathway investigation. SRVs are a screening tool that may be used to evaluate potential human health risks from soil exposure. They were derived based on EPA Superfund methodƚƌƚŭǤ Ʒƚ ĬĻ ǒƭĻķ ĬǤ at/!͸ƭ a9w\[! ğƓķ w/w! programs. Exposure assumptions based on specific land use categories (LUC) depicting a specific soil land use scenario and set of receptors are used. SRVs are not appropriate to use as a screening tool in other situations unless a thorough evaluation has been conducted to ensure their applicability. SRVs applicable to most sites in Minnesota were derived to be used as screening values. Exceedance of a SRV indicates further investigation should be conducted to determine if there is an actual risk present on site. In some cases, it may be appropriate to use site specific SRVs as clean up values. Refer to program specific guidanc e to determine appropriate clean up values. SRVs do not assess risks associated with soil contaminants leaching into groundwater or intrusion of soil contaminant vapors into buildings. Risks associated with these pathways are evaluated using other risk based values: Soil Leaching Values (SLVs) and Intrusion Screening Values (ISVs). This guidance includes a description of the LUCs, the methodology and exposure assumptions used to derive SRVs and recommendations on using SRVs to conduct risk evaluations and site specific risk assessments. It is not intended to replace program specific soil investigation guidance. This guidance is intended to be used in conjunction with the SRV Spreadsheet. 2.0 Land use categories To evaluate potential risks at remediation sites from soil contaminants, land use categories (LUC) have been developed depicting specific scenarios and receptors. LUCs characterize two things: 1) LUC specific exposure parameters used to derive LUC specific SRVs and 2) accessible and potentially accessible zone depths that a human receptor is expected to access. LUCs are summarized in Table 1 and depicted in Figures 1 through 6. There are two clauses that apply to all of the LUCs explained below: Impervious Surface and Utility Corridor. There are two sets of LUC SRVs: Residential/Recreational and Commercial/Industrial. Although the Residential/Recreational LUC has three sub categories: Single Family Homes, Multi-Family Housing and Recreational, all three use the same Residential/Recreational SRVs. Although the LUCs are intended to be appropriate to use at the majority of remediation sites, there may be cases where a project team may need to deviate from the maximum depths listed based on site specific characteristics, such as they type and extent of contamination present or a site used in a way that does not fit into the typical LUCs. In these cases, the MPCA project team may use professional judgment to determine an appropriate maximum depth. The SRV TSD is not intended to be used as DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 1 Council Packet Page Number 251 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 program specific guidance. The inclusion of the LUCs in the SRV TSD is to establish the exposure scenarios used to derive SRVs for each LUC and describe the rationale for the maximum depths. Please refer to program specific guidance to determine how to perform a soil investigation for that specific program, including how SRVs will be used. Appropriate institutional controls will be included in program specific guidance. Impervious surface The impervious surface clause refers to soil beneath a newly constructed impervious surface, defined as pavements (example: roads, parking lots, sidewalks, driveways, trails) or basements made of an impervious surface, such as asphalt, concrete, stone or brick (Figure 1). Two feet of soil that does not exceed either 1) the surrounding LUC SRVs or 2) program determined clean up values should be placed under all newly constructed impervious surfaces except where an impervious surfaces already exists. Two feet of soil that either does not exceed 1) the surrounding LUC SRVs or 2) program determined clean up values should also be placed under newly constructed buildings. MPCA project teams have the right to require 2 feet or greater depths of soil that does not exceed LUC SRVs or program determined clean up values when site specific conditions require it to ensure potential receptors are adequately protected. Utility corridor Soil used to backfill a utility corridor during development shall not exceed 1) the SRVs for the planned LUC or 2) clean up levels established by a specific program (Figure 2). DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 2 Council Packet Page Number 252 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Depth Potentially Accessible Zone Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 4 feet 12 feet 4 feet 12 feet 4 feet 12 feet 4 feet 12 feet Accessible Zone Depth or ; ; ch disturb zone the 2 feet would start from the ; for an ; -family 2 feet ; public or ; ; local, state ; schools ; child care centers; * Ͳ ğƓķ ͻƚƷŷĻƩ ğƩĻğƭͼ Ώ utilities; rail storage; -term care facilities; Examples Lawns surrounding single family homes Lawns, yards, or landscaping surrounding multihousinglongcorrectional housinghospitalschurchesWildlife areasnational forestsprivate erodible trailsplaygrounds; sports fields; beaches; campgrounds Maximum soil deptherodible trails is measured from the trail disturb zone determined by trail use Lawns, yards, or landscaping surrounding warehousespublic freight storagemanufacturing facilitiesrestaurants, shopping malls, retail stores, hotels contact 3 at significant expected to significant digging - used by all ages, - used by adult worker with significant digging For example, if an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) trail has a 6 in Exposure Used by all agesReceptors are expected to contact soil Used by all agesReceptors are expected to contact soil with somewhdiggingUsed by all agesReceptors are soil with less Commercial children are not expected to spend a significant amounts of time at siteIndustrial Receptors are expected to contact soil with less significant digging -Family Housing Other Areas LU Sub-Category Figure 4) S Single Family Homes(Figure 3)Multiand(Recreational(Figure 5)(Figure 6) ) (LUC Land Use Category Residential/Recreational Commercial/Industrial Table 1: Land use categories * Trail disturb zone is the depth the trail may erode during use.end of that 6 inch disturb zone. 5w!C {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻ Λ{wΜ ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Council Packet Page Number 253 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Impervious Surface Clause Two feet of soil that does not exceed SRVs of the surrounding planned land use category (LUC) or program defined cleanup values is required under a newly constructed impervious surface (including basements). This is not required under an already existing impervious surface. Road Buildings Parking lot Soil that does not exceed SRVs of the surrounding LUC or program defined cleanup values to a depth of 2 feet protects a receptor from exposure during routine maintenance activities and erosion of the impervious surface. 2 ft Figure 1. Impervious surface clause DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 4 Council Packet Page Number 254 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Utility Corridor Clause Soil used to backfill a utility corridor during development should not exceed SRVs for the planned land use category (LUC) or program defined cleanup values. Utility Corridor Utility corridor containing soil that does not exceed SRVs of the surrounding LUC or program defined cleanup values protects receptors from exposure when working in the utility corridor. Figure 2.Utility corridor clause 5w!C {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻ ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ Θ{ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩЋЉЊЏMinnesota Pollution Control Agency 5 Council Packet Page Number 255 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 wĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌΉwĻĭƩĻğƷźƚƓğƌ Α{źƓŭƌĻ CğƒźƌǤ IƚƒĻƭ Land is used by all ages. Receptors are expected to contact soil with significant digging and may be exposed to soil while digging or to excavated soil that is left at the surface. Soil that does not exceed Residential/Recreational SRVs or program defined cleanup values to a depth of 4 feet protects a receptor from exposure to soil at the surface and while digging during activities including planting trees and other vegetation, fence installation and gardening. Although SRVs have NOT been evaluated for any potential risks via plant uptake, 4 feet is the maximum depth that garden grown produce roots are expected to grow. Accessible Zone 4 ft Soil that does not exceed Residential/Recreational SRVs or program defined cleanup values to a depth of 12 feet protects a receptor from exposure during utility work, excavation of soil during single family home construction activities and once the soil is brought to the surface and reused on site or another site. Potentially Accessible Zone 12 ft CźŭǒƩĻ Ќ͵wĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌΉwĻĭƩĻğƷźƚƓğƌ Α{źƓŭƌĻ ŅğƒźƌǤ ŷƚƒĻƭ\[ / 5w!C {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻ ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ Θ{ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩЋЉЊЏMinnesota Pollution Control Agency 6 Council Packet Page Number 256 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 wĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌΉwĻĭƩĻğƷźƚƓğƌ ΑaǒƌƷź-Family Housing & Other Areas Land is used by all ages. Receptors are expected to contact soil with somewhat significant digging and may be exposed to soil while digging or to excavated soil that is left at the surface. Multi-Family Housing Church School Soil that does not exceed Residential/Recreational SRVs or program defined cleanup values to a depth of 4 feet protects a receptor from exposure to soil at the surface and while digging during activities including planting trees and other vegetation, fence installation and gardening. Although SRVs have NOT been evaluated for any potential risks via plant uptake, 4 feet is the maximum depth that garden grown produce roots are expected to grow. Accessible Zone 4 ft Soil that does not exceed Residential/Recreational SRVs or program defined cleanup values to a depth of 12 feet protects a receptor from exposure during excavation of soil during utility work, most construction activities and once the soil is brought to the surface and reused on site or another site. Potentially Accessible Zone 12 ft CźŭǒƩĻ Ѝ͵ wĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌΉwĻĭƩĻğƷźƚƓğƌ Α Multi-family housing & Other Areas LUC DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 7 Council Packet Page Number 257 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 wĻƭźķĻƓƷźğƌΉwĻĭƩĻğƷźƚƓğƌ ΑwĻĭƩĻğƷźƚƓğƌ Land is used by all ages. Receptors are expected to contact soil with less significant digging and may be exposed to soil while digging or to excavated soil that is left at the surface. Erodible hiking trail*Forests Erodible Erodible ATV trail* horse trail* Soil that does not exceed Residential/Recreational SRVs or program defined cleanup values to a depth of 2 feet protects a receptor from exposure while participating in most recreational activities. 4 feet protects a receptor from exposure to soil at the surface and while digging during activities including planting trees and other vegetation and fence installation. *For trails the 2 feet begins at the trails disturb zone determined by how much the soil is expected to erode based on the specific use of the trail. For example, if an ATV trail has a 6 inch disturb zone the 2 feet would start from the end of that 6 inch disturb zone. Accessible Zone 4 ft Soil that does not exceed Residential/Recreational SRVs or program defined cleanup values to a depth of 12 feet protects a receptor from exposure during excavation of soil during utility work, most construction activities and once the soil is brought to the surface and reused on site or another site. Potentially Accessible Zone 12 ft Figure 5. Residential/RecreğƷźƚƓğƌ Α wĻĭƩĻğƷźƚƓğƌ \[ / DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 8 Council Packet Page Number 258 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Commercial/Industrial Commercial land is used by all ages. Industrial land is used by adult workers. Receptors are expected to contact soil with less significant digging and may be exposed to soil while digging or to excavated soil that is left at the surface. Hotel UtilityManufacturing facility Restaurant Soil that does not exceed Commercial/Industrial SRVs or program defined cleanup values to a depth of 4 feet protects a receptor from exposure to soil at the surface and during routine maintenance activities such as planting trees and other vegetation and fence installation. Accessible Zone 4 ft Soil that does not exceed Residential/Recreational SRVs or program defined cleanup values to a depth of 12 feet protects a receptor from exposure during excavation of soil during utility work, most construction activities and once the soil is brought to the surface and reused on site or another site. Potentially Accessible Zone 12 ft Figure 6.Commercial/Industrial LUC 5w!C {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻ ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ Θ{ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩЋЉЊЏMinnesota Pollution Control Agency 9 Council Packet Page Number 259 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 3.0 Derivation of soil reference values SRVs are intended to be screening values. They were derived using the following: Methodology from the United States Environmental tƩƚƷĻĭƷźƚƓ !ŭĻƓĭǤ͸ƭ Λ9t!Μ {ǒƦĻƩŅǒƓķ program for assessing risks associated with soil contamination Exposure parameters ķĻƦźĭƷźƓŭ ğ ŷǒƒğƓ ƩĻĭĻƦƷƚƩ͸ƭ ĻǣƦƚƭǒƩĻ to contaminated soil in a specific LUC Toxicity values reflecting the potential toxicity of contaminants in soil Chemical specific parameters ĭŷğƩğĭƷĻƩźǩźƓŭ ğ ĭƚƓƷğƒźƓğƓƷ͸ƭ ĭŷĻƒźĭğƌ ğƓķ ƦŷǤƭźĭğƌ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷźĻƭ Details regarding the derivation of SRVs for each LUC including methodology, exposure parameters, toxicity values and chemical specific parameters are in the SRV spreadsheet. This section provides general information regarding the derivation of the SRVs and refers to the SRV spreadsheet whenever possible. Therefore, this guidance is intended to be used in conjunction with the SRV spreadsheet. For additional information not covered in this guidance or the SRV spreadsheet please refer to the following United States Environmental ProtĻĭƷźƚƓ !ŭĻƓĭǤ͸ƭ Λ9t!Μ ŭǒźķğƓĭĻʹ 9t!͸ƭ ЊВВЏ {ƚźƌ {ĭƩĻĻƓźƓŭ DǒźķğƓĭĻʹ ƭĻƩ͸ƭ DǒźķĻ 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЉЋ Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЉЍ Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Part E 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЉЎ Supplemental Guidance for Assessing Susceptibility from Early-Life Exposures to Carcinogens 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЉБ /ŷźƌķƩĻƓ͸ƭ {ƦĻĭźŅźĭ 9ǣƦƚƭǒƩĻ CğĭƷƚƩ IğƓķĬƚƚƉ 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЊЊ Exposure Factor Handbook 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЊЍ Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Update of Standard Default Exposure Parameters memo 3.1 Methodology {wƭ ǞĻƩĻ ķĻƩźǝĻķ ǒƭźƓŭ ƷŷĻ 9t!͸ƭ {ǒƦĻƩŅǒƓķ ƒĻƷŷƚķƚƌƚŭǤ ŅƚƩ ķĻƩźǝźƓŭ 9t!͸ƭ ƩĻŭźƚƓğƌ ƭĭƩĻĻƓźƓŭ ƌĻǝĻƌƭ (RSLs) for evaluating potential risks from contaminated soils at remediation sites (EPA 1996, EPA 2002). 9t!͸ƭ ƒĻƷŷƚķƚƌƚŭǤ źƭ ĬğƭĻķ ƚƓ ƷŷĻ ƩĻğƭƚƓğĬƌĻ maximum exposure (RME) concept which uses upper- bound estimates for the most sensitive exposure parameters and central tendency estimates for less sensitive exposure parameters to derive soil screening values. Upper bound estimates of the average exposure point concentrations are compared to the soil screening levels. RME is intended to be protective of the entire population, including sensitive individuals, while still being reasonable. SRVs were derived to represent chronic, long term exposures to a contaminant. Acute, one-time event exposure SRVs have been developed for a small number of contaminants where acute exposure is of concern. Chronic, long term exposures are evaluated by deriving two SRVs: one to assess cancer risks and one to assess noncancer chronic risks. Acute, shorter term exposures are evaluated by deriving one noncancer acute SRV. Soil saturation concentration (Csat) is derived for any contaminant that is present as a liquid at ambient soil temperatures. It is not derived for contaminants that are present as solids at ambient temperature. Csat represents the concentration of a contaminant in soil at which soil pore water and pore air are DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 10 Council Packet Page Number 260 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 saturated with the chemical and the absorptive limit of the soil particles has been reached. Above Csat a contaminant may be present in free phase. EPA has also established a maximum contaminant limit of 100,000 mg/kg which represents 10% by weight of a soil sample. Concentrations at the maximum contaminant limit and higher may violate the assumptions used to derive SRVs. Final chronic SRVs are set at the lowest of the following values: Cancer SRV Noncancer Chronic SRV Soil Saturation Concentration (Csat) Maximum Contaminant Limit Methodologies used to derive cancer, noncancer chronic and noncancer acute SRVs are described below. Equations and specific exposure parameters used to derive cancer SRVs, noncancer chronic SRVs, noncancer acute SRVs and Csat are provided in the SRV spreadsheet. 3.1.1 Cancer SRV methodology Cancer SRVs include three routes of human exposure to soil: Incidental soil ingestion Dermal contact with soil Inhalation of fugitive soil dust and soil vapors They do not include plant uptake of contaminants. /ƚƓƭźƭƷĻƓƷ ǞźƷŷ 9t!͸ƭ {ǒƦĻƩŅǒƓķ ƒĻƷŷƚķƚƌƚŭǤ ĭğƓĭĻƩ SRVs were derived assuming a lifetime daily dose over 70 years and an exposure duration associated with receptors of a specific LUC. Age specific exposure parameters (such as body weight and surface area) were used for the following age brackets: 0 to 2 years, 2 to 16 years and 16 to 30 years. Two methods can be used to account for early life sensitivity: 1) chemical specific adjustment factors and 2) default age dependent adjustment factors (ADAFs). Chemical specific adjustment factors are used if they are available. Default ADAFs are applied to contaminants determined to be a linear carcinogen per Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) guidance. Although EPA only applies default ADAFs to linear carcinogens with mutagenic mode of actions (MOAs), MDH has determined that it is more appropriate to apply ADAFs to all linear carcinogens regardless of the MOA. Risks are characterized by using an excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) representing the incremental probability of an individual developing cancer over a lifetime as a result of exposure to a carcinogen. An ELCR of 1E-05 or 1 additional case of cancer in 100,000 has been established as an acceptable risk level. Contaminant soil concentrations resulting in cancer risk estimates less than an ELCR of 1E-05 are considered to be at acceptable risks levels and generally do not require risk management. To assess additivity of cancer risks, individual contaminant cancer risks are summed regardless of cancer type. Additive cancer risks less than 1E-05 are considered acceptable and generally do not require risk management. LUC specific cancer equations, exposure parameters and ADAFs are provided in the SRV spreadsheet. DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 11 Council Packet Page Number 261 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 3.1.2 Noncancer chronic SRV methodology Noncancer chronic SRVs include three routes of human exposure to soil: Incidental soil ingestion Dermal contact with soil Inhalation of fugitive soil dust and soil vapors They do not include plant uptake of contaminants. /ƚƓƭźƭƷĻƓƷ ǞźƷŷ 9t!͸ƭ ƒĻƷŷƚķƚƌƚŭǤ ƓƚƓĭğƓĭĻƩ chronic SRVs were derived based on exposure parameters applicable to specific LUCs. A combined hazard quotient (HQ)/relative source contribution (RSC) of 0.2 is used to derive the SRVs applicable to the majority of sites in Minnesota. The use of a combined HQ/RSC accounts for the following: A receptors exposure to the same contaminant in other media such as groundwater, surface water or air Using 0.2 assumes 20% of a receptors exposure to a specific contaminant will come from soil and the rest of their exposure from other media A receptors exposure to the same contaminant in different LUCs they may frequent such as school, home and work Potential additive risks from multiple contaminants present at a site Individual contaminant soil concentrations resulting in noncancer risks less than a HQ of 1.0 are considered to be at acceptable levels and generally do not require risk management. LUC specific noncancer chronic equations and exposure parameters are provided in the SRV spreadsheet. 3.1.3 Noncancer acute SRV methodology Noncancer acute SRVs include one route of human exposure to soil: Deliberate soil ingestion by a child occurring in one event They do not include dermal contact, inhalation of fugitive dust and soil vapors or plant uptake of contaminants. Noncancer acute SRVs were only derived for the Residential/Recreational LUC based on a child age 1 to 3 years deliberately ingesting a bolus of soil during a single event. Soil pica behavior is common for children 1 to 3 years in age. The one time ingestion rate of 10,000 mg/event is based on a 1995 study by Stanek and Calabrese (also referenced by EPA 2011a and ATSDR 2011) that found 33% of children will ingest greater than 10,000 mg of soil 1 to 2 days per year. Risks are characterized using a hazard quotient (HQ) of 1.0 for individual contaminants. Additivity is not assessed for noncancer acute risks. The Residential/Recreational noncancer acute equation and exposure parameters are provided in the SRV spreadsheet. DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 12 Council Packet Page Number 262 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 3.2 Exposure parameters LUC specific SRVs were derived using exposure parameters specific to the LUC. Exposure parameters were chosen based on the type of human receptor expected to be present at a LUC and their likely activities. Consistent with the RME concept, upper-bound estimates were used for the most sensitive exposure parameters and central tendency for those less sensitive. The majority of the exposure ƦğƩğƒĻƷĻƩƭ ǒƭĻķ ğƩĻ ƷŷƚƭĻ ƩĻĭƚƒƒĻƓķĻķ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ CĻĬƩǒğƩǤ ЋЉЊЍ Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Update of Standard Default Exposure Parameters memo (2014 memo) and 9t!͸ƭ ЊВВЏ {ƚźƌ {ĭƩĻĻƓźƓŭ DǒźķğƓĭĻʹ ƭĻƩ͸ƭ DǒźķĻ ğƓķ ЋЉЉЋ Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites Λ9t!͸ƭ {{DΜ͵ ŷĻ ķźŅŅĻƩĻƓƷ ƷǤƦĻƭ ƚŅ ĻǣƦƚƭǒƩĻ ƦğƩğƒĻƷĻƩƭ ǒƭĻķ źƓ ƷŷĻ SRVs are discussed below. A detailed list of the specific exposure parameters used for each LUC is provided in the SRV spreadsheet. 3.2.1 Exposure duration Exposure duration depicts the number of years a human receptor is likely to be exposed to soil at a specific LUC. Since it is a sensitive exposure parameter it is appropriate to use an upper bound estimate. The appropriate estimate to use depends on the receptor type specific to the LUC. For example, for the Commercial/Industrial LUC the upper bound estimate of exposure duration is 25 years since it is possible there will be workers who will work for the same employer for 25 years. All exposure durations for LUCs źƓĭƌǒķĻķ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЊЍ ƒĻƒƚ ǞĻƩĻ ǒƭĻķ ğƭ ƩĻĭƚƒƒĻnded. Exposure duration values used for each LUC category are listed in the SRV spreadsheet. 3.2.2 Exposure frequency Exposure frequency depicts how often a human receptor may be exposed to soil via the following routes of exposure: ingestion, dermal contact and inhalation of fugitive dust and volatiles. It is intended to estimate how many times per year a human receptor may be exposed via these different routes. Since it is a sensitive exposure parameter it is appropriate to use an upper bound estimate. Exposure ŅƩĻƨǒĻƓĭźĻƭ ŅƚƩ \[ / źƓĭƌǒķĻķ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ {{D ǞĻƩĻ ƒƚdified to reflect the climate in Minnesota. The appropriate exposure frequency depends on the following: Type of human receptor specific to the LUC Exposure route Ingestion Dermal contact Inhalation via fugitive dust Inhalation via vapors Type of contaminant present Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) Non-VOCs According to frost data from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and snow cover data from the Minnesota Office of Climatology, there are an average of 100 days per year in Minnesota when the ground is frozen and covered by 1 inch or more of snow. During these days it is not likely a human receptor will be exposed to outdoor soil via ingestion, dermal contact or inhalation of fugitive dust or vapors. However, a receptor may still be exposed to soil via ingestion of soil present in indoor dust during this 100 day time period. DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 13 Council Packet Page Number 263 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Whether the contaminant is a VOC or non-VOC determines whether it is appropriate to include the dermal exposure route. Dermal exposure to VOCs will not occur unless a receptor is digging in the soil since VOCs will be depleted from the first 2 cm of the soil surface. If digging does occur, in most cases, it is likely that dermal exposure will not be significant since the VOCs will quickly evaporate from the soil ğƓķ ƷŷĻ ƩĻĭĻƦƷƚƩ͸ƭ ƭƉźƓ͵ ŷĻƩĻ ğƩĻ ƷŷƩĻĻ ĭŷĻƒźĭğƌƭ Ǟŷere the dermal pathway is included even though the chemical is considered a VOC since the dermal pathway has been determined to be a significant route of exposure: chlordane, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) equivalents. Table 2 provides the rationale used to determine when the 100 days should be eliminated from the exposure frequency and whether the dermal exposure routes should be included for VOCs and non- VOCs. Since the 100 days per year is representative of a human receptor that frequents the LUC year round, this number needs to be modified to account for the number of days per year a receptor of a specific LUC frequents that LUC. For example, workers are estimated to work 5 days per week. The 100 days of frozen and snow covered ground would need to be reduced to represent only the frozen and snow covered days that occur during the time the worker spends at work. Specific exposure frequencies for each LUC are listed in the SRV spreadsheet. Table 2. Exposure frequency modifications Exposure VOC Non-VOC Route Eliminate 100 days/year Do NOT eliminate 100 days/year Although ingestion exposure will occur both Ingestion exposure will occur both indoor and Ingestion indoor and outdoor, VOCs will not be present in outdoor and non-VOCs will be present in indoor indoor dust due to their volatile nature dust Eliminate 100 days/year NOT included for VOCs Dermal contact is considered to only be a Dermal Dermal contact is not considered to be a significant route of exposure outdoors and will Contact significant route of exposure for VOCs due to not occur when the ground is frozen and snow their volatile nature cover greater than 1 inch NOT included for VOCs Eliminate 100 days/year Inhalation Α Inhalation of fugitive dust is not considered to Fugitive dust is not expected to be present Fugitive Dust be a significant route for exposure for VOCs due outdoors when the ground is frozen and snow to their volatile nature cover greater than 1 inch Eliminate 100 days/year Eliminate 100 days/year Inhalation Α Vapors are not expected to be present outdoors Vapors are not expected to be present Vapors when the ground is frozen and snow cover outdoors when the ground is frozen and snow greater than 1 inch cover greater than 1 inch 3.2.3 Body weight Body weight depicts the weight of the receptor that is likely to be present in a specific LUC. Since it is a less sensitive exposure parameter it is appropriate to use a central tendency estimate. All body weights were calculated using the same data used by EPA in the 2014 memo. Specific body weights and the calculations for each LUC are listed in the SRV spreadshee t. 3.2.4 Ingestion rate Ingestion rate is the amount of soil a receptor is expected to incidentally ingest when participating in activities associated with the LUC. Since this is a sensitive exposure parameter it is appropriate to use an upper bound DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 14 Council Packet Page Number 264 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 ĻƭƷźƒğƷĻ͵ !ƌƌ źƓŭĻƭƷźƚƓ ƩğƷĻƭ ŅƚƩ \[ /ƭ źƓĭƌǒķĻķ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ 2014 memo used as recommended. Specific ingestion rate values used for each LUC are listed in the SRV spreadsheet. 3.2.5 Surface area {ǒƩŅğĭĻ ğƩĻğ źƭ ƷŷĻ ğƒƚǒƓƷ ƚŅ ğ ƩĻĭĻƦƷƚƩ͸ƭ ĻǣƦƚƭĻķ ƭƉin during dermal contact with the soil. Since this is a less sensitive exposure parameter it is appropriate to use a central tendency estimate. Surface area estimates were calculated using the same data used by EPA in the 2014 memo. Specific surface areas and the calculations used are listed in the SRV spreadsheet. 3.2.6 Adherence factor Adherence factor is the amount of soil expected to ğķŷĻƩĻ Ʒƚ ğ ƩĻĭĻƦƷƚƩ͸ƭ ĻǣƦƚƭĻķ ƭƉźƓ ķǒƩźƓŭ ķĻƩƒğƌ contact with the soil. The adherence factor is a sensitive exposure parameter that depends significantly on the type of activity a receptor is engaging in. To fit with the RME scenario, EPA recommends using a central tendency value from an activity that is likely to result in more soil adherence such as an adult gardening or a child playing in wet soil. Adherence factor estimates for receptors of all LUCs included in 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЊЍ ƒĻƒƚ ǞĻƩĻ ǒƭĻķ ğƭ ƩĻĭƚƒƒĻƓķĻķ͵ {ƦĻĭźŅźĭ adherence factor values for each LUC are listed in the SRV spreadsheet. 3.2.7 Volatilization factor The volatilization factor (VF) estimates the amount of a contaminant present in vapor that may be inhaled by a receptor. It relates the amount of contamination present in the soil to the amount that may be present in vapors released from subsurface soil. There is no consideration for vapors that may be present in the first 2 cm of the soil since any vapor in this area of the soil would be released to the air rapidly. EPA includes two different VFs that can be used to derive SRVs: standard VF and mass limit VF, both based on the same model. The standard VF uses chemical specific parameters but continues to include vapor exposure even after the starting material has been depleted, violating mass balance laws. The mass limit VF includes a thickness parameter that prevents mass balance violations but does not use any chemical specific parameters. EPA recommends deriving two SRVs: one using the standard VF and one using the mass limit VF. The final SRV is set to whichever value is greater. Both methods are upper end estimates of the potential vapor exposure a receptor may experience. Therefore, use of both VFs results in a more realistic but yet still conservative estimate of potential vapor inhalation risk. Standard VF !ƌƌ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ ķĻŅğǒƌƷ ƦğƩğƒĻƷĻƩƭ ƩĻĭƚƒƒĻƓķĻķ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ {{D ǞĻƩĻ ǒƭĻķ Ʒƚ ĭğƌĭǒƌğƷĻ ƷŷĻ ƭƷğƓķğƩķ C͵ ŷĻ chemical specific parameters used in the calculatioƓ ğƩĻ ķźƭĭǒƭƭĻķ źƓ {ĻĭƷźƚƓ Ќ͵Ѝ Α /ŷĻƒźĭğƌ {ƦĻĭźŅźĭ Parameters. The inverse of the mean concentration at the center of a 0.5 acre square source (Q/C) was used. Mass limit VF !ƌƌ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ ķĻŅğǒƌƷ ƦğƩğƒĻƷĻƩƭ ƩĻĭƚƒƒĻƓķĻķ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ SSG were used to calculate the mass limit VF. A default contamination thickness (average depth of source) parameter is not given since EPA recommends this be determined according to the site. MPCA has established a standard default thickness of 12 feet based on the following rationale: The average thickness of contamination present at most remediation sites is not greater than 12 feet. Setting a thickness parameter close to the greatest depth that a receptor is expected to access (Residential/Recreational LUC) will adequately protect a receptor that is accessing the soil as well as a receptor located above the soil surface in most cases. DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 15 Council Packet Page Number 265 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 There are additional methods available to assess potential risks including: Vapor Intrusion Investigation using Intrusion Screening Values (ISVs), Soil Leaching Investigation using Soil Leaching Values (SLVs) and Groundwater Investigation using Health Risk Limits (HRLs) and other applicable groundwater values. MPCA MERLA and RCRA project teams are responsible to know if their specific site fits within the exposure parameters used to derive the SRVs applicable to the majority of sites in Minnesota listed on the SRV spreadsheet. If there is a potential volatilization issue at the site based on site specific data that does not fit these SRVs, such as the presence of a specific type of contaminant, especially high concentration of a contaminant or current and potential site use, the risk manager will deem the generic SRVs inappropriate for use. T parameter The T parameter in both volatilization factors has been determined to represent the time interval over which the contaminant present in the soil volatilizes. An estimate of the flux from the volatilized contaminant that reaches the air above the soil is averaged over T. This parameter does not represent the receptors exposure duration. Thirty years has been used for all volatilization factor T parameters as a reasonable estimate of the contaminants volatilization time interval. If this T does not appear reasonable for the specific contaminants at a site, the Remediation project team may request the assistance of the MPCA risk assessor to establish a reasonable site specific T parameter. 3.2.8 Particulate emission factor The particulate emission factor (PF) estimates the concentration of a contaminant in fugitive dust that may be inhaled by a receptor. It relates the amount of a contaminant present in soil to the amount that may be present in fugitive dust. Only wind borne dust is included in the PF. Emissions from traffic and mechanical disturbances are not included. All of ƷŷĻ ķĻŅğǒƌƷ ƦğƩğƒĻƷĻƩƭ ƦƩƚǝźķĻķ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ {{D ǞĻƩĻ used to calculate the PF except for the fraction of vegetative cover for the Commercial/Industrial LUC. A value of zero was used for vegetative cover for the Commercial/Industrial LUC based on the potential for the lack of vegetative cover at this type of site. The inverse of the mean concentration at the center of a 0.5 acre square source (Q/C) was used. 3.3 Toxicity values ƚǣźĭźƷǤ ǝğƌǒĻƭ ƦƩƚǝźķĻ ğƓ ĻƭƷźƒğƷĻ ƚŅ ğ ĭƚƓƷğƒźƓğƓƷ͸s toxicity which is used to determine an acceptable level of contamination in soil. SRVs use three types of toxicity values: cancer toxicity values to derive cancer SRVs, noncancer chronic toxicity values to derive noncancer chronic SRVs and acute toxicity values used to derive acute noncancer SRVs. Specific types of toxicity values used in SRVs are listed below. /ğƓĭĻƩ ƚǣźĭźƷǤ ğƌǒĻƭ Α ĻƭƷźƒğƷĻ ƚŅ ğƓ źƓĭƩĻğƭĻķ ĭğƓĭĻƩ ƩźƭƉ ŅƩƚƒ ğ ƌźŅĻƷźƒĻ ƚŅ ĻǣƦƚƭǒƩĻ Ʒƚ ğ contaminant via the oral or inhalation routes of exposure Cancer Slope Factor Λ/{CΜ Α ǒƭĻķ Ʒƚ ĻƭƷźƒğƷĻ ĭğƓĭĻƩ ƩźƭƉƭ ŅƩƚƒ ƚƩğƌ ğƓķ ķĻƩƒğƌ ƩƚǒƷĻƭ ΛƭźƓĭĻ there are typically no dermal toxicity values) of exposures Inhalation Unit Risk ΛL wΜ Α ǒƭĻķ Ʒƚ ĻƭƷźƒğƷĻ ĭğƓĭĻƩ ƩźƭƉƭ ŅƩƚƒ źƓŷğƌğƷźƚƓ ƩƚǒƷĻ ƚŅ ĻǣƦƚƭǒƩĻ bƚƓĭğƓĭĻƩ /ŷƩƚƓźĭ ƚǣźĭźƷǤ ğƌǒĻƭ Α ĻƭƷźƒğƷĻ ƚŅ ğ continuous oral or inhalation exposure to the human population that is likely to not result in an appreciable risk Chronic Reference Dose (RfD) Α ǒƭĻķ Ʒƚ ĻƭƷźƒğƷĻ ƓƚƓĭğƓĭĻƩ ƩźƭƉƭ ŅƩƚƒ ƚƩğƌ ğƓķ ķĻƩƒğƌ (since there are typically no dermal toxicity values) routes of exposures DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 16 Council Packet Page Number 266 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Chronic Reference Concentration (RfC) Α ǒƭĻķ Ʒƚ ĻƭƷźƒğƷĻ ƓƚƓĭğƓĭĻƩ ƩźƭƉƭ ŅƩƚƒ źƓŷğƌğƷźƚƓ route of exposure bƚƓĭğƓĭĻƩ !ĭǒƷĻ ƚǣźĭźƷǤ ğƌǒĻƭ Α ĻƭƷźƒğƷĻ ƚŅ an acceptable exposure to a child deliberately ingesting soil during a single event Acute Reference Dose Α ǒƭĻķ Ʒƚ ĻƭƷźƒğƷĻ ƓƚƓĭğƓĭĻƩ ƩźƭƉƭ ŅƩƚƒ ƚƩğƌ ĻǣƦƚƭǒƩĻƭ Cancer, noncancer chronic and noncancer acute toxicity values used for specific contaminants are listed in the SRV spreadsheet. 3.3.1 Toxicity value hierarchy The following hierarchy is generally followed to determine appropriate toxicity values to use for deriving cancer and noncancer chronic SRVs. In some cases the hierarchy is not followed if rationale exists to support a deviation from it for a specific contaminant. Noncancer acute toxicity value sources are ķźƭĭǒƭƭĻķ źƓ {ĻĭƷźƚƓ Ќ͵Ќ͵Ћ Α !ĭǒƷĻ ƚǣźĭźƷǤ ğƌǒĻƭ͵ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ 5ĻƦğƩƷƒĻƓƷ ƚŅ IĻğƌƷŷ͸ƭ IĻğƌƷŷ wźƭƉ ğƌǒĻƭ ΛIwΜͲ IĻğƌƷŷ wźƭƉ \[źƒźƷƭ ΛIw\[ΜͲ IĻğƌƷŷ Based Values (HBV) or Risk Assessment Advice (RAA) 9t!͸ƭ LƓƷĻŭƩğƷĻķ wźƭƉ LƓŅƚƩƒğƷźƚƓ {ǤƭƷĻƒ͸ƭ ΛLwL{Μ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ 5ƚƭĻ ΛwŅ5ΜͲ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ Concentration (RfC), Cancer Slope Factor (CSF) and Inhalation Unit Risk (IUR) 9t!͸ƭ {ǒƦĻƩŅǒƓķ tƩƚǝźƭźƚƓğƌ tĻĻƩ wĻǝźĻǞĻķ ƚǣźĭźty Values (PPRTVs) Reference Dose (RfD), Reference Concentration (RfC), Cancer Slope Factor (CSF) and Inhalation Unit Risk (IUR) !ŭĻƓĭǤ ŅƚƩ ƚǣźĭ {ǒĬƭƷğƓĭĻƭ ğƓķ 5źƭĻğƭĻ wĻŭźƭƷƩǤ͸ƭ Λ!{5wΜ aźƓźƒğƌ wźƭƉ \[ĻǝĻƌƭ Λaw\[ƭΜ California Environmental Protection Agency Office of Environmental Health Hazard !ƭƭĻƭƭƒĻƓƷ͸ƭ Λh9II!Μ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ 9ǣƦƚƭǒƩĻ \[ĻǝĻƌƭ ğƓķ /ğƓĭĻƩ tƚƷĻƓĭǤ ğƌǒĻƭ 9t!͸ƭ {ǒƦĻƩŅǒƓķ tƩƚǝźƭźƚƓğƌ tĻĻƩ wĻǝźĻǞĻķ ƚǣźĭźty Values (PPRTV) Appendix Reference Dose (RfD), Reference Concentration (RfC), Cancer Slope Factor (CSF) and Inhalation Unit Risk (IUR) 9t!͸ƭ {ǒƦĻƩŅǒƓķ IĻğƌƷŷ 9ŅŅĻĭƷƭ !ƭsessment Summary (HEAST) Reference Dose (RfD), Reference Concentration (RfC), Cancer Slope Factor (CSF) and Inhalation Unit Risk (IUR) Other sources such as other states that derive their own toxicity values may be used if 1) an appropriate dataset was used, 2) the derivation was based on current methodologies and 3) it was subject to peer review. 3.3.2 Acute toxicity values Acute noncancer SRVs based on ingestion were derived for chemicals that are known historically to pose an acute risk from soil exposure. Since acute noncancer RfDs are not as readily available as chronic RfDs, an evaluation was conducted to determine the most appropriate toxicity value to use. In most cases the acute toxicity values were derived from effect levels. Evaluations conducted are summarized in Appendix A. Acute noncancer RfDs are listed in Table 3. DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 17 Council Packet Page Number 267 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Table 3. Acute RfDs Chemical Acute RfD (mg/kg-event) Arsenic 0.005 Barium 0.2 (Ch) Cadmium 0.007 Copper 0.09 Cyanide 0.0056 Fluoride 0.5 Nickel 0.2 Pentachlorophenol 0.005 Phenol 1.0 Ch = Chronic RfD used since acute was less than chronic RfD 3.3.3 Benzo\[a\]Pyrene equivalents On August 15, 2013, the Minnesota DepaƩƷƒĻƓƷ ƚŅ IĻğƌƷŷ Λa5IΜ ƩĻƌĻğƭĻķ ͻGuidance for Evaluating the Cancer Potency of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) Mixtures in Environmental Samples͵ͼ ŷźƭ guidance was revised on October 31, 2014. MDH guidance recommends a revised method to evaluate carcinogenic PAHs (cPAHs) using relative potency factors (RPF) instead of potency equivalency factors (PEF) and an alternative surrogate mixture method using 7X the concentration of benzo\[a\]pyrene (B\[a\]P). Six new cPAHs have been added to the list to analyze and ten have been removed. Although it is at/!͸ƭ ƦƩğĭƷźĭĻ Ʒƚ ğķƚƦƷ a5I͸ƭ ŭǒźķğƓĭĻͲ ƭźƓĭĻ ƌğboratory analytical methods are not available to analyze the six additional cPAH compounds added to the RPF list, it is not feasible at this time. MPCA and MDH are working together to develop soil analytical methods for the new cPAH compounds. Once analytical methods have been established MPCA will re-evaluate the feasibility of implementing this guidance. Until then, MPCA will continue to use the t9C ƒĻƷŷƚķ Λa5I͸ƭ ƦƩĻǝźƚǒƭ guidance) to evaluate human health risks from cPAHs as described below. Previous guidance issued by MDH recommends evaluating 25 cPAHs that the California Environmental Protection Agency (CAEPA) has identified as being probable or possible human carcinogens (MDH 2001, CA EPA 1999). Since toxicity data does not exist for all individual cPAHs, they are evaluated according to how potent they are in relation to a reference contaminant, benzo\[a\]pyrene (B\[a\]P). Assuming B\[a\]P has a toxicity of 1, other cPAHs are assigned a potency equivalency factor (PEF) to indicate how toxic they are in comparison to B\[a\]P. A list of PEFs for the 25 cPAHs is provided in the SRV spreadsheet. Site soil concentrations of individual cPAHs are multiplied by the corresponding PEF values to obtain an individual B\[a\]P equivalent concentration. These individual B\[a\]P equivalent concentrations are summed for all cPAHs to arrive at a total B\[a\]P equivalent concentration that is compared to the appropriate SRV. .ğƭĻķ ƚƓ ƷŷĻ ŅƚƌƌƚǞźƓŭ ŅğĭƷƚƩƭͲ at/!͸ƭ a9w\[! ğnd RCRA programs recommend evaluating only the ͻƭŷƚƩƷ ƌźƭƷͼ ƚŅ ƭĻǝĻƓ ĭt!Iƭ ƦƩƚǝźķĻķ ƚƓ ƷŷĻ SRV spreadsheet at the majority of sites. Source of extended list of cPAHs is only present at a minority of MERLA and RCRA sites Limitations of soil analytical methods for extended list of cPAHs Consistency with EPA and other states DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 18 Council Packet Page Number 268 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 at/!͸ƭ a9w\[! ğƓķ w/w! ƦƩƚŭƩğƒƭ ķƚ ƩĻĭƚƒƒĻƓķ evaluating the extended list of 25 cPAHs at the specific types of sites listed below. Source of contamination was from a combustion process such as an incinerator or open burning Environmental fingerprinting or forensics will be used to identify sources or waste streams Extended list of 25 cPAHs are a concern or have been previously identified In this case contact the MPCA project team and the MPCA or MDH risk assessor to determine whether it necessary to evaluate the extended list of 25 cPAHs Note: This section only pertains to cPAHs, which are evaluated by using B\[a\]P equivalents. Noncarcinogenic PAHs are evaluated individually and are not included in the total B\[a\]P equivalent concentration. 3.3.4 2,3,7,8 - Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin equivalents a5I͸ƭ ķźƚǣźƓ ƦƚƌźĭǤ recommends using the World Health OrgaƓźǩğƷźƚƓ͸ƭ Λ‘IhΜ ƷƚǣźĭźƷǤ ĻƨǒźǝğƌĻƓĭǤ factors (TEFs) to evaluate dioxin-like compounds (MDH 2009). Since toxicity data does not exist for all individual dioxin-like compounds, they are evaluated according to how potent they are in relation to a reference contaminant, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD). Assuming TCDD has a toxicity of 1, other dioxin-like compounds are assigned a toxicity equivalency factor (TEFs) to indicate how toxic they are in comparison to TCDD. A list of TEFs for dioxin-like compounds is provided in the SRV spreadsheet. Site soil concentrations of individual dioxin-like compounds are multiplied by the corresponding TEF value to obtain an individual TCDD equivalent concentration. These individual TCDD equivalent concentrations are summed for all dioxin-like compounds to arrive at a total TCDD equivalent concentration that is compared to the appropriate SRV. 3.4 Chemical specific parameters The following chemical specific parameters were used in the derivation of the SRVs. Please refer to the SRV spreadsheet for a detailed list of the specific parameters that were used for a specific chemical. Table 4 lists the hierarchies for the chemical specific parameters which are modeled after the hierarchies EPA uses for their Regional Screening Values (RSLs). Dermal Absorption Factor Α 9ƭƷźƒğƷĻƭ ğƒƚǒƓƷ ƚŅ ğ ĭŷĻƒźĭğƌ that will be absorbed through the skin Gastrointestinal Absorption Factor Α 9ƭƷźƒğƷĻƭ ğƒƚǒƓƷ ƚŅ ğ ĭŷĻƒical that will be absorbed by the gastrointestinal system Relative Bioavailability Α 9ƭƷźƒğƷĻƭ ğƒƚǒƓƷ ƚŅ ğ ĭŷĻƒźĭğƌ ƷŷğƷ Ǟźƌƌ ĬĻ ğǝğźƌğĬƌĻ źƓƭźķĻ ğƓ organism to cause an adverse effect Generally limited to site specific risk assessments except in cases where there is sufficient data to provide a reasonable value to be used that would apply to all sites in Minnesota Diffusivity in Air Α 9ƭƷźƒğƷĻƭ ķźŅŅǒƭźƚƓ ƚŅ ğ ĭŷĻƒźĭğƌ źƓƷƚ ğźƩ Diffusivity in Water Α 9ƭƷźƒğƷĻƭ ķźŅŅǒƭźƚƓ ƚŅ ğ ĭŷĻƒźĭğƌ źƓƷƚ ǞğƷĻƩ Soil Organic Carbon Partition Coefficient Α 9ƭƷźƒğƷĻƭ Ʒƚ ǞŷğƷ ķĻŭƩĻĻ ğ ĭŷĻƒźĭğƌ Ǟźƌƌ ĬźƓķ Ʒƚ ƷŷĻ organic fraction of soil IĻƓƩǤ͸ƭ \[ğǞ Α 9ƭƷźƒğƷĻƭ ǝğƦƚƩ ƩĻƌĻğƭĻ ŅƩƚƒ ĭŷĻƒźĭğƌƭ źƓ ƭƚźƌ Solubility Α 9ƭƷźƒğƷĻ ğƒƚǒƓƷ ƚŅ ĭŷĻƒźĭğƌ ƷŷğƷ ĭğƓ ĬĻ ķźƭƭƚƌǝĻķ źƓ ǞğƷĻƩ DRAFT Soil Reference Value Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 19 Council Packet Page Number 269 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 . . . Solubility EPI Suite - Exp SSSG CRC Perry Lange YAWS - Exp YAWS - Est EPI Suite - Est PHYSPROP . . Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 3 perfund/sites/npl/hrsres/tools/scdm.htm . Henrys Law EPI Suite - Exp SSSG YAWS - Exp EPI Suite - EstPHYSPROP ntal Guidance for Dermal Risk Assessment): http://why.knovel.com 2 http://why.knovel.com/ ntally Released Radionucleotides through Agriculture: e: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/exposure/pubs/episuite.htm . . 1 Koc EPI Suite - EstSSSG YAWS - Est EPI Suite - Exp YAWS - Exp http://www.epa.gov/su . . Interface (EPI) Suite: Estimation Interface (EPI) Suit Water Diffusion WATER9 SSSG ical Properties of Chemical Compounds: 20 ical Properties of Chemical Compounds: . Air Diffusion WATER9 SSSG oration (SRC), Estimation . http://www.syrres.com/what-we-do/product.aspx?id=133 nd Volume 1: Human Health Evaluation Manual (Part E: Suppleme se Research Corporation (SRC), http://www.knovel.com/web/portal/browse/display?_EXT_KNOVEL_DISPLAY_bookid=1347&VerticalID=0 . ical Engineer's Handbook: . gion9/superfund/prg/ http://www.epa.gov/superfund/health/conmedia/soil/index.htm http://www.epa.gov/superfund/health/conmedia/soil/index.htm Gastrointestinal Absorption EPA 2004 . Values are also found in Superfund Chemical Data Matrix: ay?_EXT_KNOVEL_DISPLAY_bookid=2203&VerticalID=0 http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/software/water/index.html http://www.hbcpnetbase.com/ , YAWS Handbook of Thermodynamic and Phys YAWS Handbook of Thermodynamic and Phys tory, 1984, A Review and Analysis of Parameters for Asessing Transport of environme UP method first, then the BOND method. ation (SRC), 2005, PHYSPROP Database: Relative Bioavailability CSR EPA 1996 http://www.epa.gov/re e that specifies a relative bioavailability (ex. ATSDR profile). Robert H., 2008, Perry's Chem lues, US EPA and Toxics and Syracuse Research Corp Dermal Absorption EPA 2004 EPA 2012 Priority 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 - Not applicable to inorganics - For estimated Koc use the MCI method first, then the log Kow method. - For estimated Henry's Law use the GRO Table 4. Chemical specific parameter hierarchies 123 EPA 2004 - EPA's 2004 RAGS E, Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfuhttp://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/ragse/index.htmEPA 2012 - EPA's 2012 RSL Tables: /{w Α /ŷĻƒźĭğƌ ƭƦĻĭźŅźĭ ƩĻŅĻƩĻƓĭ9t! ЊВВЏ Ώ 9t!͸ƭ {ƚźƌ {ĭƩĻĻƓźƓŭ DǒźķğƓĭĻʹ ƭĻƩ͸ƭ ağƓǒğƌʹ EPI Suite Exp - Experimental Values, US EPA and Toxics and Syracuhttp://www.epa.gov/opptintr/exposure/pubs/episuite.htmSSSG - EPA, 2002, Supplemental Soil Screening Guidance: YAWS Exp - Knovel, 2003, Experimental ValuesEPI Suite Est - Estimated VaPHYSPROP - Syracuse Research CorporYAWS Est - Estimated Values, Knovel, 2003, Baes - Baes, C.F., Oak Ridge National Laborahttp://homer.ornl.gov/baes/documents/ornl5786.htmlCRC - CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics: Perry - Green, Don W., Perry, http://www.knovel.com/web/portal/browse/displLange - Speight, James G., 2005, Lange's Handbook of Chemistry: WATER9 - EPA's WATER9 software, available at 5w!C {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻ Λ{wΜ ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Council Packet Page Number 270 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Ѝ͵Љ wźƭƉ ĻǝğƌǒğƷźƚƓ Α aźƓźƒǒƒ ƩĻƨǒźƩĻƒĻƓƷƭ This section includes the minimum requirements for using the SRVs in a risk evaluation but is not intended to replace program specific guidance. Risk evaluations use information obtained through site investigation to evaluate whether a human health risk exists at a site. There are two options: 1) conduct a risk evaluation explained in this section using SRVs derived to be applicable to a LUC for the majority of sites in Minnesota or 2) conduct a site specific risk assessment (Appendix B) using site specific SRVs derived using site specific information. Generally, it is more efficient to first conduct the risk evaluation before considering whether it is appropriate to conduct a site specific risk assessment. SRVs evaluate chronic noncancer and cancer risks and acute noncancer risks for a limited number of chemicals (listed in Section 3.3.2). Any other potential subchronic, short-term or acute risks associated with a site should be evaluated using a site specific risk assessment (Appendix B). 4.1 Identify LUC and contaminants of potential concern Site uses should be clearly identified to determine which LUC is appropriate for the site and identify the contaminants of potential concern (COPC). Table 1 and Figures 1 through 6 should be used to determine the appropriate LUC for the site. Any contaminants associated with site uses or that have been detected at the site should be included as COPCs. 4.2 Exposure pathways and receptors All potential exposure pathways and receptors must be identified. For an exposure pathway to be complete, the following three conditions must exist: Source of contamination Exposure route Potential receptor Possible routes of human health exposure to contaminants in soil include: Incidental soil ingestion Ingestion via produce Ingestion via food chain Dermal contact with soil Inhalation via fugitive dust Inhalation via volatilization - outdoor air Inhalation via volatilization - indoor air Routes of exposure included in the derivation of SRVs are bolded. The inhalation via volatilization - indoor air route of exposure is evaluated during the vapor intrusion investigation. If any of the routes of exposure that are not bolded in the list apply to a site (except for the inŷğƌğƷźƚƓ ƚŅ ǝƚƌğƷźƌźǩğƷźƚƓ Α źƓķƚƚƩ air), a site specific risk assessment may be required (Appendix B). Potential receptors on or off site that may be exposed to site soil contamination should be identified. It is also important to identify the most sensitive receptor that may be exposed. In general, if there is no completed exposure pathway for a COPC then it can be eliminated. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 21 Council Packet Page Number 271 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 4.3 Risk evaluation conceptual site model A conceptual site model (CSM) used in a risk evaluation should clearly demonstrate site conditions impacting human health soil exposures and risks. At a minimum, the following items should be clearly illustrated in the CSM: Site geological and hydrogeological settings Location, concentration and volume of contamination Contaminant migration pathways Exposure pathways Potential receptors on and off site 4.4 Exposure area/point and exposure concentrations An exposure area or exposure point is where a receptor contacts contaminated soil. Chronic, subchronic and short-term exposures typically occur in an exposure area, whereas acute exposure occurs at an exposure point. Due to the possible transport of contamination off site, exposure areas or points may be located on or off site. Site use should be taken into consideration when determining appropriate exposure areas and exposure points. Samples from an exposure area may be averaged over the entire exposure area to arrive at an exposure area concentration. Exposure areas should be defined to include areas of contaminated soil only and should not contain uncontaminated soil. Including uncontaminated areas in the exposure area results in an underestimate of the actual exposure area concentration. Exposure points should be defined by discrete samples with one exposure concentration. Samples used to represent an exposure area or exposure point concentration should be representative of the area and depth to which the potential receptor may be exposed. Areas containing significantly higher concentrations of contamination than surrounding areas are referred to as hot spots. These areas may have been subject to larger releases or contaminated in different ways than other areas of the site. All hot spots should be defined as distinct exposure areas and evaluated separately. 4.5 Sampling Data obtained from sampling is used to estimate an exposure concentration used to evaluate potential risks. Appropriately designed sampling accomplishes the following: Determines presence or absence of contamination Identifies contaminants present Delineates both lateral and vertical extent of contamination Identifies hot spots Provides background concentrations Two types of sampling designs commonly used are target (judgmental) and probabilistic sampling. In target sample locations are selected based on site information and professional judgment. In probabilistic sample locations are selected based on a random statistical model. Probabilistic models commonly used are: simple random, systematic/grid and stratified sampling. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 22 Council Packet Page Number 272 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Simple random is used when the population being sampled is homogeneous without potential hot spots. Sample locations are selected on a random basis so they are not necessarily uniformly distributed across the site. Systematic/grid is often used when little information is available about a site or to fully characterize a site. Sample locations are evenly distributed throughout the site using a grid. Stratified sampling separates a site into homogeneous groups or strata based on soil characteristics, site knowledge and professional judgment. Each strata is sampled independently using an appropriate method, most commonly systematic/grid. These sampling designs are discussed in greater detail in 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЉЋ Guidance on Choosing a Sampling Design for Environmental Data Collection. The type of sampling that will be most effective to adequately characterize a site will depend on sampling objectives, how much information is available regarding contaminant releases and site specific characteristics. For most situations a combination of two sampling methods, target and stratified, are recommended. Sites are typically divided into units that share common soil and COPC release characteristics and then sampled appropriately. The default soil depth a receptor is likely to be directly exposed to will vary by LUC. Exposure concentrations to evaluate any potential risks from ingestion, dermal or inhalation via fugitive dust should be calculated from samples obtained from the surface to the depth a receptor is likely to have direct exposure to (Table 1 and Figures 1 through 6). If a situation exists on site that does not meet the assumptions used to establish the applicable LUC depth of exposure, the exposure concentration is required to be obtained from the site specific depth the receptor is likely to have direct exposure to. When VOCs or semi-VOCs (SVOCs) are present, exposure concentrations to evaluate potential outdoor inhalation risk from vapor should be calculated from subsurface samples obtained from 2 cm below the soil surface to an appropriate depth based on the specific contaminant present and site characteristics. Composite sampling Composite sampling must be approved by the MPCA project team. If any of the following conditions apply, composite sampling should not be conducted: VOCs are being analyzed Soil samples that are not homogeneous Contaminant pattern is unknown or variable Matrix interference among contaminants is likely Acute risks are being evaluated (includes cases where the SRV is based on acute risks) Maximum contaminant concentrations should be used to evaluate risks when using results from composite sampling. Laboratory analysis Analysis should be conducted for all COPCs and calculated on a total, dry weight basis. Appropriate quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures and methods with detection limits below the SRVs should be used. For general considerations when designing a sampling plan please refer to Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Quality Assurance Project Plan Guidance and at/!͸ƭ 5ğƷğ vǒğƌźƷǤ hĬƆĻĭƷźǝĻƭ. Additional źƓŅƚƩƒğƷźƚƓ ĭğƓ ĬĻ ŅƚǒƓķ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ SW-846 On-line. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 23 Council Packet Page Number 273 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Non-detects ŷĻ YğƦƌğƓ aĻźĻƩ ƒĻƷŷƚķ ğǝğźƌğĬƌĻ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ tƩƚ /\[ software should be used to evaluate non-detect data including calculations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD and Benzo\[a\]pyrene equivalents (please refer to the Soil Investigation Guidance for additional information. Background concentrations For some soil contaminants, existing published background concentrations may lack a sufficient number of samples, be based on outdated QA/QC procedures and/or may not accurately represent background concentrations. In these cases, site specific background data are preferred. The following items apply when obtaining background samples: Samples should be collected in areas that have not been impacted by environmental contamination from the site and must be representative of natural background concentrations Background samples should be of similar soil characteristics, geologic origin, hydrogeologic situation and depth bgs as the samples obtained from the site Published background concentrations that are based on a sufficient number of samples, up to date QA/QC procedures and are expected to accurately represent background concentrations will be considered when appropriate. 4.6 Risk characterization Risk characterization determines if there is a possibility that human health risks may exist at a site. The risk evaluation (screening evaluation) is performed by comparing site contaminant concentration to their LUC SRVs using the SRV spreadsheet. Based on the methodology used to derive the SRVs, the following sections recommend specific contaminant concentrations, such as 95% upper confidence level of the mean (95 UCL) or maximum, to use in specific situations. In some cases it may not be possible or appropriate to use these recommendations. For example, if data sets are small it may not be possible to calculate a 95 UCL. If it is not possible to calculate the 95UCL, reference program specific guidance and/or contact the MPCA project team. Individual contaminant risks The SRV spreadsheet applicable to all sites in Minnesota should be used for this evaluation. For discrete samples or to evaluate chronic noncancer or cancer risks the 95% upper confidence level of the mean (95 UCL) contaminant concentration should be used. If the 95 UCL is greater than the maximum concentration too few samples may have been obtained. In this case, if additional samples are not an option, the maximum concentration should be used. For composite samples or to evaluate acute noncancer risks the maximum contaminant concentration should be used. Discrete samples or to evaluate chronic risks: If 95 UCL contaminant concentration is equal to or less than applicable LUC chronic SRV, contaminant does not present an unacceptable human health risk and is not considered a contaminant of concern (COC) If 95 UCL contaminant concentration is equal to or less than site background, contaminant does not present an unacceptable human health risk and is not considered a COC If 95 UCL contaminant concentration is greater than applicable LUC chronic SRV, contaminant may present an unacceptable human health risk and is considered a COC Exceedance of a chronic SRV indicates the need for further investigation to determine if a ĭŷƩƚƓźĭ ƩźƭƉ ĻǣźƭƷƭ Α źƷ ķƚĻƭ bh źƓķźĭğƷĻ ƷŷğƷ ğ ƩźƭƉ ĻǣźƭƷƭ DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 24 Council Packet Page Number 274 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 If 95 UCL contaminant concentration is greater than site background, contaminant may present an unacceptable human health risk and is considered a COC Composite samples or to evaluate acute risks: If maximum contaminant concentration is equal to or less than applicable LUC chronic SRV (composite samples) or acute SRV (acute risks), contaminant does not present a potential human health risk and is not considered a COC If maximum contaminant concentration is equal to or less than site background, contaminant does not present a potential human health risk and is not considered a COC If maximum contaminant concentration is greater than applicable LUC chronic SRV (composite samples) or acute SRV (acute risks), contaminant may present an unacceptable human health risk and is considered a COC Exceedance of an acute SRV indicates the need for further investigation to determine if an ğĭǒƷĻ ƩźƭƉ ĻǣźƭƷƭ Α źƷ ķƚĻƭ bh źƓķźĭğƷĻ ƷŷğƷ ğ ƩźƭƉ ĻǣźƭƷƭ If maximum contaminant concentration is greater than site background, contaminant may present an unacceptable human health risk and is considered a COC In general, if background concentrations exceed the LUC SRVs, it is appropriate to use the site background concentration as the SRV. ƚ ķĻƷĻƩƒźƓĻ ƷŷĻ ВЎ /\[ ƭƚŅƷǞğƩĻ ƭǒĭŷ ğƭ 9t!͸ƭ ProUCL, R or Minitab should be used. Potential risks for contaminants that are not listed in the SRV spreadsheet and lack sufficient toxicity data to derive a site specific SRV should be evaluated qualitatively (Appendix B). Background threshold values (BTVs) Ten of the soil reference values (SRVs) derived based on exposure parameters and toxicity values resulted in SRVs that were estimated as being potentially below background soil concentrations. An evaluation was conducted to determine if the health based SRV was below background concentrations and if necessary establish appropriate background values (Background Threshold Values or BTVs) that ĭƚǒƌķ ĬĻ ǒƭĻķ źƓƭƷĻğķ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ ŷĻğƌƷŷ ĬğƭĻķ {w źƓ at/!͸ƭ a9w\[! ğƓķ w/w! ƦƩƚŭƩğƒƭ͵ at/!͸ƭ wĻƒĻķźğƷźƚƓ ğƓķ 9ƓǝźƩƚƓƒĻƓƷğƌ !ƓğƌǤƭźƭ ğƓķ hǒƷĭƚƒĻ 5źǝźƭźƚƓƭ Λ9!hΜ ĭƚƓķǒĭƷĻķ ƷŷĻ evaluation to determine how the SRVs or BTVs for these 10 contaminants could be used at Remediation ĭƌĻğƓǒƦ ƭźƷĻƭ͵ tƌĻğƭĻ ƩĻŅĻƩ Ʒƚ ƷŷĻ ͻBackground Threshold (BTV) Evaluationͼ ķƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ ŅƚƩ ğķķźƷźƚƓğƌ information regarding that evaluation (MPCA 2015a). If a BTV was established for a specific chemical, it will be listed in the SRV spreadsheet in place of the health based SRV. It is not appropriate to include BTVs in calculations of additive risk. Additive risks It is generally not necessary to perform a separate evaluation for additive risks when conducting a risk evaluation using the SRVs spreadsheet containing SRVs derived to be applicable to the majority of sites in Minnesota. These SRVs are derived using a combined hazard quotient (HQ)/relative source contribution (RSC) of 0.2 and an excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) of 1E-05 making them reasonably protective of potential additive noncancer and cancer risks at the majority of MERLA and RCRA sites. If there is a site specific characteristic that a MPCA project team identifies as being a potential additive risk concern, an additive risk evaluation may be required as part of a risk evaluation. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 25 Council Packet Page Number 275 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 4.7 Uncertainty Uncertainties that could have a significant effect on the outcome of the risk evaluation (either an under or over estimate of risks) may exist for two reasons: Lack of knowledge of the site which can be reduced by additional research or knowledge Site specific data or information Scientific information Natural variability which cannot be reduced by additional research or knowledge There are many uncertainties involved in the risk evaluation. Some examples are exposure assumptions, sampling, laboratory analysis, toxicity information, contaminant speciation and professional judgment. 4.8 Conclusion The results from a risk evaluation may include: Quantitative results from the SRV spreadsheet Whether contaminant concentrations exceed their respective SRVs Whether the additive risk evaluations exceed the target noncancer and cancer risk levels (when necessary to evaluate) Qualitative discussion of potential risks associated with contaminants lacking toxicity data Quantitative and/or qualitative discussion of uncertainty and how it may impact the quantitative results If all contaminant concentrations are below the appropriate LUC SRVs and both noncancer and cancer additive risks are below target risks, it can be concluded that unacceptable human health risks do not exist at the site. If there are contaminant concentrations in exceedance of the appropriate LUC SRVs and/or noncancer or cancer additive risks are above target risks, this does not indicate there is an actual human health risk at the site. It indicates a need for further investigation by the specific program to determine if there may be an actual human health risk at the site. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 26 Council Packet Page Number 276 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 5.0 References ATSDR 2011. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Summary Report for the STSDR Soil Pica Workshop. July 5, 2011. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/child/soilpica.html. CA EPA 1999. California Environmental Protection Agency. Air Toxics Hot Spot Program Risk Assessment Guidelines. http://oehha.ca.gov/air/hot_spots/. EPA 1996. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Soźƌ {ĭƩĻĻƓźƓŭ DǒźķğƓĭĻʹ ƭĻƩ͸ƭ DǒźķĻ͵ WǒƌǤ ЊВВЏ͵ http://www.epa.gov/superfund/health/conmedia/soil/index.htm. EPA 2002. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Supplemental Guidance for Developing Soil Screening Levels for Superfund Sites. December 2002. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/health/conmedia/soil/index.htm. EPA 2002b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Guidance on Choosing a Sampling Design for Environmental Data Collection. http://www.epa.gov/QUALITY/qs-docs/g5s-final.pdf. EPA 2004. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund, Part E. July 2004. https://www.epa.gov/risk/risk-assessment-guidance-superfund-rags-part-e. EPA 2005. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Supplemental Guidance for Assessing Susceptibility from Early Life Exposures to Carcinogens. March 2005. http://epa.gov/cancerguidelines/guidelines- carcinogen-supplement.htm. EPA 2007. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. SW-846 On-line. http://www.epa.gov/epawaste/hazard/testmethods/sw846/online/index.htm. EPA 2008. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. /ŷźƌķƩĻƓ͸ƭ {ƦĻĭźŅźĭ 9ǣƦƚƭǒƩĻ CğĭƷƚƩ IğƓķĬƚƚƉ͵ September 2008. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=199243. EPA 2011a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Exposure Factor Handbook. September 2011. http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/risk/recordisplay.cfm?deid=236252. EPA 2011b. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. ProUCL Version 4.1.0, July 12, 2011. http://www.epa.gov/osp/hstl/tsc/software.htm. EPA 2013. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Test Method Collection Website. http://www.epa.gov/osa/fem/methcollectns.htm. EPA 2014. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Human Health Evaluation Manual, Supplemental Guidance: Update of Standard Default Exposure Factors. February, 2014. https://rais.ornl.gov/documents/OSWER-Directive-9200-1-120-Exposure-Factors_corrected.pdf. MDH 2001. Minnesota Department of Health. 2001. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons: Methods for Estimating Health Risks from Carcinogenic PAHs. http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/risk/guidance/pahmemo.html. MDH 2009. Minnesota Department of Health. June 2009. Guidance for Dioxins Α aĻƷŷƚķƭ ŅƚƩ 9ƭƷźƒğƷźƓŭ the Carcinogenic Health Risks from Dioxin-Like Compounds. http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/risk/guidance/dioxinmemo1.pdf. MPCA 1998. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Remedy Selection Guidance. http://www.pca.state.mn.us/enzq83d. MPCA 2011. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. at/!͸ƭ \[ğĬƚƩğƷƚƩǤ vǒğƌźƷǤ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ ğƓķ 5ğƷğ tƚƌźĭǤ. July 2011. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/about-mpca/mpca-quality-system. MPCA 2011a. Minnesota DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 27 Council Packet Page Number 277 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Pollution Control Agency. at/!͸ƭ \[ğĬƚƩğƷƚƩǤ 5ğƷğ Review Checklist Guidance. September 2011. https://www.pca.state.mn.us/about-mpca/mpca-quality-system. MPCA 2012. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Quality Assurance Project Plan Guidance. February 2012. http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ktqh3d9. MPCA 2012a. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Data Quality Objectives. March 2012. http://www.pca.state.mn.us/ktqh3d9. MPCA 2015. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. Soil Reference Value (SRV) Spreadsheet. http://www.pca.state.mn.us/enzq83d. MPCA 2015a. Minnesota Pollution control Agency. Background Threshold Value (BTV) Evaluation. http://www.pca.state.mn.us/enzq83d. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 28 Council Packet Page Number 278 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Appendix A: Derivation of acute RfDs A.1 Arsenic Acute arsenic toxicity results in gastrointestinal symptoms including nausea, vomiting and diarrhea and facial edema as the critical effects. Both symptoms subside when exposure is removed. Acute exposure may also result in the following other effects: respiratory effects including respiratory distress, hemorrhagic bronchitis and pulmonary edema; cardiac effects including altered myocardial depolarization (prolonged QT interval, nonspecific ST segment changes), cardiac arrhythmias and ischemic heart disease; and neurological effects including headache, lethargy, mental confusion, hallucination, seizures and coma (ATSDR 2007). LƷ źƭ ğƦƦƩƚƦƩźğƷĻ Ʒƚ ǒƭĻ !{5w͸ƭ ğĭǒƷĻ aw\[ ƚŅ Ў9ΏЉЌ mg/kg-day based on gastrointestinal effects from poisoning to humans from contaminated soy sauce. Exposure lasted two to three weeks and the dose was estimated at 0.05 mg/kg-day. An uncertainty factor of 10 was used to account for the use of a lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) instead of a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL). This results in an acute RfD of 5E-02 mg/kg-day. References ATSDR 2007. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Arsenic. August 2007. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/index.asp. A.2 Barium Acute barium toxicity usually begins with gastrointestinal symptoms including: abdominal pain, vomiting, diarrhea and weakness. Toxicity may progress to include more severe symptoms including: severe gastrointestinal hemorrhage, decreased blood potassium levels, cardiac arrhythmias, abnormal sensations that may begin in the mouth and spread to the extremities, muscle paralysis, complete quadriplegia, respiratory paralysis and death (Norberg et al. 2007, ATSDR 2007, IPCS 1991). It is not clear from the literature whether gastrointestinal effects always occur prior to the more severe effects (Lewi 1964, ATSDR 2007). Several cases of accidental and intentional barium poisoning have been reported but do not have an associated effect level. Norberg et al. 2007 reports a lowest effect level of 3 mg/kg based on a dose of 200 to 500 mg of barium and an adult weight of 70 kg. It is appropriate to use the effect level of 3 mg/kg from Norberg 2007. An uncertainty factor (UF) of 10 is applied to account for the use of a lowest observed adverse effect level (LOAEL) instead of a no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) since it has been reported that paralysis has been observed prior to any gastrointestinal effects. An UF of 10 is also applied to account for intraspecies variability. This result in an acute reference dose (RfD) of 0.03 mg/kŭΏĻǝĻƓƷ Ǟŷźĭŷ źƭ ƌƚǞĻƩ ƷŷğƓ 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЉЎ ĭŷƩƚƓźĭ wŅ5 of 0.2 mg/kg-day. It is generally not appropriate to set an acute RfD lower than a chronic RfD. Therefore, the ğĭǒƷĻ wŅ5 Ǟźƌƌ ĬĻ ƭĻƷ ğƷ 9t!͸ƭ ĭŷƩƚƓźĭ wŅ5 ƚŅ Љ͵Ћ ƒŭΉƉŭΏĻǝĻƓƷ. References ATSDR 2007. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Barium and Barium Compounds. August 2007. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/index.asp. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 29 Council Packet Page Number 279 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 IPCS 1991. International Programme on Chemical SaŅĻƷǤ͵ IĻğƌƷŷ ğƓķ {ğŅĻƷǤ DǒźķĻ bƚ͵ ЍЏ Α .ğƩźǒƒ͵ Geneva, Switzerland: United Nations Environment Programme, International Labour Organization, and the World Health Organization. 1991. http://www.inchem.org/pages/hsg.html. Lewi 1964. Lewi, Z., Bar-Khayim, Y., Warsaw, D.M., and Jerasalem, M.D. (1964). Food-poisoning from barium carbonate. Lancet, 2:342-343. Norberg et al. 2007. Norberg, G. F., Fowler, B.A., Norberg, M., Friberg, L. Handbook on the Toxicology of Metals. Third edition. Elsevier. 2007. A.3 Cadmium Acute cadmium toxicity begins with gastrointestinal symptoms including: nausea, vomiting, salivation, abdominal pain, cramps and diarrhea. No fatalities were reported in the literature and rapid recovery is experienced due to the low absorption rate of cadmium (ATSDR 2012, Norberg et al. 2007). There are cases of accidental cadmium poisoning reported in the literature as a result of cadmium plated utensils, metal pitchers, ice cube trays, food molds, solder, pipes, beverage taps and refrigerators (Frant and Kleeman 1941, Lauwerys 1979, Norberg 2007, ATSDR 2012). Norberg 1973 (as reported in ATSDR 2012) reported an effect dose of 0.07 mg/kg based on an accidental poisoning case that occurred due to cadmium contamination of a soft drink machine. It is appropriate to use the acute effect level from Norberg 1973 (also stated in ATSDR) of 0.07 mg/kg based on cadmium poisoning to humans caused by a soft drink machine. An UF of 3 is used to account for LOAEL to NOAEL with a less severe, transient effect and an UF of 3 is used to account for intraspecies variability. The result is an acute RfD of 0.007 mg/kg-event. References ATSDR 2012. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Cadmium. September 2012. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/index.asp. CƩğƓƷ ğƓķ YƌĻĻƒğƓ ЊВЍЊ͵ CƩğƓƷ {Ͳ ğƓķ YƌĻĻƒğƓ L͵ ЊВЍЊ͵ /ğķƒźǒƒ ͷŅƚƚķ ƦƚźƭƚƓźƓŭ͸͵ W !ƒ aĻķ !ƭƭƚĭ͵ 117:86-89. Norberg 1973. Nordberg GF, Slorach S, and Stenstrom T. 1973. Kadmiumforgiftning orsakad av kalidrycksoutumat. Lakartidningen 70:601 (as cited in ATSDR, 1999). Norberg et al. 2007. Norberg, G. F., Fowler, B.A., Norberg, M., Friberg, L. Handbook on the Toxicology of Metals. Third edition. Elsevier. 2007. Lauwerys, R. 1979. Cadmium in man. In Webb. Webb M, ed. NY, NY: Elsevier/North Holland Biomedical Press. The Chemistry, Biochemistry, and Biology of Cadmium. pp. 433-455. A.4 Copper Although copper is an essential element, acute copper toxicity may occur and begins with gastrointestinal symptoms including: nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain and diarrhea. Severe cases may result in liver and kidney damage (Norberg 2007). World Health Organization (WHO 1996) has established a recommended daily allowance (RDA) for copper of 0.09 mg/kg-day. Several copper drinking water studies have been conducted where doses were established. An adult study conducted by Olivares 2001 reported a NOAEL of 2 mg/L and a LOAEL of 4 mg/L. Olivares 1998 conducted a study on infants that indicated no adverse effects in infants exposed to 2 mg/L copper. Two DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 30 Council Packet Page Number 280 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 additional adult studies conducted by Araya 2001, 2003 reported NOAELs of 2 and 0.8 mg/L, respectively. Spitalny 1984 reported symptoms in a family exposed to 2.8 to 7.8 mg/L. Nichloas 1968 reported symptoms in adult workers exposed to 0.07 mg/kg in drinking water. Knobeloch 1994 reported five copper poisoning cases, some of which were infants symptomatic after exposure to 0.16 to 7.8 mg/L of copper. Although the 1994 Knobeloch study documents infant acute symptoms at exposure concentrations below 2 mg/L, the infants were also exposed to nitrate in drinking water. Mild symptoms subside after exposure is eliminated. It is appropriate to use the RDA of 0.09 mg/kg-day with UF of 1. It would be appropriate to use the 1998 Olivares study NOAEL of 2 mg/L which corresponds to a NOAEL of 0.2 mg/kg. However, after using an UF of 3 for intraspecies variability the resulting RfD would be 0.07 mg/kg, less than the RDA. It is appropriate to use the RDA as the acute RfD, 0.09 mg/kg-event. References Araya 2001. Araya M, McGoldrick MC, Klevay LM, et al. 2001. Determination of an acute no-observed- adverse-effect level (NOAEL) for copper in water. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 34(2):137-145. Araya 2003. Araya M, Chen B, Klevay LM, et al. 2003. Confirmation of an acute no-observed-adverse- effect and low-observed-adverse-effect level for copper in bottled drinking water in a multi-site international study. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 38(3):389-399. Knobeloch 1994. Knobeloch, L., Ziarnik, M., Howard, J., Theis, B., Farmer, D., Anderson, H., and Proctor, M.(1994). Gastrointestinal upsets associated with ingestion of copper-contaminated water. Environ. Health Perspect., 102:958-961. Norberg et al. 2007. Norberg, G. F., Fowler, B.A., Norberg, M., Friberg, L. Handbook on the Toxicology of Metals. Third edition. Elsevier. 2007. Nichloas 1968. Nicholas, P.O. (1966). Food Poisoning in the Morning Tea. The Lancet, 7558, 292. Olivares 1998. Olivares M, Pizarro F, Speisky H, et al. 1998. Copper in infant nutrition: safety of World Health Organization provisional guideline value for copper content of drinking water. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 26:251-257. Olivares 2001. Olivares M, Araya M, Pizarro F, Uauy R. 2001. Nausea threshold in apparently healthy individuals who drink fluids containing graded concentrations of copper. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 33(3):271-275. Spitalny 1984. Spitalny, K.C., Brondum, J., Vogt, R.L., Sargent, H.E., and Kappel, S. (1984). Drinking-water induced copper intoxication in a Vermont family. Pediatrics, 74:1103-1106. WHO 1996. World Health Organization. Trace Elements in Human Nutrition and Health. 1996. http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/micronutrients/9241561734/en/index.html. A.5 Cyanide Acute cyanide toxicity results in respiratory distress followed by convulsions, loss of consciousness, respiratory failure and death (ATSDR 2006). Although cyanide poisoning has been widely studied, no lowest effect levels have been reported in the literature. ATSDR 2006 reports an average fatal dose of 1.52 mg/kg and a lowest fatal dose of 0.56 mg/kg from Gettler and Baine 1938. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 31 Council Packet Page Number 281 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 It is appropriate to use the lowest fatal dose of 0.56 mg/kg from Gettler and Baine 1938 as cited in ATSDR 2006. An UF of 10 is applied to account for a severe lethal effect and an UF of 10 is applied to account for intraspecies variability. This results in an acute RfD of 0.0056 mg/kg-event. References ATSDR 2006. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Cyanide. July 2006. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/index.asp. Gettler and Baine 1938. Gettler, A.O. and Baine, J.O. (1938). The toxicology of cyanide. Am. J. Med. Sci., 195:182-198. A.6 Fluoride Acute fluoride toxicity begins with gastrointestinal symptoms including: nausea, vomiting, weakness, diarrhea, muscle twitching and excess salivation. Rapid recovery generally takes place once the exposure is eliminated (Hoffman 1980, ATSDR 2003). Reports of accidental fluoride poisoning due to exposure via drinking water resulting from malfunctioning fluoridators have been reported in the literature. Hoffman 1980 reported a dose of 70 to 140 mg/kg caused gastrointestinal symptoms in children. Vogt 1982 estimated that a dose of 0.7 to 1.3 mg/kg caused nausea in adults and 2 to 3 mg/kg caused vomiting in adults. Two studies investigated reports of fluoride poisoning by poison control centers. Augenstien 1991 estimated an effect dose from 2 to 4 mg/kg and a lethal dose from 6 to 83 mg/kg. Spoerke 1980 estimated an effect dose of 50 to 225 mg/kg. A dose of 5 mg/kg where medical attention is required has been established by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC 1995) as reported in Whitman 1990 and as cited in ATSDR 2003 and Ellenhorn 1997. LƷ źƭ ğƦƦƩƚƦƩźğƷĻ Ʒƚ ǒƭĻ Ў ƒŭΉƉŭ ĬğƭĻķ ƚƓ /5/͸ƭ ƩĻĭƚƒƒĻƓķĻķ ķƚƭĻ ŅƚƩ ƭĻĻƉźƓŭ ƒĻķźĭğƌ ğƷƷĻƓƷźƚƓ͵ ŷĻƩĻ are other lower potential lethal doses reported from poison control centers but these doses cannot be verified. An UF of 10 was applied to account for a use of a LOAEL instead of a NOAEL. It is assumed that intraspecies variability was taken into consideration when the dose to received medical treatment was established. This results in an acute RfD of 5 mg/kg-event. References ATSDR 2003. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Fluoride, Hydrogen Fluoride and Fluorine. September 2003. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/index.asp. Augenstien 1991. Augenstein, L., Spoerke, D.G., Kulig, K.W., Hall, A.H., Hall, P.K., Riggs, B.S., Saadi, M.E., and Rumack, B.H. (1991). Fluoride ingestion in children: a review of 87 cases. Pediatrics, 88:907-912. CDC 1995. Center for Disease Control. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR). Engineering and administrative Recommendations for Water Fluoridation 1995. September 29, 1995. Vol. 44. 9ƌƌĻƓŷƚƩƓ ЊВВА͵ 9ƌƌĻƓŷƚƩƓͲ a͵W͵Ͳ {ĭŷƚƓǞğƌķͲ {͵Ͳ hƩķƚŭͲ D͵Ͳ ğƓķ ‘ğƭƭĻƩĬĻƩŭĻƩͲ W͵ ΛЊВВАΜ͵ 9ƌƌĻƓŷƚƩƓ͸ƭ aĻķźĭğƌ͵ Toxicology: Diagnosis and Treatment of Human Poisoning, 2nd Edition. Baltimore, MD. Williams & Williams. Hoffman 1980. Hoffman, R., Mann, J., Calderone, J., Trumbell, J., and Burkhart, M. (1980). Acute fluoride poisoning in a New Mexico elementary school. Pediatrics, 65:897-900. Spoerke 1980. Spoerke, D.G., Bennett, D.L., and Gullekson, D.J.K. (1980). Toxicity related to acute low dose sodium fluoride ingestions. J. Fam. Practice, 10:139-140. Vogt 1982. Vogt, R.L., Witherell, L., LaRue, D., and Klaucey, D.N. (1982). Acute fluoride poisoning associated with an on-site fluoridation in a Vermont elementary school. Am. J. Public Health, 72:1168-1171. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 32 Council Packet Page Number 282 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 A.7 Nickel Acute nickel toxicity results in nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, giddiness, lassitude, headache and cough (ATSDR 2005, Sunderman 1988). Although it is an essential trace element for several other species, the nutritional importance of nickel in humans has not been studied. Nickel is present in a wide variety of foods. There is no evidence that consumptźƚƓ ƚŅ ğ ƓƚƩƒğƌ ğƒƚǒƓƷ ƚŅ ƓźĭƉĻƌ źƓ ğ ŷǒƒğƓ͸ƭ ķźĻƷ will cause adverse effects. However, two studies report nickel ingestion from food may cause contact dermatitis in sensitive individuals (Cronin 1980, Gawkrodger 1986, ATSDR 2005). Sunderman 1988 reported nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps, giddiness, lassitude, headache and cough in adult workers exposed to 7 to 36 mg/kg in drinking water. Ten of these workers required hospitalization. It is appropriate to use the lowest effect dose of 7 mg/kg from Saunderman 1988. An UF of 3 is applied to account for the use of a LOAEL instead of a NOAEL and an UF of 10 to account for intraspecies variability. Although 10 out of 20 people did require hospitalization, their exposure may have been increased compared to the 10 who did not require hospitalization and the UF of 10 for intraspecies variability appears to adequately cover this uncertainty. This results in an acute RfD of 0.2 mg/kg-event. References ATSDR 2005. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Nickel. August 2005. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/index.asp. Cronin 1980. Cronin, E., DiMichiel, A.D., and Brown, S.S. (1980). Oral challenge in nickel-sensitive women with hand eczema. In: Nickel Toxicology. (Brown, S.S., and F.W. Sunderman, Eds.). Gawkrodger 1986. Gawkrodger, D.J., Cook, S.W., Fell, G.S., and Huner, J.A.A. (1986). Nickel dermatitis: the reaction or oral nickel challenge. Br. J. Dermatol., 115:33-38. Sunderman 1988. Sunderman FW, Dingle B, Hopfer SM, and Swift T. 1988. Acute nickel toxicity in electroplating workers whom accidentally ingested a solution of nickel sulfate and nickel chloride. Am. J. Ind. Med. 14:257-266. A.8 Pentachlorophenol There are few reports regarding acute toxicity in humans following ingestion of pentachlorophenol. All of the cases reported in the literature lack exposure data and information regarding possible exposure to other chemicals. Symptoms associated with these cases include: hyperthermia generated by uncoupling of oxidative phosphorylation, hemolytic anemia, hepatic enlargement, dermal toxicity, chloracne and death (ATSDR 2001). Animal studies report symptoms of vomiting, hyperpyrexia and elevated blood pressure, heart rate and respiration rate following acute exposures. ATSDR 2001 reports an acute oral minimum risk level (MRL) of 0.005 mg/kg-day based on delayed ossification of skulls in rat pups. Similar results have been observed in other animal studies. MDH has derived an acute RfD of 0.0040 mg/kg/day (MDH 2013). UF factors applied include 3 for interspecies variability, 10 for intraspecies variability, 3 for a LOAEL to NOAEL and 3 for database uncertainty. Additivity endpoints include developmental and thyroid (endocrine disrupting). It is ğƦƦƩƚƦƩźğƷĻ Ʒƚ ǒƭĻ a5I͸ƭ acute RfD of 0.0040 mg/kg-event. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 33 Council Packet Page Number 283 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 References ATSDR 2001. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Pentachlorophenol. September 2001. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/index.asp. MDH 2013. Minnesota Department of Health. Toxicological Summary for Pentachlorophenol (PCP). August 2013. http://www.health.state.mn.us/divs/eh/risk/guidance/gw/table.html. A.9 Phenol Acute phenol toxicity results in mouth sores, burning mouth, dark urine, diarrhea and in some cases death (ATSDR 2008, Baker 1978). Bennett 1950 reported a lethal dose of 230 mg/kg. EPA 2002 estimates the lowest lethal doses range between 14 to 930 mg/kg. Baker 1978 reported a lowest effect level of 0.14 to 3.4 mg/kg-day. However, exposure data in this study was uncertain. A study conducted on cases at a poison control center reported a lowest effect dose for a child of 98 mg/kg (Spiller 1993). ATSDR 2008 reports an acute oral MRL of 1 mg/kg-day based on decreased fetal weight in a rat study using divided gavage dosing to reduce the increased toxicity with gavage dosing vs. drinking water exposure. LƷ źƭ ğƦƦƩƚƦƩźğƷĻ Ʒƚ ǒƭĻ !{5w͸ƭ ğĭǒƷĻ aw\[ ƚŅ Њ ƒŭ/kg-day based on decreased fetal weight in a rat ƭƷǒķǤ͵ ! .a5 ƚŅ ЊЎЋ ƒŭΉƉŭΏķğǤ Ǟğƭ ķĻƩźǝĻķ ǒƭźƓŭ 9t!͸s software. An UF of 10 was used for intraspecies variability and another UF of 10 was used for interspecies variability resulting in an acute MRL of 1 mg/kg. This result in an acute RfD of 1 mg/kg-event. References ATSDR 2008. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Toxicological Profile for Phenol. September 2008. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/index.asp. Baker 1978. Baker, E.L., Bertozzi, P.E., Field, P.H., Basteyns, B.J., and Skinner, H.G. (1978). Phenol poisoning due to contaminated drinking water. Arch. Environ. Health, 33:89-94. Bennett, I.L., James, D.F., and Golden, A. (1950). Severe acidosis due to phenol poisoning. Report of two cases. Ann. Intern. Med., 32:324-327. Spiller HA, Quadrani-Kushner DA, and Cleveland P. 1993. A five year evaluation of acute exposures to phenol disinfectant (26%). Clin Toxicol. 31:307-313. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 34 Council Packet Page Number 284 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 !ƦƦĻƓķźǣ .ʹ {źƷĻ ƭƦĻĭźŅźĭ ƩźƭƉ ğƭƭĻƭƭƒĻƓƷ Α Minimum requirements This section includes the minimum requirements for using the SRVs in a site specific risk assessment and is not intended to replace program specific guidance. Site specific risk assessments are conducted to 1) evaluate an exposure pathway that exists on a site that is not included in the SRVs or 2) obtain a more realistic estimate of potential human health risks at a site using site specific information. A site specific risk assessment allows more flexibility when determining exposure concentrations and the use of site specific information to derive site specific SRVs. In comparison, a risk evaluation uses procedures for determining exposure concentrations and deriving SRVs that are applicable to the majority of sites in Minnesota. The site specific risk assessment procedure listed below has been modified from the risk evaluation procedure listed in Section 4.0. Much of the process will be identical. Parts of the process that are identical are listed in normal font. Items that differ between the two processes are listed in italics. ŷźƭ ğƭƭĻƭƭƒĻƓƷ ƭŷƚǒƌķ ĬĻ ĭƚƓķǒĭƷĻķ ǒƭźƓŭ 9t!͸ƭ ƩĻasonable maximum exposure (RME) concept to provide a realistic and health protective estimate of risks. It should not be based on a worst case scenario. SRVs evaluate chronic noncancer and cancer risks and acute risks for a limited number of chemicals (listed in Section 3.3.2). Any other potential subchronic, short-term or acute risks associated with a site should be evaluated. B.1 Identify LUC and contaminants of potential concern Site uses should be clearly identified to determine which LUC is appropriate for the site and identify the contaminants of potential concern (COPC). Table 1 and Figures 1 through 6 should be used to determine the appropriate LUC for the site. Any contaminants associated with site uses or that have been detected at the site should be included as COPCs. B.2 Exposure pathways and receptors All potential exposure pathways and receptors must be identified. For an exposure pathway to be complete, the following three conditions must exist: Source of contamination Exposure route Potential receptor Possible routes of human health exposure to contaminants in soil include: Incidental soil ingestion Ingestion via produce Ingestion via food chain Dermal contact with soil Inhalation via fugitive dust Inhalation via volatilization - outdoor air Inhalation via volatilization - indoor air DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 35 Council Packet Page Number 285 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Routes of exposure included in the derivation of SRVs are bolded. The inhalation via volatilization - indoor air route of exposure is evaluated during the vapor intrusion investigation. If any of the routes of exposure that are not bolded in the list apply to a site (except for the inŷğƌğƷźƚƓ ƚŅ ǝƚƌğƷźƌźǩğƷźƚƓ Α źƓķƚƚƩ air), a site specific risk assessment may be required (Appendix B). Potential receptors on or off site that may be exposed to site soil contamination should be identified. It is also important to identify the most sensitive receptor that may be exposed. In general, if there is no completed exposure pathway for a COPC then it can be eliminated. B.3 Risk assessment conceptual site model A conceptual site model (CSM) used in a risk evaluation should clearly demonstrate site conditions impacting human health soil exposures and risks. At a minimum, the following items should be clearly illustrated in the CSM: Site geological and hydrogeological settings Locations, concentrations and volumes of contamination Contaminant migration pathways Exposure pathways Potential receptors on or off site B.4 Exposure area/point and exposure concentrations An exposure area or exposure point is where a receptor contacts contaminated soil. Chronic, subchronic and short-term exposures typically occur in an exposure area, whereas acute exposure occurs at an exposure point. Due to the possible transport of contamination off site, exposure areas or points may be located on or off site. Site use should be taken into consideration when determining appropriate exposure areas and exposure points. Samples from an exposure area may be averaged over the entire exposure area to arrive at an exposure area concentration. Exposure areas should be defined to include areas of contaminated soil only and should not contain uncontaminated soil. Including uncontaminated areas in the exposure area results in an underestimate of the actual exposure area concentration. Exposure points should be defined by discrete samples with one exposure concentration. Samples used to represent an exposure area or exposure point concentration should be representative of the area and depth to which the potential receptor may be exposed. Areas containing significantly higher concentrations of contamination than surrounding areas are referred to as hot spots. These areas may have been subject to larger releases or contaminated in different ways than other areas of the site. All hot spots should be defined as distinct exposure areas and evaluated separately. Area and time weighted exposure point concentrations For the risk evaluation, the exposure concentration used is a spatial average and is assumed to be equal to the temporal average based on the following assumptions: Soil concentrations remain constant over time. There is no mechanism decreasing contaminant concentrations over time, such as biodegradation. Samples represent a uniform, random distribution of soil samples over the entire exposure area. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 36 Council Packet Page Number 286 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 A receptor is equally likely to be exposed to any exposure points within the exposure area. Rationale and data should be provided for any adjustments made to an exposure concentration due to biodegradation. In some cases, the spatial average exposure concentration is not equal to the temporal average exposure concentration. It may be appropriate to use area or time weighted exposure concentrations if detailed site specific exposure pattern information is known and if necessary, potential future site use is known and considered. This does require the approval of a MPCA or MDH risk assessor and the Remediation project team. Area weighted exposure concentration For cases where samples (contaminant concentrations) are not evenly spaced over the exposure area but ğ ƩĻĭĻƦƷƚƩ͸ƭ ĻǣƦƚƭǒƩĻ źƭ ĻƨǒğƌƌǤ ƌźƉĻƌǤ ƚǝĻƩ ƷŷĻ ĻƓƷźƩĻ exposure area, an area weighted average exposure concentration can be calculated. Time weighted exposure concentration For cases where a receptor is not equally likely to be exposed over the entire exposure area but the samples are evenly spaced over the exposure area, a time weighted average exposure concentration can be calculated. In this case, the most conservative applicable exposure assumptions must be used to derive the site specific SRVs. Soil concentration modeling Data from actual sampling is the most accurate method of determining an exposure concentration and is always preferred. In some cases modeling may be appropriate if the site situation does not allow sampling. B.5 Sampling Data obtained from sampling is used to estimate an exposure concentration used to evaluate potential risks. Appropriately designed sampling accomplishes the following: Determines presence or absence of contamination Identifies contaminants present Delineates both lateral and vertical extent of contamination Identifies hot spots Provides background concentrations when necessary Two types of sampling designs commonly used are target (judgmental) and probabilistic sampling. In target sample locations are selected based on site information and professional judgment. In probabilistic sample locations are selected based on a random statistical model. Probabilistic models commonly used are: simple random, systematic/grid and stratified sampling. Simple random is used when the population being sampled is homogeneous without potential hot spots. Sample locations are selected on a random basis so they are not necessarily uniformly distributed across the site. Systematic/grid is often used when little information is available about a site or to fully characterize a site. Sample locations are evenly distributed throughout the site using a grid. Stratified separates a site into homogeneous groups or strata based on soil characteristics, site knowledge and professional judgment. Each strata is sampled independently using an appropriate method, most commonly systematic/grid. These sampling designs are discussed in ŭƩĻğƷĻƩ ķĻƷğźƌ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ ЋЉЉЋ Guidance on Choosing a Sampling Design for Environmental Data Collection. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 37 Council Packet Page Number 287 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 The type of sampling that will be most effective to adequately characterize a site will depend on sampling objectives, how much information is available regarding contaminant releases and site specific characteristics. For most situations a combination of two sampling methods, target and stratified, are recommended. Sites are typically divided into units that share common soil and COPC release characteristics and then sampled appropriately. The default soil depth a receptor is likely to be directly exposed to will vary by LUC. Exposure concentrations to evaluate any potential risks from ingestion, dermal or inhalation via fugitive dust should be calculated from samples obtained from the surface to the depth a receptor is likely to have direct exposure to (Table 1 and Figures 1 through 6). If a situation exists on site that does not meet the assumptions used to establish the applicable LUC depth of exposure, the exposure concentration is required to be obtained from the site specific depth the receptor is likely to have direct exposure to. When VOCs or SVOCs are present, exposure concentrations to evaluate potential outdoor inhalation risk from vapor should be calculated from subsurface samples obtained from 2 cm below the soil surface to an appropriate depth based on the specific contaminant present and site characteristics. Composite sampling Composite sampling must be approved by the MPCA project team. If any of the following conditions apply, composite sampling should not be conducted: VOCs are being analyzed Soil samples that are not homogeneous Contaminant pattern is unknown or variable Matrix interference among contaminants is likely Acute risks are being evaluated (includes cases where the SRV is based on acute risks) Maximum contaminant concentrations should be used for composite samples. Laboratory analysis Analysis should be conducted for all COPCs and calculated on a total, dry weight basis. Appropriate quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures and methods with detection limits below the SRVs should be used. For general considerations when designing a sampling plan please refer to Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Quality Assurance Project Plan GuźķğƓĭĻ ğƓķ at/!͸ƭ 5ğƷğ vǒğƌźƷǤ hĬƆĻĭƷźǝĻƭ. Additional źƓŅƚƩƒğƷźƚƓ ĭğƓ ĬĻ ŅƚǒƓķ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ SW-846 On-line. Data presentation Sampling data should be presented in a clear and concise manner in tables and include the following statistics: Results of each individual sample Detection limit and type of detection limit Number of observations Frequency of detection Maximum Minimum Median Arithmetic mean and standard deviation DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 38 Council Packet Page Number 288 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 95% upper confidence level of the mean (95UCL) Identify samples designated with J to reflect an estimated concentration For composite samples maximum concentrations should be used. It is not appropriate to report the items bolded in the list above for composite samples. Non-detects ŷĻ YğƦƌğƓ aĻźĻƩ ƒĻƷŷƚķ ğǝğźƌğĬƌĻ źƓ 9t!͸ƭ tƩƚ /\[ software is recommended to evaluate non-detect data including calculations of 2,3,7,8-TCDD and Benzo\[a\]pyrene equivalents (please refer to the Soil Investigation Guidance for additional information. Background concentrations For some soil contaminants, existing published background concentrations may lack a sufficient number of samples, be based on outdated quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures and/or may not accurately represent background concentrations. In these cases, site specific background data are preferred. The following items apply when obtaining background samples: Samples should be collected in areas that have not been impacted by environmental contamination from the site and must be representative of natural background concentrations Background samples should be of similar soil characteristics, geologic origin, hydrogeologic situation and depth bgs as the samples obtained from the site Published background concentrations that are based on a sufficient number of samples, up to date QA/QC procedures and are expected to accurately represent background concentrations will be considered when appropriate. B.6 Risk characterization Risk characterization determines if there is a possibility that human health risks may exist at a site. The risk evaluation (screening evaluation) is performed by comparing site contaminant concentration to their LUC SRVs using the SRV spreadsheet. Based on the methodology used to derive the SRVs, the following sections recommend specific contaminant concentrations, such as 95% upper confidence level of the mean (95 UCL) or maximum, to use in specific situations. In some cases it may not be possible or appropriate to use these recommendations. For example, if data sets are small it may not be possible to calculate a 95 UCL. If it is not possible to calculate the 95UCL, reference program specific guidance and/or contact the MPCA project team. Individual contaminant risks The {w ƭƦƩĻğķƭŷĻĻƷ Α {źƷĻ {ƦĻĭźŅźĭ should be used for this evaluation. For discrete samples or to evaluate chronic noncancer or cancer risks the 95% upper confidence level of the mean (95 UCL) contaminant concentration should be used. If the 95 UCL is greater than the maximum concentration too few samples may have been obtained. In this case, if additional samples are not an option, the maximum concentration should be used. For composite samples or to evaluate acute noncancer risks the maximum contaminant concentration should be used. Discrete samples or to evaluate chronic risks: If 95 UCL contaminant concentration is equal to or less than applicable LUC chronic SRV, contaminant does not present an unacceptable human health risk and is not considered a contaminant of concern (COC) DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 39 Council Packet Page Number 289 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 If 95 UCL contaminant concentration is equal to or less than site background, contaminant does not present an unacceptable human health risk and is not considered a COC If 95 UCL contaminant concentration is greater than applicable LUC chronic SRV, contaminant may present an unacceptable human health risk and is considered a COC Exceedance of a chronic SRV indicates the need for further investigation to determine if a ĭŷƩƚƓźĭ ƩźƭƉ ĻǣźƭƷƭ Α źƷ ķƚĻƭ bh źƓķźĭğƷĻ ƷŷğƷ ğ ƩźƭƉ ĻǣźƭƷƭ If 95 UCL contaminant concentration is greater than site background, contaminant may present an unacceptable human health risk and is considered a COC Composite samples or to evaluate acute risks: If maximum contaminant concentration is equal to or less than applicable LUC chronic SRV (composite samples) or acute SRV (acute risks), contaminant does not present a potential human health risk and is not considered a COC If maximum contaminant concentration is equal to or less than site background, contaminant does not present a potential human health risk and is not considered a COC If maximum contaminant concentration is greater than applicable LUC chronic SRV (composite samples) or acute SRV (acute risks), contaminant may present an unacceptable human health risk and is considered a COC Exceedance of an acute SRV indicates the need for further investigation to determine if an ğĭǒƷĻ ƩźƭƉ ĻǣźƭƷƭ Α źƷ ķƚĻƭ bh źƓķźĭğƷĻ ƷŷğƷ ğ ƩźƭƉ ĻǣźƭƷƭ If maximum contaminant concentration is greater than site background, contaminant may present an unacceptable human health risk and is considered a COC In general, if background concentrations exceed the LUC SRVs, it is appropriate to use the site background concentration as the SRV. ƚ ķĻƷĻƩƒźƓĻ ƷŷĻ ВЎ /\[ ƭƚŅƷǞğƩĻ ƭǒĭŷ ğƭ 9t!͸ƭ ProUCL, R or Minitab should be used. Background threshold values (BTVs) Ten of the soil reference values (SRVs) derived based on exposure parameters and toxicity values resulted in SRVs that were estimated as being potentially below background soil concentrations. An evaluation was conducted to determine if the health based SRV was below background concentrations and if necessary establish appropriate background values (Background Threshold Values or BTVs) that ĭƚǒƌķ ĬĻ ǒƭĻķ źƓƭƷĻğķ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ ŷĻğƌƷŷ ĬğƭĻķ {w źƓ at/!͸ƭ a9w\[! ğƓķ w/w! ƦƩƚŭƩğƒƭ͵ at/!͸ƭ wĻƒĻķźğƷźƚƓ ğƓķ 9ƓǝźƩƚƓƒĻƓƷğƌ !ƓğƌǤƭźƭ ğƓķ hǒƷĭƚƒĻ 5źǝźƭźƚƓƭ Λ9!hΜ ĭƚƓķǒĭƷĻķ ƷŷĻ evaluation to determine how the SRVs or BTVs for these 10 contaminants could be used at Remediation ĭƌĻğƓǒƦ ƭźƷĻƭ͵ tƌĻğƭĻ ƩĻŅĻƩ Ʒƚ ƷŷĻ ͻBackground Threshold (BTV) Evaluationͼ ķƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ ŅƚƩ ğķķźƷźƚƓğƌ information regarding that evaluation (MPCA 2015a). If a BTV was established for a specific chemical, it will be listed in the SRV spreadsheet in place of the health based SRV. It is not appropriate to include BTVs in calculations of additivity risk. Site specific SRVs The SRV spreadsheet - Site Specific may be used to derive site specific SRVs that may be used to establish cleanup values by 1) deriving SRVs that are appropriate to be site specific cleanup values or 2) by presenting a range of risks that may be used to set site specific cleanup values based on the range of risks and other site specific information. All modifications to exposure parameters require approval of the MPCA project team and a MPCA or MDH risk assessor. Table B.1 describes the modifications that are allowed and the appropriate use of the modification. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 40 Council Packet Page Number 290 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency pper percentile estimates -06 to 1E-04 Appropriate Purpose of Modification Value is more appropriate to use with different species of chemical presentPresent a range of potential risks based on appropriate central and uPresent a range of potential risks based on ELCR's from 1EPresent a range of potential risks based on HQ's from 0.2 to 1Value is more appropriate to use with different species of chemical presentSufficient rational exists to support difference, ex. nursing home, state forestSufficient rational exists to support difference, ex. hospital, nursing home Spreadsheet from MPCA Risk Assessor Modification Requires Modified SRV X X SRV Spreadsheet Modification Can Be Made in Site Specific X X X X X Approval Required 3 X X X X X X X Modification Allowed 41 Com/Ind Modification Allowed Res/Rec-Recreational Modification Allowed Res/Rec-MFH Other X X X X X X 2 Modification Allowed Res/Rec-MFH - Multi Family Housing 1 Modification Allowed Res/Rec-Single Family Home X X X X NAX X X X NAX X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Parameter chronic noncancer SRVs noncancer SRV Acute Toxicity ValueIngestion Rate Cancer and Excess Lifetime Cancer Risk (ELCR)Hazard Quotient (HQ)Toxicity Values Exposure FrequencyExposure Duration Table B-1. Site specific SRV parameter modifications 5w!C {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻ Λ{wΜ ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Council Packet Page Number 291 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency pper percentile estimates upland sediments Appropriate Purpose of Modification appropriate to modify Present a range of potential risks based on appropriate central and uEvaluation of Value is more appropriate to use with different species of chemical presentValue is more appropriate to use with different species of chemical presentValue appropriate to use with species of chemical present and site soil characteristicsNot appropriate to modifyNot Modification is automated in spreadsheet when exposure duration is modifiedNot appropriate to modifyNot appropriate to modify Spreadsheet from MPCA Risk Assessor Modification Requires Modified SRV X X X SRV Spreadsheet Modification Can Be Made in Site Specific X X X Approval Required 3 X X X X X X Modification Allowed 42 Com/Ind Modification Allowed Res/Rec-Recreational Modification Allowed Res/Rec-MFH Other X X X 2 Modification Allowed Res/Rec-MFH - Multi Family Housing 1 Modification Allowed Res/Rec-Single Family Home X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Parameter Ingestion RateAdherence FactorDermal AbsorptionGastrointestinal AbsorptionRelative BioavailabilityAge Dependent Adjustment Factors Cancer Averaging TimeNoncancer Averaging TimeBody WeightSurface Area Standard Volatilization Factor 5w!C {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻ Λ{wΜ ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Council Packet Page Number 292 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Appropriate Purpose of Modification Site specific modeling or different source area than default of 0.5 acre square Site specific data Site specific modeling or different source area than default of 0.5 acre square Site specific dataSite specific data Site specific dataSite specific dataAutomatically calculated when soil particle density and dry soil bulk density are modifiedSite specific dataSite specific dataSite specific data Spreadsheet from MPCA Risk Assessor Modification Requires Modified SRV SRV Spreadsheet Modification Can Be Made in Site Specific X X X X X X X X X X X Approval Required 3 X X X X X X X X X X X Modification Allowed 43 Com/Ind Modification Allowed Res/Rec-Recreational Modification Allowed Res/Rec-MFH Other 2 Modification Allowed Res/Rec-MFH - Multi Family Housing 1 Modification Allowed Res/Rec-Single Family Home X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X (thickness) X X X X X X X X X X Parameter Volatilization Factor Inverse of Mean ConcentrationDry Soil Bulk Density Mass Limit Inverse of Mean ConcentrationDry Soil Bulk DensityAverage Depth of Source Apparent Diffusivity Air Filled Soil PorosityWater Filled Soil PorosityTotal Soil PorositySoil Particle DensityDry Soil Bulk DensityFraction of Organic Carbon in Soil 5w!C {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻ Λ{wΜ ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Council Packet Page Number 293 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency are modified rational exists to support difference, ex. are required to be modified at the same parameters: MAW, ETV and dependent Appropriate Purpose of Modification based on modeling specific data Site specific modeling or different source area than default of 0.5 acre square Sufficient no significant amount of exposed soilAll threefunction timeSite specific dataSiteSite specific dataSite specific dataAutomatically calculated when soil particle density and dry soil bulk density Site specific data Spreadsheet from MPCA Risk Assessor Modification Requires Modified SRV SRV Spreadsheet Modification Can Be Made in Site Specific X X X X X X X X X X X Approval Required 3 X X X X X X X X X X X Modification Allowed 44 Com/Ind Modification Allowed Res/Rec-Recreational Modification Allowed Res/Rec-MFH Other 2 Modification Allowed Res/Rec-MFH - Multi Family Housing X X X X 1 Modification Allowed Res/Rec-Single Family Home X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X 4 4 4 X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Function Parameter Particulate Emission Factor Inverse of Mean ConcentrationFraction of Vegetative CoverMean Annual Windspeed (MAW) Equivalent Threshold Value (ETV) MAW & EVT Dependent Soil Saturation Limit Dry Soil Bulk DensityFraction of Organic Carbon in SoilWater Filled Soil PorosityAir Filled Soil PorosityTotal Soil PorositySoil Particle Density 5w!C {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻ Λ{wΜ ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Council Packet Page Number 294 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Appropriate Purpose of Modification Spreadsheet from MPCA Risk Assessor Modification Requires Modified SRV SRV Spreadsheet Modification Can Be Made in Site Specific Approval Required 3 Modification Allowed 45 Com/Ind ing and Other Areas Land Use Category Modification Allowed the same time based on modeling Res/Rec-Recreational Modification Allowed and Other Areas Land Use Category Res/Rec-MFH Other 2 Modification Allowed Res/Rec-MFH - Multi Family Housing 1 Modification Allowed Res/Rec-Single Family Home CA project team and MPCA risk assessor are all required to be modified at rtion of the Res/Rec-Multi-Family Hous the Res/Rec-Multi-Family Housing Parameter - Commercial/Industrial - Residential/Recreational - Includes "multi-family housing" po - Includes "other" portion of - Modifications must be approved by MP - MAW, ETV and dependent function Res/Rec Com/Ind 1234 5w!C {ƚźƌ wĻŅĻƩĻƓĭĻ ğƌǒĻ Λ{wΜ ĻĭŷƓźĭğƌ {ǒƦƦƚƩƷ 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ Council Packet Page Number 295 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Additive risks Additive risks are generally required to be evaluated quantitatively using the {w ƭƦƩĻğķƭŷĻĻƷ Α {źƷĻ Specific since site specific SRVs will be derived using modified site specific exposure parameters. All site noncancer risks are summed according to similar target endpoints and compared to a hazard quotient (HQ) of 1.0. All cancer risks are summed and compared to an excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) of 1E-05. If the summed noncancer risks for a specific target endpoint are equal to or less than 1.0, there is not an unacceptable additive noncancer human health risk on site If the summed noncancer risks for a specific target endpoint are greater than 1.0, there is a potential unacceptable additive noncancer human health risk on site If the summed cancer risks are equal to or less than 1E-05, there is not an unacceptable additive cancer human health risk on site If the summed cancer risks are greater than 1E-05, there is a potential unacceptable additive cancer human health risk on site In some cases, it may not be possible to evaluate additive risks quantitatively and it may be necessary and appropriate to evaluate additive risks qualitatively. B.7 Uncertainty A thorough explanation of the uncertainties involved in the risk evaluation should be provided. Uncertainties that could have a significant effect on the outcome of the risk evaluation (either an under or over estimate of risks) may exist for two reasons: Lack of knowledge of the site which can be reduced by additional research or knowledge Site specific data or information Scientific information Natural variability which cannot be reduced by additional research or knowledge There are many uncertainties involved in the risk evaluation. Some examples are exposure assumptions, sampling, laboratory analysis, toxicity information, contaminant speciation and professional judgment. B.8 Conclusion A concise summary should be provided indicating whether an unacceptable human health risk exists on site. This summary should include: Quantitative results from the SRV spreadsheet Whether contaminant concentrations exceed their respective SRVs Whether the additive risk evaluations exceed the target noncancer and cancer risk levels Qualitative discussion of potential risks associated with contaminants lacking toxicity data Quantitative and/or qualitative discussion of uncertainty and how it may impact the quantitative results If all contaminant concentrations are below the appropriate LUC SRVs and both noncancer and cancer additive risks are below target risks, it can be concluded that unacceptable human health risk do not exist at the site. If there are contaminant concentrations in exceedance of the appropriate LUC SRVs and/or noncancer or cancer additive risks are above target risks, this does not indicate there is an actual human health risk at the site. It indicates a need for further investigation by the specific program to determine if there may be an actual human health risk at the site. DRAFT Soil Reference Value (SRV) Technical Support Document Θ {ĻƦƷĻƒĬĻƩ ЋЉЊЏ aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ tƚƌƌǒƷźƚƓ /ƚƓƷƩƚƌ !ŭĻƓĭǤ 46 Council Packet Page Number 296 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Appendix E Council Packet Page Number 297 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 www.pca.state.mn.us Vapor mitigation best management practices Purpose The purpose of this best management practices (BMPs) document is to provide guidelines onvapor mitigation approaches for buildings. Effective vapormitigation approaches can vary based on the building size, building construction, heating ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system present and building use. This BMP includes vapor mitigation approaches for smaller residentialbuildings (e.g. single family residential homes and multi-unit residential buildings with four or less units) as well as larger commercial, industrial, residential and mixed-use buildings. This BMP also provides guidelines onverification testing, institutional controls and long- term operation and maintenance for vapor mitigation systems. This BMP document is applicable to the following Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) programs: Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Superfund Site assessment Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup (VIC) Petroleum Brownfield Program(PBP) Petroleum Remediation Program(PRP) This BMP does not include the decision making process for when vapor mitigation is necessary for a building. tƌĻğƭĻ ƩĻŅĻƩ Ʒƚ at/!͸ƭ ğƦƚƩ źƓǝĻƭƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ğƓķ ƒźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ķĻĭźƭźƚƓ .atķƚĭǒƒĻƓƷƷƚ ķĻƷĻƩƒźƓĻ ǞŷĻƓ ǝğƦƚƩ mitigation is necessary for a building (https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/c-rem3-06e.pdffor MERLA sites or https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/c-prp4-01a.pdffor PRP sites). Vapor mitigation systems are installed to addresspotential vapor intrusion risks to a specific building and are generally not intended to act as a remediation system to clean-up soil vapor contamination.Whileremediation systems such as soil vapor extraction and methane extraction can be designed to include vapor intrusion mitigation, it isimportant to keep in mind that long-term vapor intrusion mitigation may be necessary even after the remediation system is turned off. What are the different types of vapor mitigation? There are a variety of building mitigation approaches that can be effective at preventing vapor intrusion into buildings. The mitigation approach selected should be based on site specific conditions including but not limited to severity of vapor intrusion risk, use or occupancy of the building,and building construction/design. MPCA considers active vapor mitigation systems as a best management practice for addressing vapor intrusion risk to buildings. Active vapor mitigation systems generally provide more reliable vapor risk reduction and provide a more consistentverification mechanism to evaluate system effectiveness than passive vapor mitigation approaches. Following is a summary of common active building mitigation approaches that are used to address vapor intrusion along with a brief descriptionof each. Details on implementing and verifying each of these active vapor mitigation approaches is included in the followingsections of this document. Please contact the MPCA project teamfor prior approvalif you plan to implement avapormitigation system other than those listed belowor if you have questions regarding the appropriateness of a mitigation type based on building specific conditions. Minnesota Pollution Control AgencyApril 2020 | c-rem3-06 Available in alternative formats 651-296-6300 | 800-657-3864 or use your preferred relay service| Info.pca@state.mn.us Council Packet Page Number 298 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Active sub-slab depressurization (SSD) Α Ʒŷźƭ ƒźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ğƦƦƩƚğĭŷ ǒƭĻƭ ƭǒĬΏƭƌğĬ ƭǒĭƷźƚƓ ƦźƷƭ ƚƩ ƭǒĬΏƭƌğĬ perforated piping connected to a powered fan to create a low pressure vacuum zone under the entire building \[or defined vapor intrusion area of concern (VI AOC) beneath the building\] to prevent potential vapor intrusion into the building. The SSD system generates a pressure barrier beneath the building that compensates for the depressurization of the building. This approach includes sub-membrane depressurization (SMD) where a vapor barrier or membrane is used when a concrete slab is not present (e.g. dirt floor crawl spaces). Active sub-slab ventilation (SSV) Α Ʒŷźƭ ƒźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ğƦƦƩƚğĭŷ ǒƭĻƭ ğ ƦƚǞĻƩĻķ ŅğƓ Ʒƚ ǝĻƓƷ ƷŷĻ ƭǒĬΏƭƌğĬ ƭƚźƌ ƚƩ crawl space directly beneath the building allowing for dilution of vapor concentrations beneath the building and discharge to the atmosphere. SSV systems are similar to SSD systems; however, instead of using a pressure field to collect and route contaminated vapors, the SSV system sufficiently dilutes VOC levels below the building by advective air flow. These systems typically consist of a venting layer (e.g. filled with porous media such as sand or pea gravel) and a vent pipe array with fresh air intakes on one exterior side of the building and discharges on the opposite side of the building. The venting layer allows lateral soil-gas movement to the pipe array where soil-gas is collected and vented to the atmosphere. Active indoor air building controls Α Ʒŷźƭ ƒźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ğƦƦƩƚğĭŷ ǒƭĻƭ ƷŷĻ ĬǒźƌķźƓŭ͸ƭ I!/ ƭǤƭƷĻƒ ƚƩ źƓķƚƚƩ ğźƩ building controls to maintain a consistent higher indoor air pressure relative to the ambient outdoor air, including and most importantly, below the building floor slab. It can be difficult and costly to maintain positive pressure in spaces and buildings that are not designed for these conditions. This vapor mitigation approach is best implemented for buildings already operating under positive pressure and new construction buildings designed to operate under positive pressure. Consult a certified HVAC contractor and/or a mechanical engineer if implementing this vapor mitigation approach. Parking structures Α ǒƓķĻƩŭƩƚǒƓķ ĻƓĭƌƚƭĻķ ƦğƩƉźƓŭ ƭƷƩǒĭƷǒƩĻƭ use enhanced building construction and ventilation techniques associated with vehicle exhaust mitigation to also address vapor mitigation from the sub- surface. Open-air above grade parking structures typically interrupt the completed vapor intrusion pathway to the occupied building space above. For open-air above grade parking structures, discrete vapor entry points (e.g. stairwells and elevator shafts extending from the parking structure to the occupied building space) should be evaluated individually and mitigated as necessary. Passive vapor barriers Α ƦğƭƭźǝĻ ǝğƦƚƩ ĬğƩƩźĻƩƭ ΛźƓĭƌǒķźƓŭ ƭŷĻĻƷ ğƓķ MPCA does not consider passive spray-applied membranes) are typically placed beneath a building to mitigation systems, passive vapor reduce the migration of contaminated vapors into the occupied building space. Passive vapor barriers are not considered a barriers, indoor air filtration, standalone vapor mitigation approach by MPCA due to the difficulty and/or interim completed pathway in verifying the installation and performance of the vapor barrier evaluation as long-term, stand- after building construction. Passive vapor barriers may be used to alone vapor mitigation approaches. enhance the efficiency and performance of an active vapor mitigation system (e.g. for sub-membrane depressurization). Active mitigation system performance verification will require sampling and diagnostic testing from beneath the passive vapor barrier. Indoor air filtration Α źƓķƚƚƩ ğźƩ ŅźƌƷƩğƷźƚƓ ƷǤƦźĭğƌƌǤ ĭƚƓƭźƭƷƭ ƚŅ ƩĻmoving contaminants from the indoor air using a filter media (i.e. granular activated carbon) contained within a portable, powered filtration unit. MPCA does not consider indoor air filtration a stand-alone or long-term vapor mitigation approach. Indoor air filtration does not prevent vapor intrusion into the building. Indoor air filtration is typically used to temporarily reduce indoor air concentrations below ISVs when active mitigation cannot be installed in an expedited timeframe and the building is still being occupied. Partial building mitigation Α .ǒźƌķźƓŭ ƒźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ źƭ ƓĻĭĻƭƭğƩǤ ŅƚƩ all areas of the building where sub-slab concentrations exceed 33X ISVs (VI AOC) or where soil vapor concentrations exceed the ISVs when the attenuation factor is not valid. Partial building mitigation (PBM) may be appropriate for larger existing or new construction buildings (footprint larger than 30,000 square feet) where the VI AOC is defined beneath the building and does not encompass the entire building footprint. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 2 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 299 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Conditions when PBM is appropriate: Building footprint is larger than 30,000 square feet. The area needing mitigation (VI AOC) may end up being smaller than 30,000 square feet; however, the initial building vapor assessment must start with a minimum of 30,000 square feet. There are no preferential vapor migration pathways beneath the building beyond the PBM area. The VI AOC (concentrations greater than 33X ISV or ISV if attenuation factor is not valid) beneath the building has been adequately defined with two sub-slab sampling events conducted in opposite seasons (one heating season and one non-heating season). Installation of an SSD system can commence based on the first round of sub-slab sampling out to the VI AOC boundary. However, the second seasonal sub-slab sampling event is still necessary to confirm that the VI AOC boundary is defined. If the second seasonal sub-slab sampling event indicates the VI AOC needs to be expanded, the mitigation area will also need to be expanded. Steps for partial building mitigation 1.Determine the area(s) of the building that need(s) mitigation (VI AOC beneath building) based on the sub- slab sampling data collected for the initial building vapor assessment. 2.All areas beneath the building with sub-slab concentrations exceeding applicable 33X ISVs (or ISVs if attenuation factor is not valid) require mitigation. 3.The partial building mitigation area should extend to the nearest points with two seasonal rounds of data with VOCs less than applicable 33X ISVs (or ISVs if attenuation factor is not valid), or to the exterior building walls. 4.Install building mitigation to cover the entire VI AOC(s) beneath the building. 5.Collect post mitigation analytical samples and diagnostic testing to verify effectiveness of the mitigation system within the originally defined VI AOC. 6.Conduct any follow-up seasonal sub-slab sampling to confirm the VI AOC boundaries, if necessary. Interim completed pathway evaluation for vapor intrusion Interim completed pathway evaluation includes collecting paired sub-slab, indoor and outdoor air samples along with evaluating the existing building conditions to determine if sub-surface vapors are migrating into the indoor building air. Interim completed pathway evaluation is not considered a stand-alone, long-term vapor mitigation approach. However, interim completed pathway evaluation may be an appropriate interim measure for the following situations: A property is up for sale and the fate of the existing building is unknown (e.g. whether a new owner will demolish or renovate the existing building). To evaluate potential imminent short-term exposure risk to building occupants from vapor intrusion (e.g. TCE is the contaminant of concern or sub-slab VOC concentrations exceed the expedited 33X ISVs and a sensitive receptor is present) and mitigation cannot commence under an expedited timeframe. An interim completed pathway evaluation for vapor intrusion can determine if vapor levels above ISVs are present in indoor air creating an exposure risk to building occupants. If a completed pathway for vapor intrusion is confirmed (ISV exceedances in indoor air), temporary building control measures (i.e. indoor air filtration, limiting building occupancy, active building controls) need to be implemented immediately to protect occupants from the indoor air exposure conditions. In addition, active building mitigation needs to be implemented to address the long term exposure risk. If a completed vapor intrusion pathway is not present, a building owner may be able to temporarily postpone installation of the vapor mitigation system until the fate/occupancy of the building is known. A minimum of quarterly monitoring of paired sub-slab and indoor air along with outdoor air testing is required for ongoing confirmation that a completed pathway is not present. A general outline of the completed pathway evaluation process is provided below. Contact the MPCA project team if you are planning to conduct interim completed pathway evaluation for vapor intrusion. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 3 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 300 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Interim completed pathway evaluation process 1.Interim completed pathway evaluation consists of the following: a.Conduct a VI building survey (see Appendix D of the Vapor investigation and mitigation decision BMP) to assess building susceptibility to VI and identify potential VI entry points including: Floor slab conditions (thickness, excessive cracking and/or deterioration) Crawl spaces with earthen floors Unsealed groundwater sumps Floor drains open to the subsurface Utility penetrations with significant openings to the sub-surface b.Document the operating characteristics of the HVAC system for the building on the MPCA VI building survey form (Appendix D of the Vapor investigation and mitigation decision BMP). c.Identify and evaluate potential vapor contributions from indoor and ambient background sources (i.e. chemical storage inventory, known use of chlorinated VOCs within the building) d.Conduct quarterly seasonal sampling events (two heating season and two non-heating season) a minimum of 30 days apart that includes concurrent paired sampling of; sub-slab, indoor air and outdoor ambient air. e.Evaluate whether VI is occurring by comparing indoor air concentrations to: Applicable ISVs (residential or commercial/industrial) Sub-slab concentrations Outdoor air concentrations f.In addition to the above analytical sampling, for each sampling event, monitor the pressure differential between the indoor building air and the air beneath the building at each sub-slab sampling location under various occupancy conditions to determine if a pressure differential exists that would cause movement of vapors from the subsurface into the building. g.Submit the interim completed pathway evaluation results to MPCA for review and determination of a completed pathway. MPCA will evaluate the following general criteria for determining whether the VI pathway is complete or likely to be complete: Are there Indoor air concentrations above ISVs in any of the indoor air samples that are not attributable to an indoor or outdoor source? Are there building conditions that indicate the 33X ISV screening level is not valid and the building is susceptible to VI? Do the differential pressure measurements indicate positive pressure between the building indoor air and the sub-surface? What are the source and sub-surface concentrations and stability of soil gas and groundwater plumes? h.If evidence of a confirmed completed pathway including vapor concentrations exceeding ISVs is observed, the MPCA should be notified immediately and prompt building mitigation is necessary. If the building is occupied, immediate temporary mitigation measures are also necessary to protect building occupants from the identified vapor intrusion exposure risk. i.Additional investigation, interim completed pathway evaluation or building mitigation is necessary if the completed pathway evaluation is inconclusive that: VI is not occurring. There is no VI risk to the building. 2.An additional important part of the mitigation decision process is determining if expedited actions are needed to protect human health. Expedited action decisions are discussed in the Vapor investigation and building mitigation decisions BMP. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 4 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 301 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 3.Illustrate vapor mitigation decisions for buildings on MPCA GIS Template 4. Which vapor mitigation approach should I use for my building? It is important to select a mitigation system approach that will be effective in protecting the building occupants from vapor intrusion. Not all types of vapor mitigation systems included in this document are effective for all building types. Items to consider when selecting an effective mitigation system for your building may include level of vapor intrusion risk, building size, building construction, building use, building HVAC controls and building occupancy. For single-family residential and small multi-family (4 units or less) residential buildings, active SSD systems have proven to be an effective vapor mitigation approach. An active SSD system should be the vapor mitigation approach for these types of buildings. Any other vapor mitigation system approach for single-family residential and small multi-family (4 units or less) residential buildings other than an active SSD system must be approved by the MPCA Project Team prior to implementation. For commercial, industrial, large multi-family residential (5 units or more) and mixed use buildings, multiple mitigation system options may be effective for addressing vapor intrusion risk. Table 1 below summarizes vapor mitigation approaches based on building type. ğĬƌĻ Њ Α ğƦƚƩ ƒźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ğƦƦƩƚğĭŷĻƭ ĬğƭĻķ ƚƓ ĬǒźƌķźƓŭ ƷǤƦĻ Vapor Mitigation Approach Active indoor air Building type 12 Active SSDActive SSVbuilding Parking structures 3 controls Single-family and small multi-family X (4 units or less) residential Commercial, industrial, large residential X XX X (5 units or more) and mixed use Notes: Њ Α ağǤ ğƌƭƚ źƓĭƌǒķĻ ğĭƷźǝĻ Λ{a5Μ ƭǤƭƷĻƒ ĭƚƒƦƚƓĻƓƷƭ Ʒƚ ğķķƩĻƭƭ ĻğƩƷŷĻƓ ĭƩğǞƌ ƭƦğĭĻƭ͵ Ћ Α !ĭƷźǝĻ {{ źƭ ƷǤƦźĭğƌƌǤ ƚƓƌǤ ŅĻğƭźĬƌĻ ŅƚƩ ƓĻǞ ĭƚƓƭƷƩǒĭƷźƚƓ ĬǒźƌķźƓŭƭ ķǒĻ Ʒƚ ƷŷĻ ƓĻĻķ ŅƚƩ ğƓ ĻƓŭźƓĻĻƩĻķ ĬğƭĻ ƌğǤĻƩ ĬĻƓĻğƷŷ Ʒhe lowest layer of flooring. Crawl spaces with earthen floors is another possible application for active SSV mitigation. Ќ Α LƓķƚƚƩ ğźƩ ĬǒźƌķźƓŭ ĭƚƓƷƩƚƌƭ ğƩĻ ƷǤƦźĭğƌƌǤ ƓƚƷ ĻŅŅĻĭƷźǝĻ źƓ ĬǒźƌķźƓŭƭ ƷŷğƷ ķƚ ƓƚƷ ŷğǝĻ ĭƚƓƷƩƚƌƌĻķ ğĭĭĻƭƭ Ʒƚ ğƌƌ ƚƦĻƓźƓŭƭ Ʒƚ the exterior (i.e. doors and windows) or where tenants have control over individual HVAC components. Some examples include buildings with large bay doors that are routinely opened and closed and buildings where tenants can freely open windows throughout the building and/or alter HVAC system components at-will. If your site is in the MPCA Brownfield program, prepare and submit a Vapor Mitigation Response Action Plan (RAP) to the MPCA Project Team for review and approval prior to installation of a vapor mitigation system. If your site is in an MPCA Superfund or RCRA Program, prepare and submit a Vapor Mitigation Work Plan to the MPCA Project Team for review and approval prior to installation of the vapor mitigation system. The Brownfield vapor mitigation RAP and Superfund/RCRA vapor mitigation Work Plan should include the following elements, as applicable: Building use and occupancy (i.e. residential, commercial, industrial, any sensitive receptors, etc.) Initial sub-slab testing results compared to relevant 33X ISVs based on building use and occupancy Any pre-mitigation diagnostic testing results Building construction information (i.e. additions, slab-on-grade, slab thickness, footing breaks, etc.) Vapor mitigation approach (i.e. SSD, SSV, underground parking, etc.) April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 5 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 302 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 If partial building mitigation is proposed, include a figure illustrating the proposed partial mitigation area based on the vapor intrusion area of concern (VI AOC) beneath the building defined by sub-slab locations below applicable 33X ISVs (or ISVs if attenuation factor not valid) and/or exterior building walls. Proposed post mitigation verification testing including pressure MPCA approval of a Vapor field extension (PFE) monitoring points (number and location) Mitigation RAP or Work Plan is and paired sub-slab, indoor air and ambient outdoor air sample not endorsement of a specific locations. design, but rather concurrence If expedited mitigation is necessary, please call the MPCA Vapor with the proposed Hotline at 651-757-2040. Please refer to the MPCA expedited performance objectives. action criteria located in the Vapor investigation and mitigation decision BMP to determine if expedited action is necessary. The final mitigation system design and/or approach may change based on conditions encountered during installation and diagnostic testing. Vapor mitigation system installation This section provides details on the installation of the various vapor mitigation system approaches summarized in Table 1. All active vapor mitigation systems should be installed to avoid creation of other health, safety and environmental hazards to building occupants including but not limited to; backdrafting combustion appliances, constricting or blocking building exits with pipe runs or degradation of fire rated assemblies with pipe and/or cable penetrations. All elements of any mitigation system installed must meet with all State and local building codes and regulations. If the contaminants of potential concern (COPC) include flammable or explosive compounds (i.e. petroleum compounds), the active vapor mitigation system must be intrinsically safe. Special safety considerations, which are not included in this document, are required if methane is a COPC. If methane is a COPC, please contact MPCA staff to discuss further safety considerations prior to system installation. !ĭƷźǝĻ {{5 ƭǤƭƷĻƒ źƓƭƷğƌƌğƷźƚƓ Α ĻǣźƭƷźƓŭ ĬǒźƌķźƓŭƭ Pre-mitigation diagnostic testing Prior to installation of an active SSD system, diagnostic testing should be performed to assist in determining the following information: number and placement of suction points, size of system piping, sizing of vent fan, tightness to the floor slab and evaluating the overall effectiveness of the system to provide adequate protection of the building occupants from vapor intrusion. Pre-mitigation testing includes collection of PFE measurements. PFE measurements are obtained by measuring the pressure differential between the indoor air space and the air space directly beneath the floor slab, floor membrane and/or outside the foundation wall. Pre-mitigation diagnostic testing should be conducted in accordance with Section 3 of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 1993. Pre-mitigation diagnostic testing measurements, building floor plan and system źƓŅƚƩƒğƷźƚƓ ƭŷƚǒƌķ ĬĻ ƩĻĭƚƩķĻķ ƚƓ !ƷƷğĭŷƒĻƓƷ ! Α tƩĻΏƒźtigation Diagnostic Testing Checklist. Following is a summary of procedures for conducting pre-mitigation diagnostic testing. 1. Prepare a floor plan (to-scale, with north arrow) of the lowest level of the building including any crawl spaces and floor-slab additions of different elevations (if present) prior to any diagnostic testing for system installation. This includes foundation and footing locations. 2. Conduct backdraft testing in accordance with all State and local building codes on all combustion appliances inside the building. Procedures for checking combustion appliance backdrafting can be found in section 11.5 of EPA, 1993. If backdraft conditions are identified, notify the building occupants and the building owner immediately. DO NOT conduct pre-mitigation diagnostic testing or commence with mitigation system installation until all backdraft conditions have been corrected. A heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) contractor should evaluate and correct any backdraft conditions and verify proper appliance installation and performance. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 6 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 303 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 3.Confirm the locations of any underground utilities beneath or within the floor slab with the property owner and/or hire a utility locating contractor to identify and mark the utilities prior to drilling through the floor slab. 4.Seal potential vapor intrusion points in the floor (e.g. gaps, cracks, cold joints, utility penetrations) to the extent practical. 5.All suction points and proposed system piping locations should be confirmed with the property owner prior to installation. 6.Select a suitable location for a suction point based on building layout and utilities and property owner approval and make a hole in the concrete floor slab to open communication with the soil space beneath the floor slab. 7.The diameter of the suction point hole should correspond to the type of diagnostic testing equipment you are using (shop-type vacuum, mitigation fan, etc.). 8.Connect the suction source (shop-type vacuum, mitigation fan, etc.) to the suction point and seal against the floor slab. 9.The vacuum applied at the suction point should generally be similar to the vacuum developed by the fan that is selected for use in the building. Therefore, if using a shop-type vacuum you may need to reduce the vacuum by bleeding in fresh air. 10.Make sure that the exhaust from the shop-type vacuum or mitigation fan is vented to the outside to prevent vapor emissions into the building. 11.Drill ¼ inch to ½ inch diameter PFE test holes in the floor slab with a masonry drill bit. Sub-slab vapor monitoring points may also be used to measure PFE. 12.A sufficient number of PFE test points should be conducted to confirm that the mitigation system will effectively address vapor intrusion risk across the entire building slab or the VI AOC beneath the building for partial building mitigations. The total number of PFE test points will vary based on building size, building construction and area needing mitigation. 13.Conduct the PFE diagnostic testing with all natural draft appliances (older non-high efficiency furnaces, stove/range hoods, clothes dryers, bathroom fans, etc.) operating and all windows and exterior doors closed Ʒƚ ƦƩƚǝźķĻ ͻǞƚƩƭƷ ĭğƭĻͼ ĭƚƓķźƷźƚƓƭ͵ 14.Measure the pressure differential between the area below the floor slab and the indoor air space above the floor slab at each PFE test hole using a calibrated micromanometer. 15.Measure the air flow from or into the vacuum to assist in proper selection of the fan size for the active system. 16.The pre-mitigation PFE diagnostic testing should demonstrate a pressure differential at each PFE test point that is greater than the following default pressure differential criteria: -3 pascals (0.012 inches of water) during heating season (November 1 through March 31) -5 pascals (0.020 inches of water) during non-heating season (April 1 through October 31) 17.Additional suction points and/or adjustments to the suction point (e.g. removal of soil, increasing vacuum) may be needed to obtain the required PFE across the building footprint. 18.The results of the pre-mitigation system PFE diagnostic testing are necessary to assist in selecting the active system components including: determining the correct fan size, number of suction points and diameter of the suction/vent piping. 19.The PFE test points should be left in place and used for post-mitigation diagnostic testing where appropriate. The PFE test points should be temporarily sealed with an air tight cap between diagnostic tests and final sealed (remove sampling insert and backfill hole with cement) upon completion of testing to prevent vapor intrusion from the sub-slab into the living space. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 7 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 304 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 20.Pre-mitigation diagnostic testing results should be documented on Attachment A and included with the final Property Summary Report (PSR). 21.In the event that the building has existing combustion appliances that draw room air from inside the building and a direct source of make-up air from outside the building is not present, make-up air to the combustion appliance room should be installed prior to conducting pre-mitigation diagnostic testing. Providing outside make-up air for combustion appliances significantly reduces the potential for backdrafting in addition to reducing the potential for vapor intrusion into the building. Modifications to combustion appliances, including providing make-up air, may require a permit. 22.Any building construction/reconstruction work must be completed in accordance with all State and local building codes and regulations. All elements of any mitigation system installed must meet with all State and local building codes and regulations, as well. !ĭƷźǝĻ {{5 ƭǤƭƷĻƒ źƓƭƷğƌƌğƷźƚƓ Α ĻǣźƭƷźƓŭ ƭƷƩǒĭƷǒƩĻƭ Active SSD systems should be installed in general accordance with the most current versions of ASTM International and EPA technical documents (ASTM, 2013, ASTM, 2009, EPA, 1993, EPA 1994a, 1994b, 1994). The following procedures can be applied to both existing buildings as well as new construction. For new construction buildings, an engineered depressurization layer is typically installed beneath the lowest level floor slabs which may reduce the overall number of suction points/risers penetrating the floor. !ĭƷźǝĻ {{5 ƭǤƭƷĻƒ źƓƭƷğƌƌğƷźƚƓ źƓŅƚƩƒğƷźƚƓ ƭŷƚǒƌķ ĬĻ ƩĻĭƚƩķĻķ ƚƓ !ƷƷğĭŷƒĻƓƷ . Α !ĭƷźǝĻ {ǤƭƷĻƒ LƓƭƷğƌƌğƷźƚƓ Checklist. Following is a summary of active SSD system installation methods and procedures: 1.The placement of all suction points and piping should be confirmed with the property owner prior to installation of the active SSD system. 2.A minimum of one suction point should be installed in each level (e.g. multi-level basements, crawl spaces, etc.) and in each area where there is a building addition or the foundation would restrict the air flow from one area to another. 3.PFE diagnostic testing should be conducted prior to installation of the active system to evaluate PFE across the building footprint and determine how many suction points are required (see pre-mitigation diagnostic section above). 4.If the required pressure differential is not achieved at all PFE test points, additional suction pits, higher vacuum fans, additional fans, or alternative vapor mitigation techniques should be employed. 5.Install piping to connect the suction point(s) to the fan(s). Piping material should be compatible with the site specific contaminants of concern. Common piping material for SSD systems include schedule 40 polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and galvanized steel. Piping diameter will vary based on system design. Typical pipe diameter for single family residential homes is three to four inches where larger commercial/industrial systems may use six inch or larger diameter piping. 6.The fan(s) should be located in an unconditioned space with limited occupancy like the attic or garage or outside if there is no available unconditioned space. If the stack piping and/or fan(s) need to be located outside, they should be chased and insulated to reduce the potential for condensation and frost build-up. 7.The circuit breaker box should indicate which breaker the active system electrical supply is connected to. 8.Electrical connections for the fan should be conducted by a licensed electrician in accordance with all State and local building codes. 9.The stack discharge should be located a minimum of 10 feet from any building openings to prevent vapor re-entrainment. 10.The discharge height of the stack should be a minimum of two feet above the roof line. 11.The exhaust discharge should be vertical with no elbows or deflectors. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 8 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 305 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 12.Active system piping should have labels identifying it as vapor mitigation system piping, and should have flow direction arrows on the piping in all visible locations on each floor/level. 13.A manometer should be installed in a visible and accessible location on at least one suction point stack/riser associated with each fan so the system performance can be monitored. 14.A label should be placed in a visible location on the stack/riser containing the manometer. The label should contain the following information: !ĭƷźǝĻ ƭǤƭƷĻƒ źƓƭƷğƌƌĻƩ͸ƭ ƓğƒĻͲ ƷĻƌĻƦŷƚƓĻ ƓǒƒĬĻƩ ğƓķ bğƷźƚƓğƌ wğķƚƓ tƩƚŅźĭźĻƓĭǤ tƩƚŭƩğƒ (NRPP) or National Radon Safety Board (NRSB) certification number Initial vacuum reading on the manometer upon active system installation Active system installation date Fan model 15.Active system installation activities and diagnostic testing results should be recorded on Attachment B and included in the final PSR. !ĭƷźǝĻ {{5 ƭǤƭƷĻƒ źƓƭƷğƌƌğƷźƚƓ Α ƓĻǞ ĭƚƓƭƷƩǒĭƷźƚƓ Active SSD system installation in new construction is similar to existing structures; however, new construction provides the opportunity to design a connected venting layer beneath the building slab to allow for efficient depressurization of the slab. An active SSD system in new construction can be designed using suction points as described above for existing structures or with a continuous venting layer as described below. The continuous venting layer should be installed directly beneath the floor slab in all areas of the building where vapor mitigation is necessary (VI AOC). The venting layer generally consists of porous material (e.g. pea gravel or sand) and a slotted PVC pipe array (or MPCA approved equivalent) to allow movement of soil-gas beneath the building floor slab. A vapor barrier/membrane may also be used beneath the floor slab to isolate the venting layer from the building space and provide an upper boundary condition for the venting layer. Prior to completion of building construction, conduct PFE diagnostic testing to evaluate PFE across the building footprint requiring mitigation and determine if the system is affecting all areas at the required pressure differential as follows: -3 pascals (0.012 inches of water) during heating season (November 1 through March 31) -5 pascals (0.020 inches of water) during non-heating season (April 1 through October 31) Post-mitigation diagnostic testing will also be required upon completion of building construction and with the buildings HVAC system operating to ensure the above PFE readings are maintained during building operating conditions. For crawl spaces with earthen floors, air-tight seal all potential vapor intrusion entry points (e.g. utility penetrations and any open access to the crawl space) into the building. A vapor barrier/membrane may also be used to isolate the lowest layer of building flooring from the earthen crawl-space floor creating a layer to actively depressurize and vent contaminated soil-gas from beneath the occupied building space. CƚƌƌƚǞ ƭƷĻƦƭ Ў ƷŷƩƚǒŭŷ ЊЎ ŅƩƚƒ ƷŷĻ !ĭƷźǝĻ {{5 ƭǤƭƷĻƒ źƓƭƷğƌƌğƷźƚƓ Α ĻǣźƭƷźƓŭ ƭƷƩǒĭƷǒƩĻƭ ğĬƚǝĻ͵ Active SSV system installation Active SSV involves placement of a venting layer beneath the building floor slab to allow for actively moving soil- gas from beneath the building and discharging it to the atmosphere via a continuously active powered fan(s) while replacing/diluting the soil-gas with outdoor ambient air. Active SSV is typically only feasible for new construction buildings due to the need for an engineered base layer beneath the lowest layer of flooring. Crawl spaces with earthen floors is another possible application for active SSV mitigation. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 9 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 306 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Active SSV System Installation for new construction and crawl spaces with earthen floors 1.For new construction buildings, install a continuous venting layer directly beneath the floor slab in all areas of the building where vapor mitigation is necessary (vapor intrusion area of concern). The venting layer generally consists of porous material (e.g. pea gravel or sand) and a slotted PVC pipe array (or MPCA approved equivalent) to allow movement of soil-gas beneath the building floor slab and provide dilution from the outdoor ambient air intakes. A vapor barrier/membrane may also be used beneath the floor slab to isolate the venting layer from the building space and provide an upper boundary condition for the venting layer. 2.For crawl spaces with earthen floors, air-tight seal all potential vapor intrusion entry points (e.g. utility penetrations and any open access to the crawl space) into the building. A vapor barrier/membrane may also be used to isolate the lowest layer of building flooring from the earthen crawl-space floor creating a layer to actively vent contaminated soil-gas from beneath the occupied building space. 3.Install outdoor ambient air intakes on one side of the building or crawl-space connected directly to the slotted PVC pipe array/venting layer. 4.On the opposite side of the building or crawl-space, install vent/discharge pipes connected to the slotted PVC pipe array/venting layer beneath the building on one end and a powered electric ventilation fan on the other end. 5.The powered ventilation fan(s) must be located in unconditioned building space with limited occupancy or outside of the building. If the fans (and associated piping) are located outside, they should be chased and insulated to reduce the potential for condensation and frost build-up. 6.The circuit breaker box should indicate which breaker the active system electrical supply is connected to. 7.If the rated electricity requirements of a mitigation system fan exceed 50% of the circuit capacity into which it will be connected, or if the total connected load on the circuit (including the mitigation vent fan) exceeds 80% of the circuit's rated capacity, a separate, dedicated circuit shall be installed to power the fan. 8.The stack discharge should be located a minimum of 10 feet from any building openings to prevent vapor re-entrainment into the building. 9.The discharge height of the stack should be a minimum of two feet above the roof line. 10.The exhaust discharge should be vertical with no elbows or deflectors. 11.Active system piping should have labels identifying it as vapor mitigation system piping, and should have flow direction arrows on the piping in all visible locations on each floor/level. 12.A manometer should be installed in a visible and accessible location on at least one suction point stack/riser associated with each fan so the system performance can be monitored. 13.A label should be placed in a visible location on the stack/riser containing the manometer. The label should contain the following information: !ĭƷźǝĻ ƭǤƭƷĻƒ źƓƭƷğƌƌĻƩ͸ƭ ƓğƒĻͲ ƷĻƌĻƦŷƚƓĻ ƓǒƒĬĻƩ ğƓķ bwtt ƚƩ bw{. ĭĻƩƷźŅźĭğƷźƚƓ ƓǒƒĬĻƩ Initial vacuum reading on the manometer upon active system installation Active system installation date Fan model 14.Active system installation activities and diagnostic testing results should be recorded on Attachment B and included in the final PSR. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 10 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 307 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 15.To ensure connectivity of the engineered venting layer beneath the building, measure air flow at each of the SSV system outlet locations with the system turned off and again with the system turned on. With the system turned on, there should be a noticeable increase in the flow rate in the downstream direction at each of the measured outlet locations compared to when the system is turned off. Document flow rate diagnostics on Attachment C. Active indoor air building controls system installation This vapor mitigation approach is best implemented for buildings already operating under positive pressure and new construction buildings designed to operate under positive pressure. This approach effectively prevents advective flow of soil-gas into the building by maintaining a higher indoor air pressure relative to the outdoor ambient air through use of the buildings heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system. Continuous, adequate positive pressurization is necessary for all areas of the building where sub-slab concentrations exceed MPCA screening criteria (i.e. areas within the VI AOC). MPCA defines adequate positive pressurization as pressure differential (negative from the indoor air to the outdoor ambient \[sub-surface\]) equal to or greater than the following: -3 pascals (0.012 inches of water) during heating season (November 1 through March 31) -5 pascals (0.020 inches of water) during non-heating season (April 1 through October 31) Any non-ventilated or passively ventilated rooms (e.g. mechanical rooms) should be specifically evaluated to determine if modifications are necessary to achieve positive pressurization of these spaces relative to the outdoor ambient air. Specific building construction and uses that will significantly reduce the effectiveness of this approach include buildings where tenants can freely open and close windows, large bay doors and individual adjustable HVAC components throughout the building. This vapor mitigation approach may result in a significant increase in energy use for buildings not designed to operate under positive pressure. This vapor mitigation approach is not allowed for small (4 units or less) residential buildings. Consult a certified HVAC contractor and/or a mechanical engineer if implementing this vapor mitigation approach. Any HVAC system adjustments for vapor mitigation must be in compliance with all State and local building codes. Parking structure active system installation For the purposes of this BMP, MPCA is defining a parking structure as a parking structure consisting of nine or more stalls located beneath the occupied spaces of the building. The parking structure can be fully enclosed and underground or open air and above ground. The parking structure may be present beneath the entire building footprint or only a portion of the building footprint. For situations where the parking structure is not present beneath the entire building footprint, and full building mitigation is necessary, multiple vapor mitigation approaches will likely be necessary. Above ground open air parking structures Above ground, open-air parking structures generally provide sufficient ventilation to prevent vapor intrusion into the occupied portions of the building above the parking structure. However, there may be vapor intrusion risk associated with specific components of the above ground open-air parking structure including stairwells, elevator shafts and utility penetrations that extend from at or below the ground surface up into the occupied building space. These components should be constructed with a concrete base and walls and not earthen floors/walls. These components should be evaluated for vapor intrusion risk (sub-slab sampling) and mitigated as necessary per the MPCA vapor intrusion BMPs. Underground enclosed parking structures Underground parking structures typically consist of fully enclosed, single or multi-level parking located beneath a building. Underground parking structures are designed to ventilate exhaust fumes from vehicles; however, there are additional building construction and ventilation system considerations to be implemented beyond a typical underground parking structure design when using the underground parking structure as an active vapor April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 11 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 308 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 mitigation approach. Table 2 below summarizes additional building component design upgrades for when an underground parking is being utilized to address vapor intrusion risk. ğĬƌĻ Ћ Α .ǒźƌķźƓŭ ĭƚƒƦƚƓĻƓƷ ķĻƭźŭƓ ǒƦŭƩğķĻ ĭƚƓƭźķĻƩğƷźƚƓƭ ŅƚƩ ǝğƦƚƩ źƓƷƩǒƭźƚƓ ƒźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ǒƭźƓŭ ǒƓķĻƩŭƩƚǒƓķΉĻƓĭƌƚƭĻķ parking structures Building Component Design upgrades for vapor intrusion mitigation Floor slab Epoxy/urethane coating, seal all cracks and saw cuts Concrete block walls (sub-surface) Fill voids with concrete/insulation, paint block walls Ceilings/walls of underground parking Waterproofing membranes, coat or paint walls structure Additional ventilation/positive pressurization, subsurface concrete floors or Stairwells and elevator shafts walls HVAC/ventilation units for Continuous operation, minimum air exchanges per hour, digital control underground parking system Utility penetrations Upgrade firestop/sealing to extend replacement period Vapor retarder/barrier Upgrade thickness of barrier or vapor intrusion specific barrier Radon system (if required for building Upgrade system for vapor intrusion mitigation (i.e. make passive radon type) system active) aźƓźƒźǩĻ ͻŷǒƒğƓ ĻƩƩƚƩΉĭƚƓƷƩƚƌͲͼ ĬǒźƌķźƓŭΏƭƦĻĭźŅźĭ ƚƦĻƩğƷźƚƓƭ ğƓķ maintenance plan to evaluate condition of building materials and ventilation Operations and maintenance systems, periodic effectiveness testing Source: Parking Facilities and Vapor Intrusion Mitigation, Table 9.1. pg. 27, dated February 22, 2019, prepared for the MPCA by Braun Intertec Mitigation system installation activities and any associated pre-mitigation diagnostic testing during construction ƭŷƚǒƌķ ĬĻ ķƚĭǒƒĻƓƷĻķ ğƓķ ƭǒĬƒźƷƷĻķ ǞźƷŷ ƷŷĻ tƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ {ǒƒƒğƩǤ wĻƦƚƩƷ Λt{wΜ ŅƚǒƓķ ƚƓ at/!͸ƭ ǞĻĬƭźƷĻ ğƷ https://www.pca.state.mn.us/waste/vapor-intrusion-best-management-practices-0 . For more information on parking structures as vapor intrusion mitigation, please refer to the document: Parking Facilities and Vapor Intrusion Mitigation, dated February 22, 2019, prepared for the MPCA by Braun Intertec (https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/c-rem3-06i ). How do I verify the effectiveness of a vapor mitigation system? Regardless of the type of mitigation system implemented, performance verification testing is necessary to determine if the mitigation system is operating as designed to prevent vapor intrusion into the building. Evidence of successful operation and performance of a mitigation system is required for MPCA to issue a Completion of vapor mitigation response actions for on-site building(s) letter or a No Further Action letter on sites where vapor mitigation is necessary. System performance verification is Three types of verification testing are discussed below including; necessary for all mitigation types construction verification, diagnostic testing and analytical testing. during the MPCA defined heating Table 3 below summarizes the types of verification testing necessary season (November 1 thru March 31), based on the vapor mitigation approach. Additional details regarding regardless of when the system was how to conduct the different types of verification testing are installed or constructed. provided below the table. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 12 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 309 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 ğĬƌĻ Ќ Α {ǒƒƒğƩǤ ƚŅ ƦĻƩŅƚƩƒğƓĭĻ ǝĻƩźŅźĭğƷźƚƓ ŅƚƩ ǝğƦƚƩ ƒźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ ƭǤƭƷĻƒƭ Mitigation Approach Active indoor air Parking Performance Verification Active SSD Active SSV building controls structures Construction Visual verification X X X X verification and documentation Pressure Field X Extension (PFE) Post-mitigation Building 2 X X diagnostic testing Pressurization Connectivity test X Paired sub-slab, 1 Post-mitigation indoor air and X X X X analytical testing outdoor air sampling Notes: Њ Α LƓķƚƚƩ ğźƩ ƷĻƭƷźƓŭ ƭŷƚǒƌķ ĬĻ ĭƚƓķǒĭƷĻķ źƓ ƷŷĻ ƌƚǞĻƭƷ ƌĻǝĻƌΛƭΜ ƚŅ ƷŷĻ ĬǒźƌķźƓŭ͵ LŅ ƷŷĻƩĻ ğƩĻ ĬƚƷŷ ĬğƭĻƒĻƓƷ ğƓķ ƭƌğĬΏƚƓΏŭƩğķe levels present, both levels should be tested for indoor air along with paired sub-slab sampling for each level. For underground parking structures, indoor air should be collected in the lowest level of the parking structure as well as the first occupied level of the building above the parking structure. Ћ Α /ƚƓŅźƩƒ ĬǒźƌķźƓŭ ƦƩĻƭƭǒƩźǩğƷźƚƓ ŅƚƩ ğƩĻğƭ ĭƚƓƓĻĭƷĻķ Ʒƚ ƚƩ źƓƭźķĻ ƷŷĻ ƦğƩƉźƓŭ ƭƷƩǒĭƷǒƩĻ ƭƦğĭĻ ƷŷğƷ ŷğǝĻ ƭĻƦğƩğƷĻ I!/ΉǝĻƓƷźƌation systems including but not limited to; stairwells, elevator shafts and occupied spaces inside that may be located in the parking structure area such as ticket booths, offices, exercise rooms, etc. Active SSD system performance verification Construction verification Visually verify and document that the active SSD system components were installed in accordance with the MPCA approved RAP/Work Plan, State and local building codes and per all applicable sections of EPA, 1993. Construction verification can be documented in Attachment B. Post-mitigation diagnostic testing A primary diagnostic performance verification method for active SSD systems is to confirm that the system is creating adequate pressure field extension (PFE) across the building floor slab(s) where mitigation is necessary (VI AOC beneath the building). PFE must measure per the MPCA defined seasonal condition (-3 Pascal in heating season, -5 Pascal in non-heating season). Post-mitigation diagnostic testing should be conducted upon installation of the system by the installation contractor to confirm the system is operating effectively. Post-mitigation diagnostic testing should be repeated a minimum of one week (seven calendar days) after system installation and no more than 30 days after system installation in conjunction with post-mitigation analytical testing. For new construction, post-mitigation diagnostic testing is required under typical operating conditions of the building (i.e. construction complete and HVAC is operating). If the initial post-mitigation verification event was conducted in the MPCA defined non- heating season, a second round of post-mitigation diagnostic testing will be necessary in the MPCA defined heating season. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 13 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 310 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Post-mitigation diagnostic testing should be conducted in accordance with Section 11 of EPA, 1993. Post- mitigation diagnostic testing measurements, building floor plan and system information should be recorded on the Attachment C checklist. Following is a summary of the procedures to be followed for conducting post- mitigation diagnostic testing after installation of an active SSD system. 1.With the active system running and all internal combustion appliances and exhaust fans operating, the post-mitigation PFE diagnostic testing should demonstrate a pressure differential (negative from the indoor air to the sub-surface) at each PFE test point that is equal to or greater than the following default pressure differential criteria: -3 pascals (0.012 inches of water) during heating season (November 1 through March 31) -5 pascals (0.020 inches of water) during non-heating season (April 1 through October 31) 2.A sufficient number of PFE test points are necessary to demonstrate pressure field extension across the entire building slab or the entire area where vapor mitigation is necessary (VI AOC) for partial building mitigations. The total number of PFE test points will vary based on the mitigation system design, building size and building construction. PFE test points should be located at the maximum distances from all suction points within the building footprint. 3.Sub-surface building footings can disrupt PFE and sub-surface utility corridors can create a short circuit for mitigation systems both resulting in a loss of PFE at these features. PFE should be measured on both sides of these features where mitigation is necessary. 4.Conduct PFE testing with all combustion appliances and natural draft appliances (older non-high efficiency furnaces, stove/range hoods, bathroom fans, etc.) operating and all windows and doors closed to provide ͻǞƚƩƭƷ ĭğƭĻͼ ĭƚƓķźƷźƚƓƭ͵ 5.The PFE test points installed during the pre-mitigation diagnostic testing can be re-used for post- mitigation diagnostic testing; however, additional PFE test points may be required to confirm PFE across the floor slab and/or membrane and the PFE test points need to be temporarily sealed between tests to prevent vapor intrusion to the building. Upon completion of the post-mitigation PFE diagnostic testing, the PFE test points need to be sealed to prevent vapor intrusion to the building. 6.Smoke/tracer gas testing may be conducted along interior floor cracks and wall joints while active system is operating to check for air leakage. This method can be used to trouble-shoot when PFE cannot be obtained. 7.With the active mitigation system, all combustion appliances and vent fans running, conduct backdraft testing on all combustion appliances to ensure backdraft conditions were not created within the building due to the installed active system or HVAC system modifications. This is a critical step from a health and safety standpoint. If backdrafting conditions are observed, the active system or HVAC modifications must be turned off until the backdrafting condition is corrected. Report any backdrafting to the building owner and document the conditions. If the backdraft condition is not corrected, building occupants may be at risk from carbon monoxide poisoning. Procedures for checking combustion appliance backdrafting can be found in Section 11.5 of EPA, 1993 and ASTM 2007a. 8.Diagnostic testing results should be documented on a field checklist form (Attachment C) and included with the final PSR. Post-mitigation analytical testing The purpose of post-mitigation analytical testing is to evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation approach by confirming that vapor intrusion is not resulting in unacceptable human exposure to contaminants of concern in indoor air. Post-mitigation analytical testing information and a checklist can be found in Attachment D. Regardless of seasonal conditions, post-mitigation analytical testing is required after installation of the mitigation system. Post-mitigation analytical testing should be conducted after a one week (seven calendar days) equilibration period and must be completed within 30 days after mitigation system installation. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 14 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 311 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 If the post-mitigation analytical testing is not collected in the MPCA defined heating season, a second round of post-mitigation analytical testing during the MPCA defined heating season is necessary to evaluate system performance under worst-case conditions Procedures for conducting post-mitigation analytical testing include: 1.Collect concurrent sub-slab, indoor air and ambient outdoor air samples. The purpose of collecting paired sub-slab and ambient outdoor air samples is to assist in evaluating the source of any indoor air impacts, if detected. 2.The number of paired sub-slab and indoor air samples necessary will vary based on specific mitigation system design, building size and building construction. The Vapor Mitigation Response Action Plan (RAP) for Brownfield sites or Vapor Mitigation Work Plan for Superfund sites should include the proposed number and locations of paired post-mitigation analytical samples for MPCA review and approval prior to mitigation system installation. Following are considerations for determining where to collect paired sub-slab and indoor air samples for post-mitigation confirmation testing: Within areas of highest known sub-slab vapor concentrations (i.e. source areas beneath the building) Both areas of the building separated by sub-surface barriers to air flow (i.e. footing breaks) and/or preferential air flow pathways (i.e. sub-surface utility corridors) All lowest level portions of a building that may be at differing elevations (i.e. sub-surface basement and adjacent slab-on-grade) Stairwells and elevator shaft areas All areas of the building with separate or discontinuous mitigation systems A sufficient number of sample locations should be completed to provide coverage across the originally identified VI AOC 3.Indoor air samples and ambient outdoor air samples should be collected over a twenty-four hour period. Both indoor air and outdoor ambient air sampling require the use of individually certified clean canisters by the laboratory. The canister certification laboratory results should be included with the analytical data package received from the laboratory. 4.Indoor air samples should be collected from the basement or lowest level of the building near suspected vapor entry points (if present) to assess the worst-case vapor intrusion locations. If there are multiple lower levels in the building (i.e. basement and slab-on-grade), indoor air samples (with paired sub-slab samples) should be collected from each of the lower level areas. 5.The indoor air sample collection point should be located in the breathing zone, approximately three to five feet above the floor. 6.Complete the twenty-four hour indoor air and ambient outdoor air samples prior to purging and sampling of the paired sub-slab sample points to prevent sub-slab sampling activities from cross contaminating the indoor air samples. 7.Sub-slab samples should be collected with a canister equipped to collect the sample at a maximum flow rate of 200 milliliters (ml)/minute and the canister should be individually certified clean by the analytical laboratory. 8.All confirmation samples should be analyzed using EPA Method TO-15 (full scan) by a fixed base Minnesota Department of Health certified laboratory for the full Minnesota Soil Gas List compounds. The use of other analytical methods will require prior MPCA staff approval. 9.Follow-up PFE diagnostic testing should also be completed at the same locations as the test points completed for post-mitigation PFE diagnostic testing upon system installation. 10.Collect PFE readings at all sub-slab locations during post-mitigation analytical testing. Concurrent collection of this information will assist in distinguishing indoor air contaminants resulting from vapor intrusion versus those originating from other background contaminant sources. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 15 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 312 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Active SSV system performance verification Construction verification Visually verify and document that the active SSV system components were installed in accordance with the MPCA approved RAP/Work Plan, State and local building codes. Construction verification can be documented in Attachment B. Post-mitigation diagnostic testing Two key components of an effective active SSV system include continuous air exchange beneath the building and connectivity of the engineered venting layer beneath the building. Following are the post-mitigation diagnostic testing procedures for active SSV systems: 1.The amount of air exchange necessary beneath the building will depend on the sub-slab soil gas concentrations present and the source of the soil gas contamination. A continuous minimum air exchange rate of one air exchange per day (based on the square footage of the mitigated building area and the thickness of the venting layer) is necessary for the active SSV system to maintain beneath the building. The air exchange rate should be maintained at a level that results in dilution of the sub-slab soil-gas concentrations to below the applicable 33X ISVs. The air exchange rate of the active SSV system should be measured at the time of post-mitigation analytical testing (both heating and non-heating seasons) to confirm the air exchange rate is sufficient to reduce sub-slab soil-gas concentrations to below the applicable 33X ISVs. 2.To ensure connectivity of the engineered venting layer beneath the building, measure air flow at each of the SSV system outlet locations with the system turned off and again with the system turned on. With the system turned on, there should be a noticeable increase in the flow rate in the downstream direction at each of the measured outlet locations compared to when the system is turned off. Document flow rate diagnostics on Attachment C. 3.Smoke/tracer gas testing may be conducted along interior floor cracks and wall joints while active SSV system is operating to check for air leakage. Any identified leakage should be sealed to increase the efficiency of the active SSV system and prevent additional costs associated with the loss of conditioned air from the building. Post-mitigation analytical testing The purpose of post-mitigation analytical testing is to evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation approach by confirming that vapor intrusion is not resulting in unacceptable human exposure to contaminants of concern in indoor air and that sub-slab concentrations are being diluted to below applicable mitigation action levels. Regardless of seasonal conditions, post-mitigation analytical testing is required after installation of the mitigation system. Post-mitigation analytical testing should be conducted after a one week (seven calendar days) equilibration period and must be completed within 30 days after mitigation system installation. Post-mitigation analytical testing is necessary in both the heating and non-heating seasons to evaluate SSV system operation in both seasons and confirm that the system is capable of maintaining dilution of sub-slab levels below applicable 33X ISVs under both heating and non-heating seasons. Post-mitigation analytical testing information should be recorded on the Attachment D checklist. Procedures for conducting post-mitigation analytical testing are summarized in the Post-mitigation analytical testing for active SSD system performance verification section above. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 16 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 313 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Active indoor air building controls performance verification Post-mitigation diagnostic testing A primary diagnostic performance verification method for active indoor air building controls is to confirm that the building controls are creating adequate pressure differential across the building floor slab(s) where mitigation is necessary (VI AOC beneath the building). Pressure differential across the slab (or VI AOC beneath the building) must measure per the MPCA defined seasonal condition (-3 Pascal in heating season, -5 Pascal in non-heating season). Pressure differential testing should be conducted concurrent with post-mitigation analytical testing. Post-mitigation diagnostic testing should be conducted upon initiation of the building controls for vapor mitigation to confirm the system is operating effectively. Post-mitigation diagnostic testing should be repeated a minimum of one week (seven calendar days) after system installation and no more than 30 days after system installation in conjunction with post-mitigation analytical testing. If the initial post-mitigation verification event was conducted in the MPCA defined non-heating season, a second round of post-mitigation diagnostic testing will be necessary in the MPCA defined heating season. Post-mitigation diagnostic testing should be conducted in accordance with Section 11 of EPA, 1993. Post- mitigation diagnostic testing measurements, building floor plan and system information should be recorded on the Attachment C checklist. Additional procedures for conducting post-mitigation diagnostic testing (pressure differential testing) are summarized in the Post-mitigation analytical testing for active SSD system performance verification section above. Once the building control settings for vapor mitigation are established and verified, the building control settings should be documented and not be adjusted or modified without re-verification of the post-mitigation diagnostic testing. Building maintenance staff and anyone with access to adjusting the building control settings should be notified of the need to maintain these settings for vapor mitigation purposes. Signage documenting the building control settings for vapor mitigation and the need to maintain these settings should be placed in the immediate vicinity of the building controls, visible to anyone attempting to adjust the building controls. Post-mitigation analytical testing The purpose of post-mitigation analytical testing is to evaluate the effectiveness of the mitigation approach by confirming that vapor intrusion is not resulting in unacceptable human exposure to contaminants of concern in indoor air. Regardless of seasonal conditions, post-mitigation analytical testing is required after initiation of the mitigation approach. Post-mitigation analytical testing should be conducted after a one week (seven calendar days) equilibration period and must be completed within 30 days after initiation of the building controls for mitigation. If the post-mitigation analytical testing is not collected in the MPCA defined heating season, a second round of post-mitigation analytical testing during the MPCA defined heating season is necessary to evaluate system performance under worst-case conditions. Post-mitigation analytical testing information should be recorded on the Attachment D checklist. Procedures for conducting post-mitigation analytical testing are summarized in the Post-mitigation analytical testing for active SSD system performance verification section above. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 17 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 314 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Parking structure performance verification Above ground open-air parking structures For above ground open-air parking structures the only features that would need performance verification are stairwells and elevators that extend from the sub-surface into the occupied building space above the parking structure. These features should have either continuous ventilation or indoor air controls adjusted to positive pressurization as allowed by building codes. Construction verification includes documenting the presence of concrete floors and walls to the stairwells and elevator shaft. Post construction diagnostic testing includes verifying positive pressurization or continuous ventilation at an air exchange rate of 0.05 CFM per square foot of area. Post-construction analytical testing consists of paired sub-slab, indoor air and outdoor ambient air sampling for stairwells and elevator shafts that extend from the subsurface into the occupied building space. Indoor air samples should be collected as close to the bottom of these structures as possible. If additional ventilation and/or positive pressurization of these structures was necessary to address vapor intrusion, verify that the additional ventilation air exchanges is adequate, collect positive pressure measurements and confirm vapor intrusion risk has been addressed by collecting paired sub-slab, indoor air and ambient outdoor air testing. Underground parking structures Construction verification and post-mitigation diagnostic testing For underground parking structures, there are multiple building components that are not typically part of a standard parking structure design which are critical to vapor mitigation. These vapor mitigation building components need to be evaluated and verified. Additional building components of a parking structure necessary for vapor mitigation include the following: 1.Verify any construction design upgrades implemented for vapor mitigation as identified in Table 2 above. 2.Verify that the air exchange system for the underground parking structure is designed to operate continuously and not intermittently. A continuous minimum air exchange rate of 0.05 CFM per square foot of area is necessary for the underground parking structure. 3.If concrete block is used for the sub-surface foundation, verify the blocks are filled (i.e. concrete filled or air-tight foamed) and not hollow or an appropriate vapor barrier/membrane is installed to seal this potential vapor intrusion pathway into the building space. 4.Verify that elevator shafts, stairwells and any occupied structures within the parking structure area (i.e. ticket booths, office space, work-out facilities) are positively pressurized to the parking structure space in accordance with the State and local building codes. Positive pressurization of these spaces should also be verified by collecting pressure differential readings (where feasible) that correspond to the MPCA defined heating season (-3 Pascals) or non-heating season (-5 Pascals). 5.Verify that all penetrations (i.e. utility conduits) from the parking structure space into occupied building spaces are appropriately sealed against vapor intrusion. Post-construction analytical testing The purpose of post-construction analytical testing is to evaluate the effectiveness of the underground parking structure to prevent vapor intrusion into the occupied portions of the building by confirming that vapor intrusion is not resulting in unacceptable human exposure to contaminants of concern in indoor air. Post-construction analytical testing information should be recorded on the Attachment D checklist. Procedures for conducting post-construction analytical testing include: 1.Post-mitigation analytical testing for underground parking structures consists of collecting concurrent sub- slab, indoor air in the lowest level of the parking structure, first level of occupied building space above the parking structure and ambient outdoor air samples. Regardless of seasonal conditions, post-mitigation analytical testing is required after building construction. Post-mitigation analytical testing should be April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 18 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 315 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 conducted after a one week (seven calendar days) equilibration period and must be completed within 30 days after mitigation system installation. 2. If the post-mitigation analytical testing is not collected in the MPCA defined heating season, a second round of post-mitigation analytical testing during the MPCA defined heating season is necessary to evaluate system performance under worst-case conditions. 3. Indoor air samples and outdoor ambient air samples should be collected over a twenty-four hour period. Both indoor air and outdoor ambient air sampling require the use of individually certified clean canisters by the laboratory. The canister certification laboratory results should be included with the analytical data package received from the laboratory. 4. Sub-slab samples should be collected with a canister equipped to collect the sample at a maximum flow rate of 200 milliliters (ml)/minute and the canister should be individually certified clean by the analytical laboratory. 5. Indoor air samples should be collected from the lowest level of the parking structure near suspected vapor entry points (if present) to assess the worst-case vapor intrusion locations as well as in the first occupied space above the parking structure. If there are multiple lower levels in the building, indoor air samples (with paired sub-slab samples) should be collected from each of the lower level areas. 6. The number of paired sub-slab and indoor air samples necessary will vary based on specific building design, building size and building construction. The Vapor Mitigation Response Action Plan (RAP) for Brownfield sites or Vapor Mitigation Work Plan for Superfund sites should include the proposed number and locations of paired post-mitigation analytical samples for MPCA review and approval prior to mitigation system installation. Following are considerations for determining where to collect paired sub- slab and indoor air samples for post-mitigation confirmation testing: Within areas of highest known sub-slab vapor concentrations (i.e. source areas beneath the building) Both areas of the building separated by sub-surface barriers to air flow (i.e. footing breaks) and/or preferential air flow pathways (i.e. sub-surface utility corridors) All lowest level portions of a building that may be at differing elevations (i.e. sub-surface parking structure and adjacent slab-on-grade Stairwells and elevator shaft areas All areas of the building with separate or discontinuous mitigation systems A sufficient number of sample locations should be completed to provide coverage across the originally identified vapor intrusion area of concern 7. The indoor air sample collection points should be located in the breathing zone, approximately three to five feet above the floor. 8. All confirmation samples should be analyzed using EPA Method TO-15 (full scan) by a fixed base Minnesota Department of Health certified laboratory for the full Minnesota Soil Gas List compounds. The use of other analytical methods will require prior MPCA staff approval. Vapor mitigation system documentation Upon successful installation and verification of a vapor mitigation system, submit a Vapor Mitigation RAP Implementation Report (for Brownfield sites) or a Vapor Mitigation Work Plan Implementation Report (for Superfund sites) documenting the vapor investigation and mitigation work completed to the MPCA. Prepare a building specific PSR for each building where vapor mitigation was conducted and/or where vapor investigation was conducted as part of the submittal. A building specific PSR should be prepared for each building investigated for vapor intrusion risk, regardless of whether vapor mitigation was conducted or not. A PSR template for documenting building specific vapor investigation and mitigation can be found on the MPCA website at: https://www.pca.state.mn.us/waste/vapor-intrusion-best-management-practices-0 April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 19 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 316 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Institutional controls When vapor mitigation is installed for a building there are long-term considerations that need to be addressed to ensure the vapor mitigation system continues to protect building occupants from vapor intrusion risk. Two important long-term considerations include: Notification to future property owners that a vapor mitigation system is present Continued operation and maintenance of the vapor mitigation system An Environmental Covenant (EC) is required to be recorded and filed on all commercial, large multi-family residential, industrial and mixed-use commercial/residential properties where a vapor mitigation system is present. The EC is necessary to ensure that the mitigation system remains operational and effective. Future property owners should be notified of the presence and operation of the vapor mitigation system and who is providing ongoing operation and monitoring of the system. Documentation that an EC was filed for the property where vapor mitigation was completed shall be provided to MPCA prior to issuance of any vapor related technical assistance letters or no further action letters. A condition of the EC is that an Annual Report be submitted to the MPCA to ensure the mitigation system remains in place and operational and to document the ongoing mitigation system operation and maintenance. Annual Reports are due to the MPCA by July 1 and should be emailed to: instcontrols.pca@state.mn.us. Long-term operation and maintenance Preparation of a long-term operation and maintenance (O&M) manual is necessary to ensure that the mitigation system remains operational and effective at mitigating vapor intrusion. A long-term O&M manual should be prepared for all mitigation systems and include the following items at a minimum: 1.A description of the system design, construction and operating parameters, with building-specific PSR attached along with attached manuals and specifications of the installed mitigation equipment 2.Mitigation system as-built drawings illustrating building construction, all mitigation system components as well as locations of diagnostic testing, manometers, alarm settings, fans, electrical connections, suction points, and sub-slab system components (i.e. vent pipe arrays) 3.A schedule for how and when mitigation system monitoring and building condition inspection will be conducted and the party(s) responsible to complete these tasks 4.Commitment to submitting annual reporting to the MPCA by July 1 of each year as per the Environmental Covenant, emailed to: instcontrols.pca@state.mn.us 5.A sub-section on mitigation system troubleshooting 6.As-built plan for the vapor mitigation system and building construction 7.Contact information for the property owner/occupant if there are questions or issues regarding the mitigation system 8.Placards/signage for visual components of the mitigation system System monitoring Verify the system is operating (i.e. powered fan is active) and conditions are consistent with when the system was originally verified (i.e. verify system manometer or Magnehelic gauge reading is within acceptable range of the initial reading collected at the time of original system verification per the site specific O&M Manual). Verify there is no evidence of damage to the system fans or piping and no blockage of system piping. At a minimum, system monitoring should be conducted semi-annually in alternating MPCA defined heating/non-heating seasons. Building conditions Evaluate building conditions to determine if any changes to the building have occurred since the mitigation system was installed and verified that could compromise the effectiveness of the mitigation system. Examples of building changes that could affect a mitigation system include; building additions, building renovations, changes April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 20 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 317 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 to the HVAC system, installation of range or fume hoods venting large volumes of air and building use/occupancy changes (i.e. commercial to residential). Building conditions evaluation should be conducted semi-annually in alternating MPCA defined heating/non-heating seasons at a minimum. Analytical testing In general, ongoing analytical testing for the vapor mitigation system is not necessary once the system is installed and verification diagnostic and analytical testing is completed to demonstrate system effectiveness. Additional analytical testing may be appropriate in situations where you are trying to re-evaluate system effectiveness based on a changed building condition, system reconfiguration or when system monitoring indicates there may be issues with system effectiveness. Contractor certification The MPCA recommends only qualified professionals trained and experienced in performing the requirements and duties described herein should conduct vapor mitigation and verification testing work. Examples of training options for contractors performing pre and post-mitigation diagnostic testing and active system installation for commercial, industrial and mixed-use buildings include the NRPP and NRSB for installation of mitigation systems. Contractors must also have current certification for Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 40 hour Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (HAZWOPER) to conduct pre- and post- mitigation diagnostic testing and mitigation system installation on Superfund sites. MPCA also recommends that mitigation contractors complete training on chemical vapor intrusion mitigation. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 21 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 318 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Attachments !ƷƷğĭŷƒĻƓƷ ! Α tƩĻΏaźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ 5źğŭƓƚƭƷźĭ /ŷĻĭƉƌźƭƷ !ƷƷğĭŷƒĻƓƷ . Α !ĭƷźǝĻ {ǤƭƷĻƒ LƓƭƷğƌƌğƷźƚƓ /ŷĻĭƉƌźƭƷ !ƷƷğĭŷƒĻƓƷ / Α tƚƭƷΏaźƷźŭğƷion Diagnostic Checklist !ƷƷğĭŷƒĻƓƷ 5 Α tƚƭƷΏaźƷźŭğƷźƚƓ Analytical Testing Checklist April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 22 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 319 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 Acronym list AOC Area of Concern ASTM ASTM International BMPs Best Management Practices CFM Cubic Feet per Minute EC Environmental Covenant EPA Environmental Protection Agency HAZWOPER Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response HVAC Heating Ventilation and Air Conditioning ISVs Intrusion Screening Values MPCA Minnesota Pollution Control Agency NRPP National Radon Proficiency Program NRSB National Radon Safety Board O&M Operation and Maintenance OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PBM Partial Building Mitigation PBP Petroleum Brownfield Program PFE Pressure Field Extension PRP Petroleum Remediation Program PSR Property Summary Report PVC Poly Vinyl Chloride RAP Response Action Plan RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act SMD Sub-membrane depressurization SSD Sub-slab depressurization SSV Sub-slab ventilation VI Vapor Intrusion VI AOC Vapor Intrusion Area of Concern VIC Voluntary Investigation and Cleanup VOCs Volatile Organic Compound April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 23 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 320 of 347 J1, Attachment 4 References ASTM. 2007a. Standard Guide for Assessing Depressurization-Induced Backdrafting and Spillage from ĻƓƷĻķ /ƚƒĬǒƭƷźƚƓ !ƦƦƌźğƓĭĻƭ͵ !{a 9 ЊВВБ Α ЉЋ ΛЋЉЉАΜ͵ !{aͲ ‘ĻƭƷ /ƚƓƭŷƚŷƚĭƉĻƓͲ t!͵ ASTM, 2009, E1465-09, Standard Practice for Radon Control Options for the Design and Construction of New Low-Rise Residential Buildings, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 24 pp. ASTM, 2013, E2121-13, Standard Practice for Installing Radon Mitigation Systems in Existing Low-Rise Residential Buildings, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 13 pp. ASTM. 2015. Standard Guide for Application of Engineering Controls to Facilitate Use or Redevelopment of Chemical-Affected Properties. ASTM E 2435-05(2015). ASTM, West Conshohocken, PA. Braun Intertec, Parking Facilities and Vapor Intrusion Mitigation, Design and Operation Considerations for Parking Facilities as Vapor Intrusion Mitigation Options, February 22, 2019, 35 pp. EPA, 1993, Radon Reduction Techniques for Existing Detached Houses, Technical Guidance (Third Edition) for Active Soil Depressurization Systems, October 1993, EPA Document: EPA/625/R-93/011, EPA Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 329 pp. EPA, 1994a, Radon Prevention in the Design and Construction of Schools and Other Large Buildings, Third Printing with Addendum, June 1994, EPA Document: EPA/625/R-92/016, EPA Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 50 pp. EPA, 1994b, Radon Mitigation Standards, Revised April 1994, EPA Document: EPA/402-R-93-078, EPA Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 24 pp. EPA, 1994c, Model Standards and Techniques for Control of Radon in New Residential Buildings, March 1994, EPA Document: EPA/402/R-94/009, EPA Air and Energy Engineering Research Laboratory, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, 17 pp. EPA, 2015, OSWER Technical Guide for Assessing and Mitigating the Vapor Intrusion Pathway from Subsurface Vapor Sources to Indoor Air, EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, 267 pp. MPCA, Introduction to Vapor Intrusion Map Templates, MPCA Document c-s4-10, 8 pp. April 2020 | c-rem3-06 Page 24 of 24 Council Packet Page Number 321 of 347 J1, Attachment 5 aźƓƓĻƭƚƷğ 9ƓǝźƩƚƓƒĻƓƷğƌ vǒğƌźƷǤ .ƚğƩķ VIA E-MAIL (cover letter & petition) ЎЋЉ \[ğŅğǤĻƷƷĻ wƚğķ bƚƩƷŷ {ğźƓƷ tğǒƌͲ ab ЎЎЊЎЎ February 17, 2023 Melinda Coleman City of Maplewood, City Managers Office 1830 County Road B E Maplewood, MN 55109 Melinda.Coleman@MaplewoodMN.gov RE:Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Reuter Walton 1136/1160 Project. Dear Ms. Coleman, The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) received a petitionon February 13,2023requesting that an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) be prepared forthe project described in the petitionand has determined that the City of Maplewoodis the appropriate governmental unit to decide the need for an EAW. The requirements for environmental review, including the preparation of an EAW, can be found in Minnesota Rules, chapter 4410. The procedures to be followed in making the EAW decision are set forth in part 4410.1100. Key points in the procedures include: 1.No final governmentalapprovals may be given to the project named in the petition, nor may construction on the project be started until the need for an EAW has been determined. Project construction includes any activities which directly affect the environment, including preparation of land. If the decision is to prepare an EAW, final governmental approval must be withheld until either a negative declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is issued or an EIS is determined adequate. See part 4410.3100,subparts 1 and 2 for the prohibitions on final governmentaldecisions. 2.Tomakethe decisiononthe need for an EAW,compare the project to the mandatory EAW, EIS, and exemption categories listed in parts 4410.4300, 4410.4400, and 4410.4600, respectively. If the project should fall under any of these categories, environmental review is automatically required or prohibited. If this should be the case, proceed accordingly: a.If the project meets orexceeds the thresholds of anymandatory EAW or EIS category, then environmental review is required for the project.Please see the guidance documents on the EQB websitefor preparing an EAW or EIS. b.If the project is exempt from environmental review, please document the reason for the exemption in writing conclusion. 1 Council Packet Page Number 322 of 347 J1, Attachment 5 Reuter Walton 1136/1160 Project Page 2 February 17, 2023 3.If preparation of an EAW is neither mandatory nor exempted, the City of Maplewood has the option to prepare a discretionary EAW in accordance with part 4410.1000, subpart 3, item B. The standard for making the decision on the need for an EAW is provided in part 4410.1100, subpart 6. When considering the evidence provided by the petitioners, proposers, or other persons, the City of Maplewood must take into account the factors listed in part 4410.1700, subpart 7. Note that this requires that a record of decision, including specific findings of fact, be maintained. 4.You are allowed up to 30 working days (Saturdays, Sundays and holidays do not count) for your decision if it will be made by a council, board, or other body which meets only periodically, or 15 working days if the decision will be made by a single individual. If the decision will be made by an individual, the individual may request an additional 15 working days from the EQB in accordance with part 4410.1100, subpart 7. 5.You must provide written notification of your decision to the proposer, the petitioners' representative, and the EQB, within 5 working days as described in part 4410.1100, subpart 8. Please provide written notification to these parties even in cases where an EAW or EIS will be prepared according to part 4410.1000, subparts 2 or 3, or the project is found to be exempt from environmental review. a.To notify the EQB of your decision on the need for an EAW, complete the EQB aƚƓźƷƚƩ submission form found on the EQB website. The EQB requests that you upload a copy of your record of decision using the same electronic submission form, including instances where environmental review is mandatory, voluntary, or exempt. 6.If for any reason you are unable to act on the petition at this time (e.g., no application has yet been filed or the application has been withdrawn or denied), the petition will remain in effect for a period of one year, and must be acted upon prior to any final decision concerning the project identified in the petition. It is recommended that you notify in writing both the e petition at the time it is received. Notice of the petition and its assignment to your unit of government will be published in the 9v. aƚƓźƷƚƩ on Tuesday, February 21, 2023. If you have any questions or need any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us at env.review@state.mn.us or 651-757-2873. Sincerely, Kayla Walsh Kayla Walsh Environmental Review Program Administrator Environmental Quality Board cc: Mr. Patrick M. Vaughan, Courtney Ahlers-Nelson, EQB Interim Executive Director Denise Wilson, Council Packet Page Number 323 of 347 J1, Attachment 5 From: Walsh, Kayla (EQB) <kayla.walsh@state.mn.us> Sent: Wednesday, March 8, 2023 3:27 PM External message alert: Thismessage originated from outside the City of Maplewood email system. Use caution when clicking hyperlinks, downloading pictures or opening attachments. Dear Ms. Coleman, The Environmental Quality Board (EQB) has determined that the City of Maplewood is the appropriate governmental unit to decide the need for an EAW on the Reuter Walton Project. It has come to our attention that the initial transmittal on February 17, 2023 did not include material evidence which was submitted to EQB and would help to inform the RGU’s decision. Content of the additional material evidence to be used in your decision-making will be forwarded to you in this series of emails. If you need additional information, please contact us at 651-757-2873 or at env.review@state.mn.us. Thank You, Kayla Walsh (she/her) Environmental Review Program Administrator 651-757-2796 Minnesota Environmental Quality Board 520 Lafayette Road St. Paul, MN, 55155 Council Packet Page Number 324 of 347 For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment g n i t e e M l i c n u o C y t i C 3 2 0 2 , 7 2 h c r a M Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Reuter Walton Project at 1136/1160 Frost Avenue East For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment t c e j o r P e u n e v A t s o r F 0 6 1 Comprehensive Plan AmendmentConditional Use PermitLot CombinationPublic VacationDesign Review 1 ¤¤¤¤¤ / Site located at the SE corner of Frost Avenue and PhalenPlace150-Unit Apartment BuildingPreviously Received Approvals 6 3¤¤¤ 1 1 For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment s i s y l a t n c A e l j a o t r n P e e m u n n o e r v i v A n t E s o e r t i F S 0 s 6 u 1 1 o i / v 6 e Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation (October, 2021)Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (April, 2022)Phase II Environmental Investigation Report (August, 2022)Voluntary Response Action Plan and Response Action Design (January, 2023) 3 r 1 ¤¤¤¤ 1P For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment t c e j o r P e u n e v A W t s A o E r r F o f 0 6 n 1 1 o i / t i 6 t MN Environmental Quality Board (EQB) received a Petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) for the Reuter Walton ProjectCity retained Kimley-Horn to review the request and determine if the proposed project would trigger the mandatory requirement for an EAW or create significant environmental impacts that would warrant an EAW 3 e 1 ¤¤ 1P For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment ) W A E ( t e e h s k r o W t n trigger a mandatory EAW. e t o m n s s s e e s o s d A l a t n e w m e n i v o r r Residential development in Maplewood must have 375 attached units or more to meet the threshold for a mandatory EAW; therefore, the 1136/1160 Frost Avenue development i e ¤ v v An EAW is an environmental review process as outlined in state statute and Mn Rules 4410An EAW is completed by the Responsible Government UnitProjects that meet the criteria outlined in Mn Rules 4410.4300 are required to complete an EAW n EO¤¤¤ For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment W A ? E W n a A f E o n e a s s i o It is a source of information to guide other approvals and permitting decisions t p ¤ r a An EAW is a brief document designed to lay out the basic facts of a project to determine if additional environmental review is requiredThe EAW form consists of 22 questions and is published by the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) u Informs the public about the project Provides information on future permitting and approvalsHelps identify potential impacts and mitigation strategies An EAW does not approve or deny a project h ¤¤ P¤¤¤¤ W For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment Habitat and Endangered SpeciesHistoric PropertiesVisualGreenhouse gas analysisTransportationAir and Noise Cumulative ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ 6Ï8-month process : e l u d s e c i h p c S o l T a Surface WatersStormwater Water and Sewer Infrastructure c i W ¤¤¤ p Climate AdaptionCover TypesLand UseGeology/SoilsWater ResourcesContamination and Hazardous Materials A y ¤¤¤¤¤¤ E T For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment ) 2 / 1 ( n o i t i t e P t n e m p o l e v e D t s a E e u n this is recommended mitigation in the Phase II this is recommended mitigation in the Phase II e :: v nn A oo ii tt t aa s dd o nn r ee F mm 0 mm 6 oo 1 cc 1 ee / RESA and in processRESA and in process 6 ¤¤ 3 Vapor intrusion Ïdeveloper to mitigate through installing a mitigation system to vent the vapors to the outside airRequest developer complete additional testing for tetrachloroethene and other hazardous materialsIn January 2023, developer prepared a Voluntary Response Action Plan and Response Action Design for the project, both include several elements to implement the redevelopment plans in accordance with MPCA guidelines. 1 1 Petition evidence included concerns about:¤¤¤ For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment ) 2 / 2 ( n o i t i t e P t n e m p o l e v e D t s a E (not included in petition but was e u n e v mowing could be limited to late winter/early spring, developerconsult with the US Fish & Wildlife Service :: A nn t oo ii s tt o aa r dd F nn ee 0 mm 6 mm 1 1 oo / cc ee 6 Rprior to the active season, and disturbed areas can be reseeded using native mixes to minimize potential for impacts to the rusty patched bumble bee. R(USFWS) to comply with Section 9 of the federal Endangered Species Act for any potential impacts to the Northern Long-Eared Bat and its habitatNew USFWS guidance will be released March 31, 2023, that is anticipated to recommend projects clear trees during the bat inactive season (i.e., Nov. 1 to March 31) or show evidence that no habitat or species is present 3 ¤¤¤ 1 1 Rusty-Patched Bumble BeeNorthern Long-Eared Bat reviewed given that tree removal is proposed) ¤¤ For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment ? s t c e f f E l a t n e m n o r i v n E t n a c i f i n g i S e v City of Maplewood deny the citizen a : H n o t i c t a e j d o n r e P m e m h t o c s e e A. Type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects.B. Cumulative potential effects. C. The extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation by ongoing public regulatory authority. D. The extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and controlled as a result of other available environmental studies undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, including other EISs. Rpetition for an EAW. o D The project does not have significant environmental effects, according to Minnesota Rules, part 4410.1700, subpart 7: For the permanent record: Meeting Date: 3/27/2023 Agenda Item J1, Additional Attachment t c e j o r P e n u o i n t e a v d A n t e s m o r Fm o 0 c 6 e 1 1 R / f f 6 a 3 t 1 Recommended Action: A motion to approve a resolution denying a petition for preparation of an EAW for the Reuter Walton residential development project at 1136/1160 Frost Avenue 1S J2 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 Melinda Coleman, City Manager REPORT TO: Danette Parr, Community Development Director REPORT FROM: Ron Batty, City Attorney Ron Batty, City Attorney PRESENTER: Resolution Approving Third Amendmentto the Purchase Agreement, AGENDA ITEM: 1160 Frost Avenue East Action Requested: Motion Discussion Public Hearing Form of Action:ResolutionOrdinanceContract/AgreementProclamation Policy Issue: The city previously entered into a Purchase Agreement with Reuter Walton Development, LLC for the sale and redevelopment of the property at 1160 Frost Avenue. In November, 2022, the city entered into a First Amendment to Purchase Agreement to extend certain dates. The city approved a Second Amendment to Purchase Agreement in December, 2022. The buyer has requested a Third Amendment to the Purchase Agreement to extend the Closing Date due to the delay caused by the citizens’ petition for an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). Recommended Action: Motion to approve the resolution authorizing execution of Third Amendment to Purchase Agreement regarding 1160 Frost Avenue. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $0 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: N/A Strategic Plan Relevance: Community InclusivenessFinancial & Asset MgmtEnvironmental Stewardship Integrated CommunicationOperational EffectivenessTargeted Redevelopment The city has previously entered into a Purchase Agreement with Reuter Walton Development, LLC, and subsequently entered into a First Amendment and Second Amendment to extend dates as needed. As the property owner, the city has the right to extend the closing date to allow flexibility as necessary to assist with redevelopment efforts. Council Packet Page Number 325 of 347 J2 Background The redevelopment project contemplated by the developer involves the city-owned property at 1160 Frost Avenue, which is the subject of the purchase agreements with the city, and the adjacent privately owned land at 1136 Frost Avenue, which is also under contract. The developer has requested a Third Amendment to the Purchase Agreement to extend the Closing Date to June 30, 2023. The extension is necessary to avoid a default under the Purchase Agreement which currently requires closing by March 31, 2023. That date is no longer practical in light of the delay caused by the consideration of the citizens’ petition for an EAW. Attachments 1.Resolution Approving Third Amendment to the Purchase Agreement, 1160 Frost Avenue East 2.Third Amendment to Purchase Agreement Council Packet Page Number 326 of 347 J2, Attachment 1 CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA OLUTION NO. ___________ RES RESOLUTION APPROVING THIRD AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR 1160 FROST AVENUE WHEREAS, the City of Maplewood (the “City”) is the owner of certain real property located at 1160 Frost Avenuein Maplewood, Minnesota (the “Property”); and WHEREAS, the legal description of the Property is: s 1 through 20 inclusive, Block 1, Kavanagh and Dawson’s Addition to Lot Gladstone, together with the vacated alley in said Block 1, Ramsey County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, on July 8, 2021 the City entered into a purchase agreement with Reuter Walton Development, LLC (the “Purchase Agreement”) regarding the Property; and WHEREAS, on November 17, 2022 the parties executed the First Amendment to Purchase Agreement to extend certain dates and deadlines; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2022 the parties executed the Second Amendment to Purchase Agreement to extend certain dates and deadlines; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend the Purchase Agreement again. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS: 1.The recitals set forth herein are incorporated into and made a part hereof. 2.The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Third Amendment to Purchase Agreement with Reuter Walton Development, LLC regarding the Property. 3.TheCitystaff and consultants are hereby authorized and directed to take any and all additional steps and actions necessary or convenient to accomplish the intent of this resolution. th Approved this 27 day of March, 2023 by the City Council of the City of Maplewood, Minnesota. CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA Marylee Abrams, Mayor Attest: Andrea Sindt, City Clerk 1 MA745-36-862386.v2 Council Packet Page Number 327 of 347 J2, Attachment 2 THIRD AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT s Third Amendment to Purchase Agreement (the “Third Amendment”) is made this ___ Thi day of ___________, 2023, by andbetween the city of Maplewood, a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota (“Seller”) and Reuter Walton Development LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (“Buyer”). RECITALS: WHEREAS, Seller and Buyer previously entered into a Purchase Agreement dated July 8, 2021 regarding the Property legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto; and EREAS, Seller and Buyer executed a First Amendment to Purchase Agreement on WH November 17, 2022 (the “First Amendment”); and WHEREAS, Seller and Buyer executed a Second Amendment to Purchase Agreement on December 12, 2022 (the “Second Amendment”); and WHEREAS, the original Purchase Agreement, as amended by the First Amendmentand Second Amendment, is hereinafter defined as the “Purchase Agreement”; and WHEREAS, Sellerand Buyer desire to modify the Purchase Agreement again to extend the Closing Date. AGREEMENT: In consideration of the promises made between Seller and Buyer, the parties agree as follows: 1.Definitions. All capitalized terms used in this Third Amendment have the meanings ascribed to them in the Purchase Agreement. 2.Section 4 of the Purchase Agreement is modified to change the date by which the Closing must occur to June 30, 2023. 3.Confirmation of Purchase Agreement. In case of any conflict between this Third Amendment and the Purchase Agreement, the terms of this Third Amendment shall control. Except as modified by this Third Amendment, the Purchase Agreement as previously amended is confirmed by the parties. 4.Counterparts. This Third Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all such counterparts together shall constitute one and the same agreement. 1 MA745-36-862384.v2 Council Packet Page Number 328 of 347 J2, Attachment 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Seller and Buyer have executed this Third Amendment as of the day and year first above written. SELLER: CITY OF MAPLEWOOD By: _____________________________ Marylee Abrams, Mayor By: _____________________________ Melinda Coleman, City Manager 2 MA745-36-862384.v2 Council Packet Page Number 329 of 347 J2, Attachment 2 BUYER: REUTER WALTON DEVELOPMENT LLC By: _____________________________ Its: _____________________________ 3 MA745-36-862384.v2 Council Packet Page Number 330 of 347 J2, Attachment 2 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of the Property Lots 1 through 20 inclusive, Block 1, Kavanagh and Dawson’s Addition to Gladstone, together with the vacated alley in said Block 1, Ramsey County, Minnesota. PID# 16-29-22-42-0112 Abstract Property A-1 MA745-36-862384.v2 Council Packet Page Number 331 of 347 J3 CITY COUNCILSTAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager REPORT FROM: Steven Love, Public Works Director / City Engineer Jon Jarosch, Assistant City Engineer PRESENTER:Steven Love AGENDA ITEM: Myrtle-Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16 a. Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Advertising For Bids b. Resolution Ordering Preparation Of Assessment Roll Action Requested: Motion Discussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution Ordinance Contract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: The Engineering Department prepares plans and specifications prior to advertising the project for bids. The plans and specifications are essential to ensuring the project is constructed to current standards, meets the needs of area residents, receives reasonable bids, and the project is constructed in a timely manner. The City Council will consider approving the plans and specifications and advertising for bids for the Myrtle-Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16. Final plans and specifications are complete and ready to be advertised for bids. The bid opening is tentatively proposed for 10:00 a.m. on April 28, 2023. The City Council will also consider ordering the preparation of the assessment roll for the Myrtle- Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16. The assessment hearing is proposed to be held in September of 2023. Recommended Action: a. Motion to approve the attached resolution approving plans and specifications and advertising bids for Myrtle-Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16. b. Motion to approve the attached resolution ordering preparation of assessment roll for Myrtle- Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $5,391,700.00 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: The proposed funding plan includes a combination of the Special Benefit Assessments, the Environmental Utility Fund, the Sanitary Sewer Fund, St. Paul Regional Water Services, G.O. Improvement Bonds, and the W.A.C. Fund. Council Packet Page Number 332 of 347 J3 Strategic Plan Relevance: Community Inclusiveness Financial & Asset Mgmt Environmental Stewardship Integrated Communication Operational Effectiveness Targeted Redevelopment The Myrtle-Sterling Area Neighborhood is an important part of the City’s infrastructure serving as a connection to local properties and the Alan Page Elementary School. The streets in this area have deteriorated beyond the point of regular annual maintenance and are in need of replacement. The addition of a sidewalk along the east side of Lakewood Drive from Holloway Avenue to Ripley Avenue will aid in connectivity and improve safety for pedestrians accessing the Alan Page Elementary School on the east side of Lakewood Drive. The project will be constructed utilizing environmentally sound practices such as pavement reclamation and using recycled asphalt in the pavement. Background: The project area is generally bounded by Holloway Avenue to the north, McKnight Road to the west, Montana Avenue to the south, and Century Avenue to the east. This project is a part of the 2023 – 2027 Maplewood Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Construction is scheduled to begin in June of 2023. The streets included in the Myrtle-Sterling project total approximately 1.50 miles in length and have an average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating of 35/100. The PCI rating is based on a visual survey of the pavement and is a number between 0 and 100, with 0 being the worst possible pavement condition and 100 being the best possible pavement condition (i.e. a new road). The existing street pavement and aging utility infrastructure on the project streets present an ongoing maintenance problem for the City of Maplewood Street and Utility Departments. The condition of the existing street also represents a decreased level of service for the residents of Maplewood, with the City receiving complaints from area residents about substandard street conditions. This project would include the following improvements: Pavement rehabilitation of the following streets to include the full depth reclamation of existing pavement and underlying aggregate base, full replacement of the existing bituminous pavement, spot replacement of concrete curb and gutter and subgrade corrections as necessary: Idaho Avenue (west of Sterling Street) Kingston Avenue Knoll Circle Lakewood Drive (south of Ripley Avenue) Mary Street Myrtle Street (south of Ripley Avenue) Ripley Avenue Full reconstruction of the following streets which includes the removal of existing pavement and underlying aggregate base, extensive soil subgrade corrections, major utility improvements, water quality improvements and construction of new concrete curb and gutter: Council Packet Page Number 333 of 347 J3 Idaho Avenue (east of Sterling Street) Lakewood Drive (north of Ripley Avenue) Myrtle Street (north of Ripley Avenue) Sterling Street (South of Larpenteur Avenue) The installation of a new sidewalk on the east side of Lakewood Drive from Holloway Avenue to Ripley Avenue is proposed along with the upgrading of existing pedestrian facilities to ADA standards. Utility work in the project area will consist of the addition of new storm sewer systems on select streets, the construction of an infiltration basin system at Hillside Park to reduce runoff and improve water quality, and the replacement of 2,000 feet of SPRWS cast iron water main on Myrtle Street and Lakewood Drive. Assessments An independent appraisal firm has been hired to provide an opinion of special benefit received by properties within the neighborhood project area. This information will ultimately be utilized to determine the special benefit assessment amounts for the project area. The rates established in the City’s Special Assessment Policy were utilized at this time to generate a preliminary assessment roll. Based on the City of Maplewood’s Pavement Management Policy, parcels are assessed on an equal “unit” basis. However, per Minnesota State Statute 429, the assessment amount cannot be greater than the benefit received by the property from the type(s) improvement. Ultimately the special benefit appraisal report will determine the final assessment amounts for the properties proposed to be assessed as a part of the project. For the purposes of this report and establishing a project financing plan, the preliminary assessment rate(s) are as follows. Residential Single Unit, Pavement Rehabilitation Rate = $3,450.00/unit Commercial Unit, Pavement Rehabilitation Rate = $69.00/front-foot Residential Single Unit, Full Reconstruction = $6,600.00/unit Commercial Unit, Full Reconstruction = $132.00/front-foot The assessment hearing is currently proposed to be held September of 2023. Estimated Project Cost The total estimated project cost is $5,391,700 and is outlined below: Estimated Project Cost Summary Proposed ImprovementsTotal Amount % of Total Street Improvements$2,966,600 55% Drainage Improvements $1,287,100 24% Sanitary Sewer Improvements $70,700 1% Water System Improvements $1,067,300 20% Total Estimated Project Cost: $5,391,700 100% The estimated costs include 10% contingencies and 12% overhead, which include geotechnical, legal, and fiscal expenses. Council Packet Page Number 334 of 347 J3 Project Funding Plan The improvements are proposed to be financed through a combination of Environmental Utility Fund, G.O. Improvement Bonds, Sanitary Sewer Fund, Special Benefit Assessments, Saint Paul Regional Water, and the W.A.C. Fund. An update to the financing plan will be provided after the special benefits appraisal is received. Estimated Project Cost Recovery Funding SourceTotal Amount% of Total General Obligation (G.O.) Improvement Bonds $2,142,100 40% Environmental Utility Fund $1,287,100 24% Sanitary Sewer Fund $70,700 1.5% Water Area Fund $25,600 0.5% St. Paul Regional Water Services (SPRWS) $1,041,700 19% Special Benefit Assessments $824,500 15% Total Estimated Project Funding: $5,391,700 100% It is necessary to note that the total estimated project cost and funding for this project are significantly higher than the currently approved Capital Improvement Plan ($4,130,000) due to price escalations in the current market and a significant increase in the amount of water main replacement work needed for this project. The increased project cost due to the proposed water main replacement will be reimbursed back to the City from SPRWS. Additionally, the City’s other 2023 Improvement project, the Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Improvements, is estimated to be significantly under the currently approved CIP. When looking at the combined estimated costs for the two projects, the total funding plan is slightly less than the currently approved CIP. The estimated project costs and the preliminary project funding plan have been reviewed by the Finance Director. Council Packet Page Number 335 of 347 J3 Project Schedule The following is a tentative schedule for City Project 22-16 should it be determined to proceed with the project: Project MilestoneDate Order Preparation of Feasibility Study 8/8/2022 Neighborhood Meeting #112/5/2022 Accept Feasibility Study, Order Public Hearing, Authorize Preparation of 2/13/2023 Plans & Specifications Neighborhood Meeting #22/10/2023 Public Hearing 2/27/2023 Ordering of Improvements 3/13/2023 Approve Plans and Specifications, Authorize Advertisement for Bids, 3/27/2023 Authorize Preparation of Assessment Roll Bid Opening4/28/2023 Award Contract 5/8/2023 Neighborhood Meeting #3May/2023 Begin Construction June 2023 Accept Assessment Roll & Order Assessment Hearings 8/14/2023 Neighborhood Meeting #49/6/2023 Assessment Hearing and Adopt Assessment Roll9/11/2023 Complete Construction November 2023 Assessments Certified to Ramsey County November 2023 Attachments: 1.Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Advertising for Bids 2.Resolution Authorizing Preparation of Assessment Roll 3.Project Location Map Council Packet Page Number 336 of 347 J3, Attachment 1 RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ADVERTISING FOR BIDS th WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution of the City Council adopted February 13, 2023, fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed street improvements for the Myrtle-Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16. th WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the City Council on February 27, 2023, plans and specifications for the Myrtle-Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16, have been prepared by (or under the direction of) the City Engineer, who has presented such plans and specifications to the City Council for approval, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1.Such plans and specifications are hereby approved and ordered placed on file in the office of the City Engineer. 2.The City Clerk or office of the City Engineer shall prepare and cause to be inserted into the official paper and Finance and Commerce an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published twice, at least twenty-one days before the date set for bid opening, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be publicly opened electronically via th QuestCDN and considered by the council at 10:00 a.m. on the 28 day of April, 2023. Bids shall be accompanied by a certified check or bid bond, payable to the City of Maplewood, Minnesota for five percent of the amount of such bid. 3.The City Clerk and City Engineer are hereby authorized and instructed to receive, open, and read aloud bids received at the time and place herein noted, and to tabulate the bids received. The City Council will consider the bids, and the award of a contract, at the th regular City Council meeting of May 8, 2023. th Approved this 27day of March2023. Council Packet Page Number 337 of 347 J3, Attachment 2 RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, the City Clerk and City Engineer will receive bids for the Myrtle-Sterling Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-16. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that the City Clerk and City Engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land abutting on the streets affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and they shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the city office for inspection. FURTHER, the City Clerk shall, upon completion of such proposed assessment notify the City Council thereof. th Approved this 27day of March 2023. Council Packet Page Number 338 of 347 J3, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 339 of 347 J4 CITY COUNCILSTAFF REPORT Meeting Date March 27, 2023 REPORT TO: Melinda Coleman, City Manager REPORT FROM: Steven Love, Public Works Director / City Engineer Jon Jarosch, Assistant City Engineer PRESENTER:Steven Love AGENDA ITEM: Woodlynn-SouthlawnArea Street Improvements, City Project 22-17 a.Resolution Approving Plans And Specifications And Advertising For Bids b.Resolution Ordering Preparation Of Assessment Roll Action Requested: MotionDiscussion Public Hearing Form of Action: Resolution OrdinanceContract/Agreement Proclamation Policy Issue: The Engineering Department prepares plans and specifications prior to advertising the project for bids. The plans and specifications are essential to ensuring the project is constructed to current standards, meets the needs of area residents, receives reasonable bids and is constructed in a timely manner. The City Council will consider approving the plans and specifications and advertising for bids for the Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-17. Final plans and specifications are complete and ready to be advertised for bids. The bid opening is tentatively proposed for 10:00 a.m. on April 28, 2023. The City Council will also consider ordering the preparation of the assessment roll for the Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-17. The assessment hearing is proposed to be held in September of 2023. Recommended Action: a.Motion to approve the attached resolution approving plans and specifications and advertising bids for Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-17. b.Motion to approve the attached resolution ordering preparation of assessment roll for Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-17. Fiscal Impact: Is There a Fiscal Impact? No Yes, the true or estimated cost is $ 3,527,800.00 Financing source(s): Adopted Budget Budget Modification New Revenue Source Use of Reserves Other: The proposed funding plan includes a combination of Special Benefit Assessments, the Environmental Utility Fund, the Sanitary Sewer Fund, Street Revitalization Fund, G.O. Improvement Bonds, and the W.A.C. Fund. Council Packet Page Number 340 of 347 J4 Strategic Plan Relevance: Community Inclusiveness Financial & Asset Mgmt Environmental Stewardship Integrated Communication Operational Effectiveness Targeted Redevelopment The Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Neighborhood is an important part of the City’s infrastructure serving as a connection to local properties and businesses in the area. The streets in this area have deteriorated beyond the point of regular annual maintenance and are in need of replacement. The addition of a sidewalks along Woodlynn Avenue, Ariel Street and Radatz Avenue will aid in connectivity and improve safety for pedestrians accessing the many points of interest in the area. The project will be constructed utilizing environmentally sound practices such as pavement reclamation and using recycled asphalt in the pavement. Background: The project streets are bounded by County Road D to the north, Hazelwood Street to the west, County Road C to the south, and McKnight Road to the east. This project is a part of the 2023 – 2027 Maplewood Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The city streets included in the Woodlynn-Southlawn project total approximately 1.77 miles in length and have an average Pavement Condition Index (PCI) rating of 37/100. The PCI rating is based on a visual survey of the pavement and is a number between 0 and 100, with 0 being the worst possible pavement condition and 100 being the best possible pavement condition (i.e. a new road). The existing street pavement and aging utility infrastructure on the project streets present an ongoing maintenance problem for the City of Maplewood Street and Utility Departments. The condition of the existing street also represents a decreased level of service for the residents of Maplewood, with the City receiving numerous complaints from area residents about substandard street conditions. This project would include the following improvements: Pavement rehabilitation of the following streets to include the full depth reclamation of existing pavement and underlying aggregate base, full replacement of the existing bituminous pavement, spot replacement of concrete curb and gutter and subgrade corrections as necessary. Woodlynn Avenue Ariel Street Furness Court Southlawn Drive Kennard Street Germain Court Full reconstruction of Radatz Avenue to include the full depth reclamation of the existing pavement and underlying aggregate base, subgrade corrections and construction of new concrete curb and gutter. The installation of new pedestrian connections on Woodlynn Avenue, Ariel Street and Radatz Avenue along with the upgrading of existing pedestrian facilities to ADA standards. Staff utilized the City’s consultant, SRF Consulting Group, to take an in-depth look at the existing roadway width and future traffic and pedestrian needs on Woodlynn Avenue between Ariel Street and McKnight Road. Options were investigated that would reduce traffic speeds, improve corridor safety, reduce the amount of impervious surface, and design Woodlynn Avenue to better meet Council Packet Page Number 341 of 347 J4 traffic and pedestrian needs. It is proposed that Woodlynn Avenue, between Ariel Street and McKnight Road, be reduced to one driving lane in each direction along with parking lanes on either side at select locations. th On March 13 , 2023 the City Council directed staff to add a sidewalk on Radatz Avenue. Staff have included this sidewalk in the final design. Additionally, the width of the road has been reduced from 28-feet to 26-feet to account for the additional room needed for the 5-foot sidewalk and 3-foot boulevard as guided by the Living Street’s Policy. This street narrowing will aid in promoting slower vehicle speeds. Assessments An independent appraisal firm has been hired to provide an opinion of special benefit received by properties within the neighborhood project area. This information will ultimately be utilized to determine the special benefit assessment amounts for the project area. The rates established in the City’s Special Assessment Policy were utilized at this time to generate a preliminary assessment roll. Based on the City of Maplewood’s Pavement Management Policy, parcels are assessed on an equal “unit” basis. However, per Minnesota State Statute 429, the assessment amount cannot be greater than the benefit received by the property from the type(s) improvement. Ultimately the special benefit appraisal report will determine the final assessment amounts for the properties proposed to be assessed as a part of the project. For the purposes of this report and establishing a project financing plan, the preliminary assessment rate(s) are as follows. Residential Single Unit, Pavement Rehabilitation Rate = $3,450.00/unit Commercial Unit, Pavement Rehabilitation Rate = $69.00/front-foot Residential Single Unit, Full Reconstruction = $6,600.00/unit Commercial Unit, Full Reconstruction = $132.00/front-foot The assessment hearing is currently proposed to be held September of 2023. Estimated Project Cost The total estimated project cost is $3,527,800 and is outlined below: Estimated Project Cost Summary Proposed Improvements Total Amount % of Total Street Improvements$3,169,000 90% Drainage Improvements $227,000 6% Sanitary Sewer Improvements $73,500 2% Water System Improvements $58,300 2% Total Estimated Project Cost: $3,527,800 100% The estimated costs include 10% contingencies and 12% overhead, which include geotechnical, legal, and fiscal expenses. This cost estimate does not include the additional costs associated with the Radatz Avenue sidewalk, which will be included in the engineer’s estimate at the time of an award of contract. Council Packet Page Number 342 of 347 J4 Project Funding Plan The improvements are proposed to be financed through a combination of Environmental Utility Fund, G.O. Improvement Bonds, Sanitary Sewer Fund, Special Benefit Assessments, Street Revitalization Fund, and the W.A.C. Fund. An update to the financing plan will be provided after the special benefits appraisal is received. Estimated Project Cost Recovery Funding Source Total Amount % of Total General Obligation (GO) Bonds$348,600 10% Environmental Utility Fund$227,0006% Sanitary Sewer Fund $73,500 2% Water Area Fund $58,300 2% Street Revitalization Fund $1,822,700 52% Special Benefit Assessments $997,700 28% Total Estimated Project Funding: $3,527,800 100% The estimated project costs and funding needs are significantly lower than those estimated in the approved Capital Improvement Plan ($4,860,350) due to less utility and subgrade corrections needed than anticipated. The unused funds from this project will be utilized to offset the additional funding needs on the Myrtle-Sterling Project. The cost recovery plan does not include the additional costs associated with the Radatz Avenue sidewalk directed at the March 13, 2023 Council meeting. These costs will be reflected in the engineer’s estimate at the time of an award of contract. Any necessary budget adjustments would be recommended at that time. The estimated project costs and the preliminary project funding plan have been reviewed by the Finance Director. Project Schedule The following is a tentative schedule for City Project 22-17 should it be determined to proceed with the project: Project MilestoneDate Order Preparation of Feasibility Study 8/8/2022 Neighborhood Meeting #112/5/2022 Accept Feasibility Study, Order Public Hearing, Authorize Preparation of 2/13/2023 Plans & Specifications Neighborhood Meeting #22/10/2023 Public Hearing 2/27/2023 Ordering of Improvements 3/13/2023 Approve Plans and Specifications, Authorize Advertisement for Bids, 3/27/2023 Authorize Preparation of Assessment Roll Bid Opening4/27/2023 Award Contract 5/8/2023 Neighborhood Meeting #3May/2023 Begin Construction June 2023 Accept Assessment Roll & Order Assessment Hearings 8/14/2023 Neighborhood Meeting #49/6/2023 Council Packet Page Number 343 of 347 J4 Assessment Hearing and Adopt Assessment Roll9/11/2023 Complete Construction November 2023 Assessments Certified to Ramsey County November 2023 Attachments: 1. Resolution Approving Plans and Specifications and Advertising for Bids 2. Resolution Authorizing Preparation of Assessment Roll 3. Project Location Map Council Packet Page Number 344 of 347 J4, Attachment 1 RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND ADVERTISING FOR BIDS th WHEREAS, pursuant to a resolution of the City Council adopted February 13, 2023, fixed a date for a Council hearing on the proposed street improvements for the Woodlynn- Southlawn Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-17. th WHEREAS, pursuant to resolution passed by the City Council on February 27, 2023, plans and specifications for the Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-17, have been prepared by (or under the direction of) the City Engineer, who has presented such plans and specifications to the City Council for approval, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA: 1.Such plans and specifications are hereby approved and ordered placed on file in the office of the City Engineer. 2.The City Clerk or office of the City Engineer shall prepare and cause to be inserted into the official paper and Finance and Commerce an advertisement for bids upon the making of such improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall be published twice, at least twenty-one days before the date set for bid opening, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids will be publicly opened electronically via th QuestCDN and considered by the council at 10:00 a.m. on the 27 day of April, 2023. Bids shall be accompanied by a certified check or bid bond, payable to the City of Maplewood, Minnesota for five percent of the amount of such bid. 3.The City Clerk and City Engineer are hereby authorized and instructed to receive, open, and read aloud bids received at the time and place herein noted, and to tabulate the bids received. The City Council will consider the bids, and the award of a contract, at the th regular City Council meeting of May 8, 2023. th Approved this 27 day of March 2023. Council Packet Page Number 345 of 347 J4, Attachment 2 RESOLUTION ORDERING PREPARATION OF ASSESSMENT ROLL WHEREAS, the City Clerk and City Engineer will receive bids for the Woodlynn-Southlawn Area Street Improvements, City Project 22-17. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF MAPLEWOOD, MINNESOTA that the City Clerk and City Engineer shall forthwith calculate the proper amount to be specially assessed for such improvement against every assessable lot, piece or parcel of land abutting on the streets affected, without regard to cash valuation, as provided by law, and they shall file a copy of such proposed assessment in the city office for inspection. FURTHER, the City Clerk shall, upon completion of such proposed assessment notify the City Council thereof. th Approved this 27day of March 2023. Council Packet Page Number 346 of 347 J4, Attachment 3 Council Packet Page Number 347 of 347 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 Phase II EnvironmentalInvestigationReport 1136 Î 1160 Frost Avenue East, Maplewood, Minnesota Prepared for: Reuter Walton Development August 2022 Landmark Environmental, LLC 9555 James Ave S, Suite 262| Bloomington, MN 55431 | Phone: 952-295-9400| www.landmarkenv.com J1, Attachment 6 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction and Background .............................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Background and Phase I ESA Summary .......................................................................... 1 2.0 Investigation Results ............................................................................................................ 5 2.1 Field Investigation Summary ........................................................................................... 5 2.2 Field Investigation Results ............................................................................................... 6 2.3 Laboratory Analytical Results .......................................................................................... 6 3.0 Conclusions and Recommendations .................................................................................... 8 Figures Figure 1 Property Location Map Figure 2 Property Layout Map with Investigation Boring Locations Tables Table 1 Laboratory Soil Data Î Detected Parameters Table 2 Laboratory Soil Vapor Data Î Detected Parameters Appendices Appendix A Landmark Standard Operating Procedures Appendix B Geotechnical Investigation Report Appendix C Photo Log Appendix D Field Sheets and Boring Logs Appendix E Pace Analytical Laboratory Reports www.landmarkenv.com © Copyright 2021. Landmark Environmental LLC. All rights reserved. Proprietary and confidential content contained within. No part of this document may be reproduced, distributed or transmitted by any means, electronic or physical, for any purpose without the expressed prior written consent of Landmark Environmental. This document contains specific Intellectual Property (IP) owned by Landmark Environmental. This document is intended solely for the party specified within. J1, Attachment 6 1.0 Introduction and Background 1.1 Introduction Landmark Environmental, LLC (Landmark) conducted a Phase II Environmental Investigation (Investigation) on behalf of Reuter Walton Development (Reuter Walton) at properties located at 1136-1160 Frost Ave East, Maplewood Minnesota (hereafter collectively referred to as the Ð Property Ñ). The location of the Property is shown on Figure 1. The scope of the Investigation was based on the information documented in a report titled Phase I Environmental Site Assessment,1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Maplewood, Minnesota 55109 (Phase I ESA Report), which was prepared by Landmark on behalf of Reuter Walton and dated April 2022. The Investigation provides an evaluation of the soil and soil vapor at the Property. No groundwater samples were collected as part of the Investigation. Hand Geoprobe borings were completed at fifteen (15) locations on the Property to investigate the findings from the Phase I ESA Report. Landmark collected 15 soil samples and seven (7) soil vapor samples from the hand Geoprobe locations. Figure 2 shows the Property boundary with Investigation boring locations. All Investigation activities were conducted in accordance with Landmark Ós Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), which are included in Appendix A, as well as applicable Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) guidance documents. 1.2 Background and Phase I ESA Report Summary The Property consists of three parcels of land that are zoned commercial located at 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East in Maplewood, Ramsey County, Minnesota in the southeast Quarter of Section 16 in Township 29 Range 22. The Property Identification Numbers for the Property are as follows: Parcel 1: 162922420004 (0.34 acres/parking lot) Parcel 2: 162922420003 (1.17 acres/retail commercial buildings corresponding to 1136 & 1146 street addresses) Parcel 3: 162922420112 (2.37 acres/currently vacant parcel with small shed corresponding to 1160 street address) Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 are owned by Nessco LLC (Nessco), and Parcel 3 is owned by the city of Maplewood (City). The Property consists of 3.88 acres of land that currently is zoned for commercial use. The general Property vicinity has been developed since the 1930s for residential and agricultural use. The Current use of the Property is light industrial (Precision Resources, Inc.) and 1 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\Phase II\\Final Draft 1136 - 1160 Frost Ave East, Phase II Report 08 25 22.docx J1, Attachment 6 residential; these uses are not likely to involve the use, treatment, storage, disposal, or generation of significant quantities of hazardous substances or petroleum products. Parcel 1 is a paved surface parking lot. Parcel 2 has two adjacent commercial/retail buildings currently occupied by Precision Resources, Inc., and used for the assembly and packaging of light industrial packaging machinery. Parcel 2 includes a largely undeveloped area used for boat storage. Parcel 3 has one shed with the remainder being vacant grassland/scrub-wooded land. Parcel 1: Parcel 1 has never been developed. Parcel 1 was originally used as agricultural tillable land from the 1930s through the 1940s. Parcel 2: Parcel 2 was originally developed for agricultural tillable land in the 1930s through the 1950s. One small building (east building) was present on the Property in 1957 and then the west building was constructed in 1961. According to city directories, the Parcel 2 west building was used for marine supply and service as early as 1961 through 2013 (Breuer Marine Sales and Service and Maplewood Marine). The Parcel 2 west building has been used for the assembly of light industrial packaging machinery since 2017. The Parcel 2 east building has occupied by HowieÓs Lock & Key from 1976 to 1982, Reeds Tire Sales & Service from 1961 to 1982, Northern Door in 1987, and Top Line Clips (dog grooming) from 1997 to 2013. The Parcel 2 east building has been used for office and residential use since 2017. During the use of the Parcel building for marine sales and service, some chemical use may have occurred including the use of motor oil (new and used). According to the City building records, the west building was connected to city services in 1961. City records also indicate the presence of a well on the east building (135 feet deep). Parcel 3: Parcel 3 was developed for commercial use in 1957. Various buildings have been present on the Property over the years in several locations. Beginning in 1957, one building was located on the northwest side of Parcel 3. This building has a permit for sanitary sewer (1956) and a permit for a septic drain field (1957). By 1966, the small building on the northwest is still present, and a small building is located in the middle of the parcel. By 1970, the northwestern building appears to be larger. The northwestern building is present until 1995 when it was demolished after sustaining heavy fire damage (April 1994) and being condemned by the City. One small building is located in the center of the western edge of the parcel between 1984 and 1997. In 2000, two long buildings are present on either side of the small shed on the west side of the parcel, and the two long buildings were no longer present by 2008. A permit issued by the City indicates a load of fill was brought to the Parcel in 2004 and spread across some portion of the Parcel. According to city directories, Parcel 3 has been used by the following businesses: 2 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\Phase II\\Final Draft 1136 - 1160 Frost Ave East, Phase II Report 08 25 22.docx J1, Attachment 6 VFW, Gausman Plastering (contractor), Archie Midwest, Axin Building Products, Rodco Midwest, AAA Appliance Service, Maplewood Auto Center R&W Golf Car, Northland Tool, Precision Fabricators, and Arctic Midwest Distributors (snow vehicles). As stated in the Phase I ESA Report, g iven the PropertyÓs historic uses as a marine service facility as well as a fabrication business and automotive repair, historical activities at the Property did likely involve the use of hazardous substances and/or petroleum products. The Phase I ESA Report also stated that the adjacent and potentially upgradient regulatory sites (sites within ½ miles northeast of the Property with respect to anticipated groundwater flow to the southwest) identified in the regulatory search likely will not have the potential for impacting soil vapor or groundwater beneath the Property. Previous environmental assessments and a geotechnical investigation were prepared for the Property or portions thereof, including the following: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report, Two Vacant Lots, 6320 and 6340 Zane Avenue North, Brooklyn Park, Minnesota. April 30, 2002. Prepared by Braun Intertec Corporation (Braun) on behalf of First Farmers and Merchants State Bank. Proposed Frost Avenue Apartments Frost Avenue and Edward Street North Maplewood, Minnesota. Prepared by Chosen Valley Testing Inc. (CVT), (2021 Geotechnical Evaluation Report) Based on the previous geotechnical investigation, the potential exists for buried demolition debris or building materials to be present on the Property as a result of historic development. The previous geotechnical investigation conducted on the Property by CVT in 2021 identified buried debris and or building materials at one location. During the geotechnical investigation, groundwater was observed by CVT at a depth of 20.5 feet below ground surface (bgs). The geotechnical report is presented in Appendix B. Recognized environmental conditions (RECs) indicate the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products on the Property under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release of any hazardous substance or petroleum products into structures on the Property or into the ground, groundwater, or surface water of the Property. Historical recognized conditions (HRECs) are defined as past releases that have been addressed to a degree allowing for unrestricted use of the Property. Controlled recognized conditions (CRECs) are defined as past releases that have been addressed but allow contamination to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls. The Phase I ESA Report identified the following findings: 3 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\Phase II\\Final Draft 1136 - 1160 Frost Ave East, Phase II Report 08 25 22.docx J1, Attachment 6 Finding: Historic or current Property uses involving the use of petroleum compounds or hazardous substances. There may have been releases of contamination to the Property from historic and current uses. This finding is considered a REC based on the planned future use of the Property. Finding: Demolition of former Property buildings potentially resulting in buried building materials and debris located on the Property. It is not known if all of the former building materials were removed from the Property during demolition. Buried building materials and debris could be present on the Property. This finding is considered a REC based on the planned future use of the Property. 4 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\Phase II\\Final Draft 1136 - 1160 Frost Ave East, Phase II Report 08 25 22.docx J1, Attachment 6 Investigation Results 2.1 Field Investigation Summary The RECs identified in the Phase I ESA Report were assessed as part of this Investigation. Landmark completed the field work portion of the Investigation on August 11 and 12, 2022 at the locations shown on Figure 2. As stated, the scope of the Investigation was intended to assess impacts to soil and soil vapor. Groundwater was not encountered during the Investigation. As a result, no groundwater samples were collected. Prior to conducting the field work, Landmark prepared a Site Safety Plan. Geoprobe type hand tooling was used for the collection of soil and soil vapor samples and was completed by Landmark. All borings were sealed in accordance with Minnesota Department of Health requirements upon completion. A Photo Log documenting the Investigation activities is included in Appendix C. 2.1.1 Soil Sampling Summary As stated, 15 hand Geoprobe borings, labeled Landmark Geoprobe 1 (LGP-1) through LGP-15, were advanced to investigate the RECs, based on the planned future use of the Property. Geoprobe borings facilitated the collection of soil samples and were advanced to a depth of six (6) feet bgs. Soil samples were submitted for laboratory analysis based on field screening indications of contamination and to primarily characterize soil across the Property. Soil samples are labeled according to location and depth. For instance, sample LGP-1/0-2 Ó is a sample collected at boring LGP-1 from zero (0) to 2 feet bgs. All soil samples were screened in the field for organic headspace values with a photoionization detector (PID). A total of 15 soil samples were submitted to Pace Analytical Services, Inc. (Pace). One soil sample was collected from each boring. Five (5) soil samples were submitted for the analysis of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Ten (10) soil samples were collected and submitted for the analysis of diesel range organics (DRO) and Resource Conversation and Recovery Act metals (RCRA metals). The sampling locations were spaced out spatially for coverage. Field screening results are listed on the boring logs and field notes in Appendix D and the detected parameters from the Pace analytical results for soil samples are listed in Table 1. 2.1.2 Soil Vapor Sampling Summary A total of 7 soil vapor samples were collected from the 15 hand Geoprobe boring locations including; LSV-2, LSV-4, LSV-8, LSV-10, LSV-11, LSV-12, and LSV-15 on the Property at a depth of 1 to 2, 5 to 6, and 4 to 5 feet bgs. The soil vapor samples were submitted to Pace and 5 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\Phase II\\Final Draft 1136 - 1160 Frost Ave East, Phase II Report 08 25 22.docx J1, Attachment 6 analyzed for VOCs. Field screening results are listed on the field notes in Appendix D and the detected parameters from the Pace analytical results for soil vapor samples are listed in Table 2. 2.2 Field Investigation Results Figure 2 shows the Property layout with the Investigation locations. As listed on the boring logs in Appendix D, native soil material was observed across the Property to depths of 2 to 6 feet bgs. The soil on parcels 1 and 2 was mainly comprised of silty sand soils and poorly graded sand. In parcel 3 soils were mainly comprised of silty sand soils, poorly graded sand, as well along the northeastern, eastern side, and southeastern, soils from 0 to 2 feet were mainly comprised of what appeared to be city street sweepings. Hand Geoprobe boring locations: LGP- 12, LGP-14, and LGP-10 were attempted multiple times to reach 6 feet bgs but had to be moved due to what appeared concrete pieces of debris. A possible concrete debris field mirrors the fence along the north, east, and portions of the south at Parcel 3. The borings listed were moved inward more from the property boundary to reach 6 feet bgs. No field screening indications of contamination were observed by elevated PID readings \[greater than 10 parts per million (ppm)\] in any of the sampling locations. As mentioned in the Phase I ESA Report, the regional groundwater flow direction beneath the Property is likely to the southwest, towards Lake Phalen. Groundwater was not encountered during the Investigation. 2.3 Laboratory Analytical Results 2.3.1 Soil Analytical Summary Detected analytical parameters for soil are listed in Table 1 along with the MPCA Residential Soil Reference Values (R-SRVs) and the MPCA Commercial\\Industrial Soil Reference Values (I-SRVs) for comparison purposes. The analytical results are included in the laboratory reports in Appendix E. The following items summarize the analytical results of soil samples listed in Table 1: Without exception, none of the RCRA metals detections from the 15 samples exceeded the relevant MPCA criteria. In addition, none of the detections were high enough to request a toxicity characteristic leaching procedure (TCLP) analysis from Pace. Without exception, none of the DRO detections from the 15 samples exceeded the MPCA Unregulated Fill Criteria for DRO. Without exception, none of the 5 samples submitted for VOC analysis had detection above the laboratory method detection limit (MDL). 6 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\Phase II\\Final Draft 1136 - 1160 Frost Ave East, Phase II Report 08 25 22.docx J1, Attachment 6 2.3.2 Soil Vapor Analytical Summary Detected analytical parameters for soil vapor are listed in Table 2 along with the MPCA thirty- three times the Residential Intrusion Screening Values (33X R-ISVs) and the MPCA thirty-three times the Expedited Residential Intrusion Screening Values (33X R-EISVs) for comparison purposes. The analytical results are included in the Pace laboratory reports in Appendix E. The following items summarize the analytical results of soil vapor samples listed in Table 2: In total, 22 VOCs were detected in the 7 samples that were submitted for laboratory analysis. With the exception of a detection of PCE on one soil vapor sample, none of the detections were reported above the laboratory MDL or were reported above the 33X R- ISVs or the 33X R-EISVs. PCE was detected in LSV-15 at a concentration of 567 3 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m). This concentration exceeds the applicable MPCA 3 action criteria (33X R-ISV) of 110 ug/m. 7 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\Phase II\\Final Draft 1136 - 1160 Frost Ave East, Phase II Report 08 25 22.docx J1, Attachment 6 3.0 Conclusions and Recommendations Based on the Investigation results, historical operations on the Property and nearby properties have resulted in a single detection to soil vapor at the Property, with the single detection of PCE above the 33X R-ISVs at LSV-15. Based on the results from the Investigation: No impacted soils were reported to be present on the Property. However, fill/debris material was observed on portions of Parcel 3 along the north, east, and portions of the south end. The debris noted was concrete. All detected parameters in the soil samples, based on laboratory analysis, were reported at concentrations below applicable MPCA risk-based criteria. With the exception of a detection of PCE in one soil vapor sample, all VOC detections were reported below the applicable MPCA action criteria. Based on the Investigation results, Landmark offers the following recommendations: If the fill/debris material is excavated as part of the proposed redevelopment, the fill/debris material should be transported and disposed in a permitted landfill. No other response actions (RAs) related to soil are needed or recommended at the Property. The soil not impacted by the fill/debris material can be reused on-site or off-site on another commercial property. Based on the reported PCE concentration in one sampling location and taking into account the proposed future use of the Property, RAs related to soil vapor are recommended. A vapor mitigation system (VMS) should be designed and installed during the redevelopment of the Property. The VMS will double as a radon reduction system that would be partially required as part of the development of the Property as a multi-family building. A Voluntary Response Action Plan should be prepared and submitted to the MPCA for review and approval. Reuter Walton is eligible to request a No Association Determination from the MPCA. If Reuter Walton decides to submit the VRAP to the MPCA for review and approval, a proposed actions letter should also be submitted to the MPCA requesting the No Association Determination. As a condition to the No Association Determination, the MPCA will require that a second round of soil vapor sampling be conducted. 8 F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\Phase II\\Final Draft 1136 - 1160 Frost Ave East, Phase II Report 08 25 22.docx J1, Attachment 6 Figures J1, Attachment 6 THE PROPERTY Legend FIGURE 1 Property Boundary PROPERTY LOCATION MAP USA Topo Maps 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Maplewood, MN 55109 05001,0002,000Feet LANDMARK ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC 1 inch = 1,000 feet J1, Attachment 6 LGP-6 LGP/LSV-4 LGP/LSV-15 LGP/LSV-8 Parcel 1 LGP/LSV-12 LGP-1 Parcel 2 LGP-9 LGP-7LGP-14 LGP/LSV-2 LGP-13 Parcel 3 LGP-3 LGP/LSV-10 LGP/LSV-11 LGP-5 Legend FIGURE 2 Boring Locations PROPERTY LAYOUT MAP 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Property Boundary Maplewood, MN 55109 055110220Feet Ramsey Parcels 1 inch = 110 feet LANDMARK ENVIRONMENTAL, LLC J1, Attachment 6 Tables J1, Attachment 6 Page 1 of 1 0-2' 84.80.21 LGP-15 2-4' LGP-14 228/12/20228/12/2022 4-6' <0.018<0.019<0.020 LGP-13 0-2' 0.12 <0.16<0.15<0.15 LGP-12 0-2' 0.16 <10.9<10.3<10.2<10.2 LGP-11 0-2' 12.5 LGP-10 1.11.61.32.61.21.72 0-2' LGP-9 2-4' LGP-8 0-2 <1.0<0.99 LGP-7 Table 1 (Results in mg/kg) 38402236366552192562 1.88.48.19.611.411.89.712.38.68.611.54.532.24144.48.31.91.839 0-2' <0.15<0.15<0.15<0.16<0.17<0.97<1.0<0.99<1.1<1.1<1.1<1.1<1.0<1.0<1.1<0.48<0.51<0.50<0.53<0.55<0.53<0.53<0.51<0.51<0.53 LGP-6 <0.019<0.018<0.019<0.021<0.021<0.021 Laboratory Soil Data - Detected Parameters 1136-1160 Frost Avenue East, Maplewood, Minnesota 5 20 3.1 4-6' <0.98<0.15<0.98<0.49 LGP-5 <0.020 1-2' LGP-4 0-2' <10.8<10.1<3.8<10.4<10.1<10.0<10.7 LGP-3 <0.021<0.019 2.53.22.11.50.811.60.20.20.60.61.80.71.2 2-4' <0.16<0.15<0.15 LGP-2 85548928 0.4NANANANANANANANANANANANANANANA 2.12.32.21.1 0-2' 0.1910.811.411.89.210.14.57.520.030.022 <5.4<11.1<1.0<1.1<1.0<0.97 <0.52<0.54<0.50<0.49 LGP-1 9 107878 1.62.7 200 3,100 MPCA Varies 100 (1)100 (1) 23000/2.3 April 2022 Residential/ Recreational Chronic SRVs8/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/12/20228/12/20228/12/20228/12/20228/12/20 Sample Name/LocationDepth/Sample TypeSoil TypeDate Collected Petroleum PID Readings (ppm)DROGRO RCRA Metals Arsenic BariumCadmiumChromium (III/VI)LeadSeleniumSilverMercury VOCs (Various)Footnotes:(1) Meets MPCA Unregulated Fill Criteria for DRO and GRO.BaP Eq: benzo(a)pyrene equivalentDRO: diesel range organicsmg/kg: milligrams per kilogramMPCA: Minnesota Pollution Control AgencyNA: not analyzedPID: photoionization detectorppm: parts per millionRCRA: Resource Conservation Recovery ActVOCs: Volatile Organic Compounds F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\Phase II\\Analytical\\Soil Results Table J1, Attachment 6 Table 2 Laboratory Vapor Data - Detected Parameters 1136-1160 Frost Ave East, Maplewood, Minnesota 3 (Results in g/m) Sample Name/LocationMPCAMPCALSV-2LSV-4LVS-8LSV-10LSV-11LSV-12LSV-15 Depth/Sample TypeJanuary 2021January 20215-6'1-2'5-6'5-6'5-6'5-6'4-5' Date Collected ResidentialResidential8/11/20228/11/20228/11/20228/12/20228/12/20228/12/20228/12/2022 33X ISVs33X EISVs 33 (g/m)(g/m) PID Reading (ppm)0.10.60.30.30.30.40.6 VOCs Acetone1,100,0003,200,000 ЍЋ͵ЋЋЊЋБЎ͵АБЎ͵ЋБЏ͵ЌБЊ͵ЊЊЉБ Benzene43310 Њ͵ЏЉ͵ВЍЋ͵ЎЋ͵ЎЋ͵БЋ͵ВЍ͵В Benzyl chloride7.070 ѡЍ͵АѡЎ͵ЊѡЏ͵ЌѡЎ͵ЌѡЎ͵ЋѡЎ͵ЋѡЎ͵Њ Bromodichloromethane 7002,100 ѡЋ͵ЍѡЋ͵ЏѡЌ͵ЌѡЋ͵АѡЋ͵АѡЋ͵АѡЋ͵Џ BromoformNSNS ѡВ͵ЍѡЊЉ͵ЋѡЊЋ͵ЏѡЊЉ͵ЏѡЊЉ͵ЍѡЊЉ͵ЍѡЊЉ͵Ћ ѡЊ͵ЍѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵Ў Bromomethane140430 ѡЉ͵БЊѡЉ͵БАѡЊ͵ЊѡЉ͵ВЊѡЉ͵БВѡЉ͵БВѡЉ͵БА 1,3-Butadiene9.393 ЊЌ͵ЋЊЊ͵ЋЋЉ͵ЎЌЉ͵ЋЋБ͵БЋЍ͵ЋЎЎ͵Ѝ 2-Butanone (MEK)100,000310,000 Carbon disulfide28,00083,000 ѡЊ͵Њ ЊЊ͵ЍЍ͵Ў ѡЊ͵ЌѡЊ͵ЌѡЊ͵Ќ ЊЍ Carbon tetrachloride57570 ѡЎ͵БѡЏ͵ЋѡА͵АѡЏ͵ЎѡЏ͵ЌѡЏ͵ЌѡЏ͵Ћ Chlorobenzene1,7005,300 ѡЊ͵АѡЊ͵Б Ћ͵Џ ѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵Б Chloroethane140,000430,000 ѡЉ͵ВЏѡЊ͵ЉѡЊ͵ЌѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵Љ Chloroform3,30010,000 ѡЉ͵БВѡЉ͵ВЏѡЊ͵ЋѡЊ͵ЉѡЉ͵ВБѡЉ͵ВБѡЉ͵ВЏ ѡЉ͵АЏѡЉ͵БЊ Њ͵Њ ѡЉ͵БЎ ЋЊ͵Ѝ ѡЉ͵БЊ Chloromethane3,1009,300 ѡЌ͵ЋѡЌ͵ЍѡЍ͵ЋѡЌ͵ЎѡЌ͵ЎѡЌ͵ЎѡЌ͵Ѝ Cyclohexane210,000630,000 ѡЌ͵ЊѡЌ͵ЍѡЍ͵ЋѡЌ͵ЎѡЌ͵ЍѡЌ͵ЍѡЌ͵Ѝ DibromochloromethaneNSNS 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)0.575.7 ѡЊ͵ЍѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵Ў 1,2-DichlorobenzeneNSNS ѡЎ͵ЎѡЎ͵ВѡА͵ЌѡЏ͵ЋѡЏ͵ЊѡЏ͵ЊѡЎ͵В 1,3-DichlorobenzeneNSNS ѡЎ͵ЎѡЎ͵ВѡА͵ЌѡЏ͵ЋѡЏ͵ЊѡЏ͵ЊѡЎ͵В 1,4-Dichlorobenzene2,1006,300 ѡЎ͵ЎѡЎ͵ВѡА͵ЌѡЏ͵ЋѡЏ͵ЊѡЏ͵ЊѡЎ͵В DichlorodifluoromethaneNSNS Ћ͵ЋЋЍ͵ВЏ͵Ѝ ѡЋ͵ЉѡЋ͵Љ Ў͵ЏЋБ͵Ў 1,1-DichloroethaneNSNS ѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵ЏѡЋ͵ЉѡЊ͵АѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵Џ ѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵ЏѡЋ͵ЉѡЊ͵АѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵Џ 1,2-Dichloroethane13130 ѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵Џ 1,1-Dichloroethene7,00021,000 cis-1,2-DichloroetheneNSNS ѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵Џ trans-1,2-Dichloroethene 7002,100 ѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵Џ 1,2-Dichloropropane 90430 ѡЊ͵АѡЊ͵БѡЋ͵ЌѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵ВѡЊ͵Б cis-1,3-Dichloropropene83830 ѡЍ͵ЋѡЍ͵ЎѡЎ͵ЎѡЍ͵АѡЍ͵ЏѡЍ͵ЏѡЍ͵Ў trans-1,3-Dichloropropene83830 ѡЍ͵ЋѡЍ͵ЎѡЎ͵ЎѡЍ͵АѡЍ͵ЏѡЍ͵ЏѡЍ͵Ў ѡЋ͵ЏѡЋ͵Б Ќ͵Џ ѡЋ͵ВѡЋ͵Б Б͵Ў ѡЋ͵Б DichlorotetrafluoroethaneNSNS ЊЌ͵ЍЏВ͵ЌЍЊ͵БЋЋ͵ЋЋЉ͵ЍЊЎЊА͵Џ EthanolNSNS ѡЊ͵ЌѡЊ͵ЍѡЊ͵БѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵ЎѡЊ͵Ѝ Ethyl acetate2,4007,300 Ethylbenzene1401,400 ѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵АѡЋ͵ЊѡЊ͵Б Ќ͵Ќ ѡЊ͵АѡЊ͵А 4-EthyltolueneNSNS ѡЍ͵ЎѡЍ͵БѡЏ͵ЉѡЎ͵ЉѡЎ͵ЉѡЎ͵ЉѡЍ͵Б n-Heptane14,00043,000 Б͵Њ ѡЊ͵ЏѡЋ͵ЉѡЊ͵АѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵ЏѡЊ͵Џ Hexachloro-1,3-butadieneNSNS ѡВ͵БѡЊЉ͵ЎѡЊЌ͵ЉѡЊЉ͵ВѡЊЉ͵АѡЊЉ͵АѡЊЉ͵Ў n-Hexane24,00073,000 Ћ͵Ѝ ѡЊ͵Ѝ Ў͵ЋЌ͵ЌЋ͵ЏЍ͵ЋЎ͵В 2-Hexanone1,0003,100 ѡА͵ЎѡБ͵ЊѡЊЉѡБ͵ЍѡБ͵ЋѡБ͵ЋѡБ͵Њ ѡЏ͵ЍѡЏ͵БѡБ͵ЎѡА͵ЊѡА͵ЉѡА͵ЉѡЏ͵Б Methylene Chloride21,00063,000 ѡА͵ЎѡБ͵ЊѡЊЉѡБ͵ЍѡБ͵ЋѡБ͵ЋѡБ͵Њ 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)100,000310,000 Methyl-tert-butyl ether1,30013,000 ѡЏ͵ЏѡА͵ЊѡБ͵БѡА͵ЍѡА͵ЋѡА͵ЋѡА͵Њ Naphthalene310930 Ў͵Њ ѡЎ͵ЋѡЏ͵ЍѡЎ͵ЍѡЎ͵ЌѡЎ͵ЌѡЎ͵Ћ 2-Propanol7,00021,000 Ў͵ЋЊБ͵ЍЏ͵ЌЊЍ͵ЊВ͵А ѡЎ͵ЉѡЍ͵Б Propylene100,000310,000 Ў͵А ѡЊ͵А ЋЌ͵ЌЊЋ͵ЋБ͵ЍЋЏ͵ЍББ͵А Styrene31,00093,000 Њ͵ЏЊ͵А ѡЋ͵ЊѡЊ͵АѡЊ͵АѡЊ͵АѡЊ͵А ѡЋ͵ЎѡЋ͵АѡЌ͵ЍѡЋ͵БѡЋ͵БѡЋ͵БѡЋ͵А 1,1,2,2-TetrachloroethaneNSNS ѡЊ͵Ћ ЊВ͵ЏЍ͵Ў ѡЊ͵ЍѡЊ͵ЍѡЊ͵Ѝ ЎЏА Tetrachloroethene (PCE)1101,100 ѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵ЋѡЊ͵ЍѡЊ͵ЋѡЊ͵ЋѡЊ͵ЋѡЊ͵Ћ Tetrahydrofuran70,000210,000 Toluene140,000430,000 Ќ͵ЊЍ͵ЌЌ͵АЋ͵ЌА͵ВЍ͵ЊЍ͵Ќ 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene70210 ѡЊЌ͵ЏѡЊЍ͵ЏѡЊБ͵ЊѡЊЎ͵ЋѡЊЍ͵ВѡЊЍ͵ВѡЊЍ͵Џ 1,1,1-Trichloroethane170,000530,000 ѡЋ͵ЉѡЋ͵ЋѡЋ͵АѡЋ͵ЋѡЋ͵ЋѡЋ͵ЋѡЋ͵Ћ 1,1,2-Trichloroethane7.021 ѡЊ͵ЉѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵ЌѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵Њ Trichloroethene (TCE)70210 ѡЉ͵ВБѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵ЌѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵ЊѡЊ͵Њ ѡЋ͵ЊѡЋ͵ЋѡЋ͵А Ћ͵Ў ѡЋ͵Ќ Ћ͵Џ ѡЋ͵Ћ Trichlorofluoromethane 33,000100,000 ѡЋ͵БѡЌ͵ЉѡЌ͵АѡЌ͵ЋѡЌ͵ЊѡЌ͵ЊѡЌ͵Љ 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane 170,000530,000 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene2,1006,300 Ќ͵ЋЋ͵ЎЌ͵Њ ѡЋ͵Љ Ѝ͵Ў ѡЋ͵ЉѡЊ͵В 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene2,1006,300 ѡЊ͵БѡЊ͵ВѡЋ͵ЍѡЋ͵ЉѡЋ͵ЉѡЋ͵ЉѡЊ͵В Vinyl acetate7,00021,000 ѡЌ͵ЋѡЌ͵ЎѡЍ͵ЌѡЌ͵ЏѡЌ͵ЎѡЌ͵ЎѡЌ͵Ў Vinyl chloride57570 ѡЉ͵ЍАѡЉ͵ЎЉѡЉ͵ЏЋѡЉ͵ЎЌѡЉ͵ЎЊѡЉ͵ЎЊѡЉ͵ЎЉ m&p-Xylene3,30010,000 ЊЌ͵ЎЍ͵ЌЊЋ͵ЏЍЊЌ͵АЍЌ͵Б o-Xylene3,30010,000 Ѝ͵Џ ѡЊ͵А Ѝ͵Ѝ ѡЊ͵Б Ў͵Ќ ѡЊ͵АѡЊ͵А Footnotes: EISV: Expedited Intrusion Screening Value ISV: Intrusion Screening Value 3 g/m: micrograms per cubic meter MPCA: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency ND: not detected above laboratory method detection limits NS: no standard PID: photoionization detector ppm: parts per million VOCs: Volatile Organic Compounds F:\\PROJECTS\\RW - Reuter Walton\\2022\\Frost Avenue Maplewood\\Phase II\\Analytical\\Soil Vapor Results TablePage 1 of 1 J1, Attachment 6 Appendices J1, Attachment 6 Appendix A Landmark Standard Operating Procedures J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6     J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6   J1, Attachment 6   J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6      J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 Appendix B Geotechnical Investigation Report J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 L O G O F B O R I N G CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT:19161.21.MNTBORING:B-1 Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION:LOCATION: See attached sketch Proposed Frost Avenue. Market Rate Apartments Frost Ave. Maplewood, Minnesota SCALE:1" = 3' DATE: 10/14/2021 USCSDescription of Materials Elev.DepthBPFWLTests and Notes Symbol(ASTM D 2487/2488) 886.00.0 , fineElevation estimated to Slightly Organic POORLY GRADED SAND SP grained, trace gravel and debris, roots, brown, moist,nearest 1/2 foot with medium dense to loose.MnDNR LiDAR. (Fill) 8 3" buried concrete around 3 1/2 feet. 882.53.5 Void, auger dropped into hole, poor sample returns, concrete shards. * w / w / w = 1.5' (set) * * w / w / w = 1.5' (set) * * w / w / 1 = 1.5' (set) * 875.510.5 , fine grained, trace POORLY GRADED SAND SP gravel, light brown, dry to moist, very loose to medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) MC = 9.4% 4" Clayey Sand seam around 12 feet. 20 Fine to medium grained, moist, below 12 1/2 feet. 23 869.516.5 End of boring. Auger refusal around 16 1/2 feet, presumably upon cobble or boulder. Water not observed during drilling. Boring unable to be backfilled due to near surface void. 19161.21.MNTB-1 page 1 of 1 J1, Attachment 6 L O G O F B O R I N G CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT:19161.21.MNTBORING:B-2 Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION:LOCATION: See attached sketch Proposed Frost Avenue. Market Rate Apartments Frost Ave. Maplewood, Minnesota SCALE:1" = 3' DATE: 10/14/2021 USCSDescription of Materials Elev.DepthBPFWLTests and Notes Symbol(ASTM D 2487/2488) 886.00.0 , fine to mediumElevation estimated to POORLY GRADED SAND SP grained, trace gravel, brown, moist, loose to mediumnearest 1/2 foot with dense.MnDNR LiDAR. (Fill) 13 Poorly graded sand with gravel, clay chunks below 4 feet. 9 879.56.5 , fine grained, trace POORLY GRADED SAND SP gravel, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) MC = 3.7% 20 877.09.0 , fine POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL SP grained, trace gravel, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) 24 874.311.7 , fine grained, brown, wet, CLAYEY SAND SC 873.812.2 PP = 1.25 medium. SP 17 (Glacial Outwash) , fine grained, trace POORLY GRADED SAND gravel, light brown, dry to moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) MC = 2.2% 14 15 865.021.0 End of boring. Water not observed during drilling. Boring sealed upon completion. 19161.21.MNTB-2 page 1 of 1 J1, Attachment 6 L O G O F B O R I N G CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT:19161.21.MNTBORING:B-3 Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION:LOCATION: See attached sketch Proposed Frost Avenue. Market Rate Apartments Frost Ave. Maplewood, Minnesota SCALE:1" = 3' DATE: 10/14/2021 USCSDescription of Materials Elev.DepthBPFWLTests and Notes Symbol(ASTM D 2487/2488) 886.50.0 .Elevation estimated to 6" AGGREGATE BASE 886.00.5 nearest 1/2 foot with POORLY GRADED SAND, fine grained, trace SP MnDNR LiDAR. gravel, brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Outwash) 6 882.54.0 , fine POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL SP to medium grained, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) 11 24 876.510.0 , fine grained, traceMC = 4.9% POORLY GRADED SAND SP 28 gravel, light brown, moist, medium dense to dense. (Glacial Outwash) 20 Clayey sand seam around 15 feet. 30 870.016.5 End of boring. Auger refusal around 16 1/2 feet, presumably upon cobbles or boulders. Water not observed during drilling. Boring sealed upon completion. 19161.21.MNTB-3 page 1 of 1 J1, Attachment 6 L O G O F B O R I N G CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT:19161.21.MNTBORING:B-4 Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION:LOCATION: See attached sketch Proposed Frost Avenue. Market Rate Apartments Frost Ave. Maplewood, Minnesota SCALE:1" = 3' DATE: 10/14/2021 USCSDescription of Materials Elev.DepthBPFWLTests and Notes Symbol(ASTM D 2487/2488) 885.50.0 Elevation estimated to Slightly Organic POORLY GRADED SAND with SP , slightly organic poorly graded sandnearest 1/2 foot with GRAVEL with gravel, fine grained, roots, dark brown, moist,MnDNR LiDAR. very loose. (Fill) 3 Slightly organic poorly graded sand, fine grained, trace gravel and glass shards, white silty chunks below 4 feet. * 1 / w / 1 = 1.5' (set) * 879.06.5 , fine grained, trace POORLY GRADED SAND SP gravel, brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Outwash) MC = 2.8% 5 6 874.011.5 , fine POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL SP to medium grained, brown, dry to moist, medium dense. 12 (Glacial Outwash) Possible cobbles around and below 15 feet. 27 868.017.5 , fine to medium SILTY SAND with GRAVEL SM grained, trace roots, dark brown, moist to wet, dense. (Glacial Outwash) MC = 7.3% 33 864.521.0 End of boring. Water observed around 20 1/2 feet during drilling. Boring sealed upon completion. 19161.21.MNTB-4 page 1 of 1 J1, Attachment 6 L O G O F B O R I N G CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT:19161.21.MNTBORING:B-5 Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION:LOCATION: See attached sketch Proposed Frost Avenue. Market Rate Apartments Frost Ave. Maplewood, Minnesota SCALE:1" = 3' DATE: 10/14/2021 USCSDescription of Materials Elev.DepthBPFWLTests and Notes Symbol(ASTM D 2487/2488) 886.50.0 , fine to mediumElevation estimated to POORLY GRADED SAND SP grained, trace gravel, brown, moist, loose.nearest 1/2 foot with (Fill)MnDNR LiDAR. 8 882.54.0 , very fine to fine grained, light SILTY SAND SM brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Outwash) MC = 8.6% 8 880.06.5 , fine to medium POORLY GRADED SAND SP grained, trace gravel, brown, dry to moist, medium dense. 26 (Glacial Outwash) 877.59.0 , fine grained, light POORLY GRADED SAND SP brown, dry to moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) MC = 2.4% 19 18 19 869.017.5 , fine to medium POORLY GRADED SAND SP grained, trace gravel, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) 15 865.521.0 End of boring. Water not observed during drilling. Boring sealed upon completion. 19161.21.MNTB-5 page 1 of 1 J1, Attachment 6 L O G O F B O R I N G CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT:19161.21.MNTBORING:B-6 Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION:LOCATION: See attached sketch Proposed Frost Avenue. Market Rate Apartments Frost Ave. Maplewood, Minnesota SCALE:1" = 3' DATE: 10/14/2021 USCSDescription of Materials Elev.DepthBPFWLTests and Notes Symbol(ASTM D 2487/2488) 887.00.0 , black.Elevation estimated to Slightly Organic SANDY LEAN CLAY CL 886.50.5 (Topsoil)nearest 1/2 foot with OL MnDNR LiDAR. , fine grained, trace POORLY GRADED SAND SP gravel, light brown, moist, loose. (Fill) 5 7 881.55.5 , fine grained, trace POORLY GRADED SAND SP gravel, light brown, moist, loose. (Glacial Outwash) 880.07.0 , fine POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL SP to medium grained, trace seams of clay, brown, MC = 4.9% 16 moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) 18 3" seam of clayey sand around 12 feet. Trace gravel below 12 feet. 24 18 11 866.021.0 End of boring. Water not observed during drilling. Boring sealed upon completion. 19161.21.MNTB-6 page 1 of 1 J1, Attachment 6 L O G O F B O R I N G CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT:19161.21.MNTBORING:B-7 Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION:LOCATION: See attached sketch Proposed Frost Avenue. Market Rate Apartments Frost Ave. Maplewood, Minnesota SCALE:1" = 3' DATE: 10/14/2021 USCSDescription of Materials Elev.DepthBPFWLTests and Notes Symbol(ASTM D 2487/2488) 887.00.0 .Elevation estimated to 1" AGGREGATE BASE 886.90.1 SP nearest 1/2 foot with , fine POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL MnDNR LiDAR. grained, brown, moist, medium dense. (Fill) 18 16 880.56.5 , fine POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL SP grained, dark brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) MC = 5.9% 17 878.09.0 , fine to medium POORLY GRADED SAND SP grained, trace gravel, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) 18 MC = 6.4% 21 16 869.517.5 , fine POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL SP to medium grained, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) 17 866.021.0 End of boring. Water not observed during drilling. Boring sealed upon completion. 19161.21.MNTB-7 page 1 of 1 J1, Attachment 6 L O G O F B O R I N G CHOSEN VALLEY TESTING PROJECT:19161.21.MNTBORING:B-8 Design Phase Geotechnical Evaluation LOCATION:LOCATION: See attached sketch Proposed Frost Avenue. Market Rate Apartments Frost Ave. Maplewood, Minnesota SCALE:1" = 3' DATE: 10/14/2021 USCSDescription of Materials Elev.DepthBPFWLTests and Notes Symbol(ASTM D 2487/2488) 888.00.0 Elevation estimated to Slightly Organic POORLY GRADED SAND with SP , fine grained, roots, dark brown, dry tonearest 1/2 foot with GRAVEL moist.MnDNR LiDAR. (Topsoil) 886.02.0 POORLY GRADED SAND with GRAVEL, fine SP to medium grained, brown, moist, medium dense. 13 (Fill) 884.04.0 , fine grained, trace POORLY GRADED SAND SP gravel, brown, moist, medium dense. (Glacial Outwash) 19 Possible cobbles around 7 feet. 12 MC = 3.7% 13 10 11 Fine to medium grained below 19 feet. 16 867.021.0 End of boring. Water not observed during drilling. Boring sealed upon completion. 19161.21.MNTB-8 page 1 of 1 J1, Attachment 6 UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION (ASTM D-2487/2488) MATERIALGROUP CRITERIA FOR ASSIGNING SOIL GROUP NAMESSOIL GROUP NAMES & LEGEND TYPESSYMBOL Cu>4 AND 1<Cc<3GWWELL-GRADED GRAVEL GRAVELS CLEAN GRAVELS <5% FINES Cu>4 AND 1>Cc>3GPPOORLY-GRADED GRAVEL >50% OF COARSE FRACTION RETAINED FINES CLASSIFY AS ML OR CL GMSILTY GRAVEL ON NO 4. SIEVE GRAVELS WITH FINES >12% FINES FINES CLASSIFY AS CL OR CH GCCLAYEY GRAVEL Cu>6 AND 1<Cc<3SWWELL-GRADED SAND SANDS CLEAN SANDS <5% FINES Cu>6 AND 1>Cc>3SPPOORLY-GRADED SAND >50% OF COARSE FRACTION PASSES FINES CLASSIFY AS ML OR CL SMSILTY SAND SANDS AND FINES ON NO 4. SIEVE >12% FINES FINES CLASSIFY AS CL OR CH SCCLAYEY SAND PI>7 AND PLOTS>"A" LINE CLLEAN CLAY SILTS AND CLAYS INORGANIC PI>4 AND PLOTS<"A" LINE MLSILT LIQUID LIMIT<50 LL (oven dried)/LL (not dried)<0.75 ORGANICOLORGANIC CLAY OR SILT PI PLOTS >"A" LINE CHFAT CLAY SILTS AND CLAYS INORGANIC PI PLOTS <"A" LINE MHELASTIC SILT LIQUID LIMIT>50 LL (oven dried)/LL (not dried)<0.75 ORGANICOHORGANIC CLAY OR SILT PRIMARILY ORGANIC MATTER, DARK IN COLOR, AND ORGANIC ODOR HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILSPTPEAT SAMPLE TYPES Relative Proportions of Sand and Gravel Hollow Stem TERMPERCENT Trace< 15 Standard Penetration Test With15 - 29 Modifier> 30 Relative Proportions of Fines TERMPERCENT TEST SYMBOLS Trace< 5 With5 - 12 MC-MOISTURE CONTENT LL-LIQUID LIMIT Modifier> 12 OC-ORGANIC CONTENT PI-PLASTISITY INDEX CN-CONSOLIDATION SW-SWELL TEST Grain Size Terminology DD-DRY DENSITY UUUnconsolidated Undrained triaxial TERMSIZE PP-POCKET PENETROMETER Boulder< 12 in. RV-R-VALUE Cobble3 in. - 12 in. Gravel#4 sieve to 3 in. SA-SIEVE ANALYSIS Sand#200 sieve to #4 sieve P200-% PASSING #200 SIEVE Silt or ClayPassing #200 sieve -WATER LEVEL (WITH TIME OF) PLASTICITY CHART MEASUREMENT 80 PENETRATION RESISTANCE 70 (RECORDED AS BLOWS / 0.5 FT) 60 SAND & GRAVELSILT & CLAY CH COMPRESSIVE 50 RELATIVE DENSITYBLOWS/FOOT*CONSISTENCYBLOWS/FOOT*STRENGTH (TSF) 40 VERY LOOSE0 - 4VERY SOFT0 - 10 - 0.25 SOFT2 - 30.25 - 0.50 LOOSE4 - 10 RATHER SOFT4 - 5 30 0.50 - 1.0 MEDIUM DENSE10 - 30MEDIUM6 - 8 CLMH RATHER STIFF9 - 12 1.0 - 2.0 DENSE30 - 50 20 STIFF13 - 16 VERY DENSEOVER 50VERY STIFF17 - 302.0 - 4.0 HARDOVER 30OVER 4.0 10 CL-ML ML 0 *NUMBER OF BLOWS OF 140 LB HAMMER FALLING 30 INCHES TO DRIVE A 2 INCH O.D. 0102030405060708090100110120 (1-3/8 INCH I.D.) SPLIT-BARREL SAMPLER THE LAST 12 INCHES OF AN 18-INCH DRIVE (ASTM-1586 STANDARD PENETRATION TEST). LIQUID LIMIT (%) Chosen Valley Testing LEGEND TO SOIL DESCRIPTIONS Job No. 19161.21.MNT J1, Attachment 6 Appendix C Photo Log J1, Attachment 6 Photo Log 1136- 1160 Frost Ave East, Maplewood Minnesota August 11-12, 2022 źĻǞ ƚŅ ğ ƭƚźƌ ƭƌĻĻǝĻ źĻǞ ƚŅ ƭƚźƌ ŅƩƚƒ ƭƚźƌ ĬƚƩźƓŭ źĻǞ ƚŅ ƭƚźƌ ƭƌĻĻǝĻ źĻǞ ƚŅ ĬƚğƷ ǤğƩķ ƭƷƚƩğŭĻ źĻǞ ƚŅ ƭƚźƌ ƦƩƚĬĻ ĭƚƌƌĻĭƷźƓŭ ƭƚźƌ ƭğƒƦƌĻ źƓ źĻǞ ƚŅ ƭƚźƌ ǝğƦƚƩ ƭğƒƦƌĻ ĬğƭĻƒĻƓƷ ƚŅ ЊЊЌЏ ƦƩƚƦĻƩƷǤ J1, Attachment 6 Appendix D Field Sheets and Boring Logs J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 J1, Attachment 6 Appendix D E Pace Analytical Laboratory Reports J1, Attachment 6 #=CL# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 LIMS USE: FR - BLAKE SHAW LIMS OBJECT ID: 10621140 August 18, 2022 Blake Shaw Landmark Environmental 9555 James Avenue South Suite 262 Bloomington, MN 55431 RE:Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Dear Blake Shaw: Enclosed are the analytical results for sample(s) received by the laboratory on August 12, 2022. The results relate only to the samples included in this report. Results reported herein conform to the applicable TNI/NELAC Standards and the laboratory's Quality Manual, where applicable, unless otherwise noted in the body of the report. The test results provided in this final report were generated by each of the following laboratories within the Pace Network: ¤ Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Annika Asp annika.asp@pacelabs.com (612)607-1700 Project Manager Enclosures cc:Eric Gabrielson, Landmark Environmental Landmark Info, Landmark REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 1 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=CP# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 CERTIFICATIONS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Pace Analytical Services, LLC - Minneapolis MN 1700 Elm Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55414Missouri Certification #: 10100 Montana Certification #: CERT0092 A2LA Certification #: 2926.01* 1800 Elm Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55414--Satellite Air Nebraska Certification #: NE-OS-18-06 Lab Nevada Certification #: MN00064 Alabama Certification #: 40770 New Hampshire Certification #: 2081* Alaska Contaminated Sites Certification #: 17-009* New Jersey Certification #: MN002 Alaska DW Certification #: MN00064 New York Certification #: 11647* Arizona Certification #: AZ0014* North Carolina DW Certification #: 27700 Arkansas DW Certification #: MN00064 North Carolina WW Certification #: 530 Arkansas WW Certification #: 88-0680 North Dakota Certification (A2LA) #: R-036 California Certification #: 2929 North Dakota Certification (MN) #: R-036 Colorado Certification #: MN00064 Ohio DW Certification #: 41244 Connecticut Certification #: PH-0256 Ohio VAP Certification (1700) #: CL101 EPA Region 8 Tribal Water Systems+Wyoming DW Ohio VAP Certification (1800) #: CL110* Certification #: via MN 027-053-137 Oklahoma Certification #: 9507* Florida Certification #: E87605* Oregon Primary Certification #: MN300001 Georgia Certification #: 959 Oregon Secondary Certification #: MN200001* Hawaii Certification #: MN00064 Pennsylvania Certification #: 68-00563* Idaho Certification #: MN00064 Puerto Rico Certification #: MN00064 Illinois Certification #: 200011 South Carolina Certification #:74003001 Indiana Certification #: C-MN-01 Tennessee Certification #: TN02818 Iowa Certification #: 368 Texas Certification #: T104704192* Kansas Certification #: E-10167 Utah Certification #: MN00064* Kentucky DW Certification #: 90062 Vermont Certification #: VT-027053137 Kentucky WW Certification #: 90062 Virginia Certification #: 460163* Louisiana DEQ Certification #: AI-03086* Washington Certification #: C486* Louisiana DW Certification #: MN00064 West Virginia DEP Certification #: 382 Maine Certification #: MN00064* West Virginia DW Certification #: 9952 C Maryland Certification #: 322 Wisconsin Certification #: 999407970 Michigan Certification #: 9909 Wyoming UST Certification #: via A2LA 2926.01 Minnesota Certification #: 027-053-137* USDA Permit #: P330-19-00208 Minnesota Dept of Ag Approval: via MN 027-053-137 *Please Note: Applicable air certifications are denoted with Minnesota Petrofund Registration #: 1240* an asterisk (*). Mississippi Certification #: MN00064 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 2 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=SS# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 SAMPLE SUMMARY Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Lab IDSample IDMatrixDate CollectedDate Received 10621140001LGP-1 / 0-2'Solid08/11/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140002LGP-2 / 2-4'Solid08/11/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140003LGP-3 / 0-2'Solid08/11/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140004LGP-4 / 1-2'Solid08/11/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140005LGP-5 / 4-6'Solid08/11/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140006LGP-6 / 0-2'Solid08/11/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140007LGP-7 / 0-2'Solid08/11/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140008LGP-8 / 2-4'Solid08/11/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140009LGP-9 / 0-2'Solid08/12/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140010LGP-10 / 0-2'Solid08/12/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140011LGP-11 / 0-2'Solid08/12/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140012LGP-12 / 0-2'Solid08/12/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140013LGP-13 / 4-6'Solid08/12/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140014LGP-14 / 2-4'Solid08/12/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 10621140015LGP-15 / 0-2'Solid08/12/22 00:0008/12/22 14:30 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 3 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=SA# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 SAMPLE ANALYTE COUNT Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Analytes Lab IDSample IDMethodReportedLaboratory Analysts 10621140001LGP-1 / 0-2'WI MOD DROTT22PASI-M EPA 6010DIP7PASI-M LMW1 EPA 7471BPASI-M JDL ASTM D29741PASI-M 10621140002LGP-2 / 2-4'WI MOD DROTT22PASI-M EPA 6010DIP7PASI-M EPA 7471BLMW1PASI-M ASTM D2974JDL1PASI-M 10621140003 TT22 LGP-3 / 0-2'WI MOD DROPASI-M IP EPA 6010D7PASI-M EPA 7471BLMW1PASI-M ASTM D2974JDL1PASI-M EPA 8260DZB70PASI-M 10621140004 TT22 LGP-4 / 1-2'WI MOD DROPASI-M IP7 EPA 6010DPASI-M LMW EPA 7471B1PASI-M ASTM D2974JDL1PASI-M EPA 8260DZB70PASI-M 10621140005LGP-5 / 4-6'WI MOD DROTT22PASI-M IP7 EPA 6010DPASI-M LMW EPA 7471B1PASI-M JDL ASTM D29741PASI-M 10621140006LGP-6 / 0-2'WI MOD DROTT22P ASI-M IP EPA 6010D7PASI-M EPA 7471BLMW1PASI-M ASTM D2974JDL1PASI-M 10621140007LGP-7 / 0-2'WI MOD DROTT22PASI-M IP7 EPA 6010DPASI-M LMW EPA 7471B1PASI-M JDL ASTM D29741PASI-M 10621140008LGP-8 / 2-4'WI MOD DROTT22PASI-M EPA 6010DIP7PASI-M EPA 7471BLMW1PASI-M JDL1 ASTM D2974PASI-M TT2 10621140009LGP-9 / 0-2'WI MOD DRO2PASI-M EPA 6010DIP7PASI-M EPA 7471BLMW1PASI-M REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 4 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=SA# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 SAMPLE ANALYTE COUNT Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Analytes Lab IDSample IDMethodReportedLaboratory Analysts ASTM D2974JDL1PASI-M 10621140010LGP-10 / 0-2'WI MOD DROEB32PASI-M IP7 EPA 6010DPASI-M LMW EPA 7471B1PASI-M ASTM D2974JDL1PASI-M EPA 8260DZB70PASI-M 10621140011LGP-11 / 0-2'WI MOD DROTT22PASI-M EPA 6010DIP7PASI-M LMW1 EPA 7471BPASI-M JDL ASTM D29741PASI-M 10621140012LGP-12 / 0-2'WI MOD DROTT22PASI-M EPA 6010DIP7PASI-M EPA 7471BLMW1PASI-M JDL1 ASTM D2974PASI-M ZB EPA 8260D70PASI-M TT2 10621140013LGP-13 / 4-6'WI MOD DRO2PASI-M EPA 6010DIP7PASI-M EPA 7471BLMW1PASI-M ASTM D2974JDL1PASI-M 10621140014 TT22 LGP-14 / 2-4'WI MOD DROPASI-M IP EPA 6010D7PASI-M LMW EPA 7471B1PASI-M ASTM D2974JDL1PASI-M 10621 140015LGP-15 / 0-2'WI MOD DROEB32PASI-M EPA 6010DIP7PASI-M EPA 7471BLMW1PASI-M ASTM D2974JDL1PASI-M ZB70 EPA 8260DPASI-M PASI-M = Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 5 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-1 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140001 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<5.4 mg/kg08/16/22 12:355.42.0108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)82%.08/16/22 12:3538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 2.1 mg/kg08/17/22 16:417440-38-21.00.16108/17/22 10:06 Barium 85.2 mg/kg08/17/22 16:417440-39-30.520.015108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium 0.19 mg/kg08/17/22 16:417440-43-90.160.035108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 10.8 mg/kg08/17/22 16:417440-47-30.520.032108/17/22 10:06 Lead 10.1 mg/kg08/17/22 16:417439-92-10.520.11108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.0 mg/kg08/17/22 16:417782-49-21.00.34108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.52 mg/kg08/17/22 16:417440-22-40.520.036108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury 0.030 mg/kg0.0220.0094108/17/22 12:1308/18/22 12:527439-97-6 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 8.6%0.100.10108/16/22 14:18N2 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 6 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-2 / 2-4'Lab ID:10621140002 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<11.1 mg/kg08/16/22 13:2111.14.1108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)83%.08/16/22 13:21D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 2.3 mg/kg08/17/22 16:437440-38-21.10.16108/17/22 10:06 Barium 54.3 mg/kg08/17/22 16:437440-39-30.540.016108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.16 mg/kg08/17/22 16:437440-43-90.160.037108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 11.4 mg/kg08/17/22 16:437440-47-30.540.034108/17/22 10:06 Lead 4.5 mg/kg08/17/22 16:437439-92-10.540.11108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.1 mg/kg08/17/22 16:437782-49-21.10.35108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.54 mg/kg08/17/22 16:437440-22-40.540.038108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury 0.022 mg/kg0.0190.0083108/17/22 12:1308/18/22 12:537439-97-6 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 10.1%0.100.10108/16/22 14:19N2 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 7 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-3 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140003 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<10.8 mg/kg08/16/22 12:4710.84.0108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)84%.08/16/22 12:47D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 2.2 mg/kg08/17/22 16:447440-38-21.00.15108/17/22 10:06 Barium 89.1 mg/kg08/17/22 16:447440-39-30.500.015108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.15 mg/kg08/17/22 16:447440-43-90.150.034108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 11.8 mg/kg08/17/22 16:447440-47-30.500.031108/17/22 10:06 Lead 7.5 mg/kg08/17/22 16:447439-92-10.500.10108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.0 mg/kg08/17/22 16:447782-49-21.00.33108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.50 mg/kg08/17/22 16:447440-22-40.500.035108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.021 mg/kg08/18/22 12:557439-97-60.0210.0091108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 8.3%08/16/22 14:19N20.100.101 Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone<1.2 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4167-64-11.20.43108/16/22 13:08 Allyl chloride<0.23 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41107-05-10.230.055108/16/22 13:08 Benzene<0.023 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4171-43-20.0230.0070108/16/22 13:08 Bromobenzene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41108-86-10.0580.017108/16/22 13:08 Bromochloromethane<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4174-97-50.0580.0068108/16/22 13:08 Bromodichloromethane<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4175-27-40.0580.017108/16/22 13:08 Bromoform<0.23 mg/kg0.230.094108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4175-25-2L2 Bromomethane<0.58 mg/kg0.580.10108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4174-83-9 2-Butanone (MEK)<0.29 mg/kg0.290.090108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4178-93-3 n-Butylbenzene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41104-51-8 sec-Butylbenzene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.016108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41135-98-8 tert-Butylbenzene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.011108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4198-06-6 Carbon tetrachloride<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.0076108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4156-23-5 Chlorobenzene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41108-90-7 Chloroethane<0.58 mg/kg0.580.11108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4175-00-3 Chloroform<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.014108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4167-66-3 Chloromethane<0.23 mg/kg0.230.043108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4174-87-3 2-Chlorotoluene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4195-49-8 4-Chlorotoluene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.0068108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41106-43-4 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane<0.58 mg/kg0.580.024108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4196-12-8L2 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 8 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-3 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140003 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Dibromochloromethane<0.23 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41124-48-1L20.230.11108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41106-93-40.0580.019108/16/22 13:08 Dibromomethane<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4174-95-30.0580.022108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4195-50-10.0580.012108/16/22 13:08 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41541-73-10.0580.017108/16/22 13:08 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41106-46-70.0580.0092108/16/22 13:08 Dichlorodifluoromethane<0.23 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4175-71-80.230.029108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloroethane<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4175-34-30.0580.020108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichloroethane<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41107-06-20.0580.019108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloroethene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4175-35-40.0580.016108/16/22 13:08 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41156-59-20.0580.013108/16/22 13:08 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41156-60-50.0580.011108/16/22 13:08 Dichlorofluoromethane<0.58 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4175-43-40.580.027108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichloropropane<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4178-87-50.0580.016108/16/22 13:08 1,3-Dichloropropane<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41142-28-90.0580.019108/16/22 13:08 2,2-Dichloropropane<0.23 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41594-20-70.230.021108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloropropene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41563-58-60.0580.012108/16/22 13:08 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4110061-01-50.0580.017108/16/22 13:08 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4110061-02-60.0580.017108/16/22 13:08 Diethyl ether (Ethyl ether)<0.23 mg/kg0.230.017108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4160-29-7 Ethylbenzene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.0099108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41100-41-4 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<0.29 mg/kg0.290.015108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4187-68-3 Isopropylbenzene (Cumene)<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.014108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4198-82-8 p-Isopropyltoluene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.0082108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4199-87-6 Methylene Chloride<0.23 mg/kg0.230.095108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4175-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<0.29 mg/kg0.290.062108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.022108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:411634-04-4 Naphthalene<0.23 mg/kg0.230.014108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4191-20-3 n-Propylbenzene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41103-65-1 Styrene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.011108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41100-42-5 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.019108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41630-20-6 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.015108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4179-34-5 Tetrachloroethene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.0097108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41127-18-4 Tetrahydrofuran<2.3 mg/kg2.30.045108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41109-99-9 Toluene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.022108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41108-88-3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.016108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4187-61-6 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.015108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:41120-82-1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.015108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4171-55-6 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.016108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4179-00-5 Trichloroethene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.015108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4179-01-6 Trichlorofluoromethane<0.23 mg/kg0.230.024108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4175-69-4 1,2,3-Trichloropropane<0.23 mg/kg0.230.022108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4196-18-4 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<0.23 mg/kg0.230.016108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4176-13-1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<0.058 mg/kg0.0580.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:4195-63-6 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 9 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-3 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140003 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<0.058 mg/kg08/18/22 00:41108-67-80.0580.0078108/16/22 13:08 Vinyl chloride<0.023 mg/kg08/18/22 00:4175-01-40.0230.010108/16/22 13:08 Xylene (Total)<0.17 mg/kg08/18/22 00:411330-20-70.170.022108/16/22 13:08 Surrogates Toluene-d8 (S)97%.08/18/22 00:412037-26-575-125108/16/22 13:08 4-Bromofluorobenzene (S)98%.08/18/22 00:41460-00-475-125108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichlorobenzene-d4 (S)100%.08/18/22 00:412199-69-175-125108/16/22 13:08 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 10 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-4 / 1-2'Lab ID:10621140004 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<10.1 mg/kg08/16/22 13:3310.13.8108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)84%.08/16/22 13:33D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 1.1 mg/kg08/17/22 16:467440-38-20.970.15108/17/22 10:06 Barium 28.2 mg/kg08/17/22 16:467440-39-30.490.014108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.15 mg/kg08/17/22 16:467440-43-90.150.033108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 9.2 mg/kg08/17/22 16:467440-47-30.490.030108/17/22 10:06 Lead 2.0 mg/kg08/17/22 16:467439-92-10.490.10108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<0.97 mg/kg08/17/22 16:467782-49-20.970.32108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.49 mg/kg08/17/22 16:467440-22-40.490.034108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.019 mg/kg08/18/22 12:577439-97-60.0190.0080108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 1.6%08/16/22 14:19N20.100.101 Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone<0.94 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2167-64-10.940.36108/16/22 13:08 Allyl chloride<0.19 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21107-05-10.190.045108/16/22 13:08 Benzene<0.019 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2171-43-20.0190.0057108/16/22 13:08 Bromobenzene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21108-86-10.0470.014108/16/22 13:08 Bromochloromethane<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2174-97-50.0470.0056108/16/22 13:08 Bromodichloromethane<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2175-27-40.0470.014108/16/22 13:08 Bromoform<0.19 mg/kg0.190.077108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2175-25-2L2 Bromomethane<0.47 mg/kg0.470.083108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2174-83-9 2-Butanone (MEK)<0.23 mg/kg0.230.074108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2178-93-3 n-Butylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0099108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21104-51-8 sec-Butylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.013108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21135-98-8 tert-Butylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0088108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2198-06-6 Carbon tetrachloride<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0062108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2156-23-5 Chlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.010108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21108-90-7 Chloroethane<0.47 mg/kg0.470.086108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2175-00-3 Chloroform<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.011108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2167-66-3 Chloromethane<0.19 mg/kg0.190.035108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2174-87-3 2-Chlorotoluene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.010108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2195-49-8 4-Chlorotoluene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0055108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21106-43-4 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane<0.47 mg/kg0.470.020108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2196-12-8L2 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 11 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-4 / 1-2'Lab ID:10621140004 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Dibromochloromethane<0.19 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21124-48-1L20.190.090108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21106-93-40.0470.016108/16/22 13:08 Dibromomethane<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2174-95-30.0470.018108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2195-50-10.0470.0094108/16/22 13:08 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21541-73-10.0470.014108/16/22 13:08 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21106-46-70.0470.0075108/16/22 13:08 Dichlorodifluoromethane<0.19 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2175-71-80.190.024108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloroethane<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2175-34-30.0470.016108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichloroethane<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21107-06-20.0470.016108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloroethene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2175-35-40.0470.013108/16/22 13:08 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21156-59-20.0470.010108/16/22 13:08 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21156-60-50.0470.0088108/16/22 13:08 Dichlorofluoromethane<0.47 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2175-43-40.470.022108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichloropropane<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2178-87-50.0470.013108/16/22 13:08 1,3-Dichloropropane<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21142-28-90.0470.015108/16/22 13:08 2,2-Dichloropropane<0.19 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21594-20-70.190.017108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloropropene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21563-58-60.0470.0099108/16/22 13:08 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2110061-01-50.0470.014108/16/22 13:08 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2110061-02-60.0470.014108/16/22 13:08 Diethyl ether (Ethyl ether)<0.19 mg/kg0.190.014108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2160-29-7 Ethylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0081108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21100-41-4 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<0.23 mg/kg0.230.013108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2187-68-3 Isopropylbenzene (Cumene)<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.012108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2198-82-8 p-Isopropyltoluene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0067108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2199-87-6 Methylene Chloride<0.19 mg/kg0.190.078108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2175-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<0.23 mg/kg0.230.051108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.018108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:211634-04-4 Naphthalene<0.19 mg/kg0.190.011108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2191-20-3 n-Propylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.011108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21103-65-1 Styrene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0091108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21100-42-5 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.015108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21630-20-6 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.012108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2179-34-5 Tetrachloroethene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0079108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21127-18-4 Tetrahydrofuran<1.9 mg/kg1.90.037108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21109-99-9 Toluene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.018108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21108-88-3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.013108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2187-61-6 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.012108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:21120-82-1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.012108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2171-55-6 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.013108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2179-00-5 Trichloroethene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.012108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2179-01-6 Trichlorofluoromethane<0.19 mg/kg0.190.019108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2175-69-4 1,2,3-Trichloropropane<0.19 mg/kg0.190.018108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2196-18-4 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<0.19 mg/kg0.190.013108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2176-13-1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0099108/16/22 13:0808/17/22 23:2195-63-6 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 12 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-4 / 1-2'Lab ID:10621140004 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg08/17/22 23:21108-67-80.0470.0064108/16/22 13:08 Vinyl chloride<0.019 mg/kg08/17/22 23:2175-01-40.0190.0083108/16/22 13:08 Xylene (Total)<0.14 mg/kg08/17/22 23:211330-20-70.140.018108/16/22 13:08 Surrogates Toluene-d8 (S)96%.08/17/22 23:212037-26-575-125108/16/22 13:08 4-Bromofluorobenzene (S)95%.08/17/22 23:21460-00-475-125108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichlorobenzene-d4 (S)98%.08/17/22 23:212199-69-175-125108/16/22 13:08 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 13 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-5 / 4-6'Lab ID:10621140005 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<3.8 mg/kg08/16/22 13:443.81.4108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)72%.08/16/22 13:4438-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic<0.98 mg/kg08/17/22 16:487440-38-20.980.15108/17/22 10:06 Barium 20.1 mg/kg08/17/22 16:487440-39-30.490.015108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.15 mg/kg08/17/22 16:487440-43-90.150.033108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 5.0 mg/kg08/17/22 16:487440-47-30.490.031108/17/22 10:06 Lead 3.1 mg/kg08/17/22 16:487439-92-10.490.10108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<0.98 mg/kg08/17/22 16:487782-49-20.980.32108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.49 mg/kg08/17/22 16:487440-22-40.490.034108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.020 mg/kg08/18/22 12:587439-97-60.0200.0089108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 2.4%08/16/22 14:19N20.100.101 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 14 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-6 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140006 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<10.4 mg/kg08/16/22 13:1010.43.9108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)81%.08/16/22 13:10D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 1.8 mg/kg08/17/22 16:497440-38-20.970.15108/17/22 10:06 Barium 38.0 mg/kg08/17/22 16:497440-39-30.480.014108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.15 mg/kg08/17/22 16:497440-43-90.150.033108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 8.4 mg/kg08/17/22 16:497440-47-30.480.030108/17/22 10:06 Lead 4.5 mg/kg08/17/22 16:497439-92-10.480.10108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<0.97 mg/kg08/17/22 16:497782-49-20.970.32108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.48 mg/kg08/17/22 16:497440-22-40.480.034108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.019 mg/kg08/18/22 13:007439-97-60.0190.0081108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 5.5%08/16/22 14:20N20.100.101 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 15 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-7 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140007 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<10.1 mg/kg08/16/22 12:5810.13.8108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)86%.08/16/22 12:58D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic<1.0 mg/kg08/17/22 16:517440-38-21.00.15108/17/22 10:06 Barium 39.6 mg/kg08/17/22 16:517440-39-30.510.015108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.15 mg/kg08/17/22 16:517440-43-90.150.035108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 8.1 mg/kg08/17/22 16:517440-47-30.510.032108/17/22 10:06 Lead 3.0 mg/kg08/17/22 16:517439-92-10.510.10108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.0 mg/kg08/17/22 16:517782-49-21.00.33108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.51 mg/kg08/17/22 16:517440-22-40.510.036108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.018 mg/kg08/18/22 13:027439-97-60.0180.0079108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 3.6%08/16/22 14:20N20.100.101 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 16 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-8 / 2-4'Lab ID:10621140008 Collected:08/11/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<10.0 mg/kg08/16/22 11:4910.03.8108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)86%.08/16/22 11:49D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic<0.99 mg/kg08/17/22 16:537440-38-20.990.15108/17/22 10:06 Barium 22.3 mg/kg08/17/22 16:537440-39-30.500.015108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.15 mg/kg08/17/22 16:537440-43-90.150.034108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 9.6 mg/kg08/17/22 16:537440-47-30.500.031108/17/22 10:06 Lead 2.2 mg/kg08/17/22 16:537439-92-10.500.10108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<0.99 mg/kg08/17/22 16:537782-49-20.990.33108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.50 mg/kg08/17/22 16:537440-22-40.500.035108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.019 mg/kg08/18/22 13:037439-97-60.0190.0082108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 3.3%08/16/22 14:20N20.100.101 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 17 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-9 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140009 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<10.7 mg/kg08/16/22 12:0110.74.0108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)87%.08/16/22 12:01D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 1.1 mg/kg08/17/22 16:547440-38-21.10.16108/17/22 10:06 Barium 36.0 mg/kg08/17/22 16:547440-39-30.530.016108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.16 mg/kg08/17/22 16:547440-43-90.160.036108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 11.4 mg/kg08/17/22 16:547440-47-30.530.033108/17/22 10:06 Lead 4.0 mg/kg08/17/22 16:547439-92-10.530.11108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.1 mg/kg08/17/22 16:547782-49-21.10.35108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.53 mg/kg08/17/22 16:547440-22-40.530.037108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.021 mg/kg08/18/22 13:087439-97-60.0210.0093108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 7.0%08/16/22 14:20N20.100.101 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 18 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-10 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140010 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28 12.5 mg/kg08/16/22 11:26T611.14.1108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)91%.08/16/22 11:26D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 1.6 mg/kg08/17/22 17:017440-38-21.10.17108/17/22 10:06 Barium 35.8 mg/kg08/17/22 17:017440-39-30.550.016108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.17 mg/kg08/17/22 17:017440-43-90.170.038108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 11.8 mg/kg08/17/22 17:017440-47-30.550.034108/17/22 10:06 Lead 14.0 mg/kg08/17/22 17:017439-92-10.550.11108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.1 mg/kg08/17/22 17:017782-49-21.10.36108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.55 mg/kg08/17/22 17:017440-22-40.550.039108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.021 mg/kg08/18/22 13:107439-97-60.0210.0091108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 10.5%08/16/22 14:20N20.100.101 Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone<0.94 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2967-64-10.940.35108/16/22 13:08 Allyl chloride<0.19 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29107-05-10.190.045108/16/22 13:08 Benzene<0.019 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2971-43-20.0190.0057108/16/22 13:08 Bromobenzene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29108-86-10.0470.014108/16/22 13:08 Bromochloromethane<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2974-97-50.0470.0056108/16/22 13:08 Bromodichloromethane<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2975-27-40.0470.014108/16/22 13:08 Bromoform<0.19 mg/kg0.190.077108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2975-25-2L2 Bromomethane<0.47 mg/kg0.470.083108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2974-83-9 2-Butanone (MEK)<0.23 mg/kg0.230.074108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2978-93-3 n-Butylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0098108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29104-51-8 sec-Butylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29135-98-8 tert-Butylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0088108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2998-06-6 Carbon tetrachloride<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0062108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2956-23-5 Chlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.010108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29108-90-7 Chloroethane<0.47 mg/kg0.470.086108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2975-00-3 Chloroform<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.011108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2967-66-3 Chloromethane<0.19 mg/kg0.190.035108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2974-87-3 2-Chlorotoluene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0099108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2995-49-8 4-Chlorotoluene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0055108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29106-43-4 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane<0.47 mg/kg0.470.020108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2996-12-8L2 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 19 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-10 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140010 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Dibromochloromethane<0.19 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29124-48-1L20.190.090108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29106-93-40.0470.016108/16/22 13:08 Dibromomethane<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2974-95-30.0470.018108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2995-50-10.0470.0094108/16/22 13:08 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29541-73-10.0470.014108/16/22 13:08 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29106-46-70.0470.0075108/16/22 13:08 Dichlorodifluoromethane<0.19 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2975-71-80.190.024108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloroethane<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2975-34-30.0470.016108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichloroethane<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29107-06-20.0470.016108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloroethene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2975-35-40.0470.013108/16/22 13:08 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29156-59-20.0470.010108/16/22 13:08 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29156-60-50.0470.0088108/16/22 13:08 Dichlorofluoromethane<0.47 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2975-43-40.470.022108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichloropropane<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2978-87-50.0470.013108/16/22 13:08 1,3-Dichloropropane<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29142-28-90.0470.015108/16/22 13:08 2,2-Dichloropropane<0.19 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29594-20-70.190.017108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloropropene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29563-58-60.0470.0098108/16/22 13:08 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2910061-01-50.0470.014108/16/22 13:08 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2910061-02-60.0470.014108/16/22 13:08 Diethyl ether (Ethyl ether)<0.19 mg/kg0.190.014108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2960-29-7 Ethylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0081108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29100-41-4 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<0.23 mg/kg0.230.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2987-68-3 Isopropylbenzene (Cumene)<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2998-82-8 p-Isopropyltoluene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0067108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2999-87-6 Methylene Chloride<0.19 mg/kg0.190.078108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2975-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<0.23 mg/kg0.230.051108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.018108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:291634-04-4 Naphthalene<0.19 mg/kg0.190.011108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2991-20-3 n-Propylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.011108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29103-65-1 Styrene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0091108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29100-42-5 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.015108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29630-20-6 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2979-34-5 Tetrachloroethene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0079108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29127-18-4 Tetrahydrofuran<1.9 mg/kg1.90.037108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29109-99-9 Toluene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.018108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29108-88-3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2987-61-6 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:29120-82-1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2971-55-6 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2979-00-5 Trichloroethene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2979-01-6 Trichlorofluoromethane<0.19 mg/kg0.190.019108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2975-69-4 1,2,3-Trichloropropane<0.19 mg/kg0.190.018108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2996-18-4 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<0.19 mg/kg0.190.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2976-13-1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg0.0470.0098108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:2995-63-6 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 20 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-10 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140010 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<0.047 mg/kg08/18/22 01:29108-67-80.0470.0063108/16/22 13:08 Vinyl chloride<0.019 mg/kg08/18/22 01:2975-01-40.0190.0083108/16/22 13:08 Xylene (Total)<0.14 mg/kg08/18/22 01:291330-20-70.140.018108/16/22 13:08 Surrogates Toluene-d8 (S)98%.08/18/22 01:292037-26-575-125108/16/22 13:08 4-Bromofluorobenzene (S)95%.08/18/22 01:29460-00-475-125108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichlorobenzene-d4 (S)99%.08/18/22 01:292199-69-175-125108/16/22 13:08 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 21 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-11 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140011 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<10.9 mg/kg08/16/22 12:1210.94.1108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)85%.08/16/22 12:12D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 1.3 mg/kg08/17/22 17:037440-38-21.10.16108/17/22 10:06 Barium 65.2 mg/kg08/17/22 17:037440-39-30.530.016108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium 0.16 mg/kg08/17/22 17:037440-43-90.160.036108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 9.7 mg/kg08/17/22 17:037440-47-30.530.033108/17/22 10:06 Lead 4.4 mg/kg08/17/22 17:037439-92-10.530.11108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.1 mg/kg08/17/22 17:037782-49-21.10.35108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.53 mg/kg08/17/22 17:037440-22-40.530.037108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.021 mg/kg08/18/22 13:117439-97-60.0210.0091108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 9.9%08/16/22 14:21N20.100.101 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 22 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-12 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140012 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<10.3 mg/kg08/16/22 12:2410.33.9108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)88%.08/16/22 12:24D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 2.6 mg/kg08/17/22 17:057440-38-21.10.16108/17/22 10:06 Barium 51.6 mg/kg08/17/22 17:057440-39-30.530.016108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.16 mg/kg08/17/22 17:057440-43-90.160.036108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 12.3 mg/kg08/17/22 17:057440-47-30.530.033108/17/22 10:06 Lead 8.3 mg/kg08/17/22 17:057439-92-10.530.11108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.1 mg/kg08/17/22 17:057782-49-21.10.35108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.53 mg/kg08/17/22 17:057440-22-40.530.037108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury 0.12 mg/kg08/18/22 13:137439-97-60.0210.0093108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 10.9%08/16/22 14:21N20.100.101 Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone<1.2 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5767-64-11.20.47108/16/22 13:08 Allyl chloride<0.25 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57107-05-10.250.059108/16/22 13:08 Benzene<0.025 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5771-43-20.0250.0075108/16/22 13:08 Bromobenzene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57108-86-10.0620.018108/16/22 13:08 Bromochloromethane<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5774-97-50.0620.0073108/16/22 13:08 Bromodichloromethane<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5775-27-40.0620.018108/16/22 13:08 Bromoform<0.25 mg/kg0.250.10108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5775-25-2L2 Bromomethane<0.62 mg/kg0.620.11108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5774-83-9 2-Butanone (MEK)<0.31 mg/kg0.310.097108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5778-93-3 n-Butylbenzene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57104-51-8 sec-Butylbenzene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.017108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57135-98-8 tert-Butylbenzene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5798-06-6 Carbon tetrachloride<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.0082108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5756-23-5 Chlorobenzene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57108-90-7 Chloroethane<0.62 mg/kg0.620.11108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5775-00-3 Chloroform<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.015108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5767-66-3 Chloromethane<0.25 mg/kg0.250.046108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5774-87-3 2-Chlorotoluene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5795-49-8 4-Chlorotoluene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.0073108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57106-43-4 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane<0.62 mg/kg0.620.026108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5796-12-8L2 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 23 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-12 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140012 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Dibromochloromethane<0.25 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57124-48-1L20.250.12108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57106-93-40.0620.021108/16/22 13:08 Dibromomethane<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5774-95-30.0620.024108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5795-50-10.0620.012108/16/22 13:08 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57541-73-10.0620.018108/16/22 13:08 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57106-46-70.0620.0099108/16/22 13:08 Dichlorodifluoromethane<0.25 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5775-71-80.250.031108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloroethane<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5775-34-30.0620.021108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichloroethane<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57107-06-20.0620.021108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloroethene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5775-35-40.0620.017108/16/22 13:08 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57156-59-20.0620.014108/16/22 13:08 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57156-60-50.0620.012108/16/22 13:08 Dichlorofluoromethane<0.62 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5775-43-40.620.029108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichloropropane<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5778-87-50.0620.017108/16/22 13:08 1,3-Dichloropropane<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57142-28-90.0620.020108/16/22 13:08 2,2-Dichloropropane<0.25 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57594-20-70.250.022108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloropropene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57563-58-60.0620.013108/16/22 13:08 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5710061-01-50.0620.019108/16/22 13:08 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5710061-02-60.0620.019108/16/22 13:08 Diethyl ether (Ethyl ether)<0.25 mg/kg0.250.018108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5760-29-7 Ethylbenzene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.011108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57100-41-4 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<0.31 mg/kg0.310.017108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5787-68-3 Isopropylbenzene (Cumene)<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.015108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5798-82-8 p-Isopropyltoluene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.0088108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5799-87-6 Methylene Chloride<0.25 mg/kg0.250.10108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5775-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<0.31 mg/kg0.310.067108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.024108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:571634-04-4 Naphthalene<0.25 mg/kg0.250.015108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5791-20-3 n-Propylbenzene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.014108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57103-65-1 Styrene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57100-42-5 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.020108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57630-20-6 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.016108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5779-34-5 Tetrachloroethene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.010108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57127-18-4 Tetrahydrofuran<2.5 mg/kg2.50.049108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57109-99-9 Toluene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.023108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57108-88-3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.017108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5787-61-6 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.016108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:57120-82-1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.016108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5771-55-6 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.017108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5779-00-5 Trichloroethene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.016108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5779-01-6 Trichlorofluoromethane<0.25 mg/kg0.250.025108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5775-69-4 1,2,3-Trichloropropane<0.25 mg/kg0.250.024108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5796-18-4 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<0.25 mg/kg0.250.017108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5776-13-1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<0.062 mg/kg0.0620.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 00:5795-63-6 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 24 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-12 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140012 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<0.062 mg/kg08/18/22 00:57108-67-80.0620.0084108/16/22 13:08 Vinyl chloride<0.025 mg/kg08/18/22 00:5775-01-40.0250.011108/16/22 13:08 Xylene (Total)<0.19 mg/kg08/18/22 00:571330-20-70.190.023108/16/22 13:08 Surrogates Toluene-d8 (S)98%.08/18/22 00:572037-26-51M75-125108/16/22 13:08 4-Bromofluorobenzene (S)98%.08/18/22 00:57460-00-475-125108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichlorobenzene-d4 (S)98%.08/18/22 00:572199-69-175-125108/16/22 13:08 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 25 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-13 / 4-6'Lab ID:10621140013 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<10.2 mg/kg08/16/22 13:5610.23.8108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)84%.08/16/22 13:56D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 1.2 mg/kg08/17/22 17:067440-38-21.00.16108/17/22 10:06 Barium 19.2 mg/kg08/17/22 17:067440-39-30.510.015108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.15 mg/kg08/17/22 17:067440-43-90.150.035108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 8.6 mg/kg08/17/22 17:067440-47-30.510.032108/17/22 10:06 Lead 1.9 mg/kg08/17/22 17:067439-92-10.510.11108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.0 mg/kg08/17/22 17:067782-49-21.00.34108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.51 mg/kg08/17/22 17:067440-22-40.510.036108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.018 mg/kg08/18/22 13:157439-97-60.0180.0079108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 3.9%08/16/22 14:21N20.100.101 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 26 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-14 / 2-4'Lab ID:10621140014 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28<10.2 mg/kg08/16/22 14:0710.23.8108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)87%.08/16/22 14:07D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 1.7 mg/kg08/17/22 17:087440-38-21.00.15108/17/22 10:06 Barium 25.1 mg/kg08/17/22 17:087440-39-30.510.015108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium<0.15 mg/kg08/17/22 17:087440-43-90.150.034108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 8.6 mg/kg08/17/22 17:087440-47-30.510.032108/17/22 10:06 Lead 1.8 mg/kg08/17/22 17:087439-92-10.510.10108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.0 mg/kg08/17/22 17:087782-49-21.00.33108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.51 mg/kg08/17/22 17:087440-22-40.510.035108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.019 mg/kg08/18/22 13:167439-97-60.0190.0084108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 3.0%08/16/22 14:22N20.100.101 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 27 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-15 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140015 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: WI MOD DRO Preparation Method: WI MOD DRO WIDRO GCS Silica Gel Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis WDRO C10-C28 84.8 mg/kg08/16/22 11:38T611.14.1108/15/22 14:04 Surrogates n-Triacontane (S)97%.08/16/22 11:38D538-125108/15/22 14:04 Analytical Method: EPA 6010D Preparation Method: EPA 3050B 6010D MET ICP Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Arsenic 2.0 mg/kg08/17/22 17:107440-38-21.10.16108/17/22 10:06 Barium 61.7 mg/kg08/17/22 17:107440-39-30.530.016108/17/22 10:06 Cadmium 0.21 mg/kg08/17/22 17:107440-43-90.160.036108/17/22 10:06 Chromium 11.5 mg/kg08/17/22 17:107440-47-30.530.033108/17/22 10:06 Lead 39.0 mg/kg08/17/22 17:107439-92-10.530.11108/17/22 10:06 Selenium<1.1 mg/kg08/17/22 17:107782-49-21.10.35108/17/22 10:06 Silver<0.53 mg/kg08/17/22 17:107440-22-40.530.038108/17/22 10:06 Analytical Method: EPA 7471B Preparation Method: EPA 7471B 7471B Mercury Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Mercury<0.020 mg/kg08/18/22 13:187439-97-60.0200.0088108/17/22 12:13 Analytical Method: ASTM D2974 Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Percent Moisture 11.6%08/16/22 14:22N20.100.101 Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone<0.98 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1367-64-10.980.37108/16/22 13:08 Allyl chloride<0.20 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13107-05-10.200.047108/16/22 13:08 Benzene<0.020 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1371-43-20.0200.0059108/16/22 13:08 Bromobenzene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13108-86-10.0490.015108/16/22 13:08 Bromochloromethane<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1374-97-50.0490.0058108/16/22 13:08 Bromodichloromethane<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1375-27-40.0490.014108/16/22 13:08 Bromoform<0.20 mg/kg0.200.080108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1375-25-2L2 Bromomethane<0.49 mg/kg0.490.087108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1374-83-9 2-Butanone (MEK)<0.24 mg/kg0.240.077108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1378-93-3 n-Butylbenzene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.010108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13104-51-8 sec-Butylbenzene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13135-98-8 tert-Butylbenzene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.0091108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1398-06-6 Carbon tetrachloride<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.0065108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1356-23-5 Chlorobenzene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.010108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13108-90-7 Chloroethane<0.49 mg/kg0.490.090108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1375-00-3 Chloroform<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1367-66-3 Chloromethane<0.20 mg/kg0.200.037108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1374-87-3 2-Chlorotoluene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.010108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1395-49-8 4-Chlorotoluene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.0058108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13106-43-4 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane<0.49 mg/kg0.490.020108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1396-12-8L2 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 28 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-15 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140015 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Dibromochloromethane<0.20 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13124-48-1L20.200.094108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13106-93-40.0490.016108/16/22 13:08 Dibromomethane<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1374-95-30.0490.019108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1395-50-10.0490.0098108/16/22 13:08 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13541-73-10.0490.014108/16/22 13:08 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13106-46-70.0490.0079108/16/22 13:08 Dichlorodifluoromethane<0.20 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1375-71-80.200.025108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloroethane<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1375-34-30.0490.017108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichloroethane<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13107-06-20.0490.017108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloroethene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1375-35-40.0490.014108/16/22 13:08 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13156-59-20.0490.011108/16/22 13:08 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13156-60-50.0490.0092108/16/22 13:08 Dichlorofluoromethane<0.49 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1375-43-40.490.023108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichloropropane<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1378-87-50.0490.014108/16/22 13:08 1,3-Dichloropropane<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13142-28-90.0490.016108/16/22 13:08 2,2-Dichloropropane<0.20 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13594-20-70.200.018108/16/22 13:08 1,1-Dichloropropene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13563-58-60.0490.010108/16/22 13:08 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1310061-01-50.0490.015108/16/22 13:08 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1310061-02-60.0490.015108/16/22 13:08 Diethyl ether (Ethyl ether)<0.20 mg/kg0.200.014108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1360-29-7 Ethylbenzene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.0084108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13100-41-4 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<0.24 mg/kg0.240.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1387-68-3 Isopropylbenzene (Cumene)<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1398-82-8 p-Isopropyltoluene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.0070108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1399-87-6 Methylene Chloride<0.20 mg/kg0.200.081108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1375-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<0.24 mg/kg0.240.053108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.019108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:131634-04-4 Naphthalene<0.20 mg/kg0.200.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1391-20-3 n-Propylbenzene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.011108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13103-65-1 Styrene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.0095108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13100-42-5 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.016108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13630-20-6 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1379-34-5 Tetrachloroethene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.0082108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13127-18-4 Tetrahydrofuran<2.0 mg/kg2.00.039108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13109-99-9 Toluene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.019108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13108-88-3 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.014108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1387-61-6 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:13120-82-1 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.013108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1371-55-6 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.014108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1379-00-5 Trichloroethene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.012108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1379-01-6 Trichlorofluoromethane<0.20 mg/kg0.200.020108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1375-69-4 1,2,3-Trichloropropane<0.20 mg/kg0.200.019108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1396-18-4 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<0.20 mg/kg0.200.014108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1376-13-1 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<0.049 mg/kg0.0490.010108/16/22 13:0808/18/22 01:1395-63-6 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 29 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Sample:LGP-15 / 0-2'Lab ID:10621140015 Collected:08/12/22 00:00Received:08/12/22 14:30Matrix:Solid Results reported on a "dry weight" basis and are adjusted for percent moisture, sample size and any dilutions. Report ParametersResultsUnitsDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.QualLimitMDL Analytical Method: EPA 8260D Preparation Method: EPA 5035/5030B 8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<0.049 mg/kg08/18/22 01:13108-67-80.0490.0066108/16/22 13:08 Vinyl chloride<0.020 mg/kg08/18/22 01:1375-01-40.0200.0087108/16/22 13:08 Xylene (Total)<0.15 mg/kg08/18/22 01:131330-20-70.150.019108/16/22 13:08 Surrogates Toluene-d8 (S)98%.08/18/22 01:132037-26-575-125108/16/22 13:08 4-Bromofluorobenzene (S)95%.08/18/22 01:13460-00-475-125108/16/22 13:08 1,2-Dichlorobenzene-d4 (S)99%.08/18/22 01:132199-69-175-125108/16/22 13:08 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 30 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 QC Batch:834429Analysis Method:EPA 7471B QC Batch Method:EPA 7471BAnalysis Description:7471B Mercury Solids Laboratory:Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 10621140001, 10621140002, 10621140003, 10621140004, 10621140005, 10621140006, 10621140007, Associated Lab Samples: 10621140008, 10621140009, 10621140010, 10621140011, 10621140012, 10621140013, 10621140014, 10621140015 METHOD BLANK:4419480Matrix:Solid Associated Lab Samples:10621140001, 10621140002, 10621140003, 10621140004, 10621140005, 10621140006, 10621140007, 10621140008, 10621140009, 10621140010, 10621140011, 10621140012, 10621140013, 10621140014, 10621140015 BlankReporting ParameterUnitsResultLimitMDLAnalyzedQualifiers Mercurymg/kg<0.0190.0190.008108/18/22 12:36 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE:4419481 SpikeLCSLCS% Rec ParameterUnitsConc.Result% RecLimitsQualifiers Mercurymg/kg0.460.4610080-120 MATRIX SPIKE & MATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATE:44194824419483 MSMSD 10620964001SpikeSpikeMSMSDMSMSD% RecMax ParameterUnitsResultConc.Conc.ResultResult% Rec% RecLimitsRPDRPDQual Mercurymg/kg0.0340.520.520.560.55999980-120220 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 31 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 QC Batch:834393Analysis Method:EPA 6010D QC Batch Method:EPA 3050BAnalysis Description:6010D Solids Laboratory:Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 10621140001, 10621140002, 10621140003, 10621140004, 10621140005, 10621140006, 10621140007, Associated Lab Samples: 10621140008, 10621140009, 10621140010, 10621140011, 10621140012, 10621140013, 10621140014, 10621140015 METHOD BLANK:4419338Matrix:Solid Associated Lab Samples:10621140001, 10621140002, 10621140003, 10621140004, 10621140005, 10621140006, 10621140007, 10621140008, 10621140009, 10621140010, 10621140011, 10621140012, 10621140013, 10621140014, 10621140015 BlankReporting ParameterUnitsResultLimitMDLAnalyzedQualifiers Arsenicmg/kg<0.950.950.1508/17/22 16:19 Bariummg/kg<0.470.470.01408/17/22 16:19 Cadmiummg/kg<0.140.140.03208/17/22 16:19 Chromiummg/kg<0.470.470.03008/17/22 16:19 Leadmg/kg<0.470.470.09808/17/22 16:19 Seleniummg/kg<0.950.950.3108/17/22 16:19 Silvermg/kg<0.470.470.03308/17/22 16:19 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE:4419339 SpikeLCSLCS% Rec ParameterUnitsConc.Result% RecLimitsQualifiers Arsenicmg/kg49.351.810580-120 Bariummg/kg49.350.510380-120 Cadmiummg/kg49.349.610180-120 Chromiummg/kg49.350.310280-120 Leadmg/kg49.349.510080-120 Seleniummg/kg49.349.710180-120 Silvermg/kg24.624.49980-120 MATRIX SPIKE & MATRIX SPIKE DUPLICATE:44193404419341 MSMSD 10620964001SpikeSpikeMSMSDMSMSD% RecMax ParameterUnitsResultConc.Conc.ResultResult% Rec% RecLimitsRPDRPDQual Arsenicmg/kg5.15555.251.152.0848575-125220 Bariummg/kg81.25555.2133136959975-125220 Cadmiummg/kg0.285555.245.946.9838475-125220 Chromiummg/kg12.55555.262.364.2909475-125320 Leadmg/kg31.85555.270.473.4707575-125420M1 Seleniummg/kgND5555.244.946.0818275-125220 Silvermg/kgND27.627.724.424.9889075-125220 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 32 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 QC Batch:834714Analysis Method:ASTM D2974 QC Batch Method:ASTM D2974Analysis Description:Dry Weight / %M by ASTM D2974 Laboratory:Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 10621140001, 10621140002, 10621140003, 10621140004, 10621140005, 10621140006, 10621140007, Associated Lab Samples: 10621140008, 10621140009, 10621140010, 10621140011, 10621140012, 10621140013, 10621140014, 10621140015 SAMPLE DUPLICATE:4420387 10621140001DupMax ParameterUnitsResultResultRPDRPDQualifiers 8.6 Percent Moisture%8.9330N2 SAMPLE DUPLICATE:4420388 10621140011DupMax ParameterUnitsResultResultRPDRPDQualifiers 9.9 Percent Moisture%10.0130N2 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 33 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 QC Batch:834799Analysis Method:EPA 8260D QC Batch Method:EPA 5035/5030BAnalysis Description:8260D MSV 5030 Med Level Laboratory:Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Associated Lab Samples:10621140003, 10621140004, 10621140010, 10621140012, 10621140015 METHOD BLANK:4420632Matrix:Solid Associated Lab Samples: 10621140003, 10621140004, 10621140010, 10621140012, 10621140015 BlankReporting ParameterUnitsResultLimitMDLAnalyzedQualifiers 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01608/16/22 18:00 1,1,1-Trichloroethanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01308/16/22 18:00 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01308/16/22 18:00 1,1,2-Trichloroethanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01408/16/22 18:00 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethanemg/kg<0.200.200.01408/16/22 18:00 1,1-Dichloroethanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01708/16/22 18:00 1,1-Dichloroethenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01408/16/22 18:00 1,1-Dichloropropenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01008/16/22 18:00 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01408/16/22 18:00 1,2,3-Trichloropropanemg/kg<0.200.200.01908/16/22 18:00 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01308/16/22 18:00 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01008/16/22 18:00 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropanemg/kg<0.500.500.02108/16/22 18:00 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)mg/kg<0.0500.0500.01708/16/22 18:00 1,2-Dichlorobenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01008/16/22 18:00 1,2-Dichloroethanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01708/16/22 18:00 1,2-Dichloropropanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01408/16/22 18:00 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.006808/16/22 18:00 1,3-Dichlorobenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01408/16/22 18:00 1,3-Dichloropropanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01608/16/22 18:00 1,4-Dichlorobenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.008008/16/22 18:00 2,2-Dichloropropanemg/kg<0.200.200.01808/16/22 18:00 2-Butanone (MEK)mg/kg<0.250.250.07908/16/22 18:00 2-Chlorotoluenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01108/16/22 18:00 4-Chlorotoluenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.005908/16/22 18:00 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)mg/kg<0.250.250.05408/16/22 18:00 Acetonemg/kg<1.01.00.3808/16/22 18:00 Allyl chloridemg/kg<0.200.200.04808/16/22 18:00 Benzenemg/kg<0.0200.0200.006108/16/22 18:00 Bromobenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01508/16/22 18:00 Bromochloromethanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.005908/16/22 18:00 Bromodichloromethanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01408/16/22 18:00 Bromoformmg/kg<0.200.200.08208/16/22 18:00 Bromomethanemg/kg<0.500.500.08908/16/22 18:00 Carbon tetrachloridemg/kg<0.0500.0500.006608/16/22 18:00 Chlorobenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01108/16/22 18:00 Chloroethanemg/kg<0.500.500.09208/16/22 18:00 Chloroformmg/kg<0.0500.0500.01208/16/22 18:00 Chloromethanemg/kg<0.200.200.03708/16/22 18:00 cis-1,2-Dichloroethenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01108/16/22 18:00 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 34 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 METHOD BLANK:4420632Matrix:Solid Associated Lab Samples: 10621140003, 10621140004, 10621140010, 10621140012, 10621140015 BlankReporting ParameterUnitsResultLimitMDLAnalyzedQualifiers cis-1,3-Dichloropropenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01508/16/22 18:00 Dibromochloromethanemg/kg<0.200.200.09608/16/22 18:00 Dibromomethanemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01908/16/22 18:00 Dichlorodifluoromethanemg/kg<0.200.200.02608/16/22 18:00 Dichlorofluoromethanemg/kg<0.500.500.02308/16/22 18:00 Diethyl ether (Ethyl ether)mg/kg<0.200.200.01508/16/22 18:00 Ethylbenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.008608/16/22 18:00 Hexachloro-1,3-butadienemg/kg<0.250.250.01308/16/22 18:00 Isopropylbenzene (Cumene)mg/kg<0.0500.0500.01208/16/22 18:00 Methyl-tert-butyl ethermg/kg<0.0500.0500.01908/16/22 18:00 Methylene Chloridemg/kg<0.200.200.08308/16/22 18:00 n-Butylbenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01008/16/22 18:00 n-Propylbenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01108/16/22 18:00 Naphthalenemg/kg<0.200.200.01208/16/22 18:00 p-Isopropyltoluenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.007108/16/22 18:00 sec-Butylbenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01408/16/22 18:00 Styrenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.009708/16/22 18:00 tert-Butylbenzenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.009308/16/22 18:00 Tetrachloroethenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.008408/16/22 18:00 Tetrahydrofuranmg/kg<2.02.00.04008/16/22 18:00 Toluenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01908/16/22 18:00 trans-1,2-Dichloroethenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.009408/16/22 18:00 trans-1,3-Dichloropropenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01508/16/22 18:00 Trichloroethenemg/kg<0.0500.0500.01308/16/22 18:00 Trichlorofluoromethanemg/kg<0.200.200.02008/16/22 18:00 Vinyl chloridemg/kg<0.0200.0200.008908/16/22 18:00 Xylene (Total)mg/kg<0.150.150.01908/16/22 18:00 1,2-Dichlorobenzene-d4 (S)%.9975-12508/16/22 18:00 4-Bromofluorobenzene (S)%.9675-12508/16/22 18:00 Toluene-d8 (S)%.9875-12508/16/22 18:00 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE & LCSD:44206334420634 SpikeLCSDLCSLCSDLCS% RecMax ParameterUnitsConc.ResultResult% Rec% RecLimitsRPDRPDQualifiers 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethanemg/kg10.720.74727466-126220 1,1,1-Trichloroethanemg/kg10.860.86868662-125020 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethanemg/kg10.880.87888766-139120 1,1,2-Trichloroethanemg/kg11.00.981009873-125320 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethanemg/kg11.11.111210554-126620 1,1-Dichloroethanemg/kg11.00.941009460-125620 1,1-Dichloroethenemg/kg11.00.941039450-125920 1,1-Dichloropropenemg/kg11.01.010210055-125220 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzenemg/kg10.840.81848163-136320 1,2,3-Trichloropropanemg/kg10.970.98979868-129120 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 35 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE & LCSD:44206334420634 SpikeLCSDLCSLCSDLCS% RecMax ParameterUnitsConc.ResultResult% Rec% RecLimitsRPDRPDQualifiers 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzenemg/kg10.830.81838162-130220 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzenemg/kg10.970.92979263-125520 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropanemg/kg10.550.53555359-150420L2 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)mg/kg10.960.99969969-125320 1,2-Dichlorobenzenemg/kg10.970.93979367-125420 1,2-Dichloroethanemg/kg10.960.94969460-125320 1,2-Dichloropropanemg/kg11.00.961029667-125620 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzenemg/kg10.950.93959362-125220 1,3-Dichlorobenzenemg/kg10.990.95999566-125320 1,3-Dichloropropanemg/kg10.990.98999870-125120 1,4-Dichlorobenzenemg/kg10.990.95999569-125320 2,2-Dichloropropanemg/kg10.890.85898555-125520 2-Butanone (MEK)mg/kg54.64.6929146-142020 2-Chlorotoluenemg/kg11.00.981019865-125420 4-Chlorotoluenemg/kg11.00.961009666-125520 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)mg/kg54.34.4878859-150220 Acetonemg/kg54.44.2878562-125320 Allyl chloridemg/kg10.820.81828147-135120 Benzenemg/kg10.990.96999658-126420 Bromobenzenemg/kg11.00.951009566-125520 Bromochloromethanemg/kg11.00.941049469-1251020 Bromodichloromethanemg/kg10.740.73747370-125120 Bromoformmg/kg10.540.57545767-133620L2 Bromomethanemg/kg10.940.89948946-150520 Carbon tetrachloridemg/kg10.670.70677057-125420 Chlorobenzenemg/kg10.990.96999667-125320 Chloroethanemg/kg11.11.010810230-150620 Chloroformmg/kg10.990.97999762-125220 Chloromethanemg/kg10.740.70747030-150620 cis-1,2-Dichloroethenemg/kg11.00.961049664-125920 cis-1,3-Dichloropropenemg/kg10.830.81838164-127220 Dibromochloromethanemg/kg10.590.60596068-127220L2 Dibromomethanemg/kg10.910.90919064-125120 Dichlorodifluoromethanemg/kg10.920.85928530-150720 Dichlorofluoromethanemg/kg11.10.991079955-150820 Diethyl ether (Ethyl ether)mg/kg10.900.86908630-150420 Ethylbenzenemg/kg11.01.010310067-125320 Hexachloro-1,3-butadienemg/kg10.820.82828248-137020 Isopropylbenzene (Cumene)mg/kg11.00.971009766-125320 Methyl-tert-butyl ethermg/kg10.920.90929065-128220 Methylene Chloridemg/kg10.940.91949150-128320 n-Butylbenzenemg/kg10.890.87898754-134220 n-Propylbenzenemg/kg11.00.971019763-125420 Naphthalenemg/kg10.910.91919157-145020 p-Isopropyltoluenemg/kg10.960.92969264-125420 sec-Butylbenzenemg/kg10.970.94979464-125320 Styrenemg/kg11.01.010410268-125220 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 36 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE & LCSD:44206334420634 SpikeLCSDLCSLCSDLCS% RecMax ParameterUnitsConc.ResultResult% Rec% RecLimitsRPDRPDQualifiers tert-Butylbenzenemg/kg10.980.95989563-125320 Tetrachloroethenemg/kg11.00.961009658-125420 Tetrahydrofuranmg/kg54.54.5899164-125220 Toluenemg/kg10.990.95999557-125420 trans-1,2-Dichloroethenemg/kg10.990.94999456-125520 trans-1,3-Dichloropropenemg/kg10.790.80798066-132120 Trichloroethenemg/kg11.01.010310062-125320 Trichlorofluoromethanemg/kg11.21.212411637-148720 Vinyl chloridemg/kg10.900.83908330-150820 Xylene (Total)mg/kg33.12.91039864-125520 1,2-Dichlorobenzene-d4 (S)%.999875-125 4-Bromofluorobenzene (S)%.1009975-125 Toluene-d8 (S)%.999775-125 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 37 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 QC Batch:834602Analysis Method:WI MOD DRO QC Batch Method:WI MOD DROAnalysis Description:WIDRO Solid GCV Laboratory:Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 10621140001, 10621140002, 10621140003, 10621140004, 10621140005, 10621140006, 10621140007, Associated Lab Samples: 10621140008, 10621140009, 10621140010, 10621140011, 10621140012, 10621140013, 10621140014, 10621140015 METHOD BLANK:4419997Matrix:Solid Associated Lab Samples:10621140001, 10621140002, 10621140003, 10621140004, 10621140005, 10621140006, 10621140007, 10621140008, 10621140009, 10621140010, 10621140011, 10621140012, 10621140013, 10621140014, 10621140015 BlankReporting ParameterUnitsResultLimitMDLAnalyzedQualifiers WDRO C10-C28mg/kg<10.010.03.708/16/22 11:03 n-Triacontane (S)%.8838-12508/16/22 11:03 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE & LCSD:44199984419999 SpikeLCSDLCSLCSDLCS% RecMax ParameterUnitsConc.ResultResult% Rec% RecLimitsRPDRPDQualifiers WDRO C10-C28mg/kg8071.567.2898459-125620 n-Triacontane (S)%.909138-125 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 38 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=QL# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALIFIERS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 DEFINITIONS DF - Dilution Factor, if reported, represents the factor applied to the reported data due to dilution of the sample aliquot. ND - Not Detected at or above adjusted reporting limit. TNTC - Too Numerous To Count J - Estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below the adjusted reporting limit. MDL - Adjusted Method Detection Limit. PQL - Practical Quantitation Limit. RL - Reporting Limit - The lowest concentration value that meets project requirements for quantitative data with known precision and bias for a specific analyte in a specific matrix. S - Surrogate 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine decomposes to and cannot be separated from Azobenzene using Method 8270. The result for each analyte is a combined concentration. Consistent with EPA guidelines, unrounded data are displayed and have been used to calculate % recovery and RPD values. LCS(D) - Laboratory Control Sample (Duplicate) MS(D) - Matrix Spike (Duplicate) DUP - Sample Duplicate RPD - Relative Percent Difference NC - Not Calculable. SG - Silica Gel - Clean-Up U - Indicates the compound was analyzed for, but not detected. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine decomposes and cannot be separated from Diphenylamine using Method 8270. The result reported for each analyte is a combined concentration. Reported results are not rounded until the final step prior to reporting. Therefore, calculated parameters that are typically reported as "Total" may vary slightly from the sum of the reported component parameters. Pace Analytical is TNI accredited. Contact your Pace PM for the current list of accredited analytes. TNI - The NELAC Institute. BATCH QUALIFIERS Batch: 835121 \[M5\]A matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate was not performed for this batch due to insufficient sample volume. Trichlorofluoromethane did not meet the secondary source verification criteria for the initial calibration. The reported result \[1\] should be considered an estimated value. On 8/16/22 the continuing calibration verification was below the method acceptance limit for carbon tetrachloride, \[2\] bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane, bromoform, and 1,2-dibromo-3- chloropropane. The analyte was not detected in the associated samples and the sensitivity of the instrument was verified with a reporting limit check standard. On 8/16/22 the continuing calibration verification was above the method acceptance limit for dichlorofluoromethane, \[3\] trichlorofluoromethane, and n-hexane. Any detection for the analyte in the associated samples may have a high bias. On 8/17/22 the continuing calibration verification was below the method acceptance limit for chloromethane, carbon \[4\] tetrachloride, bromodichloromethane, trans-1,3-dichloropropene, dibromochloromethane, 1,1,1,2-tetrachloroethane, bromoform, and 1,2-dibromo-3-chloropropane. The analyte was not detected in the associated samples and the sensitivity of the instrument was verified with a reporting limit check standard. On 8/17/22 the continuing calibration verification was above the method acceptance limit for trichlorofluoromethane. Any \[5\] detection for the analyte in the associated samples may have a high bias. ANALYTE QUALIFIERS 1M Preserved from glass jar with headspace outside of 48 hours from collection. The sample was re-weighed into a new container because the sample weight in the original container exceeded the D5 method specifications. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 39 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=QL# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALIFIERS Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 ANALYTE QUALIFIERS Analyte recovery in the laboratory control sample (LCS) was below QC limits. Results for this analyte in associated L2 samples may be biased low. M1Matrix spike recovery exceeded QC limits. Batch accepted based on laboratory control sample (LCS) recovery. The lab does not hold NELAC/TNI accreditation for this parameter but other accreditations/certifications may apply. A N2 complete list of accreditations/certifications is available upon request. T6High boiling point hydrocarbons are present in the sample. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 40 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=CR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA CROSS REFERENCE TABLE Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Analytical Lab IDSample IDQC Batch MethodQC BatchAnalytical MethodBatch 10621140001LGP-1 / 0-2'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140002LGP-2 / 2-4'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140003LGP-3 / 0-2'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140004LGP-4 / 1-2'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140005LGP-5 / 4-6'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140006LGP-6 / 0-2'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140007LGP-7 / 0-2'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140008LGP-8 / 2-4'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140009LGP-9 / 0-2'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140010LGP-10 / 0-2'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140011LGP-11 / 0-2'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140012LGP-12 / 0-2'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140013LGP-13 / 4-6'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140014LGP-14 / 2-4'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140015LGP-15 / 0-2'WI MOD DROWI MOD DRO834602834785 10621140001LGP-1 / 0-2'EPA 3050BEPA 6010D834393835225 10621140002LGP-2 / 2-4'EPA 3050BEPA 6010D834393835225 10621140003LGP-3 / 0-2'EPA 3050BEPA 6010D834393835225 10621140004LGP-4 / 1-2'EPA 3050BEPA 6010D834393835225 10621140005LGP-5 / 4-6'EPA 3050BEPA 6010D834393835225 10621140006LGP-6 / 0-2'EPA 3050BEPA 6010D834393835225 10621140007LGP-7 / 0-2'EPA 3050BEPA 6010D834393835225 10621140008LGP-8 / 2-4'EPA 3050BEPA 6010D834393835225 10621140009LGP-9 / 0-2'EPA 3050BEPA 6010D834393835225 10621140010LGP-10 / 0-2'EPA 3050BEPA 6010D834393835225 10621140011LGP-11 / 0-2'EPA 3050B834393EPA 6010D835225 10621140012LGP-12 / 0-2'EPA 3050B834393EPA 6010D835225 10621140013LGP-13 / 4-6'EPA 3050B834393EPA 6010D835225 10621140014LGP-14 / 2-4'EPA 3050B834393EPA 6010D835225 10621140015LGP-15 / 0-2'EPA 3050B834393EPA 6010D835225 10621140001LGP-1 / 0-2'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140002LGP-2 / 2-4'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140003LGP-3 / 0-2'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140004LGP-4 / 1-2'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140005LGP-5 / 4-6'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140006LGP-6 / 0-2'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140007LGP-7 / 0-2'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140008LGP-8 / 2-4'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140009LGP-9 / 0-2'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140010LGP-10 / 0-2'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140011LGP-11 / 0-2'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140012LGP-12 / 0-2'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140013LGP-13 / 4-6'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140014LGP-14 / 2-4'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140015LGP-15 / 0-2'EPA 7471B834429EPA 7471B835241 10621140001LGP-1 / 0-2'ASTM D2974834714 10621140002LGP-2 / 2-4'ASTM D2974834714 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 41 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=CR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA CROSS REFERENCE TABLE Project:1136 Frost Pace Project No.:10621140 Analytical Lab IDSample IDQC Batch MethodQC BatchAnalytical MethodBatch 10621140003LGP-3 / 0-2'ASTM D2974834714 10621140004LGP-4 / 1-2'ASTM D2974834714 10621140005LGP-5 / 4-6'ASTM D2974834714 10621140006LGP-6 / 0-2'ASTM D2974834714 10621140007LGP-7 / 0-2'ASTM D2974834714 10621140008LGP-8 / 2-4'ASTM D2974834714 10621140009LGP-9 / 0-2'ASTM D2974834714 10621140010LGP-10 / 0-2'ASTM D2974834714 10621140011LGP-11 / 0-2'ASTM D2974834714 10621140012LGP-12 / 0-2'ASTM D2974834714 10621140013LGP-13 / 4-6'ASTM D2974834714 10621140014LGP-14 / 2-4'ASTM D2974834714 10621140015LGP-15 / 0-2'ASTM D2974834714 10621140003LGP-3 / 0-2'EPA 5035/5030BEPA 8260D834799835121 10621140004LGP-4 / 1-2'EPA 5035/5030BEPA 8260D834799835121 10621140010LGP-10 / 0-2'EPA 5035/5030BEPA 8260D834799835121 10621140012LGP-12 / 0-2'EPA 5035/5030BEPA 8260D834799835121 10621140015LGP-15 / 0-2'EPA 5035/5030BEPA 8260D834799835121 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/18/2022 04:53 PM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 42 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 Page 43 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 010011012013014015 Page 44 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 8/15/2022 Page 45 of 45 J1, Attachment 6 #=CL# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 LIMS USE: FR - BLAKE SHAW LIMS OBJECT ID: 10621136 August 24, 2022 Blake Shaw Landmark Environmental 9555 James Avenue South Suite 262 Bloomington, MN 55431 RE:Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Dear Blake Shaw: Enclosed are the analytical results for sample(s) received by the laboratory on August 12, 2022. The results relate only to the samples included in this report. Results reported herein conform to the applicable TNI/NELAC Standards and the laboratory's Quality Manual, where applicable, unless otherwise noted in the body of the report. The test results provided in this final report were generated by each of the following laboratories within the Pace Network: ¤ Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis This report was revised on August 24, 2022, to update the sample ID from LSV-4/5-6Ó to LSV-4/1-2Ó for sample 10621136002. If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Annika Asp annika.asp@pacelabs.com (612)607-1700 Project Manager Enclosures cc:Eric Gabrielson, Landmark Environmental Landmark Info, Landmark REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 1 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=CP# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 CERTIFICATIONS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Pace Analytical Services, LLC - Minneapolis MN 1700 Elm Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55414Missouri Certification #: 10100 Montana Certification #: CERT0092 A2LA Certification #: 2926.01* 1800 Elm Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55414--Satellite Air Nebraska Certification #: NE-OS-18-06 Lab Nevada Certification #: MN00064 Alabama Certification #: 40770 New Hampshire Certification #: 2081* Alaska Contaminated Sites Certification #: 17-009* New Jersey Certification #: MN002 Alaska DW Certification #: MN00064 New York Certification #: 11647* Arizona Certification #: AZ0014* North Carolina DW Certification #: 27700 Arkansas DW Certification #: MN00064 North Carolina WW Certification #: 530 Arkansas WW Certification #: 88-0680 North Dakota Certification (A2LA) #: R-036 California Certification #: 2929 North Dakota Certification (MN) #: R-036 Colorado Certification #: MN00064 Ohio DW Certification #: 41244 Connecticut Certification #: PH-0256 Ohio VAP Certification (1700) #: CL101 EPA Region 8 Tribal Water Systems+Wyoming DW Ohio VAP Certification (1800) #: CL110* Certification #: via MN 027-053-137 Oklahoma Certification #: 9507* Florida Certification #: E87605* Oregon Primary Certification #: MN300001 Georgia Certification #: 959 Oregon Secondary Certification #: MN200001* Hawaii Certification #: MN00064 Pennsylvania Certification #: 68-00563* Idaho Certification #: MN00064 Puerto Rico Certification #: MN00064 Illinois Certification #: 200011 South Carolina Certification #:74003001 Indiana Certification #: C-MN-01 Tennessee Certification #: TN02818 Iowa Certification #: 368 Texas Certification #: T104704192* Kansas Certification #: E-10167 Utah Certification #: MN00064* Kentucky DW Certification #: 90062 Vermont Certification #: VT-027053137 Kentucky WW Certification #: 90062 Virginia Certification #: 460163* Louisiana DEQ Certification #: AI-03086* Washington Certification #: C486* Louisiana DW Certification #: MN00064 West Virginia DEP Certification #: 382 Maine Certification #: MN00064* West Virginia DW Certification #: 9952 C Maryland Certification #: 322 Wisconsin Certification #: 999407970 Michigan Certification #: 9909 Wyoming UST Certification #: via A2LA 2926.01 Minnesota Certification #: 027-053-137* USDA Permit #: P330-19-00208 Minnesota Dept of Ag Approval: via MN 027-053-137 *Please Note: Applicable air certifications are denoted with Minnesota Petrofund Registration #: 1240* an asterisk (*). Mississippi Certification #: MN00064 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 2 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=SS# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 SAMPLE SUMMARY Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Lab IDSample IDMatrixDate CollectedDate Received 10621136001LSV-2/5-6 Air08/11/22 11:1508/12/22 14:42 10621136002LSV-4/1-2'Air08/11/22 12:5708/12/22 14:42 10621136003LSV-8/5-6'Air08/11/22 17:2108/12/22 14:42 10621136004LSV-10/5-6'Air08/12/22 07:4708/12/22 14:42 10621136005LSV-11/5-6'Air08/12/22 08:4708/12/22 14:42 10621136006LSV-12/5-6'Air08/12/22 09:5708/12/22 14:42 10621136007LSV-15/4-5'Air08/12/22 11:0708/12/22 14:42 10621136008Unused Can # 2903 Air08/12/22 14:42 10621136009Unused Can # 2588 Air08/12/22 14:42 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 3 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=SA# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 SAMPLE ANALYTE COUNT Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Analytes Lab IDSample IDMethodReportedLaboratory Analysts 10621136001LSV-2/5-6 TO-15SW61PASI-M 10621136002LSV-4/1-2'TO-15SW61PASI-M 10621136003 SW61 LSV-8/5-6'TO-15PASI-M SW 10621136004LSV-10/5-6'TO-1561PASI-M 10621136005LSV-11/5-6'TO-15SW61PASI-M 10621136006LSV-12/5-6'TO-15SW61PASI-M 10621136007LSV-15/4-5'TO-15SW61PASI-M PASI-M = Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 4 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-2/5-6Lab ID:10621136001 Collected:08/11/22 11:15Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone 42.2 ug/m308/16/22 16:2567-64-110.93.31.8 Benzene 1.6 ug/m308/16/22 16:2571-43-20.580.211.8 Benzyl chloride<4.7 ug/m308/16/22 16:25100-44-74.71.61.8 Bromodichloromethane<2.4 ug/m308/16/22 16:2575-27-42.40.431.8 Bromoform<9.4 ug/m308/16/22 16:2575-25-29.42.91.8 Bromomethane<1.4 ug/m308/16/22 16:2574-83-91.40.271.8 1,3-Butadiene<0.81 ug/m308/16/22 16:25106-99-00.810.221.8 2-Butanone (MEK)13.2 ug/m308/16/22 16:2578-93-35.40.841.8 Carbon disulfide<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 16:2575-15-01.10.231.8 Carbon tetrachloride<5.8 ug/m308/16/22 16:2556-23-55.80.501.8 Chlorobenzene<1.7 ug/m308/16/22 16:25108-90-71.70.281.8 Chloroethane<0.96 ug/m308/16/22 16:2575-00-30.960.401.8 Chloroform<0.89 ug/m308/16/22 16:2567-66-30.890.331.8 Chloromethane<0.76 ug/m308/16/22 16:2574-87-30.760.151.8 Cyclohexane<3.2 ug/m308/16/22 16:25110-82-73.20.401.8 Dibromochloromethane<3.1 ug/m308/16/22 16:25124-48-13.10.931.8 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<1.4 ug/m308/16/22 16:25106-93-41.40.541.8 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<5.5 ug/m308/16/22 16:2595-50-15.50.731.8 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<5.5 ug/m308/16/22 16:25541-73-15.50.921.8 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<5.5 ug/m308/16/22 16:25106-46-75.51.61.8 Dichlorodifluoromethane 2.2 ug/m308/16/22 16:2575-71-81.80.341.8 1,1-Dichloroethane<1.5 ug/m308/16/22 16:2575-34-31.50.301.8 1,2-Dichloroethane<1.5 ug/m308/16/22 16:25107-06-21.50.351.8 1,1-Dichloroethene<1.5 ug/m308/16/22 16:2575-35-41.50.251.8 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.5 ug/m31.50.351.808/16/22 16:25156-59-2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.5 ug/m31.50.301.808/16/22 16:25156-60-5 1,2-Dichloropropane<1.7 ug/m31.70.481.808/16/22 16:2578-87-5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.2 ug/m34.20.461.808/16/22 16:2510061-01-5 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.2 ug/m34.20.981.808/16/22 16:2510061-02-6 Dichlorotetrafluoroethane<2.6 ug/m32.60.361.808/16/22 16:2576-14-2 Ethanol 13.4 ug/m33.51.11.808/16/22 16:2564-17-5 Ethyl acetate<1.3 ug/m31.30.241.808/16/22 16:25141-78-6 Ethylbenzene<1.6 ug/m31.60.561.808/16/22 16:25100-41-4 4-Ethyltoluene<4.5 ug/m34.50.851.808/16/22 16:25622-96-8 n-Heptane 8.1 ug/m31.50.331.808/16/22 16:25142-82-5 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<9.8 ug/m39.82.21.808/16/22 16:2587-68-3 n-Hexane 2.4 ug/m31.30.341.808/16/22 16:25110-54-3 2-Hexanone<7.5 ug/m37.50.801.808/16/22 16:25591-78-6 Methylene Chloride<6.4 ug/m36.41.11.808/16/22 16:2575-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<7.5 ug/m37.50.581.808/16/22 16:25108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<6.6 ug/m36.60.231.808/16/22 16:251634-04-4 Naphthalene 5.1 ug/m34.83.91.808/16/22 16:2591-20-3 2-Propanol 5.2 ug/m34.50.921.808/16/22 16:2567-63-0 Propylene 5.7 ug/m31.60.231.808/16/22 16:25115-07-1 Styrene 1.6 ug/m31.60.691.808/16/22 16:25100-42-5 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 5 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-2/5-6Lab ID:10621136001 Collected:08/11/22 11:15Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<2.5 ug/m308/16/22 16:2579-34-52.50.671.8 Tetrachloroethene<1.2 ug/m308/16/22 16:25127-18-41.20.531.8 Tetrahydrofuran<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 16:25109-99-91.10.321.8 Toluene 3.1 ug/m308/16/22 16:25108-88-31.40.441.8 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<13.6 ug/m308/16/22 16:25120-82-113.68.81.8 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<2.0 ug/m308/16/22 16:2571-55-62.00.331.8 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<1.0 ug/m308/16/22 16:2579-00-51.00.351.8 Trichloroethene<0.98 ug/m308/16/22 16:2579-01-60.980.351.8 Trichlorofluoromethane<2.1 ug/m308/16/22 16:2575-69-42.10.421.8 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<2.8 ug/m308/16/22 16:2576-13-12.80.521.8 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 3.2 ug/m308/16/22 16:2595-63-61.80.641.8 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<1.8 ug/m308/16/22 16:25108-67-81.80.521.8 Vinyl acetate<3.2 ug/m308/16/22 16:25108-05-43.20.371.8 Vinyl chloride<0.47 ug/m308/16/22 16:2575-01-40.470.161.8 m&p-Xylene 13.5 ug/m308/16/22 16:25179601-23-13.21.21.8 o-Xylene 4.6 ug/m308/16/22 16:2595-47-61.60.491.8 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 6 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-4/1-2'Lab ID:10621136002 Collected:08/11/22 12:57Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone 212 ug/m308/16/22 18:4467-64-111.73.51.94 Benzene 0.94 ug/m308/16/22 18:4471-43-20.630.221.94 Benzyl chloride<5.1 ug/m308/16/22 18:44100-44-75.11.71.94 Bromodichloromethane<2.6 ug/m308/16/22 18:4475-27-42.60.461.94 Bromoform<10.2 ug/m308/16/22 18:4475-25-210.23.11.94 Bromomethane<1.5 ug/m308/16/22 18:4474-83-91.50.291.94 1,3-Butadiene<0.87 ug/m308/16/22 18:44106-99-00.870.231.94 2-Butanone (MEK)11.2 ug/m308/16/22 18:4478-93-35.80.901.94 Carbon disulfide 11.4 ug/m308/16/22 18:4475-15-01.20.251.94 Carbon tetrachloride<6.2 ug/m308/16/22 18:4456-23-56.20.541.94 Chlorobenzene<1.8 ug/m308/16/22 18:44108-90-71.80.301.94 Chloroethane<1.0 ug/m308/16/22 18:4475-00-31.00.431.94 Chloroform<0.96 ug/m308/16/22 18:4467-66-30.960.361.94 Chloromethane<0.81 ug/m308/16/22 18:4474-87-30.810.171.94 Cyclohexane<3.4 ug/m308/16/22 18:44110-82-73.40.431.94 Dibromochloromethane<3.4 ug/m308/16/22 18:44124-48-13.41.01.94 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<1.5 ug/m308/16/22 18:44106-93-41.50.581.94 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<5.9 ug/m308/16/22 18:4495-50-15.90.791.94 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<5.9 ug/m308/16/22 18:44541-73-15.90.991.94 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<5.9 ug/m308/16/22 18:44106-46-75.91.71.94 Dichlorodifluoromethane 24.9 ug/m308/16/22 18:4475-71-82.00.361.94 1,1-Dichloroethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 18:4475-34-31.60.321.94 1,2-Dichloroethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 18:44107-06-21.60.381.94 1,1-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 18:4475-35-41.60.271.94 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m31.60.381.9408/16/22 18:44156-59-2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m31.60.331.9408/16/22 18:44156-60-5 1,2-Dichloropropane<1.8 ug/m31.80.521.9408/16/22 18:4478-87-5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.5 ug/m34.50.491.9408/16/22 18:4410061-01-5 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.5 ug/m34.51.11.9408/16/22 18:4410061-02-6 Dichlorotetrafluoroethane<2.8 ug/m32.80.391.9408/16/22 18:4476-14-2 Ethanol 69.3 ug/m33.71.11.9408/16/22 18:4464-17-5 Ethyl acetate<1.4 ug/m31.40.251.9408/16/22 18:44141-78-6 Ethylbenzene<1.7 ug/m31.70.601.9408/16/22 18:44100-41-4 4-Ethyltoluene<4.8 ug/m34.80.921.9408/16/22 18:44622-96-8 n-Heptane<1.6 ug/m31.60.351.9408/16/22 18:44142-82-5 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<10.5 ug/m310.52.41.9408/16/22 18:4487-68-3 n-Hexane<1.4 ug/m31.40.371.9408/16/22 18:44110-54-3 2-Hexanone<8.1 ug/m38.10.861.9408/16/22 18:44591-78-6 Methylene Chloride<6.8 ug/m36.81.21.9408/16/22 18:4475-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<8.1 ug/m38.10.621.9408/16/22 18:44108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<7.1 ug/m37.10.241.9408/16/22 18:441634-04-4 Naphthalene<5.2 ug/m35.24.21.9408/16/22 18:4491-20-3 2-Propanol 18.4 ug/m34.80.991.9408/16/22 18:4467-63-0 Propylene<1.7 ug/m31.70.251.9408/16/22 18:44115-07-1 Styrene 1.7 ug/m31.70.751.9408/16/22 18:44100-42-5 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 7 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-4/1-2'Lab ID:10621136002 Collected:08/11/22 12:57Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<2.7 ug/m308/16/22 18:4479-34-52.70.721.94 Tetrachloroethene 19.6 ug/m308/16/22 18:44127-18-41.30.571.94 Tetrahydrofuran<1.2 ug/m308/16/22 18:44109-99-91.20.351.94 Toluene 4.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:44108-88-31.50.471.94 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<14.6 ug/m308/16/22 18:44120-82-114.69.51.94 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<2.2 ug/m308/16/22 18:4471-55-62.20.361.94 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 18:4479-00-51.10.381.94 Trichloroethene<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 18:4479-01-61.10.381.94 Trichlorofluoromethane<2.2 ug/m308/16/22 18:4475-69-42.20.451.94 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<3.0 ug/m308/16/22 18:4476-13-13.00.561.94 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 2.5 ug/m308/16/22 18:4495-63-61.90.691.94 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<1.9 ug/m308/16/22 18:44108-67-81.90.561.94 Vinyl acetate<3.5 ug/m308/16/22 18:44108-05-43.50.401.94 Vinyl chloride<0.50 ug/m308/16/22 18:4475-01-40.500.171.94 m&p-Xylene 4.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:44179601-23-13.41.21.94 o-Xylene<1.7 ug/m308/16/22 18:4495-47-61.70.531.94 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 8 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-8/5-6'Lab ID:10621136003 Collected:08/11/22 17:21Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone 85.7 ug/m308/16/22 18:0967-64-114.54.32.4 Benzene 2.5 ug/m308/16/22 18:0971-43-20.780.272.4 Benzyl chloride<6.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:09100-44-76.32.12.4 Bromodichloromethane<3.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:0975-27-43.30.572.4 Bromoform<12.6 ug/m308/16/22 18:0975-25-212.63.92.4 Bromomethane<1.9 ug/m308/16/22 18:0974-83-91.90.362.4 1,3-Butadiene<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 18:09106-99-01.10.292.4 2-Butanone (MEK)20.5 ug/m308/16/22 18:0978-93-37.21.12.4 Carbon disulfide 4.5 ug/m308/16/22 18:0975-15-01.50.312.4 Carbon tetrachloride<7.7 ug/m308/16/22 18:0956-23-57.70.672.4 Chlorobenzene 2.6 ug/m308/16/22 18:09108-90-72.20.372.4 Chloroethane<1.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:0975-00-31.30.542.4 Chloroform<1.2 ug/m308/16/22 18:0967-66-31.20.442.4 Chloromethane 1.1 ug/m308/16/22 18:0974-87-31.00.202.4 Cyclohexane<4.2 ug/m308/16/22 18:09110-82-74.20.532.4 Dibromochloromethane<4.2 ug/m308/16/22 18:09124-48-14.21.22.4 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<1.9 ug/m308/16/22 18:09106-93-41.90.722.4 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<7.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:0995-50-17.30.972.4 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<7.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:09541-73-17.31.22.4 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<7.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:09106-46-77.32.12.4 Dichlorodifluoromethane 6.4 ug/m308/16/22 18:0975-71-82.40.452.4 1,1-Dichloroethane<2.0 ug/m308/16/22 18:0975-34-32.00.402.4 1,2-Dichloroethane<2.0 ug/m308/16/22 18:09107-06-22.00.472.4 1,1-Dichloroethene<1.9 ug/m308/16/22 18:0975-35-41.90.332.4 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.9 ug/m31.90.472.408/16/22 18:09156-59-2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.9 ug/m31.90.402.408/16/22 18:09156-60-5 1,2-Dichloropropane<2.3 ug/m32.30.652.408/16/22 18:0978-87-5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<5.5 ug/m35.50.612.408/16/22 18:0910061-01-5 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<5.5 ug/m35.51.32.408/16/22 18:0910061-02-6 Dichlorotetrafluoroethane 3.6 ug/m33.40.482.408/16/22 18:0976-14-2 Ethanol 41.8 ug/m34.61.42.408/16/22 18:0964-17-5 Ethyl acetate<1.8 ug/m31.80.312.408/16/22 18:09141-78-6 Ethylbenzene<2.1 ug/m32.10.742.408/16/22 18:09100-41-4 4-Ethyltoluene<6.0 ug/m36.01.12.408/16/22 18:09622-96-8 n-Heptane<2.0 ug/m32.00.432.408/16/22 18:09142-82-5 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<13.0 ug/m313.03.02.408/16/22 18:0987-68-3 n-Hexane 5.2 ug/m31.70.462.408/16/22 18:09110-54-3 2-Hexanone<10 ug/m3101.12.408/16/22 18:09591-78-6 Methylene Chloride<8.5 ug/m38.51.42.408/16/22 18:0975-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<10 ug/m3100.772.408/16/22 18:09108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<8.8 ug/m38.80.302.408/16/22 18:091634-04-4 Naphthalene<6.4 ug/m36.45.22.408/16/22 18:0991-20-3 2-Propanol 6.3 ug/m36.01.22.408/16/22 18:0967-63-0 Propylene 23.3 ug/m32.10.312.408/16/22 18:09115-07-1 Styrene<2.1 ug/m32.10.922.408/16/22 18:09100-42-5 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 9 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-8/5-6'Lab ID:10621136003 Collected:08/11/22 17:21Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<3.4 ug/m308/16/22 18:0979-34-53.40.892.4 Tetrachloroethene 4.5 ug/m308/16/22 18:09127-18-41.70.702.4 Tetrahydrofuran<1.4 ug/m308/16/22 18:09109-99-91.40.432.4 Toluene 3.7 ug/m308/16/22 18:09108-88-31.80.592.4 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<18.1 ug/m308/16/22 18:09120-82-118.111.72.4 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<2.7 ug/m308/16/22 18:0971-55-62.70.452.4 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<1.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:0979-00-51.30.472.4 Trichloroethene<1.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:0979-01-61.30.472.4 Trichlorofluoromethane<2.7 ug/m308/16/22 18:0975-69-42.70.562.4 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<3.7 ug/m308/16/22 18:0976-13-13.70.692.4 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 3.1 ug/m308/16/22 18:0995-63-62.40.852.4 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<2.4 ug/m308/16/22 18:09108-67-82.40.702.4 Vinyl acetate<4.3 ug/m308/16/22 18:09108-05-44.30.502.4 Vinyl chloride<0.62 ug/m308/16/22 18:0975-01-40.620.212.4 m&p-Xylene 12.6 ug/m308/16/22 18:09179601-23-14.21.52.4 o-Xylene 4.4 ug/m308/16/22 18:0995-47-62.10.652.4 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 10 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-10/5-6'Lab ID:10621136004 Collected:08/12/22 07:47Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone 85.2 ug/m308/16/22 17:3567-64-112.23.72.02 Benzene 2.5 ug/m308/16/22 17:3571-43-20.660.232.02 Benzyl chloride<5.3 ug/m308/16/22 17:35100-44-75.31.82.02 Bromodichloromethane<2.7 ug/m308/16/22 17:3575-27-42.70.482.02 Bromoform<10.6 ug/m308/16/22 17:3575-25-210.63.32.02 Bromomethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 17:3574-83-91.60.302.02 1,3-Butadiene<0.91 ug/m308/16/22 17:35106-99-00.910.242.02 2-Butanone (MEK)30.2 ug/m308/16/22 17:3578-93-36.10.942.02 Carbon disulfide<1.3 ug/m308/16/22 17:3575-15-01.30.262.02 Carbon tetrachloride<6.5 ug/m308/16/22 17:3556-23-56.50.572.02 Chlorobenzene<1.9 ug/m308/16/22 17:35108-90-71.90.312.02 Chloroethane<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 17:3575-00-31.10.452.02 Chloroform<1.0 ug/m308/16/22 17:3567-66-31.00.372.02 Chloromethane<0.85 ug/m308/16/22 17:3574-87-30.850.172.02 Cyclohexane<3.5 ug/m308/16/22 17:35110-82-73.50.452.02 Dibromochloromethane<3.5 ug/m308/16/22 17:35124-48-13.51.02.02 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 17:35106-93-41.60.612.02 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<6.2 ug/m308/16/22 17:3595-50-16.20.822.02 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<6.2 ug/m308/16/22 17:35541-73-16.21.02.02 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<6.2 ug/m308/16/22 17:35106-46-76.21.82.02 Dichlorodifluoromethane<2.0 ug/m308/16/22 17:3575-71-82.00.382.02 1,1-Dichloroethane<1.7 ug/m308/16/22 17:3575-34-31.70.332.02 1,2-Dichloroethane<1.7 ug/m308/16/22 17:35107-06-21.70.392.02 1,1-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 17:3575-35-41.60.282.02 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m31.60.392.0208/16/22 17:35156-59-2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m31.60.342.0208/16/22 17:35156-60-5 1,2-Dichloropropane<1.9 ug/m31.90.542.0208/16/22 17:3578-87-5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.7 ug/m34.70.522.0208/16/22 17:3510061-01-5 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.7 ug/m34.71.12.0208/16/22 17:3510061-02-6 Dichlorotetrafluoroethane<2.9 ug/m32.90.412.0208/16/22 17:3576-14-2 Ethanol 22.2 ug/m33.91.22.0208/16/22 17:3564-17-5 Ethyl acetate<1.5 ug/m31.50.262.0208/16/22 17:35141-78-6 Ethylbenzene<1.8 ug/m31.80.622.0208/16/22 17:35100-41-4 4-Ethyltoluene<5.0 ug/m35.00.952.0208/16/22 17:35622-96-8 n-Heptane<1.7 ug/m31.70.372.0208/16/22 17:35142-82-5 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<10.9 ug/m310.92.52.0208/16/22 17:3587-68-3 n-Hexane 3.3 ug/m31.40.392.0208/16/22 17:35110-54-3 2-Hexanone<8.4 ug/m38.40.892.0208/16/22 17:35591-78-6 Methylene Chloride<7.1 ug/m37.11.22.0208/16/22 17:3575-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<8.4 ug/m38.40.652.0208/16/22 17:35108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<7.4 ug/m37.40.252.0208/16/22 17:351634-04-4 Naphthalene<5.4 ug/m35.44.42.0208/16/22 17:3591-20-3 2-Propanol 14.1 ug/m35.01.02.0208/16/22 17:3567-63-0 Propylene 12.2 ug/m31.80.262.0208/16/22 17:35115-07-1 Styrene<1.7 ug/m31.70.782.0208/16/22 17:35100-42-5 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 11 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-10/5-6'Lab ID:10621136004 Collected:08/12/22 07:47Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<2.8 ug/m308/16/22 17:3579-34-52.80.752.02 Tetrachloroethene<1.4 ug/m308/16/22 17:35127-18-41.40.592.02 Tetrahydrofuran<1.2 ug/m308/16/22 17:35109-99-91.20.362.02 Toluene 2.3 ug/m308/16/22 17:35108-88-31.50.492.02 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<15.2 ug/m308/16/22 17:35120-82-115.29.92.02 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<2.2 ug/m308/16/22 17:3571-55-62.20.382.02 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 17:3579-00-51.10.402.02 Trichloroethene<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 17:3579-01-61.10.402.02 Trichlorofluoromethane 2.5 ug/m308/16/22 17:3575-69-42.30.472.02 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<3.2 ug/m308/16/22 17:3576-13-13.20.582.02 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<2.0 ug/m308/16/22 17:3595-63-62.00.722.02 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<2.0 ug/m308/16/22 17:35108-67-82.00.592.02 Vinyl acetate<3.6 ug/m308/16/22 17:35108-05-43.60.422.02 Vinyl chloride<0.53 ug/m308/16/22 17:3575-01-40.530.182.02 m&p-Xylene 4.0 ug/m308/16/22 17:35179601-23-13.61.32.02 o-Xylene<1.8 ug/m308/16/22 17:3595-47-61.80.552.02 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 12 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-11/5-6'Lab ID:10621136005 Collected:08/12/22 08:47Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone 86.3 ug/m308/16/22 19:5367-64-112.03.61.98 Benzene 2.8 ug/m308/16/22 19:5371-43-20.640.231.98 Benzyl chloride<5.2 ug/m308/16/22 19:53100-44-75.21.81.98 Bromodichloromethane<2.7 ug/m308/16/22 19:5375-27-42.70.471.98 Bromoform<10.4 ug/m308/16/22 19:5375-25-210.43.21.98 Bromomethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 19:5374-83-91.60.301.98 1,3-Butadiene<0.89 ug/m308/16/22 19:53106-99-00.890.241.98 2-Butanone (MEK)28.8 ug/m308/16/22 19:5378-93-35.90.921.98 Carbon disulfide<1.3 ug/m308/16/22 19:5375-15-01.30.261.98 Carbon tetrachloride<6.3 ug/m308/16/22 19:5356-23-56.30.551.98 Chlorobenzene<1.9 ug/m308/16/22 19:53108-90-71.90.311.98 Chloroethane<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:5375-00-31.10.441.98 Chloroform<0.98 ug/m308/16/22 19:5367-66-30.980.361.98 Chloromethane 2.0 ug/m308/16/22 19:5374-87-30.830.171.98 Cyclohexane<3.5 ug/m308/16/22 19:53110-82-73.50.441.98 Dibromochloromethane<3.4 ug/m308/16/22 19:53124-48-13.41.01.98 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<1.5 ug/m308/16/22 19:53106-93-41.50.591.98 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<6.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:5395-50-16.10.801.98 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<6.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:53541-73-16.11.01.98 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<6.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:53106-46-76.11.71.98 Dichlorodifluoromethane<2.0 ug/m308/16/22 19:5375-71-82.00.371.98 1,1-Dichloroethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 19:5375-34-31.60.331.98 1,2-Dichloroethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 19:53107-06-21.60.381.98 1,1-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 19:5375-35-41.60.271.98 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m31.60.391.9808/16/22 19:53156-59-2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m31.60.331.9808/16/22 19:53156-60-5 1,2-Dichloropropane<1.9 ug/m31.90.531.9808/16/22 19:5378-87-5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.6 ug/m34.60.501.9808/16/22 19:5310061-01-5 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.6 ug/m34.61.11.9808/16/22 19:5310061-02-6 Dichlorotetrafluoroethane<2.8 ug/m32.80.401.9808/16/22 19:5376-14-2 Ethanol 20.4 ug/m33.81.21.9808/16/22 19:5364-17-5 Ethyl acetate<1.5 ug/m31.50.261.9808/16/22 19:53141-78-6 Ethylbenzene 3.3 ug/m31.70.611.9808/16/22 19:53100-41-4 4-Ethyltoluene<5.0 ug/m35.00.931.9808/16/22 19:53622-96-8 n-Heptane<1.6 ug/m31.60.361.9808/16/22 19:53142-82-5 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<10.7 ug/m310.72.41.9808/16/22 19:5387-68-3 n-Hexane 2.6 ug/m31.40.381.9808/16/22 19:53110-54-3 2-Hexanone<8.2 ug/m38.20.881.9808/16/22 19:53591-78-6 Methylene Chloride<7.0 ug/m37.01.21.9808/16/22 19:5375-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<8.2 ug/m38.20.641.9808/16/22 19:53108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<7.2 ug/m37.20.251.9808/16/22 19:531634-04-4 Naphthalene<5.3 ug/m35.34.31.9808/16/22 19:5391-20-3 2-Propanol 9.7 ug/m35.01.01.9808/16/22 19:5367-63-0 Propylene 8.4 ug/m31.70.261.9808/16/22 19:53115-07-1 Styrene<1.7 ug/m31.70.761.9808/16/22 19:53100-42-5 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 13 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-11/5-6'Lab ID:10621136005 Collected:08/12/22 08:47Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<2.8 ug/m308/16/22 19:5379-34-52.80.741.98 Tetrachloroethene<1.4 ug/m308/16/22 19:53127-18-41.40.581.98 Tetrahydrofuran<1.2 ug/m308/16/22 19:53109-99-91.20.361.98 Toluene 7.9 ug/m308/16/22 19:53108-88-31.50.481.98 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<14.9 ug/m308/16/22 19:53120-82-114.99.71.98 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<2.2 ug/m308/16/22 19:5371-55-62.20.371.98 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:5379-00-51.10.391.98 Trichloroethene<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:5379-01-61.10.391.98 Trichlorofluoromethane<2.3 ug/m308/16/22 19:5375-69-42.30.461.98 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<3.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:5376-13-13.10.571.98 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 4.5 ug/m308/16/22 19:5395-63-62.00.701.98 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<2.0 ug/m308/16/22 19:53108-67-82.00.571.98 Vinyl acetate<3.5 ug/m308/16/22 19:53108-05-43.50.411.98 Vinyl chloride<0.51 ug/m308/16/22 19:5375-01-40.510.171.98 m&p-Xylene 13.7 ug/m308/16/22 19:53179601-23-13.51.31.98 o-Xylene 5.3 ug/m308/16/22 19:5395-47-61.70.541.98 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 14 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-12/5-6'Lab ID:10621136006 Collected:08/12/22 09:57Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone 81.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:1867-64-112.03.61.98 Benzene 2.9 ug/m308/16/22 19:1871-43-20.640.231.98 Benzyl chloride<5.2 ug/m308/16/22 19:18100-44-75.21.81.98 Bromodichloromethane<2.7 ug/m308/16/22 19:1875-27-42.70.471.98 Bromoform<10.4 ug/m308/16/22 19:1875-25-210.43.21.98 Bromomethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 19:1874-83-91.60.301.98 1,3-Butadiene<0.89 ug/m308/16/22 19:18106-99-00.890.241.98 2-Butanone (MEK)24.2 ug/m308/16/22 19:1878-93-35.90.921.98 Carbon disulfide<1.3 ug/m308/16/22 19:1875-15-01.30.261.98 Carbon tetrachloride<6.3 ug/m308/16/22 19:1856-23-56.30.551.98 Chlorobenzene<1.9 ug/m308/16/22 19:18108-90-71.90.311.98 Chloroethane<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:1875-00-31.10.441.98 Chloroform<0.98 ug/m308/16/22 19:1867-66-30.980.361.98 Chloromethane 1.4 ug/m308/16/22 19:1874-87-30.830.171.98 Cyclohexane<3.5 ug/m308/16/22 19:18110-82-73.50.441.98 Dibromochloromethane<3.4 ug/m308/16/22 19:18124-48-13.41.01.98 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<1.5 ug/m308/16/22 19:18106-93-41.50.591.98 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<6.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:1895-50-16.10.801.98 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<6.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:18541-73-16.11.01.98 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<6.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:18106-46-76.11.71.98 Dichlorodifluoromethane 5.6 ug/m308/16/22 19:1875-71-82.00.371.98 1,1-Dichloroethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 19:1875-34-31.60.331.98 1,2-Dichloroethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 19:18107-06-21.60.381.98 1,1-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 19:1875-35-41.60.271.98 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m31.60.391.9808/16/22 19:18156-59-2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m31.60.331.9808/16/22 19:18156-60-5 1,2-Dichloropropane<1.9 ug/m31.90.531.9808/16/22 19:1878-87-5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.6 ug/m34.60.501.9808/16/22 19:1810061-01-5 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.6 ug/m34.61.11.9808/16/22 19:1810061-02-6 Dichlorotetrafluoroethane 8.5 ug/m32.80.401.9808/16/22 19:1876-14-2 Ethanol 15.0 ug/m33.81.21.9808/16/22 19:1864-17-5 Ethyl acetate<1.5 ug/m31.50.261.9808/16/22 19:18141-78-6 Ethylbenzene<1.7 ug/m31.70.611.9808/16/22 19:18100-41-4 4-Ethyltoluene<5.0 ug/m35.00.931.9808/16/22 19:18622-96-8 n-Heptane<1.6 ug/m31.60.361.9808/16/22 19:18142-82-5 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<10.7 ug/m310.72.41.9808/16/22 19:1887-68-3 n-Hexane 4.2 ug/m31.40.381.9808/16/22 19:18110-54-3 2-Hexanone<8.2 ug/m38.20.881.9808/16/22 19:18591-78-6 Methylene Chloride<7.0 ug/m37.01.21.9808/16/22 19:1875-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<8.2 ug/m38.20.641.9808/16/22 19:18108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<7.2 ug/m37.20.251.9808/16/22 19:181634-04-4 Naphthalene<5.3 ug/m35.34.31.9808/16/22 19:1891-20-3 2-Propanol<5.0 ug/m35.01.01.9808/16/22 19:1867-63-0 Propylene 26.4 ug/m31.70.261.9808/16/22 19:18115-07-1 Styrene<1.7 ug/m31.70.761.9808/16/22 19:18100-42-5 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 15 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-12/5-6'Lab ID:10621136006 Collected:08/12/22 09:57Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<2.8 ug/m308/16/22 19:1879-34-52.80.741.98 Tetrachloroethene<1.4 ug/m308/16/22 19:18127-18-41.40.581.98 Tetrahydrofuran<1.2 ug/m308/16/22 19:18109-99-91.20.361.98 Toluene 4.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:18108-88-31.50.481.98 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<14.9 ug/m308/16/22 19:18120-82-114.99.71.98 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<2.2 ug/m308/16/22 19:1871-55-62.20.371.98 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:1879-00-51.10.391.98 Trichloroethene<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:1879-01-61.10.391.98 Trichlorofluoromethane 2.6 ug/m308/16/22 19:1875-69-42.30.461.98 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<3.1 ug/m308/16/22 19:1876-13-13.10.571.98 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<2.0 ug/m308/16/22 19:1895-63-62.00.701.98 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<2.0 ug/m308/16/22 19:18108-67-82.00.571.98 Vinyl acetate<3.5 ug/m308/16/22 19:18108-05-43.50.411.98 Vinyl chloride<0.51 ug/m308/16/22 19:1875-01-40.510.171.98 m&p-Xylene 4.0 ug/m308/16/22 19:18179601-23-13.51.31.98 o-Xylene<1.7 ug/m308/16/22 19:1895-47-61.70.541.98 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 16 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-15/4-5'Lab ID:10621136007 Collected:08/12/22 11:07Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Acetone 108 ug/m308/16/22 20:2767-64-111.73.51.94 Benzene 4.9 ug/m308/16/22 20:2771-43-20.630.221.94 Benzyl chloride<5.1 ug/m308/16/22 20:27100-44-75.11.71.94 Bromodichloromethane<2.6 ug/m308/16/22 20:2775-27-42.60.461.94 Bromoform<10.2 ug/m308/16/22 20:2775-25-210.23.11.94 Bromomethane<1.5 ug/m308/16/22 20:2774-83-91.50.291.94 1,3-Butadiene<0.87 ug/m308/16/22 20:27106-99-00.870.231.94 2-Butanone (MEK)55.4 ug/m308/16/22 20:2778-93-35.80.901.94 Carbon disulfide 14.0 ug/m308/16/22 20:2775-15-01.20.251.94 Carbon tetrachloride<6.2 ug/m308/16/22 20:2756-23-56.20.541.94 Chlorobenzene<1.8 ug/m308/16/22 20:27108-90-71.80.301.94 Chloroethane<1.0 ug/m308/16/22 20:2775-00-31.00.431.94 Chloroform<0.96 ug/m308/16/22 20:2767-66-30.960.361.94 Chloromethane<0.81 ug/m308/16/22 20:2774-87-30.810.171.94 Cyclohexane<3.4 ug/m308/16/22 20:27110-82-73.40.431.94 Dibromochloromethane<3.4 ug/m308/16/22 20:27124-48-13.41.01.94 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)<1.5 ug/m308/16/22 20:27106-93-41.50.581.94 1,2-Dichlorobenzene<5.9 ug/m308/16/22 20:2795-50-15.90.791.94 1,3-Dichlorobenzene<5.9 ug/m308/16/22 20:27541-73-15.90.991.94 1,4-Dichlorobenzene<5.9 ug/m308/16/22 20:27106-46-75.91.71.94 Dichlorodifluoromethane 28.5 ug/m308/16/22 20:2775-71-82.00.361.94 1,1-Dichloroethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 20:2775-34-31.60.321.94 1,2-Dichloroethane<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 20:27107-06-21.60.381.94 1,1-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m308/16/22 20:2775-35-41.60.271.94 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m31.60.381.9408/16/22 20:27156-59-2 trans-1,2-Dichloroethene<1.6 ug/m31.60.331.9408/16/22 20:27156-60-5 1,2-Dichloropropane<1.8 ug/m31.80.521.9408/16/22 20:2778-87-5 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.5 ug/m34.50.491.9408/16/22 20:2710061-01-5 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene<4.5 ug/m34.51.11.9408/16/22 20:2710061-02-6 Dichlorotetrafluoroethane<2.8 ug/m32.80.391.9408/16/22 20:2776-14-2 Ethanol 17.6 ug/m33.71.11.9408/16/22 20:2764-17-5 Ethyl acetate<1.4 ug/m31.40.251.9408/16/22 20:27141-78-6 Ethylbenzene<1.7 ug/m31.70.601.9408/16/22 20:27100-41-4 4-Ethyltoluene<4.8 ug/m34.80.921.9408/16/22 20:27622-96-8 n-Heptane<1.6 ug/m31.60.351.9408/16/22 20:27142-82-5 Hexachloro-1,3-butadiene<10.5 ug/m310.52.41.9408/16/22 20:2787-68-3 n-Hexane 5.9 ug/m31.40.371.9408/16/22 20:27110-54-3 2-Hexanone<8.1 ug/m38.10.861.9408/16/22 20:27591-78-6 Methylene Chloride<6.8 ug/m36.81.21.9408/16/22 20:2775-09-2 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)<8.1 ug/m38.10.621.9408/16/22 20:27108-10-1 Methyl-tert-butyl ether<7.1 ug/m37.10.241.9408/16/22 20:271634-04-4 Naphthalene<5.2 ug/m35.24.21.9408/16/22 20:2791-20-3 2-Propanol<4.8 ug/m34.80.991.9408/16/22 20:2767-63-0 Propylene 88.7 ug/m31.70.251.9408/16/22 20:27115-07-1 Styrene<1.7 ug/m31.70.751.9408/16/22 20:27100-42-5 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 17 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=AR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 ANALYTICAL RESULTS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Sample:LSV-15/4-5'Lab ID:10621136007 Collected:08/12/22 11:07Received:08/12/22 14:42Matrix:Air Report ParametersResultsUnitsLimitMDLDFPreparedAnalyzedCAS No.Qual Analytical Method: TO-15 TO15 MSV AIR Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane<2.7 ug/m308/16/22 20:2779-34-52.70.721.94 Tetrachloroethene 567 ug/m308/17/22 11:54127-18-46.72.89.7 Tetrahydrofuran<1.2 ug/m308/16/22 20:27109-99-91.20.351.94 Toluene 4.3 ug/m308/16/22 20:27108-88-31.50.471.94 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene<14.6 ug/m308/16/22 20:27120-82-114.69.51.94 1,1,1-Trichloroethane<2.2 ug/m308/16/22 20:2771-55-62.20.361.94 1,1,2-Trichloroethane<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 20:2779-00-51.10.381.94 Trichloroethene<1.1 ug/m308/16/22 20:2779-01-61.10.381.94 Trichlorofluoromethane<2.2 ug/m308/16/22 20:2775-69-42.20.451.94 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethane<3.0 ug/m308/16/22 20:2776-13-13.00.561.94 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene<1.9 ug/m308/16/22 20:2795-63-61.90.691.94 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene<1.9 ug/m308/16/22 20:27108-67-81.90.561.94 Vinyl acetate<3.5 ug/m308/16/22 20:27108-05-43.50.401.94 Vinyl chloride<0.50 ug/m308/16/22 20:2775-01-40.500.171.94 m&p-Xylene 3.8 ug/m308/16/22 20:27179601-23-13.41.21.94 o-Xylene<1.7 ug/m308/16/22 20:2795-47-61.70.531.94 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 18 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 QC Batch:834879Analysis Method:TO-15 QC Batch Method:TO-15Analysis Description:TO15 MSV AIR Low Level Laboratory:Pace Analytical Services - Minneapolis Associated Lab Samples:10621136001, 10621136002, 10621136003, 10621136004, 10621136005, 10621136006, 10621136007 METHOD BLANK:4421179Matrix:Air Associated Lab Samples: 10621136001, 10621136002, 10621136003, 10621136004, 10621136005, 10621136006, 10621136007 BlankReporting ParameterUnitsResultLimitMDLAnalyzedQualifiers 1,1,1-Trichloroethaneug/m3<1.11.10.1908/16/22 15:50 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethaneug/m3<1.41.40.3708/16/22 15:50 1,1,2-Trichloroethaneug/m3<0.560.560.2008/16/22 15:50 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethaneug/m3<1.61.60.2908/16/22 15:50 1,1-Dichloroethaneug/m3<0.820.820.1608/16/22 15:50 1,1-Dichloroetheneug/m3<0.810.810.1408/16/22 15:50 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzeneug/m3<7.57.54.908/16/22 15:50 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzeneug/m3<1.01.00.3508/16/22 15:50 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)ug/m3<0.780.780.3008/16/22 15:50 1,2-Dichlorobenzeneug/m3<3.13.10.4008/16/22 15:50 1,2-Dichloroethaneug/m3<0.820.820.1908/16/22 15:50 1,2-Dichloropropaneug/m3<0.940.940.2708/16/22 15:50 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzeneug/m3<1.01.00.2908/16/22 15:50 1,3-Butadieneug/m3<0.450.450.1208/16/22 15:50 1,3-Dichlorobenzeneug/m3<3.13.10.5108/16/22 15:50 1,4-Dichlorobenzeneug/m3<3.13.10.8808/16/22 15:50 2-Butanone (MEK)ug/m3<3.03.00.4608/16/22 15:50 2-Hexanoneug/m3<4.24.20.4408/16/22 15:50 2-Propanolug/m3<2.52.50.5108/16/22 15:50 4-Ethyltolueneug/m3<2.52.50.4708/16/22 15:50 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)ug/m3<4.24.20.3208/16/22 15:50 Acetoneug/m3<6.06.01.808/16/22 15:50 Benzeneug/m3<0.320.320.1108/16/22 15:50 Benzyl chlorideug/m3<2.62.60.8908/16/22 15:50 Bromodichloromethaneug/m3<1.41.40.2408/16/22 15:50 Bromoformug/m3<5.25.21.608/16/22 15:50 Bromomethaneug/m3<0.790.790.1508/16/22 15:50 Carbon disulfideug/m3<0.630.630.1308/16/22 15:50 Carbon tetrachlorideug/m3<3.23.20.2808/16/22 15:50MN Chlorobenzeneug/m3<0.940.940.1608/16/22 15:50 Chloroethaneug/m3<0.540.540.2208/16/22 15:50 Chloroformug/m3<0.500.500.1808/16/22 15:50 Chloromethaneug/m3<0.420.420.08508/16/22 15:50 cis-1,2-Dichloroetheneug/m3<0.810.810.2008/16/22 15:50 cis-1,3-Dichloropropeneug/m3<2.32.30.2608/16/22 15:50 Cyclohexaneug/m3<1.81.80.2208/16/22 15:50 Dibromochloromethaneug/m3<1.71.70.5208/16/22 15:50 Dichlorodifluoromethaneug/m3<1.01.00.1908/16/22 15:50 Dichlorotetrafluoroethaneug/m3<1.41.40.2008/16/22 15:50 Ethanolug/m3<1.91.90.5908/16/22 15:50 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 19 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 METHOD BLANK:4421179Matrix:Air Associated Lab Samples: 10621136001, 10621136002, 10621136003, 10621136004, 10621136005, 10621136006, 10621136007 BlankReporting ParameterUnitsResultLimitMDLAnalyzedQualifiers Ethyl acetateug/m3<0.730.730.1308/16/22 15:50 Ethylbenzeneug/m3<0.880.880.3108/16/22 15:50 Hexachloro-1,3-butadieneug/m3<5.45.41.208/16/22 15:50 m&p-Xyleneug/m3<1.81.80.6408/16/22 15:50 Methyl-tert-butyl etherug/m3<3.73.70.1308/16/22 15:50 Methylene Chlorideug/m3<3.53.50.5908/16/22 15:50 n-Heptaneug/m3<0.830.830.1808/16/22 15:50 n-Hexaneug/m3<0.720.720.1908/16/22 15:50 Naphthaleneug/m3<2.72.72.208/16/22 15:50 o-Xyleneug/m3<0.880.880.2708/16/22 15:50 Propyleneug/m3<0.880.880.1308/16/22 15:50 Styreneug/m3<0.870.870.3808/16/22 15:50 Tetrachloroetheneug/m3<0.690.690.2908/16/22 15:50 Tetrahydrofuranug/m3<0.600.600.1808/16/22 15:50 Tolueneug/m3<0.770.770.2408/16/22 15:50 trans-1,2-Dichloroetheneug/m3<0.810.810.1708/16/22 15:50 trans-1,3-Dichloropropeneug/m3<2.32.30.5408/16/22 15:50 Trichloroetheneug/m3<0.550.550.2008/16/22 15:50 Trichlorofluoromethaneug/m3<1.11.10.2308/16/22 15:50 Vinyl acetateug/m3<1.81.80.2108/16/22 15:50MN Vinyl chlorideug/m3<0.260.260.08708/16/22 15:50 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE:4421180 SpikeLCSLCS% Rec ParameterUnitsConc.Result% RecLimitsQualifiers 1,1,1-Trichloroethaneug/m35854.99570-130 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethaneug/m372.876.210570-132 1,1,2-Trichloroethaneug/m358.356.89770-131 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethaneug/m381.275.19270-130 1,1-Dichloroethaneug/m342.539.99470-130 1,1-Dichloroetheneug/m341.940.29670-130 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzeneug/m31751468370-130 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzeneug/m352.558.511170-137 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)ug/m380.586.210770-137 1,2-Dichlorobenzeneug/m363.973.211570-131 1,2-Dichloroethaneug/m342.443.510370-134 1,2-Dichloropropaneug/m349.346.39470-130 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzeneug/m352.456.410870-131 1,3-Butadieneug/m323.925.010570-139 1,3-Dichlorobenzeneug/m364.277.212070-134 1,4-Dichlorobenzeneug/m364.361.69670-131 2-Butanone (MEK)ug/m331.330.99970-133 2-Hexanoneug/m343.440.69470-136 2-Propanolug/m31371339765-133 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 20 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE:4421180 SpikeLCSLCS% Rec ParameterUnitsConc.Result% RecLimitsQualifiers 4-Ethyltolueneug/m352.362.011970-130 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)ug/m343.648.211170-130 Acetoneug/m31271249860-134 Benzeneug/m333.831.59370-130 Benzyl chlorideug/m355.651.59370-130 Bromodichloromethaneug/m371.574.210470-130 Bromoformug/m31101069670-138 Bromomethaneug/m341.441.210068-131 Carbon disulfideug/m33330.39270-130 Carbon tetrachlorideug/m366.769.710470-132 Chlorobenzeneug/m34947.69770-130 Chloroethaneug/m328.128.710270-134 Chloroformug/m352.148.79370-130 Chloromethaneug/m32221.49868-131 cis-1,2-Dichloroetheneug/m342.142.410170-136 cis-1,3-Dichloropropeneug/m348.242.58870-130 Cyclohexaneug/m336.433.69270-131 Dibromochloromethaneug/m390.698.510970-134 Dichlorodifluoromethaneug/m352.553.510270-130 Dichlorotetrafluoroethaneug/m374.474.510070-130 Ethanolug/m311311610355-145 Ethyl acetateug/m338.443.111270-135 Ethylbenzeneug/m346.245.19870-133 Hexachloro-1,3-butadieneug/m31301229470-132 m&p-Xyleneug/m392.487.99570-134 Methyl-tert-butyl etherug/m338.337.09670-131 Methylene Chlorideug/m336.834.79465-132 n-Heptaneug/m343.540.69370-130 n-Hexaneug/m337.734.69270-132 Naphthaleneug/m363.961.49670-130 o-Xyleneug/m34643.29470-134 Propyleneug/m318.618.39869-133 Styreneug/m345.353.711970-135 Tetrachloroetheneug/m37267.89470-134 Tetrahydrofuranug/m331.330.49770-140 Tolueneug/m340.239.59870-136 trans-1,2-Dichloroetheneug/m342.342.910170-134 trans-1,3-Dichloropropeneug/m348.445.09370-131 Trichloroetheneug/m357.256.69970-134 Trichlorofluoromethaneug/m360.357.39563-130 Vinyl acetateug/m338.736.39470-139 Vinyl chlorideug/m327.227.210070-132 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 21 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 SAMPLE DUPLICATE:4422867 10621136001DupMax ParameterUnitsResultResultRPDRPDQualifiers <2.0 1,1,1-Trichloroethaneug/m3<2.025 <2.5 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethaneug/m3<2.525 <1.0 1,1,2-Trichloroethaneug/m3<1.025 <2.8 1,1,2-Trichlorotrifluoroethaneug/m3<2.825 <1.5 1,1-Dichloroethaneug/m3<1.525 <1.5 1,1-Dichloroetheneug/m3<1.525 <13.6 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzeneug/m3<13.625 3.2 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzeneug/m32.81425 <1.4 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB)ug/m3<1.425 <5.5 1,2-Dichlorobenzeneug/m3<5.525 <1.5 1,2-Dichloroethaneug/m3<1.525 <1.7 1,2-Dichloropropaneug/m3<1.725 <1.8 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzeneug/m3<1.825 <0.81 1,3-Butadieneug/m3<0.8125 <5.5 1,3-Dichlorobenzeneug/m3<5.525 <5.5 1,4-Dichlorobenzeneug/m3<5.525 13.2 2-Butanone (MEK)ug/m311.71125 <7.5 2-Hexanoneug/m3<7.525 5.2 2-Propanolug/m38.04225R1 <4.5 4-Ethyltolueneug/m3<4.525 <7.5 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK)ug/m3<7.525 42.2 Acetoneug/m343.0225 1.6 Benzeneug/m31.41425 <4.7 Benzyl chlorideug/m3<4.725 <2.4 Bromodichloromethaneug/m3<2.425 <9.4 Bromoformug/m3<9.425 <1.4 Bromomethaneug/m3<1.425 <1.1 Carbon disulfideug/m3<1.125 <5.8 Carbon tetrachlorideug/m3<5.825 <1.7 Chlorobenzeneug/m3<1.725 <0.96 Chloroethaneug/m3<0.9625 <0.89 Chloroformug/m3<0.8925 <0.76 Chloromethaneug/m31.525 <1.5 cis-1,2-Dichloroetheneug/m3<1.525 <4.2 cis-1,3-Dichloropropeneug/m3<4.225 <3.2 Cyclohexaneug/m3<3.225 <3.1 Dibromochloromethaneug/m3<3.125 2.2 Dichlorodifluoromethaneug/m32.3525 <2.6 Dichlorotetrafluoroethaneug/m3<2.625 13.4 Ethanolug/m320.94425R1 <1.3 Ethyl acetateug/m3<1.325 <1.6 Ethylbenzeneug/m3<1.625 <9.8 Hexachloro-1,3-butadieneug/m3<9.825 13.5 m&p-Xyleneug/m311.71525 <6.6 Methyl-tert-butyl etherug/m3<6.625 <6.4 Methylene Chlorideug/m3<6.425 8.1 n-Heptaneug/m3<1.525 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 22 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=QC# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 SAMPLE DUPLICATE:4422867 10621136001DupMax ParameterUnitsResultResultRPDRPDQualifiers 2.4 n-Hexaneug/m32.5325 5.1 Naphthaleneug/m3<4.825 4.6 o-Xyleneug/m34.01325 5.7 Propyleneug/m35.5425 1.6 Styreneug/m3<1.625 <1.2 Tetrachloroetheneug/m3<1.225 <1.1 Tetrahydrofuranug/m3<1.125 3.1 Tolueneug/m33.0625 <1.5 trans-1,2-Dichloroetheneug/m3<1.525 <4.2 trans-1,3-Dichloropropeneug/m3<4.225 <0.98 Trichloroetheneug/m3<0.9825 <2.1 Trichlorofluoromethaneug/m3<2.125 <3.2 Vinyl acetateug/m3<3.225 <0.47 Vinyl chlorideug/m3<0.4725 Results presented on this page are in the units indicated by the "Units" column except where an alternate unit is presented to the right of the result. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 23 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=QL# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALIFIERS Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 DEFINITIONS DF - Dilution Factor, if reported, represents the factor applied to the reported data due to dilution of the sample aliquot. ND - Not Detected at or above adjusted reporting limit. TNTC - Too Numerous To Count J - Estimated concentration above the adjusted method detection limit and below the adjusted reporting limit. MDL - Adjusted Method Detection Limit. PQL - Practical Quantitation Limit. RL - Reporting Limit - The lowest concentration value that meets project requirements for quantitative data with known precision and bias for a specific analyte in a specific matrix. S - Surrogate 1,2-Diphenylhydrazine decomposes to and cannot be separated from Azobenzene using Method 8270. The result for each analyte is a combined concentration. Consistent with EPA guidelines, unrounded data are displayed and have been used to calculate % recovery and RPD values. LCS(D) - Laboratory Control Sample (Duplicate) MS(D) - Matrix Spike (Duplicate) DUP - Sample Duplicate RPD - Relative Percent Difference NC - Not Calculable. SG - Silica Gel - Clean-Up U - Indicates the compound was analyzed for, but not detected. N-Nitrosodiphenylamine decomposes and cannot be separated from Diphenylamine using Method 8270. The result reported for each analyte is a combined concentration. Reported results are not rounded until the final step prior to reporting. Therefore, calculated parameters that are typically reported as "Total" may vary slightly from the sum of the reported component parameters. Pace Analytical is TNI accredited. Contact your Pace PM for the current list of accredited analytes. TNI - The NELAC Institute. ANALYTE QUALIFIERS The reporting limit has been raised in accordance with Minnesota Statutes 4740.2100 Subpart 8. C, D. Reporting Limit MN Evaluation Rule. R1RPD value was outside control limits. REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 24 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 #=CR# Pace Analytical Services, LLC 1700 Elm Street Minneapolis, MN 55414 (612)607-1700 QUALITY CONTROL DATA CROSS REFERENCE TABLE Project:1136 Frost-Revised Report Pace Project No.:10621136 Analytical Lab IDSample IDQC Batch MethodQC BatchAnalytical MethodBatch 10621136001LSV-2/5-6 TO-15834879 10621136002LSV-4/1-2'TO-15834879 10621136003LSV-8/5-6'TO-15834879 10621136004LSV-10/5-6'TO-15834879 10621136005LSV-11/5-6'TO-15834879 10621136006LSV-12/5-6'TO-15834879 10621136007LSV-15/4-5'TO-15834879 REPORT OF LABORATORY ANALYSIS This report shall not be reproduced, except in full, Date: 08/24/2022 10:00 AM without the written consent of Pace Analytical Services, LLC. Page 25 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 Page 26 of 27 J1, Attachment 6 TF 85/12/2022 1619 Client requested this project to be called 1136 Frost. 8/12/2022 Page 27 of 27