Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facility Improvements

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET

Note to reviewers: The Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. This EAW was prepared by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), acting as the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU), to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared. The project proposer supplied reasonably accessible data for, but did not complete the final worksheet. Comments on the EAW must be submitted to the MPCA during the 30-day comment period which begins with notice of the availability of the EAW in the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) EQB Monitor. Comments on the EAW should address the accuracy and completeness of information, potential impacts that are reasonably expected to occur that warrant further investigation, and the need for an EIS. A copy of the EAW may be obtained from the MPCA by calling 651-757- 2101. An electronic version of the completed EAW is available at the MPCA website at http://www.pca.state.mn.us/news/eaw/index.html#open-eaw.

1. Project Title: Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Facility Improvements

2. Proposer: City of Long Prairie 3. RGU: Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Contact Person Paul Saffert, P.E. Contact Person Debra Moynihan

and Title Associate Engineer and Title Planner Principal

Address Bolton & Menk, Inc. Address 520 Lafayette Road North 7533 Sunwood Drive NW St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4194 Suite 206 Ramsey, Minnesota 55303

Phone 763-433-2851 Phone 651-757-2587 Fax 763-427-0833 Fax 651-297-2343 E-mail [email protected] E-mail [email protected]

4. Reason for EAW Preparation: EIS Mandatory Citizen RGU Proposer Scoping EAW X Petition Discretion Volunteered

If EAW or EIS is mandatory give EQB rule category subpart number and name: Minn. R. 4410.4300, subp. 18B. Wastewater Systems

5. Project Location: County Todd City/Twp City of Long Prairie

NW 1/4 SE 1/4 Section 8 Township T129N Range R33W

GPS Coordinates: N 45° 60’ 59.4” W 94° 52’ 44.7”

Tax Parcel Number

p-ear2-20a TDD (for hearing and speech impaired only): 651-282-5332 Printed on recycled paper containing 30% fibers from paper recycled by consumers Tables, Figures, and Appendices attached to the EAW:

• Figure 1 – County map showing the general location of the project • Figure 2 – Aerial view existing municipal and industrial facilities • Figure 3 – Discharge location municipal mechanical wastewater treatment facility (WWTF) • Figure 4 – Proposed project improvements • Figure 5 – Site layout displaying proposed improvements • Appendix A – Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Natural Heritage Information System response letter • Appendix B – Minnesota Historical Society State Preservation Office response letter

6. Description:

a. Provide a project summary of 50 words or less to be published in the EQB Monitor.

The city of Long Prairie (or City) is proposing to expand and upgrade its existing municipal WWTF to accommodate additional flow and loadings from the Long Prairie Packing Company. The upgraded treatment system (Project) will utilize the existing Long Prairie Packing Company’s stabilization pond system for storage and pretreatment. The existing municipal WWTF has an average wet weather (AWW) design flow capacity of 0.923 million gallons per day (mgd) and discharges to the Long Prairie River. The AWW design flow of the expanded facility would be 1.836 mgd. Upon completion of the Project, the direct discharge from Long Prairie Packing Company to the Long Prairie River would be eliminated.

b. Give a complete description of the proposed project and related new construction. Attach additional sheets as necessary. Emphasize construction, operation methods and features that will cause physical manipulation of the environment or will produce wastes. Include modifications to existing equipment or industrial processes and significant demolition, removal or remodeling of existing structures. Indicate the timing and duration of construction activities.

Background The city of Long Prairie currently holds two National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System/State Disposal System (NPDES/SDS) Permits to treat domestic and industrial wastewater at three separate facilities located in the same vicinity in Long Prairie, Minnesota (Figures 1 and 2).

The City owns and operates a mechanical WWTF regulated under NPDES/SDS Permit MN0066079. The mechanical facility was newly constructed in 2003. The facility is designed to treat an AWW flow of 923,000 gpd and discharges continuously to the Long Prairie River. Previously, the City owned a three- cell stabilization pond system that was constructed in 1989 to treat primarily domestic wastewater. One of the pond cells was kept for flow equalization when the new mechanical WWTF was built. Two of the pond cells were sold to Central Bi-Products in 2003 to provide operational flexibility to the industry’s wastewater system.

The second NPDES/SDS Permit (MN0020303) covers several pond systems that receive wastewater from industrial sources. The first of these facilities was constructed in 1956 to treat wastewater primarily from the Long Prairie Packing Company. It consists of one anaerobic pond, two aerated ponds, and a three-cell stabilization pond system. This system treats 400,000 gpd and currently discharges on a controlled basis (spring and fall) to the Long Prairie River. A second pond system was constructed in 1975 to treat wastewater from Central Bi-Products, a local rendering facility. The

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 2 Worksheet system was designed to treat 313,000 gpd and consists of one anaerobic pond, four aerated ponds, three holding ponds, and the two ponds purchased from the City in 2003. Originally, the Central Bi- Products pond system discharged directly to the Long Prairie River; however, the controlled discharge to the river was eliminated in September 2010 and rerouted for connection to the City’s mechanical WWTF. The current pond system for Central Bi-Products is used as a pretreatment system prior to discharge to the City’s mechanical WWTF.

Historical monitoring of the Long Prairie River has shown that dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations in portions of the river intermittently fall below the minimum DO level considered necessary to support aquatic life. Periodic fish kills have been reported in the river. Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act requires states to identify waters that do not meet state water quality standards, even after pollution controls have been implemented. A Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) study identifies the pollutant or pollutants causing the impairment, all contributing sources of the pollutant, and the pollutant load reductions needed to meet the applicable water quality standards.

The MPCA has completed a TMDL study for the Long Prairie River Watershed, which was approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on August 5, 2005. Results from the Long Prairie River Watershed TMDL study indicate that it is possible to reach the water quality standard for DO by reducing ammonia levels in the Long Prairie River during low flow conditions. Modeling during low flow conditions indicated that the loadings of oxygen-demanding pollutants, carbonaceous and nitrogenous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD and NBOD), released from the spring season combined discharges would need to be reduced. The City proposes to meet its share of the TMDL load allocation with construction of the proposed Project.

Existing Mechanical Treatment Facility The existing mechanical WWTF consists of one 12.67-acre flow equalization pond; a mechanical fine screen used to remove sticks, rags, and other large items from the influent waste stream; vortex grit removal where flow is slowed down to allow sand, grit, and other materials to settle out; an anaerobic basin and an anoxic (oxygen deficient) basin used for biological phosphorus removal; four extended aeration basins used to reduce organic wastes, nitrify ammonia in the wastewater, and remove additional phosphorus; two final clarifiers used to remove solids from the water; disinfection with the use of a chlorine contact basin; dechlorination using sulfur dioxide; and three biosolids storage tanks for 180 days of storage. The mechanical WWTF is designed to treat up to 0.923 mgd and discharge continuously through a 3,800-foot outfall to the Long Prairie River (Figure 3).

Proposed Project The Long Prairie Packing Company generates approximately 172 million gallons of wastewater per year. As explained above, this wastewater is currently treated in a pond system using a series of anaerobic, aerated, and stabilization ponds with a controlled discharge to the Long Prairie River. New, more stringent ammonia limits imposed through the TMDL process requires further wastewater treatment. To meet the waste load allocation specified through the TMDL, the City proposes to expand and upgrade its existing mechanical WWTF to accommodate wastewater from the Long Prairie Packing Company and eliminate the controlled discharge to the Long Prairie River directly from the pond system. After construction completion of the upgraded and expanded mechanical WWTF and elimination of the Long Prairie Packing Company discharge, the City will be managing all waste streams under one permit (MN0067099). The MPCA will then terminate NPDES/SDS Permit MN0020303.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 3 Worksheet The existing pond system will be used as a pretreatment facility and will be owned by the Long Prairie Packing Company. The stabilization pond will be used for storage and wastewater will be discharged to the upgraded mechanical WWTF for phosphorus and ammonia removal. The storage component of the treatment system will allow 210 days of storage and reduce the risk of overloading the mechanical WWTF. Discharge from the stabilization pond to the upgraded mechanical WWTF would take place during the warmer months of the year from April through October, enhancing the biological removal of ammonia and reducing the need for larger aeration tank volumes to increase detention time requirements for nitrification at colder temperatures. The Project includes the construction of 2,100 lineal feet of new 10-inch forcemain and a new lift station located east of the existing Long Prairie Packing pond system (Figure 4).

The existing mechanical WWTF will be expanded and upgraded by constructing a new 50-foot diameter final clarifier, an additional 5,500-gallon chlorine contact basin, three additional aerated sludge storage tanks, a lime storage silo, installing two additional aeration blowers and two additional sludge aeration blowers, a return activated sludge pump, and another building to house equipment. The expansion will take approximately one acre of land on property currently owned by the City. The location of the proposed additional treatment units in comparison to the footprint of the existing mechanical WWTF is shown in Figure 5. The expanded facility will have an AWW design capacity of 1.836 mgd. The existing mechanical facility’s outfall pipe will be used to discharge to the Long Prairie River.

Construction of the upgraded facility is scheduled to begin in the Summer of 2011 and is expected to be completed by Fall of 2012.

c. Explain the project purpose; if the project will be carried out by a governmental unit, explain the need for the project and identify its beneficiaries.

The purpose of the Project is to meet the waste load allocation imposed by the Long Prairie Watershed TMDL and ensure capacity for future growth of the City. The design life of the upgraded treatment facility would be 20 years, extending the life of the facility to 2030.

The proposed upgrade will allow the City to expand service to treat increased municipal waste streams from population growth and/or new industries, allowing the City to promote economic growth and increased employment. The additional capacity reserved for future growth from the Project is projected for 200,000 gpd.

The Project will consolidate discharges currently regulated under two permits into a discharge from a single outfall under one permit. The effluent limitations that would be assigned to the consolidated discharge would be more stringent than those now in place for the currently permitted discharges. These proposed changes in the treatment and discharge of the three major waste streams will improve the quality of the receiving water.

d. Are future stages of this development including development on any other property planned or likely to happen? Yes No

If yes, briefly describe future stages, relationship to present project, time line, and plans for environmental review.

The Long Prairie River Watershed will be monitored to evaluate the effectiveness of implementation of the TMDL. The results of this monitoring may require the City and other point and nonpoint sources to

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 4 Worksheet make further reductions in pollutant loadings. Details of the future stage expansion will be determined if TMDL implementation changes are required. At this time, it is not known if such changes would trigger the need for environmental review.

e. Is this project a subsequent stage of an earlier project? Yes No

If yes, briefly describe the past development, timeline and any past environmental review.

Environmental review was conducted during the summer of 2001 for construction of the new mechanical WWTF in 2002 and 2003. The MPCA was the RGU for the project and issued a negative declaration on the need for an EIS on July 27, 2001.

7. Project Magnitude Data

Total Project Area (acres) 4.0 or Length (miles)

Number of Residential Maximum Units Per Units: Unattached Attached Building:

Commercial/Industrial/Institutional Building Area (gross floor space): total square feet 5,000

Indicate area of specific uses (in square feet): Office Manufacturing Retail Other Industrial 3,000 (clarifier) Warehouse Institutional Light Industrial 2,000 Agricultural Other Commercial (specify) Building height 30 feet If over 2 stories, compare to heights of nearby buildings

8. Permits and approvals required. List all known local, state and federal permits, approvals and financial assistance for the project. Include modifications of any existing permits, governmental review of plans, and all direct and indirect forms of public financial assistance including bond guarantees, Tax Increment Financing and infrastructure. All of these final decisions are prohibited until all appropriate environmental review has been completed. See Minn. R. 4410.3100.

Unit of Government Type of Application Status Minnesota Public Facilities Authority Application for State Revolving Fund Program Submitted MPCA NPDES/SDS Surface Water Discharge Permit Submitted MPCA WWTF Plans and Specification Approval Submitted NPDES/SDS General Storm Water Permit for MPCA Construction Activities To be submitted MPCA Industrial Stormwater Multi-Sector General Permit To be submitted Todd County Building Permit To be submitted

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 5 Worksheet

9. Land use. Describe current and recent past land use and development on the site and on adjacent lands. Discuss project compatibility with adjacent and nearby land uses. Indicate whether any potential conflicts involve environmental matters. Identify any potential environmental hazards due to past site uses, such as soil contamination or abandoned storage tanks, or proximity to nearby hazardous liquid or gas pipelines.

Expansion of the mechanical WWTF would take place on vacant land north and adjacent to the existing site and owned by the City. The surrounding properties are currently used for industrial wastewater treatment, agricultural fields, and open spaces.

The nearest residence is approximately one-half mile away from the mechanical WWTF. Residential growth is not expected in the Project area, as it is zoned for industrial uses. Central Bi-Products owns the majority of the land in the area, which is made up of farm fields and brushy woodland. The company has stated that it does not intend to allow residential development on this land in the future.

There are no indications of soil contamination, leaking storage tanks, or other environmental hazards in the area of the mechanical WWTF site.

10. Cover Types. Estimate the acreage of the site with each of the following cover types before and after development:

Before After Before After Types 1-8 wetlands 0 0 Lawn/landscaping 0 0.5 Wooded/forest 0 0 Impervious Surfaces 0 0.5 Brush/grassland 4 3 Stormwater pond 0 0 Cropland 0 0 Other (describe) 0 0 TOTAL 4 4

11. Fish, Wildlife, and Ecologically Sensitive Resources.

a. Identify fish and wildlife resources and habitats on or near the site and describe how they would be affected by the project. Describe any measures to be taken to minimize or avoid impacts.

Wildlife The site is located approximately three-fourths of a mile west of the Long Prairie River. Just west of the site is a wooded area consisting of a mixture of deciduous hardwoods and coniferous softwoods. The areas north and east of the site consist of open grasslands and farmland. The area near the site has wildlife resources typical of the region, consisting primarily of deer, grouse, small mammals, and song birds.

Since construction of the additional treatment units will take place adjacent to the existing facility, the Project is not expected to have a permanent significant impact on wildlife in the area. Some wildlife will be displaced by the noise and heavy equipment during construction activities.

The existing ponds near the site currently attract waterfowl and shorebirds during the spring and fall migration seasons. Since the ponds will not be altered by this Project, there should not be any significant impacts to wildlife that use these ponds.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 6 Worksheet Fishery Assessments The most recent stream population assessment conducted by the DNR is dated July 2002.

General information from the DNR assessment report indicates that the Long Prairie River is a warmwater stream flowing through a prairie landscape with drainage mainly from agricultural lands. The river was designated as a Canoe and Boating Route in 2001. Past surveys show a diverse fish community with 32 species documented in the last four population assessments (1987, 1992, 1996, and 2002). Non-gamefish such as white sucker and various redhorse and minnow species typically comprise the majority of the catch in Long Prairie River assessments. Gamefish (northern pike and walleye) populations have fluctuated in the past in response to various environmental conditions. Northern pike and walleye were common in the 1987 population assessment when water levels were above normal. Few gamefish were sampled during the 1992 assessment after several years of drought conditions and periodic fish kills on the river. Northern pike and walleye were again sampled and observed more frequently during the 1996 and 2002 assessments. Many walleye and northern pike were observed but not successfully sampled due to poor performance of electrofishing gear. Low DO levels were documented in some summers and winters during the drought of the late 1980s.

The results of the 2002 assessment were summarized as follows:

The Long Prairie River is a navigable stream, which provides a sport fishery for northern pike and walleye during normal to high discharge years. A total of ten northern pike between 4.0 and 19.3 inches were sampled. A smallmouth bass measuring 12.8 inches and age III was captured. Many other northern pike, walleye, and a few smallmouth and largemouth bass were seen but not sampled during the assessment due to water conductivity levels prohibitive of effective shocking. Smallmouth bass were sampled for the first time. DNR Area Fisheries personnel stocked smallmouth bass fingerlings in the Long Prairie River in 1999 and 2002. Smallmouth bass could also have entered the river from the Crow Wing River and/or Lake Placid. The DNR summary indicates that environmental factors, mainly flow and low DO, are the major limiters of gamefish abundance. White sucker and shorthead redhorse dominated the catch comprising 45.5 percent and 13.2 percent of the total catch by numbers, respectively. Northern pike was the dominant gamefish species, making up 3.5 percent of the total catch. Burbot (6.9 percent) and greater redhorse (6.3 percent) were other species commonly seen during the assessment. A total of 23 species were sampled in 2002 compared to 20, 17, and 31 in 1996, 1992, and 1987, respectively. Eight species considered sensitive to, or intolerant of, pollution were captured in this or prior assessments. These included hornyhead chub, longnose dace, blacknose shiner, greater redhorse, tadpole madtom, rock bass, smallmouth bass, and logperch.

The MPCA sampled the Long Prairie River at three sites in 1999 and 2000 as part of its Biological Monitoring Program. Species sampled were similar to what was seen in DNR assessments. Species captured that were unique to the MPCA assessments included creek chub, bigmouth shiner, mottled sculpin, and spottail shiner. Index of Biotic Integrity values assigned to MPCA study sites ranged from 46 to 62, which indicated fair to good biological integrity. The MPCA plans to conduct further biological monitoring in the summer of 2011 as part of the intensive watershed monitoring study targeted for completion in 2015.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 7 Worksheet Measures to Mitigate Impacts The purpose of the proposed Project is to comply with the waste load allocation imposed by the TMDL study approved by the EPA in 2005. Completion of the Project will result in a reduction of ammonia discharged to the river, which should result in improved conditions for aquatic life due to increased DO and reduction of toxicity from un-ionized ammonia. In addition, the Project will eliminate the direct discharge of wastewater from the Long Prairie Packing Company pond system, which does not currently provide additional treatment for phosphorus. The reduction in phosphorus loadings provided by the Project should also help to improve the DO conditions of the Long Prairie River and waters downstream. See Section 18 of this EAW for further discussion regarding the Project’s effects on water quality.

b. Are any state (endangered or threatened) species, rare plant communities or other sensitive ecological resources on or near the site? Yes No

Describe any measures that will be taken to minimize or avoid adverse impacts. Provide the license agreement number (LA-______) and/or Division of Ecological Resources contact number (ERDB # 20110187) from which the data were obtained and attach the response letter from the DNR Division of Ecological Resources. Indicate if any additional survey work has been conducted within the site and describe the results.

The DNR’s Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System was queried to determine if any rare species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one-mile radius of the proposed Project. Based on the query, the DNR did not locate any known occurrences of rare features in the search area. A copy of the DNR letter is included as Attachment A.

12. Physical Impacts on Water Resources. Will the project involve the physical or hydrologic alteration (dredging, filling, stream diversion, outfall structure, diking, and impoundment) of any surface waters such as a lake, pond, wetland, stream or drainage ditch? Yes No

If yes, identify water resource affected and give the DNR Public Waters Inventory (PWI) number(s) if the water resources affected are on the PWI. Describe alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures to minimize impacts.

Since the existing outfall structure would be used, the Project would not result in any physical impacts to the Long Prairie River due to construction of an outfall.

A survey conducted by the City’s consultant indicated that no wetland areas are on or near the construction site.

13. Water Use. Will the project involve installation or abandonment of any water wells, connection to or changes in any public water supply or appropriation of any ground or surface water (including dewatering)? Yes No

14. Water-related land use management districts. Does any part of the project involve a shoreland zoning district, a delineated 100-year flood plain, or a state or federally designated wild or scenic river land use district? Yes No

15. Water Surface Use. Will the project change the number or type of watercraft on any water body? Yes No

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 8 Worksheet

16. Erosion and Sedimentation. Give the acreage to be graded or excavated and the cubic yards of soil to be moved: 4 acres; 15,000 cubic yards. Describe any steep slopes or highly erodible soils and identify them on the site map. Describe any erosion and sedimentation control measures to be used during and after project construction.

Construction of the Project will affect four acres north and adjacent to the existing WWTF. Three of the four acres will be returned to grassland, one-half acre will consist of lawn and landscaping, and one-half acre will be turned into impervious surfaces consisting of the new treatment units. There are no steep slopes or highly erodible soils on the site where construction will take place. However, there is a steep slope located adjacent to and west of the construction site. This area is heavily forested.

The City will be required to obtain an NPDES/SDS General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activities from the MPCA for this Project. This permit has specific requirements for the treatment and overall management of stormwater, including the preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and the development of best management practices (BMPs) to minimize short-term impacts of stormwater runoff during construction. The SWPPP must be completed prior to submitting a permit application and before beginning construction. Possibilities for BMPs include: construction phasing, vegetative buffer strips, temporary seeding, sod stabilization, horizontal-slope grading, minimization of land disturbance, preservation of trees and natural vegetation, mulch or wood-fiber blankets, and stockpile covers.

Projects that are located within one mile of impaired waters must incorporate additional BMPs found in Appendix A of the General Stormwater Permit. Since the Project is located about three-fourths of a mile from the Long Prairie River (impaired for DO) but will disturb less than five acres during construction, the City is required to meet one of the special requirements. Appendix A of the general permit requires that all exposed soil areas be stabilized as soon as possible to limit soil erosion, but no later than seven days after work in that portion of the site has been completed.

17. Water Quality – Surface-water Runoff.

a. Compare the quantity and quality of site runoff before and after the project. Describe permanent controls to manage or treat runoff. Describe any storm-water pollution prevention plans.

The quantity and quality of site runoff is not expected to change significantly as a result of the Project, as impervious surfaces will be increased by 0.5 acres. The Long Prairie River Watershed TMDL Implementation Plan did not establish a waste load allocation for construction stormwater. However, for this Project, the City is required to incorporate applicable BMPs provided in Appendix A of the General Stormwater Permit for Construction Activities. Two stormwater infiltration basins will be constructed to serve as a permanent stormwater management system.

Upon completion of the expansion, the mechanical WWTF will become a major discharger, discharging greater than one million gallons per day. The City will be required to apply for the NPDES/SDS Industrial Stormwater Multi-Sector General Permit from the MPCA. This permit will include the development of an SWPPP, implementation of BMPs, and benchmark monitoring of stormwater discharges from the site. This permit allows a “no exposure” exclusion if the City can demonstrate that all significant materials and activities are protected from stormwater. These activities include the transfer of biosolids and other liquids at the WWTF. Facilities under the no exposure exclusion must re-apply every five years and must re-apply if there are any changes in activity or management of materials.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 9 Worksheet

b. Identify routes and receiving water bodies for runoff from the site; include major downstream water bodies as well as the immediate receiving waters. Estimate impact runoff on the quality of receiving waters.

Stormwater runoff from the site will be routed to two stormwater infiltration basins located on site (Figure 5). Any runoff leaving the site would flow to the Long Prairie River, which flows into the Crow Wing River to Lake Placid to Crow Wing River to the Sylvan Reservoir to the Crow Wing River to the Mississippi River. The route toward the Long Prairie River is characterized by grassed, bushy areas. Due to the nature of the discharge route, the amount of increase of actual impervious surface area, and construction of the two stormwater basins, potential impacts to the river as a result of the Project are not expected to be significant.

18. Water Quality – Wastewater.

a. Describe sources, composition and quantities of all sanitary, municipal and industrial wastewater produced or treated at the site.

The expanded mechanical WWTF would treat normal domestic sewage from the city of Long Prairie and wastes from four significant industrial users: Central Bi-Products, Long Prairie Packing Company, Daybreak Foods, and Dan’s Prize Meats. The table below provides the design influent wastewater flows and loadings for the proposed upgraded and expanded WWTF:

Parameter Quantity and Units AWW Flow 1.836 mgd Average Dry Weather Flow (ADW) 0.560 mgd Peak Hourly Flow 3.550 mgd Peak Instantaneous Flow 3.800 mgd Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand (CBOD) 4,311 lb/day Total Suspended Solids (TSS) 2,131 lb/day Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) 976 lb/day Phosphorus (P) 242 lb/day mgd = million gallons per day lb/day = pounds per day

b. Describe waste treatment methods or pollution prevention efforts and give estimates of composition after treatment. Identify receiving waters, including major downstream water bodies (identifying any impaired waters), and estimate the discharge impact on the quality of receiving waters. If the project involves on-site sewage systems, discuss the suitability of site conditions for such systems.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 10 Worksheet Receiving Water Designation and Standards The expanded mechanical WWTF would discharge through the existing outfall to the Long Prairie River (Figure 3). No improvements to the existing outfall are necessary for the expanded discharge. The existing outfall is located within a reach of the Long Prairie River that does not have a “listed” use designation in Minn. R. 7050.0470. Under Minn. R. 7050.0430, such “unlisted” waters are given the 2B, 3C, 4A, 4B, 5, and 6 classifications. These use classifications are aquatic life and recreation, industrial consumption, agriculture and wildlife, aesthetic enjoyment and navigation, and other uses.

Of the designated use classifications, Class 2B has the most stringent DO and un-ionized ammonia standards. The DO standard is 5 milligrams per Liter (mg/L) as a daily minimum, and the un-ionized ammonia chronic standard is 0.04 mg/L. The low flow conditions under which these standards are required to be met are the 7-day, 10-year low flow (7Q10) for the DO standard, and the 30-day, 10-year low flow (30Q10) for the un-ionized ammonia standard.

Long Prairie River Watershed TMDL The Long Prairie River was listed as impaired for DO occurring primarily during low flow conditions. An MPCA consultant completed a modeling study of the Long Prairie River and developed a waste load allocation for point and nonpoint sources. For the TMDL study, the Long Prairie River’s watershed was considered to be the 647-square-mile drainage area downstream from Lake Carlos. The watershed is predominately agricultural and contains five municipal wastewater dischargers (Carlos, Long Prairie, Browerville, Eagle Bend, and Clarissa) that were explicitly considered in the TMDL study. The TMDL was approved by the EPA on August 5, 2005.

The TMDL study found that the pollutants of concern for low DO are carbonaceous and nitrogenous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD and NBOD) which are measures of organic matter and oxygen- consuming wastes. Modeling during low flow conditions indicated that the loadings of oxygen- demanding pollutants from the spring season controlled discharges would need to be reduced. Implementation of the TMDL and reduced loadings would be accomplished through the NPDES/SDS permitting process. Following the TMDL study, Central Bi-Product’s direct discharge to the river was rerouted to the City’s recently constructed mechanical WWTF. The proposed Project calls for an upgrade to the mechanical facility to accommodate wastewater from the Long Prairie Packing Company. The Project proposes to comply with the TMDL waste load allocation by improving treatment for Long Prairie Packing’s wastewater and eliminating its spring controlled discharge to the river.

Nondegradation Review for the Expanded WWTF The design flow for the proposed Project will increase the existing AWW flow from 0.923 mgd to 1.836 mgd. The proposed expansion required additional review by MPCA staff under Minn. R. 7050.0185 Nondegradation Requirements for all waters of the state. The nondegradation-to-all- waters rule allows the MPCA to consider additional control measures beyond the minimum needed to maintain water quality standards, and to protect receiving waters from further use degradation. The essence of a nondegradation review is to ensure that the economic and social benefits that society receives from the project exceed the resulting additional degradation to a natural resource. Under the nondegradation rule, the MPCA is required to consider factors such as the importance of economic and social development impacts, impact of the discharge on the receiving water, characteristics of the receiving water, cumulative impacts, costs of additional treatment beyond the minimum treatment required of non-significant dischargers, and any other matters brought to the MPCA’s attention.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 11 Worksheet MPCA staff determined that the upgraded WWTF would be designed to meet effluent limits that will not cause significant increases in the mass loads of pollutants to the receiving waters. The current permitted summer concentration limit (June to September) for ammonia nitrogen will be reduced from 16 mg/L to a more stringent value of 5 mg/L. The direct discharge from Long Prairie Packing Company to the Long Prairie River would be eliminated and the waste stream would be further treated to remove ammonia and phosphorus through the expanded mechanical WWTF.

Proposed Effluent Limits for Expanded WWTF The expanded mechanical WWTF is designed to meet the proposed advanced secondary effluent limitations shown in the table below and any other requirements contained in the NPDES/SDS Permit. Following this table, further discussion on the proposed effluent limitations is provided.

Proposed Effluent Limits for Long Prairie WWTF at 1.836 MGD Parameter or Characteristic Limiting Concentration or Range

(1) CBOD5 15 mg/L Total Suspended Solids(1) 30 mg/L Fecal coliform Group Organisms(2) 200 org/100 mL pH Range 6.0-9.0 Total Phosphorus 1.0 mg/L(3) Total Residual Chorine (disinfection required) 38 μg/L (maximum daily value) Ammonia-Nitrogen 5 mg/L(4) Dissolved Oxygen 6 mg/L(5)

(1) The arithmetic mean for concentrations of five-day carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD5) and total suspended solids shall not exceed the stated values in any calendar month. In any calendar week, the arithmetic mean for concentrations of five-day carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand shall not exceed 40 milligrams per liter and total suspended solids shall not exceed 45 milligrams per liter. (2) Disinfection of wastewater effluent to reduce the levels of fecal coliform organisms to the stated value is required from April 1 through October 31 (Class 2 waters). (3) The arithmetic mean for monthly concentrations of total phosphorus during the most recent 12 months shall not exceed the stated value. The total phosphorus load is limited to 2,029 kilograms per year. (4) Ammonia-N (nitrogen) limits were determined based on the TMDL DO demand mass balance. The arithmetic mean for concentrations of ammonia nitrogen shall not exceed the stated value in any calendar month during June 1 through September 30. (5) Calendar month minimum, applies June – March. This limit was assigned in 2001 when the Long Prairie WWTF, which was a controlled discharge pond system at that time, was replaced with a continuous, year-round discharge facility. The limit was based on the need to protect the Long Prairie River, which is listed as impaired for low DO, during critical low-flow conditions.

Ammonia Limit Federal guidelines typically use the 30Q10 flow values of the receiving water to determine applicable ammonia-nitrogen limits. In the case of the Long Prairie WWTF, the ammonia-nitrogen limits were derived from the DO TMDL mass balance for the Long Prairie River. The mass balance included the municipal sanitary waste stream plus the industrial waste streams from Central Bi-Products and the Long Prairie Packing Company. As a result, the expanded WWTF must meet an ammonia-nitrogen limit of 5.0 mg/L during the summer months of June through September. The ammonia limit will also serve to protect the aquatic life in the Long Prairie River from ammonia toxicity.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 12 Worksheet

Phosphorus Limit Phosphorus is a common constituent in wastewater discharges and has a potential to negatively impact the receiving waters by causing excessive plant and algae growth. The excessive plant growth, in turn, can contribute to degradation of aquatic habitat or cause depletion of DO in the receiving waters as the plants die off and decay. MPCA staff reviewed the proposed expansion to assess the need for a total phosphorus water quality based effluent limitation (WQBEL). As part of that review, staff evaluated the impact of the expanded discharge on two downstream lakes – Lake Lake Placid and Sylvan Lake. Both of these lakes have a residence time of approximately five days during low flow conditions. Therefore, both of the water bodies act like river systems rather than reservoirs, and numeric lake standards do not apply under Minnesota rules.

The expanded discharge was also evaluated as a contributor of phosphorus potentially impacting Lake Pepin, which is listed as impaired for excess nutrients. Federal law (40 CFR 122.44(d)) restricts mass increases of specific pollutants upstream of impaired waters and states that all NPDES discharges that cause, contribute, or have the reasonable potential to cause or contribute to downstream impaired waters are required to have a WQBEL. The MPCA hired a consultant (LimnoTech) to develop a computer reservoir model for Lake Pepin and evaluate site specific eutrophication criteria and the reductions necessary to achieve these criteria. Using the best available science, draft criteria were developed for total phosphorus and for chlorophyll-a. During the modeling process, MPCA staff simultaneously developed draft waste load allocations for all NPDES dischargers within the contributing watershed.

The MPCA determined that the Long Prairie WWTF has the reasonable potential to contribute to the impairment in Lake Pepin by excess nutrients and is, therefore, required to have a WQBEL. The proposed total phosphorus concentration limit is 1.0 mg/L and the loading is based on the facility’s expanded design flow for an annual mass limit of 2,029 kilograms per year. The following table provides a comparison of the current and proposed total phosphorus loading to the Long Prairie River. The proposed Project would result in an overall annual load reduction of 11,966 kilograms per year. However, following completion of the Lake Pepin excess nutrient TMDL study and the adoption of numeric river nutrient criteria during the next triennial rulemaking session, more restrictive total phosphorus limits may be necessary for the WWTF in the future.

Current Permitted Facility Facility Note Flow (mgd) Type TP (mg/L) TP (kg/yr) Long Prairie –Municipal 0.923 AWWDF 1.0 1,275 Long Prairie –Industrial CBP* 0.313 ADF 13.5 5,828 Long Prairie – Industrial LPP* 0.4 ADF 12.5 6,892 Total 13,995

Proposed Facility Flow (mgd) Type TP (mg/L) TP (kg/yr)1 Long Prairie–Municipal 1.836 AWWDF 1.0 2,029

Reduction TP (kg/yr)2 Total Current – Proposed 11,966 Table footnotes on following page

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 13 Worksheet

*CBP = Central Bi-Products; LPP = Long Prairie Packing AWWDF = Average Wet Weather Design Flow; ADF = Average Design Flow

1 At full AWWDF the permittee will need to treat to 0.8 mg/L to remain in compliance with the recommended mass limit. 2The current permitted loading capacity for the industrial dischargers is an underestimate as MDF values are unavailable for the industrial dischargers. Only ADF values were available for these facilities. As a result, the estimated permitted load reduction is also an underestimate.

Mercury The Statewide TMDL: Mercury Reduction Plan was approved by the EPA on Mary 27, 2007, and the MPCA developed a strategy for addressing mercury through the issuance of NPDES/SDS Permits. The TMDL established a cap of 24.2 pounds per year on water discharges.

The proposed Project was evaluated for mercury based on reasonable potential and nondegradation requirements. Since the expanded WWTF is required to remove phosphorus to meet a limit of 1.0 mg/L, the facility will also be capable of removing more suspended solids than a WWTF not designed to remove phosphorus. MPCA staff has found that the removal of total suspended solids generally results in the removal of mercury in the effluent. For that reason, the MPCA has determined that mercury effluent limits are rarely justified for a WWTF that meets a phosphorus limit as low as the limit imposed on the city of Long Prairie. The expanded WWTF will be required to conduct quarterly influent and effluent monitoring for mercury and to submit a Mercury Minimization Plan (MMP) to MPCA. The purpose of the MMP is to evaluate the collection and treatment systems to determine possible sources of mercury and potential options for reducing mercury in the waste stream should it be present.

Additional Requirements in the NPDES/SDS Permit The NPDES/SDS Permit will require a carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD) limit more stringent than secondary standards because the stream to effluent dilution ration is less than 10:1 during low flow conditions. The expanded WWTF will be required to meet a DO limit of 6.0 mg/L as a daily minimum to ensure that the 5 mg/L water quality standard is met. A total residual chlorine limit is required to protect aquatic life from the effects of chlorine toxicity. Municipal wastewater treatment facilities that discharge greater than one million gallons per day are required to conduct whole effluent toxicity testing and priority pollutant scans on their effluent. If the test results indicate significant toxicity, the NPDES/SDS Permit can be reopened to include additional testing or a toxicity limit, if necessary. The NPDES/SDS Permit will also require periodic monitoring for total Kjeldahl nitrogen, nitrite + nitrate nitrogen, total dissolved solids, and a number of parameters indicating a potential “salty discharge” to comply with federal requirements for effluent monitoring. The monitoring of these parameters will be used by the MPCA to determine if the discharge has the reasonable potential to exceed a water quality standard in the receiving water.

c. If wastes will be discharged into a publicly owned treatment facility, identify the facility, describe any pretreatment provisions and discuss the facility’s ability to handle the volume and composition of wastes, identifying any improvements necessary.

The Long Prairie Packing Company's existing pond system will be utilized to provide pre-treatment of its wastewater prior to discharge to the City's upgraded mechanical WWTF. The purpose of this Project is to complete the improvements necessary to accommodate the additional waste load from the Long Prairie Packing Company.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 14 Worksheet

19. Geologic hazards and soil conditions.

a. Approximate depth (in feet) to Ground water: 10 minimum; 14 average. Bedrock: 100 minimum; 150* average.

*100-200 feet Geomorphology Data – Depth to Bedrock, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources

Describe any of the following geologic site hazards to ground water and also identify them on the site map: sinkholes, shallow limestone formations or karst conditions. Describe measures to avoid or minimize environmental problems due to any of these hazards.

There are no known geologic site hazards to ground water in the area of the proposed Project site.

b. Describe the soils on the site, giving Natural Resources Conservation Service classifications, if known. Discuss soil texture and potential for ground-water contamination from wastes or chemicals spread or spilled onto the soils. Discuss any mitigation measures to prevent such contamination.

Soil borings were done at the site prior to construction of the existing mechanical WWTF. Additional soil borings will be taken at the site of the proposed expansion in the spring. The previous borings correlates with the soil classifications provided by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) data shown in the table below.

The NRCS soil classifications for this site are: Rockwood 99% of site area Depth to restrictive feature: 46-60” sandy loam, Drainage class: Well drained 2-6 percent Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water: slopes Very low (0.00 in/hr) Rockwood 1% of site area Depth to water table: More than 80 inches sandy loam, Frequency of ponding: None 12-25 percent Calcium carbonate, maximum content: 15% slopes Available water capacity: Moderate (about 6.7”)

The site conditions indicate sandy loam soils that are well-drained. The soils are very suitable for construction of a WWTF. The potential for groundwater contamination would be minimal, as wastewater would be contained in process tanks constructed to International Building Code standards. All new structures and piping would be leak-tested prior to initiation of operation to ensure they are water-tight.

Small quantities of toxic and hazardous materials used during construction would be stored temporarily on site in containers having appropriate containment. Any potentially hazardous fluids or chemicals would be handled in a manner that minimizes risk of release onto the ground surface. Should any spills occur, it would be cleaned up immediately and impacted soils would be disposed of properly in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 15 Worksheet

20. Solid Wastes, Hazardous Wastes, Storage Tanks.

a. Describe types, amounts and compositions of solid or hazardous wastes, including solid animal manure, sludge and ash, produced during construction and operation. Identify method and location of disposal. For projects generating municipal solid waste, indicate if there is a source separation plan; describe how the project will be modified for recycling. If hazardous waste is generated, indicate if there is a hazardous waste minimization plan and routine hazardous waste reduction assessments.

There would be no hazardous waste, animal manure, or ash produced during construction or operation of the upgraded WWTF. All solid waste or debris generated during construction would be disposed off site by the contractor in accordance with applicable state and local regulations.

An additional biosolids storage tank will be added to the WWTF, which has three existing biosolids storage tanks, for a total storage capacity of approximately 2.5 million gallons. The tank will be constructed of cast in place concrete. The biosolids are land applied on permitted land application sites. In 2010, the City’s Annual Report to the MPCA indicated that approximately 161 dry tons of biosolids from the mechanical WWTF were land applied. The proposed expansion would result in an increase of 300 additional tons of biosolids land applied each year. The facility produces Class B biosolids, which have low levels of pathogens and which do not attract vectors. The MPCA requires the testing of biosolids applied and the soils on the land application sites to ensure that nutrients and heavy metals do not build up and exceed safe thresholds over time.

b. Identify any toxic or hazardous materials to be used or present at the site and identify measures to be used to prevent them from contaminating ground water. If the use of toxic or hazardous materials will lead to a regulated waste, discharge or emission, discuss any alternatives considered to minimize or eliminate the waste, discharge or emission.

Chlorine gas and sulfur dioxide gas are already stored on site for use in disinfection of the wastewater prior to its discharge. The proposed expansion will not require an increase in size of these storage tanks, which are located within a building. The chemicals are not a threat to groundwater due to their gaseous state.

c. Indicate the number, location, size and use of any above or below ground tanks to store petroleum products or other materials, except water. Describe any emergency response containment plans.

There would be no permanent above ground storage tanks to store petroleum products on the site. Temporary portable fuel storage tanks will be needed to support construction equipment. The construction contractor would be responsible for emergency response containment planning in accordance with state and local regulations concerning petroleum products.

Lime will be used as part of the ammonia treatment process and would be stored on site in an above ground silo made of steel.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 16 Worksheet

21. Traffic. Parking spaces added: 0 Existing spaces (if project involves expansion): 6 Estimated total average daily traffic generated: 4 trips Estimated maximum peak hour traffic generated and time of occurrence:

Indicate source of trip generation rates used in the estimates.

If the peak hour traffic generated exceeds 250 vehicles or the total daily trips exceeds 2,500, a traffic impact study must be prepared as part of the EAW. Using the format and procedures described in the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s Traffic Impact Study Guidance (available at http://www.oim.dot.state.mn.us/access/pdfs/Chapter%205.pdf) or a similar local guidance, provide an estimate of the impact on traffic congestion on affected roads and describe any traffic improvements necessary. The analysis must discuss the project’s impact on the regional transportation system.

The expansion would not generate a significant increase in traffic to and from the site.

22. Vehicle-related Air Emissions. Estimate the effect of the project’s traffic generation on air quality, including carbon monoxide levels. Discuss the effect of traffic improvements or other mitigation measures on air quality impacts.

During construction, there would be a temporary increase in exhaust emissions from heavy construction equipment. These would result in short-term impacts on local air quality and are not expected to significantly impact residences or commercial entities due to the Project’s distance from these areas.

23. Stationary Source Air Emissions. Describe the type, sources, quantities and compositions of any emissions from stationary sources of air emissions such as boilers, exhaust stacks or fugitive dust sources. Include any hazardous air pollutants (consult EAW Guidelines for a listing), any greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxides), and ozone-depleting chemicals (chlorofluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons or sulfur hexafluoride). Also describe any proposed pollution prevention techniques and proposed air pollution control devices. Describe the impacts on air quality.

The Project would not require the use of a back-up generator or otherwise contribute stationary source air emissions.

24. Odors, noise and dust. Will the project generate odors, noise or dust during construction or during operation? Yes No

If yes, describe sources, characteristics, duration, quantities or intensity and any proposed measures to mitigate adverse impacts. Also identify locations of nearby sensitive receptors and estimate impacts on them. Discuss potential impacts on human health or quality of life. (Note: fugitive dust generated by operations may be discussed at item 23 instead of here.)

Odors Heavy equipment used during construction activities will result in temporary exhaust odors. These odors should not impact residents due to their distances from the construction site.

The existing mechanical WWTF does not have any reported odor problems and the expanded facility is not expected to result in an increase of odors from existing levels.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 17 Worksheet Noise Typical construction equipment noise would be generated during construction of the additional treatment units and piping. Noise impacts will be temporary and will be limited to daylight hours (7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.). Noise is not expected to be a significant impact due to the distances of receptors from the construction site.

The existing mechanical WWTF itself is currently not a significant source of noise and this would not change with the additional treatment units added as part of the upgrade.

Dust During construction, dust emissions will increase temporarily. Adverse impacts are not expected. Water would be used to suppress dust before it becomes airborne. Dust from construction activities should not impact residents or commercial entities due to their distances from the Project site.

25. Nearby resources. Are any of the following resources on or in proximity to the site?

a. Archaeological, historical, or architectural resources? Yes No b. Prime or unique farmlands or land within an agricultural preserve? Yes No c. Designated parks, recreation areas, or trails? Yes No d. Scenic views and vistas? Yes No e. Other unique resources? Yes No

If yes, describe the resource and identify any project-related impacts on the resources. Describe any measures to minimize or avoid adverse impacts.

a. The State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) was contacted regarding the proposed expansion. Based on the information provided by the City, the SHPO concluded that there are no known or suspected archeological properties in the area that could be affected by this Project. A copy of the SHPO response letter can be found as Attachment B.

c. The Long Prairie River was designated as a Canoe and Boating Route by the Minnesota Legislature in 2001. The intent of the proposed Project is to comply with the DO water quality standard, improve treatment for ammonia during low flow conditions, and limit the loading of total phosphorus to the Long Prairie River.

26. Visual impacts. Will the project create adverse visual impacts during construction or operation? Such as glare from intense lights, lights visible in wilderness areas and large visible plumes from cooling towers or exhaust stacks? Yes No

If yes, explain.

The expansion of the WWTF will not significantly alter the existing visual effects.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 18 Worksheet

27. Compatibility with plans and land use regulations. Is the project subject to an adopted local comprehensive plan, land use plan or regulation, or other applicable land use, water, or resource management plan of a local, regional, state or federal agency? Yes No

If yes, describe the plan, discuss its compatibility with the project and explain how any conflicts will be resolved. If no, explain.

The Project is in compliance with the City’s comprehensive plan. The Project is located on the site of the existing mechanical WWTF, which is zoned for industrial use and designated for wastewater treatment.

The Project will also contribute to achieving the goals of the Todd County Comprehensive Local Water Management Plan because its main purpose is to improve the water quality of the Long Prairie River, which is impaired by low DO.

28. Impact on infrastructure and public services. Will new or expanded utilities, roads, other infrastructure or public services be required to serve the project? Yes No

If yes, describe the new or additional infrastructure or services needed. (Note: any infrastructure that is a connected action with respect to the project must be assessed in the EAW; see EAW Guidelines for details.)

The only additional infrastructure needed is a lift station and forcemain used to pipe the wastewater from Long Prairie Packing Company’s stabilization pond to the mechanical WWTF. This is included as part of the overall Project and environmental review.

29. Cumulative potential effects. Minn. R. 4410.1700, subp. 7, item B requires that the RGU consider the “cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects” when determining the need for an environmental impact statement. Identify any past, present or reasonably foreseeable future projects that may interact with the project described in this EAW in such a way as to cause cumulative potential effects. (Such future projects would be those that are actually planned or for which a basis of expectation has been laid.) Describe the nature of the cumulative potential effects and summarize any other available information relevant to determining whether there is potential for significant environmental effects due to these cumulative effects (or discuss each cumulative effect under appropriate item(s) elsewhere on this form).

Water Quality Receiving Waters When developing effluent limits for the NPDES/SDS Permit, MPCA staff must consider the cumulative sources of pollutants to receiving waters to ensure that the proposed discharge does not cause or contribute to a violation of water quality standards. With the effluent limits proposed in the permit, the expanded Long Prairie WWTF is not expected to exceed current water quality standards in combination with other sources. The proposed expansion of the Long Prairie municipal WWTF has been evaluated by MPCA staff in conjunction with the approved DO (2005) and mercury in fish tissue (2007) TMDLs, and the TMDL implementation plans that were subsequently approved by the MPCA. As explained in Section 6.b. of this EAW, the attainment of the DO TMDL is the major objective for the proposed Project.

The source assessment and load allocations for the DO TMDL explicitly considered discharges from five municipalities in the watershed: Carlos, Long Prairie (including its industrial sources), Browerville, Eagle Bend, and Clarissa. The TMDL incorporated an allowance for future growth for each of the

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 19 Worksheet watersheds’ municipalities. In addition to the municipal wastewater dischargers, the TMDL study considered a Superfund project located in the city of Long Prairie, which discharges treated effluent to the Long Prairie River under an NPDES/SDS Permit issued by the MPCA. These dischargers and nonpoint sources were evaluated for load reductions needed to meet the DO standard.

The proposed effluent limitations for the Project will be subject to future review and revision pending the results of the Long Prairie Major Watershed Project and intensive watershed monitoring that will address impairments, scheduled for completion in 2015. Also, as discussed in Section 18.b., more restrictive total phosphorus effluent limits may be necessary following completion of the Lake Pepin excess nutrient TMDL study and the adoption of numeric river nutrient criteria during the next triennial rulemaking session.

The Project proposes to expand the existing AWW design flow from 0.923 mgd to 1.836 mgd. Most of the additional flow to the mechanical WWTF results from the elimination of the direct discharge of the industrial sources, Central Bi-Products (0.313 mgd), and the Long Prairie Packing Company (0.400 mgd) to the Long Prairie River. This leaves 0.200 mgd of reserve capacity that will be regulated under the proposed NPDES/SDS Permit. The 0.200 mgd of new flow represents the amount allotted for future growth for residential and commercial users of the City’s WWTF.

As discussed in Section 18.b. of this EAW, the Project triggered a nondegradation demonstration/review under Minnesota rules. During this review, MPCA staff determined that the proposed Project would reduce the mass loadings of critical pollutants to the receiving waters and that the economic and social benefits that society receives from the Project offset the need for additional reductions in either the effluent concentrations or mass loading limitations for regulated pollutants.

At this time, there are no known anticipated future projects that could interact with the proposed Project in such a way as to cause cumulative potential effects.

Growth and Development Expansion of the Long Prairie WWTF is designed to meet the wastewater needs of the City through the design year 2030. The availability of additional treatment capacity enables future residential and commercial development, which would be accompanied by increased traffic, stormwater runoff, and solid waste generation. The City will need to regularly assess and address impacts that occur due to development. The potential environment impacts from future development can be mitigated through the enforcement of local, state, and federal ordinances and regulations.

30. Other Potential Environmental Impacts. If the project may cause any adverse environmental impacts not addressed by items 1 to 28, identify and discuss them here, along with any proposed mitigation.

There are no additional known impacts that have not been identified and addressed in this EAW.

31. Summary of issues. List any impacts and issues identified above that may require further investigation before the project is begun. Discuss any alternatives or mitigative measures that have been or may be considered for these impacts and issues, including those that have been or may be ordered as permit conditions.

There are no issues that may require further investigation before the Project is begun.

Long Prairie Municipal Wastewater Treatment Improvements Environmental Assessment Facility Improvements, Long Prairie, Minnesota 20 Worksheet

City of Long Prairie

Legend County Boundaries

County Location Map

Figure 1.0 0 35,326 Feet

Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Division of Ecological and Water Resources, Box 25 Attachment A 500 Lafayette Road

St. Paul, Minnesota 55155-4025

Phone: (651) 259-5107 Fax: (651) 296-1811 E-mail: [email protected]

November 15, 2010 Correspondence # ERDB 20110187

Ms. Chantill Kahler Royer Bolton & Menk, Inc. 1960 Premier Drive Mankato, MN 56001

RE: Natural Heritage information in the vicinity of the proposed Wastewater Treatment Facility Improvements, T129N R33W Section 8, Todd County

Dear Ms. Kahler Royer,

As requested, the Minnesota Natural Heritage Information System has been queried to determine if any rare species or other significant natural features are known to occur within an approximate one-mile radius of the proposed project. Based on this query, there are no known occurrences of rare features in the area searched. The Natural Heritage Information System (NHIS), a collection of databases that contains information about Minnesota’s rare natural features, is maintained by the Department of Natural Resources, Division of Ecological and Water Resources. The NHIS is continually updated as new information becomes available, and is the most complete source of data on Minnesota's rare or otherwise significant species, native plant communities, and other natural features. However, the NHIS is not an exhaustive inventory and thus does not represent all of the occurrences of rare features within the state. Therefore, ecologically significant features for which we have no records may exist within the project area. This letter does not constitute review or approval by the Department of Natural Resources as a whole. Instead, it identifies issues regarding known occurrences of rare features and potential effects to these rare features. Additional rare features for which we have no data may be present in the project area, or there may be other natural resource concerns associated with the proposed project. For these concerns, please contact your DNR Regional Environmental Assessment Ecologist, Melissa Doperalski at (651-259-5738). Please be aware that additional site assessments or review may be required. Thank you for consulting us on this matter, and for your interest in preserving Minnesota's rare natural resources. An invoice will be mailed to you under separate cover.

Sincerely,

Heidi Cyr Natural Heritage Review Specialist

DNR Information: 651-296-6157 ● 1-888-646-6367 ● TTY: 651-296-5484 ● 1-800-657-3929

An Equal Opportunity Employer Who Values Diversity

Attachment B