Agenda - Council - 09/13/1982 - Special

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 13 Nevertheless, some ecosystems are irreplaceable once destroyed. For example, the loss of a mature stand of maple-basswood forest is not easily restored within a short period of time'. The mature maple-basswood forest is a unique ecosystem in Minnesota and its loss could not be replaced by other tree stands. Another potential problem when replanting vegetation at a landfill site after closure is maintaining the integrity of the landfill cover.~ Because water should be prevented from entering the landfill, plants with deep roots should be avoided. This limits the types of crops or grasses that can be grown when a landfill area is covered. If wetlands are part of the waste facility's acreage, they should be located in the buffer zones. If a protected wetland is destroyed, another of greater or equal value should be constructed within the facility boundaries or elsewhere. State law does allow the "trading" or substitution of wetlands with the con- currence of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The PCA requires that completely filled areas of a landfill be covered with adequate topsoils and seeded to prevent erosion. PCA must approve a develop- ment plan for the site and immediately adjacent areas, including plans for the site's end use. PCA's responsibility for a site ends once the permit condi- tions for closing a facility have been satisfactorily met. Replacement of vegetation lost during development and operation of a sanitary landfill should be the responsibility of a landfill operator. A facility plan specifying such conditions could be.negotiated between the community and the developer, with the advice of the DNR. When wetlands are traded or reestablished, the developer should negotiate alternative or replacement wetland sizes and locations with the community and DNR. Trading of wetlands and the preparation of plans to replace vegetation should be conducted concurrently with the permit review process to ensure no measures are made that conflict with environmental protection measures required by the PCA. POTENTIAL HEALTH RISKS Operation of waste disposal facilities can pose potential health related prob- lems: 1) Contamination of well water by leachate from landfills may endanger the health of animals and humans consuming the water; 2) landfills may be the source of diseases carried by insects and rodents; and 3) landfills may be the site of accidents such as waste spills, fires or explosions. Measures are available to guard against these risks, but the potential for risk cannot be completely eliminated. For example, no mitigating measure will com- pletely eliminate the health risk resulting from groundwater contamination (discussed later in the section on compensation). The potential health risks associated with transmission of disease by insects and rodents have been reduced significantly in the last decade since the prac- tice of open dumping was prohibited. Generally, the potential for diseases from such exists only while the facility is operating.