Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Dan Berg of the MPCA referred to Item ~23 of the findings of fact and <br />stated that ash residue from incineration could be diaposed of in a <br />Minnesota ash landfill or a mixed municipal waste landfill if it is tested <br />and found not to be hazardous. <br /> <br />Mr. Labat referred to Item ~53 in the findings which states that Atlas' <br />facility is classified as a hazardous waste processing facility because of <br />the infectious nature of both the hospital and pathological wastes. Mr. <br />Labat noted that MPCA's letter to David Hartley dated July 26, 1988, <br />Response ~2 to July 1 questions, states: "Hazardous waste is defined by <br />Minnesot Rule Chapter 7045 (Hazardous Waste). The rules define hazardous <br />waste by its characteristics (ignitability, corrosiveness, oxidizer, <br />toxicity, reactivity) and by listing specific materials or constituents as <br />Lazardous. The rules determine what is a hazardous waste. Facilities <br />storing, transporting or disposing of hazardous waste are defined as <br />hazardous waste facilities, whether or not the wastes are intended for use <br />as a fuel. If the hazardous waste is being used for its fuel value, the <br />process is defined as hazardous waste recycling, and is regulated by <br />Minnesota Rule 7045.0125, Management of Waste by Uae, Reuse, Recycling and <br />Reclamation. MPCA would then require that the facility be permitted as a <br />hazardous waste storage facility. Both RCRA rules and Minnesota Statutes <br />initially defined medical waste as hazardous, due solely to its infectious <br />nature. However, height the RCRA rules nor Minnesota rules regulate <br />medical waste as a hazardous waste. In Minnesota, the solid waste rules <br />pr~,ide a definition for infectious waste and proper disposal practices. <br />However, because the statutes identify the waste as hazardous, MPCA <br />requires the preparation of an environmental assessment worksheet." Mr. <br />Labat further noted that MPCA's Responses ~3 and #6 to July 20 questions <br />also address this issue very clearly. <br /> <br />Council consensus is that Item #28 of the proposed findings of fact should <br />read: <br /> <br />28. <br /> <br />That MPCA has stated that the applicant must prepare an <br />environmental assessment worksheet assessing the impacts of the <br />proposed facility. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember DeLuca and seconded by Councilmember Pearson to <br />adopt Findings of Fact 0214 relating to Atlas Incinerator, Inc.'s request <br />for a conditional use permit to construct and operate a contract bur~ <br />facility. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor R~imann, Councilmembers Sorteberg, <br />DeLuca and Pearson. Voting Ho: None. Absemt: Councilmember Cox. <br /> <br />F. Review proposed conditional use permit - <br /> <br />Council took no action. <br /> <br />C. Council discussion/action on conditional use permit - <br /> <br />Mr. Otto stated that City Council is required to take action on the <br />conditional use permit application within the 30 day requirement unless <br />both the applicant and Council totally agree to extend that time period. <br />City Council/July 27, 1988 <br /> <br />Page 8 of 9 <br /> <br /> <br />