June 1, 2001August 2, 2026

EXH AR017746: Acceptable Fill Criteria Language for Draft 401 Certification — Sea-Tac Airport Third Runway

Notes

Email chain (June 1, 2001) from Kevin Fitzpatrick, Section Manager, Water Quality Program NWRO, to Ann Kenny and Ching-Pi Wang, cc Raymond Hellwig and Steve Alexander (Ecology), forwarding deliberative draft language for clean fill criteria in the 401 Certification for Sea-Tac Airport Third Runway construction. Includes August 24, 2000 email from Fitzpatrick to Tom Luster and Chung Yee with attached draft clean fill criteria. Draft conditions E6–E7c specify acceptable fill sources (state-certified borrow pits, contractor-certified construction sites, Port-owned property), documentation requirements, and site investigation report elements including environmental professional observation for toxic materials. Pete Kmet of TCP review comments also referenced. Document marked deliberative, exempt from public disclosure. AR017746–AR017748.

Sidebar On/Off

As the source for federal transportation grants, the Puget Sound Regional Council was charged with developing a system to meet the growing need for commercial aviation. When the search for a second airport failed, they authorized the Port of Seattle to build the Third Runway, with a mandate to develop a noise abatement and mitigation program. In their effort to stop the Third Runway, the ACC argued over every detail of the Port's efforts--including property buyouts and sound insulation. The dispute was meant to be settled by a three member Expert Arbitration Panel. This is their final report. It finds 2-1, that the Port's program was insufficient in several respects. Despite that, funding for the Third Runway was approved by the PSRC, and the 'Port Package' program, proceeded largely unchanged. Expert Arbitration Panel's final decision finding that the Port of Seattle had not shown sufficient reduction in real on-the-ground noise impacts to satisfy noise reduction conditions required for approval of a third runway at Sea-Tac International Airport. The majority decision concluded the Port's noise abatement programs were insufficient despite being impressive in scope.

continue...

V V

Notes

Message