EXH2135034358

PCHBPollution Control Hearings Board of the State of Washington

Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 2:15 PM To: Fitzpatrick, Kevin; Drabek, John; Abbasi, Ed Cc: Hellwig. Raymond; Marchioro. Joan (ATG); Young, Tom (ATG) Subject: FW: Processed Materials _p_i_pedfl_Uon BaseCourseSpedflcSpedr_nsUUliUeGeneralEm bankmen s.doc _o_.doc s.dE 5pedr_uon... For your evaluation from the Port re fill criteria. Please review and get back to me with your comments and then we should set up a meeting with them to discuss. Thanks. Ann ..... Original Message ..... From: Leavitt, Elizabeth [mailto:leavitt.e@portseattle.org] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 2:00 PM To: Kenny, Ann; Hellwig, Raymond Cc: Clark, Beth; Agid, Paul; Walsh, Dave; Tom Walsh (E-mail); Thomson, Jim Subject: FW: Processed Materials _n-- This e-mail follows up the meeting we had a few weeks ago to begin discussions on which projects and types of materials the "fill criteria" condition of the 401 might apply to. As promised, attached are the specifications for the various types of fill that are commonly used, and will be spec'd for the embankment. We are proposing, for your consideration, that topsoil, utility backfill and base course not be subject to fill criteria, and that the bulk of the soils used, general embankment material, would be subject to testing/the condition. Generally speaking, the first three types of material are highly processed and graded as to size and shape (eg: have sharp angles that allow for important physical properties) , have a higher percentage of gravel and rock, and are used in far lesser quantity than the general embankment materials. The first three are also used…
V V