February 1, 1996August 2, 2026

Exhibit 2124: Model Toxics Control Act Cleanup Levels and Risk Calculations (CLARC II) Update, February 1996

Notes

Washington State Department of Ecology publication #94-145 (updated 1/96) presenting the February 1996 annual update to the MTCA (Model Toxics Control Act) Cleanup Standards under CLARC II. Covers Method B and Method C cleanup levels for soil and groundwater, reference doses (RfD), cancer potency factors, hazard quotients, WAC 173-340-740 and WAC 173-340-745 calculations, inhalation correction factors, and chemicals of note including arsenic (gastrointestinal absorption factor 0.4), lead (IEUBK model review), and manganese (EPA modifying factor of 3 for RfD). Includes Natural Background Soil Metals Concentrations and notes on excessively high risk-based cleanup levels for chromium (III), 1,1-dichloroethane, xylenes, and approximately 100-125 contaminants in the Method C Industrial Soil Category.

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