TagPollution Control Hearings Board(1507)

TO: Pete Douglass, P.E.and Embankment Technical Review Board Members So,to, FROM: Douglas Lindquist, E.I.T.,and Michael Bailey, P.E.,Hart Crowser, Inc. RE: ProposedLiquefaction Procedure under Walls and Slopes o_,,._o 4978-30 CC: Jim Thomson, P.E.,HNTB Denver This memorandum describes the proposed procedure that will be used to evaluate liquefaction potential for areas beneath walls and slopes of the Third Runway embankment. The liquefaction procedure takes into account (a) the anticipated level of ground shaking, (b) the existing soil conditions as reflected in measured standard penetration test resistances, F_,r,':._,,k_ (C)the irregular topography associated with the embankment (i.e., walls and slopes), (d) the high confining pressuresthat will exist beneath the embankment, and (e) the potentially high static shear stressesthat may exist beneath walls and/or slopes. J,_rsey City The following procedure accounts for each of these factors in a practical and reasonably conservative manner. It uses conventional, one-dimensional, equivalent linear site response analysesto evaluate liquefaction potential in areas unaffected by the presence of walls or slopesand two-dimensional FLAC analyses to account for geometric/topographic effects in areasthat are affected by walls and slopes. The procedure allows evaluation of liquefaction J_'"*.'_ potential for a variety of improved zone geometries so that an optimum improved zone geometry can be identified. A simplified representation of a typical profile through the edge of the embankment is LongOe_h shown on Figure 1; note that the transition from embankment grade to adjacent natural grade may occur through a slope or a retaining wall. A generalized soil profile consists of dense natural soils overlain…

TO: Port of Seattle, attn. Michael J. Cheyne FROM: Michael Bailey, P.E. RE: MSE Wall Performance During Earthquake ch,c_o J-4978-19 CC: HNTB,attn.Mr. JimThomson,P.E. Denver Per our discussion this morning here is a summary of our research on the two MSE walls that are noted by Helsell Fetterman (Eglick & Stock, 3/20/01) and GeoSyntec (3/15/01 ) as Fairbanks having had problems during the February 28 Nisqually earthquake. "! Basically Eglick & Stock and GeoSyntec claim that because the recent earthquake caused significant or extensive damage to these two walls, the Corps should carefully scrutinize structural integrity of the Port's proposed wall. GeoSyntec further raise a number of JerseyCity technical questions (mostly the same as already raised in their original 2/16/01 letter) that we are working on responses to. The 2 MSE walls identified as having "problems" are discussed below, s_neau Summary: 9 to 12-foot High Wall in Tumwater This MSE wall failed by collapsing during or possibly shortly after the earthquake, and was shown on a number of photos taken by Shannon & Wilson, a local consulting tongBeach engineer who was doing regional post earthquake damage assessment. Details are scarce because there is reportedly pending litigation, but the following information summarized below was compiled from post earthquake survey notes posted on the web and an email from Shannon & Wilson to Hart Crowser and a member of the Port's ETRB. Portland In summary: 1) The failed wall was not a RECo wall although it was designed using similar principals. Seattle 1970…

Port of Seattle POS SEPA No. 0]-08 March 30,2001 FINAL SEPA DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) OF PROPOSED ACTION Alaska Airlines 31aintenance Facility Expansion The Port of Seattle has completed an environmental analysis, including review of pertinent and available environmental information and preparation of an Environmental Checklist for the following proposal: Description of the Proposed Action: The proposed project is to expand and remodel existing Alaska Airlines maintenance facilities including offices, repair shops, parts storage and vehicle parking. The purpose of the proposed project is to modernize existing facilities, to consolidate aircraft maintenance fimctions, to accommodate maintenance nee.ds for new aircr,'fft type.% and to provide additional office space needed to respond to FAA mandated operational changes. Project Location: The proposed project is located at the Seattle-Tacoma Airport adjacent to the existing Alaska Airlines maintenance hangars located north of South 188th Street and west of 28th Avenue South. Lead Agency: Port of Seattle (SEPA File No. 01-08) Determination: This determination of non-significance has been prepared following the provisions of the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) under Chapter 43.21C, Revised Code of Washington CRCW), Chapter 197-11, Washington Administrative Code (WAC), and Resolution 3028, Port of Seattle SEPA Policies & Procedures. As lead agency, the Port has determined that the proposal will not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. Therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). This is the Port's final decision on this proposal. Supporting Information: Information used to reach this determination, and…

Both sites considered for locating the North Main Service Point are small, triangular-shaped landscaped parcels with roadways on two sides. Land uses along the routeof the 12.5 kV cable system that will connect the North Main Service Point with the Bow Lake Substation consist of roadrights-of-way, median strips, and a parking lot. Use of either site for the North Main Service Point will require an underground crossing of International Boulevard. Under the revised proposal, this would occur near the intersection with South 176thStreet. The revised proposal includes underground ductbanks to be installed between the North Main Service Point and Airport electric circuits. The land uses along this route are primarily Airport access roads and narrow planted median strips. During construction, traffic control measures will be taken to minimize impacts to the operation of the roads affected by the installation of the underground cables systems and ductbanks. All pavement and landscaping disturbed during construction will be restored following project construction. Aesthetics The proposed North Main Service Point will be identical to the facility previously proposed. It consists of a 25- foot by 60-foot by 15-foot tall concrete building enclosed by an 8-foot cyclone fence. At the new location, the facility will be visible from the sections of the Airport drives that access the garage from the south and from the northbounddrives that returnto the terminal. Construction of the revised proposal will involve temporarily disturbing landscaping along Airport roadways. All landscaping disturbed during construction will be replaced following project completion. Transportation Construction…

FROM: Douglas Lindquist, E.I.T., Barry Chen, PhD., P.E., and Michael Bailey, P.E., Hart Crowser, Inc. - RE: Revised Methods and Results of Liquefaction Analyses ch,c_go Third Runway Embankment SeaoTac,Washington J-4978-30 Denver This memorandum provides results of liquefaction analyses for the SeaTac Third Runway project. Preliminary liquefaction analyses were presented in our September 7, 2000 draft memorandum. This update is based upon the results from the revised probabilistic seismic Falrbanks hazard analysis (PSHA) and one-dimensional site response analyses. The site response analyses were performed for proposed embankment heights of 50 and 150 feet above the existing ground surface. See Hart Crowser's memorandum entitled "Additional Information on the Seismic Design" (Hart Crowser, 2001 ) for additional information on these aqalyses. Jer',eV City This memorandum presents the methods and results of Hart Crowser's analyses of potential liquefaction and post-liquefaction residual strength for the proposed Third Runway embankment and retaining walls. Results of both the preliminary and revised analyses are presented. We analyzed a total of 120 borings and their corresponding Standard Joneau Penetration Test (SPT) results. Logs of these borings are presented in previous subsurface conditions data reports (references are listed at the end of this memorandum, (see Civil Tech, 1997 and Hart Crowser, 1999a, 2000a, 2000b, 2000c, and 2000e for information on subsurface conditions). See Hart Crowser's report entitled "Geotechnical Engineering Lorrq Beach Report, 404 Permit Support" for an overview of the project (Hart Crowser, 1999b). Potential for liquefaction, and resulting soil behavior, is influenced by a number of factors. This memorandum…

ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT CONSULTATION FOR CERT.4dN MASTER PLAN" UPDATE LMPROV'E.MENTS AND RELATED ACTIONS PACIFIC COAST SALMON ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT ASSESSMENT MASTER PLAN UPDATE IMPRO_rEMEN"lr'S SEATTLE-TACOMA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Prepared for FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION 1601 Lind Ave SW Renton. WA 98055-4056 and PORT OF SEATTLE Seattle-Tacoma International Airport P.O. Box 69727 Seattle. Washington 98168-0727 Prepared by Parametrix, Inc. 5808 Lake Washington Blvd. NE. Suite 200 Kirk]and, Washington 98033-7350 March 2001 556-2912-001 (01) ('48) AR 049874 T._BLE OF CON'I'E._'TS Page EXECL-I'I_"ESL_'MM.M_Y................................................................................................................... -x 1. I2_'TRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1-1 2. PACIFIC SALMON FISHERY SPECIES LIFE HISTORY SL_S ..................... 2-1 2.1 GEN'ER.M_CI-ILNOOKSALMON LIFE HISTORY. ............................................ 2-1 2.2 GENER.M. COHO SALMON LIFE HISTORY. ................................................... 2-2 ")'_.... 1 General Puget Sound Pink Salmon Life I-Iistorv......................................... 2-4 3. ESSENTL4.L FISH HABITAT ............................................................................................. 3-1 3.1 MILLER CREEK BASIN ........................................................................................ 3-3 3.1.1 Miner Creek Freshwater Fish Habitat.......................................................... 3-3 3.1.2 Miller Creek Esmarine Fish Habitat ............................................................ 3-4 3.1.3 Miller Creek EFH Condition ....................................................................... 3-5 3.2 DES MOINES CREEK BASIN ............................................................................... 3-7 3.2.1 Des Momes Creek Freshwater Fish Habitat ................................................ 3-7 3.2.2 Des Moixies Creek Estamrme Fish Habitat ................................................... 3-8 3.2.3 Des Moines Creek EFH Condition .............................................................. 3-8 3.3 GREEN RIVER BASIN ........................................................................................... 3-9 3.3.I Green River Freshwater Fish Habitat ........................................................ 3- I0 3.3.2 GiIliam Creek Freshwater Fish Habitat ..................................................... 3-I0 3.3.3 Auburn Wetland Mitigation Site Freshwater Fish Habitat ........................ 3-10 3.3.4 Green River EFI-ICondition ...................................................................... 3-11 3.4 IWS OU'ITALL MARINE HABITAT ................................................................. 3-11 4. PROPOSED ACTION .......................................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 MASTER PLAN UPDATE ACTIONS ................................................................... 4-1 4.2 EFFECTS OF THE ACTION ON EFH ..................................................................…

This letter documents comments I made at the public hearing on January 26, 2001. The focus of my comments pertain to design of the proposed retaining walls for the project, JerseyCity and the process used for independent technical review of that design process. My qualifications to provide these comments are as follows. I am a Principal Geotechnical Engineer employed by Hart Crowser, Inc., of Seattle Washington. I am a Professional Juneau Engineer, registered in Washington, and have over 20 years geotechnical engineering experience in the Puget Sound region. I have been a member of the Port of Seattle's design team for the Third Runway project for the past 2-1/2 years. Long Beach The Port of Seattle proposes to construct mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls on the west side and north end of the new runway, to avoid relocating a high value section of Miller Creek and to limit the amount of wetland filling. MSEwalls are a technology that has been used for more than 30 years, and hundreds of Porrtancl MSEwalls have been constructed in the U.S. 5eatt_- 19!0 Fairv_ew Avenue East 5eattte, "%,'asning_on _8102-3599 AR 049869T=i 206.324.9550 [r L U.S. Army Corps of Engineersand Washington State Department of Eco[ogy J4978-30 February 8, 2001 Page 2 The MSEwalls proposed by the Port of Seattle range in height from 50 to 135 feet; there are higher MSEwalls that have been built elsewhere, the technology performs well. Prior to starting design of any walls, the Port of Seattle reviewed eight different…

Seattle, Washington 98124-2255 _ATTN: Jonathan Freedmart, Project Manager __ Washington State Department of Ecology _ _, Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program O _t" _:_ 3190 - 160_ Avenue Southeast _ 3: _!'_/7 Bellevue, Washington 98008-5452 , tTi "-" ATTN: Ann Kenny, Environmental Specialist _- Dear Mr. Freedman and Ms. Kenny: _' am writing to summarizethe findings and qualifications of a panel of independent experts, convened by the Port of Seattle to review the technical aspects of the embankmentfill and mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls proposed for constructionof the thirdrunway at Seattle-Tacoma InternationalAirport. I am providing this letter because it was not possible for all the members of the Review Board to be at the public meeting scheduled for January26 and27, 2001. The Board is in general agreement with the design approaches and methodologies employed by the design team on the third runway project. The Board further concludes that the embankment and MSE wall investigations and technical analyses being conducted on the project are at an appropriate level of detail and thoroughness deemed necessary for a project of this complexity and are in compliance with current engineering and construction industry practice. Based on their review, the Board identified questions and/or provided suggestions for further study. The Board recommended that additional subsurface explorations be accomplished in one area of the site in order to verify the nature and extent of the different soil units and to develop site specific correlations between different exploration methods. These additional explorations have since been accomplished and…

FROM: Douglas Lindquist, EIT, Michael Bailey, P.E., Hart Crowser, Inc. RE: Additional Information on the Seismic Design }-4978-30 CO: Jim Thomson, P.E., HNTB This memorandum provides additional information regarding the seismic analyses performed for the Third Runway at the Sea-Tac International Airport in SeaTac, Washington. ,_......... This discussion includes the probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) and the ensuing ground response analyses used to provide the basis for analysis of seismic stability, deformation, and liquefaction potential. This memorandum provides an overview and details for the following: 1. Seismic Sources; 2. Attenuation Relationships; 3. Results of the PSHA; 4. Input Motion Development; and 5. One-Dimensional Site Response Analysis. OVERVIEW OF PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS Seismically induced ground motions at the Third Runway site can be produced by earthquakes from a number of different shallow and deep sources spread throughout the greater Puget Sound region. Hart Crowser and subconsultant Professor Steven L. Kramer • : ., .. .: _,.., _ __,_ '._,_'°_ STIA 00519 AR 049834 L IrE, Embankment Technical Review Board J-4978-30 January 25, 2001 Page 2 used a probabilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) to evaluate ground motion characteristics for different seismic hazard levels. The characteristics of ground motions with different exceedence probabilities were evaluated by quantifying the uncertainties in earthquake magnitude, recurrence, and location, and by considering the uncertainties in ground motion parameter predictions. The results of the PSHA indicate the probability that a certain level of ground shaking will be exceeded in any given time period, such as a seismic…