TagThird Runway(1068)

Internal email chain dated June 27, 2001 from Peter Kmet (Ecology HQ/TCP) to Kevin Fitzpatrick, cc Chung K. Yee, marked ‘Deliberative Document Currently Exempt From Public Disclosure.’ Kmet recommends language for fill material criteria in the Draft 401 Certification for the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Third Runway project, including: requiring the uppermost 6 feet of fill

Internal email chain dated June 27, 2001 among Peter Kmet, Kevin Fitzpatrick, Chung K. Yee, and others at Washington State Department of Ecology regarding acceptable fill criteria language for the Draft 401 Certification for the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Third Runway Master Plan improvements. Kmet recommends against restricting fill to naturally occurring uncontaminated soils and proposes

Email from Chung K. Yee to Kevin Fitzpatrick (cc: Craig E. Thompson, Ann Kenny), dated June 26, 2001, transmitting draft clean fill criteria language for the 401 Certification related to the proposed Third Runway embankment at Sea-Tac Airport. Fill criteria based on Method A table, 3-phase model protection of ground water and surface water, PQL,

Email dated June 26, 2001 from Chung K. Yee to Craig E. Thompson and Kevin Fitzpatrick (Ecology) transmitting draft fill criteria requirements for the 401 Water Quality Certification for the SeaTac Third Runway Embankment project. Attachments include: draft clean fill criteria, spreadsheets deriving surface water quality criteria and ground water cleanup levels using three-phase model

Email from Chung K. Yee to Kevin Fitzpatrick, cc Craig E. Thompson and Ann Kenny, dated June 26, 2001, transmitting draft fill criteria language for a 401 Certification related to the Port Of Seattle Third Runway embankment project. Fill criteria are based on Method A table, 3-phase model protection of ground water and surface water,

Final meeting notes prepared by Kate Snider of Floyd & Snider Inc. for the 401 Permit Decision-Making process for the Sea-Tac International Airport Third Runway project, covering Low Flow Analysis discussions held June 25, 2001. Attendees included representatives from Washington State Department of Ecology (Ann Kenny, John Drabeck), King County (Kelly Whiting), Port of Seattle

A June 2001 technical memo from Pacific Groundwater Group to the Port of Seattle outlines groundwater modeling work related to the proposed Sea-Tac Airport third runway construction. The memo defines areas to be analyzed using Hydrus/Slice modeling software instead of the standard HSPF model, focusing on how new runway fill in the Miller Creek and Walker Creek basins will affect groundwater recharge. It also describes the selection of three representative hydrogeologic cross sections and methods for calculating effective recharge, accounting for runoff from impervious runway surfaces into surrounding pervious fill areas.

Northwest Hydraulic Consultants submitted follow-up technical comments to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Washington State Department of Ecology regarding stormwater, hydrology, and hydraulics concerns related to the proposed third runway at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The letter, written on behalf of the Airport Communities Coalition, challenges the Port of Seattle's responses to earlier criticisms, raising unresolved issues about stormwater management standards, independent design review, cost estimates for detention facilities, and the accuracy of hydrological modeling. Key concerns include ambiguity in which stormwater standards will apply, inadequate quality assurance processes, and inconsistencies in the project's Stormwater Management Plan.

These are meeting notes from a June 25, 2001 technical meeting regarding the 401 Permit Decision-Making process for the Sea-Tac International Airport Third Runway project, focused on analyzing low stream flow impacts. Participants from the Department of Ecology, King County, Port of Seattle, and various consulting firms discussed methodologies for evaluating water flow modeling results, vault filling estimates, and potential mitigation requirements for affected streams. Modeling results were not yet available at the time of the meeting, and a follow-up meeting was scheduled for July 9, 2001 to review completed modeling output and determine any required mitigation measures.