We're Listening

Construction is anticipated to take two years, although we expect active construction to occur only during parts of this period. However, work must be conducted within the “fish windows” which are times of the year when in-water construction work is less likely to harm spawning fish.

There will be some disturbance of sediment if the bridge is removed, and there are many measures, such as curtain bubble screens, that will be used to limit the amount of disturbance. River sediments are contaminated around the footings of the bridge on the east bank of the river. Boeing is responsible for cleaning up that contamination. There will be regulatory oversight of the construction to make sure that sediment and habitat disruption are minimized. At this time, we do not believe there will be any impacts to the T-117 sediments from bridge construction or demolition.

The construction contractor will be required to use active safety controls to prevent blowing dust, such as keeping surfaces dampened by spraying water, washing wheel wells of trucks before they leave the site, etc. Also, air monitoring will be required and the overall project will be monitored by the Port and the City, as well as EPA to ensure environmental standards are met.

We will require the cleanup contractor to implement environmental controls to keep residents safe during the construction such as dust and noise controls and monitoring, designated truck hauling routes, signs, a 1-800 24 hr. hotline, etc. We don’t anticipate increased health risks for residents near the T-117 site during construction.

Yes – all of the T-117 site, many parts of the streets and some yards, and part or all of the contaminated sediments will be dug up and hauled away.

We’ll backfill with clean materials, likely imported pit material that is traditionally used in construction projects.

We will haul it away. The most contaminated material will go to a licensed hazardous waste disposal facility or landfill, likely in eastern Washington or Oregon. Most of the material, if it’s not severely contaminated, will go to municipal landfills to be used as daily cover material at the landfill.

No. We have evaluated other waste treatment technologies and found them either disproportionately expensive or result in other, secondary issues or concerns (like unacceptable emissions).

Only the section of contamination in the sediments. However, a cap is proposed used only in Alternative 1. In Alternative 2, all the contaminated sediments are removed. One of the disadvantages of capping is that it requires monitoring the performance of the cap in perpetuity.