May 15, 2000August 2, 2026

EXH AR017771: Ecology Internal Email — May 16 Meeting with Port Of Seattle on Third Runway 401 and CZM Review

Notes

Raymond Hellwig (Washington State Department of Ecology) emails Joe Dear and colleagues on May 15, 2000, as an addendum to a memo preparing for a May 16 meeting with Port Of Seattle regarding the Sea-Tac Third Runway. Explains that the one-year 401 Water Quality Certification evaluation period restarted September 1999, with a possible July 2000 decision if Port Of Seattle submits adequate information. Critically, Port Of Seattle must withdraw and resubmit its Coastal Zone Management (CZM) consistency determination request before the June 8, 2000 deadline to avoid Ecology denying CZM consistency. Documents the administrative conflict between the one-year WQ 401 timeline and the six-month CZM timeline, and states Ecology is assuming Port Of Seattle will honor its verbal commitment to withdraw and resubmit the CZM request. AR 017771.

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