June 13, 1999August 2, 2026

Exhibit 2106: ATG MI Sea-Tac Third Runway — Email Chain on Water Quality Standards and 401 Permit Review for Des Moines Creek

Notes

Email chain (AR 033708–033710) among Washington State Department of Ecology staff Paula Ehlers, Tom Luster, and Raymond Hellwig, with ATG staff Tom McDonald and Joan Marchioro, dated June 1–13, 1999, regarding the Port Of Seattle third runway proposal and 401 water quality certification for Des Moines Creek. Discusses antidegradation requirements under Washington Water Quality Standards (WQS), beneficial uses, Class AA waterbody criteria, scenarios a) and b) for restoring beneficial uses, TMDL, stormwater BMPs, flow augmentation, Recirculating Detention Facility (RDF), 303(d)-listed waters, cumulative impacts, and the watershed approach to permit review. Key legal question: whether a single 401 applicant (Port Of Seattle) can be required to restore all lost beneficial uses in the Des Moines Creek watershed.

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