June 21, 2001August 2, 2026

EXH AR050665: Ecology & Port Of Seattle Letter to Army Corps of Engineers Extending Coastal Zone Management Consistency Review Deadline

Notes

Letter dated June 21, 2001 from Jeannie Summerhays (Washington Department of Ecology, Northwest Regional Office) and Elizabeth Leavitt (Port Of Seattle, Aviation Environmental Programs, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport) to Tom Mueller, Chief, Department of the Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Regulatory Branch. Pursuant to 15 CFR § 930.60, Ecology and the Port Of Seattle mutually agreed to extend the six-month review deadline for Ecology’s review of the Port’s Certification of Consistency with the Washington State Coastal Zone Management Program. Corps Reference Number 1996-4-02325. Review period extended until December 27, 2001. Copied to Muffy Walker (Corps), Masi Okasaki (OCRM), Ray Hellwig, Gordon White, Ann Kenny (Ecology), Joan Marchioro (AAG), Tom Walsh (Foster Pepper & Shefelman).

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