Category : Correspondence(309)

In a November 1992 letter to the FAA's Northwest Mountain Region manager, the President of the Regional Commission on Airport Affairs urges the federal government to defer funding and detailed planning for a proposed third runway at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Sea-Tac). The letter argues that the Puget Sound Regional Council's ongoing regional airport system planning process must be allowed to fully evaluate all alternatives before any single project receives federal financial commitment. The author warns that proceeding prematurely with site-specific plans and an Environmental Impact Statement risks wasting federal money if the regional plan ultimately selects an alternative other than a third runway at Sea-Tac.

These documents relate to the Airport Alternative Committee's October 1992 meeting, which brought together cities, community organizations, and citizen groups concerned about aircraft noise around Seattle-Tacoma (Sea-Tac) Airport. The committee evaluated criteria and requirements for addressing airport expansion, including minimizing noise impact on the largest number of people, maximizing aircraft and ground safety, and providing 750 operations capacity by the year 2020. Alternative airport sites such as Vancouver, Black Lake, Fort Lewis, Portland, McCord, Arlington, and SeaTac were also discussed.

A September 1992 internal memo from Doug Graves and Len Oebser to Rick Aramburu summarizes a site visit to the Toledo-Winlock area of Washington State as a potential location for a new replacement airport. The site was praised for its large size, proximity to the I-5 freeway midway between Seattle and Portland, access to Burlington Northern rail lines, and its sparsely populated surroundings, which would minimize noise and environmental impacts. However, drawbacks noted included its distance from major population centers such as Seattle, Tacoma, Everett, and Portland, which would require some form of mass rapid transit to serve the airport effectively.

In a September 1, 1992 letter to the FAA Administrator, the Regional Commission on Airport Affairs formally requests reconsideration of the FAA's August 14, 1992 decision approving Passenger Facility Charges (PFCs) at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The Commission, representing communities near Sea-Tac severely impacted by aircraft noise, argues that PFC funds should be redirected toward noise mitigation efforts rather than security improvements and preliminary studies, and that local governments were not properly notified or consulted during the PFC application process. The letter calls for increased funding levels for noise mitigation, cancellation of certain approved expenditures deemed inappropriate or excessive, and greater consideration of local government views in future PFC allocation decisions.

A 1992 position statement argues that Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Sea-Tac) has reached its operational, economic, and environmental capacity and should be capped at a maximum of 380,000 operations per year with no third runway authorized. The document contends that noise impacts on surrounding communities are severely underestimated, that a third runway would make no operational or economic sense, and that alternatives such as demand management, use of existing regional airports, and improved transportation systems should be pursued instead.

In this 1992 letter, acoustics expert James D. Chalupník explains to attorney Richard Aramburu how aircraft noise near Seattle's Sea-Tac Airport is measured and rated, focusing on the appropriateness of the Ldn metric and the data used in the FAA's Integrated Noise Model (INM). He outlines the key physical properties of noise—intensity, frequency distribution, and fluctuation over time—and describes how various weighting schemes, particularly the A-weighting (dBA) scale, are used to approximate human perception of loudness and annoyance. The letter also notes the limitations of simpler metrics and introduces more sophisticated rating methods such as Stevens' Loudness Level and Perceived Noise Level for evaluating aircraft noise.

This handwritten document appears to be notes from an early 1992 meeting (dated 3/2/92) concerning aircraft noise policy near Sea-Tac Airport, referencing a group opposed to further aircraft noise and seeking members from both inside and outside city limits, with a target population of 100,000. The notes outline several case studies of organizations and community colleges receiving donations ranging from $50,000 to $100,000, apparently as part of noise mitigation or community foundation funding efforts. Key concerns include growing a membership list beyond those already on a computer list and organizing inaugural meetings to advance the no-more-aircraft-noise agenda.

In July 1984, homeowners on 26th Ave. South near Seattle-Tacoma International Airport wrote to Port of Seattle Commissioners supporting the acquisition of their properties under the Noise Remedy program, citing increasing aircraft noise, growing industrial traffic hazards, and uncertainty that had delayed home maintenance. A separate letter from the Port's Director of Aviation to an airline captain acknowledged that non-compliance with existing noise abatement procedures — such as aircraft flying lower or turning sooner than prescribed — was a significant community concern, and noted that the Port was developing computer software using FAA radar data to automatically detect and report such violations.