October 1, 2001August 2, 2026

PCHB 01-133: Declaration of Donald E. Weitkamp, Ph.D. — Port Of Seattle’s Memo Opposing ACC’s Motion for Stay

Notes

Declaration of Donald E. Weitkamp, Ph.D., fish biologist, filed in PCHB No. 01-133 before the Pollution Control Hearings Board for the State of Washington. Filed by Port Of Seattle opposing ACC (Airport Communities Coalition) motion to stay the §401 Certification issued by Washington Department of Ecology for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Public Notice 1996-4-02325, covering construction of a new third runway and other improvements at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (STIA). Weitkamp addresses fisheries and aquatic resources, §404 permit, Biological Assessment prepared for U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Marine Fisheries Service, Low Streamflow Analysis, Summer Low Flow Impact Offset Facility, Natural Resources Mitigation Plan, Stormwater Management Plan, and John Strand declaration. AR 011917–011919.

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