Tagairport issues(15)

On February 3rd and 4th, Seattle television station KIRO aired an expose titled "Exposed Hidden Dangers at Sea-Tac Airport". Their investigation ofthe NASA AMES files documented hundreds of near misses, close incursions, and mechanical problems in the very crowded airspace near Sea-Tac airport. The fact that these incidents are not reported (by the pilots, the airlines, or the aircraft controllers) to the FAA and then to the decision making local public officials is very serious. The FAA is the public lead ~gency responsible for protecting public safety in aviation matters. The KIRO report uncovered very disturbing information that may be only the tip of the iceberg. 'Ihe investigation indicated that there could be other agencies keeping information about safety issues at Sea-Tac Airport. The combined airspace of the Sea-Tac, Boeing Field, Renton, and Auburn airports now produces more than one million (1,000,000) aircraft operations a year. It should be a cause for concern that in addition to this very large number of current operations the Port of Seattle's Master Plan includes a major expansion with a 3rd runway to increase the number of operations. Would the FAA and our local officials support this expansion had they been aware of the dangers to public safety that the KIRO documentary has revealed? We are requesting that you initiate an investigation of the public safety issues that this very limited expose has uncovered. We suggest that the investigation should also cover any additional safety issues that come to light as it progresses. From…

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.

A RESOLUTION of the Port Commission of the Port of Seattle, King County Washington, adopting an updated Noise Remedy Program for Sea-Tac International Airport as an ele- ment to replace the Noise Remedy element of the previously adopted Sea-Tac Communities Plan described in Resolution No. 2626. Wllt:KEAS, the l:'Or't OI '>ea..::t.:.Le· aJ.oug Wl. LU 1..LU~ .IVUln.y . . ..Vdi)!J.t::l..c::.u Sea-Tac Communities Plan and the Port adopted it by Resolution No. 2626 on '• June 8, 1976, as-a-~id~development and environmental compatihiliLy for~th~e ______ __ Airport and its vicinity; WHEREAS, the Sea-Tac Communities Plan contained a major element deal- ing with noise impact and mitigation; WHEREAS, that element contained a series of noise remedy proposals . dealing with property acquisition and measures to reinforce or stabilize other impacted residential areas; WHEREAS, the Port of Seattle in accordance with the Sea-Tac Communities Plan has continued a program of land acquisition for noise compatibility purposes; WHEREAS, such programs are based on extensive technical analysis of noise exposure patterns; WHEREAS, periodic updating of such noise exposure information is desirable to determine changes in noise patterns and to employ more recent measurement technology; WHEREAS, the Port Commission authorized an updated Noise Exposure Study which was completed in June 1982; WHEREAS, a complete update of the Noise Remedy Program portion of the Sea-Tac Communities Plan was authorized by the Commission on October 26, 1982; and WHEREAS, the previous Environmental Impact Statement has been adopted and an addendum has been prepared in compliance with the State Environment Policy…

SUBJECT Meeting Notice and Distribution of Working Paper Airport Noise Remedy Update--Jackson International Airport The next Technical Working Committee Meeting will be held on Wednesday~ January 25, 1984, in the Airport Administration Conference Room on the Third Floor of the Airport Terminal Building at 4:00 p.m. The agenda will include a review of the proposed criteria and boundaries for land acquisi- tion, purchase assurance and sound insulation programs, a presentation of the recommendations for changes/additions to the criteria and boundaries made by the Technical Working Committee's subcommittee on noise remedy program boundaries, and a review of the proposed "on-airport" noise abatement measures. In advance of the January 25 meeting, a copy of the "on-airport" component of the "Final Evaluation" working paper is attached for your review. As with the "off-airport" component of the working paper, comments should be _ received by me no later than January 31, 1984. Notice of the next set of neighborhood workshops (January 23 and will be sent to all those persons on the Update's Mailing List. you need additional copies of this notice, please give either me (382-3327) or Ms. Janet Bowlin (382-3320) a call. 2785p Attachment Distribution: 24, 1984) Should Technical Working Committee: Berwald, Black, Bohrer, Bray~ Carver; Conradi, Dana, Dinwiddie, Dodds, Drury, Gestner, Hall, Hamilton; Holstine ; Horner, Jhaveri, Johnson, Kos, Kumasaka, D. Legg, R. Legg, Nelson; Petterson, D. Robertson, Rus, Russell, Secrist, Shride, Simpson, Strander, Tranum, Vinton, Wing, Zalud King County: Miller, R. Robertson, Taratino Federal Aviation Administration: Coppinger, Saito Peat Marwick:…

Thank you for taking the time to participate in the community attitude survey distributed at the August Noise Remedy Update neighborhood work- shops. Your thoughts about aircraft noise as expressed in this survey will help the Update staff to develop workable noise remedies. ' In September and October, McClure Resea~ch Company conducted two telephone surveys in addition to the one presented at the workshops. The results of all three are attached. Although the summary itself covers the signifi- cant information, I would like to highlight a few items of special import- ance. The workshop survey {completed by 70% of the 350 participants) was quite similar to the telephone survey given to 151 residents in the general • airpor.t area now experiencing noise levels of 70 Ldn and above. The workshdP attendees proved to be representative of the general surveyed population with a couple of minor exceptions. This important fact ' J indicates that those who are actively involved in aircraft noise issues share the same concerns as those community members who do not often contact the Port with their questions and comments. The surveys are only one of the many tools being used in developing the program • . The results have given the staff a means of predicting likely program participation rates and costs for several tentative voluntary noise remedy programs. The Update, however, is not limited to considering only those noise remedies represented in the surveys. If you have any questions about the Airport Noise Remedy Update, feel…