TagSAMP(650)

In a March 2020 letter to the FAA Administrator, King County Councilmember Dave Upthegrove urges the FAA to conduct a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) covering both short- and long-term projects for Seattle-Tacoma International Airport's expansion, rather than splitting the review into separate studies. Upthegrove argues that a piecemeal approach risks undermining the integrity of the environmental analysis, particularly given the airport's significant noise and air pollution impacts on surrounding communities. He calls for the comprehensive EIS to include mitigation strategies addressing all projects outlined in the Port of Seattle's Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP).

The Burien Airport Committee had a meeting scheduled for March 17, 2020 that was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Key topics on the agenda included a follow-up phone call with the city's FAA lawsuit attorney Matt Adams, an update on a Washington D.C. legislative visit, and discussion of the Port of Seattle's response to community concerns about airport impacts. Draft minutes from the February 26, 2020 meeting document earlier discussions about challenging FAA flight path decisions over Burien and addressing cumulative noise and growth impacts on surrounding communities through the Seattle-Tacoma Airport's Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) Environmental Impact Statement process.

In a March 10, 2020 letter to Burien Mayor Jimmy Matta, FAA Regional Administrator David C. Suomi explained that an Environmental Assessment (EA) — not a full Environmental Impact Statement — is the appropriate level of review for Sea-Tac Airport's Near Term Projects (NTP), which are designed to meet projected demand through 2027. The EA will evaluate all resource categories and cumulative impacts from past, present, and foreseeable projects on and near the airport. The FAA noted that preparing an EA does not rule out a future Environmental Impact Statement if significant impacts are identified.

In March 2020, the Burien City Council wrote to the FAA requesting a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that fully accounts for the cumulative noise and air quality impacts of Sea-Tac Airport's rapid growth, which saw operations increase by nearly 30% between 2014 and 2018. The letter argues that multiple airport expansion projects — including new terminal gates and altered flight paths — were each approved without significant environmental review, but together have caused substantial harm to surrounding communities. The council also cites a 2019 Ninth Circuit Court ruling that found the FAA failed to properly assess cumulative impacts, and demands the agency conduct a thorough analysis using a pre-expansion baseline of 2013.

The Burien Airport Committee met in January and February 2020 to address concerns related to Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, including efforts to push the FAA to conduct a full Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) rather than a lesser Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Sustainable Airport Master Plan. The committee also discussed re-engagement with the StART (Sea-Tac Airport Roundtable) process, involving six cities in dialogue with the Port of Seattle, and planned a joint visit to Washington, D.C. in March 2020 to advocate for community interests on airport noise and expansion issues.

The Port of Seattle Commission held a regular meeting on February 25, 2020, at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, covering a range of airport and maritime topics. Key noise-related items included a Noise Programs Briefing and Motion 2020-04, which directed the acceleration of the sound insulation program at Sea-Tac Airport. Additional agenda items addressed airport infrastructure, security upgrades, and the Sustainable Airport Master Plan Environmental Review.

The Port of Seattle requested $3.4 million in additional funding to complete environmental review studies required under federal (NEPA) and state (SEPA) law for planned near-term expansion projects at Sea-Tac Airport. The cost increase was driven by a two-year planning delay, expanded public engagement in multiple languages, additional technical analyses including aircraft noise, air quality, and environmental justice studies, and a decision to produce two separate review documents instead of one combined report. The contract with aviation environmental consulting firm Landrum & Brown brings the total project cost to $6.4 million.