Skip to content
  • STNI
  • Statistics
    • Ops and Passengers
      • King County International Airport (Boeing Field) Annual Operations
    • Financials
    • Aviation fuel uplift in the State of Washington 2018 – 2025
      • Aviation Fuel Uplift at Sea-Tac Airport
    • Air Quality Monitoring
    • Flight Tracking
      • Flow and Flight Tracks
      • Five Year Comparison
      • Busiest Hours and Days
    • SEL Noise Reports & Graphs
      • About The Permanent Noise Monitors
      • Minutes of Quiet by Noise Monitor
      • Noise Events mapped
      • Noise Events (SEL)
    • Runways
    • Employees
    • Real Estate
      • Port Properties and Trees mapped
    • Parking
  • Events
  • Protest
    • Regular Events
    • Legislation 2026
    • Complain about a particular flight
    • Advocacy Organizations
    • Media Outlets
    • People
    • The Port of Seattle
      • Commission Meetings
      • Public Records Requests
      • StART
      • Highline Forum
    • Contact Your Electeds
  • Resources
    • FAQs
      • FAA Occurrences/Accidents/Indents
    • The unSustainable Airport Master Plan
      • SAMP Public Comment Template
        • Two versions of Appendix K: NEPA/SEPA 2018 vs 2023
      • SAMP NTP: 31 projects by the numbers
      • SEPA Draft EIS (2026)
      • SAMP Record of Decision/FONSI (2025)
      • SAMP Draft EA (October 2024)
      • 2018 Scoping
    • Port Packages
      • Port Package Property Costs
      • Port Packages mapped
      • The Port Package Explainer
      • So you want a (first-time) Port Package? Start here
      • Port Package Looker Upper
      • How do I determine if I have a Port Package or Avigation Easement?
      • Progress on Port Package Update legislation
      • Having a Port Package Problem?
      • Port Package Site Visit Follow-Up
    • Document Library
    • Explainers
      • The Airport Law Cheat Sheet
      • The Grant Explainer
    • External Articles
    • History
      • Timeline
      • The Sea-Tac Communities Plan
        • Sea-Tac Communities Plan – Planning Maps
      • PSRC Third Runway Decision Process
    • Studies
    • Videos
  • Stories
  • Mission
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
Scroll down to content

Get InformedStay Informedx

I understand that you will never share my information with anyone, you will only use it to keep me updated on relevant events and that I may unsubscribe at any time.

STNI

STNISea-Tac Noise.Info

  • Solve for Sea-Tac. Solve for every airport.
  • Since 2016, working to obtain justice for everyone living under the flight path.
  • Less Noise. Cleaner Air. Better Public Health. Compensation.
  • Everything you think you know about the airport is wrong.

TagWAC(42)

Advanced Search Options

  • Dates
  • Media
    • External Articles
    • Images
    • PDFs
    • Video
    • Audio
  • Order By
  • 2026-05-28

    Formal Comment of Jeffrey Bogen: SAMP Draft EIS Noise Analysis Deficiency — Inadequate Metric and Health Impact Assessment

    A Des Moines resident's formal comment argues that the Seattle-Area Metroplex Environmental Impact Statement's noise analysis is legally inadequate because it relies solely on a federal FAA noise threshold rather than Washington State's own multi-factor significance standard. The comment contends that the standard noise metric used (DNL) masks the real impact of roughly 96 additional daily flights projected by 2037, since it averages out individual disturbance events rather than counting them. The commenter calls for supplemental analysis using alternative metrics—such as single-event sound levels and nighttime averages—supported by peer-reviewed health studies linking aircraft noise to sleep disruption and cardiovascular harm.
    TagsDes Moines, Environmental Impact Statement, FAA, NEPA, Noise, SAMP, SAMP Draft SEPA EIS, SEPA, WAC, WHO
  • 2026-05-28

    Formal Comment by Jeffrey Bogen: SAMP SEPA Draft EIS Noise Analysis Deficiency — Inadequate Metric and Health Impact Assessment

    Des Moines resident Jeffrey Bogen submitted a formal comment arguing that the Seattle-Area Metroplex Environmental Impact Statement's noise analysis is legally inadequate because it relies solely on a federal average-noise metric (DNL) rather than Washington State's broader, multi-factor significance standard. Bogen contends that with roughly 96 additional flights per day projected by 2037, residents will experience more frequent individual noise disruptions — including sleep disturbance and cardiovascular stress — that the DNL metric is mathematically incapable of detecting. He calls on the Port of Seattle to supplement its Final EIS with event-level and nighttime noise metrics supported by peer-reviewed health research, including the FAA's own National Sleep Study.
    TagsEnvironmental Impact Statement, Noise, SAMP, SEPA, WAC
  • SEPA noise legal challenge comment pdf
    2026-05-28

    Formal Comment of Jeffrey Bogen: SAMP Draft EIS Noise Analysis Deficiency — Inadequate Metric and Health Impact Assessment

    Formal SEPA comment filed 2026-05-28 by Jeffrey Bogen, Des Moines resident, challenging the Seattle-Area Metroplex (SAMP) Draft Environmental Impact Statement noise analysis as legally insufficient under WAC 197-11-794. Bogen argues the Port Of Seattle improperly imported the FAA’s 1.5 dB/65 DNL significance threshold from the federal NEPA process in place of Washington’s multi-factor significance standard.
    TagsDes Moines, Environmental Impact Statement, FAA, NEPA, Noise, SAMP, SAMP Draft SEPA EIS, SEPA, WAC, WHO
  • SEPA noise legal challenge support pdf
    2026-05-28

    Formal Comment by Jeffrey Bogen: SAMP SEPA Draft EIS Noise Analysis Deficiency — Inadequate Metric and Health Impact Assessment

    Formal SEPA comment filed 2026-05-28 by Jeffrey Bogen, Des Moines resident, challenging the Seattle-Area Metroplex (SAMP) Draft Environmental Impact Statement noise analysis as legally insufficient under WAC 197-11-794. Argues the Port Of Seattle improperly imported the FAA’s 1.5 dB/65 DNL significance threshold wholesale from NEPA, substituting it for Washington’s required multi-factor significance standard covering magnitude,
    TagsEnvironmental Impact Statement, Noise, SAMP, SEPA, WAC
  • 2020-11-12

    Applicable law, case no. 02-296

    This document outlines Washington State campaign finance laws related to political contributions, coordination, and reporting requirements. It defines when an expenditure made by a third party counts as a campaign contribution — particularly when made in coordination with a candidate or political committee — and sets out registration and disclosure deadlines for political committees. These rules govern how campaigns and political organizations must track and report donations and spending.
    TagsLegal, RCW, WAC, Washington Administrative Code, Washington State Legislature
  • 2002-11-14

    Exhibit 137: WAC 173-201A-050 Title 173 — Ecology, Department of — Ambient Water Quality Criteria Footnotes (Dissolved Metals, Cyanide, Ammonia)

    Exhibit 137 (AR 018038), WAC 173-201A-050, Title 173 Washington Administrative Code, Washington State Department of Ecology ambient water quality criteria footnotes. Covers dissolved metals criteria, weak acid dissociable cyanide method (Standard Methods 4500-CN I), total recoverable effluent limits, conversion factors, water effects ratio approach (USEPA Water Quality Standards Handbook December 1983), site-specific metals adjustment, seasonal
    TagsACC, Ecology, Pollution Control Hearings Board, WAC, Washington Administrative Code, Water Quality
  • 2002-10-23

    EXH AR039919: Resolution No. 3211 — Port Of Seattle SEPA Appeal Procedures

    Resolution No. 3211 of the Port Commission of the Port of Seattle, King County, Washington, repealing sections 15.4 and 21 and subsections 21.1, 21.2, 21.3, 21.4, and 21.5 of Port Resolution 3028, and adopting new SEPA administrative appeal procedures under ch. 43.21C RCW and chapter 197-11 WAC. Establishes appealable SEPA decisions (EIS adequacy and issuance
    TagsACC, Environmental Impact Statement, Pollution Control Hearings Board, Port Of Seattle, RCW, SEPA, WAC
  • 2002-10-22

    EXH AR024630: WAC 173-201A-100 Mixing Zones WA Water Quality Standards Surface Waters

    This Washington State administrative regulation establishes rules for 'mixing zones,' which are designated areas in bodies of water where pollutant discharges are allowed to mix and dilute before meeting water quality standards. The rules set strict size limits for mixing zones in rivers, estuaries, lakes, and ocean waters, and require that dischargers apply all available pollution-reduction technology before a mixing zone is approved. Special provisions are also included for storm water discharges and combined sewer overflows.
    TagsACC, Ecology, PCHB, Pollution Control Hearings Board, WAC, Washington Administrative Code, Water Quality
  • 2002-10-22

    EXH AR024628: Stormwater Mixing Zones Mar 25 Meeting Discussion Doc STIA Third Runway EIS

    This technical document from a March 25 meeting discusses stormwater mixing zone analysis for proposed outfalls around Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (STIA). Because standard stream flow conditions (7Q10 and 30Q5) are extremely unlikely to coincide with stormwater discharge events, Parametrix proposed a site-specific approach using higher-probability rainfall-based discharge combinations instead. The analysis found that reasonable dilution of 14- to 24-fold could occur within about 15 to 20 meters downstream, though complete mixing requirements would exceed standard regulatory width and flow percentage criteria, prompting a request for exceptions under WAC 173-201A-100.
    TagsACC, Miller Creek, Pollution Control Hearings Board, Stormwater, Third Runway, WAC, Water Quality
  • 2002-10-22

    EXH AR033807: WAC 173-340-747 Deriving Soil Concentrations for Ground Water Protection — Sea-Tac Third Runway Embankment Project

    Exhibit AR033807, WAC 173-340-747 soil concentration calculations for ground water and surface water protection under the Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA), SeaTac Third Runway Embankment Project. Tables derive cleanup levels for hazardous substances including antimony, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, chromium +3, chromium +6, copper, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, zinc, and lead using Equations 747-1 and
    TagsACC, MTCA, Pollution Control Hearings Board, Sea-Tac Airport, soil, Third Runway, WAC

Posts pagination

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 … Page 5
Sidebar On/Off

Upcoming Events

  • StART SEA Stakeholder Advisory Round Table
    Add to CalendarMWednesday Aug 26, 5:00pm - 7:00pm
    Zoom (Virtual Meeting)
    START meetingagenda 2026826 final 0 pdf

    Meeting Objectives Introduce the primary feedback themes identified by StART members regarding StART’s Operating Procedures and determine areas that may warrant future discussion. 5:00 PM – Welcome Meeting Management Welcome Lead: Andrés Mantilla, Facilitator, Uncommon Bridges; Wendy Reiter, Airport Managing Director, POS 5:15 PM – Dinner: All participants eat. 5:30 PM – StART Operating Procedures

    [...]
  • Commercial Aviation Work Group
    Add to CalendarMThursday Sep 3, 10:00am - 1:30pm
    Virtual Meeting (Zoom)
    Cawg agenda sep 3 26 virtual pdf

    Meeting Agenda 10:00 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. | Welcome – Evan Nordby, Chair a. Introductions and Agenda Reviewb. Status of appointments and non-voting member invitationsc. Other updates as necessary 10:15 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. | Is it practical and legal to operate the western Washington [Puget Sound] airports as a single airport system? – Consultant

    [...]

[See all...]


Help study childhood asthma. Get free HEPA filter!

read more...

Issues

Sea-Tac Airport is currently undergoing the largest and longest expansion in its history, collectively known as the Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP). Some of it you can already hear, but you’re probably not aware of what it all means. Here’s what you need to know.
read more...

Read This!

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...

The Podcast!

Subscribe to the only podcast devoted to policies, politics, history, impacts for people living under the flight path everywhere. It’s definitely not just about noise!
  • Sea-Tac Noise.Info
  • Connect with STNI

    • Subscribe
    • Port Package Problem?
    • Donate
    • Podcast
    • Socials
      • Facebook
      • X (Twitter)
      • Bluesky
      • Instagram

    "StART Meeting Agenda — February 26, 2025" — , 2025

  • Learn

    • Frequently Asked Questions
    • Explainers
    • Youtube
    • Research Requests
    • Make a complaint
  • Goals

    Fulfill the promises of 1976:
    • Compensation
    • Reduced noise
    • Improved air quality
    • Environmental remediation
Login/Register
©2026•Data Privacy

Message

We use cookies to provide basic functionality. We also provide access to search engines in order to provide site analytics. We do not sell or share your data.
V V