Truth In Aviation, August 2002

		September 12, 2002
		Port Appeals Pollution Board's Ruling: Hearing Scheduled for April 2003 On 6 September, the Port of Seattle filed an appeal in King County Superior Court, seeking removal of important environmental protections imposed on the third runway project by the State Pollution Control Hearings Board (PCHB). More... Lora Lake Suffering During Construction Photos of Lora Lake show a stunning deterioration over just one year nearby Port activity. (Click on Photos for large version & more photos.) The Lake is on the north side of Sea-Tac, closer to Port trucking and construction activities than other wetland areas which, so far, show no similar deterioration. (See Map) Next Clearcut? Some neighbors on the south west side of Tyee Golf Course in Des Moines have received post cards from the Port announcing that the Port will be cutting trees south and west of the golf course for a month starting Sept. 16 as an aviation safety measure. More... County Council Sets Hearing Dates of 16 & 26 September for KCIA Part 150 Study The recommendations from King County Airport's Part 150 study will be the subject of two hearings before the King County Council in September, to complete County approval of the study's noise-abatement proposals. More... Please send copies of letters you write to the editors of the local papers to rcaa@earthlink.net, so that we can post them. Visit our homepage at www.rcaanews.org... Back issues of Truth in Aviation

	©RCAA 2002 Regional Commission on Airport Affairs is a nonprofit citizens' organization 19900 4th Ave S. Normandy Park, WA 98166 (206)824-3120 E-mail us


	If the great wall(s) of Sea-Tac will fall down in a big earthquake...Because the Port convinced the Pollution Control Hearings Board that they didn’t need to find out.
	How much the walls might cost...Because they were added to the plans in after the last cost estimate was done in 1999.
		Who will pay for the walls and the runway...Because some of the airlines have said that they won’t pay, and the rest of them obviously cannot pay. The feds have only ponied up a small portion, and the Port promised that the taxpayers would not have to pick up the tab. Who then?
		If the runway will add any capacity to Sea-Tac at all...Because the Port claims the runway will double capacity in the “benefits” half of the EIS but that it will create no capacity increase in the “impacts” half of the EIS—and won’t reconcile their opposing claims.
		What effect of windshear from the walls might have on runway operations... Because the Port has never studied it. An all-weather runway that can’t be used in bad weather?