for immediate release October 26, 2001
RCAA CORRECTS ERROR
IN CURRENT NEWSLETTER
- - - -
Airport’s Contaminated Waters Released
To Puget Sound, Not into Lake Washington
Normandy Park, Washington 26 October 2001. The Regional
Commission on Airport Affairs, a coalition of citizens
and citizen groups concerned with airport expansion
and air transportation, announced today a correction
to an article in its current newsletter.
The group’s president, Mike Anderson, said, “By
an editing error, the issue of our newsletter that is
now in the mail mistakenly says that industrial wastewater
from Sea-Tac Airport is sent into Lake Washington. Actually,
at this time the Airport’s industrial waste water
goes into Puget Sound. After collection & pre-treatment
at the Airport to remove some pollutants, it is sent
to the Puget Sound via a discharge pipe owned by the
Midway Sewer District. RCAA regrets the error.”
The Seattle
Weekly carried a cover story describing the proposed
third runway as "our next publically-financed boondoggle"
and giving more detail on the "great wall of Sea-Tac."The
next three press releases concern the Port's withdrawal
of its permit application to the Department of Ecology
on Aug. 28. See stories on in at the links below:
Seattle
Times
Seattle
P-I
Airport
Noise Report
Sept. 29, 2000
REGIONAL COMMISSION ON AIRPORT AFFAIRS
NEWS
RELEASE
RCAA
Hails Courage and Vision of Department of Ecology
In Withholding Approval for Third-Runway Project
Third-runway opponents today hailed the
withdrawal by the Port of Seattle of its application for
key environmental permits for the ill-fated third-runway
project at Sea-Tac Airport, as announced by the office
of Governor Gary Locke this afternoon.
"The Airport's plans will now be
delayed for at least another year," according Larry
Corvari, President of the Regional Commission on Airport
Affairs, headquartered at Normandy Park. "This is
great news for all the thousands of people who would suffer
even more noise if the new runway were to be built. The
best thing for Sea-Tac to do now would be to abandon its
third-runway plans and join the rest of us in the search
for the right place for a true Twenty-first Century regional
airport."
In a prepared statement, the organization
said, "The state Department of Ecology deserves praise
for its courage and vision in insisting on full and complete
documentation for the Airport's wetlands planning. The
Port's withdrawal comes one day before the deadline for
approval or denial of the plans by Ecology. The plans
are so defective that they could not be approved, a message
that was delivered loud and clear to the Airport. There
was no choice but to withdraw."
The statement also said, "We know
that Governor Locke was under extreme political pressure
to order Ecology to allow the project to proceed. The
Governor was wise to stand firm, and to allow the experts
at Ecology to do their work in a thorough and professional
manner."
"The Airport's plans have been four
years in the making, were revised again and again in the
last 12 months, and were still fatally defective. Thanks
go to all the hardworking experts and volunteers who have
spent so much time analyzing the numerous and ever-changing
documents that the Port submitted, and uncovering so many
flaws in those documents. The critical habitats of Miller
Creek, Walker Creek, Des Moines Creek, and the wetlands
that support those streams were not adequately protected
in the Airport's plans. Ecology could not issue a certificate
that there was 'reasonable assurance' that building the
runway would not violate State and Federal water-quality
standards."
RCAA President Larry Corvari said, "We
have followed the Port's dubious proposals with great
interest. We are well aware that they do not have a good
plan for dealing with stream pollution from a third runway.
In fact, they do not have a good plan for dealing with
existing pollution. We are delighted that the Department
of Ecology has resisted all the political pressure and
has aimed for a fair decision based on the facts and on
good science.
The no-third-runway group called for the
Port of Seattle to abandon its quest for a third runway.
"Spending $773 million dollars, mostly borrowed money,
to build a part-time runway that will not bring one single
additional plane to Sea-Tac is a colossal waste of money.
No matter how they try, the Airport's planners can never
find a way to build the huge runway embankment without
doing unacceptable damage to the environment, and without
violating long-standing water-quality rules. The right
thing to do now is to abandon the project, and to join
with us and others in looking for a real solution to our
State's need for a truly modern airport. The airport or
airports that are needed must built in locations that
do not have bad weather for much of the year, where there
will not be toxic run-offs into salmon-bearing streams."
"Our State and entire region need
a first-class airport, one that will work for generations
to come, one that will truly meet our needs. Sea-Tac Airport
is not and cannot be such an airport. It is in the wrong
place, pure and simple."
NR00-265C
Sept.
28, 2000
AIRPORT COMMUNITIES COALITION
NEWS
RELEASE
Port of Seattle 401 Permit Application
The Washington State Department of Ecology
has done the right thing in not bending to political pressure
to issue the Clean Water Act (401) permit for the proposed
third runway at SeaTac airport. After an extensive campaign
to discredit those who question this project and override
legitimate environmental concerns, the Port's considerable
public relations and political muscle failed to compensate
for poor science and shoddy work.
"This project would change the character
of the South County community and severely degrade the
physical environment", said Bob Sheckler, Chairman
of the Airport Communities Coalition. "We will continue
our fight to hold the Port accountable and protect our
neighborhoods."
The third runway is one of the largest
construction projects ever undertaken in this region -
a project involving a 16-story retaining wall and 20 million
cubic yards of fill - a project that would destroy sensitive
wetlands and obliterate the headwaters of an important
salmon bearing stream.
"From the beginning the ACC has pointed
to deficiencies in the Port's permit application and insisted
that the Department of Ecology use science, not politics,
in reviewing that application, said Sheckler. "Now
the Port, failing in its public relations campaign, has
faced reality and withdrawn its application. Today the
environment won."
The Port originally expected to obtain
the 401 permit for the Department of Ecology last June.
This withdrawal is the second time the Port has failed
to meet the DOE requirements and has had to withdraw its
application. This means an unprecedented third attempt
by the Port at obtaining the 401 permit will be necessary.
This development announced today will mean at least an
additional year added to the process for required public
notice and comment.
Its becoming increasingly clear that
there is no way that the Port can add a third runway at
SeaTac due to the costs, lack of space, and unacceptable
environmental damage. It is time for the region to abandon
this albatross and begin planning for a major supplemental
airport, said Bob Sheckler.
Sept.
28, 2000
State Senator Julia Patterson
NEWS
RELEASE
Patterson
calls for second airport after
failure of third runway certification
OLYMPIA - Following the Port of Seattle's failure to
gain the necessary state environmental certification for
a proposed third runway at SeaTac Airport, Sen. Julia
Patterson, D-SeaTac, said she plans to introduce legislation
during the upcoming 2001 session to create a process for
siting>a second airport in Washington.
"Now is the time to move forward with a new solution
- a new airport," Patterson said.The legislation will
create and fund an independent commission to study air
transportation needs and create a process to site a new
International Airport serving the entire state. The Port's
own projections show a need for a new airport by 2020-with
or without a third runway at SeaTac. Patterson believes
that many economically depressed areas would welcome the
economic development that an International Airport would
provide.
In order for construction of the proposed third runway
at SeaTac to proceed, the Department of Ecology would
have needed to certify that there is a "reasonable assurance"
that state, federal, and county water-quality standards
would not have been violated. The Port of Seattle today,
for the second time, was unable to receive that certification
and has withdrawn their application. The proposed third
runway was projected to cost over $1 billion-- the most
expensiverunway ever to be built in the history of the
nation. "Because of the serious impacts on salmon and
wetlands, there is no way that the Port of Seattle can
justify the proposed third runway," said Patterson.
