Additions to RCAA Library

Airports create health hazards & other environmental challenges.  A recent addition to the RCAA library calls attention to the risks to health that are associated with aircraft noise.  A second new publication, from the US GAO, reviews the actions of airport operators in dealing with health & other environmental issues that seem to arise almost every time an airport seeks to expand.

Skeptics who deny that aircraft noise has serious effects on human health should spend a thoughtful hour or so, perusing "A Review of the Literature Related to Potential  Health Effects if Aircraft Noise", published in July by a joint effort of the FAA, NASA, & Transport Canada.  We recommend this to anyone concerned about aircraft noise but unsure of how serious the problem is.

The GAO report was published (on the web) a few days ago.  It's turgid reading, replete with abbreviations & acronyms (mostly unfamiliar), but it does confirm that environmental issues (noise high on the list) are contributing to delays in major expansion at airports all over the U.S. The report leaves a feeling that much was left unsaid, & at least one reader has told us that it seems aimed at placating those who feel that airports aren't doing anything about the environment.  The GAO's conclusion is that most are doing something, & the inference is "Oh, goody!". But whether it's enough, or is actually relevant ... that really is what is important but isn't addressed candidly.  The title is a guide to the mindset of the writers:  "Systematically Addressing Environmental Impacts and Community Concerns Can Help Airports Reduce Project Delays", GAO-10-50.  It is assumed that all airport projects are worthy & should not be delayed.  If an airport is seen to be "addressing" environmental issues, projects should be able to move forward more briskly.

One finds at p. 37 of the GAO report some discussion of Federal legislation that had escaped RCAA's notice, "The Aviation Streamlining Approval Process Act of 2003".  We know nothing about this legislation.

*  *  *

Although RCAA was consulted by the GAO team while they were doing their research, the report does not go into detail about either Sea-Tac or Boeing Field, & RCAA's views are not reflected in the report.  Not that that is important.

* * *  * * *

To borrow arrange to borrow a copy of either report, e-mail the RCAA office.  

Flim-Flam Artists at Work

A comment on the Part 150 noise study at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport

The work of the Part 150 noise-study team is almost over. The basic contents of the final report are already available in the study team’s presentation on 29 July to the so-called Technical Review Committee. (Available at the special website for the study.) Even a casual look at slide 32 in that presentation will show how very little is being proposed for noise relief or noise mitigation. This is not much result for a study that will cost more than a million dollars.

The really interesting part of this process is the "flim-flam" that has gone on. As any good magician knows, success comes by getting the audience looking one way while he is working in the other direction. 

Almost all of the public meetings/process were directed at the way the Part 150 study was being conducted. While this was going on, the study consultants, Landrum & Brown, were working outside of the public view or review on the actual subjects of the study. 

In July they published the "2009 noise contour maps", the "Aviation planning forecast", and the outline of the "Noise Compatibility Plan". These are the required basics of a Part 150 process.

A Part 150 study is supposed to look at NOISE REDUCTION, NOISE MITIGATION, and LAND USE PLANNING. The noise-study team have successfully completed a Part 150 study without touching any of these topics.

Next Noise Workshop Scheduled for 27 October

The study team for the Sea-Tac noise study has announced that the next public workshop will be held on Wednesday, 27 October, at Mt Rainier High School, in Des Moines.  See below for details.

Since the last workshop (9 June), the study team has prepared air-traffic forecasts for the Airport (with no public input or participation).  The traffic forecasts have been used to prepare noise-exposure maps (with no public input or participation).  The study team is also preparing maps to show noise-sensitive areas & facilities (again with no public input or participation).  All these maps will presumably be available at the workshop.  

The study team has, so far, rejected requests to extend the noise mapping out to the 55 YDNL contour.  The work is restricted to the small area within the 65 YDNL contour.  The study team calculates that there are 6.30 square miles within that contour.  Almost half (2.96 square miles) is within the Airport itself.  The study team has strongly indicated that it will not propose any mitigation or noise-relieving measures for non-Airport areas outside the 65 YDNL contour.  In other words, mitigation & noise relief is under consideration for only 3.34 square miles very close to the Airport.  Too bad about the noise in Federal Way, in the Shorewood neighborhood of Burien, in other parts of the greater Highline area, & in Beacon Hill & Rainier Valley in Seattle, & points north & south.

The text of the announcement follows:

Third Part 150 Study Public Workshop Set for October 27th Part 150 Study also an Agenda Item at September 22nd Highline Forum

 

The community is invited to attend the third in a series of public workshops for Sea-Tac Airport's Part 150 Noise Study on October 27th at Mount Rainier High School (22450 19th Ave. S.) in Des Moines.  The program is from 6:30 PM to 8:30 PM.   At the workshop, the new airport-area noise exposure "contour" maps showing neighborhoods currently affected by noise and those that will be affected by noise in the future will be unveiled and discussed.  As with the last two workshops, small group working sessions will be utilized to foster conversation and actively develop solutions to reducing airport noise.   On September 22nd, the members of the Highline Forum will also discuss the Part 150 Noise Study at the City of Des Moines Activity Center - 2045 South 216th Street, Des Moines.  The meeting begins at 2:30 and the public is invited to observe.  The Highline Forum includes the southwest King County communities of Des Moines, Burien, Normandy Park, SeaTac, Tukwila and Federal Way and the Highline School District and Port of Seattle. Please visit the dedicated Part 150 Study website for all documentation and reports connected to the study including the comprehensive summary from the June 9th public workshop.

 

 

Sea-Tac Airport Can't But Boeing Can

Since the start of the noise study at Sea-Tac Airport, our organization has asked for air-traffic forecasts for the Airport for the next 20 years.  We've been told by the study team (led by the consultancy Landrum & Brown) that such forecasts are next to impossible.   Never mind that for purposes of justifying Sea-Tac expansion the same consultants (& the Airport) were able to make 20-year forecasts. For purposes of mitigation, it's just too hard to figure what air travel will do in 20 years.

Well, as it turns out, the Boeing Company has a different view.  The news item below, found in a recent issue of the on-line aviation daily news service, "Airwise", tells us all that Boeing feels quite confident that they can predict the general direction for 20 years to the point that they are willing to go public with estimates of how many passenger aircraft will be needed to meet travel demand. 

Here's something that might help Landrum & Brown to figure it all out -- the main phone number for Boeing's commercial-aircraft division:  206-655-1131.

Now the news item:

------------------------------------------------------ Boeing Sees USD$700 Bln Market In North America ------------------------------------------------------ September 3, 2010 Boeing has reiterated that it expects North American airlines
to take delivery of about 7,200 new planes over the next 20 years
at a value of about USD$700 billion. Details: http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1283497136.html 

Who gets the credit, really?

Those of you fortunate enough to receive news releases from the Port of Seattle will want to take a look at today's story about the Airport winning an award for its environmental program, oh boy!

It would be interesting to have an accurate accounting from the Port, detailing how many tens of  millions the Port spent fighting against the environmental requirements that it now boasts about.  Legal fees, consultants' fees, staff time ... all paid for with public money, too.   The story is far too long to tell in a blog posting.  But for sheer stubbornness in defying environmental law, THAT'S the award the Port should have received.

Will Port spend own money for noise relief?

Does the Port of Seattle have $73 million in Airport money that could be used for noise relief?

When dealing with the Port of Seattle about Airport-related noise, the Port's consistent message has been that it will not, cannot, or is not allowed to spend its own money.  We recall former Commissioner Paige Miller insisting (for years) that no Port money could be used to help with the noise in the buildings of the Highline School District.  FAA money or nothing.  In the end, the Port agreed to provide $50 million for school insulation & rebuilding from tax revenues.

There is, of course, no general legal barrier to the Port District spending its own money (tax revenue, net profits from its various lines of business) for such things as property buy-outs, insulation of noise-affected homes & schools, investment in real estate, buying abandoned railway right-of-way, helping to fund a new South Park bridge, &c.  There are some restrictions on use of money from direct operation of the Airport.  But it is our understanding that what are called "non-aero" profits are free of FAA-imposed constraints (as are general revenue from property taxes).

So the "Miller Doctrine" (FAA money or nothing) was not based on legalities. Maybe it was nothing but stinginess.

A staff briefing to the Port Commission on 17 August revealed that the Airport expects to make net operating income (profits) on "non-aero" business of $73 million this year (2010).  The Port District needs to be very clear & straightforward with the community about how this money can be used.  If it is legally not available for noise relief, let's see an understandable explanation (not the "Miller Doctrine" re-stated).  Otherwise, the study team for the Part 150 noise study, & the interested public should feel free to make recommendations for noise relief actually paid for by the Port.

+ + +

The staff briefing (in 36 Powerpoint slides) can be downloaded from the Port's website.  The "non-aero NOI" is discussed on Slide 8.  Go to 

http://www.portseattle.org/about/organization/commission/meetingagenda.shtml

Then click on the agenda for 17 August, & then find agenda item 7 b & click on PowerPoint. That will give you the slideshow.

II-010-008-D

Dioxin study at Lora Lake Apartments

The Department of Ecology has just released its reply to public comments about the study of contamination at the site of the former Lora Lake Apartments in Burien.  This document (known as a "Responsiveness Summary") may be borrowed by interested parties from the Regional Commission on Airport Affairs. The summary will give readers a  lot of background on the environmental issues, & on the studies that are planned to resolve (one hopes) the complex problem of chemical contamination at the site.  

The Port of Seattle acquired the property as part of the third-runway project.  The apartments were felt to be unacceptably close to the third runway & its noise. So, the Port bought the facility & closed it.  In acquiring the land, the Port also acquired legal responsibility for pre-existing contamination, which dates back to a time before the apartments were built.  The site has been described as having the worst dioxin-contamination problem of any place in the State.   There is fear that the contamination on site may have migrated toward or into Lora Lake itself.  The lake is a source for Miller Creek.

E-mail RCAA at to arrange to borrow the report.

Job numbers revisited

Earlier today, we posted a sarcastic comment about the number of jobs (3,000) that, according to the Port of Seattle, have been created by construction of the Rental Car Facility at Sea-Tac Airport.   Readers should be aware that the Port now advises us that the 3,000 jobs are actually construction & construction-related "jobs".  

When the facility is completed, in a few months,  we have no doubt that those "jobs" will be gone.

The Port further advises that the new facility will have between 300 & 400 permanent employess -- not of the Port but of tenant companies.  For further information, visit

http://www.portseattle.org/seatac/construction/rentalcar.shtml

Noise-measurement workshop, 29 July

Landrum & Brown, lead consultants for the noise study at Sea-Tac Airport, have announced  that a "Technical Noise Workshop", featuring Vince Mestre, PE, will be held on Thursday, 29 July at the Beijing Room in the main terminal at the Airport, from 12.30 to 1.30 pm..  

After the formal session of the 9 June noise-study workshop, Mr Mestre met briefly with some of the attendees (including Normandy Park Mayor George Hadley & Burien Councilwoman Rose Clark), to discuss in more depth the noise-modelling & noise-measurement issues that are involved in the study.  This unplanned seminar (if we may call it that) was so informative that Clark & Hadley immediately suggested that Mr Mestre come back to the area for an extended discussion of these issues for the benefit of people interested in the technical details.  Although the request was for an evening meeting on a Wednesday (to accommodate city electeds & senior staff), the study team has chosen a shorter session in the middle of the work day.  

Mayor Hadley has circulated a group of questions that he would like to see addressed -- too extensive for a 'blog' post.  Contact RCAA or Mayor Hadley for a copy.

Inefficient new parking structure at Sea-Tac

According to a recent news release from the Port of Seattle about the new parking structure at Sea-Tac Airport, some 3,000 people will be required to operate it !  Rather inefficient.  Here's the lead sentence from the news release.

(Seattle - July 14, 2010) - Only one year after re-starting the project due to the bad economy, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport's new Rental Car Facility celebrated it's [sic] topping off today with the help of one of the four tower cranes on-site to signal the halfway point of a project creating an estimated 3,000 jobs. 

The new garage will have about 3,200 spaces, according to the Port's news release.  So this works out to almost one employee per space.  Wow, what service !  Why don't we believe any of this?

Sea-Tac Part 150 study behind schedule

The following statement on the Sea-Tac Part 150 noise study has been submitted to the Port Commission by RCAA.

The Part 150 noise study has fallen far behind the published schedule.  Public-participation is suffering as a result.  We fear that the consultants will make major decisions outside of public view, in order to catch up. 

Let’s review:  In order to do meaningful noises reduction, you have to understand where the noise comes from.  That requires that you have good data on certain key elements --

            *  the fleet mix &

            *  flight operations, present & future

In order to predict future flight operations in detail, you need to know how the various runways will be used:  you need a runway-usage plan.  You also need aviation forecasts, estimates of future travel for the whole airport. 

From all of this information, you can prepare noise exposure maps to tell you where noise is being experienced, & you can then propose methods to reduce the noise.  And the point of this exercise is to reduce the noise.  Reduction is cheaper than mitigation.  

Aviation forecasts for the Airport were scheduled for completion in early May, but so far the consultants have released no information about that key element.  

Nothing in the way of a runway usage plan has even been discussed with the public.  It is true that in the end the actual runway usage plan will come from the FAA, but the consultants cannot wait for the FAA to make a proposal.  In a Part 150 study, proposals come from the airport operator (that’s the Commission), & the airport operator hires a consultant to make proposals.  

Noise-exposure maps as of the present are due out next month.  The public does not know what will be mapped or how.  

The schedule calls for the consultants to produce their analysis of future noise exposure in September.  This work will apparently be completed before the next opportunity for public input, which is the workshop planned for October. 

No runway-usage plan, no traffic forecasts, & no current noise data.  All these key elements are to be dealt with in the Summer and Fall, with no public involvement, to be followed by publication of maps of future noise exposure, again with no public involvement till after the decisions are made. 

If you have the key elements, you can know where the noise is.  If you develop the data for these key elements with no significant public involvement, then you do not have meaningful public participation, no matter how many workshops are held, no matter how many slides there are in your Powerpoint presentations.  And as you move to the stage of proposing noise remedies, you will NOT have consensus on the underlying data.  And you will not have much public acceptance of the final results of the study. 

 

Amazing news

Amazing news about our largest local airport!  

According to a news release just received from the Port of Seattle, "Sea-Tac generates more than 161,000 jobs (89,902 direct jobs)"

Does this mean what it seems to say?  That the Port of Seattle employs 89,902 people at the Airport?  Full-time?  No wonder that it's sometimes hard to find parking.  

What do all those Sea-Tac employees do, & where do they do it?  The FAA runs the tower.  The airlines fly the aircraft & handle all the ticketing.  The Feds are in charge of most of the security. Concessionaires staff the shops, coffee bars, &c.  Sub-subcontractors do the fueling & all of that work out by the gates.  

Perhaps the Port needs to hire a systems engineer (efficiency expert) to find ways of running the Airport with fewer personnel -- about 89,000 fewer, if we may offer a suggestion.

No, It's not Boeing Field. Mystery solved.

Data from Boeing Field (King County International Airport) received today show that there are no super-noisy night-time flights in or out of that facility.  

In our posts on 13 & 14 April, we reported that at Sea-Tac Airport there is a consistent pattern of very noisy aircraft, operated by FedEx, arriving & departing in the time frame, midnight to 6 a.m.   The data covered the period 15 March through 5 April, which we believe is reasonably representative.   The "guilty" aircraft are DC-10s & MD-11s.  At our request, Boeing Field supplied the data for night-time operations there for the same time frame.  Not a single DC-10 or MD-11.  No planes operating during that hours that would be considered particularly noisy.  

Renton has told us that they have essentially NO night-time operations, & absolutely no heavy noisy aircraft.

The mystery of the noisy flights is solved.  Case closed.  FedEx is responsible.

II-010-050 c (3)

Heathrow's third runway unlikely

Reprinted below is an article from The Telegraph (UK), published just before yesterday's general election in the United Kingdom.  The election returns are in; the Conservatives (Tories) & Liberal Democrats between them have enough seats in the new Parliament (306 & 57 respectively) to form a coalition government (even without the likely support of the minor Democratic Unionist Party, with 8 seats).   If the politicians stand by their campaign manifestos, Heathrow's proposed third runway is dead, & there is likely to be a strong push for very-high-speed rail in Great Britain.

* * * * *

General Election 2010:  Heathrow's third runway unlikely after vote

Heathrow's third runway is likely to be a casualty of the election, with two of the three parties opposed to the project.


By David Millward, Transport Editor
Published: 7:30AM BST 07 May 2010
Both the Lib Dems and the Tories have said they would scrap the plans for a third runway at Heathrow Photo: EPA

Both the Lib Dems and the Conservatives have said they would scrap the plans and even some senior Labour figures have misgivings about the scheme.

Assuming poll predictions are accurate there is unlikely to be a majority in favour of the runway in the new House of Commons.

Related Articles
General Election 2010 latest: live
Unhappy landings on the marsh
Judge: Heathrow Airport expansion 'untenable'
Third runway 'has fewer benefits than thought'
Heathrow third runway vote passed
Heathrow third runway would deliver £30bn benefits, says British Chambers of Commerce

Should Labour cling to power with Lib Dem support, the party could find that dropping Heathrow’s expansion will be part of the price it will have to pay even though it was a manifesto commitment.

With the exception of Heathrow, the gulf between the parties on transport is not particularly dramatic.

All three support the building of a high-speed rail line to the West Midlands and beyond.  ["Beyond" probably means Glasgow and Edinburgh] 

The Tories believe there should be a hub at Heathrow itself, while Labour has dismissed the idea arguing that it would add about £2 billion to the cost of the scheme. 
 

[balance of article, dealing with other UK transportation issues, not reprinted]

Forum on Port of Seattle

Reprinted from the website of the League of Women Voters of Greater Seattle:

May Forum: Port of Seattle

Thursday, May 6 at 7:30 PM

Seattle First Baptist Church
1111 Harvard Avenue
Seattle, WA

The Port of Seattle will be examined by the League of Women Voters of Greater Seattle in a forum that is free and open to the public.

Seattle Times columnist Jerry Large in a recent column interviewing local author Paul Loeb ("Soul of a Citizen"), asked him "where citizen involvement was missing locally." Loeb replied, "hardly anyone knows much about the Port."  How do we, the voters of King County, begin to understand the Port and its governing body, the Port Commission?  How does the Commission balance the public interest with the competitive international business role of the Port?  A distinguished panel of speakers will help us as citizens to do our part.  For more information contact the League office at 206-329-4848 or at info@seattlelwv.org.

For background information, read past port studies made by the League of Women Voters of Washington:

Washington State Public Port Districts (1989)

Washington Public Port Districts: Governance Issues (1992)

* * *

See also the on-line version of the May 2010 issues of "Seattle Voter",  the newsletter of the LWV, p.1, & pp. 21-50, for a current report by the League:  http://www.seattlelwv.org/sites/default/files/webvotermay'10.pdf

Big Drop in Costs for Second Runway Work

A follow-up on our post of yesterday (28 April) on the subject of costs for the temporary work on the center runway at Sea-Tac Airport.

We are advised by Perry Cooper, Media Officer at the Airport, that bidding has closed on the project and "we are currently projecting to save nearly 40% on the budget for this project as the bid came in very low for the work".

Hurrah for the competitive-bidding process!

More details as they become available.

II-010-052.b

Passenger service at Paine?

There's a lot of interest in what happens at Paine Field, & RCAA tries to follow developments there. People affected by noise related to Sea-Tac Airport have often considered that there might be significant relief if some flights were shifted up to Paine Field. Some have argued that it would be wise, good planning, to have passenger facilities in place at Paine as a back-up against the time when some disaster or another will close Sea-Tac. Some want service out of Paine as a good-in-itself, without regard to Sea-Tac -- there being quite a number of air travellers living & working in places north of downtown Seattle, places closer in distance & travel time to Paine than to Sea-Tac. People close to Paine Field fear that once any commercial service is established the floodgates will open, & all sorts of undesireable (noisy) aircraft will be flying over them 24 hours a day.

So the reader will understand why RCAA has been trying to understand the current proposals for bringing commercial passenger service to Paine.

While a bulky environmental document has been issued, the authorities in Snohomish County have been unable to lay their hands on the actual proposals under consideration (we began asking back in very early January). So we asked the regional office of the FAA for what documentation they might have. This afternoon, they disgorged 848 pages of documentation.

We are just dipping into this four-inch pile of paper, but already we are seeing interesting undercurrents in the whole decision-making process at Paine. Who else would like to peruse 848 pages of documentation.

(We have also received various documents from Snohomish County, in dribs & drabs, as the result of asking & asking & asking. Perhaps that's a subject for another post at another time. Anyone else want to look through the Snohomish County paperwork? Give a call or e-mail.)

II-113-PAE

Another Sea-Tac runway closure

Local readers will have received the current (print) issue of the Highline Times, with its front-page story about the planned closure of the center runway at Sea-Tac Airport for two month (July & August) for some temporary repairs. Folks who do not see the Times can view this article on the paper's website. If the link doesn't work, here's the URL: http://www.highlinetimes.com/2010/04/22/news/third-runway-be-noisier-again-summer-second-runway-closed-repairs

The project bears an estimated cost of $5,650,000 -- we have more to say about that later in this post

This project caught the interested public by complete surprise. Neither the Times nor RCAA picked up this story when the Seattle Port Commission had the project on its agenda for 9 February. Oddly, the super-active PR office at the Port did not issue a press release on this interesting topic. (Critics will say that we shouldn't wait for the PR folks to serve up stories on silver salvers, & the critics will be right.)

The urgency of the project is not apparent, given that Airport staff have plans to rebuild the whole runway, stem to stern, in the relatively near future (2016). But safety concerns have been expressed, which tend to override all other considerations. A staff memo. describes the work as replacement of about 150 concrete panels. The runway has already been given a quick fix by way of re-sealing joints between panels (2008). As one has come to expect, no environmental assessment has been published for the current project.

Now about the cost:

First point -- The new budget of $5,650,00 is an increase of 146 percent over the 2008 estimate ($2,415,000). Sounds like a mini-micro version of the project creep (leap?) for the third runway. No engineering documents were submitted to the Commission to explain this increase, & we have no explanation to offer.

Second point: The actual construction costs are estimated at $4 million. Add some outside consultants' work & the sales tax ($485,000). What's left is $1,165,000 for administrative costs (Port staff, that is). One has to wonder, what's to administer? Folks with real-world business experience are invited to tell us whether this is a sensible cost, or whether it's gold-plated feather-bedding.

A final point: The construction staff state that having the runway closed for two months will not affect the pending Part 150 noise study, because "the noise contours will be based off of 2009 operations and fleet mix when all runways were operational". We wonder if the noise-study team agrees.

II-010-008D

II-010-052 (b)

Couldn't happen here ....

From Airwise:

Volcanic Ash Turns North Europe Into No-Fly Zone
------------------------------------------------------
April 15, 2010
A huge cloud of ash from a volcano in Iceland turned the skies of northern Europe into a no-fly zone on Thursday, leaving hundreds of thousands of passengers stranded.
Details: http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1271322385.html

RCAA comments:

RCAA has long advocated a second full-service regional airport in case Sea-Tac should be closed.  RCAA also advocates high-speed rail for the region.  A major volcanic eruption would likely close all airports (including a new regional facility), but would probably have no impact on a maglev rail system.  It's not just Iceland that has active volcanoes.  Remember 1980?  Can you say Shasta, Hood, St Helens, Adams, Rainier, Baker?  And bear in mind, the Kamchatka Peninsula, with a large number of active volcanoes, lies West of us -- upwind, & only half as far northwards as Glasgow is from Iceland.

For up-to-date coverage from the UK, visit http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/travelnews/7592867/Volcanic-ash-cloud-latest-news-from-British-airports.html

FedEx flies a uniquely noisy fleet

Yesterday we noted that most of the really noisy night-time flights at Sea-Tac (DC-10s & MD-11s) were flown by one carrier -- FedEx.

Further investigation reveals that, nation-wide, this carrier flies far many more DC-10s & MD-11s than anyone else.  No scheduled passenger carrier in the U.S. uses those old obsolescent birds.  UPS has a fleet of mostly newer, mostly quieter Boeing planes.  But FedEx goes out of its way to buy these aircraft from airlines that are phasing them out, & it has 85 DC-10s and 58 MD-11s in its fleet.  It would seem that most airports served by FedEx must be getting lots of night-time noise.

Time for a change at FedEx?

Source:  Wikipedia entries for DC-10 and MD-11, as of 1600 this afternoon.

II-010-050

More about night-time noise at Sea-Tac

There are plenty of flights in & out of Sea-Tac during the hours midnight to 6 a.m., according to data furnished by the Airport’s noise office for the period 15 March – 5 April 2010.  Yesterday’s post pointed out that the worst offender is FedEx, flying very noisy, almost-obsolete aircraft.  Today, we report on the total number of midnight to 6 a.m. flights. 

SUMMARY

            On average, there are 24 NOISE-creating arrivals or departures every night from midnight to 6:00 a.m. at Sea-Tac Airport. 

PERIOD SURVEYED:  15 MARCH  TO 5 APRIL 2010 

Night flight events (Arrival or Departure) Midnight to 6:00 a.m. 

15 - 31 March                          415 flight events

1 – 5 April                                114 flight events

Total, 15  March -5 April         529 events

 

22 days, Average 24 events per night (midnight - 6 a.m.) 

Low 14 , High 33 , average 24 events

* * * 

The sample period seems to RCAA to be reasonably reflective of the whole year.  The data are not skewed by unusual demand (a major travel holiday or the Christmas rush), nor by events (such as unusual bad weather) that would cause big delays, missed / cancelled flights, or the like. 

It may also be noted that regularly-scheduled flights do not always arrive at just the scheduled minute.  Some are scheduled very close to midnight or 6 a.m.  Some of these occasionally arrive just within the midnight – 6 a.m. time frame, & sometimes just outside it.  This is largely responsible for the fluctuation between the nightly low of 14 operations & the nightly high of 33.  These flights at the very edges of the midnight - 6 a.m. period do not appear to generate as many complaints as are caused by the isolated flights at 3 & 4 in the morning.

Night-time noisy flight mystery solved ?

So many complaints about individual flights that wake people in the darkest hours !  All very mysterious & unfathomable (according to Sea-Tac Airport and the FAA).  Now, RCAA research provides a partial answer.

Working with flight-operations data for Sea-Tac for the period 15 March - 5 April 2010, provided by the Airport's Noise Office, we have learnt that there is a consistent pattern of one particular carrier flying very noisy planes in & out of Sea-Tac.  That carrier is FedEx, flying  MD11s and DC10s -- the noisiest planes still in common (civilian) use. 

Shouldn't the Airport take some effective action to get these noisy birds out of the skies during the wee hours?  If not, why not?

 

High-speed rail comes a little closer

Here in Washington the State government has vast plans to work toward passenger rail service that  might some day attain a top speed of 79 m.p.h.  (the Federal speed limit for trains in our State).  Now we learn that the State of California plans some real high-speed rail -- probably to be built by the Chinese.  But several other countries are also interested in selling equipment for real high- speed rail to California.   It's instructive to consider that high-speed rail cannot be built in the U.S., but there are experienced firms in the following countries eager to compete with the Chinese for the California project:  Japan, Germany, South Korea, Spain, France, and Italy.  Whatever happened to good old American know-how?

Read more in this article from the New York Times:

If the link doesn't work, paste this URL into your browser --

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/business/global/08rail.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

Port Commission DOES hear from public

The meeting of the Port Commission on Tuesday, 23 March, indeed did hear from the public on the subject of the Part 150 noise study now underway for Sea-Tac Airport.  Our post on the 19th reflected uncertainty on this point.   As part of its regular business meeting the Commission had scheduled a staff briefing on the study, but no action was contemplated.   Nonetheless, a small group of interested members of the public, as well as local elected officials, were on hand.  

The staff presentation was held to a minimum.  Commissioners had available print versions of the extensive report on the 24 February 2010 workshop.  It was not clear whether they had found time to peruse it, & there was minimal discussion between the Commission & staff.

The bulk of the comments seemed to deal with issues that the study team had not come to grips with.  

        *  For example, Pastor Jon Cortese, Burien Free Methodist Church, pointed out that many churches are subject to overflight noise, yet the study team was not suggesting anything that dealt with their problems.  

         *  Clarke Brant, Normandy Park Councilmember, responding to a comment from the Airport's noise-program manager, Stan Shepherd, that a night-time curfew was outside the scope of the study, noted that most developed countries do not allow night-time operations at metropolitan airports.  He called upon the Commission to advocate changes in Federal law to return control of night-time flights to local authorities.  

          *  Shawn McEvoy, Councilmember from Normandy Park (& former mayor), urged the Commission to fund mitigation outside the 65 DNL contour.  Mr McEvoy also spoke to the need for the study to have a longer planning horizon (at least 10 years), the need to define noise from the third runway with care, & the need to examine compliance with existing procedures.

We will carry on this discussion in later posts.

 

Next Part 150 workshop -- 9 June

The next public workshop in Sea-Tac Airport's Part 150 noise study has been scheduled for 6.30 p.m., Wednesday, 9 June, at Cedarhurst Elementary School in Burien, according to an announcement made at the meeting of the Port Commission on 23 March.   An agenda for the workshop has not been released at this time.

Cedarhurst Elementary School is located at 611 So. 132nd, Burien, 98168.   It is one of the Highline schools that has been rebuilt to reduce overflight noise in the classrooms, under the terms of the 2002 agreement between the School District, the Port District, & the FAA.  (More details about the work at Cedarhurst will be found on the School District's website at http://www.hsd401.org/ourdistrict/construction/cedarhurst.html )

 

Port Commission may hear from the public

Public comment on the pending Part 150 study may be allowed -- or perhaps not -- at the meeting of the Seattle Port Commission on Tuesday, 23 March, at The Cove in Normandy Park.  A staff briefing on the study is shown on the agenda as Item 7 a.   Under the Commission's rules of procedure, "The Commission does not generally take public testimony for non-action agenda items such as "Staff Briefings," but may do so at the discretion of the Commission Chair".   We have not seen anything that officially says that Commission President Bill Bryant will allow public comment -- if it is allowed, commenters must sign up before the presentation begins.

The meeting is scheduled to begin at 12 noon, with Item 7 a noted as beginning at 1 p.m. (suggesting that whoever writes these agendas is expecting unusual public interest in this item).

Acoustics at The Cove are lousy -- fine for dance bands but not for public meetings.  Perhaps Port staff will provide extra microphones & a better sound system -- we'll ask.

Report on Part 150 workshop, 24 Feb.

An extensive report on the Part 150 workshop held on 24 February has been posted on the special Part 150 website.   For those who were unable to attend on the 24th, this report will provide some of the flavor.  The over-all summary prepared by the consultants suffers from a certain amount of 'spin' (who's surprised?), but the summaries from the 15 break-out sessions are closer to the reality.  The actual worksheets prepared by the 15 facilitators are even closer to the reality, while the hand-written comments submitted by a few participants deserve extra attention.

Readers who attended the workshop & are now thinking about attending the Port Commission's meeting on the 23rd in order to comment (see next posting) may want to refresh their memories as to what was said a month ago.

The report is a whopper -- over 6 megabytes, & all in one file.  As RCAA suggested to the consultants a month ago, it's better to do these big "posts" in segments, so that the user can download (more quickly) just what he or she is interested in.

Sea-Tac Noise complaints continue

For the six months from September 2009 through February 2010, the Sea-Tac noise hotline recorded noise complaints from more than 300 different households, according to a log of complaints released to RCAA by the Airport yesterday.   Calls came in from more than 50 different ZIP codes, 25 different cities, & from all four Western Washington area codes.

With multiple calls from the same household NOT included, here is a month-by-month breakdown:

September 2009        99

October 2009            64

November 2009         29

December 2009         22

January 2010            51

February 2010          44

It is striking that noise impacts are felt & reported in places far, far removed from the very small area defined by the 65 DNL maps -- Shoreline, Lake Forest Park, Kirkland, & even Sumner, to mention a few.   

The number of complaints is noteworthy, also, because nothing ever seems to happen at the Airport as the result of citizens complaining to the hotline's voice-mail system, so there seems to be little purpose to making the call.   Yet the complaints continue.  

RCAA has urged the Part 150 study team to take a hard look at the reports of commercial jets overhead in places where no jets should be heard, if established flight procedures are being followed.  Such flights may be part of the reason for noise so far from the Airport.   Clearly, however, the 300-plus complaints point to a severe noise problem from routine operations.   Will the Part 150 study team pay attention to these data?  Will the Port Commission require the study team to propose changes that will bring real relief to the thousands of people living under too-much-noise, but not within the 65 DNL line?

Spring clean-up In Miller/Walker Creek

Miller/Walker Creek Stewardship Update: Spring Stewardship Sign Up

It’s time to get out and dig in for Miller and Walker Creeks in Burien, Normandy Park, and SeaTac.  March kicks off the land and water stewardship season – sign up today!  Plus, there’s a new volunteer opportunity you can do on your own schedule – storm drain marking!

For dates, times, places & other details of how you can participate in this unglamorous but rewarding work, check with the Miller/Walker Creeks Stewardship Page, maintained by Dennis Clark, the Basin Steward.  

 

Investments 101

Singapore's Changi Airport said on Monday (1 March) that it has acquired a 5 percent stake in Gemina, the operator of Rome's two major airports, for SGD$100 million (USD$71 million), its biggest acquisition ever.

Details: http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1267441780.html

Comment:  Suppose Sea-Tac Airport were a separate for-profit corporation.  How much would you, a prudent investor, pay for a 5 percent stake in that business?  $71 million?  The two airports at Rome handled slightly over 38 million passengers last year.  Sea-Tac handled slightly over 32 million 2008 (2009 numbers not yet available).  So, on a passengers-served basis, a 5 percent stake in Sea-Tac should be worth $60 million or so, & the whole Airport would be worth $1.2 billion.  That's a minor fraction of what has been spent recently in capital building projects.  

Suppose that the Airport had to reveal the sort of financial information about itself that a firm on the stock exchange has to publish -- what would be learned? 

Good Work !

Congratulations to those who attended last night's kick-off workshop for Sea-Tac Airport's Part 150 study!  Despite a restrictive format, the public delivered a loud & clear message spelling out major issues that concern us all.  

After an initial presentation, the attendees (estimated at about 200) crowded around the whiteboards in 15 break-out groups.   We heard over & over that the attendees do not believe that the FAA's 65 DNL noise assessment has anything to do with noise as it is actually experienced.  We heard over & over that single-event noise --not averages -- is what intrudes on people's lives.   Sharp questions were raised about the five-year planning horizon:  the study needs to look long-term.  And what will the Airport look like, what will it sound like, at its maximum?  At the concluding, wrap-up session, there was widespread spontaneous applause for comments that the region needs two more airports, & for the suggestion that if the present noise cannot be fixed, the airport should be moved.  Less-controversial comments included pleas for more noise insulation, more buy-outs, more sellers' assistance programs.

Part 150 workshop on 24 February

The Sea-Tac Part 150 (noise) study will kick off on Wednesday, 24 February, with its first public workshop, at the Mt Rainier High School, 22450 19th Avenue South, Des Moines, 98198.  The session is scheduled to run from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. 

In consultation with other community members, RCAA has prepared a list of 16 key issues for the study, & an accompanying group of questions – 25 at last count.  If you would like to see one or both of these documents, e-mail us.  We hope that they will be helpful to people who want to participate on the 24th.

Unfortunately, the Airport has set up this study so that it will not address most of the issues that are important to the broader community.  The meeting on the 24th is very early in the two-year process, & we do not expect the consultants or Airport staff to be offering any actionable proposals on how to cut noise significantly.  However, the folks running this study will probably say that the community is in full agreement with their limited approach – unless there is a reasonable turn-out of folks to point out that the study needs a much broader focus.  Thus, early comments & questions may turn out to have real importance.

You can see the agenda for the meeting, the Powerpoint presentation prepared by the consultants, & other relevant paperwork at the consultants’ new website for the study,

http://www.airportsites.net/SEA-Part150/meetings.htm

Sea-Tac plows ahead with Part 150 study

The Port of Seattle announced today that a contract had been signed with the aviation consultancy Landrum & Brown, to manage the pending Part 150 (noise reduction) study at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.   The Port's news release appears below.

The contract was negotiated privately with the consultant, without input from the communities and local governments who suffer harm from the Airport's noise.   We have not yet seen the actual contract, but the proposed scope of work for that contract, as we have seen it in the last couple of weeks, fails to address about two-thirds of what can & should be done in a study like this.  RCAA's request for disclosure of the actual contract is pending with the Port.  More on this as soon as we have solid information.

Text of the news release

The Port of Seattle has finalized its contract with Landrum & Brown, an aviation and airport planning firm, hired to assist the Port with the management of Sea-Tac Airport's Part 150 Study. Learn more about the Part 150 Scope of Work (103 KB, PDF - http://www.portseattle.org/downloads/community/environment/Part150-scopeofwork.pdf) which includes the project schedule and a detailed description of the work items required for completion of the study.
 
The date and the location of the first public workshop, open to all, will be announced soon.

Oh, no, that's impossible !

High-speed rail?  Never, oh, never !  That's impossible !

That's what we hear when advocating high-speed rail as one measure to take the pressure for expansion off of over-crowded airports.  

The Federal government helps, by setting a 79 m.p.h. absolute top speed limit on rail in our State.  

But, amazingly -- unbelieavably -- trains CAN & DO go faster than 79 m.p.h. in foreign countries.  Such as China.  See the following article posted on the "Aviation Watch" list earlier this month, & originating as shown. 

High speed rail

Posted by: "Charles R. Miller" atandsf@sbcglobal.net santaferr
Sat Jan 2, 2010 5:52 pm (PST)


Hello, Everyone,

A new HSR route with trains running at 217mph has opened, but not in the United States. Here's a short report from Trains News Wire.

Chuck Miller

China launches world's fastest train


Published: Monday, December 28, 2009
BEIJING — China launched what it says is the fastest train in the world Saturday, with trains running at an average speed of 217 mph on a route covering 664 miles in three hours, Agence France Press has reported. The route links Guangzhou and Wuhan, China, roughly the same distance apart as Chicago and Little Rock, Ark.

Work on the project began in 2005, with the idea of linking Guangzhou with Beijing. Guangzhou is a business hub in southern China, located near Hong Kong. Test runs began earlier this month, and the first revenue trips operated Saturday.

China launched its first high speed train in 2008, a service that connects Beijing and Tianjin. The Chinese government has plans to complete 42 high speed routes by 2012 in an effort to reinvent the country's transportation system. Siemens, Bombardier, and Alstom contributed technology for the new line.