The Airport Communities Podcast

Ep #28: Emergency! SAMP/SEPA DEIS (3/3)

Ep #28 Emergency! SAMP/SEPA DEIS (3/3) [https://seatacnoise.info/ep-28-emergency-samp-sepa-deis-3-3/] On May 22, 2026 the Sustainable Airport Master Plan DEIS was released and a sixty day public comment period began. [https://seatacnoise.info/samp-sepa-60-day-public-comment-period-opens/] Our third 3 minute explainer on how you can help your community by being patient and providing high quality comments.  It is not click bait to say: It's easier than you think. It's not what you think. In our last one Ep #27 (2/3) [https://seatacnoise.info/ep-26-emergency-samp-sepa-deis-1-3/], we said that the documents weren't too long, they were too short. We may have have added fuel to the fire by noting the large amount of shared material with the federal NEPA EA -- and almost identical page counts. That never meant they were copy/pasted. They were using the same sources and same categories. Despite what anyone said, if the NEPA and SEPA documents had been radically different that would have been surprising. No matter how much time is made available, the public will always want more. They will always complain that the documents are too hard to read. At least in the latter case the Port has complied! Plain Language Take a look at a page from the 1996 Third Runway EIS, which is very typical of environmental documents from that era. Every page is very dense by today's standards. Since the 2010's agency documents are intentionally written to be far less intimidating. That is now the law.  A short front end, with as much of the technical analysis as possible (which almost no one reads) pushed to the back. This begs the question of what an Environmental Impact Statement is meant to accomplish. Back in the day, that density limited the audience to specialists, which seemed discriminatory. If you couldn't afford professionals to interpret them you were out of luck. But on other hand, this meant that the people you had to hire to read them for you had the skills to identify find flaws, push back on the conclusions, and provide truly meaningful suggestions to improve the project. You want both: readability when possible, but always with the most rigorous available analysis. But if success tilts too much towards "digestible for laypersons", it runs the risk of convincing the public that a reasonable sounding document is genuinely reasonable. It also might provide cover to agencies (including your cities) who want to look concerned about a project, without putting in the effort it takes to understand what to do about it.

Ep #27 Emergency! SAMP-NTP/SEPA-DEIS (2/3) (It's too short)

Ep #27 Emergency! SAMP/SEPA DEIS (2/3) - Sea-Tac Noise.Info [https://seatacnoise.info/ep-27-emergency-samp-sepa-deis-2-3/] On May 22, 2026 the Sustainable Airport Master Plan DEIS was released and a sixty day public comment period began. [https://seatacnoise.info/samp-sepa-60-day-public-comment-period-opens/] Our second in a series of 3 minute explainers on how you can help your community by being patient and providing high quality comments.  It is not click bait to say: It's easier than you think. It's not what you think. Background In our last one Ep #26 (1/3) [https://seatacnoise.info/ep-26-emergency-samp-sepa-deis-1-3/], we noticed that the initial set of documents uploaded by the Port had at least two flaws. Since no one else seemed to notice we immediately questioned how seriously anyone was taking the ticking clock of '60 days!' We know this stings. But for people familiar with the 2025 NEPA, and the past 14 years of process, sixty days should be plenty of time to read the materials. If you are not, we recommend giving us 3 minutes a day. Or, waiting for trusted sources, like the template we will publish. The 2025 NEPA process was an Environmental Assessment (EA) -- a much lighter review than an EIS. The FAA is required to choose an EA (to speed permitting) if the airport owner demonstrate that the project(s) likely pose no major mitigation challenges. That 2025 final document was prox. 3,650 pages. The Port of Seattle heard this critique loud and clear. In fact, it complained loudly over the Trump Executive Orders stripping various categories from consideration. It promised a much more thorough, complete State EIS process. But being much more sotto voce over the fact that with this process they are the approver. They (literally) sign off on their own environmental review. Erratum: The video says that the SAMP EIS is prox. 3,700 pages. The total page count is closer to 3,650 -- almost identical to the Final NEPA EA. Nevertheless, we regret the error. It may be coincidental that the two page-counts are almost identical, but we are skeptical. An EIS for any large construction project is typically many hundreds of pages. As one example, the Third Runway EIS was almost twice as long.

Ep #26 Emergency! SAMP-NTP/SEPA-DEIS (1/3)

https://seatacnoise.info/ep-26-emergency-samp-sepa-deis-1-3/ [https://seatacnoise.info/ep-26-emergency-samp-sepa-deis-1-3/] On May 22, 2026 the Sustainable Airport Master Plan DEIS was released and a sixty day public comment period began. [https://seatacnoise.info/samp-sepa-60-day-public-comment-period-opens/] Our first in a series of 3 minute explainers on how you can help your community over the next 60 day comment period.  It's not click bait to say this: It's easier than you think. It's not what you think. Background Even before its release, the Three City ILA issued a joint release complaining that their request for 90 days had been denied. On Friday two things happened: 1. We got to work reading its 3,700 pages and immediately noticed that a few links were broken. 2. We started getting push back about our comment that the cities' complaint over 90 vs. 60 days was beside the point. It is logical for Cities to advocate for as much time as possible. On the other hand, the SAMP was first announced in 2012. We've had fourteen years to prepare! So, anyone who thinks thirty more days to study will help is missing the point. We believe some are not taking these issues seriously, using an 'extension' as posturing or perhaps desperation. We haven't heard anyone else complain that they are having trouble downloading. If the document is really so challenging. If time is really so critical, someone besides us should be losing sleep reading it. There is a better approach. It begins with holding everyone to account. The people who write the documents--and governments who wait until the last minute to prepare. Topics *

Ep #25 Highly Automated (Flight Paths Part II)

In our last episode, The 400,000lb tube going 200mph [https://seatacnoise.info/ep-24-the-400000lb-tube-going-200mph/], we talked about what everyone always wants to talk about: flight paths. Because deep down, people just want the airplanes to go somewhere else. So much so, the subject always goes to extremes: Magical thinking, We're doomed, Don't like it? Move!' We outlined the differences between 'tower' and 'TRACON' and FAA lingo like SIDs, STARs, RNAV, glide slopes. But beneath the millions of lines of code that defines all the flight procedures for professionals, what you care about at Sea-Tac is The Four Post Plan--eight pages which define why the airplanes follow these paths. The entire premise is simple: The Greater Good Argument. Improving efficiency also reduces the number of people impacted by aviation impacts. Win. win. This second half looks at what it means to try to change one flight path from two points of view: the court system, or by hiring consultants. Specifically, we examine the Burien 250 - a procedure known as a CATEX, or 'automation' -- one of the hundreds of routine exceptions to the main procedures that never get discussed unless someone complains. There are lawyers you can hire, typically people who move back and forth between industry and communities. Then there are the consultants. The people you did not know you needed to hire -- in order to change a flight paths. Both approaches are expensive, both are ad hoc, and neither has a good track record because as any professional will tell you: seen one airport, seen one airport. It really does take years to learn the territory. The stats that people follow, the ones concerning flight paths and noise, are designed to fail. The thresholds needed to compel the FAA to change any flight path are so high they can never be exceeded at airports like Sea-Tac. CATEX, schmatex. That is The Casino. A compelling game designed to keep you playing, but never win. We need a different kind of Greater Good Argument. We need to start developing a language of mitigation, something we don't know how to do because the only thing people think about today is "making the airplanes go somewhere else." The process shuts down our ability to think of other options. We also say that we need to start asking everyone to pay a little. Not only passengers, but people within the TRACON who want their area given special treatment. Everyone must start ponying up in order to create the proper incentives. Otherwise, there will never be equity for people who cannot move.

Ep #24 The 400,000lb tube going 200mph

Ep #24 [https://seatacnoise.info/ep-24-the-400000lb-tube-going-200mph/] In our last episode, Honk If Ya Love California [https://seatacnoise.info/ep-23-honk-if-ya-love-california/], we talked about the history of modern environmental law in America: the EPA, NEPA, SEPA.  We showed how many complex, interconnected pieces there are, like PSCAA. We took some time to mention how important WA electeds were in that process, and how they created carve outs for aviation. Today we're talking about what everyone always wants to talk about: flight paths. Because deep down, people just want the airplanes to go somewhere else. We get it. That is why the subject is always subject to extremes: magical thinking, or 'Don't like it? Move!' Neither were ever true. But the system constraints are also as split-personality as the environmental law in Episode #23. The legislators who helped create so many improvements to air pollution writ large were also key advocates for the aviation industry and very intentionally created the box we now find ourselves in. That was the Greater Good Argument. Reducing negative impacts overall was the win. Creating economic benefits overall was the win. The one-line rule of aviation law is this: No 'residential zoning'. The FAA gets stuck in the middle as the bad cop enforcing a system we all voted for, 'Flight paths' is such a big topic, we had to split it into two episodes. Both are much longer than we would prefer. But you asked for it. Splitting such a tightly integrated system into pieces is just part of the Casino. One cannot see how rough it is without scanning everything from ancient aircraft to cutting-edge physics--and everything in between. In Part I, we discuss those 400,000lb tubes going 200mph and how FAA-speak like NextGen, SIDs, STARs, RNAV, Glide Slopes and Wake Recat figure into your rights. Most of it is depressing. Even worse, there are also several terrible jokes referencing Lord of the Rings, Star Trek and Orcas. In Part II, we'll use that to talk about why so many lawsuits fail, and some better options given the current playing field.  Topics * HistoryLink: NEPA [https://historylink.org/File/9903] * Ep #4: The Railroad In The Sky! [https://seatacnoise.info/ep-4-the-railroad-in-the-sky/] * Ep #23 Honk If Ya Love California! [https://seatacnoise.info/ep-23-honk-if-ya-love-california/] * Airport Noise and Capacity Act of 1990 (ANCA) [https://seatacnoise.info/anca/] * Four Post Plan from FAA DECISION and ORDER [https://seatacnoise.info/4-post-plan-from-faa-decision-and-order/] * Seattle Community Council Federation v. FAA 961 F.2d 929 [https://seatacnoise.info/bookmark/seattle-community-council-federation-v-faa-961-f-2d-929/] * Gate to Gate How the FAA Manages Air Traffic [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjwgyFX5hA8] * FAA Puget Sound Area Airspace Explainer [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGYzzgfU9Lg] * Quieter skies ahead: Seattle at forefront of high-tech plan to change airplane traffic [https://seatacnoise.info/bookmark/seattle-times-quieter-skies-ahead-seattle-at-forefront-of-high-tech-plan-to-change-airplane-traffic/] * Sea-Tac airliner tests could yield quieter, more efficient landings [https://seatacnoise.info/bookmark/sea-tac-airliner-tests-could-yield-quieter-more-efficient-landings/] * Final Environmental Assessment for Greener Skies Over Seattle [https://seatacnoise.info/ea_sea_greenerskies_vol1_121030/]