Sea-Tac International Airport Director Mark Reis says the final EIS stated that the third runway's..."purpose would be to enable two separate arrival streams to Sea-Tac during poor and good weather." Whoa, wait a minute, when did they add the word good?

I sure don't remember seeing this. In the draft, final, and supplemental EIS in big bold letters on the front page where the purpose and need is located, it says they want to relieve bad weather delay.

This lie worked so well here, they used it in Cleveland, Illinois and recently, Philadelphia. I am sure they have used it elsewhere, too.

The reason for this is if they would have stated only that they wanted to add capacity, as the region wanted and as we all knew was the real reason, their project never would have been approved.

Why? Too much jet produced air pollution. EPA had a rough time approving even their falsified data as it was.

The cities hired experts who proved the delay data the Port provided in their EIS was false. Did anybody care? No.

Experts also found their noise insulation program wasn't providing adequate relief. Was there someone in charge? No.

Seems that they destroy your will with the runaround, then your spirit by making you aware you have no one to go to, then devalue your property so you can't leave, (a fresh new resident might fight hard) then they make you sick and weak with jet fumes and noise, then tease you into believing they might help you if you attend meetings for two years where you beg for mercy and they ultimately don't help you.

Yes, they will test the new noise, using their equipment, their technicians, their labs to evaluate it and measure it against the standards they set and tell you "you are OK."

This is how they handle complaints about soot, water and air quality and of course, noise. The way things have gone so far, next thing you know, a new crosswise runway will show up from a 'safety' project at the end of the first runway.

Debi Wagner

Burien