NOAA Panel Reports

The first NOAA panel report is available at BCDC.

This second is only available here, so far as I know.

NOAA panel Final Report is in. The actual report is available here.(PDF format, 800Kbytes) In addition, there is a word by word transcript(PDF, 200Kbytes) of the June forum and the Powerpoint presentation given by URS(SFIA consultant). The Powerpoint presentation has been transformed(by me) into an HTML presentation. As such, the graphics are less than perfect but you will get the idea.

The NOAA panel evaluated the METHODOLOGY, not the long term impact of building runways. NOAA did not say the project should, or should not, take place.

The "Final Technical Report, June 2003" below was subject of the NOAA panel public meeting on June 25. You can read one report on the public meeting here. This is the most recent version of the April 2002 report that I made available previously. The parts of that report are still available below.

I can't make the complete contents available but here's some of the report (The Bookmarks and links will not work.):

From the June, 2003 Report
Table of Contents
Introduction
Summary
Project Refinements
Table 8.1 (Gives areas of fill of alternatives)
Conceptual Model (Large graphic of various elements under consideration)

Here's an example of what is in the report. Computer modeling is the only way anyone could predict what would happen if the runways would be built. One problem with that, in an extremely complex system, is how to find out if your model is correct. URS used 'hindcasting,' running the model against a known case. Want to see how well this worked? Click here for an example. Hint, not very good is the answer.

Here's a quote to keep in mind, "Prediction is very difficult, especially of the future." --Niels Bohr

NOAA Panel II I'm making some of the earlier NOAA panel documents available since they are not available elsewhere for the general public. You can bet everyone else has them. Some key points before you read any of the files.
1. This is possible due to the Sunshine Act lawsuit filed by BayKeeper, Arc Ecology, and the League of Conservation Voters. But most of all because of the continued efforts of Amy Quirk, Alliance for a Clean Waterfront.
2. A little information is a dangerous thing and old information makes that even more true. This is both small and old. Use with caution. I don't know, and won't know until June 25th, what URS has changed to respond. The parts of the Final Report are from April 2002. The comments are from May, 2002 and December, 2002. But the comments will give you a sense of what the NOAA panel thought about the report while the work was in progress.

Here's what's available (all in PDF):

The Introduction from the April, 2002 Final Report
The Conclusions from the April, 2002 Final Report
The NOAA Panel's May, 2002 Comments
The NOAA Panel's Dec. 2002 Comments.